14831
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Tuesday 11 September 2012
______
The President (The Hon. Donald Thomas Harwin) took the chair at 2.30 p.m.
The President read the Prayers.
The PRESIDENT: I acknowledge the Gadigal clan of the Eora nation and its elders and thank them for their custodianship of this land.
ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE
The PRESIDENT: I report the receipt of the following message from Her Excellency the Governor:
Office of the Governor Sydney 2000 Marie Bashir GOVERNOR
Professor Marie Bashir, Governor of New South Wales, has the honour to inform the Legislative Council that she re-assumed the administration of the Government of the State at 3.30 p.m. on Friday 7 September 2012.
7 September 2012
ASSENT TO BILLS
Assent to the following bills reported:
Courts and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 Fines Amendment Bill 2012 National Parks and Wildlife Amendment (Adjustment of Areas) Bill 2012 Succession Amendment (International Wills) Bill 2012
TRIBUTE TO DR ANDREW PENMAN
Motion by the Hon. MARIE FICARRA agreed to:
1. That this House notes that:
(a) NSW Cancer Council Chief Executive Officer [CEO] Dr Andrew Penman announced his retirement from the role in April 2012, and
(b) Dr Penman had been the Chief Executive Officer of the NSW Cancer Council since 1998.
2. That this House acknowledges that:
(a) during Dr Penman's tenure as Chief Executive Officer of the NSW Cancer Council, a total of $320 million has been raised,
(b) during his time as Chief Executive Officer, Dr Penman sought to reframe the perception of cancer as more than just a medical issue, but also as a social issue, and
(c) Dr Penman's work has led to:
(i) better support networks and facilities for cancer sufferers, allowing better access to information and tools to assist in changing their lifestyles and habits to reduce their risk of developing cancer at some stage during their life,
(ii) a ban on smoking in pubs and clubs, and the regulation of solariums,
(iii) concealing cigarette packages so that they are out of sight in retail outlets,
(iv) plain paper packaging for cigarettes,
14832 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
(v) providing rural cancer patients with better access to radiotherapy treatments,
(vi) advocating the nation-wide SunSmart campaign.
3. That this House congratulates the outstanding efforts of Dr Andrew Penman and the outstanding contribution he has made in the field of research into cancer treatments and cancer prevention.
DEAN YOUNG RETIREMENT
Motion by the Hon. JOHN AJAKA agreed to:
1. That this House notes:
(a) the retirement of National Rugby League St George Illawarra Dragons player Dean Young,
(b) the loyalty and dedication showed by Dean Young to the St George Illawarra Dragons Club throughout his 10 seasons of first grade rugby league, and
(c) Dean Young's commitment to rugby league in the St George and Illawarra regions, having come up through the Dapto Canaries junior club, and Jersey Flegg for St George Illawarra.
2. That this House congratulates Dean Young on:
(a) playing 209 first grade games,
(b) representing Country Origin in 2010,
(c) representing the New South Wales Blues in the 2010 State of Origin,
(d) representing Australia against New Zealand in 2010,
(e) having played in the St George Illawarra Dragons Premiership team in 2010, and
(f) having played in the St George Illawarra Dragons Minor Premiership team in 2009 and 2010.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Formal Business Notices of Motions
Private Members' Business items Nos 890 and 891 outside the Order of Precedence objected to as being taken as formal business.
TABLING OF PAPERS
The Hon. Greg Pearce tabled the following paper:
Industrial Relations Act 1996—Report of Industrial Relations Commission for year ended 31 December 2011
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Greg Pearce.
LEGISLATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
Report
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps tabled the report of the Legislation Review Committee entitled "Legislation Review Digest No. 24/55", dated 11 September 2012.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps.
GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 3
Government Response to Report
The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to standing orders, of the Government's response to report No. 26, entitled "Rail Infrastructure Project Costing in New South Wales", tabled on 8 March 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 10 September 2012. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14833
PETITIONS
Religious Discrimination
Petition supporting the proposition that the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 be amended to include religion as a grounds of discrimination, and requesting that the House support the amendment to the Act to make it unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of religious belief or absence of religious belief, received from the Hon. Shaoquett Moselmane.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CLOSURE OR DOWNSIZING OF CORRECTIVE SERVICES NSW FACILITIES
Membership
The PRESIDENT: I inform the House that the Clerk has received the following nominations for membership of the Select Committee on the Closure or Downsizing of Corrective Services NSW Facilities from the Leader of the Opposition: the Hon. Amanda Fazio and the Hon. Mick Veitch.
NSW GRANDPARENTS DAY
The PRESIDENT: On Thursday of last week the Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones moved, according to contingent notice, that standing and sessional orders be suspended to bring on an item of business concerning Grandparents Day. I am advised that the Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones had not actually given the relevant contingent notice. As no point of order was taken, the matter proceeded and the Minutes of Proceedings record that the motion was subsequently agreed to, as amended.
CRIMES AMENDMENT (CHEATING AT GAMBLING) BILL 2012
Second Reading
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE (Parliamentary Secretary) [2.50 p.m.], on behalf of the Hon. Michael Gallacher: I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Government is pleased to introduce the Crimes Amendment (Cheating at Gambling) Bill 2012. Following concerns about incidents of match fixing in Australian sport and overseas the former Government made a reference to the New South Wales Law Reform Commission in January 2011 requesting the commission review the coverage of the criminal law in relation to cheating at gambling. A consultation paper was released in March 2011 and a final report was released in August of that year. A number of high-profile incidents of match fixing, which members will be aware of, have occurred in Australia and overseas in recent years, across sports from cricket and rugby league, to racing and football.
In light of these incidents and the size of the growing online sports betting market the Law Reform Commission concluded that it is imperative that a safe and lawful market for sports betting be preserved. This market should be transparent and supervised by regulatory authorities that work closely with sports controlling bodies and betting agencies. While noting that such issues strictly fell outside the terms of reference for the report, the Law Reform Commission made a number of recommendations in relation to the rationalisation of gambling regulatory legislation, and indeed the long-term consolidation of regulatory functions for gambling and liquor licensing into a single authority. Such regulatory issues are being addressed by the Minister for Tourism, Major Events, Hospitality and Racing.
To provide a safety net to such a regulatory approach the Law Reform Commission considered it appropriate that specific criminal offences be available to prosecute those who seek to fix a betting outcome, to profit from such a fix or to use inside information. The Law Reform Commission outlined in its consultation paper the reasons why existing common law and statutory offences that might apply in circumstances of match fixing were inadequate to cover the range of match-fixing behaviours. Reasons included that the offences did not use consistent terminology—some focusing on fraud or dishonesty and others on acting corruptly—or that they required the person charged to have obtained a benefit or be directly engaged in gambling. As such, the Law Reform Commission recommended the introduction of broadly framed criminal offences to cover conduct which corrupts betting outcomes, ideally to be implemented by all States and Territories as uniform offences. 14834 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
The Law Reform Commission noted that, whilst there is already close supervisory control of the racing industry and betting in that market, such controls were not in place for the growing area of betting on other sports and events. Nevertheless, the proposed draft offences outlined below are broad enough to cover inappropriate conduct with respect to betting on racing. Separately to the work undertaken by the Law Reform Commission, sports Ministers prepared a national policy on match fixing in sport, which was approved on 10 June 2011. The policy commits governments to address the threat of match fixing and the corruption that flows from it.
On 30 September Australian sports Ministers released an operational model outlining the proposed interaction between sporting organisations, betting agencies and relevant State and Territory regulators in relation to integrity agreements and baseline parameters for betting on events. Work on implementing this model in New South Wales is underway, led by NSW Sport and Recreation in consultation with the Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing. Following the agreement on the national policy, in July 2011 the Standing Council on Law and Justice established a working group to develop a proposal for pursuing a nationally consistent approach to criminal offences in relation to match fixing. The working group conducted an analysis of the existing legislative arrangements in each jurisdiction and agreed on a list of match-fixing behaviours to be covered by State and Territory statutory offences. These behaviours describe, for example, the scope of match fixing, conduct to be covered and the extent to which the use of inside information should be criminalised.
At the standing council meeting on 18 November 2011 the Ministers endorsed the list of match-fixing behaviours and agreed to seek approval from their respective cabinets for the introduction of specific match-fixing offences. Earlier this year the Government took the opportunity to undertake targeted consultation with legal and sporting stakeholders on the offences proposed by the Law Reform Commission. The consultation included the judiciary, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Law Society, police, the Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing, NSW Sport and Recreation, Racing NSW, the New South Wales Sports Federation, and the sporting organisation for the major sports in New South Wales. The majority of respondents supported the introduction of the draft offences, some with minor amendments. The amendments in this bill are based upon the Law Reform Commission recommendations, amended to ensure consistency with the nationally endorsed match-fixing behaviours and to reflect comments made during the consultation. As such, we are confident that the provisions in this bill represent a considered, firm and fair approach to the issue of match fixing in sport.
Turning to the substantive provisions of the bill, schedule 1 [1] contains the definitions and offences to be included in the Crimes Act 1900 in new part 4ACA. Proposed section 193H contains the definition of "corrupting the betting outcome of an event". The term applies where conduct affects or, if engaged in, would be likely to affect, the outcome of any type of betting on the event, and is contrary to the standards of integrity that a reasonable person would expect of persons in a position to affect the outcome of any type of betting on the event. This has two key aspects: first, the conduct must be connected with betting on the event. The Law Reform Commission noted that the key risk with match fixing was in relation to betting on events, and hence the conduct must be related to the outcome of betting on the event.
Secondly, the conduct must be contrary to the relevant standard of integrity. This test has been inserted to ensure that conduct that may affect the outcome of betting on an event, but is not inappropriate, is not caught by the offences. For example, tactical decisions, honest errors and even foul play that results in a penalty may all affect the outcome of betting on the event but would generally not be considered contrary to the standards of integrity applicable to those persons participating in the event. Whether the conduct is contrary to the standard of integrity that a reasonable person would expect of persons in a position to affect the outcome of any type of betting on the event will be a matter to be determined by the trier of fact in any proceedings. Proposed section 193I relates to the definition of "betting". It states that "to bet" includes placing a bet, causing a bet to be placed, accepting a bet, or withdrawing a bet.
Further, a reference to betting on an event includes betting on event contingencies. This will ensure the offences cover exotic bets such as first scorer. Proposed section 193J ensures the offences cover betting on events on which it is lawful to bet under a law of any State, Territory or the Commonwealth. For example, this means that someone in New South Wales who places a bet on an event in respect of which it is lawful to bet on in the Northern Territory will be exposed to prosecution if he is committing an offence under the Act. The Law Reform Commission intended the offences to have a wide operation, and interstate online betting is a reality in the market. The offences are not limited to betting on sporting events but extend to any betting on any event. There is no sound policy reason not to criminalise corrupt conduct in relation to betting on non-sporting events. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14835
Proposed sections 193K and 193L relate to defining the terms "obtaining a financial advantage" or "causing a financial disadvantage". Again, in order to avoid criminalising actions that may affect betting on events but do not involve any financial gain, the corrupt conduct offences are limited to circumstances where the accused intended to obtain a financial advantage, or cause a financial disadvantage, in connection with any betting on the event. The person does not need to personally gain the advantage. The definitional provisions ensure that circumstances where the accused obtained a financial advantage for themselves or someone else, or induced someone else to do something that results in themselves or someone else obtaining a financial advantage, or keeping a financial advantage that they have, whether the financial advantage is permanent or temporary, are included.
The provisions mirror those used in the fraud provisions in the Crimes Act. Proposed section 193L ensures that the offences extend to circumstances where a person engages in conduct without an intent to cause a financial advantage but is nevertheless aware that a specific financial advantage might be obtained as a result. This may include situations involving blackmail or a threat, in which case the Law Reform Commission noted that the common law defence of duress may apply. Proposed section 193N contains the primary offence of engaging in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event. The offence applies where a person, knowing or reckless as to whether their conduct corrupts a betting outcome of the event and with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial advantage in connection with any betting on the event, engages in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event.
As outlined above, the offence is targeted at circumstances where a person acted contrary to the relevant standard of integrity to affect betting with the intention to obtain a financial advantage or cause a disadvantage. These elements ensure that the offence is targeted at the kind of behaviour that represents a real risk to the integrity of sport and not to the sorts of behaviour that, while not strictly within the spirit of fair play, are matters which are best dealt with by sporting administrators rather than the criminal law. The financial element to the offence and the required connection with betting ensure that the offence does not overreach in this regard. Given its targeted nature, the maximum penalty for the offence is appropriately set at 10 years imprisonment.
The Law Reform Commission recommended this penalty given the serious fraud involved, the potentially wide impact of the conduct, and the need to send a strong deterrent regarding this kind of behaviour. In consultation earlier this year most stakeholders supported the introduction of this severe penalty for cases involving such corrupt conduct. Proposed section 193O contains an offence of facilitating conduct that corrupts the betting outcome of an event. The offence covers circumstances where a person offers to engage in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event, or encourages another person to engage in such conduct, or enters an agreement about conduct that corrupts a betting outcome. Proposed section 193P covers encouraging someone to conceal from relevant authorities conduct that corrupts a betting outcome.
Proposed section 193Q introduces offences relating to the use of corrupt and inside information. The Law Reform Commission considered that the creation of an inside information offence was important, as such information can be of considerable importance to criminal syndicates that use sports betting as a form of money laundering. In any case, several submissions to the commission's review supported the creation of such an offence, noting that the opportunity for misuse of such information to gain an unfair advantage warranted a criminal response. The commission originally proposed a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment for anyone who bet on the basis of, or passed on, information about an event that was not generally available and would be likely to influence betting on the event.
During consultation earlier this year a number of stakeholders were of the view that the proposed 10-year penalty for using inside information was too high, particularly given that there was no requirement to show an intent to gain a financial advantage. As a result the Government has amended the proposed offences to distinguish between the use of "corrupt conduct" information, and "inside" information. Where information is used to place a bet or passed on to someone else who is likely to bet, and the information is about conduct that corrupts a betting outcome, that is covered by the "corrupt conduct" information offence, and a maximum penalty of 10 years will apply as this is clearly serious criminal behaviour.
Where the information used or communicated is inside information the offence carries a penalty of two years imprisonment. "Inside information" is still defined as information about an event that is not generally available and would be likely to influence betting on the event. This sends a message that where someone knows or is reckless as to whether the information they possess is inside information it is inappropriate to either bet on that event or pass on the information to someone who is likely to bet on the event. Such behaviour gives that 14836 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
person an unfair advantage in betting and undermines the concept of fair betting on sporting and other events. Item 2 of schedule 1 inserts a requirement to review these new offences after three years to determine whether the policy objectives remain valid and whether the terms of the offences remain appropriate. Such a review is appropriate given the somewhat novel nature of the offences.
Schedule 2 to the bill provides that the offences may be tried summarily before a Local Court, in which case the maximum financial penalty available in the Local Court will be 100 penalty units or $11,000. The offences in this bill are a culmination of the extensive work of the New South Wales Law Reform Commission and the Standing Council on Law and Justice Working Group on Match Fixing, and have been the subject of consultation amongst New South Wales legal and sporting stakeholders. The bill reflects the experience and thought of these expert groups, which we thank for their assistance in its development. The bill, which is the product of this work, is designed to send a clear message that criminal behaviour in relation to betting on sport will not be tolerated. Given their consistency with the match-fixing behaviours approved by the Standing Council on Law and Justice, it is hoped that they can serve as a model set of offences to be adopted across the country, reinforcing the message that cheating at gambling will be prosecuted wherever it occurs. I commend the bill to the House.
The Hon. ADAM SEARLE (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [3.06 p.m.]: I lead for the Opposition in debate on the Crimes Amendment (Cheating at Gambling) Bill 2012. The Opposition does not oppose the bill. The objects of the bill are set out as follows:
The Bill prohibits:
(a) engaging in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage, or causing a financial disadvantage, in connection with betting on the event, and
(b) facilitating such conduct …
(c) encouraging another person to conceal conduct, or an agreement about conduct, that corrupts a betting outcome of an event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage, or causing a financial disadvantage, in connection with betting on the event, and
(d) using corrupt conduct information or inside information about an event for betting purposes.
The bill's terms come largely from the recommendations in Law Reform Commission Report No. 130 entitled "Cheating at Gambling", which is dated August 2011. The starting point for the report is the size and growth of gambling markets. As the Law Reform Commission pointed out, cheating at sports betting has the potential to cause disruption to significant economic activity. In that sense, it is not that there are notorious overseas cases or that it is a headline-grabbing event; it is the size of the economic activity in Australia that drives this legislation. In 2011 Australians were estimated to have spent $611 million in online sports betting. The commission also clearly pointed out, in particular at paragraph 1.6, that a lot more is required than the mere enactment of criminal offences. The commission said:
Criminal offences are necessary as a safety net to deter and to punish those who do engage in cheating at gambling in its several forms. Of equal if not more importance, in a practical sense, however, is the need for sports controlling agencies, and for gaming and betting agencies and authorities, to adopt appropriate systems, through codes of conduct, educational programs, and the like, to discourage misconduct in this area, and to provide an effective means of detecting and dealing with it.
Those issues are outside the leave of this bill but the Opposition looks forward to further action from the Government on these important issues in the future. This is in the context of a significant number of international incidents itemised at paragraph 1.9 of the Law Reform Commission report. The commission has also noted the National Rugby League action in conjunction with betting agencies in excluding certain forms of exotic bets and the release of the report of the Anti-corruption Working Party of the Coalition of Major Professional and Participation Sports [COMPPS].
In June 2011 Australian sports Ministers announced a national policy on match fixing in sport, and in July 2011 the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General agreed to establish a working group to develop proposals and timetables for a nationally consistent approach. The Law Reform Commission, in relation to specific legislative changes, noted widespread support from industry and agencies for the introduction of specific offences to strengthen the existing anti-cheating laws. There was also widespread support for an insider-dealing offence that would be clear and easy to understand and to apply.
The commission pointed to these advantages in this approach: removing uncertainties that currently exist in relation to prosecuting those who are involved in dishonest practices; raising community awareness of 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14837
boundaries between sport and event-related gambling; and the obvious deterrent effect. The report provides draft offences to achieve this. Most, but not all, of these provisions are reproduced in the bill before the House today. There are some differences, but it is fair to say that the bill is based largely on the Law Reform Commission report. The major difference is probably the addition of new section 193Q (2) as an extra offence with a maximum penalty of two years.
The Law Reform Commission notes that its proposals were drafted by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel in consultation with the Law Reform Commission. New section 193H (1) (b) is included to avoid overcriminalisation so that it does not capture legal play, tactical decisions or the type of play giving rise to penalties, none of which should be targeted by this legislation. The sort of behaviour targeted by new section 193H includes deliberately underperforming, a failure to employ best efforts, withdrawing without proper cause and improperly interfering with or disrupting the normal course of an event. As well, there must be an intent to obtain a financial advantage for someone or causing financial disadvantage to another person.
There is an extended definition of betting in new section 193I to prevent someone avoiding prosecution by getting someone else to lay the bet. New section 193J defines "events" widely to include the wide range of events on which betting is permitted. It is also aimed to include micro events that are the subject of exotic bets or sport bets. New section 193M defines "encourage" quite broadly so as to include what might otherwise have included soliciting and other criminal behaviour. That is consistent with other reports from the Law Reform Commission and its approach to complicity generally.
New section 193N avoids defining a participant. This provision now includes those who engage in any form of proscribed conduct who are not connected with a competition team or with officiating. This might include dousing stadium lights, digging up the pitch, interference with equipment or spiking drinks. New section 193P is broadly similar to a provision in the Law Reform Commission report. It is aimed at those who try to encourage someone who is involved in, or aware of, the existence of conduct prohibited by the Act to conceal its existence from a defined relevant authority. New section 193Q imposes sanctions on the use of corrupt conduct information for betting purposes with a maximum penalty of 10 years and a similar use of the inside information provision with a maximum penalty of two years.
Certainly there were offences in New South Wales before this bill that might be used to respond to cheating. There were common law offences of cheating and conspiracy to defraud and statutory offences such as section 192E and section 249B of the Crimes Act, among other things. However, the existing framework is complex. There is also an inconsistency in the expression of the reach of the statutes and in the applicable penalties. Some legislation refers to "fraudulent conduct" and some to "dishonest conduct". As I said, there is an inconsistency or at the very least different terminology, which may not necessarily describe co-terminus behaviours that the law seeks to proscribe. The complexity of the existing provisions imposes a degree of uncertainty for prosecuting authorities and, for that matter, defence counsel in various matters. The amendments recommended by the Law Reform Commission are an attempt to overcome this complexity and make the law clearer and simpler, which seems to be of benefit to everyone in society. As I indicated at the outset, the Opposition does not oppose the bill.
Dr JOHN KAYE [3.14 p.m.]: I address the Crimes Amendment (Cheating at Gambling) Bill 2012 on behalf of The Greens. At the outset I say that The Greens support this legislation, although we have some reservations with respect to whether it really addresses the key causes of cheating at gambling and also with respect to the size of some of the penalties, which might not be commensurate with the nature of the crime being committed. The object of the bill, as the legislation states, is to make it a crime to engage in conduct that corrupts the betting outcome of an event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage in connection with betting on the event, with a 10-year penalty. A number of other penalties relate to facilitating conduct that corrupts a betting outcome, encouraging another person to conceal such conduct and using corrupt conduct information.
There is no doubt that since August 2010 there has been media concentration on the issue of match fixing, particularly after the match fixing scandal involving Ryan Tandy in the 21 August 2010 game between the Cowboys and the Bulldogs. It is interesting to note that the TAB announced that 95 per cent of the bets placed on that game were for the first scoring play of the match being the very unusual option of a Cowboys penalty goal. It was alleged, and was later found to be so by a court of law, that Bulldogs player Ryan Tandy placed some of these bets himself, and then engaged in action within the match to allow the opposing side to score a penalty goal. However, it turns out that the Cowboys decided on an attacking option and scored a try instead. Tandy was discovered, which later led to a criminal conviction against Tandy and a number of other charges being laid. Most significantly, the outcome of the case tarnished the credibility of rugby league— 14838 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: It didn't have any.
Dr JOHN KAYE: I acknowledge the interjection of the Opposition Whip. It tarnished the credibility of rugby league and put the flourishing sports betting industry under heavy scrutiny. This bill has multipartisan support. Its genesis, as described by the Parliamentary Secretary, was on 10 June last year when all of Australia's sports Ministers endorsed the national policy on match fixing in sport with the aim of protecting the integrity of Australian sport. The policy binds Commonwealth, State and Territory governments to pursue a nationally consistent approach in deterring and dealing with match fixing in Australia. It also binds all governments to a degree of information sharing and to the creation of consistent codes of conduct for sports, and active participation in the national effort to combat corruption in sport, including an international code of conduct and the development of an international body. Likewise, on 18 November 2011 Australia's Attorneys General at the Standing Council on Law and Justice supported the development of consistent national match fixing offences, with a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment for some offences. This legislation comes from that issue.
There is no doubt that Australians want their sporting matches to be clean. When watching a sporting event—whether it is rugby league, rugby union, round ball soccer or Australian rules—they do not want to have the sense that somehow the outcome has been fixed. The great thing about sport is that it is human beings striving to do their very best in a competitive environment. Where that competitive environment has been corrupted or subverted by illegal match fixing activities it undermines the value of the activity. It also undermines the integrity of our society and places at risk those governance procedures which are so important in maintaining a healthy, functional and successful society.
It is therefore extremely important not just to clamp down on illegal match fixing but also to identify and address the causes of the rise in illegal match fixing. I do not wish it to be said that illegal match fixing is an entirely new phenomenon. Many people will be aware of the activities of John Wren in fixing boxing matches in my home State of Victoria between the 1890s and 1930s, as made famous by Frank Hardy in Power Without Glory. So there is nothing new in this activity, but we have seen an upsurge in illegal match fixing in the past decade. The question that has to be asked is: Why has this happened? Very clearly it goes back to what many people are referring to as the "gamblification" of sports, that is, the enormous rise in gambling on sports. A recent analysis showed that betting turnover on sports, the number of dollars bet on Australian Rules and Rugby League, has doubled over the past five years. That is a massive increase in the amount of gambling that is occurring. That gambling is raising the stakes on sporting outcomes and creating an environment that is conducive to match fixing.
If this Parliament and the O'Farrell Government were genuinely serious about driving match fixing out of sporting codes in this State and around Australia we would have to look at gambling more carefully, in particular, the rise of exotic betting, the rise of live betting and the rise in in-your-face advertising and sponsorship that surrounds the sports betting industry. The February 2012 study published by Sport Accord entitled "Sports betting and corruption: How to preserve the integrity of sport" noted that:
Corruption has always been intimately linked with gambling. The laws of cricket and golf were codified in England in the 18th Century in order to resolve betting-related disputes. Cricket has a particularly rich history when it comes to cheating and fraudulent bets. But it appears from the review carried out by the authors of this study that scandals of this type have multiplied in recent years, while the sports betting phenomenon has simultaneously become more widespread, particularly thanks to online betting sites.
Chris Eaton, who went from the international police group Interpol to the international football federation, FIFA, said in an article published on 14 October 2012 entitled "Growth in Sports Gambling helps fuel match fixing, FIFA says":
Match fixing has grown because of the explosion of gambling.
Worldwide sports betting grew by 66 per cent between 2001 and 2011 to about $52.5 billion as internet and mobile phone wagers and live betting during games proliferated, according to Lorien Pilling, the head of research at the Isle of Man based Global Gaming and Betting Consultancy. On 30 August this year a Sydney Morning Herald article, "Caught in the web: footy betting will double to $1.5 billion, says report", said that according to a report by Deloitte, betting on the Australian Football League [AFL] and the National Rugby League [NRL] is set to double over the next five years, driven by strong growth in the gambling industry. Current annual betting on the Australian Football League is about $900 million and on the National Rugby League about $750 million. This is forecast to rise to $1.8 billion for the Australian Football League and 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14839
$1.5 billion for the National Rugby League in the next five years. The Deloitte report found that turnover on sports betting grew by more than 13 per cent a year, driven by strong online sports wagering of 28 per cent. Tim Costello says:
There's no question that if the bets get big enough, people will start throwing games. When there's so much money at stake, the corruption follows inexorably. While gambling is a part of life, there's a vice dimension that drops, compromises and changes what should be family and children's passions. To literally hand it over to gambling organisations is a profound shift in what sport has previously been about.
There are three aspects to the way in which the gambling industry is influencing or creating an environment in which corruption of sporting games is becoming endemic. The first is the increase in the amount of gambling. The second is the live betting opportunities. Since the advent of the internet and particularly since the advent of internet-enabled smartphones, live betting has become a major form of gambling. According to "Sports betting and corruption: How to preserve the integrity of sport", live betting can be particularly advantageous to criminals. The study says of live betting that it allows a larger overall sum to be bet than would be accepted by the market prior to the match. It is, in effect, possible to bet throughout the match and thereby multiply one's bets. If one knows, for example, that a match will end at 3-0, and the third goal has already been scored, one can continue to bet on the fact there will be no more goals in that match. That kind of live betting creates an environment in which corruption of sporting events is almost inevitable. Senator Richard Di Natale, the Australian Greens spokesperson on gambling, said:
Online in-play betting has the potential to create a new generation of problem gamblers by encouraging the average punter to chase their losses as momentum shifts between teams. It's become impossible to enjoy a game of footy without being bombarded with betting odds or advertising for sports betting. With more opportunities for in-play betting, taking your kids to the football would be like taking them to the TAB.
The reality of what Senator Di Natale is saying is that we are losing the joy of sport and it is becoming just a gambling opportunity rather than an opportunity to express one's support for one's team or to enjoy, as I do, the simple pleasures of two teams struggling to be the best they can. It becomes an opportunity for gambling and it becomes an obsessive opportunity, capturing more and more individuals in the network of problem gambling. The third aspect of modern gambling is exotic betting. In fact, the Ryan Tandy case I referred to earlier centred around the so-called exotic bet where money is placed on a particular event or action taking place within a game. The 2008 study on the "Risks to Integrity of Sport from Betting Corruption" at the University of Selford explains both the allure and risks of exotic betting:
... many of the new types of bet[s] available raise concerns for sports because they appear to offer more scope for fixing than bets on [the] final outcome. For example, they may relate to aspects of the game under the control of a small sub-set of players or officials (making it easier to arrange a fix) or they may relate to components of an event that are fairly marginal to final outcome (tempting athletes because winning the bet need not involve losing the game).
That is to say, the creation of exotic bets creates opportunities for a relatively small number of individuals to manipulate an outcome much more easily than they can manipulate the outcome of a win or loss in a game. It also creates the opportunity to manipulate an outcome without throwing the game. Of course, any player in a team sport who throws the game obviously is not very popular with their team-mates. But if they can do so in a way that does not damage the win or lose outcome of the game there are more opportunities to corrupt the game. After a lot of public debate around exotic bets and the Ryan Tandy affair sports can now veto exotic or spot bets they think are at risk of corruption, but the problem is that there is no general ban on exotic bets. They still float around and they still create the environment in which sporting events are being corrupted. We support moves for regulation of live and exotic betting as both are a risk of corruption in sports and both are a trap for more and more problem gamblers.
Another concern we raise with respect to gambling and in particular with respect to this legislation is the huge growth in marketing of sports betting. The problem with the marketing of sports gambling is that it is targeted mostly at young people between the ages of 18 and 35, and predominantly males because they are inclined to take greater risks. A growing gambling population is increasing the stakes of sports betting and the opportunities and pressure for corruption. This legislation will go some way towards addressing the problem of sports corruption, but other things need to be done such as addressing the issues of exotic betting, the rise in gambling and live betting on games.
The final issue about which I wish to speak this afternoon relates to whether the punishment fits the crime. The major crime that is addressed in this Act is engaging in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage in connection with betting on that event, and the punishment is 10 years in jail. Is that an appropriately lengthy sentence, given 14840 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
that a person promoting or engaging in an act of child prostitution involving a child over the age of 14 is liable to imprisonment for 10 years? Similarly, a person must not sell, purchase or possess or use a firearm that is not registered and if the firearm concerned is a prohibited firearm or a pistol the penalty is 10 years imprisonment.
Is the act of corrupting a sporting event for the purpose of a gambling outcome worthy of the same degree of punishment as engaging in child prostitution with a child over the age of 14 or selling a registered firearm that is either a pistol or a prohibited weapon? It appears to The Greens as though that is not the case. As I said earlier, the harm done by the corruption of sports betting is not proportional to the harm done by engaging in child prostitution or the illegal trade in firearms. There is scope to reduce those penalties that are disproportionate to the crime that is being conducted. Nonetheless, there should be penalties and enforcement of this law. In conclusion, I reiterate a comment made by my colleague Greens Senator Richard Di Natale who said:
The time has come to create some space between sports and gambling.
If any lesson were to be learned from the Ryan Tandy affair, the cricket gambling scandals that have occurred over the past decade and the ongoing stench of corruption that surrounds football games, it would be that encouraging high-stakes gambling on sporting events and allowing it to appear as exotic online live gambling is an invitation to corruption. Unless and until this Parliament and this Government address those issues those events will continue to occur. The Greens do not oppose this legislation but we recognise it is not the complete solution to the problems that it seeks to address.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [3.32 p.m.]: On behalf of the Christian Democratic Party I support the Crimes Amendment (Cheating at Gambling) Bill 2012, which has as its purpose to amend the Crimes Act 1900 to insert new offences to prohibit cheating at gambling. There is a great deal of evidence about the growing degree of corruption in almost every area of sport. I blame it on the great expansion of online betting. The operators of those companies have cleverly devised many ways to enable people to bet that are different from the traditional way of betting. At one time gamblers bet on a winning horse but now they can bet on which horse might lose the race, or which team might lose the match. Players now work towards losing a match to gain a financial benefit from bookmakers and others who organise sporting events. In football, betting on when the first penalty will occur makes it easy for the player creating that penalty to gain some financial benefit. I am pleased that the Government has introduced this legislation.
I have conducted research to establish how much cheating at gambling occurs in sports. In August this year the dangers of gambling and sports converging were made clear in a Four Corners program on organised crime networks and official corruption in the Victorian racing industry. That episode showed how criminal syndicates valued thoroughbred racing as a means of laundering illegal proceeds. The allegations covered in the story that are under police investigation include race fixing and a murder that occurred last year in Middle Park. One of the issues raised in that Four Corners program was the growth of collusion between criminals and racing industry members since the advent of what is called exotic betting. It is easier to fix a race if someone bets on a horse losing as opposed to winning. In 2010 Canterbury forward rugby league player Ryan Tandy was convicted of trying to obtain a financial benefit for others through deception. He also provided false information to the New South Wales Crime Commission hearing after there was a betting plunge on how the first points would be scored in the National Rugby League match. This type of corruption obviously is widespread.
The Sydney Morning Herald reported details of a police investigation into Australian racing figures, including leading jockey Danny Nikolic, for alleged race fixing involving a horse called Smoking Aces. Racing figures were alleged to have fixed a race in Victoria by arranging for two jockeys to ride in a way that would reduce the favourite's chances of winning and boost Smoking Aces chances. This alleged fix is estimated to have netted the participants over $200,000—a great incentive for corruption with potential amounts such as that to be won. Betfair, which is involved in making money for the industry, revealed a separate betting investigation that took place when a punter backed a horse not to come first. Another leading jockey is believed to be involved in such betting in more than 24 races. The Betfair source said:
We have been aware of it for some time and we have told the authorities in Victoria. It is the most serious case we have at the moment.
The August 2011 report No. 130 of the New South Wales Law Reform Commission—the basis for this legislation because the Law Reform Commission recommended the introduction of new offences to prohibit corrupt betting outcomes by using inside information—gives a number of examples of corruption in the Greek football league. In April 2011 in the United States a number of basketball players and others were indicted with 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14841
conspiracy to commit bribery in relation to college basketball games. In Pakistan—a matter about which we have heard a lot in Australia—three players were given lengthy playing bans by the anti-corruption tribunal of the International Cricket Council for conspiring with bookmakers to take part in spot-fixing. Members would be aware of the corruption in Germany involving football matches, and the corruption in Taiwan where a group of former professional basketball players and a politician were jailed for match fixing.
Those examples confirm the need for this legislation, which I fully support. However, I made it clear when online betting came into vogue that we would have these problems. One does not need to be a genius to know that. We are now being subjected to heavy promotion of online betting on television and radio. Some radio stations have saturation advertising of online betting and I believe that is leading to the recruitment of many new and naive gamblers who are getting involved in what could be corrupt events.
The bill defines "corrupting a betting outcome of an event" and inserts offences of corrupting a betting outcome of an event, concealing such conduct and using corrupt or inside information for betting purposes. The offences extend to any event or contingency on which it is legal to bet under a law of any State, Territory or the Commonwealth. This is now uniform national legislation. The maximum penalty is 10 years imprisonment, except for the offence of using inside information, which carries a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment. That penalty is too lenient and I hope the Government will closely monitor its impact and review it in due course. The Christian Democratic Party is pleased to support the bill.
The Hon. SARAH MITCHELL [3.41 p.m.]: I am pleased to join my colleagues in supporting the Crimes Amendment (Cheating at Gambling) Bill 2012. I do so in the context that, as other members have said, Australia is proudly known as a sporting nation. We have recently seen some fantastic achievements at both the Olympics and the Paralympics. Australians love sport throughout the year and that love goes hand in hand with opportunities for people to gamble. It is important to note that people have the right to gamble and as long as they do so responsibly we have no right to criticise them. However, it is equally the Government's responsibility to ensure that the incidence of match fixing and cheating is minimised, and that is what this bill seeks to achieve.
The reality is that match fixing and cheating at gambling tarnish our nation's sporting credentials and they should not be tolerated. There is no place for such practices in Australia or when our competitors represent us overseas. As members have said, there has been increasing concern about match fixing and cheating at gambling in sport. It is sad to see that many of the sports that we enjoy watching, such as cricket, the various codes of football, racing and so on, fall victim to a practice that undermines not only public confidence in sport but also public confidence in the credibility of sporting professions.
With the online betting market continually expanding it has become easier than ever for people to place bets. As stated by the Law Reform Commission, a safe and lawful market should be preserved, and that market should be transparent and supervised by regulatory authorities that work closely with sports controlling bodies and betting agencies. The object of this bill is to amend the Crimes Act to prohibit conduct that can corrupt the outcome of events on which it is lawful to place bets. The Parliamentary Secretary spoke in great detail about the content of this bill and I will deal with the four main areas that it addresses.
The bill prohibits engaging in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage in connection with betting on the event. It also prohibits facilitating conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage in connection with betting on the event and encouraging another person to conceal conduct or an agreement about conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage in connection with betting on the event. Finally, it prohibits using corrupt conduct, information or inside information about an event for betting purposes.
This bill follows a national policy on match fixing in sport that commits governments at all levels to address the threat of match fixing and the corruption that is embedded in such a practice. The bill also enacts recommendations of the Law Reform Commission to introduce broadly framed criminal offences to cover conduct that corrupts betting outcomes, ideally to be implemented by the States and Territories. In July 2011 the Standing Council on Law and Justice agreed to establish a working group to develop a proposal for pursuing a nationally consistent approach to criminal offences relating to match fixing.
The working group endorsed the introduction of new offences covering match-fixing behaviours. After targeted consultation with legal and sporting stakeholders this year, the bill enacts the offences recommended by 14842 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
the Law Reform Commission amended to be consistent with those endorsed by the Standing Council on Law and Justice. The bill sends a clear message that criminal activity in regard to betting on sport will not be tolerated by this Government. I am very pleased to commend the bill to the House.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE (Parliamentary Secretary) [3.45 p.m.], in reply: I thank members for their contributions to this debate. The New South Wales Government is taking the lead in sending a clear message that cheating at gambling will not be tolerated and that it will do all that it can to ensure a safe, transparent and lawful sports betting market. This is a very important bill. The Government is intent on cleaning up this area and it takes this issue very seriously.
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: I do not think you introduced the legislation flippantly.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: This Government does not introduce any legislation flippantly.
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: We did not either when we were in government.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: That is a matter of debate. Many members on this side of the House believe that the Labor Government did introduce bills flippantly, and I think the majority of people agree. That is why the Coalition is in government and the Labor Party is not after some 16 years of misery for the people of New South Wales.
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: That's not true.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: It is true.
The Hon. Walt Secord: Point of order: The Parliamentary Secretary is straying far from the leave of the bill.
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: To the point of order: That point of order is outrageous. Opposition members are deliberately provoking the Parliamentary Secretary. It is outrageous for the Hon. Walt Secord to object when the Parliamentary Secretary acknowledges interjections.
The Hon. Catherine Cusack: Having distracted him.
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: Yes, having distracted him. He is suggesting that the Parliamentary Secretary has no right to respond. Madam Deputy-President, I ask you to call the Hon. Walt Secord to order.
DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! There is no point of order. However, I remind members that interjections are disorderly at all times. I also remind the Parliamentary Secretary not to respond to interjections.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: Madam Deputy-President, I thank you for your wise ruling. I will no longer respond to interjections from Opposition members. In this new era in this State crime will no longer be tolerated and there will be no soft options for criminals. This Government intends to clean up this area which is why it introduced the Crimes Amendment (Cheating at Gambling) Bill 2012. We are intent on taking the lead in Australia to clean up this area. Following the Law Reform Commission report on complicity, which was released in December 2010, the chair of the Law Reform Commission wrote to the then Attorney General noting that the report might have implications for the common law offence of conspiracy to cheat and defraud. The chair identified possible weaknesses in existing unlawful gambling provisions and recommended further consideration of a broader cheating at gambling offence.
This Government has taken that recommendation on board and I believe it has been incorporated in this legislation. In early January 2011 the then Attorney General referred the issue back to the commission, in March a consultation paper was issued and in August 2011 a final report was handed down. The commission received a number of submissions that supported the view that specific criminal offences were necessary to provide a safety net for any regulatory action to address cheating at gambling. The Government has taken those suggestions on board.
The final report of the Law Reform Commission relating to this matter included a draft bill with recommended offences. Those offences, which covered engaging in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome and 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14843
the use of inside information, have subsequently been the subject of targeted stakeholder consultations conducted by the Department of Attorney General and Justice. I listened closely to the contribution of Dr John Kaye who offered advice, as he always does, and who said that the penalties for offences in this bill were too high. The Greens said that the penalties relating to cheating were too high.
The Hon. Walt Secord: He supports cheating?
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: Cheating is taken seriously by this Government as it corrupts sport. Dr John Kaye wants to keep sporting fixtures in this State clean.
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: Point of order: Madam Deputy-President, I draw to your attention the interjections of Opposition members which are distracting the Hon. David Clarke from concluding his reply to debate on this bill. I ask you to bring Opposition members under control.
The Hon. Walt Secord: To the point of order: We are responsible for many things but we are not responsible for the member's short attention span.
The Hon. Rick Colless: To the point of order: On behalf of the Hon. David Clarke I find that comment to be extremely offensive. Madam Deputy-President, I ask you to ask the Hon. Walt Secord to withdraw that remark.
The Hon. Walt Secord: I withdraw.
DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! I do not uphold the point of order. I remind all members that interjections are disorderly at all times.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: Once again I thank you for your wise ruling, Madam Deputy-President. On the one hand Dr John Kaye wants people to enjoy sport for the sport's sake and he does not want it corrupted by gambling and, on the other hand, he wants to reduce the penalties introduced for crime that is corrupting sporting events in this State. That is typical of The Greens; they always go soft on law and order when it comes to protecting the citizens of this State from crime. That is why The Greens vote is collapsing all over Australia, that is why it collapsed in the Northern Territory and that is why it went backwards in Queensland, Victoria and in Saturday's local government elections. In some areas The Greens vote collapsed by 30 per cent, 40 per cent, 50 per cent and more because The Greens are gathering a well-deserved reputation for being soft on criminals and soft on crime. Nothing will change. The Greens will always be soft on crime because they have that inflexible, fixed, Stalinist-type outlook.
The Greens have a cheek to come into this Chamber and talk about getting criminals out of sporting events and reducing penalties in this bill. This Government and the people of New South Wales will not succumb to what The Greens want, which is why their vote is collapsing all over the country. This Government will not be distracted by The Greens; it will continue to introduce legislation that is in accordance with the overwhelming wishes of the people of this great State. That is why the Coalition was elected with the greatest victory ever and that is why it enacted legislation that has been called for by the people of New South Wales.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: We believe in truth, purity and justice.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: As the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps said, we believe in all those laudable things.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Very laudable, and The Greens hate them.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: The Greens certainly hate them. They have always hated truth, justice, purity and liberty. We do not intend to succumb to their attempt to soften our stance on this bill. The Government is proud of and is taking the lead in relation to this legislation.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: And we acknowledge the support of the Opposition.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: As the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps said, we acknowledge the support of the Opposition. The former Labor Attorney General, the Hon. John Hatzistergos, was a fine and decent man. Just as this Government will not succumb today to the enticements of The Greens to lessen these penalties I know that 14844 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
the Hon. John Hatzistergos, if he was here, would not succumb to their blandishments. He was not taken in by The Greens and nor will we be taken in by The Greens. I am glad that today the Opposition has not been taken in by The Greens. I respectfully suggest to Opposition members, decent Australians that they are, that they should shed their Green allies as they will lead the Australian Labor Party to the depths of despair and destruction. For the good of Australia and for democracy we do not want that to happen. We do not want The Greens to weave a web over Labor Party members who, on the whole, are good and decent people. I commend the bill to the House.
Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted to proceed to the third reading of the bill forthwith.
Third Reading
Motion by the Hon. David Clarke, on behalf of the Hon. Michael Gallacher, agreed to:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Bill read a third time and returned to the Legislative Assembly without amendment.
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted at 4.00 p.m. for questions.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ______
SCHOOL FUNDING
The Hon. LUKE FOLEY: I direct my question without notice to the Hon. Marie Ficarra. As the chair of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2, the committee charged with the oversight of the Education budget, what consultation was undertaken with the member or the committee by the Premier or Minister for Education before they decided to cut $1.7 billion in funding from public, Catholic and independent schools?
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: I thank the Leader of the Opposition in this place for his relevant question, which I will pass on to the responsible Minister for a detailed answer.
The Hon. LUKE FOLEY: I thank the Hon. Marie Ficarra for her answer. Will the member further elucidate her answer, particularly as to where and when she made representations on the proposed cuts to public, Catholic and independent schools?
The PRESIDENT: Order! The question is out of order. It was not a supplementary question; it was a new question.
POLICE BULLET-RESISTANT VESTS
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: I address my question to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Will the Minister advise the House on the progress of the Government's commitment to replace bullet-resistant vests for police?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I thank the member for his question and his ongoing interest in policing issues. One of my most important tasks in becoming the police Minister was to ensure that our police officers, who provide safety and security in our communities, have the equipment and support they need to do their job. A fundamental issue for police officers is appropriate protective equipment. An audit of bullet-resistant vests by the Police Force found that around 2,880 of the vests in operational use had exceeded the manufacturer's recommended warranty, and prior to March last year the Coalition, when in opposition, committed to implementing a replacement program for bullet-resistant vests. I am pleased to say that the Government is delivering on yet another commitment. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14845
A working group was established by the NSW Police Force to investigate replacement options for bullet-resistant vests, and specifications and a procurement plan were developed. In the 2011-12 budget the Government backed up its promise by allocating funding of $3.8 million over two years. Last financial year the Government spent $2.5 million and by the end of June it had delivered 2,500 new vests to police officers. To complete the project, the remaining funding of $1.3 million was included in the 2012-12 budget. I am advised that a further 500 vests were received in early August and that the manufacturer will deliver the remainder by the end of October. The vests are being rolled out across the NSW Police Force to local area commands, regional enforcement squads and strike forces such as Strike Force Raptor, which is targeting violence between outlaw motorcycle gangs. The vests are also being rolled out to the gang squad and the dog unit—the Hon. Amanda Fazio's favourite unit. The NSW Police Force has also invested nearly $2 million in funding to purchase more than 13,000 D-ring thigh holsters.
[Interruption]
The Hon. Greg Donnelly is shooting himself in the foot; he should leave well enough alone. The thigh holsters allow an officer to wear a firearm on his or her thigh rather than the belt, where it can cause injury while driving. It also allows an officer's firearm to be completely accessible in the event it is needed. The purchase of these new bullet-resistant vests and holsters are another example of how the New South Wales Government is delivering on the promises it has made to police officers and to the people of New South Wales. I am proud to be part of a government that is getting on with the job of providing the New South Wales Police Force with the numbers, the resources and the powers it needs. Over the past 18 months the Government has provided crucial support to our police officers. It is committed to, and is clearly delivering, legislative, technological and safety initiatives to support our police officers. The new bullet-resistant vests and thigh holsters are a practical way of ensuring the safety of our police officers as each officer undertakes his or her important role in protecting our community.
NSW LONG TERM TRANSPORT MASTER PLAN
The Hon. ADAM SEARLE: I direct my question to the Minister for Roads and Ports. In light of yesterday's Cabinet documents that reveal an additional $22 billion in tolls is required to fund the $74 billion shortfall in the Government's transport plan, where will the $22 billion in additional tolls be applied across New South Wales?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I thank the member for his question. How predictable that the Labor Party has gone to its own question committee: the Daily Telegraph.
The Hon. Steve Whan: So that is your answer?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I do have an answer and those opposite will not like it. First, let us establish the facts. The document referred to in the media is a first draft internal working paper. It is not complete. It has not been checked, and it has not gone to the office of either responsible Minister. However, I have been advised that the conclusions reached are wrong. The newspaper mixed up total funding with funding sources. It has not done the maths correctly—just like those opposite.
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: It is your document—
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: If the member listened, she might learn something.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Penny Sharpe to order for the first time.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Assuming that $136.8 billion is the preliminary 20-year cost of the Long Term Transport Master Plan—
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: Do you not know what your own funding is?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: This is the draft plan, and that is the figure that was used in the media— not that it is necessarily correct. The O'Farrell Government has increased capital investment in transport. The current forward estimates—
The Hon. Walt Secord: You do not have any— 14846 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Just listen.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Walt Secord to order for the first time.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: The current forward estimates reflect $25.3 billion over the next four years in capital funding. This is detailed on page 323 of the draft master plan.
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: If you are going to be Treasurer—
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Listen.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Penny Sharpe to order for the second time
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Those opposite should be able to work it out. It is an average of $6.3 million per annum, and if one multiples that by 20—because 20 years is the period of the master plan—one gets $126.4 billion.
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: How much?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It equals $126.4 billion. Assuming the Federal Government will provide New South Wales with its fair share of funding in forward years, the O'Farrell Government is within a whisker of getting the $136.8 billion. Those opposite cannot do the maths; they just want to scaremonger. Simple mental arithmetic is too difficult for those opposite. They dragged out the Cuisenaire rods but once again they have failed. Those opposite failed in government and they have failed in opposition. They have based this question on an unaccepted document supposedly given to the responsible Ministers—which neither of us has seen—and published in the Daily Telegraph. So this question, sourced from their questions bible, the Daily Telegraph, does not add up. Those opposite should apologise to the House for their neglect of duty as an Opposition. An Opposition that so blatantly cannot get its sums right certainly does not deserve to be in government. I suspect that members opposite are seriously risking their Opposition position.
STRATA BUILDING CODES
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE: I ask the Minister for Finance and Services, representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, a question without notice. In view of the recent tragic fire in Bankstown when two female residents were forced to jump from the fifth floor of a new strata building, is the Government aware of recent research emanating from the University of New South Wales that indicates that as many as 85 per cent of new strata buildings completed in New South Wales contain defects often relating to fire safety, water egress and noise? Is the Minister aware that 75 per cent of owners subsequently report difficulties in getting builders, developers and insurers to make good these defects? What measures is the Government putting in place to reinforce that the New South Wales Government is admitting its own responsibilities under the law and the relevant building codes for strata buildings?
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I thank Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile for his important and serious question. On behalf of the Government I again extend our condolences to the family and friends of the victims of that fire. I will get the member a detailed answer. The matter was discussed in Cabinet earlier this week, although I cannot disclose those exact conversations. However, the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is leading a response on the matter.
PORT KEMBLA REDEVELOPMENT
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports. Will the Minister update the House on the redevelopment of Port Kembla's outer harbour?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: As the Hon. John Ajaka knows, the Government is committed to supporting jobs and growth in the Illawarra and the vital role it has to play in the New South Wales economy. The people of the Illawarra deserve the sort of infrastructure investment that, frankly, was ignored by members opposite for 16 years. Port Kembla will play an important role in rebuilding a strong Illawarra economy. The redevelopment of the outer harbour will diversify the port. Today I am delighted to announce the start of the tender process for the next phase. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14847
The PRESIDENT: Order! If the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham and the Leader of the Government want to have a conversation, they should do so in the members' lounge.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: This is an exciting and significant phase in the redevelopment. I know that The Greens do not care a hoot about the Illawarra. It is the first new berth in the outer harbour to accommodate new industry. Four experienced civil maritime design consultants have been invited to submit tenders after an extensive expression of interest process. The tender process will close in one month, and the tender is due to be awarded in December 2012, with design work commencing shortly afterwards. Getting the first berth on the drawing board is an exciting step in this long-term project, which is expected to develop over the next 20 to 30 years. The design work will include the first new berth, dredging of the shipping channel and berthing basins, further reclamation areas and roads and services to complete a fully operational berth facility and a hydrodynamic review of the outer harbour wave climate and mooring analysis.
Construction is expected in the second half of 2013. Most importantly, construction is expected to generate 500 local jobs. Once it is operational this stage is expected to generate 200 direct and indirect jobs. All this work falls within the scope of the Outer Harbour Master Plan, which was approved in 2011 to guide the development of the port to provide additional land and berthing facilities to cater for expected trade growth into the future. The entire outer harbour development is estimated to be worth $700 million, and work started on stage 1A in August of last year. I am pleased to report that that work is progressing according to schedule, and a significant milestone was achieved in March this year with the one millionth tonne of material being placed.
We expect that the significant growth opportunity presented by the outer harbour expansion will be viewed favourably by the future private landlord, who would bring investment to support the development of the port over time. I think the community understands that we need to raise revenue in various ways to help build vital transport infrastructure. We inherited an economic mess and a massive infrastructure backlog from members opposite and we need to make tough decisions to correct Labor's failures. The long-term lease of Port Botany and Port Kembla would release additional funds to deliver key projects, including upgrades of the Pacific Highway and the Princes Highway.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham to order for the first time.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Proceeds from the Port Kembla transaction will be invested in Restart NSW, with $100 million of that earmarked for infrastructure projects in the Illawarra. We are getting on with the job of rebuilding the Illawarra and rebuilding New South Wales to overcome the mess that we were left.
MEMBER FOR MYALL LAKES COMMENTS
The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: My question is addressed to the Minister for Roads and Ports. Does the Minister agree with the comments by the member for Myall Lakes, Stephen Bromhead, who, after the Minister's comments about the Manning Alliance, labelled the people who attended the Protect our Land and Water rally in May, which included members of the New South Wales Farmers Association and the Country Women's Association, as "dogs with fleas"?
The Hon. Rick Colless: You nutcase.
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Point of order: The Hon. Rick Colless just called me a nutcase. I take offence at that. His comment shows that he is a nutcase. I ask him to withdraw.
The PRESIDENT: Order! Given that the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham has just referred to another member in the same terms, I suggest that both members should voluntarily withdraw the word "nutcase". It is entirely a matter for each member.
The Hon. Rick Colless: I am happy to withdraw my comment when I referred to the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham as a nutcase.
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: I too withdraw.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Now that the excitement is over I am more than happy to answer the question. I am not one to take allegations by The Greens in their questions as the truth. 14848 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: He said it.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Listen for a moment, Corncob Joe. I know for a fact that the member for Myall Lakes did not say what the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham has accused him of saying. The member for Myall Lakes was concerned about the closeness of the alliance with The Greens, which they deny. However, given the concerns expressed by the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham, it is obvious that the alliance is very close to The Greens. I am reliably informed that the comment made by the member for Myall Lakes was that if one lies down with dogs, one gets fleas. That is a well-known country term. I know the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham is a recent import to the country. He pretends that he is part of the country and that he cares for the people in the bush, but he is just trying to sneak a vote for the inner-city Greens. I am reliably informed that that particular alliance is very close to The Greens.
RAIL FREIGHT
The Hon. PENNY SHARPE: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports. In the Government's unfunded transport plan, has the Government removed the target for freight containers being moved by rail? What is the target for freight moved by rail in New South Wales?
The PRESIDENT: Order! Before the Minister commences his answer I remind the Hon. Penny Sharpe that she is on two calls to order. If she wishes to disagree with the Minister's answer at any time, I suggest that she take the opportunity to do so later in the proceedings.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I thank the Hon. Penny Sharpe for her question.
The Hon. Walt Secord: Where's the answer?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: If members opposite had been listening, they would have heard the answer earlier in question time. The suggestion that this is an unfunded policy is a façade; just Labor drippings. This is a detailed draft document, which was constructed—
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The question is about targets for freight containers by rail. It has nothing to do with the previous non-answer from the Minister.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: To the point of order: I clearly heard the member refer in her question to "unfunded transport plan". It was as clear as anything from the Opposition.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Penny Sharpe should not make debating points when taking a point of order. Specifically, the member should not use such words as "non-answer from the Minister".
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I might add that if the honourable member opposite had read the document, she would have noticed that the detailed freight plan is still to come. Members opposite did not read it and did not respond when we invited submissions. Others throughout the State, including the shadow shadow Minister, Ryan Park, put in a submission.
The Hon. Mick Veitch: Penny said you are better than this, Duncan.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: No, the Hon. Penny Sharpe did not say that. It is a bit like playing "Mick says", I suggest. The New South Wales Government supports the use of rail freight movement. Rail is typically the dominant freight mode for bulk goods such as coal and export grain and for moving goods longer distances. Moving more freight quickly and economically by rail through our ports is critical to accommodate the high forecast growth in freight movements, particularly through Port Botany and, as the honourable member indicated, having regard to the lifting of the cap.
As part of New South Wales 2021, the Government is committed to enhancing rail freight movement and to doubling the proportion of container freight movement by rail through New South Wales ports by 2020. Achieving this target will maximise the operational capacity of our ports and ease road congestion. To help achieve this target, a New South Wales Freight and Ports Strategy, integrated with strategic land use and transport planning, is being developed by the Freight and Regional Development Division of Transport for New South Wales, as I indicated a moment ago. That is in the draft strategy. The strategy will be supported by detailed modelling to determine future operating capacity of New South Wales ports. This includes analysis of landside infrastructure and options to increase the use of rail to service ports. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14849
New South Wales is also working with Infrastructure Australia and the Commonwealth Government to identify further critical freight rail infrastructure priorities, including the duplication of the Botany line. The New South Wales Government is also jointly funding the Northern Sydney Freight Corridor Program with the Commonwealth. This is a billion dollar project. [Time expired.]
The Hon. PENNY SHARPE: I wish to ask a supplementary question. Can the Minister elucidate his answer to advise how many freight plans there will actually be?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: One.
ILLAWARRA GRAN FONDO AND MULTI SPORT FESTIVAL
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services, and Minister for the Illawarra. Can the Minister please inform the House as to recent developments of the Gran Fondo and Multi Sport Festival?
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I thank the honourable Parliamentary Secretary for his question. At the State of the Illawarra leaders summit last year I committed that the Government would showcase the region by bringing the Gran Fondo to the Illawarra. I am proud to say that, unlike those opposite, I fulfil my promises. The Gran Fondo will be rolled out over two years. On 8 and 9 December this year there will be an invitation-only elite criterium cycling race, which will raise money for prostate cancer research and awareness. For the cycling fans, the GreenEdge pro-cycling team will be racing on a course between 60 and 100 kilometres.
The Wollongong event will run in conjunction with the already successful International Cycling Grand Prix Criterium series event in Cronulla. By next year, the Wollongong Gran Fondo will be in full swing and by 2014 it is anticipated that around 4,000 cyclists of all levels of ability will take advantage of 100-kilometre and 160-kilometre races. This will truly be a mass participation cycling event. The cycling course is the Australian leg of a wider sporting experience that encompasses locations such as Los Angeles and New York and includes a fun run, a triathlon and an ocean swim. The race will take the riders through the region, particularly the scenic communities of Wollongong, Shellharbour and Kiama. It will cover landmarks like Flagstaff Hill and the Blue Mile. The race will also wind around the Illawarra coastline and escarpment, highlighting the area's stunning beaches and rough terrain.
The Gran Fondo will position the Illawarra region globally as a vibrant event destination, creating a world-class cycling race for the State and bringing together both elite and recreational riders to enjoy the picturesque Illawarra community. It will expose the region to global publicity and increase tourism revenue over the next several years. The vision is to create a major multi-sport festival catering for the huge global growth in cycling as a sport as well as stimulating the local economy. In addition to cycling, there will be a fun run, an ocean swim, a triathlon, an Expo and the New South Wales International Cycling Grand Prix Criterium.
The announcement of this event is the result of the hard work of Destination NSW, USM Events and the Wollongong City Council. Cycling is the number four ranked participation sport in Australia, but this festival is set to see the Illawarra region ranked even higher as a sporting and tourism destination in Australia. The event will be paramount in securing future tourism dollars for the region and showing the global community the significance and beauty of the region. I am looking forward to 8 December and the first stage of the Gran Fondo, and to watching this fantastic event grow over the coming years. I advise the Hon. Mick Veitch that I have with me a lovely photograph of myself with local cyclists that I am very happy to autograph and have framed for placement on his desk.
WILD DOGS
The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Primary Industries. What is the total number of wild dogs shot by Game Council conservation hunters in State Forests compared to those shot by hired contractors during the last six and a half years? Has Forests NSW been able to reduce the amount of money spent on animal control due to the work of conservation hunters and, if so, by how much?
The Hon. Marie Ficarra: Off the top of your head, Minister.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Yes, off the top of my head. I thank the honourable member for his question. I suspect that, given the tone of the question, the numbers will show that the conservation hunters he referred to in his question have done a damn good job, and I am sure they have. I do not have a detailed answer to the question, but I will make it my business to get one for the honourable member. 14850 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
SPEEDING FINES
The Hon. STEVE WHAN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports. Will the Government include speeding offences issued by police officers as part of its promise to hypothecate all revenue from speeding fines and redirect it to road safety programs?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: That is actually a damn good question. The honest answer is that I do not know. My understanding is that all the speeding fines that will go into that area—I assume this is the case but I will double check—are the ones that come from the cameras. I will clarify that and find out. There is of course a bill coming through both Houses and we will find out.
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: It is your bill.
The Hon. Mick Veitch: Penny says it is your bill.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Sorry, I could not hear you, Penny. I am sure there will be discussion when that bill comes through. By way of background, the beauty of what we have done is to put together a composite road safety package not so much to catch people speeding but to slow them down. We reduced the number of cameras that the former Government was going to put in place by 40 per cent—
The Hon. Steve Whan: It has certainly slowed you down.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It has slowed me down. The member is right about that. I have never pretended that my behaviour in the past was totally commendable. It was not bad, but it needed to be better and it certainly is better. I hope it has slowed down my colleagues as well. The fact is that where we have put the safety cameras in place we now have two signs in front of them and they are bigger signs. First, it is easier to see them and read them. One sign is immediately in front of the camera and there is another sign that is beyond the ability of the camera to actually ping motorists. If someone gets caught by one of these cameras they are either dumb or determined. What we really want people to do is to slow down. Also, and this is something the Opposition could have done, we are putting all the money from these cameras into a road safety fund. They could have done that. They can slip the questions in now, but when it came to doing the job they did not do it.
The Hon. Steve Whan: How much extra money out of it?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Just listen. You asked me a question.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Steve Whan to order for the first time. If Opposition staff continue to make noise in the President's gallery they will spend the remainder of question time outside the Chamber.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Whilst the Opposition was carrying on I have been able to get information that reinforces my knowledge about this. The money from police-issued tickets does not go to this community fund. The fund has been set up to receive only the fines revenue generated from camera-detected speed and red light offences. It includes offences detected by fixed cameras, red light speed cameras and point-to-point mobile speed cameras—those managed by Transport for NSW in partnership with Roads and Maritime Services. We are setting this up to take all the money that comes from the cameras. While enhanced police enforcement, roadside drug testing and other road safety-related operations will be paid for out of the Community Road Safety Fund, the fund will be administered by Transport for NSW and directed to meeting that organisation's road safety responsibility. It is not considered appropriate— [Time expired.]
POLICE NUMBERS
The Hon. SCOT MacDONALD: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Will the Minister provide an update on the NSW Police Force?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I inform the House that New South Wales has more police officers than I outlined to the House last Thursday. As members will recall, when last we sat I spoke about the operational capacity of the NSW Police Force, a report which reflects how many police officers are currently available for duty. The report provides transparent information on police numbers by not including police officers who are on long-term sick leave, extended leave, maternity leave, leave without pay or suspended from 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14851
duty, in the same way that members opposite did when they were in government. The data was available on the police website and was reported on as at 24 August 2012. Opposition members must have waited for a few days after I announced its release in the House last week until they got a chance to look at it because on Friday they put out a press release stating that police numbers were 350 down since May 2012.
I am happy to advise the House that this is not the case. I have been advised by the NSW Police Force that while the figures for each of the 80 local area commands across the State accurately took into account the 437 officers who had attested from the Police Academy on 24 August, they were inadvertently left out of the total strength figure. As such, instead of an operational full-time equivalent figure of 14,636.3 the number should have read 15,073.3. This represents a net increase in full-time equivalent staffing numbers of 87 officers since May 2012 and an operational capacity of 94 per cent. The NSW Police Force has advised me that this error has since been rectified on its website. So while I understand the Opposition's comments in this regard— the information they were relying on was incorrect—there is certainly no excuse for the inaccuracies in the remainder of the media release put out by the member for Blacktown and the member for Toongabbie.
Let me make this abundantly clear: The NSW Police Force has not cancelled the September intake of students into the Police Academy. I am advised by the Police Force that the entry into the Police Academy of a small number of students who have completed their preliminary studies through distance education has been deferred until January 2013. I am advised that this decision was based on the projected numbers required for the NSW Police Force between December 2012 and May 2013. This means more officers are staying in the force, which is hardly a bad thing. Despite what has been implied by the Opposition, this does not mean there will be no students at the academy over the next six months. Indeed, I have been advised that around 300 probationary constables are scheduled to attest in December. The fact is a career in the NSW Police Force is more popular than ever. That is why New South Wales is the only jurisdiction in Australia with no difficulty in attracting students.
BEEHIVE DESTRUCTION
The Hon. ROBERT BROWN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. What progress has been made in the investigation into the destruction of 1,600 beehives which were sprayed with household insecticide near Batemans Bay on the far South Coast earlier this year?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: It is a stinging question for the Government. I will endeavour to get an answer about that investigation for the local member from the local police down south.
The Hon. Robert Brown: Get you the buzz.
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: He will get the buzz. Once I get the answer I will certainly deliver it to the member's hive office as quickly as I can.
HUNTER INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS SAFETY
The Hon. WALT SECORD: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, and Minister for the Hunter. The Newcastle University Students Association recently released a report detailing 163 reports of physical and verbal assaults on international students between August 2011 and August 2012 on the main campus. Given these figures, will the Minister set up a specialist reference group to combat and tackle racist attacks on international students in the Hunter as requested by the community?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I thank the honourable member for his question. I assume I am the only member in the Parliament, including the other House, who has sat down with representatives from the university in the past to discuss this very issue. I took time to go there and speak with them, rather than maybe getting information from newspaper clippings or by some other process. The honourable member should take time to go there and not only speak to the university but also listen to what they have to say about the fine work that is being done and the fine relationship that exists between the university and the police in the local area command. Police are aware of the issues in that community that are sadly often the result of a small number of local people who decide to take it upon themselves to destroy the confidence that our international students and our domestic students enjoy when moving around the beautiful city of Newcastle.
The union recently released the results of the survey—I suspect that the honourable member gets his information from a survey release rather than putting on a pair of shoes and seeing the community himself— 14852 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
conducted between August 2011 and August 2012 in relation to the assaults. I am advised that the survey was conducted online and anonymously. Police have said that they cannot comment on the statistics in the survey or the accuracy of the survey results, but there is a disparity between incidents reported to police and those reported in the student survey. As I have indicated, university personnel indicated that they have a good relationship with the police. The police meet regularly with the University of Newcastle to discuss crime prevention issues and work closely with the university's security to ensure the safety of all students.
One of the issues for the young people was lack of transport. The students walk through the undergrowth areas of parklands of a night-time when moving from university lectures to their accommodation. There was a discussion about the provision of buses and the feedback received was that a lot of students did not want to use the buses. It required a focus on educating the students of the potential risks of walking through the quiet parkland areas of a night-time. It is important that we encourage them to report crimes. We can only address a problem if we know where it is and exactly what is occurring.
I commend the University of Newcastle for conducting a survey. I commend the honourable member for at least taking time out to read the survey. I can assure the honourable member that the university and the police take crime seriously in the grounds of the university and around the community. More importantly, the people of Newcastle and the surrounding Hunter community appreciate the monetary value that international students bring to the community. In addition, they appreciate what they bring to the social fabric of the Hunter. The Hunter most certainly welcomes international students and will continue to do so for many years to come.
EMU CREEK BRIDGE
The Hon. SARAH MITCHELL: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports. Will the Minister update the House on what the Government is doing to improve the Emu Creek Bridge near Bundarra?
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Oh, no strategic regional land use plan?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I thank the honourable member for her question. I acknowledge the irrelevant comments from The Greens, who would not give a damn about the people of Bundarra near the Emu Creek Bridge. I am delighted to inform the House that the Government has provided funding for a cost and feasibility study on the Emu Creek low-level bridge. Roads and Maritime Services will match Uralla Shire Council's commitment of $34,000 in funding to ensure the study goes ahead. The Emu Creek crossing is about 3.75 kilometres south of Bundarra on Thunderbolts Way, which connects Uralla with Inverell via Bundarra. Those on the losers lounge, which includes The Greens, would have no idea where that is. There are no trendy cafes, small wine bars or mung bean shops. Bundarra is tough country, with great residents who care about their community.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham to order for the second time.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Indeed, a former leader of those opposite could not even pronounce the bridge's name. I congratulate the member for Northern Tablelands and recently announced Nationals Federal candidate for New England, Richard Torbay, and the duty member of the Legislative Council for Northern Tablelands, Sarah Mitchell, on advocating on behalf of their community and pushing this issue to the Government. I also congratulate Bob Crouch, the Chairman of the Emu Creek Committee, and the committee members on behalf of the community. They have worked hard on this issue.
In June this year—following vehement lobbying from the local State member, the duty member of the Legislative Council, and council and community groups—I, along with the member, Sarah Mitchell and Bob Crouch, inspected the bridge and heard the concerns of the committee. I saw the needs firsthand and gave a commitment that I would return to Sydney and shake the tree to see whether I could come up with some funding. Council had asked for the help that the feasibility study needed before any upgrades could go ahead. Whilst I have done just that and whilst I have been shaking the tree, the local member of Parliament and the duty member of the Legislative Council have been hounding me for money, which is why I am so pleased we have been able to commit the funding needed towards the feasibility study.
[Interruption]
I know the Labor Party does not care about the people of the Northern Tablelands or the people of regional New South Wales, but I will continue my answer for the rest of the House who actually understand the problems they have faced. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14853
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Steve Whan to order for the second time.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: The Emu Creek Bridge is low level and often closed to traffic during flood events. I am advised that the frequent closure and unreliability of closing times of the bridge have had a significant impact on children from the southern area attending various schools in the region. It also has an impact on emergency service vehicles getting around the region, which is one of the biggest concerns of the local community.
[Interruption]
I would have thought the Hon. Mick Veitch would care about the local community.
The Hon. Mick Veitch: I do.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Then stop going on with this rubbish. There is no alternative available to us, which means people have to travel an extra 95 kilometres via Torryburn and Gwydir River roads. [Time expired]
The Hon. SARAH MITCHELL: I ask a supplementary question. Would the Minister elucidate his answer?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I could have completed my answer, but for the interjections from those opposite who just do not care for the people of Bundarra. For emergency services, the extra 95 kilometres can be the difference between life and death. Thunderbolts Way is an approved 25-metre B-double route, with 550 vehicles in total travelling each day, 30 per cent of which are heavy vehicles. Once again, the Hon. Walt Secord is showing his ignorance of regional New South Wales. He has no idea what a B-double is and has no idea how important these vehicles are for the economy of regional New South Wales. Smutty jokes from the person who was the spin doctor for the former Government shows his continuing disdain for anything happening in New South Wales.
The Hon. Luke Foley: Point of order: The Leader of the House is reflecting on an honourable member. He knows better than that.
The PRESIDENT: Order! To suggest that a member is telling smutty jokes is reflecting on a member. Although provoked by a stream of disruptive abuse from the member, the Minister should not reflect on the member in that way.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I will continue to try to resist. The feasibility and cost study is essential to council's planning to maintain traffic flow during flood events along this road. This is yet another example of our Government delivering to rural New South Wales and making a real difference to small communities.
STRATEGIC LAND USE PLAN
The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Primary Industries. Today the Government launched the Strategic Regional Land Use Plan and the Aquifer Interference Policy. What is his response to the New South Wales irrigators who have called the Government's policy a profound disappointment?
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham has asked his question. He will listen to the answer in silence.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is a sad day today for The Greens because all the nastiness and scaremongering that they have indulged in around the State for years has come to an end. The forces of good and enlightenment have released a strategic policy that is an absolute cracker. As the shadow Minister responsible for this portfolio area, I took a policy to the last election that was better than any policy members opposite offered while they were in government. In fact, they did nothing. Frankly, it was the best policy in the Commonwealth at the time. This Government has taken that policy and made 27 important changes. Something that was fantastic is now even better. 14854 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The question specifically referred to the response of the NSW Irrigators' Council. The Minister has not addressed the substance of the question.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister was being generally relevant. There is no point of order.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I recommend the drinking of water on all occasions. This is the saddest day since last Saturday, when The Greens lost badly at the local government elections. They have just copped another hiding. They have lost their ability to scaremonger across the State because, as I was about to say, the policy that this Government has implemented is not only the best in the Commonwealth but also the best in the world. We took suggestions from the community and political parties—
[Interruption]
The Greens are even losing support in Nimbin. The Government has heard the suggestions made by farmers and the community and included them in the policy. It is tough and it does not deliver everything for everyone. When a government does something as innovative and as good as this it will not address all the issues. However, it is much better than the policy introduced by the Labor Party and The Greens when they were in government.
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: When we were in government?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: You were. The Labor Party and The Greens have been in partnership for a long time. The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham's esteemed colleague Lee Rhiannon was part of the former Government.
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The question referred to the response of the NSW Irrigators' Council. The Minister has failed to mention the council in his long, rambling diatribe.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister is starting to stray from the substance of the question. However, his speaking time has expired.
KINGS CROSS LATE-NIGHT TRANSPORT SERVICES
The Hon. HELEN WESTWOOD: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Transport.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Charlie Lynn will come to order.
The Hon. HELEN WESTWOOD: In light of alcohol-fuelled violence in a number of Sydney nightspots, including Kings Cross, why does the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan not include any strategies to extend transport services to remove people from those areas late at night?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I thank the honourable member for asking a good question. The Government addressed community issues within the transport master plan.
[Interruption]
Anyone who made a submission can make a contribution. However, if I were on two calls to order I would resist the temptation to make any further comment. It is the honourable member's choice—if she wants to comment she should feel free to do so.
The Hon. Steve Whan: Point of order: It is unparliamentary for the Minister to goad a member in an attempt to get her to fall foul of your rulings, Mr President. I ask that you request the Minister to answer the question.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I remind members that interjections are disorderly at all times. The Minister will resist the temptation to respond to them. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14855
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: As I was saying before one of the Hon. Penny Sharpe's colleagues took a frivolous point of order, this is an important question, which I have answered in part. The Minister for Transport is a member of the group that is working on a plan for Kings Cross.
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: Another plan?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Does the member not want the Government to do anything? Was that interjection from the Hon. Penny Sharpe or does the Hon. Mick Veitch have his arm up her back?
The PRESIDENT: Order! I have asked the Minister not to respond to interjections.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I apologise; I am sometimes easily led. The Minister for Transport is working on this issue with the Premier, the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and the Minister for Tourism, Major Events, Hospitality and Racing. An important announcement will be made soon because this situation cannot be ignored, particularly given the tragic death of a young man recently in Kings Cross.
COUNCIL SECURITY DEPOSITS
The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK: I direct my question to the Minister for Finance and Services. Will the Minister update the House on security deposits for self-insured local councils?
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I thank the honourable member for this important question. Members should be aware that the New South Wales Liberal-Nationals Government is acting decisively to address some major problems with the workers compensation scheme. Part of the problem is the excessive red tape requirements for employers to meet their workers compensation obligations. I am pleased to inform the House that I have recently announced that the Government has reduced the requirement for government-owned entities, local government authorities and private universities to lodge security deposits to cover workers compensation obligations. For some organisations this measure has literally freed up millions of dollars. In local government it means that the additional funds can be directed towards community infrastructure projects that will in turn boost employment and thereby make local communities better places in which to live.
A total of $300 million is now held in security deposits for a number of local councils, mostly in the form of bank guarantees, which reduces their borrowing capacity and therefore their ability to fund core activities. This State deserves the sort of workers compensation scheme that will provide injured workers with the support they deserve while encouraging businesses and jobs growth. I recently had the opportunity to visit Shoalhaven City Council, where I met with the then mayor, the Hon. Paul Green, who was an excellent mayor. For the Shoalhaven these changes will result in an additional $2.2 million in cash being released this year. I am pleased that the Government was able to do this for the Shoalhaven and I am looking forward to hearing what the council will do with the additional funds that it will be able to access.
Reducing the security requirement will not only free up funds but also open up participation in alternative insurance arrangements for the workers of those employers. It may also drive improvements in work health and safety, which is of course one of this Government's prime concerns. This change to security deposit requirements is yet another way in which the Government is strengthening and improving outcomes for participants in the scheme. It again demonstrates the Government's commitment to reducing the regulatory burden that the New South Wales community faces while continuing to achieve a more effective and sustainable workers compensation scheme. It is also evidence of the Government's commitment to sustainable communities. Importantly, this measure also demonstrates the positive contribution that can be made by members of the cross bench. Unlike them, members of the Labor Party and The Greens have constantly fought the Government's changes.
BUS VANDALISM
The Hon. PAUL GREEN: My question is addressed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Transport. On 14 March 2012 I asked a question about bus vandalism. Given that graffiti and etching vandalism are a costly burden for this State, and 60-plus infringements were issued in Newcastle and only two in Sydney last year, will the Minister inform the House whether there is a different approach in Newcastle as opposed to Sydney? What changes will the Minister make, if necessary, to ensure perpetrators are caught and punished accordingly? 14856 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Frankly, off the top of my head I cannot explain the difference between the two areas.
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: Typical.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Can you? You've got the big mouth. What's your answer? The Hon. Paul Green indicated 60 infringements had been issued in Newcastle and only two in Sydney. Short of employing the Hon. Amanda Fazio to control these buses, which would fix the vandalism—
The PRESIDENT: Order! I remind the two ministerial colleagues of the Minister for Roads and Ports that he requires no assistance when answering his question.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I am also aware by way of my colleague that there is a new Transport Police section on public transport, which I am sure is making a difference. I do not have a direct answer to the question asked by the Hon. Paul Green but I will take it on notice and provide a reply.
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I suggest that if members have further questions they place them on notice and they will receive answers in the fullness of time.
SCHOOL FUNDING
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: I have further information in regard to—
The PRESIDENT: Order! I remind the Hon. Marie Ficarra of the strict parameters relating to relevance. A much higher standard of relevance is required of a private member when providing an answer to a question than is required of a Minister.
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: In relation to the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition earlier in question time in relation to school funding, with a $5.2 billion reduction in GST revenue over the next four years, and reductions in other forms of revenue—
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Marie Ficarra is now trespassing into the subject of the substantive matter; she should confine her comments to her role as the chairman of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2. I remind the member of my previous ruling. The Hon. Marie Ficarra may speak about how the committee will handle something but she must not speak to the substantive issue. Does the Hon. Marie Ficarra have anything else she wishes to add?
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: In view of the standing orders, no.
DEFERRED ANSWERS
The following answers to questions without notice were received by the Clerk during the adjournment of the House:
BUS VANDALISM
On 14 March 2012 the Hon. Paul Green asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Transport, a question without notice regarding bus vandalism. The Minister for Transport provided the following response:
I am advised:
1/7/2011 – 30/6/2012: 2 infringement notices in Sydney (no repeat offenders), 68 infringement notices in Newcastle (2 repeat offenders). Main age group for offenders is 14-16 years.
Any form of graffiti or vandalism on State Transit buses is not tolerated.
State Transit has digital CCTV on all its buses. The quality of the footage is such that Police can use the downloaded footage for identification of offenders and for evidence if necessary.
State Transit works closely with the NSW Police, often in joint operations, and also with other concerned government agencies and the community to reduce incidents of etching and other forms of vandalism and graffiti.
In Newcastle, State Transit staffs have ongoing checking of buses for vandalism and graffiti and in this respect undertake joint operations with police. Buses are always clean when they go out on the road.
11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14857
State Transit buses are routinely checked for vandalism by State Transit bus drivers as part of their pre-departure checks. When State Transit receives reports of vandalism from its drivers or from members of the public, the CCTV video from the bus is downloaded and examined. State Transit is able to send copies of etchings and tags to the police for their use as required. Where offenders are identified as school students, State Transit staff may visit the schools concerned to identify the offenders and issue the appropriate infringement penalty notices.
In a joint initiative between the NSW Police and State Transit uniformed police randomly board buses and check for anti-social behaviour, including etching occurrences. When major instances of graffiti are found on buses operating on school services, State Transit works in closely with individual schools to address the issue.
State Transit has a strategy of early detection and rapid removal of graffiti, including etching, before the problem has built up. This has proven to be a very effective way of reducing the impact of graffiti. Incidents of graffiti, including etching, have been declining with the anti-graffiti strategies adopted by State Transit over recent years.
YOUNG PEOPLE IN RESIDENTIAL AGED CARE PROGRAM
On 16 August 2012 the Hon. Jan Barham asked the Minister for Finance and Services, representing the Minister for Disability Services, a question without notice regarding the Young People in Residential Aged Care Program. The Minister for Disability Services provided the following response:
• As at 18 July 2012, 675 applications had been received by the program since its inception in 2007.
• Of the total 675 applications:
o there is a spread of requests for each of the support options offered through the program.
o 423 applications are from residents of aged care facilities. Of these, 50 per cent indicated they want to remain in a residential aged care facility.
o 382 applicants have undergone a comprehensive assessment of their support needs.
• Of the 382 applicants who have undergone an assessment of their needs, 337 were deemed eligible to receive Young People in Residential Aged Care [YPIRAC] support. Sadly 56 of the 337 eligible people have since died, leaving 281 current program participants.
• These 281 program participants receive a total of 1,334 services.
• Typical services include supported accommodation, individually planned In-Reach support packages, equipment, home modifications and case management.
In-Reach Packages
• 115 In-Reach packages have been provided across New South Wales as at 18 July 2012.
• In-Reach packages are individually tailored packages of disability supports, which consist of a range of services that increase community engagement and provide recreational and diversional therapies and allied health services.
• In-Reach packages are being made available to clients who have elected to remain in residential aged care, and to those who are waiting for alternative accommodation arrangements to become available.
• As people move into supported accommodation their In-Reach package will cease and be replaced by a day program.
Accommodation
• The program is establishing 121 supported accommodation places in 2012-13.
• 73 people are funded for their accommodation as at 18 July 2012. The remainder will move to their new accommodation in the next 12 months.
• The majority of these are clients moving out of residential aged care. Supported accommodation facilities in the program are being custom designed to meet the complex health needs of clients.
• By mid 2013, it is anticipated that 35 supported accommodation facilities will be constructed.
• As the accommodation is designed to meet specific people's needs, provision of accommodation follows needs assessment, identification of solutions to meet people's needs, acquisition of suitable property in an appropriate location, and the design and construction of premises that will be right for the residents.
• 62 people in the Young People in Residential Aged Care program have requested to be considered for supported accommodation should a suitable vacancy arise and these people are on a needs register for consideration.
14858 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
In-Home Services
• In-Home services provide a range of disability supports such as personal care, community access, social support and therapy in a person's own home.
• In-Home services are primarily being made available to the program "Divert Group" (i.e. clients in the community at risk of inappropriate entry to aged care).
• As at 18 July 2012, 65 clients were in receipt of In-Home services, which enable them to remain in their own home. Of these, 20 are receiving Young People in Residential Aged Care In-Home packages and 45 are receiving attendant care packages with Young People in Residential Aged Care augmentation.
Equipment
• In June 2008, $4.1 million was provided to EnableNSW to provide equipment to clients living in residential aged care.
• In June 2011 an additional $1.25 million was provided to EnableNSW to fund additional equipment for new clients of the Young People in Residential Aged Care and for servicing of existing equipment purchased for Young People in Residential Aged Care clients.
• 243 clients have been referred to EnableNSW and have received equipment such as specialised wheelchairs and communication aids as at 18 July 2012.
• 681 pieces of specialised equipment have been provided to these clients, noting that Young People in Residential Aged Care clients can receive up to three or more pieces of equipment, as required.
Other support services
• Funding has been provided to the New South Wales State-Wide Home Modifications Service to assist clients who require home modifications to enable them to move out of a residential aged care facility into their own home.
• Home modification services have been provided to 20 people.
• $170,000 was allocated to New South Wales Community Options Projects Incorporated in 2009-10 to provide intensive case management services for up to 50 clients with very complex support needs.
o 34 clients have now been referred for intensive case management services.
o These services are focused on assisting people to transition into alternative accommodation services.
• $266,000 has been provided to the Multiple Sclerosis Society to conduct the continuous care pilot.
o The pilot provides intensive case management, coordination and other assistance for up to 20 people with a progressive neurological condition who are at risk of inappropriate entry into residential aged care.
o 15 people were successfully diverted from entry to residential aged care following support by the pilot.
Questions without notice concluded.
Pursuant to sessional orders debate on committee reports proceeded with.
GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 2
Report: Education Amendment (Ethics Classes Repeal) Bill 2011
Debate resumed from 4 September 2012.
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE (Parliamentary Secretary) [5.04 p.m.]: As a member of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 I will make some comments regarding the committee's report inquiring into the Education Amendment (Ethics Classes Repeal) Bill 2011. The inquiry resulted from widespread community disquiet as to the manner in which the Labor Government introduced ethics classes into our public schools without an open and transparent process, without any tendering process, and without any public consultation as to what the ethics course would actually teach. I applaud the Coalition Government for facilitating the inquiry into the issue of ethics classes so that the process of what actually took place under the previous Labor Government in introducing an ethics course could be exposed to public scrutiny.
I congratulate Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, who did not allow himself to be intimidated by some media commentators and some of The Greens and did not resile from having the issue revisited in a more 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14859
democratic way. I pay tribute to the chair of the committee, the Hon. Marie Ficarra, for her professional and constructive chairmanship of the inquiry, and I thank the committee's secretariat staff who assisted to their usual high standards of excellence. The Coalition enabled and facilitated this inquiry, which is certainly far more than the previous Labor Government would have allowed. The process followed by the previous Government in introducing ethics classes was a disgrace—a heavy-handed, dictatorial and secretive approach.
The approach resulted in a deal between the Labor Government, the NSW Federation of Parents and Citizens Associations and the St James Ethics Centre, pursuant to which the Labor Government determined that the teaching of an ethics program in our public schools was to be a monopolistic arrangement which was not open to tender. No other parties that may have been willing, ready and able to provide and operate an ethics program were invited to tender. The whole process was a sham that locked out all competition. The then Labor Government, when it engineered this whole process, knew it was a government on the nose with the electorate. It eventually had come to the realisation that it was facing certain defeat, no matter how many times it changed Premiers, and in its dying days was hell-bent on ramming ethics classes through in the form it wanted, with a content that it had ticked off on and without a tendering process.
Knowing its days as a government were rapidly coming to an end, it kick-started the program, hoping it would deny an incoming Coalition Government an opportunity to effect any input at all. The inquiry which the Coalition has initiated has been a worthwhile exercise. First of all, it has confirmed for all to see that Labor's process was not a transparent one. The appointment of an ethics course provider was not by public tender. Consequently, the committee has in recommendation 5 of its report proposed that the Department of Education and Communities establish an open and transparent expression of interest process to allow other organisations to apply to deliver special education and ethics in New South Wales government primary schools before 2014.
A number of the submissions, both written and verbal, made to the committee expressed concerns about the contents of the course. A number of witnesses, including eminent ethicists, expressed concerns that the course did not properly teach right from wrong, which goes to the very heart and soul of what Western civilisation sees as the very basis of ethics. Concern was expressed in some submissions that interested parties were experiencing difficulty in obtaining details of the full curriculum outline, and what the ethics course taught. With those concerns in mind the committee proposed in recommendation 4:
That the Department of Education and Communities, in the revised Religious Education Implementation Procedures and the new Special Education in Ethics procedures, require all providers to post their curriculum outlines and curriculum scope and sequence documents online, and that all relevant curriculum information be presented in the order in which it is taught.
Whilst the recommendation rightly refers to both special religious education and special ethics education, special religious education has been taught in New South Wales public schools since 1880 and the content of such courses is well known and settled. On the whole these courses have been taught without controversy and they continue to be taught without controversy. Indeed, special religious classes are given many thousands of times each month with very little complaint.
Ethics teaching in New South Wales public schools is very new and the parents of children being taught ethics need to know exactly what their children are being taught. That is why recommendation No. 4 is particularly worthy of support, as is recommendation No. 14: that an independent review of both special religious education and special ethics education be conducted in 2014-15. The recommendations contained in this report will help restore transparency to the tainted process used by the previous Government when it introduced special ethics education into our public schools. This inquiry conducted by General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 was very worthwhile.
The Hon. PAUL GREEN [5.11 p.m.]: I speak to the inquiry into the Education Amendment (Ethics Classes Repeal) Bill 2011. I commence by thanking the Hon. Marie Ficarra, the chair of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2, the Hon. David Clarke, Dr John Kaye, the Hon. Sarah Mitchell, the Hon. Shaoquett Moselmane and the Hon. Helen Westwood. I also thank Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, who substituted for me, and all other members who volunteered their time during the inquiry. I thank the hard-working committee secretariat: Rachel Callinan, Rebecca Main, Alex Stedman, Angeline Chung and Nyoka Friel. The committee received 473 submissions and four supplementary submissions, which canvassed a broad range of views in relation to special ethics education. I will give a brief background to this debate.
The history of special religious education in New South Wales government schools dates back to the nineteenth century, and its important role in educating our children has been reflected in legislation since 1866. In A Short History of Australia author Manning Clark wrote about the absolute importance of faith groups in schools. Nevertheless, a number of parents have expressed the desire not to have their children taught special 14860 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
religious education—that is a parent's right and that right remains respected. Some have also said that they did not want their children to be idle while special religious education classes were being taught. Hence the Federation of Parents and Citizens' Association of New South Wales and the St James Ethics Centre lobbied for and trialled secular ethics classes to provide a "meaningful" activity for those students who had decided to opt out of special religious education classes.
This goes to the crux of the debate—that is, the specific purpose of ethics classes was to provide an alternative activity for students who had opted out of special religious education. Special ethics education was never legislated to displace special religious education classes. Despite this original intention, the antireligious tone of some submissions boldly proposed to eliminate special religious education classes. I quote in part from the submission received from parents4ethics:
A parent whose child was about to start school commented: "I had a Christian upbringing myself, but I strongly believe that it should not be part of the secular school system and I am amazed that this hasn't been questioned and remedied in the past in this State. The very idea that outside religious groups have unfettered access to the developing minds of our children is simply beyond belief."
Mr Hill, a parents4ethics spokesman, seemed to distance himself from that statement but it represents a number of proponents for ethics classes. Indeed, Mr Hill said:
We are not advocating the change or the abolition of the current arrangements whereby time is allocated for kids to go to scripture or to ethics.
Many different faiths are concerned that special ethics classes will be used as a tool to overtake and undermine special religious education classes. The committee noted the varying views expressed. The underlying tone of those views being that while it was great to hold an inquiry there was still a lot of contradiction, and special religious education should be taught outside the classroom. Mr Khaled Sukkarieh, the chairman of the Islamic Council of NSW, called it a "grave concern". Mr Sukkarieh said:
… we call ourselves a secular society that people might see this as a window of opportunity to taking over scripture classes slowly and by stealth. I mean "taking over" by replacing it … we feel it is a precursor to changing our State.
A number of members have not been shy in expressing their agenda to eradicate scripture classes from our public schools. I quote Dr John Kaye from the Hansard of 1 December 2010:
… religious education or spiritual education should be conducted in the home or church group, not taught at school.
In light of this opposition to special religious education classes, I note a significant finding of the committee:
The Committee "adamantly" supports the continuation of SRE classes and acknowledged the worth and valuable contribution it makes to government schools.
The committee also made a number of other findings. Both special religious education classes and special ethics classes do not receive government funding and the committee recommended that the status quo remains. A number of inquiry participants were concerned that Primary Ethics held a monopoly over the delivery of ethics classes. The committee recommended that the Department of Education and Communities establish an open and transparent expression of interest process to allow other organisations to apply to deliver special ethics education classes in New South Wales public primary schools. Other participants were concerned that some of the curriculum developed by Primary Ethics was not age appropriate. The committee recommended that the Department of Education and Communities:
… continue its role in reviewing the age appropriateness of all relevant special ethics education curriculum and teaching materials.
Inquiry participants were also concerned that access to the curriculum materials was restricted. The committee called on the Department of Education and Communities to:
… extend the proposed Religious Education Implementation Procedures requirement relating to the online disclosure of curriculum outlined by special religious education providers to also apply to curriculum scope and sequence documents.
It further recommended:
… that all relevant curriculum information be presented in the order in which it is taught and that the department incorporate these requirements in the new special ethics education procedures it is developing so that it also applies to Primary Ethics and other future providers of special ethics education.
11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14861
This is a win for transparency and will ensure that parents have greater access to what is being taught in ethics classes. The committee found that there was a lack of statistics for the number of students both in special religious education and special ethics education classes. It recommended that the Department of Education and Communities collect and publish annual data for these classes in order to assess and quantify student demand. Data will also be required for students who do not attend either class. Special education ethics classes were introduced to prevent student idleness but this concern remains. A number of students do not wish to participate in either special religious education or special ethics education classes. The committee also recommended that the Department of Education and Communities revise its Religious Education Implementation Procedures to recommend adequate supervision and appropriate meaningful activities for students to participate in.
The committee also recommended that the Department of Education and Communities require adequate training accreditation and that compulsory child protection training be mandatory for both special ethics education and special religious education volunteers. The committee heard that the ethics classes were rushed and there seemed to be a lack of community consultation, with the faith providers in particular, before the fall of the previous Government. The Christian Democratic Party is not totally happy with the content of the committee's recommendations and feels that they fall short of the overall aim of the terms of reference. However, given the U-turn by the special religious education faith groups, we note that the inquiry suggested a number of improvements to the way the special ethics classes are run. Hopefully, when the recommendations are implemented greater transparency will result.
Ultimately, the Christian Democratic Party notes that in order to address education with a holistic approach there should always be a component in the education curriculum that addresses a person's spiritual needs and outcomes. Therefore, the inquiry was quite concise in terms of the overall outcomes. The inquiry turned from special ethics education to special religious education. Someone was able to switch the inquiry to look at both of those things. At the end of the day I generally think the committee came out with fair and transparent recommendations. The Christian Democratic Party commends the report to the House.
The Hon. PENNY SHARPE [5.21 p.m.]: I will make a short contribution to debate on the General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 report on the Education Amendment (Ethics Classes Repeal) Bill 2011. Some time ago I received a letter from a student, Maia Hopf, then in year 3 at Mona Vale Public School. Maia wrote to me because she supported ethics classes. She wrote:
At the moment I go to Catholic scripture because mum makes me and there are no other things for me to do other than nothing and to me that is boring so I support your idea about learning ethics instead of going to scripture.
Like Maia, I am a strong supporter of ethics classes as an option for students not attending, and who do not wish to attend, scripture in public schools. I congratulate the committee on its work in examining ethics as an option for students opting out of special religious education. I commend the committee's recommendation not to repeal ethics classes and its support for improving and strengthening not only special education and ethics but special religious education as well. I also acknowledge the parents who campaigned so hard on this issue and who have contacted my office over many months to express their support for ethics classes for their children. More than 1,200 people signed the petition I put forward supporting ethics classes. I support ethics classes because, like Maia, I believe that students should have the chance to learn rather than to do nothing if they opt out of special religious education. As Bryan Cowling from the Anglican Education Commission, the church's peak education body in the Sydney diocese, told the Sydney Morning Herald on 21 June 2011:
"I have seen the curriculum, which none of the churches had seen before the legislation went through and, having seen the curriculum, it's nothing to be frightened of," he said. "It is good educational stuff".
Something that seemed to be lost early on in this debate is the fact that ethics classes were not, and are not, a replacement for special religious education. Ethics classes in New South Wales public schools provide parents and students with an alternative for those students who do not attend special religious education. This is not, and never was, about competing with scripture. Ethics classes are a choice for parents who have already chosen not to send their child to special religious education. Indeed, parents were crying out for ethics as an alternative. In fact, as the committee noted, ethics classes were instigated because of parent demand. The catalyst for parent concern was that the traditional special religious education structure left those children who opted out with dead time in their school calendar.
In some schools not all faiths are offered as special religious education alternatives. In other schools significant numbers of parents choose not to send their children to special religious education. Officially they were performing private study under the supervision of a regular teacher. Practically, this time was highly 14862 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
unstructured and included activities that added little or nothing to those children's education. Students watched videos or coloured in. With more than 100,000 children in New South Wales opting out of special religious education, this dead time represented a significant wasted opportunity. An ever-increasing number of parents came to view this outcome as grossly inequitable and crystallised around ethics education as a solution.
The trial of ethics classes based on the St James Ethics Centre program gave an opportunity for students to consider ethical questions without having to profess a particular theological world view. A rigorous, independent evaluation of the ethics course trial was undertaken by an independent academic—Dr Sue Knight of the University of South Australia. Some 745 submissions were received in response to the evaluation of the trial and 730 of them were in support of ethics classes. The people whose children took part in the trial were overwhelmingly positive. The message from parents was that they should have the right to choose what is best for their child; it is not up to politicians to decide for them.
I am pleased that the committee has come to this sensible conclusion and that the Government will not be repealing ethics classes. In opposition, the Coalition's position on this issue was confusing. In government, the Coalition did a deal with the Christian Democrats to allow the repeal of ethics classes to be considered via this inquiry in return for the Christian Democrats' support for restricting the rights of public sector workers and selling off electricity. Not only did this fly in the face of the Coalition's pre-election commitments, but as Dr Cowling from the Anglican Education Commission said:
… removing the classes would be "undemocratic and Mr Nile's proposal risked throwing the whole area into turmoil, so ultimately [that] could mean SRE could disappear altogether. I don't think his position can be defended on the basis of fairness."
Presumably the Government must think that New South Wales parents are not capable of making decisions in their children's best interests. The teaching of ethics is a valuable addition to New South Wales public schools that recognises the diversity of our State and contributes to the public good. Ethics classes have been implemented successfully and received a highly positive response from parent and providers. They are a better option for children who have already opted out of special religious education than unstructured private time. I look forward to the classes continuing to expand across New South Wales.
The Hon. HELEN WESTWOOD [5.25 p.m.]: I will speak briefly as many other speakers have addressed most of the issues covered in the report. First, I thank my parliamentary colleagues who were members of the committee, the chair, the Hon. Marie Ficarra, and the committee secretariat. As usual, the staff have done a superb job of putting together the submissions, summarising and analysing them, and then assisting with the recommendations. I will speak to some of the recommendations. First, I support the recommendation that the Government not seek to repeal section 33A of the Education Act that allows for special ethics classes in government schools and that it continue to facilitate the delivery of special education in ethics in government primary schools as an option for students who do not attend special religious education.
It is important to note that, contrary to the argument put to the House today, there was significant consultation prior to the establishment of special ethics education. The Labor Government had been lobbied forcefully by parents and their representatives, through parents and citizens associations, as well as individual parents and organisations such as the St James Ethics Centre. Parents saw that the failure to have an alternative to special religious education meant that children were sitting idly in classrooms not participating in any productive activity that had an educational, social or cultural value. I find it hard to understand those who argue that we should not provide an alternative to special religious education because we are a pluralist society. Many people do not have a faith: they are not believers, and that is the reality of our pluralist society.
Therefore many parents will choose not to send their children to religious education. To expect those children to spend their time watching DVDs, which make no contribution at all to their education, is absolutely irresponsible of us as legislators. I reiterate that special ethics classes were established in response to calls from parents. Once they were established they were very well received.
The other aspect with which I still have difficulty is that those who support special religious education seem to be of the view that religious education is so fragile that anything could damage or demolish it and the system that supports it in our schools. Surely religion and faiths are now far more robust than that in Australia. I cannot accept that argument at all. For some faiths the number of followers is growing; for others it is not. There is no doubt that some faiths have growing attendances at services and others are in decline. But to suggest that in 2012 the faiths and various denominations are not robust in Australia is an unsustainable argument. It is imperative for us to provide an alternative for those children who are not attending special religious education classes that have some educational and social value. I believe that ethics classes will fulfil that requirement. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14863
Recommendation 2 states that the Government should maintain the current situation so that providers of special education in ethics or special religious education do not receive direct financial support from the Government and that the Department of Education and Communities publish on its website information advising that the provision of special education in ethics and special religious education is not government funded. Whilst I understand that recommendation, an issue that was addressed by the committee—regretfully it was not supported by the majority of members—was that those organisations providing special education in ethics should have tax deductibility or charity status which would enable them to attract donations to assist in the cost of putting together various curricula and providing those classes in schools. Those committee members who voted down that suggested amendment were certainly lacking in goodwill. It is reasonable for those organisations to attract donations through tax deductibility or charity status, so I was disappointed in the position that was taken. It seemed to me to be extremely mean spirited of those who support special religious education to be unwilling to make a simple recommendation to the Federal Government about the availability of tax deductibility.
I have taken more time than I had intended but I would like to make some other points. Recommendation 5 states that the Department of Education and Communities should establish an open and transparent expression of interest process to allow other organisations to apply to deliver special education in ethics in New South Wales government primary schools before 2014. Importantly, it states that the providers of special religious education should be prohibited from providing special education in ethics as we might then end up with special religious education in another name, which would be contrary to the intention of special education in ethics and the purpose of establishing special education in ethics classes. I believe that parents would be gravely concerned if they found that churches and religious organisations were then attempting to provide special education in ethics. Once that amendment was proposed the supporters of special religious education—the Government and the Christian Democratic Party—chose not to support it. I again ask: Why is that their stated position?
Another matter of great concern to committee members was recommendation 12—the two-stage application process—which seems to make it unnecessarily complicated for parents. People talk about openness and transparency so why should parents not have those options available to them at the time that they enrol their children? It is a completely illogical and irrational recommendation. That process will require a great deal of administrative support at the same time as the Government is cutting 400 school administrative positions. This two-stage process, which is completely unnecessary, will result in the taking up of more administrative hours. Recommendation 12 is about discouraging people from enrolling their children in special education in ethics. In fact, I am sure it is an attempt to keep special education in ethics a secret from parents at the time that they enrol their children, which is indefensible. I am disappointed by the position taken by Coalition members. I thank the Hon. Lynda Voltz and the Hon. Eric Roozendaal for appearing in my place on two days of committee hearings.
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA (Parliamentary Secretary) [5.35 p.m.], in reply: I thank all my colleagues who made excellent contributions to the debate on ethics classes in government schools in New South Wales—the Hon. Shaoquett Moselmane, the Hon. Sarah Mitchell, the Hon. Lynda Voltz, Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, Dr John Kaye, the Hon. David Clarke, the Hon. Paul Green, the Hon. Penny Sharpe and the Hon. Helen Westwood. Their contribution during the inquiry and the way in which they approached this important educational issue was inspiring and showcased the value of the work of upper House committees.
I single out Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile in particular. He insisted that this Parliament and all stakeholders concerned should take a closer look at the introduction, development processes and delivery of ethics classes in New South Wales. The educational sector is now charged with the delivery not only of ethics but also of religion in State schools and will make a valued input in both areas of special education in the future. As such we have a better relationship and respectful communication between those who develop and deliver the curriculums for special education in ethics and religion under the direction of the Department of Education and Communities. There is much expertise to be shared with parents and carers of core life values, classroom management, teaching skills, training and communication. I learned on the ground that volunteers for ethics and religious classes were making terrific bonds of friendship, respect and cooperation. Left to their own devices children in the playground get on fabulously, regardless of their culture, race, colour or religion. It is only when adult prejudices start to influence children's minds that their behaviour is adversely affected and that continues often into their adult years.
There were some dissenting reports on what I considered to be minor logistical implementation procedures. I feel confident that experts in the Department of Education and Communities will discuss with principals these notification procedures and improve on the system that existed in the past. Many parents and 14864 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
carers told committee members that they wanted more information and clearer directions on what was on offer at the time of enrolling their children in schools. Many parents and carers wanted to be able to find out online what was being taught during the year as well as having an opportunity to discuss these matters with the volunteers who were teaching their children. In reality, few parents or carers avail themselves of this option. However, I was pleased that the suggestion for greater transparency and information came from major providers of special religious education such as the New South Wales Inter-Church Commission on Religious Education in Schools and the Catholic Conference of Religious Educators in State Schools.
These providers, along with the St James Centre for Ethics, as developers of their relevant curriculums, are proud of the educational standards they have developed over time with high standards of pedagogy and a holistic approach of socialising and raising children and young people. As chair of the committee I am sure I speak on behalf of all my colleagues in saluting the fine efforts of the tens of thousands of selfless volunteers who spend so much time each week in our government primary schools. We shout from the rooftops a big thank you to them all. Indeed, when we consider that special religious education has been taught in our schools since 1866—146 years—we thank the hundreds of thousands of volunteers over so many years. They are truly wonderful people. I know that the time they devote to their initial training before even setting foot in a classroom is considerable—classroom management skills, communication skills, speech training and then curriculum training—but volunteers of both ethics and religious education are given the skills base that they need to be effective in the classrooms.
Ongoing feedback, training and supervision are part of operational procedures and, from the evidence we received, prove most effective. This inquiry was a significant opportunity to unite communities with initially divergent views and perhaps a lack of understanding of one another's educational objectives. During the course of this inquiry the committee saw a converging of objectives where all participants clearly were focused on the welfare of our young students in government primary schools. The committee was of the view that special religious education and special ethics education can operate alongside each other to the benefit of all students, their families and carers, who are our key stakeholders.
It was with this objective in mind that the committee made a number of recommendations aimed at improving the implementation and delivery of ethics classes and special religious education: increasing the availability of information for parents, including fact sheets on special religious education and ethics; improving access to the special religious education and ethics curriculums; ensuring suitable training of volunteer teachers; and the collection of statistics on the number of students participating in ethics, special religious education and those students who do not attend either classes. We have also recommended that the Department of Education and Communities give more guidance to schools on what to do with students who do not attend special religious education or ethics classes, including what constitutes adequate supervision for students and in what activities these students can be meaningfully engaged during that time slot.
I am pleased to say that there was much support from our stakeholders for a future independent review of both ethics classes and special religious education to be conducted by appropriately qualified early childhood educational reviewers in 2014-15, which will include the issues that have been raised in this report. Ultimately, the Department of Education and Communities and the Minister of the day will determine the tendering and selection processes. The majority of committee members were confident that the appropriate transparency and accountability will be put in place at that time. It is with the key stakeholders in mind, the students, that the committee has considered the important issues raised in this inquiry and presented a suite of recommendations that uphold the right of choice for students and their parents and carers, and advocates improvements in the area of special religious and ethics education.
I give special praise to the members of our secretariat, Rachel Callinan, Rebecca Main, Alex Stedman, Angeline Chung and Nyoka Friel for their patience, professional support and enthusiasm. Indeed, I feel it was a great honour for all of us, secretariat and members alike, to be part of this inquiry and this process of community consultation and discussion with key stakeholders that the Legislative Council does so well in relation to so many divergent and often controversial issues. The spirit with which all the stakeholders approached the inquiry, regardless of whether they were teaching ethics or special religious education, was very positive. It is always pleasing to me that during the course of inquiries not only does the knowledge of members of the committee increase—whether Government, Opposition or crossbench members—but also the knowledge of the stakeholders about one another and one another's curriculum and objectives. It was clear from the beginning of the inquiry as we got into taking public submissions that there was a better understanding of one another's objectives. That was fantastic to see. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14865
I know for a fact that this improved relationship and communication between the developers of curriculums for both ethics and religious education is increasing. The providers of special religious education are interacting more amongst themselves and interacting with the deliverers of ethics education. As we went around the schools and talked to volunteers who participate in the teaching both of ethics and religious education it was wonderful to see that they had a fantastic working relationship. Many friendships developed outside the schools and classrooms, which was heartening to see and which set a good example for the students involved and their parents and teachers. I commend the report to the House.
Question—That the House take note of the report—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON STATE DEVELOPMENT
Report: Economic and Social Development in Central Western New South Wales
Debate resumed from 4 September 2012.
The Hon. PAUL GREEN [5.45 p.m.]: When I last spoke I was referring to corridor preservation. We keep hearing about the Bells Line of Road—
The Hon. Mick Veitch: Bells Line expressway.
The Hon. PAUL GREEN: Bells Line expressway is a no-brainer. It starts with preservation of corridors and that applies not just to the Bells Line of Road. Previous governments took the initiative to preserve corridors only to sell them off for other outcomes, which tragically we now realise was not the best idea with the city becoming gridlocked. I also noted that roads are the arteries to many rural towns out west and most of their lifeblood was coming from particular routes, whether they be expressways or highways. I note some of the concerns expressed in recommendation 16 about rail and air connectivity. I think the Hon. Steve Whan talked about it or was going to speak about it.
The Hon. Steve Whan: I have not spoken yet.
The Hon. PAUL GREEN: It was the Hon. Mick Veitch. Air connectivity was a major concern as far as arrival times in Sydney were concerned for producers and others who wanted to get flights or land their freight. There is no doubt the bigger issue of a second airport for Sydney and its ability to function means a lot for rural and regional New South Wales. But that is a debate for another day. Another issue that arose on our tour was local government financial sustainability. There is a lot of concern about this in rural and regional areas. The Fiscal Star report mentioned that about one-third of local governments across New South Wales were financially unsustainable, another third were facing troubled times and the remaining third were managing.
The communities are unsustainable, given the road maintenance costs and the large amount of money that are needed. They raised with us the hindrance of rate pegging if they were to continue maintaining the roads and other assets. Many of these local government areas want to abolish rate pegging. I am not against it, provided that we take the community with us. There are three options. With option A there will be no rate rise; the status quo will remain. With option B we will have to try to meet some of our needs with asset maintenance. Option C is the you-beaut model where we will provide asset maintenance and build infrastructure, but there will be a long-term need to service that infrastructure. Long-term financial sustainability in regional New South Wales is a matter of concern.
Many other funding models were mentioned with respect to the need for regional cultural sports facilities—something that is required in the Shoalhaven. It is nice to have the Evocities Program—people contesting migration out of Sydney and fighting for businesses to land in our region. However, if we do not have the infrastructure or the services our hands will be tied behind our backs and we will not be able to compete against other regional areas. This is no different. In his book Reinventing Australia Hugh Mackay mentioned that people move to a village or a rural area because they want to live quality lifestyles and are enamoured with the character of its people. They love the hospitality and that neighbourly feeling when they give their neighbours some veggies or eggs over the back fence. Unfortunately, most of those people move back to the city within 12 months because the locality does not have the services or the infrastructure. That ideology aligns with 14866 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
people's need to give their kids the best. Many people are having fewer children because they want to give them a better outcome in life—whether it is education, opportunity or experience. That will not happen in rural areas if they do not have the infrastructure to ensure that their kids are getting the very best.
There are also food security precinct issues. Farmers are leaving their properties and cannot subdivide their land because it is needed for food security. Their kids will not work that land. Farmers have to service their property loans, which often is a big tussle. Farmers are desperate as they cannot subdivide their land or do anything with it when they retire and need to move on. How do they manage their land, given that they cannot pass it on or do anything else to improve it? Some of these issues only get worse with time as major supermarkets press down the price of products. Farmers need help to get their freight across the mountain ranges. Mention has been made of the importance of the Maldon to Dombarton railway line. Building surgeries is an important health initiative to retain specialist general practitioners and medicos in our regional areas. I thank the committee secretariat and all committee members for their assistance and cooperation.
The Hon. STEVE WHAN [5.52 p.m.]: It is a pleasure to speak in debate on report No. 36 of the Standing Committee on State Development entitled "Economic and social development in central western New South Wales." I thank the committee secretariat for its hard work and commend the chair for the report which contains some important recommendations for the future of central and western New South Wales—an area with unique challenges and different needs. I strongly welcome some elements in this report. One of the key challenges for any government is that regional New South Wales is not a one-size-fits-all model.
We must deal with these challenges in different ways, in particular, in areas that have reasonable population growth. In some areas population growth is stagnant and in other areas there are mining booms. The proximity of some regional areas to major cities and the travelling times to those cities has resulted in growing populations which in turn has placed pressure on farmers to subdivide their land. Those areas in which land values are low would benefit from such an investment. People in regional New South Wales, in particular in central western New South Wales, have many and differing needs.
I shall refer specifically to a number of issues that are dealt with in this report. Many witnesses who appeared before the committee emphasised the importance of the National Broadband Network to the future development of central western New South Wales. A number of people said that the National Broadband Network would be a great equaliser for businesses in regional New South Wales. Mr Morrison, who appeared before the inquiry, described fibre-based delivery of the National Broadband Network as essential for the development of central and western New South Wales. He said:
This is a technology that is driving the future. This is a technology that is driving how we live. It is going to affect urban patterns of settlement and the technology of broadband or internet services changes the way we operate.
The equaliser that the National Broadband Network will provide is critical to the development of regional New South Wales overall, but particularly to central western New South Wales. It will give businesses an opportunity to locate in regional areas and communicate quickly with the rest of the world. Fibre-based delivery will bring Australia up to the world's best standard. Currently we are well behind the world in the provision of much infrastructure. When I was returning home last Thursday, I picked up the My Business magazine in the airport lounge and was pleased to see that it referred to National Broadband Network business opportunities.
It listed 10 things that businesses should do to plan for the National Broadband Network. One suggestion was to relocate to regional areas as there would no longer be a need to pay high city rents— communication would be just as accessible in regional New South Wales. It is important to emphasise the opportunities that the National Broadband Network will open up for regional New South Wales. This National Broadband Network with fibre, which was designed by the Federal Government, is not a half-baked model with fibre ending at the nodes or a reliance on copper for the remainder of the way through to homes or businesses— something that has been mentioned on a number of occasions by Federal Opposition members.
The tenth recommendation in the report is that the New South Wales Government supports a high-speed National Broadband Network and will proactively engage in the rollout to maximise the engagement of a network coordinator who will be of benefit to regional and rural communities—a welcome recommendation that I hope the Government takes on board. The Government can do that by ensuring it employs a specialised person to the position of national broadband network coordinator—a position established by legislation—who will work with Regional Development Australia groups around this State and the National Broadband Network to better highlight areas of advantage in New South Wales. At the moment that position will be filled by a departmental head who does not have such a specialised knowledge. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14867
In the brief time that is remaining to me I cannot cover the breadth of our regional policy but I wish to highlight other things in this report. Other members referred to the number of people who appear before parliamentary committees that visit regional New South Wales. Every time I visit regional New South Wales reference is made to progressing the Bells Line of Road expressway—an issue that has been dealt with in this report. It is important to continue that corridor. I was disappointed that the transport master plan only continues the work started by Labor; no commitment has been made over 20 years to progress that line of road. Many witnesses referred to the importance of progressing that corridor and the provision of adequate rail freight facilities. A number of witnesses who appeared before the inquiry highlighted the need for rail freight to avoid the congestion that is occurring in Sydney. Other people referred to the importance of the Maldon to Dombarton railway, but inland rail is also important. Some time ago a national study was commissioned to establish its viability. I hope that we reach a positive conclusion.
The report also highlights future health needs in regional New South Wales. The National Broadband Network [NBN] plays a role in that, but it will not replace the need for more doctors. It simply provides better access to specialists and that is how it should be seen. The Government must continue the progress that the Labor Government made in rebuilding hospitals in regional New South Wales. The former Government delivered 72 new or rebuilt hospitals in rural and regional areas and that should be continued with appropriate State Government investment. We should not rely solely on Federal Government investment, which is what is happening at the moment.
Unfortunately I was overseas when the final report was drafted and I missed the opportunity to correct an error. The report refers to Regional Development Australia groups as Commonwealth entities; in fact, they are Commonwealth and State entities. They are the product of cooperation between the two levels of government and were established indirectly as a result of recommendations of the Rural and Regional Taskforce. Many people recommended that they be amalgamated to reduce the number of committees, to give the body some teeth and to provide more funding. That is happening, albeit slowly, after the injection of some Federal funding.
We should continue to work with the Regional Development Australia groups, particularly on building the relationships between them and local government authorities in the regions that they represent. We should also build on their capacity to influence the delivery of services around regional New South Wales. I would like to see them play a role in the more effective coordination of contracted social services. Like many other committees, this committee heard that the delivery of those services is not as coordinated as it could be in regional centres. I understand that a committee of the other place is examining that issue and I hope it makes some progress.
I support the committee's recommendation about sport and recreational facilities. I hope the Government restores the funding that the Labor Government provided for the Community Building Partnerships program and that it renews the Country Hall Renewal Fund, which was an excellent program for small country communities. Small towns often do it toughest as their populations drift to large regional centres. They need community facilities to encourage people not to move away. I thank all the people who appeared before the committee, the committee secretariat and my fellow members for a job well done.
The Hon. SCOT MacDONALD [6.01 p.m.]: I support the Standing Committee on State Development's report entitled "Economic and social development in central western New South Wales". This was an important inquiry. I substituted for the Hon. Charlie Lynn on a visit to Parkes and Broken Hill because he was away on important Parliamentary Secretary duties.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: We almost left you there.
The Hon. SCOT MacDONALD: You did.
The Hon. Mick Veitch: You were supposed to be at a certain place at a certain time.
The Hon. SCOT MacDONALD: That is the story of my life. I agree with the Hon. Steve Whan that the inquiry embraced more than the Central West. That area of the State has been under enormous pressure as a result of 10 years of drought, widespread restructuring of core industries and tough terms of trade. That has seen an exodus of people from farming districts and smaller centres to larger centres. Of course, that is great for our inland cities, but it has a profound impact on our small centres. The committee's work and its visits to those 14868 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
areas are very important. Members heard from a range of councillors, businesspeople and other stakeholders, and produced 30 recommendations. I draw the attention of the House to three recommendations that I believe are particularly important: recommendations Nos 11, 12 and 15. The report states:
Recommendation 11 urges Transport for NSW to give serious consideration to the construction of such an expressway as part of the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan, and requests that Transport for NSW provide this Committee with a report on the current status of the preservation of a transport corridor over the Blue Mountains.
That project is in the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan and I believe that one day it will be progressed because the case for it will become more compelling. Of course, like other projects, it will be subject to funding constraints. I also believe that people will come to recognise that the economy of the Central West will benefit from the movement of goods and services and that the economic case will become more compelling. It behoves all members, especially those on this side of the House, to maintain that pressure. Recommendation No. 12 states:
That the Minister for Roads develop a planning schedule to complete the sealing of the Cobb and Silver City Highways as soon as practicable.
We hear horror stories about what happens to those highways after even a small amount of rain. One witness told the committee about a shipment of goats not being delivered to port because of the road conditions. Members might think that is a minor issue, but it is not because it impacts on people's livelihoods. The region does not have a range of industries from which to draw, so when one industry is negatively impacted it has profound ongoing effects. Those highways should be sealed as soon as possible. Recommendation No. 15 states:
That during the preparation of the Long Term Transport Master Plan, Transport for NSW closely consider ways to improve freight rail infrastructure in central and western NSW in order to facilitate freight access to sea ports, especially the Maldon to Dombarton rail line.
When rail works, it works incredibly well. There are very good rail connections in the Riverina and from Griffith to Melbourne that underpin the local horticultural industry. Daily rail services to the port of Melbourne allow a wide range of produce to be delivered, including citrus, grapes, stone fruit and rice. We should build a business case for that service. Recommendation No. 17 worries me. It states:
That the NSW Government undertake an analysis of the potential impact of the listing of the Menindee Lakes under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, by July 2013, and unless this analysis identifies significant detrimental impacts, that the NSW Government support the listing of the Menindee Lakes under the Convention.
There is probably no member who knows more about that area than the Hon. Rick Colless. If we go down the path of Ramsar declaration that might constrain some proposals that should be considered, such as deepening the Menindee Lakes to minimise evaporation. The recommendation refers to an analysis. That is good, but I sincerely hope it will be a considered analysis. I enjoyed my short stint on the committee and I commend the chairman.
The Hon. Mick Veitch: It is a hard-working committee.
The Hon. SCOT MacDONALD: It certainly is. Next time I will listen to the instructions and ensure that I am where I am supposed to be. I commend the committee and the secretariat.
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX (Parliamentary Secretary) [6.07 p.m.]: Although I am not a member of the Standing Committee on State Development, I will make a contribution on this comprehensive report as a member with a long association with the Central West of New South Wales. It is outstanding that the Government referred this issue to the committee, and there is no better committee to undertake it. I congratulate the chairman and the committee members on an excellent and wide-ranging report. The committee heard from many stakeholders while covering a vast area of regional New South Wales. That is where one sees committees work at their best: speaking to local communities about their concerns and bringing together all of that information into a cogent presentation of the issues that face a wide reach of New South Wales. Again, I congratulate the committee and the secretariat, which always does a brilliant job in compiling these reports.
I shall reflect on a number of recommendations in the report that are important to the development of this vast area. In particular, I refer to recommendation No. 3, which refers to the Evocities initiative. It is worth noting that the current seven Evocities are Albury, Armidale, Bathurst, Dubbo, Orange, Tamworth and Wagga Wagga. Many members will be aware that originally I came from the great city of Wagga Wagga. The 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14869
committee recommended that there be some examination of expanding the number of Evocities involved in the program and determining ways to establish a tiered approach to the program, whereby the development of smaller regional centres is also encouraged. This successful program was engineered under the previous Government, and that is an excellent recommendation. This Government has also gone forward with this initiative. I think of Young, Cowra and Parkes that in their own way are vibrant but are smaller regional centres that need to be encouraged.
The Hon. Robert Borsak: What about Boorowa?
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: There are plenty of towns out there. Boorowa is another one, perhaps a little smaller again. They are vibrant centres and they have reached that critical mass. Last week the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps mentioned the need to ensure that regional centres grow over time, the key component of which is to ensure that they have a strong local economy. Without that type of critical mass it will be difficult for smaller regional centres to thrive over time. I think some more work needs to go into how we expand the approach to Evocities, and perhaps look at the tiered approach as suggested by the committee. I am sure that will be fertile ground, which will no doubt be developed over time.
I refer to the importance of transport, roads and rail, in regional New South Wales. The committee has done an excellent job in this regard. I note, in particular, recommendation 11, which looks at a dual lane expressway over the Blue Mountains as part of the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan, particularly the Bells Line of Road. I recently welcomed the release of that plan, which expressly mentioned that dual lane expressway and the importance of ensuring that we set aside appropriate road reserves so that these types of visionary infrastructure projects can proceed in time. Also important was the consideration of some of the freight lines. Members have mentioned the importance of the Maldon to Dombarton railway line.
Last weekend at Harden I attended celebrations for the 150th anniversary of the Murrumburrah Public School, a wonderful event attended by approximately 500 people. Mayor of Harden Shire Council, Chris Manchester, mentioned to everyone gathered in the school hall the importance of the Blayney to Demondrille railway line, which I know is very close to the heart of the Hon. Mick Veitch. That piece of infrastructure needs to be looked at again, and I encourage the Government to revisit that in cooperation with the five council areas that are keen to ensure that the project is reconsidered in some detail. I note in that regard that a feasibility study of that line is currently with the Minister for Transport for consideration. We look forward to that outcome.
Recommendation 21 refers to regional produce showcases at the New South Wales Parliament and consideration of other initiatives that promote regional areas and businesses to be held at Parliament House. That is an excellent idea. In the past members have attended wine promotions. Recently I attended a showcase of Hunter industry with participants from across the Hunter region in the Strangers Dining Room. I think that type of interaction is important to raise the profile amongst members and the public about what these wonderful regions have to offer.
About a month ago I was in the Murray region when it released its regional profile and industry prospectus, which is an innovative approach to regional development. Its releases anchored a weekend of events to promote the region. A lot of regions need to think carefully about that type of marketing approach to ensure that over time their towns continue to be vibrant places in which to live. In that way they will get out the message that people are welcome and they have successful industries to which they can add value over time. We all realise the importance of a strong economy to a strong region.
Similarly, recommendation 27 states that the New South Wales Government should hold regional community Cabinet meetings. That is a good recommendation. Recently the Government held a Cabinet meeting in Albury, which was well received by the community. The previous Government implemented this tradition on a reasonably regular basis. I remember that the former member for Monaro held a successful Cabinet meeting at the Queanbeyan Community Centre. That type of outreach from government is important so regions understand that they are remembered and that their issues are recognised and progressed in government at all levels. It is clear from this report—as it has been clear from the many reports in the past—that regional issues are certainly at the front of the concerns of local communities. It is important that the Government addresses those concerns over time and invests in those regions to ensure that they continue to be vibrant places in which to live and work.
The Hon. RICK COLLESS [6.17 p.m.], in reply: I thank the Hon. Mick Veitch, the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps, the Hon. Paul Green, the Hon. Steve Whan, the Hon. Scot MacDonald and the Hon. Matthew 14870 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
Mason-Cox for their contributions to this debate. In particular, I thank the Hon. Mick Veitch for his role as deputy chair. I think we make a good team as the chair and the deputy chair of the committee. We discuss in some detail various aspects of the committee's work before we get too deeply involved in it, something which I appreciate. As all members know, the Hon. Mick Veitch has a great understanding of regional and rural New South Wales and the issues that impact on them. I thank the Hon. Mick Veitch for all the work he has done in that regard.
My good friend the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps is an interesting speaker. Whenever he speaks I am really not quite sure what he will say. The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps talked about the importance of freight and access routes in western New South Wales. I reiterate his comments in relation to the Cobb Highway and the Silver City Highway—that it is not about pork barrelling and putting money in someone's perceived pockets. Those highways are the only two unsealed highways in New South Wales. When it rains businesses along those highways incur hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of costs by not being able to get their produce to market. I was in western New South Wales after the drought, when there had been some substantial wet weather. Businesses along the Silver City Highway had gone bankrupt because the tourist trade had stopped. Tourists could not travel along the highway and businesspeople in Tibooburra were in tears about the direction their businesses were heading. It is a big issue for those communities; it needs to be addressed.
I thank the Hon. Paul Green, who is a new committee member, for his contribution. He is proving to be a valuable committee member. The Hon. Paul Green spoke about the importance of road, rail and aviation connectivity, corridor preservation and freight movements. He comes from a local government background so he was particularly interested in local government financial sustainability and rate pegging issues, as well as other funding models that might be available to communities. He also spoke about the issue of food security versus subdivision and the land development issues facing regional New South Wales—this important issue warrants further investigation.
I thank the Hon. Steve Whan for pointing out that the report title should include central and western New South Wales. I did make that point in the foreword and the committee approached it from that perspective. The Hon. Steve Whan focused on the National Broadband Network; while the committee made a recommendation regarding the importance of a national broadband network it stopped short of identifying the propriety name of the National Broadband Network. Indeed, there are many other models that those on the other side of politics believe may well have been far more financially effective than the National Broadband Network, but it is important for western New South Wales to have access to that sort of technology.
The Hon. Steve Whan spoke about the importance of transport and the Bells Line Expressway. The Government's transport master plan clearly identifies the importance of this expressway route. Discussion was had in the deliberative stage about the former Government's announcement of a corridor between the M7 and the Hawkesbury River. The committee has written to Transport for NSW seeking clarification as to whether that corridor has been preserved and it is waiting for a reply. The Hon. Steve Whan also spoke about the importance of the Maldon to Dombarton rail line.. Perhaps members should reflect on the rail network losses incurred under the previous Government, including the $500 million spent on the Rozelle metro with no result. That $500 million would have made a significant contribution to the completion of that rail line.
[Interruption]
DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Helen Westwood): Order!
The Hon. RICK COLLESS: I fully support the comments made by the Hon. Steve Whan about health issues and sport and recreation funding. I thank the Hon. Scot MacDonald for his comments on our transport corridors and the importance of the Cobb and Silver City highways sealing. He asked about recommendation No. 17, which reflects on the Menindee Lakes Ramsar nomination that will underpin the use of Menindee Lakes for urban and commercial purposes rather than locking it up as a national park. I have had substantial discussion with the member for Murray-Darling about this recommendation and he fully supports it. Finally, the Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox commented on the important issue of Evocities and a tiered approach. This will greatly improve the future of some of the middle towns rather than the major rural regional centres that those in western New South Wales care very much about. The Blayney to Demondrille line was also discussed at length at the Central West local government day, as was the Bells Line Expressway. The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox's comments about regional produce showcases at Parliament House were good.
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: He certainly ate plenty of oysters. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14871
The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox: I do not like oysters.
The Hon. RICK COLLESS: Are you referring to the Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox or me?
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: You.
The Hon. RICK COLLESS: I confess that I love oysters. The suggestion about the regional prospectus concept was also a good suggestion—the Government should give some thought to it. The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox commented on the issue of regional community Cabinet meetings, which will continue. It is well documented and well known that regional community Cabinet meetings make a great contribution to regional New South Wales. In conclusion, I thank all members of the committee for their collegiate approach. It is rare for committee members to have political stoushes such as I had with the Hon. Steve Whan a few moments ago. We all worked well together on this inquiry; as we will on our next inquiry into water storages. I thank the committee secretariat for its hard work. I repeat my thanks to Rachel Simpson for the great work she did on this inquiry, but I am sure the new committee secretariat will do an equally good job. Finally, I thank the Hansard members who accompanied us on our trips—sometimes under duress—for their hard work. I commend the report to the House.
Question—That the House take note of the report—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE NEW SOUTH WALES WORKERS COMPENSATION SCHEME
Report: New South Wales Workers Compensation Scheme
Debate resumed from 13 June 2012.
The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK [6.27 p.m.]: I am pleased to speak on the report of the Joint Select Committee on the New South Wales Workers Compensation Scheme. The joint select committee was established by both Houses of Parliament on 2 May 2012, following the announcement by the Government of its intention to reform the New South Wales Workers Compensation Scheme and the release of an issues paper, which canvassed options for reform. The terms of reference required the committee to have particular regard to the performance of the New South Wales Workers Compensation Scheme in meeting its key objectives of promoting better health outcomes and return to work outcomes of injured workers; the financial sustainability of the scheme and its impact on the New South Wales economy; and the functions and operations of the WorkCover Authority. Despite the short six-week duration allocated for the inquiry, the committee received several hundred submissions that highlighted the complexity and scale of the New South Wales Workers Compensation Scheme and, in particular, the problems it faced in its future financial sustainability and viability.
During the hearing some 32 organisations and agencies appeared, as did 10 individuals who shared their workplace injury experiences and their experiences with the workers compensation scheme. In total, 79 witnesses appeared over the three hearing days of this inquiry. I take this opportunity to thank the committee members: Deputy Chair Mark Speakman, Mr Michael Daley, Mr Rob Stokes, the Hon. Niall Blair, the Hon. Paul Green, the Hon. Trevor Khan and the Hon. Adam Searle. I also thank all the witnesses who took the time to attend the inquiry and for the information they provided. I particularly thank those individuals who shared their personal experiences with the committee. I thank the committee secretariat: Rachel Callinan, Vanessa Viaggio, Teresa McMichael and Shu-Fang Wei for their huge assistance in this very tight and time-constrained inquiry, and for preparing the report. I thank all committee members for their cooperation and thorough approach in the conduct of the hearing, given the highly sensitive nature of the inquiry.
The report is comprised of two main chapters. In chapter two the committee examines the financial sustainability of the scheme and considers stakeholders' views on the size and implications of the scheme deficit. There is a general consensus among all stakeholders that some sort of reform is needed if the scheme is to remain financially sustainable into the future. In chapter 3 the committee examines the options for reform contained in the issues paper released by the Minister for Finance and Services and looks at a number of reform proposals in detail based on the broad response of stakeholders and evidence presented to the committee. I note, 14872 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
however, that due to the time constraints of this inquiry it has not been possible to examine and canvass the full range of reform options in the issues paper in detail. The report contains 28 recommendations, many of which the Government has already accepted and enacted into law.
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
Pursuant to sessional orders debate on budget estimates proceeded with.
BUDGET ESTIMATES AND RELATED PAPERS
Financial Year 2012-13
Debate resumed from 4 September 2012.
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA (Parliamentary Secretary) [6.30 p.m.]: Our Building the State Program will fast-track approvals for major projects and clear the backlog of stalled development applications, in particular the part 3A remnants from the Labor Government's planning regime. Importantly, an Urban Activation Precinct Program will include $50 million of incentives for local councils to build essential infrastructure at their end, along with $30 million in interest concessions to local councils as part of the Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme that will allow them to build more than $1 billion of local infrastructure to support this new housing activity generated as part of our budget. With these initiatives in place, we aim to process twice as many development applications per year than previously and, importantly, process up to 255 major development projects that have the potential to deliver up to 100,000 jobs for New South Wales.
In particular, the budget commits $1.5 billion to complete the duplication of the Pacific Highway by 2016. Yes, we have imposed an annual 1.2 per cent labour expense cap over four years on every government department. Yes, this will involve public sector redundancies. However, police, nurses and teachers will be exempt, and directors general have the flexibility in examining all areas in their responsibility and in making cuts where necessary to achieve their compulsory expense cap. For instance, the hefty area of contractor usage readily comes to mind in relation to the likely consequences of that budget cap. On the economic front, while Labor allowed expenses to run out of control, this Government is taking the action needed to ensure that New South Wales lives within its means. For the first time since 1995 expenses came in below target in the New South Wales budget.
Why are savings needed? The O'Farrell Government has received $2.5 billion less in revenue each year since it came to office. This means $10 billion less over the budget period for infrastructure and services. This is mainly due to the collapse in GST revenues. Our households save more and spend less. When State Labor was in Government it failed to make these tough decisions and consistently blew its expense targets. If Labor had kept within budget over its 16 years New South Wales would by now have had an extra $20 billion for infrastructure and services. People ask, "Why are our railways lagging?", "Why are our roads lagging?", "Why don't we have the connections in the toll roads that we need?", and "Why didn't we have the Waratah trains delivered on time during the 16 years of Labor?" The reason is that the Labor Government squandered many opportunities.
Labor failed to invest significant increases in stamp duty revenue during the property boom, and it had an average of $650 million more revenue each year than forecast over its last 10 years. So if we did not make this $2.5 billion in cuts in this budget we would be leaving today's problems for future generations. It would mean losing the triple-A rating, which would cost New South Wales $3.75 billion over 10 years. We will be a responsible government and we will not borrow to pay wages as Labor did. These decisions are not popular. Today's decisions in the education sector will not be popular or easy, but they will be the right approach to provide the people of this State with the necessary infrastructure and services that we need into the future.
The New South Wales unemployment rate is now the second lowest of all States in the nation at 4.8 per cent as of August this year. New South Wales was the only State to record a fall in unemployment last month. Our unemployment rate has been below the national rate for the past five months and we aim to continue that trend. Over Labor's last five years the New South Wales unemployment rate was an average of 0.4 per cent higher than the national rate. Since we came to office we have created more than 30,000 jobs. New South Wales economic growth is the strongest of the non-mining States on a quarterly and yearly basis, and the New South 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14873
Wales State final demand has risen by 4.3 per cent over the year—double the growth of Victoria. The Government has helped to drive this economic growth through payroll tax rebates, infrastructure spending and restoring confidence to the economy.
Another major decision involves Port Kembla joining Port Botany in being offered to the private sector on a long-term lease. This measure will raise approximately $500 million, with $100 million going to the Illawarra for necessary infrastructure and service provision. In the short time allocated to me I will quickly touch on health services. With an extra 50,000 emergency department presentations and 30,000 additional acute in-patient services, including an extra 2,000 elective surgical procedures and $10 million for intensive care services, Minister Skinner has listened to doctors, nurses and allied health services on the ground in the regions of Sydney and regional New South Wales. Clearly, this is record health spending to clear a surgical backlog and adequately handle the growing emergency services and the resultant in-patient demand growth.
Some $64 million has been allocated for 500 more nurses and more than $4 million for more clinical nurse and midwife educators and specialists; major new hospital works at Blacktown-Mount Druitt, Bega, Hornsby, Ku-ring-gai, Tamworth, Parks and Forbes; new car parks at Blacktown, Nepean and Wollongong hospitals; and an extra $45 million in health and medical research. This year's budget delivers on so many commitments of the Liberal-Nationals. We acknowledge that we have a lot more to do and we will do our best to deliver for all the people of New South Wales. We will have to stomach the hard decisions in the public sector and in departmental expense caps and we will have to sell and explain them to the people of New South Wales. Again, they expect the Liberal-Nationals to be good and sound economic managers to ensure that we deliver services infrastructure for the families of New South Wales into the future.
The Hon. HELEN WESTWOOD [6.39 p.m.]: Two years ago I stood in this place and predicted that the people of New South Wales would suffer under a Coalition Government. Little did I realise at that time how spot-on that prediction would be. It was with ever-increasing dread that I read through the Liberal Coalition's second budget. The first one was bad enough, but this one not only attacks our State's workers; the Government has declared all-out war. Where is the "We will need more public servants, not fewer" election promise now?
The facts speak for themselves. When we left government in March last year our State had a sound record of financial performance. The budget was $1.3 billion in surplus, with a low debt burden, a triple-A rating and a sizeable and diverse economic base delivering growth and jobs. This Government inherited a 4.8 per cent unemployment rate—the second lowest in Australia. After just a matter of months the unemployment rate moved to 5.5 percent. For those lucky enough to keep a job, this Premier threatened in his recent State of the Region address at Rosehill that, "There are lots of public servants who will work their guts out." Our previous Labor Government created 195,000 essential front-line jobs in its last two years of government. By contrast, Barry O'Farrell—
The Hon. John Ajaka: The honourable.
The Hon. HELEN WESTWOOD: The Hon. Barry O'Farrell has already cut 20,000 jobs in less than 18 months, and he has promised even more to go. We have seen 3,600 jobs cut from our hospitals, 2,400 jobs cut from schools and TAFE, and 1,000 jobs cut from community services. Even as 44 children known to the department have died this year, the Government has still been willing to cut back on essential services that we need to ensure that children are safe. Rural services such as those provided by regional development offices, fisheries, gaols and fire stations have been closed.
The attack marches on, this time with public sector workers' entitlements in the Crown employees awards. The Liberal-National Coalition Government has made an application to the Industrial Relations Commission to cut the scope of parental leave to no longer cover foster carers or kinship arrangements; abolish family and community services [FACS] leave, which covers situations such as unforeseen family emergencies; and abolish annual leave loading, remote areas assistance—just another swipe at the bush despite all the rhetoric we heard a few moments ago—and a swag of other allowances too long to list here.
It is appallingly clear that this Government is antiworker and antifamily. By its own figures, it has forecast employment growth to contract from the 3.8 per cent it inherited to a miserable 1 per cent over the next financial year—a figure that will not even keep pace with population growth. I suspect that these two figures alone represent the number of public servants that have suffered the sack under this appalling Coalition Government. 14874 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
During the June quarter New South Wales was the slowest growing major State in the country. Growth in New South Wales during the June quarter was only 8 per cent above the decade-long average—the lowest in Australia by a country mile according to CommSec. This is backed up by recent Australian Bureau of Statistics data which found that State final demand over the June quarter grew at just 0.2 per cent, well below the national average of 0.9 per cent. CommSec has recently dubbed the New South Wales economy as a three-speed economy. I fear that one of those speeds may be reverse. After 17 months of this Liberal Government the State is now limping along in the breakdown lane of a three-speed economy. Mere months on from the delivery of the State budget I can say commentators have been less than lukewarm in response. It certainly has not inspired; it has been met with ire.
The previous Government left an enviable $1.3 billion surplus, a solid economic foundation that any incoming government would celebrate, a generous inheritance that any government could build upon—even one, might I add, that had languished in opposition for 16 years. However, this Liberal Government will instead plunge us into a deep debt to the estimated figure of a $718 million deficit in the next financial year. This is clearly not a prudent position to put New South Wales in given the global sovereign debt crisis that currently exists. In short, this Government has turned a huge surplus into a deficit, growth has stalled, unemployment is soaring and economic output is moving at a snail's pace. This Liberal Government has now revised economic output growth from 3 per cent to 2¼ per cent.
Internal NSW Treasury documents reveal that the O'Farrell Government has splurged $176.9 million on domestic executive travel and a further $5.2 million on international travel. This is money better spent on health or education, not jetting around the country or the globe. The Hon. Barry O'Farrell promised to build business confidence. Instead he is squandering the strong economy he inherited. As I stated earlier, he is literally standing idly by as the State sheds thousands of jobs each month under his watch.
Our successive Labor governments built a sound platform for promoting future economic growth with their share of population growth, the highest in almost a decade, and high per capita income. In 2010 New South Wales recorded private business investment of $50 billion in real terms, which was almost 10 per cent more than the next placed State. This State recorded real average increases of 5 per cent per annum in business investment in the 10 years to 2009-10. In fact, the total value of goods and services produced in this State is higher than for many national economies in Asia Pacific. More than 80 per cent of New South Wales industry income is derived from services, highlighting the strength of the State's knowledge-based business and professional services, information and communications technology [ICT], and creative industries, as well as tourism. Sydney itself contributes 32 per cent of Australia's gross domestic product.
In contrast, the recent State budget contained no new initiatives to create jobs, nothing to build on the great work of our previous Government. In fact, the O'Farrell Government's only original idea, the Regional Relocation Grant Scheme, has been exposed as a flop, with just 49 applicants in three months—well short of the forecast 7,000 per year. These results are simply not good enough from a party that campaigned on making New South Wales number one again. It is widely recognised by economists that if our economy is to continue to prosper then government spending will be a key economic driver. On closer scrutiny, what became evident with each page was the catastrophic impact this budget will have on the people of New South Wales and especially those most vulnerable in our communities.
In the last few days we have heard that the Liberal Government's aim is to put the boot into our kids. It is not enough that it is sacking parents, reducing their workers compensation and increasing their power bills. Now parents will be forced to pay more for the schooling of their children. Education spending in New South Wales will be slashed by $1.7 billion, with independent schools targeted along with those in the public system. The Government is proposing cuts to public schools of up to $250 million and up to $67 million to Catholic and independent schools. TAFE does not escape the cuts: TAFE institutes will be forced to increase fees by 9.5 per cent and to cut 800 jobs over the next four years. The concession fee will increase from $53 to $100. The overall annual increase will range from $44 for certificate I and II courses to $150 for advanced diploma courses.
The government sector will be expected to shed 600 staff in State and regional offices over four years as part of a total cut of 1,800 from the education department. The independent school sector said it would lose teacher numbers as a direct result of the funding cuts. The parents council representing independent schools says that the budget cuts would compromise the viability of more than half its schools, leading to overcrowding and unmanageable class sizes in public schools. This will directly impact on all our schoolchildren and compromise their valuable education. 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14875
It is reported that if the proposed funding cuts are made schools will have to severely restrict their intake of students. This means those students will have to be absorbed somewhere in the system, which is already having trouble catering for current student numbers. Many parents of schoolchildren are already struggling to make ends meet and they make sacrifices to meet their child's educational needs. Regrettably, a cut such as this might require schools to raise fees by 12 per cent or make other cuts to compensate. It is beyond belief that this Government is not willing to invest in education. In fact, it is de-investing.
What does that mean for our economy? It is well known that investment in education leads to economic growth, particularly for an economy like ours that is so dependent on the service industry for its growth. To de-invest in education is absolutely irresponsible: it is reprehensible, and this Government will be judged for it. I cannot believe that in 2012 this Government is not willing to acknowledge the importance of education in transforming our society. Educators recognised in the 1800s that education, beyond all other devices of human origin, is the great equaliser of the conditions of men and women, the balance-wheel of the social machinery. Horace Mann was telling us that in the 1800s, yet this Government is absolutely irresponsible in its de-investment in education. It is not interested in the future of the children of this State and it is not interested in growth in our economy. This Government will be judged by the people of New South Wales at the next election.
This Liberal Coalition Government is antifamily. All of the cuts it has made are about attacking families and making life harder for families. It is making the cost of living more expensive for families. This Government is clearly not willing to consider the support it needs to give to families and it is not willing to move away from its ideology and consider the wellbeing of the people of New South Wales. Some other cuts worth noting were to the Community Building Partnership program, which was introduced by the former Government in the 2009-10 budget. Labor provided $35 million for the scheme in the 2009-10 State budget, and 1,180 grants received funding. In the 2010-11 State budget Labor provided a further $35 million for the Community Building Partnership. This was later increased to a total of $58.4 million, and 1,775 projects received funding. In total, the former Government provided $93.4 million over two years to fund nearly 3,000 projects.
Before the last State election Barry O'Farrell promised to continue the Community Building Partnership scheme. However, after the State election the O'Farrell Government provided only $35 million over two financial years—a significant cut in the program. In my duty electorate of Blue Mountains local charities, sports clubs and community organisations will lose at least $100,000 a year in funding for essential projects such as facility upgrades. Under Labor's Community Building Partnership program $300,000 was provided to support organisations in the Blue Mountains electorate. This will now be cut to $200,000. Projects funded under Labor in the 2011-12 financial year included refurbishing the community kitchen at Wentworth Falls Anglican Church; replacing the roof at Katoomba Men's Shed; building improvements at Lawson Community Preschool; and funds for the Mount Riverview Girl Guide hall. They will now miss out. This program is so important because it helps our community organisations do the little things they would otherwise struggle to finance. All members opposite should be hanging their heads in shame at this budget. The people of New South Wales will certainly judge them poorly at the next State election.
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX (Parliamentary Secretary) [6.54 p.m.]: It is certainly a pleasure to support a wonderful budget from a reformist Coalition Government. I am certainly pleased to be part of it. At the outset I congratulate the Treasurer and indeed the whole Cabinet on compiling an excellent budget that continues the reformist agenda of the O'Farrell-Stoner Government. When one looks at the budget one sees a lot to be pleased about. At its heart it is a housing-focused and infrastructure-focused budget, because that is what New South Wales desperately needs. We need investment in housing and continued investment in infrastructure if we are going to rectify the appalling legacy of 16 years of Labor.
We need to put the budget in its economic context. I have listened with great humour to some of the contributions from members on the other side who seem to have adopted the ostrich view of economic policy by putting their heads deep into the soil rather than acknowledging the economic facts we face today. The reality is that we inherited a State economy that has underperformed for the past decade. There can be no denying that fact. The Treasury refers to it as the lost decade, a decade in which New South Wales chronically underperformed all other States in this nation. We must remember that that is the context this Government inherited when it came to power on 26 March last year. In those 10 years growth in this State was an average of 1.1 per cent lower than that of Australia as a whole. It was chronically underperforming. The budget the previous Government brought down in each of those years was basically financed by a river of money—I think the Treasurer referred to it as a river of gold—from the property boom in particular and in the last year or two by a number of ill-advised and rushed asset sales, which simply papered over the former Government's fiscal ineptitude. 14876 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
In my opinion Labor viewed the budget essentially as a magic pudding. Whatever project they came up with—whether it was the Rozelle metro or the failed T-card ticketing arrangements or the on-again off-again North West Rail Link—the Labor Party saw the budget as a means of effecting its misdirected social agenda without actually considering the economic impact of its actions. Our first step upon coming to government, which we saw in the last budget, was to turn around the fiscal problems that the State faced. We need to do that in a very difficult economic environment. Let us not understate that as members opposite have done. We have a two-speed economy in Australia with the mining boom, which according to the latest evidence is probably slowing somewhat, elevated terms of trade and a high exchange rate, which does have an impact on a range of other important industries in New South Wales as well as presenting challenges for the retail sector, which we are all very conscious of.
This is in the global context of a fragile and uncertain economic future. Expectations for world growth have been revised sharply lower and clearly the major uncertainty still lies with Europe. As many have said, the PIGS of Europe—Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain—are still very much in trouble fiscally. China also appears to be slowing, which has a significant impact on our mining sectors and elsewhere, as I mentioned earlier. It should be remembered that the United States of America is also heading directly for the fiscal cliff; it is struggling economically. With a United States election looming, the economic climate is worsening as evidenced by recent unemployment figures.
I note in particular International Monetary Fund forecasts that world growth will be 3.5 per cent this year and 4.1 per cent next year, although those estimates are somewhat optimistic when one takes into account Europe—that basket case. Consensus Economics forecasts released recently suggest that growth will be somewhat slower, which appears to be the case. With all this uncertainty we have seen a strong flight to quality triple-A rated bonds. For all these reasons bond yields are at historic lows. On the positive side, New South Wales has been exposed to the growth story in Asia, but I acknowledge that there are limitations in that regard. When we consider the economic state in which we find ourselves in both Australia and overseas, we better understand from a budgetary perspective the scope of the job that this Government had to face in its first two years in office.
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted to permit a motion to adjourn the House if desired.
The House continued to sit.
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: What improvements have been seen in economic statistics in this short time? In the 10 years from 2001 to 2010 it is clear that employment growth in New South Wales was below employment growth in the rest of Australia. Sometimes New South Wales did not realise even half the employment growth that was realised in other Australian States. Despite the comments of Opposition members, since this Government came to power for the first time in a decade employment growth in New South Wales has been higher than it has been in the rest of Australia. The New South Wales unemployment rate is now the second lowest of all the States, behind the mining powerhouse of Western Australia. In the June quarter that rate fell from 5.2 per cent to 4.8 per cent compared to a national average of 5.1 per cent. In the last quarter we saw a 0.4 per cent fall in the unemployment rate in New South Wales—a sign that under this Government small business confidence levels are starting to grow as some of the pro-industry policies that have been put in place start to bite economically. Recent census statistics show that the confidence of small and medium enterprises in New South Wales is above the national average and growing. Confidence is important to business and to growth.
The key challenge in New South Wales, which is a focus in this budget, is housing in New South Wales. It is evident that housing investment is at an all time low. In reality we are faced with an anaemic housing and construction sector. The share of the economy in the housing industry essentially is 2 per cent below the long-term average. In 1995 housing starts were about 50,000 a year, which was the average long-term level. Last year housing starts in New South Wales declined to around 25,000. Victoria, our major competitor, which has two-thirds of the population of New South Wales, increased its housing starts to around 50,000 again. We are clearly behind the eight ball in the housing sector. Based on long-term averages, we simply do not have enough investment in that sector. The New South Wales economy would receive a $2 billion injection every year if we saw the return of that investment. That does not take into account the multiplier impacts of the housing construction sector and the flowthrough that occurs, which is significant.
The other challenge that we face in this budget relates to revenue. It has been well documented that all States face the implications of a structural shift in household saving and spending patterns. In reality, 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14877
households are now saving a greater proportion of their income than they are spending. Since the global financial crisis the savings ratio is around 10 per cent. Less is being spent on goods that are subject to the goods and services tax, which has resulted in direct pressure being put on New South Wales finances as our share of the goods and services tax pool declines. Direct pressure is being felt in each of the portfolio areas—a problem that will continue over the years.
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
CRIMES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2012
Bill received from the Legislative Assembly, and read a first time and ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay, on behalf of the Hon. Michael Gallacher.
Motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay agreed to:
That standing orders be suspended to allow the passing of the bill through all its remaining stages during the present or any one sitting of the House.
Second reading set down as an order of the day for a future day.
ADJOURNMENT
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads and Ports) [7.06 p.m.]: I move:
That this House do now adjourn.
TRIBUTE TO LISA-MAREE BAILEY
The Hon. SCOT MacDONALD [7.06 p.m.]: Today I pay tribute to Lisa-Maree Bailey, the New South Wales Liberal Party campaign manager who passed away on 21 August 2012. Lisa was just 33 years of age when she tragically took her own life. I came to know Lisa in my capacity as a member of the Liberal Party State Executive prior to entering this place. Lisa was a respected political professional who worked in various capacities on the conservative side of politics for close to a decade. With a background in communications, Lisa joined the office of her local Federal member of Parliament, the then member for Dobell, Ken Ticehurst, in 2003. Lisa became Ken's media adviser and in 2005 was promoted to office manager. She oversaw Ken's successful campaign for re-election in 2004 and also the toughest of campaigns in 2007, in which Dobell was lost.
With the change of government, Lisa moved to local government, becoming a senior media officer for Gosford City Council where she handled local and national media inquiries as well as crisis management, including the coronial inquest into the collapse of a section of the Pacific Highway at Somersby. Lisa's love of campaigning saw her move to Sydney where she was appointed deputy campaign manager for the New South Wales Liberal Party in early 2009. Lisa supervised a team of field campaigners, managing election preparations for those electorates the party needed to win at the Federal and State elections. At the Federal election in 2010 Lisa was integral to winning Bennelong and Macquarie and helping secure Hughes and Macarthur after the retirement of their popular local Liberal members. Lisa was a key member of the team that achieved what still remains the largest electoral swing in Australian political history with the election of the Liberal-Nationals Government in New South Wales last year.
Earlier this year Lisa was promoted to the role of campaign manager for the New South Wales division of the Liberal Party. At the time of her death Lisa was working also with candidates across New South Wales on the local government election campaign. Lisa was a hardworking and committed political professional, and a passionate Liberal. I always found her to be courteous, no nonsense and effective. Yesterday was World Suicide Prevention Day. Lisa-Maree's death is a stark reminder to us all to think about the wellbeing of those around us. Politics at any level and in any capacity can be unforgiving and tough. I do not know what precipitated Lisa's decision to end her life, but the pressure cooker environment of year-round campaigning comes at a cost. For 14878 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
those in leadership positions at a parliamentary, organisational or volunteer level, every effort must be made to ensure our people have balanced, healthy lives. No political prize, no deadline, no campaign is worth the risk of harming our friends and colleagues. It is not trite to ask, "Are you okay?"
As a father with a daughter, I was shocked by Lisa-Maree's passing. I can only begin to imagine the devastation and pain the Baileys are enduring. Daughters are special—they are infuriating, exasperating and beguiling—and their loss would be unbearable. We should recognise that that loss was also endured by a member of this Chamber's staff 15 months ago this week. On behalf of my parliamentary colleagues, I extend my deepest condolences to Lisa's parents, Eve and John, and her brother, James. I know that her many friends in the Liberal Party and beyond are deeply grieving her loss.
VOLGREN BUS CONTRACT
The Hon. PETER PRIMROSE [7.11 p.m.]: On 23 August the Minister for Transport announced that the O'Farrell Government had awarded a contract to build double-decker buses to Bustech, a company that operates out of the Gold Coast in Queensland. On the same day, the Minister told the ABC's Richard Glover:
There's only one company in Australia at the moment that can give us these buses when we need them and that is just north of the border.
Just one week before the announcement, Volgren, a bus manufacturer located in Tomago near Newcastle, made the last of its 150 workers redundant because it did not have any work for them. Last night we saw ABC's Lateline Business interviewing workers employed at Custom Coaches at Villawood in western Sydney, where 150 skilled workers are employed from across Sydney's west. I told the House on 23 August that the workers at Custom Coaches are sweeping the floors because they have no work and no forward orders. Volgren and its partner Volvo have a brand new facility at Tomago in mothballs because they have no work. Custom Coaches has a brand new facility at Villawood with no work.
Both facilities are purpose built for double-decker buses—a point that I emphasise. In fact, Custom Coaches is one of the biggest builders of double-decker buses in the world, supplying government and private contracts throughout Europe, Asia, New Zealand and the United States of America. Volgren also specialises in building double-decker buses, and has done so in both Australia and overseas. On 14 February the chief executive officer of Volgren, Peter Dale, and Peter Duncan from the Volvo group sent a joint letter to the deputy director of Transport, Mr Gammie, and to Mr Tyrell, senior adviser to the Minister for Transport, which states:
We write to you further to Peter's discussion with you in December regarding the potential rollout of Volgren/Volvo double deck buses.
It went on to say that both Volgren and Volvo "have a proven history of supplying double-decker buses and that the new body would be manufactured in Volgren's new $20 million manufacturing facility at Tomago near Newcastle". I understand that Volgren even conducted trials of its buses on some of Sydney's routes with a view to tailoring them to the unique requirements of our road system. Despite that, neither Volgren nor Custom Coaches, which both have the specialist capability to build double-decker buses in New South Wales, even knew about the contract that was announced on 23 August until, like the rest of us, they heard about it on the radio.
Everyone knows that manufacturing in New South Wales is under pressure. More than 17,000 jobs have been lost in New South Wales since the O'Farrell Government was elected. The double-decker bus contract announced by the Minister on 23 August offered an opportunity to secure existing New South Wales jobs, to create new jobs in New South Wales, and to support the local industry in the future. The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union national secretary, Paul Bastian, provided evidence that every $1 billion invested in infrastructure creates and sustains 10,000 to 15,000 jobs. However, unless local jobs and companies are considered to build those infrastructure projects, we will miss out on a significant opportunity.
We all make mistakes. Perhaps the Minister was unaware that both her office and her department had met with Volgren, and that they had both written to her. Given her radio interviews, she is clearly unaware that there are two bus manufacturers in New South Wales with the specialist capacity to build double-decker buses. Mistakes happen; we are all human. However, it is a bit harder to explain why there was apparently no tendering process for this contract. Perhaps there is a reasonable explanation for that too. Given that it appears that the Minister has made a mistake, I ask her to detail the tendering process in place for the current double-decker bus contract. I also ask her to meet with the managers of both Custom Coaches and Volgren to discuss future 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14879
tendering opportunities that could provide them with contracts to support the 150 workers currently employed at Custom Coaches, and so allow for the possibility of the Volgren site at Tomago to be recommissioned to support the 150 workers and their families that relied on work at that site until two weeks ago.
HUNTING IN NATIONAL PARKS
The Hon. CATE FAEHRMANN [7.16 p.m.]: The Game and Feral Animal Control Bill represented another lurch forward by the Shooters and Fishers Party towards its goal of establishing a pro-hunting culture in this State facilitated by Premier O'Farrell. We now hear that Eurobodalla Shire Council is being lobbied by the South Coast Hunters Club to establish an annual hunting festival in Narooma on the June long weekend. The hunters argue the festival is about hunting photography and game food stalls. It is apparent to me that the real intention is to promote hunting and to normalise this blood sport in the community. It brings to mind the type of promotion the sport gets in America. Does the New South Wales public want to take steps that will bring us closer to the situation in which America now finds itself?
With recreational hunters already having access to many of Narooma's surrounding State forests and soon its national parks, some in the local community are concerned that further promotion of the area as a mecca for hunters will create a significant threat to other forest users and a great deal of work for local animal rescue volunteers and drive away traditional visitors who bring in about $340 million a year to the shire. It is not the first time that recreational hunters have tried to get a stronger hold in the Eurobodalla community for their businesses. In 2002 the South Coast Hunters Club president, Dan Field—who was notably standing for local election—submitted a development application for a five-range shooting complex in Bodalla State Forest just south-west of Narooma. Fortunately, the Narooma and Tilba Tilba communities came down on it like a ton of bricks and the application was knocked back. Let us hope that sense and the will of the people prevail in Eurobodalla once again.
Sense has not been prevailing in the State Parliament of late. The O'Farrell Government has been sending very dangerous signals to the trigger-happy members of this Parliament that it is game on for hunting and we are already seeing frightening consequences. The ink is barely dry on O'Farrell's dirty deal with the Shooters and Fishers Party to open up our national parks for amateur hunters to hunt feral animals. The legislation has not yet taken effect and reports of illegal shooting and illegally shot native wildlife are coming in thick and fast. Hunters are jumping the gun. On 24 August, Echonet Daily reported on a mass killing of wallabies in a nature reserve at Seven Mile Beach near Ballina. Police say that as many as 12 of the protected animals have been found dead in the area over the past week, some with obvious bullet wounds. The Hon. Catherine Cusack spoke about this last week.
On 17 August, we heard from ABC South Coast that during the July school holidays kangaroos were illegally shot at a campground in a south-east national park. This was done in front of a distressed family and the offenders drove off taking some shot kangaroos with them but leaving others that were dead and maimed. On 6 August the Sydney Morning Herald reported that a wildlife carer from Colo Heights had to rescue and rehabilitate a wallaby shot with an arrow in a State forest adjacent to her property. On 1 August the Tumbarumba Times reported on the fear and anger being generated in the Tooma and Maragle districts by the presence of shooters and incidents perpetrated by people that the newspaper says are licensed Game Council shooters.
The incidents include an 87-year-old widow disturbed by gunshots in the night, a landowner confronted by shooters when he declined permission to shoot on his land, a farmer with a bullet hole in the bonnet of his ute, hunters trespassing and shooting animals on private property and the suspected shooting of a wedge-tailed eagle. Is this what a gun culture looks like close up? The newspaper tells us that the local member, Greg Aplin, is expected to tell Premier O'Farrell that out Tooma way once loyal supporters of the Coalition are having doubts about concessions made that allow shooters to dominate local forests.
Should we be surprised the shooters are running riot? In answers provided to Mr David Shoebridge in Parliament, the Game Council NSW confirmed that it employs only 4.2 full-time equivalent staff to police hunting in State forests across the entire State. No wonder compliance is woeful. Now they will have to police national parks as well. Should we be surprised by shooters' misconduct when these people are represented in Parliament by a member who is reported in Hansard as having lamented that because it is a modern era he could not take The Greens member Jeremy Buckingham outside Parliament and "beat him to death"?
I make it clear that I am not opposed to ground shooting as part of genuine feral animal programs conducted humanely by National Parks and Wildlife Service authorised professionals, and I stress the word 14880 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
"professionals". Nor am I opposed to farmers shooting feral animals on their property to protect livestock. However, recreational hunting of feral animals by non-professional, amateur hunters is ineffective and fraught with multiple problems. Once the legislation comes into effect at the end of this year, the parks to be opened to hunters and when will be at the discretion of the Minister for the Environment, Robyn Parker. With our native wildlife already being maimed and killed and communities terrorised even before any national parks and reserves have been declared open to hunting, surely Premier O'Farrell can see the folly of his deal and the danger that lies ahead. The legislation must be revoked.
AUSTRALIA 21
The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO [7.21 p.m.]: I want to talk about Australia 21 and the work it is doing to promote a sensible debate about why we need to look at alternatives to the prohibition of illicit drugs and how we can stop killing and criminalising young Australians. I have spoken before in this Chamber about the need to accept that the war on drugs has failed and that alternative approaches need to be taken to address this issue. In its most recent report published in 2011 the Global Commission on Drug Policy declared that the longstanding war on drugs had failed, and that all countries should reconsider their drug policy. The political exploitation of a harsh approach to drugs had been initiated in 1971 by United States President Richard Nixon when he declared a war on drugs. In his book Smoke and Mirrors, Dan Baumm states:
Richard Nixon's War on Drugs was largely a response to the anti-war and civil rights movements. Although in Nixon's day, the drug war was merely a police action; his administration defined a public policy on drug abuse that is still with us today. Nixon can be credited with many "firsts". Richard Nixon gave birth to the Drug Enforcement Agency, appointed the first "drug czar" to co-ordinate an alphabet soup of enforcement agencies, and commissioned the first study on drug abuse (which recommended decriminalising marijuana, much to his dismay). Random urine testing for drugs was first introduced as an instrument of public policy, as a response to widespread drug abuse by soldiers in Vietnam.
I do not believe we should blindly accept that public policy must pursue the agenda set by Richard Nixon in 1971. Why should we accept the agenda of an American President who has been so widely discredited? After 41 years we should be actively looking for alternatives and we should be appreciative of the existence of Australia 21 which is stimulating public debate on this issue. Australia 21 aims to promote the development of new frameworks of understanding which lead to better policy decisions about the questions that challenge Australia's future. It uses interdisciplinary research and dialogue among stakeholders to create networks between researchers, community and business leaders, and policymakers across all sectors of society, so that emerging insights are widely understood and applied to societal problems.
Australia 21 raises and distributes funds to support interdisciplinary and inter-institutional dialogue and germinate new research on the questions that matter to Australia's future. It also makes the results of its research and consultation freely available to government and to the public. The board of Australia 21 has many distinguished people from a variety of backgrounds on it, including Dr Alex Wodak, AM, and Mick Palmer, AO, APM, a former Australian Federal police commissioner. These people bring an objective perspective to one of the major problems confronting our society, which is what to do about illicit drugs, given that the war on drugs has been an abject failure.
Australia 21 held a high level roundtable in Melbourne on 6 July this year which discussed more effective approaches to illicit drugs in Australia. Participants at this roundtable included a former university vice-chancellor, senior former politicians, medical and other health experts, an economist, young persons, a former drug user, family members of drug users who have died and a strong supporter of zero tolerance policies, ensuring a wide-ranging debate was held. They considered alternatives to Australia's current approach by examining the experiences of four European countries. Portugal, Switzerland and the Netherlands have increased their emphasis on health and social responses to illicit drug use, and illicit drug problems in these countries have declined.
In contrast, Sweden's strong emphasis on law enforcement has been associated with an increase in drug-related deaths. The report from this roundtable, "Alternatives to Prohibition—Illicit drugs: How can we stop killing and criminalising young Australians", has been sent to all members of Parliament. I hope that they all take the opportunity to read this important document. The roundtable rejected the view that Australia can be made drug-free. It recognised that the language of "zero tolerance" and "tough on drugs" perpetuates the view that we are engaged in an all-out war against drug users and against drugs themselves. This leads to a system that trivialises the problem and lies at the heart of the failing national approach.
In devising a new approach there was firm agreement on the need to adopt a set of explicit aims for Australian policy with firm support for enhancing the community's understanding of the risks and harm arising 11 September 2012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 14881
from the use of psychoactive drugs; aiming to minimise deaths, disease, crime and corruption arising from drug use and drug policy; increasing the likelihood that people who use or have used drugs can lead a normal and useful life as full and active members of the community; ensuring that drug policies and their implementation should not create more harm than they seek to prevent or resolve; and, finally, the policy should ensure that a range of attractive, easy-to-use, safe and affordable health and social interventions are available for those concerned by their drug use, including evidence-based drug treatment which should be of the same high quality as that employed in other parts of the healthcare system. We need only to look at the cost of the failure of the war on drugs. We have a high rate of the incidence of hepatitis C in Australia, a lot of which comes from intravenous drug users, and we have the death of drug users. Australia 21 also recommended that these aims should be debated at a National Drug Summit.
THE GREENS NSW
The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS [7.26 p.m.]: I comment on the almost laughable internal ructions in The Greens. I have before me a document that, shall I say, fell off the back of a solar-powered bicycle. Most people consider The Greens as being nice, warm, tree huggers wandering around trying to protect the environment and small furry animals. But The Greens have a dark side to which I will refer later. First I will give members a bit of background. In 1991 the Communist Party dissolved itself. Its monetary assets went into the SEARCH Foundation and, as part of its vangardism, Communist Party members were told that they should try to infiltrate three parties—the left wing of the Labor Party, the Australian Democrats and The Greens.
Previously The Greens in New South Wales had strongly opposed their assimilation into a broader Australian Greens but in 1992 they changed their minds. Prior to that time, of course, Bob Brown had demanded that one could be a member of only one party. However, the dissolution of the Communist Party in 1991 paved the way for New South Wales Greens, as it then was in 1992, to become part of the Australian Greens as no longer was there any Communist Party to which they could have dual allegiances. However, the allegiances remained. As Ian Cohen noted, "Those in position in NSW are pretty much old industrial Left." Another New South Wales Greens said:
They operate like Leninists…a small cadre of tightly-bound, ideologically attuned people controlling the committees and decision-making structures of the party, and it's actually the antithesis of grassroots democracy.
In 2000 Lee Rhiannon said, "The Greens are closest to the best politics and methods of the Communist Party of Australia." Those people have all been lumped together in what might be called the eastern bloc—the old Stalinists who have infiltrated and taken over the New South Wales Greens. They stand in distinction to what I would call the green Greens—the small, furry animal, tree-hugging types. That leads me to a document produced by Mr Chris Harris, The Greens returning officer for the 2012 Senate preselection, which contains 87 pages of complaints about The Greens processes. If it is typical behaviour, no wonder The Greens did so badly in the local government elections. They were too busy emailing and complaining about one another to campaign. As Harris said in one part of the document:
Hello Bron. I'm sorry to take so long to respond to you but I have had lots of complaints about lots of things from lots of people.
Clearly this report has been leaked to discredit the green Greens; after all, the Hon. Cate Faehrmann and her supporters lose every appeal that she lodges with the returning officer. As an unbiased reader—and I consider myself to be an unbiased reader—one is left with the conclusion that it says more about the administration of Mr Harris and The Greens committee of management than it does about the appellants. These are extraordinary decisions and comments made by Mr Harris. For example, he allowed six members of The Greens to have access to the safe that contained the ballot papers. He complained that the process was highly adversarial, as though this was not a modern political party—presumably he likes the sorts of show trials that were popular in the 1930s. He failed to acknowledge multiple errors with The Greens databases and the use of mass circulation emails in breach of the rules for the preselection.
He failed to acknowledge mass circulation emails by supporters of the eastern bloc, including James Ryan who clearly had been address trawling, using his position as party convenor. Mr Harris then goes on and assesses himself as having no bias. When a complaint came in about the bias of Mr Harris, he took a good, hard look at himself and declared, "You know what? I am not biased", which is remarkable if one considers modern administrative practices. Finally, he then falls into the habit of turning the argument into a debate on the conduct of the Hon. Cate Faehrmann and the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham. For example, he attempts to compare what 14882 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 September 2012
James Ryan did with what Justin Field did. When Maureen Bell complained, Harris accused her of lodging her complaint in bad faith. No attempt was made to explain where Ryan got Bell's email details; it was just a smear on her reputation.
Norman Thompson, a respected member of The Greens, said that this behaviour was outrageous and he is troubled about lodging further protests in future. Even the committee of management had to conclude that Mr Harris showed a lack of judgement and that the complaint of the Hon. Cate Faehrmann was justified. The election results show that The Greens are in serious trouble, and that is not only from an electoral point of view. Unless The Greens remove the Stalinist influence they will be doomed to the ash heap of history.
TRIBUTE TO LISA-MAREE BAILEY
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX (Parliamentary Secretary) [7.30 p.m.]: I join the Hon. Scot MacDonald in expressing my deepest condolences on the tragic passing of Lisa-Maree Bailey on 21 August 2012. Lisa-Maree was a vibrant and vivacious young lady, and her absolutely beautiful smile will be greatly missed. Many were fond of her. I was always impressed by her friendly manner and dedication to the Liberal cause. Indeed, a number of members owe her a great debt in their election to the respective Houses of this Parliament. I was shocked and saddened by the news of her passing. I offer my deepest condolences to her parents, Eve and John, and to her brother, James. May she rest in peace. Vale Lisa-Maree.
Question—That this House do now adjourn—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
The House adjourned at 7.31 p.m. until Wednesday 12 September 2012 at 11.00 a.m.
______