9348

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

Tuesday 31 October 2000 ______

Mr Speaker (The Hon. John Henry Murray) took the chair at 2.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.

HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR FAIRFIELD SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATION

Personal Explanation

Mr SPEAKER: I call the member for Fairfield.

Mr TRIPODI (Fairfield) [2.17 p.m.]: Mr Speaker—

Mr Hartcher: Mr Speaker, on what basis has the honourable member for Fairfield been given the call?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Fairfield has the call.

Mr TRIPODI: I rise to make a personal explanation.

Mr SPEAKER: Permission is granted.

Mrs Chikarovski: Point of order: Is the honourable member for Fairfield seeking leave to make a personal explanation?

Mr SPEAKER: Yes, he has. Leave has been granted.

Mrs Chikarovski: No, hold on, Mr Speaker—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat.

Mrs Chikarovski: Mr Speaker, we accepted—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat.

Mrs Chikarovski: —on the understanding—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat.

Mrs Chikarovski: Mr Speaker—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat.

Mr Hartcher: No, Mr Speaker— Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Gosford will resume his seat. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Gosford will resume his seat. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! For the third time, the honourable member for Gosford will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition has asked whether the member for Fairfield has leave to make a personal explanation. He has asked for that leave; I have granted that to him. The honourable member for Fairfield has the call. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9349

Mr TRIPODI: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise to make a personal explanation. As an elected representative I am accountable to the public and to my electorate through this Parliament. That is why I have waited until now to make this statement. On 20 October I asked my solicitor to make inquiries on my behalf. I did so following publication of a newspaper report and in the knowledge that I was the subject of rumours in relation to that report. I requested my solicitor contact the police and offer my assistance in any way required. My solicitor contacted Eastwood police station and spoke to Inspector Craig Atwill. The inspector reported that a statement had been made on 18 September in relation to events alleged to have occurred on the evening of 14 September. He confirmed that inquiries had been concluded on 29 September and that the matter was closed. On 22 October a newspaper reported that City Central detectives were also involved in the inquiries. My solicitor contacted City Central offering my assistance in any way possible. Detective Inspector Brett Cooper again confirmed that inquiries had been concluded. Another allegation appeared on 28 October in relation to staff of a suburban newspaper. My solicitor contacted the editors of these newspapers, who confirmed that the reports were completely false. I have at every occasion offered to co-operate and assist the police. These allegations, which are unsubstantiated, reflect directly upon my character. There are two sides to every story. I deny any suggestion that I have acted improperly or illegally. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: I seek leave to move a motion for immediate debate:

That the female person who has made allegations— Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the House will remain silent. The Leader of the Opposition wishes to move a motion. There is a time— Mr Hartcher: No, she is seeking leave— Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the honourable member for Gosford on three calls to order. Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: I seek leave to suspend standing and sessional orders to move a motion— Leave not granted. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the honourable member for Wakehurst, who tends to want to sit in the chair most of the time, on three calls to order. Mr HARTCHER: Mr Speaker, serious allegations have been made about you in that you sought to dissuade the victim of a sexual assault from proceeding with her complaint. Until this matter is resolved, the Opposition believes that you should not preside over this Chamber. I therefore seek leave to move a motion as follows:

That Mr Speaker do now vacate the chair and the Deputy-Speaker act in his stead until the House otherwise determines. Leave not granted. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Gosford will resume his seat. ASSENT TO BILL Assent to the following bill reported:

Administrative Decisions Tribunal Legislation Amendment (Revenue) Bill. COMMITTEE ON THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND THE POLICE INTEGRITY COMMISSION Membership Mr SPEAKER: I report the receipt of the following message from the Legislative Council: Mr SPEAKER The Legislative Council desires to inform the Legislative Assembly that it has this day agreed to the following resolution: That Miss Gardiner be discharged from the Committee on the Office of the Ombudsman and the Police Integrity Commission and that Mr Colless be appointed as a Member of such committee.

Legislative Council MEREDITH BURGMANN 13 October 2000 President 9350 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION

Report

Mr Speaker announced, pursuant to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, the receipt of the report entitled "1999-2000 Annual Report".

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

Report

Mr Speaker announced, pursuant to the Ombudsman Act 1974 and the Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997,s the receipt of the report entitled "Annual Report 1999/2000—Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act", dated September 2000.

POLICE INTEGRITY COMMISSION

Report

Mr Speaker announced, pursuant to the Police Integrity Commission Act 1996, the receipt of the report entitled "Report to Parliament—Operation Belfast," dated October 2000.

COMMITTEE ON THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION

Report

The Clerk announced the receipt of the report entitled "Consideration of Proposed Powers", dated 19 October 2000, together with submissions received by the committee.

JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE UPON ROAD SAFETY

Report

The Clerk announced the receipt of the report entitled "Review of the Road Safety Situation in New South Wales in 1998", dated September 2000.

PETITIONS

State Taxes

Petitions praying that the Carr Government establish a public inquiry into State taxes, with the objective of reducing the tax burden and creating a sustainable environment for employment and investment in New South Wales, received from Mr Debnam, Ms Hodgkinson and Mr Maguire.

Malabar Policing

Petition praying that the House note the concern of Malabar residents at the closure of Malabar Police Station and praying that the station be reopened and staffed by locally based and led police, received from Mr Tink.

Engadine Police Station Downgrading

Petition praying that any downgrading of Engadine Police Station be opposed and praying that the station be staffed 24 hours a day by locally based and led police, received from Mr Tink.

Wentworth Shire Physiotherapy Service

Petition praying that a physiotherapy service be established in the Wentworth shire, received from Mr Black. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9351

Coffs Harbour Health Services Funding

Petition praying for increased funding for health services in the Coffs Harbour area and a reduction in surgery waiting lists, received from Mr Fraser.

Wallsend After Hours Primary Care Service

Petition praying that assistance be provided to enable the continuation of after hours primary care services to residents of Wallsend and surrounding districts, received from Mr Mills.

Macksville Hospital Funding

Petition praying that sufficient recurrent funding be allocated to Macksville and District Hospital to enable restoration of hospital services to the level that existed prior to cutbacks instituted by the Mid North Coast Area Health Service, received from Mr Stoner.

Non-government Schools Funding

Petitions praying that the Government reimburse the $5 million in funding that has been withdrawn from non-government schools and reverse its decision to withdraw a further $13.5 million in funding in 2001, received from Mr O'Farrell and Mr E. T. Page.

Yass Public School Special Support Unit

Petition praying that the Government reverse its decision to close the special support unit at Yass Public School and that it guarantee the continued existence of the unit to permit educational security for students, parents and staff, received from Ms Hodgkinson.

Queanbeyan Preschool Services

Petition praying that funds be made available to construct a new and permanent preschool in Queanbeyan, received from Mr Webb.

North Parramatta Bus Services

Petition opposing the proposed changes to Sydney Buses route 546, Bettington Road loop, and praying that existing services be retained, received from Ms Harrison.

Windsor Road Upgrading

Petitions praying that Windsor Road be upgraded and widened within the next two financial years, received from Mr Richardson and Mr Rozzoli.

Warrell Creek Pacific Highway Realignment

Petition opposing the Roads and Traffic Authority's design and access arrangements for the realignment of the Pacific Highway at Warrell Creek and praying that the House rejects the authority's proposal and provides proper access to nearby properties, received from Mr Stoner.

Kempsey and Macksville Pacific Highway Upgrade

Petition praying that the House improve safety on the Pacific Highway and fast-track the proposed bypassing of Kempsey and Macksville, received from Mr Stoner.

Wagga Wagga Electorate Fruit Fly Campaign

Petition praying that the Government resources the Fruit Fly Campaign for the years 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003, upgrades the Wagga Wagga electorate to a fruit fly control zone, and develops and implements a fruit fly strategy to eliminate fruit fly from the electorate within the next five years, received from Mr Maguire. 9352 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

National Parks Entry Fees

Petitions praying that the proposal to introduce a $6 entry fee per car per day into national parks be rejected, particularly in Bundjalung National Park and Iluka Nature Reserve, received from Mr Fraser, Mr George, Ms Hodgkinson, Mr Oakeshott, Mr Piccoli, Mr Souris, Mr J. H. Turner and Mr Webb.

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS

Mr SPEAKER: I welcome to the Parliament members of the Select Committee on the Murray River, a committee of the South Australian Parliament. I trust that there will be many questions relating to water issues during question time.

MINISTRY

Mr CARR: In the absence of the Minister for Gaming and Racing I will take questions on his behalf.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Routine of Business

[During notices of motions for urgent consideration]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Cabramatta will cease inciting the honourable member for Gosford, who is already on three calls to order.

HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR FAIRFIELD SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATION

Mr SPEAKER: Before calling on questions without notice I wish to make a statement relating to a number of allegations that have appeared in the media over the past two weeks. A member of the upper House, the Hon. Dr A. Chesterfield-Evans, wrote to me on 26 September seeking a meeting, which was held on 28 September. At that meeting I advised him that the role of Presiding Officers does not include a police role over members of Parliament, staff or indeed the 50 accredited press gallery members or their guests, when they attend Parliament. I advised the Hon. Dr A. Chesterfield-Evans that, if he considered the matters raised by him were of such a serious nature, they should be referred to police. At no time did I seek to intimidate the person concerned to stop pursuing the complaint either directly or indirectly and this has been confirmed by the Hon. Dr A. Chesterfield-Evans. Members would be aware of the longstanding protocol that the Chair does not answer questions at question time. I advised the Hon. Dr A. Chesterfield-Evans that, if he considered the matters raised by him were of such a serious nature, they should be referred to police. At no time did I seek to intimidate the person concerned to stop pursuing the complaint either directly or indirectly, and this has been confirmed by the Hon. Dr A. Chesterfield-Evans. Members would be aware of the longstanding protocol that the Chair does not answer questions at question time.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

______HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR FAIRFIELD SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATION Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: My question without notice is directed to the Premier. On what date did the Premier first become aware that a young woman visitor to Parliament House had made serious allegations of sexual assault against the Labor member for Fairfield? Mr CARR: My office received inquiries from the television media about a police investigation, an alleged police investigation, into a sexual assault claim concerning a member of Parliament some days after 18 September. My office replied that the Premier would not comment on any matter currently the subject of a police investigation. The Premier should not, and would not, comment on a current police investigation. That is the approach I have taken during all these days of speculation in the media. It is in fact wrong for a Premier to intrude into a current police inquiry. Indeed, if I had intruded into a police inquiry into these allegations in any way we would be today facing questions about whether the Premier had attempted to lead or influence or shape the police inquiry. A warning signal flashes when I hear that there is a current police inquiry, and that is: I avoid involving myself in it. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9353

STUDENT BUSH SURVIVAL COURSE

Mr McMANUS: My question without notice is to the Minister for Education and Training. How is the Government encouraging students to learn basic outdoor skills and improve their fitness?

Mr AQUILINA: New South Wales has the most diverse and extensive national parks system in Australia. Since coming to office the Carr Government has set up more than 150 new national parks in all parts of the State, covering over one million hectares of wilderness, bushland and marine reserves. A total of five million hectares in this State are now conserved within the national parks system. Trips to national parks can be enormously enjoyable, but it is vital that they are undertaken safely. In the past year there have been more than 700 reported cases of snakebite in New South Wales, but very few Australians would know what to do—how to treat the wound and how to seek help in an emergency. Every year a number of bushfires occur as a result of overturned camp stoves, badly built camp fires or the careless use of camping equipment. Today I can announce that new course materials have been provided to high schools and central schools across New South Wales to help teach the basic bush skills that all Australians should know. The new course materials are named "Journey with a Purpose" and will be used as part of the compulsory personal development, health and physical education curriculum in Year 10. This course will also be offered to those Year 11 students who chose to study the course as an elective. "Journey with a Purpose" provides teachers with information and teaching activities that encourage students to safely explore our national parks. Students are introduced to the basics of bush survival. The course includes: planning a camping trip; food and water requirements; safety and survival techniques; simple first aid; dealing with emergencies; conserving water and preventing fires; and teamwork. It also emphasises the importance of preserving our natural environment and a clear understanding of nature. Other subjects cover what to wear outdoors, what to take on overnight trips, the use of basic camping equipment and how to plan a trip according to the fitness levels of the group. Experience has shown that it is no good tailoring outdoor education courses for the fittest members of the school community. Courses must cater for all levels of experience and ability and "Journey with a Purpose" makes this a central theme. It is also an important learning experience for fitter students who may already be regular bushwalkers to work in teams of students with differing skills. As part of the course teachers will set real life situations for students and test their responses to an emergency. For example, a teacher may select five students and ask them to prepare a report on or role play of one of their members suffering a twisted ankle on a remote hillside. Students will have to understand how to immobilise a wound, judge the seriousness of the situation and seek help if required. The course has been prepared in close consultation with the New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service, and national parks rangers will play a major role in instruction and assistance for teachers and students. Along with classroom teaching, the course materials will assist teachers in planning outdoor experiences and trips to national parks. The course covers a great many areas and teachers are encouraged to select from and adapt activities to suit their school and the needs and abilities of students. It is important to note that "Journey with a Purpose" does not teach expert skills, nor is it meant to replace more specialised training such as that offered by St John Ambulance. The course is about the basic outdoor skills that young people require. As always, all young people are encouraged to further their education by taking up a first aid course or enrolling in fire safety classes. A number of schools, especially in rural areas, already offer more detailed fire safety training, including what to do in bushfires and how to protect a home. This training is in conjunction with New South Wales Fire Brigades and the local rural fire service units. The "Journey with a Purpose" course will not replace this training. Aside from bush skills and first aid, the course will play an important role in encouraging fitness. All members would be aware of recent studies showing an increase in obesity among young people and a decrease in the time spent exercising or playing sport. It is important that our schools play an active role in encouraging young people to move away from their computer screens and television sets. By incorporating visits to the State's national parks, schools can assist in improving overall physical fitness and providing a wider range of interests for students and, through them, their families. The course documents have now been sent to all high schools and central schools for consideration as part of next year's studies. I commend the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the environmental education unit of my department for their efforts and expertise in preparing what will be an important part of teaching and learning in New South Wales government schools and national parks. I particularly commend the curriculum course, "Journey with a Purpose". 9354 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR FAIRFIELD SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATION

Mr SOURIS: My question is to the Premier. Now that he has heard the personal explanation to this House by the honourable member for Fairfield, does he accept and stand by the statements made by the honourable member ? Does he still retain the Premier's full confidence?

Mr CARR: I have confidence in any member of my team until there is a finding against him or her.

HEALTHY PEOPLE 2005 PROGRAM

Mr STEWART: My question without notice is to the Minister for Health. How is the Government helping to improve the health of New South Wales families?

Mr KNOWLES: It is interesting that the honourable member has asked a sensible question about policy and all we hear from the other side is laughter. We have been waiting for a health policy from the other side of the House for the past two years. Everyone is involved in developing good policy. I have received a sensible question from the honourable member for Bankstown. about what the Government is doing to improve the health of communities and their families. Most people would acknowledge that historically too little attention has been paid to prevention and broad-scale public health initiatives in health systems around the world. The focus is always on the state of the hospitals: the acute end of the system. As John Menadue made clear in his report to the Government in March this year, so much of the health debate is about hospitals and sickness rather than health and wellbeing. Efforts to shift resources and provide an increased emphasis on early intervention and keeping people well is usually lost in the clamour for more beds and more hospital- based services.

In response to the obvious need to give a greater focus to prevention and public health matters, and in a concerted effort to keep people well rather than treat them when they become sick, I am pleased to announce what is regarded as an Australian first and what is now being copied in other States: a fully cohesive framework to promote public health and prevention measures in New South Wales. The program known as Healthy People 2005 is a framework focusing on the promotion of healthy lifestyles, the creation of healthier environments, and the reduction of obvious inequities in the system. The five-year program incorporates everything from health promotion, such as our Slip Slop Slap campaign, to disease prevention and better management of chronic and recurring illnesses.

It is worth noting that our efforts since March have received recognition. For example, our efforts on anti-smoking initiatives have received both national and international acclaim. During the Olympics the Premier received recognition from the World Health Organisation and the International Olympic Committee for our efforts in establishing the first smoke-free Olympic Games. At the same time, but not as widely acknowledged, the Government received a national Noffs Foundation award for our recent smoke-free legislation, which was regarded as the most progressive public health initiative in more than two decades.

Those efforts form part of a comprehensive policy framework to deal with health and wellbeing rather than simply dealing with sickness and the acute, hospital-based part of the system. Because of the earlier catcalls it is worth doing a little comparing and contrasting what the Government has been doing to establish a policy framework and what the Opposition has not been doing. I have searched long and hard for an Opposition policy on health. For example, in March we had this inspirational statement from the Leader of the Opposition, and until corrected this stands as Opposition health policy:

We believe everyone is entitled to expect the best health care possible when that care is needed most. Our priority must be the patients and not the process.

The statement continued:

We must support frontline health staff with adequate resources and policy.

When you dig around you think: What has the shadow Minister been up to? The print-out of the chat room of 29 May of the honourable member for North Shore shows—and this is delightful, pay attention—that someone known as "Anonymous" said to the honourable member for North Shore:

If you were the health Minister, what would you do to fix the NSW health system? 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9355

The reply is shown as:

Jillian says: Wow Anonymous … That's the subject of a huge policy paper … let's just say my focus would be on promoting good health and preventing sickness … In a nutshell I believe that we need to put the "care" back into health care.

The platitudes end there. A two-sentence response to a legitimate question about what the Opposition would do about developing health policy.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Pittwater to order.

Mr KNOWLES: We have been waiting almost two years and all we have are two separate paragraphs outlining four platitudes and not much else. Some months ago in reply to a question in this Chamber I made the point that one has to go back a long way to find serious Opposition health policy. In fact, one has to go back to the late 1980s when the honourable member for Willoughby—quite a good author in fact, an author of some note—published on behalf of the then Government when he was Deputy Leader of the parliamentary Liberal Party and Minister for Health, a booklet entitled "Microeconomic Reform, Achievements of the New South Wales Health System". I think that was one of the earlier works of Collins.

I have said in this place that although I do not agree with everything in it, at least it forms a worthy platform for public debate. If ever there was anything in public life in this State that needed an Opposition response, it is health policy. The Government has developed the Sinclair report and the Menadue report. It is getting on with enormous political involvement in the process, and from the other side of the House we have only two paragraphs, and nothing since 1998. Is it any wonder that in the latest work of the honourable member for Willoughby, The Bear Pit, we find that they are a bit gun shy of policy? When he became Leader of the Opposition he offered none other than the present Leader of the Opposition the opportunity to become shadow Minister for Health. Page 252 states:

Offered the chance to win her spurs on the toughest portfolio in New South Wales politics, she turned it down.

She did not want to do it. So he gave it to a relative newcomer, a person I might add who, according to his record—

Mr Hartcher: Point of order: The honourable member for Bankstown asked a question about what the Government is doing to help the health of families in New South Wales. It is totally irrelevant to mention a book which may have been written by a member of this House. I ask you to bring the Minister back to the leave of the question.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I uphold the point of order. The Minister will return to the substance of his answer.

Mr KNOWLES: With the greatest respect to the honourable member for Gosford, there is more in those two short pages about the Coalition's health policy than we have heard in its entire two years in Opposition. Did she really say, "Hugs"? She has taken the Judas kiss to a new dimension. She puts her arms around him and shoves the knife in. This passage is a testament to what real policy under the Coalition may have once looked like. It is also a testament to the failure of the Opposition to introduce policy not only in the past two years but also in the lead-up to the last election. We now know, based on The Bear Pit, that the efforts by the honourable member for North Shore to develop a health policy at the last election could not come to fruition. Why? Because she never had the money to fund her promises. That is why the Coalition did not have a health policy at the last election. The honourable member for North Shore, who was promoted by the honourable member for Willoughby to shadow Minister, also knifed him in the back. She also supported a vote of no confidence in the Leader of the Opposition. Not only does she not have a policy, she has very little credibility.

The Coalition has made very little effort. The Government is getting on with good, solid, public policy and, I might say, making a demonstrable shift following the recommendations in the Menadue report towards putting greater emphasis on wellbeing and health as opposed to rectification of sickness at the acute end, that is, in hospitals. For example, our investment of $45 million to better manage chronic and recurring illnesses, such as heart and lung conditions and cancer, is a major investment in health care and prevention. It shows a shift in attitude away from treating patients at the acute end and dealing with prevention elements before people become so sick that they have to be admitted to hospital. That $45 million is now being well spent by clinicians to reshape models of care. 9356 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

Families First is another Government preventive care program. For every $1 spent on vaccination there is a $16 saving in direct medical costs. A saving to the system of $9,000 per head is achieved by getting only one person to stop smoking. As I have said, the Government has been internationally recognised for its antismoking initiative. There is a $20 saving for every $1 invested in HIV management. These prevention and public health initiatives are integral to the Menadue recommendations. That is why the Government has introduced the Healthy People 2005 program. Whilst a quarter of the entire State budget is spent on health, it is a legitimate part of public policy and public debate to determine how that money is spent, whether it should be on prevention and research or at the hospital end, the acute stage, where 60 per cent of the health budget is presently delivered. We want to make sure that we achieve an appropriate balance and that we get value for money.

The sad thing is that there has been not one response from the Opposition, which has had two years to produce a policy. All we get are two paragraphs—one from the Leader of the Opposition mouthing platitudes and one from the shadow Minister saying, "Wow, that is the subject of a big policy paper." That was in May. She has had a few months to develop the big policy paper, but we are still waiting. If the performance outlined in the book of the honourable member for Willoughby is any indication, I suspect we will be waiting a long time. As Peter Collins said, at some stage they have to tell the people what they stand for; otherwise the people will never vote for them.

HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR FAIRFIELD SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATION

Mr O'FARRELL: My question without notice is directed to the honourable member for Fairfield in his capacity as chair of the Public Accounts Committee. In light of the serious allegation made against him and the ongoing police inquiry, will he immediately stand down from his Australian Labor Party and parliamentary positions, including as chair of the Public Accounts Committee?

Mr Whelan: Point of order: The standing orders are explicit. A member is entitled to ask a chair of a parliamentary committee questions about that committee. A member is not entitled to ask questions in relation to any other issue.

Mr O'Farrell: To the point of order: Standing Order 136 could not be clearer. It allows questions to be asked of chairs about their committees. Nothing is more important to the Public Accounts Committee than the integrity of its chairman and whether the chairman will continue in that position despite the serious allegations and the policy inquiry continuing. He ought to stand down. Mr Speaker, if you rule this question out of order, you will again compromise yourself.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I allow the question.

Mr TRIPODI: I understand that I am barred from answering the question if it is beyond the responsibility of the committee.

RURAL AND REGIONAL SMALL TOWNS ASSISTANCE

Mr BLACK: My question without notice is to the Minister for Local Government, Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs. What is the Government doing to assist small towns in rural and regional New South Wales?

Mr WOODS: The State Government has a strong belief that it must approach regional development in a targeted and strategic way. The one-size-fits-all strategy simply does not and will not work. We have to recognise that although some centres in regional New South Wales are growing strongly, others are facing challenging times. That is why in the last budget the Government introduced the landmark Townlife development program. This three-year program is quarantined to small towns across New South Wales with populations of less than 2,500 people.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Wakehurst continually talks during question time. He will remain silent.

Mr WOODS: Townlife, which will assist up to 100 towns across the State, is designed to act as a catalyst for projects that will lead to new economic activity, such as the development of new products or services or the staging of tourism events. Since I launched the program on 25 August, the Government has been 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9357 flooded with inquiries, forcing it to extend the deadline for applications by three weeks. The response has been nothing short of remarkable. The reason for this is that there is a great deal of enthusiasm and commitment from people in these smaller communities. It is our responsibility as a government to use the local knowledge and, with the aid of programs such as Townlife, to direct it into economic outcomes. We saw that demonstrated by the community of Coolah, which is in the electorate of the Leader of the National Party. In tough times the township rallied together and, with Government support, revamped its main street and established a number of job creation facilities, such as the Internet Cafe.

Through Townlife the Government will draw out similar partnerships with other smaller communities. The Government has received 46 applications for funding under Townlife from every corner of regional New South Wales. The projects are as diverse as the communities they represent. They include the identification of agribusiness opportunities; the marketing of regional cultural events; various arts and crafts festivals; the design of a native species information centre; a heritage walking trail; the development of a major regional music concert; and the establishment of a crafts-cuisine information centre. I expect to announce the successful projects later this year. We will also invite the second round of applications early next year.

The Government does not walk away from the challenges facing rural communities. We do not subscribe to any claim that country towns are dying. For example, in recent years the gloom merchants made all sorts of claims about the future of Eden, Blayney, Lithgow and Cobar. We know the resilience of country people; the gloom merchants have had to eat their words about those towns, and other towns that have moved forward strongly. Last week a series of regional profiles, which included population projections, were the subject of intense media debate. The Government will not use those projections as any basis for its government service delivery commitments. More importantly, the projections do not take into account the local economic activity which has driven many communities forward, such as the activity in Blayney and Lithgow.

For example, the report says that Tumut will experience a population decrease. In fact, 1,000 new direct jobs are in the process of being created in Tumut as a result of the $350 million Visy paper mill, which is currently under construction. I also dismiss out of hand the notion that the populations of leading regional centres such as Armidale will dramatically decrease. For that to happen the Federal Government would have to close the University of New England, and that is a ludicrous suggestion. Even the Opposition has agreed that projections can be somewhat unreliable when taken in isolation. The former Leader of the National Party, the honourable member for Lachlan, recognised that fact when he said that the figures were unreliable, and that they were based on opinion and not reality. I would also make the point that the projections were based on data supplied by the Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS]. I have long argued that the ABS figures do not take into account the true economic and social activity in a number of regional centres around the State.

The current system of reporting economic activity in some areas on a local government area basis leads to distortions, particularly in the centres covered by more than one council area. In my electorate, for example, the Grafton city local government area is the hole in the doughnut: it is surrounded by three rural councils. All are integrally linked, with Grafton being the largest. It provides services for the others, and the others provide satellite housing arrangements for it. Yet, the ABS figures do not reflect that reality. Even the Federal Government has recognised this fact. In April this year I wrote to the Treasurer with my concerns. The Minister for Financial Services, Mr Joe Hockey, responded in August saying that he had asked the ABS for more detailed reporting.

With all that said, we are not going to bury our heads in the sand. Last year the Heinz-Watties tuna cannery closed its doors in Eden, which resulted in the loss of 145 jobs. Amid much pessimism about the town's future, we immediately set up a joint fund with the company to look for new jobs. We have now offered assistance to a number of projects that will lead to 242 jobs, which will outstrip the number of jobs lost at the cannery. We will also look at creative ways of driving economic and job growth forward. We accomplished this earlier in the year when the Premier and I announced a unique agreement in the township of Delegate, which is in the State's south. As a result of Government assistance, the disused hospital is being converted into a community centre, as well as the regional headquarters of a major forestry company, which will create 40 jobs in that small community. This would not have happened without Government intervention.

The Carr Labor Government will not divert from its policy of strategic intervention to promote growth in regional communities and the production of policy with rigour and direction. In almost two years of the Government's present term of office, the Opposition has undertaken no policy development. It has produced no policy in regional development, which leads one to fear that it has no confidence in country New South Wales. If it had that confidence it would have produced a policy. Because of the chronic laziness of the Opposition, it 9358 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 has lost the capacity and the rigour to produce policy. The Government has confidence in the enthusiasm and resilience of country people, and we will continue to work with them towards economic and employment growth in country areas, which equates to jobs for people in country New South Wales.

NEW SOUTH WALES GRAINS BOARD OPERATIONS

Mr McGRANE: My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation. Given the losses of the New South Wales Grains Board, will the Government initiate an independent inquiry and audit into its operations based on the Government's decision to retain vesting powers?

Mr AMERY: I suppose the best way to answer the part of the question about the audit and inquiry is to indicate to the House that I have already announced, in relation to a decision we made last week about the future of the Grains Board, that not only will the Public Accounts Committee conduct an inquiry, but the Auditor-General will be required to report to the Government, as he does every year, on the Grains Board and every other authority. The Grains Board also will be required to provide a report. I do not have the timing for that yet. The Grains Board is working with the banks and the Price-Waterhouse group to give us details about what its net losses will be, if one wants to put it that way.

Mr Slack-Smith: Don't you know yet?

Mr AMERY: That is the first comment the shadow minister has made about the Grains Board. Up until last week farmers on harvesters were worrying about what was going on with the Grains Board because of the time it took to resolve negotiations. I can understand their concern. They did not know, when they harvested the grain and it went off to the board, whether they would be paid for it, because they did not know the board's financial future. They were worried about last year's pool payments. Yet week after week after week not one statement was made by the shadow Minister for Agriculture, let alone a policy.

Mr Slack-Smith: We have been waiting for two years for one of those.

Mr AMERY: The shadow minister should take a leaf out of the book of the honourable member for North Shore. What was it she said—"Put the care back in health care"? Why not have a policy: put the grains back in the grain belt, or something like that? Make it something hard-hitting! The honourable member for Dubbo has continued to express an interest in this matter. He has contacted my office because he is concerned about the harvest. Whatever the outcome of the financial investigation into the losses of the Grains Board, it will be a lot better off under the Government's policy than it would have been under the policy recently espoused by the Opposition—not by the shadow Minister for Agriculture, but by the former Minister, the former Leader of the National Party. He said on the Alan Jones program that the whole thing should be deregulated. He acknowledges today that that is correct.

The honourable member for Dubbo is concerned about the financial implications in the wash-up of the Grains Board. However, let me advise the House what would have happened had the Government taken a different decision last Thursday, when we announced that we would maintain the vesting powers for five years, which is the subject of the competition policy review. We announced that Grainco would be the agent for the Grains Board for the next five years, when the regulations sunset. In exchange $25.2 million was added to the whole process. The former Leader of the National Party, the honourable member for Lachlan, was asked this question by Alan Jones:

Why would the Government give them five more years of legislative … legislation backed vesting powers? Why would they extend the period of the Grains Board for another five years. The response of the honourable member for Lachlan was:

Well, it's ridiculous, Alan, because when you think in recent years we've had the Grains Sorghum Board, the Oats Board, the Oilseeds Board, they've all fallen over and now the Grains Board … Everything he said is true. All those boards fell over in 1990 and 1991. Guess what the solution was? The solution was to create a Grains Board with vesting powers. Which Minister introduced that? It was the honourable member for Lachlan. The policy that he was criticising last week was a policy that he introduced— not his side, not his party, but him personally. I do not blame him, because the rest of the mob would not say a word. The shadow Minister was silent. Out of frustration the honourable member for Lachlan got up at six o'clock in the morning and he said something. I suppose we have to give him credit for that. I did not realise he was going to blow it. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9359

Had we not continued the vesting powers, done the deal with Grainco and accepted the recommendation, certain things would have happened. First of all, the money and the crop that has gone into the Grains Board from the last harvest and all through this year, and even the stuff that has gone in the last few days—those are my words—would have gone through the gate. What would have happened then? When we announced deregulation on Friday the banks would have shut the place down immediately; they would have foreclosed. All the farmers who have been waiting for the last year and all through this year for their pool payments for the last crop would be singing for their money, because the banks would pay back, if there was to be any payment at all, only after they had gone through a liquidation sale of the assets.

The pool fees, that is, the $1.50 that the honourable member for Lachlan has now put forward, would have been dumped on the farmers. Everything would have been dumped on the farmers. The contract would have been repudiated. Negotiations with overseas trading organisations would have been cancelled. The banks would have moved in and the farmers, I understand, would have been left with debts of $13 million. That is the policy enunciated by the National Party in this State. That is what it wanted to leave us with.

Our policy was a managed solution to this problem. We were confronted with a problem and as a Government we did not walk away from the farmers like the National Party wanted to do. We stayed with them. We kept the regulations in place for five years, though admittedly they will sunset after five years. We got the $25.2 million from Grainco to assist with the debt. We gave the assurance that was sought two weeks ago that the $1.50 authorised buyer fee would not increase. Many rumours were going around that it would be $15 or $25. We kept the $1.50 in place. A very important point, although not in dollar terms, is that we relieved the anxiety of the farmers who are going ahead with their harvests whilst not knowing the future of the Grain Board. The Government again stuck with the farmers and I am really pleased about that. It has been supported by the largest farmer organisation in New South Wales, the New South Wales Farmers Association, which in its press release of 26 October stated:

Farmers say a new agency agreement reached between Queensland grain handler Grainco and the Grain Board provided a solid foundation on which the harvesting of this year's barley and canola crops could proceed.

The committee chairman congratulated the Government on sticking with them through this difficult time. Finally, the boards mentioned by the honourable member went broke in 1991. He had an opportunity to deregulate them then and say, "Oh well, we'll walk away," but he then set up regulated grain boards. He should stick with the policy. This game is all about credibility. The HMAS National Party Credibility has taken a bit of water this week! If you cannot hold a policy that you implement in government, you should stay quiet on the matter, although I acknowledge that no-one else was talking. I thank the honourable member for Dubbo for his continued interest in this matter and I hope all farmers in his constituency, and throughout the grain belt, are now cultivating their harvest without the anxiety they faced over the last few weeks. BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY REFORM Mr GREENE: My question without notice is to the Minister for Public Works and Services. What is the latest information on improvements to payment practices for subcontractors and suppliers in the building and construction industry? Mr IEMMA: I commend the honourable member for Georges River for his interest in this landmark piece of reform for payment in the construction industry. Security of payment legislation came into force on 26 March this year. Our promise prior to the last election was that we would act finally to remove from the building and construction industry the very unAustralian practices that have existed for many decades by which small businesses and subcontractors have been systematically sent to the wall as a result of unscrupulous operators in that industry not meeting their payment obligations. I am pleased to report that the passing of the legislation and its operation from 26 March has finally changed the culture regarding non-payment in the construction industry aimed at sending small operators to the wall. Since 26 March I am pleased to report four examples of small businesses and/or small contractors in the industry using the cheap and quick adjudication process the legislation provides to get payment. In these instances the payments are small amounts of money, but for the businesses involved they are very important, especially to those who have to make do with a tight cash flow. The building industry has approximately 65,000 small businesses run by a single operator or two-person operators and whilst small amounts of cash are insignificant to the big end of town, they are very important to the small operator. I can report that the first successful small contractor to use the provisions of the legislation was a small cleaning business in The Hills area that claimed $1,500. The subcontractor succeeded against a builder that did 9360 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 not want to pay. The second case involved a concreter who was on a site in the outer suburbs of Sydney. That claim was for $2,000 that the builder again refused to pay. The subcontractor used the provisions of the adjudication process contained in the legislation to get payment. The third example involved a scaffolding subcontractor on the far North Coast who was refused payment by two builders. The scaffolder used the adjudication mechanism within the legislation to recover $17,000 that was claimed against the two builders who had decided to pass the buck between each other over liability for the payment.

To show that the legislation is balanced and does not always work to support the subcontractor, in the fourth instance a builder on a Central Coast site was taken through the adjudication process by a fitout subcontractor. In that case the adjudicator ruled in favour of the builder. That is a clear example of how this balanced legislation operates to support both parties in the building industry. More importantly, it acts to clean up the long history of builders attempting to avoid payment by putting into construction contracts clauses such as "pay when I get paid" or "pay if I get paid". Such clauses have sent many small businesses in the building and construction industry to the wall.

I am pleased to report also that as yet there have not been any instances of the small claims divisions of the Local Court ruling on disputes from the adjudication process. This is because the culture has changed considerably and with the introduction of the legislation parties are now sitting down before commencing work on construction sites, going through the legislation, determining their obligations and responsibilities, and reforming their practices accordingly. I am pleased to report that the larger builders are having their legal advisers brief their project managers before starting work on large construction projects by taking them through their obligations and responsibilities under the legislation so that the project managers do not give bad advice to contractors who subsequently attempt to withhold payment from subcontractors. So successful has the legislation been that the New Zealand Government and the Victorian Government have set up a task force to look at introducing similar legislation.

In conclusion, I can report happily to the House that so far with the legislation it is a matter of so far so good. It has received universal acclaim within the building industry. The 2 July edition of Build Australia, which is the leading journal in the building and construction industry, referred to the legislation as miraculous. The editor said that never before had legislation actually received approval from both sides of the industry. The legislation has received universal acclaim from all players in the construction and building industries, from industry associations, the large end of town, small operators and all of the small businesses which for many years have had to fight the big players and developers to get payment and receive justice. This is one of the best landmark pieces of legislation this country has ever seen.

HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR FAIRFIELD SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATION

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: My question is directed to the Premier. Given that the personal explanation by the Labor member for Fairfield conflicts with the published account of events given to police by the young woman, and given the outstanding allegations of the cover-up involving other Labor members, including the Speaker, will the Premier now order an immediate and independent judicial inquiry?

Mr CARR: No-one discounts the seriousness of an allegation of this kind. It is precisely because it is so serious that the woman's position demands to be respected. According to the police, according to the media and according to her own party leader, the Hon. Dr. Arthur Chesterfield-Evans, she is not pressing the matter. She has made the decision to take it no further and not reveal her name. That decision, her decision, should be respected.

On the matter of an inquiry being set up by the Government, if there is a police investigation and that is still current, any inquiry set up would only second guess it. There is no reason for an inquiry. Imagine the position if this were an allegation against a member of the Liberal Party or the National Party. If such an inquiry were being investigated by police, according to the appropriate processes involved—complaint made, police interviews launched—and I were to say that we are going to have an inquiry, there would be claims from the other side of politics that we were tearing up the rules. A matter of this kind is a police matter. It is for the police to investigate.

Mr Tink: Which branch manager is going to investigate it this time, Bob?

Mr CARR: In answer to that interjection—I am happy to respond to it—if there is any complaint about the way in which the police inquiry is being conducted, that belongs with the Police Integrity Commission. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9361

Mr Hartcher: Never you.

Mr CARR: Hear me out. Because of matters raised by the police themselves on Saturday the police Minister saw that the matter was sent to the Police Integrity Commission [PIC]. That is where such allegations belong. I might say that if the circumstances were reversed and in the investigation of a complaint against a Liberal member of Parliament it was found that one of the police officers was a member of the Liberal Party I would react precisely in the way that Opposition members have reacted. I accept absolutely the validity of that criticism. The police officer involved should have made it clear at the very start of the investigation that he was a member of the Labor Party. That is why that matter deserves examination by the PIC. I say that having given it that sort of consideration. That is a legitimate point to make. That police officer was wrong in not declaring to senior officers up front that someone might impugn his integrity or his independence. That is precisely why—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the honourable member for Hornsby on two calls to order. The honourable member for Epping will remain silent.

Mr CARR: That is precisely why that matter was sent to the PIC.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the House will remain silent.

Mr CARR: Police are investigating this matter. It belongs with the police. The woman —this is where the Opposition's case comes unstuck—involved in this serious allegation, according to the police, according to her party leader and according to media reports, says that she is not pressing the matter.

Mrs Skinner: Why?

Mr CARR: You ask why. I refer to a transcript of an interview with the woman's party leader, Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans. He provided the answer in an interview with Phillip Clark. If you want to look at his answer to that question, you can see it in the transcript.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Hornsby to order for the third time.

Mr CARR: He said, "Her response was 'I won't proceed further', which effectively meant, you know, she thought all this mud slinging was not going to do any good." That was the response of the—

[Interruption]

Don't attack me for those comments! That was a quote from a transcript of an interview with the Leader of the Australian Democrats in this Parliament, who took it upon himself to make those remarks. It is a matter for the police.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: I ask a supplementary question. In light of the Premier's answer I ask: Will he assure the House that any police investigation will also look at the question of which members of this House were involved in the cover-up? Will he also assure the House that the police will investigate who has been pressuring the young woman in a way that he knows that she has been pressured by a smear campaign? Can he assure the House that the police will investigate all other members who have had some association with this matter and make sure that those details become public?

Mr CARR: That is a very revealing question. Again, I am driven to refer to the transcript of the Leader of the Australian Democrats, who went to the Speaker, and what he said in an interview on the Phillip Clark program a couple of days ago. He said: "She made the decision herself. Really, before I was in the picture she spoke to the police." "She made the decision herself." That was said by the leader of the party to which she belongs.

Mrs Chikarovski: Under pressure.

Mr CARR: No, before. That is the account of the leader of the party to which the woman belongs. This might be frustrating to the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition—without a scrap of policy in two years, without a single positive thing to say to the House about health or education or any other policy area—falls with relish on an allegation of sexual assault. At this stage with a current police investigation— 9362 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the Deputy Leader of the Opposition on two calls to order. I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time.

Mr CARR: The Leader of the Opposition has failed to acknowledge that this matter is where it should be: with the young woman who had the complaint and the police who are investigating that complaint.

Questions without notice concluded.

CONSIDERATION OF URGENT MOTIONS

Occupancy of Chair by Mr Speaker

Mr HARTCHER: Mr Speaker, the Coalition parties do not have confidence in your retaining the chair as Speaker while serious allegations that the Premier admits are still being investigated by the police continue. The reason is that you are caught up in these allegations and there is no more urgent matter to be debated in this House than the role of the Speaker and whether the Speaker should continue in office. Why do we not have confidence in you? Because in your own statement today you have failed to address the vital issue—

Mr Whelan: Point of order: If the member for Gosford wishes to make serious allegations, which he has admitted to the House they are, he should do so by way of substantive motion. He is using the wrong forms of the House and he does not know the standing orders, like his leader.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Gosford will address the question before the Chair.

Mr HARTCHER: I will. These are serious allegations.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question before the Chair is which of the two urgent motions of which notice has been given should receive precedence. The member for Gosford should not address the substance of the motion of which he has given notice.

Mr HARTCHER: That is right. There is nothing more urgent than whether you continue to sit in that chair. That is the most urgent question before the House now: whether you continue to sit in that chair when the police are investigating serious allegations against you. What can be more urgent? The Speaker of the New South Wales Parliament is being investigated by the police as to whether he intimidated a witness not to proceed with a serious sexual complaint. The most urgent matter before the New South Wales Parliament is that you and your little minions over there are trying to cover-up.

Mr Nagle: Point of order: This is a substantial attack on your credibility as the Speaker. It should be done using the normal forms of the House, not disguised as a motion for urgent consideration. I call upon the mover to use the proper forms so that the House can have an all-out debate.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! No point of order is involved.

Mr HARTCHER: My motion is urgent because you, Mr Speaker, made a statement to this House about these serious allegations, and your statement to this House did not include what you had done in relation to the statutory declaration. It said that there were allegations. It said that Arthur Chesterfield-Evans came to see you. It said that you did not act in any improper way. But at no time did you answer the allegation that is at the heart of this complaint: that you had a statutory declaration. You may shake your head, but let us hear the denial. You will not answer the allegation and that is why you should not be in the chair. You had a statutory declaration and that statutory declaration was used by you to dissuade—

Mr Whelan: You are trying to intimidate.

Mr HARTCHER: You will get your chance. Sit down. You are trying to take up time so that I can speak for only one minute. That is what you are trying to do. Have the guts to give me time.

[Interruption] He has agreed to the motion being debated now. Mr Whelan: You are trying to intimidate. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9363

Mr HARTCHER: You are lying, and we will move it.

Mr Whelan: Stop intimidating people.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Does the Leader of the House rise on a point of order? Mr Whelan: Point of order: The honourable member is referring to allegations. This is a debate about urgency. I have already indicated to the House that this debate should be the subject a motion of no confidence in the Speaker—dissent or censure. It has nothing to do with a motion for urgent consideration. The honourable member should be told to comply with the standing orders of this Chamber. Mr HARTCHER: Mr Speaker, you do not have the confidence of the Coalition parties while this police investigation continues. This is not a no confidence motion per se; it is a motion that you should step down while the police investigation continues. You shake your head. You should stand down. South-western Sydney Firefighting Services Ms MEGARRITY (Menai) [3.32 p.m.]: My motion is extremely urgent because today is the last day of the operation of the Moorebank Army Fire Service, and the lives and properties of 10,000 constituents are at risk. Nothing could be more urgent. Question—That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Gosford be proceeded with—put. The House divided. Ayes, 33 Mr Armstrong Mr Kerr Mr Slack-Smith Mr Brogden Mr Maguire Mr Souris Mrs Chikarovski Mr Merton Mr Stoner Mr Collins Mr O'Doherty Mr Tink Mr Debnam Mr O'Farrell Mr J. H. Turner Mr George Mr Oakeshott Mr R. W. Turner Mr Glachan Mr D. L. Page Mr Webb Mr Hartcher Mr Piccoli Mr Hazzard Mr Richardson Ms Hodgkinson Mr Rozzoli Tellers, Mr Humpherson Ms Seaton Mr Fraser Dr Kernohan Mrs Skinner Mr R. H. L. Smith

Noes, 56

Ms Allan Mrs Grusovin Mr Newell Mr Amery Ms Harrison Ms Nori Ms Andrews Mr Hickey Mr Orkopoulos Mr Aquilina Mr Hunter Mr E. T. Page Mr Ashton Mr Iemma Mr Price Mr Barr Mr Knowles Dr Refshauge Mr Bartlett Mrs Lo Po' Ms Saliba Ms Beamer Mr Lynch Mr Scully Mr Black Mr Markham Mr W. D. Smith Mr Brown Mr Martin Mr Stewart Miss Burton Mr McBride Mr Torbay Mr Campbell Mr McGrane Mr Watkins Mr Carr Mr McManus Mr Whelan Mr Collier Ms Meagher Mr Windsor Mr Crittenden Ms Megarrity Mr Woods Mr Debus Mr Mills Mr Yeadon Mr Gaudry Ms Moore Tellers, Mr Gibson Mr Moss Mr Anderson Mr Greene Mr Nagle Mr Thompson

Question resolved in the negative. 9364 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

SOUTH-WESTERN SYDNEY FIREFIGHTING SERVICES

Urgent Motion

Ms MEGARRITY (Menai) [3.40 p.m.]: I move:

That this House:

(1) condemns the Federal Government's sudden decision to withdraw the provision of firefighting services in south-west Sydney; and

(2) calls on the Federal Government to immediately reverse this decision or delay such action until alternative arrangements can be made, in conjunction with the State Government.

Today marks the last day of the operation of the Moorebank Army fire service and, as a result, the lives and property of up to 10,000 of my constituents will be at risk. As at midnight, the State's fire services located at Liverpool, Macquarie Fields and Revesby will be expected to attend any fire within the vicinity of an area that is already a tinderbox . We have already experienced significant fires in the area and, by all accounts, we are set to experience a lot more.

The Department of Defence has had a very significant presence in the Holsworthy area for quite some time. Indeed, children of Defence Department families have attended local schools and have been a valuable part of our community. Nowhere was that better shown than in the recent East Timor situation where we had friends—relatives in some instances—and valuable members of the community representing our nation. In the last few years the presence of defence personnel has declined and we have witnessed a heartless grab for cash by bureaucrats in Canberra in what might be described as an obsessive trend in the disposal of assets. The cash register has been ringing long and loud. A few years ago a joint venture resulted in the development of Wattle Grove, a multimillion dollar development with many house and land packages. Existing housing, owned for many years by the Department of Defence to house defence personnel, has been sold on the open market. The cash register rings again.

A recent development, The Sanctuary, is also on Federal property and used to be called Voyager Point. In fact one reached it by a road formerly known as Sirius Road, which is now grandly named The Avenue. These houses are worth half a million dollars or more each. The proportion of defence personnel to civilians may have decreased but there are still large defence installations in the Holsworthy area, including the Holsworthy range. The largest defence warehouse in Australia is also housed on the estate. Perusal of the most recent Federal budget forecasts a very large proportion of asset sales. To me, the warning bells rang, although from the Federal Government's point of view it was the cash register that was ringing. We have seen every piece of available ground progressively sold off to the highest bidder. There have been years of rumour and uncertainty.

I have spoken in this House before about the plight of groups such as the Holsworthy Girl Guides and the First Wattle Grove Scouts who, being located on Department of Defence land, are uncertain about their future. They have now been told that they are out. I have also spoken in this House about Moorebank Public School. Although that school has a proud history, after this year it will no longer exist. The State Government has had to accommodate children from that school in the newly constructed Wattle Grove school because the ground is literally being sold from underneath them. The neighbours of Moorebank school just happen to be the Moorebank Army fire station. They, too, have been given their marching orders, and they will be marching all the way to Darwin.

After today the fire station will no longer exist or operate. I visited the fire station today and I can hardly believe that if I walk in there tomorrow it will not be operating. As I said earlier, up to 10,000 residents and their property will be left vulnerable to the threat of fire. As recently as 12 October there was a fairly significant fire in that area. Army personnel were not able to attend and the State Government fire service was able to get there from Liverpool. However, the distance involved is such that they could not get there before the fire went out of control. That is what the local people are worried about. Honourable members do not have to take my word for it. The New South Wales Fire Brigades Commissioner, Vice Admiral Ian MacDougall, has advised the Government that this move by the Army will leave lives and property at risk.

That is a fairly significant statement from someone in New South Wales Fire Brigades. Vice-Admiral MacDougall's officers, based at Liverpool, Macquarie Fields and Revesby, are now beholden to attend fires in 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9365 these areas without the provision by the Federal Government of any additional resources or, indeed, even decent notice. As early as 1997, when it was mooted that this fire service may cease to operate, negotiations were held between the Federal and State overnments. At one point the Federal Government offered to give to New South Wales Fire Brigades the station at Moorebank at no cost! Of course, that did not last long once the bean counters in Canberra got involved. The Federal Government, conscious of this cash-register approach—this fire sale, if you will pardon the pun—decided that it could not possibly be given away, that it was far too valuable, but that they would sell it at commercial rates.

The Federal Government had its own valuers determine what those commercial rates were. Once negotiations went along those lines, the Government decided that it could do even better. As I have mentioned, the scouts, the guides, Moorebank Public School and now the fire station will no longer exist and the whole area will be developed for a much more commercially beneficial opportunity, that is, a technology park and warehousing complex. If only we had had some notice. It was mooted back in 1997 and the Minister for Emergency Services has tried on at least three occasions in recent months to obtain an undertaking from the Federal Government as to its intentions. None has been forthcoming; there has been no communication at all. We have been left in the lurch. This matter came to light as a result of the good relationship that has existed between the Army fire service personnel at Moorebank and the Liverpool fire service. They literally called in to say goodbye and say they hoped that everything would be okay.

That co-operative relationship is to be commended because, during the years they have worked together, the Liverpool fire service has attended fires that the Army needed it to attend, and the Army has come to the aid of the Liverpool fire service. Despite what the Federal Government may say, the Army has indeed attended residential and urban fires and the Liverpool fire service has helped out in a similar way. What a great spirit of co-operation—two government services working together. It did not matter whether they were Federal or State; they were there to protect the community and property. The Federal Government has not handed over any additional resources, but now that the Army has been ordered to pull out of that particular property it expects the State Government to pick up the tab and look after the defence establishment.

We have a situation where our people in the State fire service will be going onto the Army estate. There may be areas that they are not permitted, by law, to enter, and they will have to seek permission to do so. Meanwhile, fires will continue to burn. That is a totally unsatisfactory situation. Finally, apart from the dilemma of thousands of my constituents and their properties being at risk as at midnight tonight—on the eve of summer, with a fire history that during the last few months has seen fires burn for almost a week on the range—now the Army is saying that we will have contract firefighters to look after the range.

As I said, that does not include the Base and the Defence Storage and other Army property—and we heard during the Holsworthy airport debate that there is contaminated property—munitions and chemicals. The safety of firefighters walking into that situation totally unprepared is a risk. Last Friday they learnt that Senator Abetz, the Parliamentary Secretary for Defence, said that Tuesday 31 October would be the last day of operation, and that was confirmed by someone in his office last Monday, after constant phone calls from Minister Debus. Thank you very much!

What about the people of Wattle Grove, The Sanctuary, and surrounding suburbs who have bought houses at large expense from the Federal Government only to find that now that the money is in its pockets and all agreements are off? The Government has no sense of social responsibility for the people who bought the properties thinking that services would be provided. No-one said that the Federal Government had to provide a fire service forever, but if it is to pull out all fire services after such a long period of co-operation, the community would expect it to do the decent thing and give people a bit of notice so that they can make arrangements. The substance of the motion is to condemn the Federal Government for its disregard of the people.

The Opposition has echoed that disregard by voting against my motion having precedence— perhaps because it involves south-western Sydney, which does not really count as far as the Opposition is concerned. But that area counts for me and it counts for members of this Government. Everyone should be concerned about the unbridled fires that could eventuate due to operational constraints. Many things need to be worked through before adequate fire protection can be given. First, the Federal Government should be condemned for this heartless and thoughtless action, this grab for cash. Second, if it will not reverse the decision, which would be the ideal scenario, it should delay action until we have had more time in which to plan and make proper arrangements. 9366 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

Mr SLACK-SMITH (Barwon) [3.50 p.m.]: The second tier of the Federal Opposition strikes again! It is obvious that, whenever the Government wants to create a smokescreen or change tack, it attacks the Federal Government—a very good move, which works every time. I move:

That the motion be amended by leaving out all words after the word “That” with a view to inserting instead the following:

"this House:

(1) commends the firefighting services of the State, both New South Wales Fire Brigades and the Rural Fire Service; and

(2) endorses the past co-operation between Federal and State firefighters to ensure full fire protection in southwest Sydney."

It is time for the State Government to realise that the responsibility of fighting fires in any part of New South Wales is its responsibility. It has the money. Why does it not spend it instead of attacking the Federal Government simply because it has a little bit of land in south-western Sydney? The Government is expecting everything to be provided by the Federal Government. How about a bit of responsibility from the State Government as well? I congratulate the fire services, both the Rural Fire Service and the New South Wales Fire Brigade, on the fantastic job they have done over the past 15 years. It is obvious that this year will be similar to others; it is predicted to be another difficult fire season.

Firefighters are mostly volunteers. They risk their lives, and sometimes lose them, to protect not only property but also other people's lives. It is a very sad day when the Government decides to relinquish some of its responsibility and pass it on to the Federal Government. It does that only when it wants to create a smokescreen or has nothing else to do. When I look at the business paper, I am sure that it is the latter rather than the former. I commend the Minister for the funding he has provided for the fire brigades and the rural fire services throughout New South Wales. However, his job is only partly done. A number of fire brigades are still a long way below par, and have a long way to go before they are up to speed.

I digress by saying that the fire brigades and the rural fire services are doing magnificent jobs, but they are working in co-operation with the State Emergency Service, the Volunteer Rescue Service and the Ambulance Service of New South Wales, all of which come under the guiding light of the New South Wales Police Service. The motion moved by the honourable member for Menai launched an attack on the Federal Government. It is interesting to note that the fire services of New South Wales do not always act alone. They act mostly with other groups, many of whom are volunteers. Of course, they always come under the control of the New South Wales Police Service. The honourable member for Menai is out of her depth. My amendment states that instead of picking on one very small area of New South Wales—

Mr Ashton: At least you are having a go, mate. Good on you.

Mr SLACK-SMITH: I always try. Instead of picking on one small area of New South Wales, why not involve the whole State? There is more to New South Wales than Sydney. Although this might come as a shock to the Government—and I am sure the honourable member for Bathurst would agree with me—there are areas of New South Wales other than Sydney which need funding. Mr Martin: They get record funding. Mr SLACK-SMITH: Yes, especially in Sydney they get record funding. Farther west the funding has been depleted. I am aware that some fire brigades in inland New South Wales have only one fire unit. Mr Ashton: And one hose. Mr SLACK-SMITH: No, three hoses. Two years ago some of the fire brigades had two units and they have been reduced to one. Of course, there is a long way to go before all of New South Wales, not only Sydney, comes under the banner of an efficient fire service. I think the Minister has grasped that point and has tried as hard as he can, through Treasury, to get the job done. It is also important to acknowledge that it is difficult in some areas to do that, irrespective of who owns the land orwhether the areas are wilderness lands, national parks, privately owned land, residential land or Commonwealth land. It is stupid to say that the New South Wales Fire Brigades are unable to go onto land because it is not their land. Let us face it, fires know no boundaries. Does the Government mean to say that now that the Federal Government has decided to withdraw its services for fire control, it will allow the New South Wales Fire Brigades to do it? It is exactly the same as 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9367 sitting on one's boundary fence, looking for one's neighbour to be burnt out, and then suddenly putting out the fire when it comes to one's boundary. That is something we do not do; that is totally unAustralian. The honourable member for Menai ought to be ashamed of herself for even thinking it. I commend my amendment to the House.

Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [3.59 p.m.]: I support the motion moved by the honourable member for Menai. I make the preliminary comment that the speech we have just heard from the honourable member for Barwon ranks as a most irrelevant contribution to the matter being debated. It is patently clear that the honourable member does not know where south-western Sydney is. It is equally patently clear that he has no idea of the serious issues involved in this motion. At times in this Chamber, issues of a less than serious nature are raised. However, the very serious matters that are raised in this motion relate directly to the lives and property of 10,000 people and to the capacity of fire services to fight fires in south-western Sydney.

The core of the problem is Moorebank fire station, which has been operated by the Department of Defence for some considerable time. For the past two to three years negotiations have centred around the fire service ceasing to operate, the moving of the fire station personnel and, inevitably, the fire service coming under the control of the State authority. At that level there is no disagreement. Attempts at negotiations over three years and a series of letters from the State Minister to the Federal Minister elicited no substantive response.

Ten days ago the Liverpool fire service found out informally that within 10 days the Department of Defence fire brigade would be moving out. That raised a considerable degree of concern. Several days later, on 24 October, someone was finally able to get coherence out of the office of Senator Abetz, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence in Canberra. There was no written formal acknowledgment, but a telephone communication confirmed that as at 31 October the Department of Defence fire station would be closed. That means, with 10 days notice, Liverpool fire service and other fire services in south-western Sydney will have to pick up the work that was being done by the Moorebank fire service. The Liverpool fire service currently has 2,700 call-outs per annum, which makes it one of the busiest fire stations in New South Wales. Now, with 10 days notice, because of the irresponsible and deplorable actions of the Federal Government, it will have to respond to another 500 calls. Its workload will increase 20 per cent, with 10 days notice. On any view, that is absurd.

Yesterday I spoke to station commander Jim Newcomb and Inspector Ken McDonald, who are based at Liverpool. They will make every endeavour to cover the extra call-outs. They will perform in the professional and competent manner that we have all grown to admire from the New South Wales Fire Brigades. The problem is that, even with the best will in the world, if resources continue to be stretched at some stage they will break. If notice approximating even a vaguely reasonable time frame had been given, steps could have been taken to deal with the situation. But this has been done with 10 days notice.

The concerns raised by people such as Jim Newcomb and Ken McDonald are not simply about resources. Their fire service will be operating in an area they do not know very well. Further, they will be operating in an area that has a range of hazards. The area, which has been under military control for a very long time, has many hidden hazards, such as firing range ordnances and hazardous chemicals. That will create a great drama because often advice is not given about the nature of hazardous materials on sites that firefighters are called to. It will be a particularly acute question in this case because a whole range of matters have been hidden away by the army which present potential dangers.

A proper handover has not taken place and proper advice has not been given about what is hidden there. Proper advice could not be given in only 10 days. That is the crux of the problem. If the Federal Government had behaved in a responsible manner it would have allowed a decent period for the transfer. That did not happen. The Federal Government has said that it has had enough, it is getting out. It does not care about the people of Moorebank or Liverpool. It does not care whether their houses burn down or whether they have adequate fire services. The Federal Government is only interested in getting out and cutting its involvement as quickly as it can. It is an absolute disgrace that people in south-western Sydney will have inadequate fire services because of the appalling performance of the Federal Government.

Mr ASHTON (East Hills) [4.04 p.m.]: I am amazed by the Federal Liberal Government's hatred for the people of the south-western suburbs of Sydney. Not so many years ago the Federal Government wanted a 24- hour airport at Holsworthy; now it wants to make Bankstown airport a regional airport and rebuild the Lucas Heights reactor. I speak in support of the motion moved by the honourable member for Menai. Today's withdrawal of the Army firefighters from the fire station at Moorebank is part of a long and sorry history of a 9368 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 lack of communication by the Federal Government on this issue. The New South Wales Government, the New South Wales Fire Brigades and local community members have been attempting to get answers from the Howard Government on its plans for the future of the Army fire station since 1997. This has involved a series of discussions between the brigades, Liverpool City Council, the Department of Defence and the Defence Estate Organisation. Over time these negotiations have broken down.

On three occasions the Minister for Emergency Services has written to the Minister for Defence, or his Parliamentary Secretary, seeking answers as to the Army's intentions. That is over three years of correspondence and representations, which have basically been ignored by the Federal Government. These are representations from our State Minister to a Federal Minister, but no reply has been received. This has seriously put in jeopardy the public safety of thousands of people of south-western Sydney. The complete lack of communication by the Federal Government has not allowed time for the fire brigades to plan for the withdrawal of the Army firefighters.

It was not until Friday 20 October that the local fire brigades, through informal discussions with local Army personnel, happened to find out that they were moving out on the thirtieth of that month. Today they are gone. After three years of negotiations to date, the New South Wales Fire Brigades have not received an official notice of the closure. Confirmation was only received from Parliamentary Secretary Abetz after urgent calls from our Minister. With only 10 days unofficial notice, the New South Wales Fire Brigades were expected to assume full responsibility for 24-hour fire protection for high-risk defence facilities and residential areas that were previously covered by the Army. This is not the Army's fault. Clearly, it is the Federal Government's fault.

Throughout the whole process the New South Wales Government's concern has been to negotiate an outcome that would secure adequate fire protection for the community in the Moorebank and Liverpool areas and to ensure that the significant defence installations were also protected. The Federal Government's failure to communicate has frustrated these negotiations and has put at risk the security of families and businesses in parts of Holsworthy, Moorebank, Wattle Grove, Voyager Point and Ingleburn. There is also a plan to sell off and subdivide this property. Although there will be many more homes, they will not be covered by a fire service. That is a great way to sell property.

I also want to highlight for the honourable member for Barwon, who did a fair job given he was sent in as a nightwatchman, that 29 October to 4 November is Fire Awareness Week. Last Friday I issued a press release in my local newspaper calling for everyone to be aware of Fire Awareness Week, to clean their gutters and remove leaves, to remove timber from sites where fires may occur and to install smoke alarms. I had a photograph taken yesterday down on the Georges River. I pointed out trees and other areas that perhaps people would be prepared to clean up. The timing of the Federal Government's announcement to close down a fire station during Fire Awareness Week is incredibly interesting.

My electorate of East Hills is surrounded by bush and national parks, as is the electorate of Menai. On several occasions in January 1994 families in areas of my electorate were evacuated. They had to move out of their houses in a hurry and leave their possessions behind. Some years later my family had to get out of the area. It may seem trivial, but, in a panic, all the Christmas presents for my children were left behind and we never saw them again. However, I am lucky that my area is serviced by a fire service in River Road, Revesby. There is no way in the world that the fire service will be able to get over and put out a fire in parts of the Liverpool and Menai electorates. By the time the firefighters get there, they will douse the ashes and mop up the debris.

I want to ask Danna Vale, the Federal member, what she is doing. She has been conspicuously silent on this matter. She is not a Minister or a Parliamentary Secretary; it is her job to get out and represent her electorate. She is not doing that. The honourable member for Menai is doing that and I congratulate her. The Federal Government is treating the people of south-western Sydney with total disdain. It is putting all its eggs into north-western Sydney—where it is focussing on a few electorates that it would like to win—but leaving thousands of people without fire brigade services is a criminal act. There are already too many fires in Australia. Too many people die from injuries sustained in fires, and those injuries could be prevented if we had more fire stations. Moorebank fire station has been there for a long time. It should not be moved at all. If it has to be moved, there should be much more consultation so that we can work together to do something about it.

Ms MEGARRITY (Menai) [4.09 p.m.], in reply: I thank all honourable members who have contributed to the debate. I take issue with the honourable member for Barwon, who asked me to cast my horizons further. I thought we were in this place to do our best to represent our constituents. My constituents are extremely concerned about this sudden move. Other parts of my electorate, which are not too far away from the 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9369 people about whom we are worried at the moment, experienced the tragic Menai bushfires. Everyone in the State must have known about those fires. I do not want a repeat of those fires and the tragedy that resulted for many people from them. In answer to the remarks of the honourable member for Barwon, I point out that we are not trying to relinquish responsibility at the State level. We are happy to accept those responsibilities. In fact, we offered to buy the facility and tried to get the negotiations going. However, the almighty dollar ruled the day: the Federal Government got a better offer which has nothing to do with fire services. Options are still available to the Department of Defence. One option would be to maintain the Army fire service so that at least Department of Defence assets would be assured, even if the Government is not interested in the community at large. That option is open so far as I am concerned. The Government could, by open tender, contract out fire and emergency responses from the Moorebank facility. New South Wales Fire Brigades would submit a tender for such a contract on commercial terms. Honourable members should not forget that we are being asked to pick up the tab for maintaining a fire service for Department of Defence facilities. The Federal Government could, of course, in the true spirit of co-operation, facilitate a transfer of responsibility to New South Wales Fire Brigades by commencing realistic negotiations on the procurement of the existing facility. This wonderful facility will be bulldozed. That is a tragedy because the facility is located close to those areas outside the major central business district and next to rapidly developing areas. It will be, once again, to the financial benefit of the Federal Government. In either case, the State Government will pay no more than the amount that should be paid for the premises. The honourable member for Barwon alleged that perhaps it is underresourced to do this. Let us think about the facts. Operational issues have to be addressed by the New South Wales Fire Brigades. Failure to give proper notice has complicated such issues, which included the production and programming of pre-determined attendances to all areas of the Department of Defence estate into the computer-aided despatch system. We are talking about the modern world. We need pre-incident planning by all four platoons of the four adjoining fire stations. I saw them today in their trucks trying to familiarise themselves with the area they will now have to defend. They will have to retain keys to premises protected by automatic fire alarms. They will have to ensure that they have access to areas which, by law, they must be invited into. What are they to do: get there and watch it burn because officially they have to wait for permission to enter? What will happen to the transfer of automatic fire alarms received at Moorebank Fire Station by 000 to the New South Wales Fire Brigades? The list goes on and on. Security clearances are another problem. All of these things had to be dealt with on fewer than 10 days notice, and they are being dealt with by good luck, good management and the co-operation of the people on the ground. Of great concern is the fact that the Department of Defence estate is too far from Liverpool Fire Station to enable a response in 7.1 minutes, which is the established time by which a fire protection service must reach a fire. The fire on 12 October that destroyed a large timber building on the estate and partially involved the adjoining occupied block of flats demonstrated how difficult it is operationally to reach these areas in time to save endangered premises. The fire stations are now expected to provide 24-hour fire protection for high-risk Department of Defence facilities and residential areas that were previously covered by the Army. A group called the East Liverpool Progress Association, like many community groups, heard rumours and innuendo about whether that was so. I quote from a letter the association wrote to New South Wales Fire Brigades in July. The honorary secretary of the association is Don Syme, who has lived in our area for many years. He has decades of experience and knowledge of the local area. He said: Members of the above organization have directed me to write you re the future of the Fire Station in Anzac Rd, Moorebank. For many years the Brigade members have played a tremendous role in fighting bush fires and protecting the homes and lives of the residents. Now there are moves to close the station, and Liverpool people are expressing strong concern.

They are suggesting that it should remain and if it is to be removed that it should not be done before a new station is built in East Liverpool (East of the Georges River). The Army has played a great role in building and policing the station for many years and should be given recognition for their work in the district.

Trusting you can use your influence and knowledge about the danger of no fire brigade in the area. Those sentiments are echoed by all members of my community, people who paid good money to the Federal Government for property and services, but the Federal Government has ripped them off and is stealing away like thieves in the night. [Time expired.] Amendment negatived. Motion agreed to. 9370 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

RURAL AND REGIONAL FILM INDUSTRY

Matter of Public Importance

Mr MARTIN (Bathurst) [4.16 p.m.]: Last weekend the cinemas of Australia were crammed with people wanting to see the latest box office smash hit to be filmed in country New South Wales. The film, namely the Working Dog production The Dish, was shot on location in the towns of Parkes and Forbes. It recounts the important role played by the Parkes tracking station when man first landed on the moon in July 1969. The film also highlights what Country Labor has been saying for some time: there is no better place to make a film, or to shoot a television series or an advertisement than regional and rural New South Wales. The reason for that is simple: we have the most beautiful locations, without doubt the warmest hospitality and, importantly, the support of the State Government. We have locations, hospitality and State Government support, which is a welcome trifecta.

This year the New South Wales film and television industry contributed $3 billion to the State economy and created 45,000 jobs. Those are huge numbers by any measure. They include all international and Australian film and television projects, as well as commercials. Unfortunately, the story has not always been so rosy. Some 5½ years ago the New South Wales film industry was losing ground to other States. However, since April 1995 there has been a 50 per cent increase in the amount of money injected into the State economy through the film and television industries. Today New South Wales accounts for 58 per cent of Australia's film and television production, compared with Victoria at 21 per cent and Queensland at a mere 16 per cent.

It is true that a significant amount of this production can be attributed to the State Government decision to secure Fox Studios for New South Wales. That tough decision has resulted in quality jobs for Australian film- makers, actors and people in related and unrelated industries, such as carpenters, caterers and couriers. An interesting by-product for the people of country New South Wales is the magnificent new showground facilities at Homebush. The challenge was to ensure that regional and rural New South Wales received their fair share of job creation projects, and the fun that flows from the international world of film-making. Thanks to the initiatives of the New South Wales Government, rural and regional New South Wales is now gaining a share of the film production pie.

Early last year, as part of the Carr Labor Government's post-2000 jobs plan for regional and rural New South Wales, the Premier announced a new $500,000 regional assistance fund to be set up in January 2001 to help film-makers shoot films outside of Sydney. As a result, the Government now offers up to $50,000 a film for 10 productions each year to encourage film-makers to leave Sydney. That is great news for regional and rural New South Wales and film-makers alike. We have always had the natural props. Both sides of politics will agree that the beautiful New South Wales countryside, coastline—

Mr Fraser: Coffs Harbour is in there.

Mr MARTIN: Coffs Harbour is in there, too. We also have historic towns that are attractive sites to international and national film-makers. But the extra costs of filming in regional and rural New South Wales sometimes stop producers and directors from leaving Sydney. Thanks to the State Government's initiative, Australian and overseas film-makers now have been given an extra incentive to shoot films in regional and rural New South Wales. It is no surprise that the response from film-makers to the regional filming assistance fund has been overwhelming. Over the last four years a conservative estimate shows that $7 million has been spent in regional areas with at least 20 films and hundreds of commercials being shot in regional areas. By any measure, these are great numbers that deliver real benefits to country towns.

We must remember that film-makers, actors and crew stay in hotels, eat in restaurants and even go shopping. For example, North Coast small businesses such as restaurants, motels and retail outlets all benefited from the cast and crew of Oscar and Lucinda spending some $750,000 in Grafton during the 13-week shoot. In turn this helped to create jobs in the services sector. Other recent examples of revenue and more jobs from films include $450,000 in Griffith for the Australian film Doing Time for Patsy Cline. Indeed, statistics compiled by the New South Wales Department of State and Regional Development and the New South Wales Film and Television Office show that the industry now employs 15,000 directly and a further 30,000 in related jobs.

Now we have The Dish. This film took nearly $3 million in its first weekend of official release. The only reason it did not vault into number one at the box office in its first week was the simple fact that it was already there! In the previous week at limited preview screenings it took nearly $1.3 million, and that was 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9371 before it was released. This film has now taken some $4.28 million, one of the largest box office figures for the opening of an Australian film. I am proud to say that last night I added to that amount when I watched the movie. It certainly was worthwhile. Without doubt it is the best film I have seen this year. I urge all my Country Labor colleagues and all members of this House who have not seen it to do so. They will see why last month The Dish was selected as the most popular film of the famous Toronto Film Festival.

The industry has not only developed through the Regional Film Development Fund. We must recognise also the changes introduced by the Minister for Local Government, Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs to streamline the council approval process for film-makers. Those changes will encourage more film-making in New South Wales. They were another important new step in our support for the development of a vibrant film industry in New South Wales, and once again they meant more jobs and investment for New South Wales. We acted on the industry's concerns about the often frustrating council approval process. Because commercial filming may include several different activities such as closing off a road, diverting traffic, filming in a public reserve and building temporary structures, film-makers often were required to obtain several council approvals for one project.

As film-making is not restricted to one suburb or town, different councils may have different approval processes. That inconsistency can become a headache, time consuming and complex. In other words, many film- makers often were being scared off by red tape. The Government did not want to sit back and watch film- makers going elsewhere due to frustration caused by local councils. So the Minister for Local Government acted by amending the Local Government Act to allow for a single application to address all council requirements. The amendment was accompanied by a protocol that sets out the requirements of approval including time for dealing with applications, schedule of fees and charges or an agreed means of calculating them, insurance requirements and the like. The amendment also includes a code of practice for film-makers which sets out standards of behaviour and ways to minimise disturbances to the community.

The community is entitled to expect that disturbances will be kept to a minimum whilst filming takes place. I do not believe that is too much to ask of film-makers, especially when one considers the country hospitality they always receive in return. Whether it be the set of a film, television series or commercial, people involved in the film industry all have the same story to tell: you cannot beat the hospitality you receive from country people when you are filming in rural or regional areas. The people are great and the food and atmosphere are top class. Film-making in regional New South Wales is on the up and up because we have such great hospitality, fantastic locations and, most importantly, great writers, producers, film-makers, technical staff and actors. All of these advantages are now backed by the State Government which is 100 per cent behind the industry. The changes to the Local Government Act make film-making a lot easier in New South Wales than in other States. The $500,000 regional film fund encourages more films to be made in country New South Wales. If all films are as good as The Dish, look out Hollywood, because there is another rush of Australian films on the way. As well as The Dish there is Bootmen, a film based on a story from Newcastle that is on worldwide distribution. Filming is about to start on Mullet. Appropriately, the location is Kiama but I am not sure who has the lead. Another film entitled The Man Who Sued God, which could refer to anyone in this House, is being made at Bellingen and stars Judy Davis. In the Central West a film called Beneath Clouds is under way and the Braidwood district has Road for Corrain. The industry is reacting to the Government's initiatives in setting up the rural and regional fund to encourage film-makers to work outside Sydney. With the ongoing support of the Government I am sure there will be great prosperity and commercial opportunities to country New South Wales through the film industry. I am sure the honourable member for Lachlan would agree that the people involved in tourism and with the Parkes council will make every post a winner in promoting The Dish. Certainly its correlation with the American public provides a good opportunity for the film to be successful in the United States of America, which is, of course, a major film market. I commend the matter of public importance to the House. Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan) [4.26 p.m.]: The matter of public importance acknowledges an industry that has operated in New South Wales and Australia almost since colonisation. It is ironic that Australia, which has a very small population, is one of the oldest movie-making countries. In recent weeks, as the honourable member for Bathurst has said, The Dish has been released. It has become the highest grossing local film, earning nearly $4.3 million in only two weekends. That success follows on that of The Wog Boy, Looking for Alibrandi, Chopper, the more modestly performing Me Myself I and Bootmen and makes the box office tally for local production more than double that of last year's disappointing $16.7 million. The honourable member mentioned also the acquisition of the old showground and Fox Studio's evolution into movie making. 9372 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

I compliment the former Minister for the Arts, the Hon. Peter Collins, who, in 1988, first started the process that would result in the showground, as it was known, at Paddington becoming a movie making and arts centre. The project has been ongoing for over a decade; clearly it has spanned two governments. Whilst The Dish is the reason for this debate, I compliment the people of the Parkes district and region for their promotion of tourism and, more particularly, for their promotion of the radio telescopic dish as a tourist attraction since it was constructed. The dish is the logo for Parkes. It is displayed on official council ties and is on the official standard that flies at the airport and other places around Parkes. Parkes is the centre of the State, of course, and its people have been able to capitalise on the dish by making it recognisable throughout the world.

The honourable member for Dubbo no doubt will have more to say about the dish. I should like to refer to some other great movies that have been made in Australia in recent years. The film 1915 was made at a little place called Quandialla, which is west of Young; in between Young, Grenfell and West Wyalong. The producers of that film virtually took over the entire Quandialla village. The main street, which was bitumen, had a pub and a couple of stores, which are still there. They covered the street with sand and repainted the front of the buildings in the livery of 1915. The film was a re-enactment of the life of one of the young soldiers going off to World War I, with all the drama that occurred on that sad occasion when many young men went off to war and did not return.

Part of the film 1915 was shot outside the Railway Hotel in Grenfell, which was painted in the colours of the time. That movie was made back in 1980-81. It was extremely successful and it has been reshown in recent months. I will run through some of the other movies that were made entirely in New South Wales or partly in New South Wales. The Castle was written by the Frontline team, an ABC development. Mr Reliable was set in Sydney in the 1950s. It is the true story of Wally Mellish. Shine has received much publicity and praise. Unlike Mr Reliable, Shine is the sensitive true story of musician David Helfgott. No Worries is a film which did not receive the success critics said that it deserved. Muriel's Wedding is another internationally known Australian movie.

The Adventures of Priscilla Queen of the Desert, love it or hate it, like it or otherwise, was depicted to more than four and a half thousand million people during the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games. It has become part of Australia's cultural history. Many members of this House represent electorates in which parts of Babe were produced. I think that the pigs in Babe were bred near Temora. Much of Babe was shot in the Moss Vale-Robertson area. Spotswood was about a run-down Australian shoe factory which was forced to bring in a consultant to change over to new technology to compete on the world market.

What a great movie Strictly Ballroom was! It was suitable for all ages, and all ages saw it. It was a very exciting and colourful movie. Again, it was depicted in the Olympic Games opening ceremony. The ballroom dancing segment was a large part of the now world famous opening ceremony of the 2000 Olympics. Crocodile Dundee and its star also were featured in the opening ceremony. These great New South Wales and Australian movies have continued to serve Australia well, particularly in recent weeks. We demonstrated our cultural diversity, our technological skills and the skills of our producers and promoters on the worldwide stage by showing sequences from them to enhance Australia's reputation during the Olympic opening ceremony.

Picnic at Hanging Rock depicts an incident in 1900 when a schoolgirl mysteriously disappeared on a St Valentine's Day excursion to a mysterious mamelon, Hanging Rock. It is a potent portrayal of the Australian bush. Most of the movies I have mentioned contain country scenes or have something of New South Wales embodied in them. Newsfront is a film made in the 1970s. Gallipoli remembers Australian heroes in World War I. Breaker Morant is also a movie that has been run and rerun. The other night I was listening to a program on the ABC which continued the ongoing debate about the accuracy of the Breaker Morant story. My Brilliant Career, Mad Max, and The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith, are other notable movies.

Going back to the 1940s and 1950s, there were Dusty and We of the Never-Never, which was a brilliant movie. Most people of my age saw it. It was one of the first movies we saw when we went to school. Storm Boy is another notable movie. Ginger Meggs is the story of a young larrikin who is good deep down and proves his worth. The Man from Snowy River is a wonderful movie. It has wonderful scenery of the Snowy Mountains and horse riding. The ride of The Man from Snowy River was re-enacted at the Royal Easter Show in 1999. From that re-enactment came the idea of using the scene at the beginning of the Olympic opening ceremony. Honourable members will remember when the 130-odd horses galloped into the arena of the Olympic Stadium. It was a superb scene. It was photographed time and again. There were full-colour photographs in the Australian and double-page spreads in the Sydney Morning Herald and other newspapers around the world. The Man from Snowy River is one of our great movies. Another one is Sunday Too Far Away. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9373

I turn now to telemovies and mini-series such as Kangaroo Palace, All the Rivers Run, Brides of Christ and Cowra Breakout. That movie was made about the largest breakout of prisoners of war in world history. In 1943 primarily Japanese prisoners broke out of the Cowra prisoner of war camp. The rest is history. The Road to Nhill was filmed around Pyramid Hill in Victoria, but I understand that there was some scenes from western New South Wales in it. They are just some of the great features that have been made in Australia. Not only have we produced great movies in New South Wales depicting the character and the colour of this State and the natural backgrounds we have for making movies, we have also produced some of the world's best theatrical movie producers and directors.

One of the great names of showmanship in this State going back nearly 100 years is that of the Sharman family. The original Jimmy Sharman, who came from Narrandera in south-western New South Wales, used to travel around the agricultural shows with a boxing tent. His son Jimmy Sharman II continued the tradition during the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s and early 1970s. Then the Sharman family moved into the ownership of machinery at shows such as the ping pong clowns, merry-go-rounds and such things. But Jimmy Sharman III is now one of the great theatrical producers in Europe. There are many similarly success stories of people who have evolved from this colourful industry in New South Wales. I do not think that any government can take credit for this. Governments have a responsibility to ensure that such industries continue and are properly funded. I encourage the Government to continue the work it is doing. No doubt subsequent governments will further enhance it. I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this important matter this afternoon. [Time expired.]

Mr BLACK (Murray-Darling) [4.36 p.m.]: We have heard that the film The Dish, which was shot at Parkes and Forbes, is well on the way to becoming one of the highest grossing Australian movies of all time. Film making is an important and proven job generator, as has been said today by members from both sides of the Chamber. The film industry now employs 15,000 people a year directly and a further 30,000 in related work. Our reforms to the Local Government Act and the introduction of the Regional Film Fund are part of this Government's strategy to maintain the position of New South Wales as the leading job generating State. Country New South Wales is now sharing in the growth of the film industry. And it is not just Australian films: over the last five years we have also seen a significant increase in American films shooting in New South Wales.

The largest of these was Mission: Impossible 2 . When I heard of the first Mission Impossible film I was reminded of the honourable member for Lachlan and the events leading up to 27 March last year. Mission: Impossible 2 was partly filmed at Broken Hill. It was probably about the Leader of the National Party, George Souris planning for the year 2003. Mission: Impossible 2 injected some $80 million into the New South Wales economy. The biggest film to be made in Australia so far, Mission: Impossible 2, provided work for 8,000 extras and up to 400 full-time set builders, technicians and crews. This was yet another film shot in Broken Hill. I am told that Tom Cruise loved his time spent in the Hollywood of Australia, Broken Hill.

Mr Armstrong: Did he have a drink, Blackie?

Mr BLACK: I am sure he did. It might interest the honourable member for Lachlan to learn that Chips Rafferty was born and bred in Broken Hill. So Broken Hill has a long tradition in the film industry. Murray- Darling has played host to some fantastic films over the years. Mad Max and Mission: Impossible 2 have been mentioned. The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert was also mentioned. I congratulate the people of the Palace Hotel, particularly Mario Celotto. The Palace Hotel has Australia's answer to the Sistine Chapel on its ceilings. It was featured in the film. In addition to the films that have been made in western New South Wales— a whole series of films have been mentioned—television series have also been filmed in the area. One of the early ones was Golden Soak. Television advertisements such as the ones for Coca-Cola, West End and XXXX have been filmed in and about Broken Hill.

I congratulate the Screen Producers Association of Australia [SPAA], whose headquarters are not far from this place. The association has played a central role in attracting overseas producers to Australia, and particularly to the outback, and it has held magnificent promotions in Darling Harbour. I should also like to mention Silverton Hotel, which has starred in six major films in five years and was repainted for each of those films. I congratulate the McLeod family on its interest in the film industry. The State Government has worked in many country communities in an effort to make cinema affordable once again for people in isolated areas and small towns.

Sadly, many small towns lost their cinemas with the introduction of television and videos, and many country kids have not had the advantage of seeing a movie on the big screen. The Premier has announced that he will appoint a regional cinema liaison officer to work with country towns with a population of 15,000 to assist 9374 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 them to have a cinema. Just this week the Film and Television Office released a guide book that provides information on everything needed to establish and operate a cinema in regional communities. This is a welcome move.

To help provide a venue for immediate screenings, a couple of months ago the Government introduced a $1 million regional infrastructure program to return cinemas to communities, such as was achieved by Alan Purtill, the mayor of Balranald. The program, which has been incredibly popular, is a joint deal with local councils in which both arms of government meet the cost of converting an old hall or existing disused cinema for modern day use. I commend to the House all that has been said by members on both sides of the House. We have a great film industry in regional and rural New South Wales, which, with the assistance of my colleagues in Sydney, will continue.

[Discussion interrupted.]

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Matter of Public Importance: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Motion by Mr Aquilina agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to permit an additional speaker on the matter of public importance.

RURAL AND REGIONAL FILM INDUSTRY

Matter of Public Importance

[Discussion resumed.] Mr McGRANE (Dubbo) [4.42 p.m.]: I bring to the attention of the House the magnificent publicity the region of Parkes is receiving in light of the movie The Dish, and the recent IBM television advertisements screened during the Olympics featuring Parkes Olympian Stephen Davies and the people of Parkes. In recent years Parkes has been a success story for regional New South Wales. Residents are enjoying their time in the limelight and their leaders are using this unprecedented publicity to continue the success. Congratulations must go to the talented Working Dog team that produced The Dish. The depiction of Australia's role in covering man's first steps on the moon showcases our ability and unique sense of humour in this wonderful movie will place Parkes on the international tourist market. I attended the premiere in Parkes of The Dish and watched as residents of Parkes reacted to business icons such as Dwyer's Eatery and Johnson's meat pies being featured in the film. Mr Woods: And the mayor? Mr McGRANE: And the mayor. As the honourable member for Lachlan said, some of the Quandialla landscape had to be changed for the movie 1915, and this also happened when filming The Dish. Few people realised that part of the filming took place in Forbes and that the buildings depicted had to feature the Parkes Shire Council logo. People were amazed that Parkes Shire Council was able to do this overnight but this short- term amalgamation was possible because of the assistance of the two mayors. Although some poetic licence was taken during the filming of The Dish the important role played by the people of Parkes in covering this momentous step in human history was also highlighted. The challenge now facing Parkes and other tourist bodies in the Central West is to harness the publicity used in promotional packages for people who now wish to visit the dish. The Central West has many fine tourist attractions that will share from the benefits of this movie. I have ensured that the Western Plains marketing team in Dubbo has made contact with Parkes council to capitalise on The Dish being an icon and tourist attraction in regional New South Wales. The making of The Dish also highlights the potential of the film industry in New South Wales. The Working Dog team received the full praise of residents from both Parkes and Forbes, whose demonstration of comradeship made the job easier for film-makers and spectators. The Australian film industry should be encouraged to embrace regional communities when considering potential sites for films. It is cheaper to film in country New South Wales than in many city areas, and the cost has been reduced even further because of changes to the Local Government Act to cut red tape to a minimum. I am aware that arts bodies in regional New South Wales seek to make more films in regional New South Wales and it is up to the government of the day to identify the regions and encourage that great 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9375 commitment to regional development. Many films have been made in regional New South Wales that have been successful worldwide. One film that has not been mentioned is the re-enactment of the Cooee march, which was made in 1988 in Gilgandra. That depicted the re-enactment of the first recruitment march for the war in 1914, in which 324 volunteers left Gilgandra and marched to Sydney. When they reached Sydney the number had swollen to 1,000. That film has been shown around the world, particularly on Anzac Day, and demonstrates the patriotic spirit of regional New South Wales. I support the motion.

Mr MARTIN (Bathurst) [4.47 p.m.], in reply: I thank all honourable members who have participated in this discussion. It is appropriate that the Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs is present because he introduced the legislation that led to New South Wales being promoted as a friendly environment in which to make films. He made changes to the Local Government Act to eliminate red tape and to encourage film-makers. Film-making is a competitive business and at the end of the day commercial interests drive film-makers. In recent years technology has made great strides, particularly with regard to simulation, and a film can be made about anything anywhere in the world. Notwithstanding the wonderful scenic attractions and natural beauty of the Broken Hill electorate, it is now possible to recreate much of that in an artificial environment. Nevertheless, through legislation introduced by the Government, film-makers are now being encouraged to visit those areas so that people can see the real McCoy.

I saw The Dish last night and greatly enjoyed it. It is unusual in that it does not depict Sydney Harbour, the Sydney Opera House or the Sydney Harbour Bridge and it does not have any filthy language or sex scenes. That is unusual for a popular film these days. A few well-known adjectives are used in the film but it is a wonderful family film for the international market and the American connection. It shows that it is possible to make a film that does not shock but depicts as a common thread the general laconic Australian humour, while at the same time highlighting this major technological event of the twentieth century when man landed on the moon.

One important thing we should realise from the debate and discussion today is the tremendous potential for the promotion of country and regional New South Wales that these films provide. The honourable member for Lachlan gave a very colourful kaleidoscope of the history of film in Australia, particularly in New South Wales, over a long period of time. That showed how wide ranging the films are and the aspects of Australian life, history and culture that they touch on. The honourable member for Dubbo mentioned that, because of the international flavour of the film, the Parkes community now has a badge to hold onto in order to promote Parkes to the world. It is something I am sure the Government and the relevant Ministers will use to build on the framework of the legislation introduced by the Minister last year, and the funding that supports it, to ensure that we use these films as a vehicle to promote tourism in country New South Wales.

The electorate of Bathurst starts to the east of the western fringes of the Blue Mountains. It includes Lithgow, the very historic heart of the area; Hartley historic village and the historic villages of Sofala and Hill End—which depicts a wonderful restoration of a village from the gold rush days; and the rugged mountain scenery of the Wolgan and Kanimbla valleys, through the Wollemi and up through Kandos. In contrast to those areas of the State on which earlier speakers concentrated, we do not have beaches in regional and rural New South Wales—although I am sure the film simulators could create a few—but the variety of landscape and settings certainly makes for a vibrant film industry. I look forward to supporting the Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs and other Ministers in further developing policies that will ensure that New South Wales continues to have a dominant share of the film and television industry for many years to come.

Discussion concluded.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT BILL Bill introduced and read a first time. Second Reading Mr WOODS (Clarence—Minister for Local Government, Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs) [4.52 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time. In introducing this bill I want to affirm the Government's ongoing commitment to ensuring a workable and responsible legislative framework for the administration of local government in this State. The House will 9376 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 recall that I tabled a report into the review of the Local Government Act, prepared under section 747, in June last year. A number of amendments contained in this package are a result of that review. Practical experiences also continue to demonstrate the need for further amendments to maintain the momentum of improvement in the legislation. Schedule 1 to the bill contains some important amendments relating to local government elections. It is usual to review local government election procedures following the four-yearly ordinary elections. Importantly, the views of the State Electoral Commissioner, who conducts these elections, are sought. The review following the last ordinary election, held in September 1999, was particularly timely because of a number of amendments to the election procedures for the Legislative Council made by the Parliamentary Electorates and Elections Amendment Act.

Local Government election procedures closely follow those for the upper House, with which I am sure honourable members are familiar. This is because of the common nature of the voting system—that is, electors voting to fulfil multiple vacancies. This bill contains a number of amendments to maintain the parity of local council election procedures with the changes made to the procedures for Legislative Council elections late last year. It will also address some of the difficulties which arose at the 1999 local government elections. One amendment returns the control to voters over how their preferences are allocated between groups when they chose to use above the line voting. Another provides stricter requirements for a body to register as a local government political party.

This bill strikes an appropriate balance between competing interests. As much as possible there is a reconciliation between the risk of voters casting informal votes and the need to give the fullest expression to their preferences in a manner consistent with the voting system. In regard to groups of candidates and group voting, the amendments seek to ensure that small groups will share in the benefits of above the line voting and at the same time provide voting procedures which should minimise any voter confusion and the incidence of informal votes. The amendments also seek to maintain broad consistency between local government and the Legislative Council in above the line and below the line voting procedures.

The amendments relating to voting procedures will not have an adverse impact on rural communities. Voters will continue to have the choice of voting for individual candidates below the line or for groups of candidates above the line. Electors voting above the line can number one or more group voting squares to indicate their preference for one group, or to allocate their preferences between the various groups. This will replace the ability of a group to decide how preferences are allocated between it and other groups, this being one of the major factors which resulted in the "tablecloth" voting sheets for the Legislative Council and for a number of councils in the elections held last year.

This proposal allows the voter, and I stress the voter, to determine preferences by showing one or more preferences for groups or parties in the square above the line. This gives control of the allocation of preferences between groups or parties to the voter, instead of to the group or party. Alternatively, the voter may allocate his or her preferences by numbering the candidates below the line. Whether voting above or below the line, the voter chooses where preferences are allocated. This proposal will reflect voters' intentions more accurately than the current system. It is also reflective of the intent of the changes to the voting system for Legislative Council elections.

Candidates, groups and parties will still be able to give out how-to-vote cards recommending how voters should allocate their preferences on the ballot papers. However, it will be up to the voters to decide whether to follow any such recommendation when voting above or below the line. A group of candidates will be able to request that a group voting square for their group be shown above the line on ballot papers. The request is to be made to the returning officer before noon on nomination day, instead of by the fourth day after nomination day. This is consistent with Legislative Council voting and will expedite the printing of ballot papers and the issue of postal votes.

In an undivided area, that is, where there are no wards, a request for a group voting square may be made if the number of candidates in the group equals at least half the number of vacancies. The minimum number of members in a group will be determined in each council area by the number of vacancies. This will ensure that voting is effective for each electorate. If above the line groups were allowed with too few members and a voter only indicated one preference then the preferences would quickly exhaust and possibly render the vote ineffective.

In rural and other areas with small populations and undivided electorates, it may be difficult for groups to be formed with a sufficient number of candidates to have above the line voting squares. However, under the 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9377 existing system this has not caused disadvantage to rural voters. In the local council elections held in September 1999, of the 82 undivided electorates where elections were held, 40 council areas did not have above the line voting. In addition, of the elections in 69 council areas with wards, 25 did not have above the line voting. A large proportion of the undivided council electorates which did not have any groups above the line could be classed as rural. In the last local council elections, above the line voting in undivided areas tended to arise in larger regional or urban councils. This means that the proposed amendments should have little effect on rural communities. Where above the line voting occurs it will ensure that the allocation of preferences is made by voters rather than through backroom deals.

If an area has wards, a request for a group voting square will be able to be made only if the number of candidates in the group equals at least the number of vacancies in the wards. This recognises that areas with wards usually have only three or four vacancies to be filled in a ward. It will ensure that where a voter, in voting above the line, indicates only one preference, the vote will at least equal the number of vacancies contested and that the use of additional preferences will be made at the discretion of the voter, not of the groups.

A group voting square for above the line voting can be printed on the ballot papers only if more than one group has requested a square. This treats all areas consistently and ensures that a voter who marks two squares will have voted for at least the number of vacancies whether the electorate is divided or not. The formality of votes, where repeated or missed preferences are shown in the group voting squares, has also been addressed. Formality in these circumstances will be the same as applies at Legislative Council elections and will try to give expression to the voters' intentions if possible. In addition, fewer preferences will be able to be shown than there are vacancies to be filled. This will avoid ballot papers being informal in undivided electorates just because they show only one preference number in a group voting square and the number of candidates in that group is less than the number of vacancies.

Further, ballot papers will not be informal just because they contain the name of a candidate whom a court has declared incapable of being elected. This provision also applies at Legislative Council elections. The other major electoral change is the introduction of more stringent requirements for registration as a local government political party. Certain benefits flow from registration and there is therefore a need for tighter registration requirements. These are based on those applying to parties participating in State elections. As recently as Friday 6 October, the Electoral Commissioner published a notice in the press advising of an application by a sitting councillor to register six parties. It might be presumed that the motive for such an application is to benefit from the ability registered parties have under the current legislation to distribute their preferences between themselves in a manner which increases the prospects of success of one or more of those parties. By this means, a candidate with a very small primary vote may be declared elected as a result of cross- preferencing arrangements between parties.

Further, although some parties may be formed over short-term local issues, many parties, such as residents and ratepayers associations, are concerned with long-term local issues. It is considered equitable that the benefits of long-term party registration should be enjoyed by such groups, with their significant community support, but not by fly-by-night groups. These amendments achieve a balance in these issues. The basic requirement will be that a local government political party must have at least 100 members to be registered, with no overlapping membership permitted. A party with a member who is a member of a council will no longer be able to be registered if it does not have at least 100 members. This is effectively the same as applies for the Legislative Council except for a reduction in the requisite number of members for registration in consideration of the smaller size of local councils. The number of members is still large enough to ensure that the party represents valid community interests.

A local government party must be registered by the Electoral Commissioner for at least one year before an election in order to be able to propose candidates for nomination for that election, to have the party’s name shown on the ballot papers and to be able to hand out the party’s how-to-vote cards on election day. This will ensure that only bona fide organisations with some history in reflecting a community of views can contest elections under a party name and reduce the incidence of opportunistic or spurious parties. The new party registration requirements will be phased in gradually. Existing parties will continue to be registered under the current requirements so that they may continue to contest any elections before the next ordinary council elections in September 2003. New parties will also be able to register under the current requirements to contest the same elections.

However, both existing and new parties will have to meet the new registration requirements, including the need to have at least 100 non-overlapping members, for the next ordinary council elections in September 9378 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

2003 and beyond. A local government political party must send to the Electoral Commissioner an annual return and any other information required to show continued eligibility for registration. However, in recognition of both their size and the need to ensure that there are no impediments to democratic representation, a party will not have to pay a registration fee as is required for parties for Legislative Council elections.

Although parties have a significant role in local government elections, I emphasise that an important role is still played by individual candidates and groups of candidates without party affiliation. The current amendments in no way lessen the importance of such individuals and groups or their ability to contest elections of local councils and, as experience in previous elections has shown, will not impact significantly on rural communities. An amendment in schedule 1 provides that if more than five candidates nominate as a group and pay their nomination deposits at the same time, the deposit for the whole group is capped at five times the deposit for one candidate. The current nomination deposit is half that for Legislative Assembly candidates. The amendment will result in no group paying more than $625 for the whole group. This is similar to the capping of deposits for candidates at Legislative Council elections.

I should also point out that the extensive savings and transitional provisions will ensure maximum opportunity for existing and new parties to be able to comply with the new requirements for registration so that they will be able to contest the next round of general council elections scheduled for 13 September 2003 under the new arrangements. Concerns have recently been raised with me about the extent of the powers of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal when it finds that there has been an irregularity in the conduct of a council election. A person who claims that there has been an irregularity in a council election, for example, in the count of ballot papers, may lodge an appeal with the Administrative Decisions Tribunal.

Under current legislation the tribunal may order the dismissal of a councillor from civic office but, unlike the courts of disputed returns in the case of State and Federal elections, the tribunal has no discretionary power to declare another candidate elected. It follows that if the tribunal orders the dismissal of a councillor, except in the limited circumstances in which the dismissal occurs in the last nine months of the particular council's term, a by-election must be held. This imposes a significant cost burden on the residents and ratepayers of the relevant local government area.

These legitimate concerns require proper consideration by this Parliament. However, this is not as simple a matter as it appears. It should be noted that the courts of disputed returns for State and Federal elections are the Supreme Court and the High Court respectively. Without diminishing the professionalism and capacity of the tribunal, and while at first glance it seems logical to extend to the tribunal the power of substitution conferred on the courts of disputed returns, a closer examination of the issue may lead to a different conclusion. Allowing the tribunal to declare another candidate elected may not, because of the differences between local council elections and those for State and Federal Parliaments, provide a fair or just result.

For example, in State or Federal elections the removal of one candidate following an appeal may result in the next candidate in the same party being elected. However, local council elections are often contested by independent candidates without political party or group membership. Removal of a candidate for an irregularity and declaration of another candidate may not be the most appropriate result and may in fact be inconsistent with the wishes of the electorate. A by-election in some circumstances may well be a fairer means of addressing the matter. By way of illustration, a councillor dismissed from civic office by the tribunal several months ago was re-elected by an absolute majority at the subsequent by-election. In that particular case, had the tribunal had the power to appoint another candidate to that office and had the tribunal in fact exercised that power, it would seem that the electors' wishes may not have been realised.

I am concerned about the costs incurred by councils and their communities when such incidents arise, seldom though they may be. However, I am also concerned that appropriate safeguards are in place to ensure that the appeal process is not abused. If the tribunal is given the power to appoint an alternative candidate I am concerned that relevant criteria are in place to guide the decision so that the democratic expression of the community is given effect to. The next major round of local council elections is not due until September 2003. I do not consider it prudent to deal with this matter with undue haste. I therefore propose that I will examine this and report back to this House during the next session on an appropriate course of action.

I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for raising this issue. Another example of something the Premier raised recentlywhich I think is worth reiterating is that as a government we are more than prepared to take on constructive suggestions from the Opposition. Returning to the bill, schedule 2 contains amendments relating to the pecuniary interest provisions in the Act. Local government decision-making is unique in its 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9379 impact on local communities. In contrast to this Parliament, councils not only determine broad policy directions but also have a role in determining regulatory matters such as development applications. Because of the proximity of decision-makers to their community it is essential that accountability be ensured. For that reason the regulation of local government pecuniary interests established in 1993 remains crucial.

Ongoing review of the pecuniary interest provisions of the Act has identified a number of areas where amendments are considered necessary to ensure accountability is maintained at the local level. The Act at present requires a councillor with a pecuniary interest in a matter with which the council is concerned and who is present at a meeting of the council at which the matter is being considered to disclose the interest as soon as practicable, to refrain from considering or discussing the matter, and to refrain from voting on the matter.

One amendment will clarify that it is not only the existence of an interest that must be disclosed but also the nature of that interest. It is considered that this will not unduly impinge upon a person’s private affairs, given that much detail is already required to have been disclosed in the annual written return of interests already required to be completed under the Act. This extended requirement will also apply to a person who, at the request or with the consent of the council, gives advice on any matter at the meeting and to a designated person with an interest in a council matter with which he or she is dealing.

A second amendment will require a councillor who has declared a pecuniary interest in a particular agenda item to actually leave the chamber, including the public gallery, while the matter is being dealt with. This will clearly avoid any perception of influence that a councillor may have by still being in the chamber, for example, through body movements, expression or mere presence. As many councils already require this as part of their meeting procedures, it is appropriate that it apply to all councils. A further important amendment will address a gap in the legislation by making it clear that when submitting a written return of interests, a contravention of the disclosure provisions in the Act occurs not only when a pecuniary interest is not disclosed in the return, but also when the interest disclosed therein is false or misleading in a material particular. Such a disclosure, if made in circumstances where the person knew or ought reasonably to have known that the disclosure was false or misleading, may also be the subject of a complaint that may be determined by the Local Government Pecuniary Interest Tribunal.

The tribunal was established under the Act in 1993 as an independent administrative tribunal with powers to discipline, suspend or disqualify councillors who breach the pecuniary interest requirements. Formerly, councils themselves had to decide whether to prosecute their own councillors in the Local Court for any such breaches. The tribunal has contributed to the more efficient, less costly determination of matters, increased accountability of public officials, and the increased awareness of pecuniary interest issues in councils, councillors and the public. It has also prevented the use of tribunal processes in vexatious or politically motivated proceedings.

Under the Act, unless the tribunal decides, in effect, not to proceed further on a complaint, the only method by which it may dispose of a complaint the subject of a report from the Director-General is to conduct a hearing. Moreover, the hearing must be held in public unless the tribunal, having regard to public interest matters, decides otherwise. The present provisions with respect to hearings reflect a legislative policy that proceedings by the tribunal on complaints of contraventions of the pecuniary interest provisions of the Act should generally be the subject of a public hearing. This promotes public awareness of the operation of the system for dealing with such complaints and ensures that the proceedings will be open to public scrutiny.

The Hon. K. J. Holland, QC a former member of the tribunal, had commented, however, that his experience in dealing with some complaints had revealed a case for some exceptions to be made to this general rule without jeopardising public interest considerations. Mr Holland envisaged that the tribunal would have a discretion to dispense with a hearing in circumstances in which the relevant facts are sufficiently established in the director-general's report and are admitted or not disputed by the parties, the parties consent, and public interest considerations do not otherwise require. An example is where a breach has been admitted and the only question remaining is that of penalty. I see considerable merit in the proposal and amendments to effect this and they are contained in this schedule. This does not compromise the rights of a party appearing before the tribunal.

The requirement that the tribunal publish full reasons in its written statement of decision will remain, irrespective of whether or not a hearing is held. A decision by the tribunal to determine proceedings into a complaint without a hearing will be subject to appeal to the Supreme Court. This will maintain public scrutiny and accountability of the process. As I mentioned earlier, the Pecuniary Interest Tribunal has power to discipline, suspend or disqualify a councillor who breaches the pecuniary interest disclosure requirements. By 9380 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 contrast, the tribunal's powers with regard to council employees who commit such a breach are limited to recommending that the employer council take specified disciplinary action against the employee or recommending dismissal of the employee. An amendment in schedule 2 to the bill will allow the tribunal to also directly counsel or reprimand the employee. This will not affect an employee's position as such and it will be up to the council to take any further disciplinary action through the appropriate contractual and industrial channels.

It is a matter of practice that the tribunal publishes most of its decisions. This is usually achieved by publishing the decisions on the Department of Local Government Internet home page. It is considered that the publication of decisions promotes an increased awareness of pecuniary interest issues and serves a valuable educative purpose. Minor amendments contained in schedule 2 will formalise this practice, so as to remove any doubt in relation to whether such decisions may be published by the department. The amendments will allow both the tribunal and the director-general of the department to publish decisions of the tribunal. The tribunal will retain the discretion it currently has to prohibit, in a particular case, the publishing of the name and address of any witness, the complainant and the person the subject of the complaint, as well as the subject matter of the complaint and any specified evidence. The director-general’s discretion to publish will be subject to any limitation set by the tribunal.

The bill also makes a cognate amendment to the Defamation Act 1974. I will return to this matter when I discuss the amendments contained in schedule 4. The remaining amendments in schedule 2 are more minor and do not involve substantive changes. The schedule also makes a number of consequential amendments. Schedule 3 contains a number of miscellaneous amendments. I will mention these in the order in which they appear in the schedule.

Item [1] inserts a new provision which requires councils, when exercising their functions, to consider any guidelines prepared by the director-general. This can be important in harmonising local government decisions with State Government policy, for example, in environmental management. The guidelines are to be made available to councils on request and on payment of such fee, if any, as the director-general may determine to any interested person. Items [2] to [7] relate to community land. Community land is public land owned or controlled by the council and which has been so classified under the Local Government Act. Land classified as community land is protected from sale or long-term lease and the responsible council must take particular steps to manage the land including, in particular, developing a plan of management in consultation with the community. Land such as bushland, escarpment, foreshore, parks or sportsgrounds, or land that has historical or Aboriginal significance is commonly designated as community land. Significant amendments strengthening the community land provisions of the Act were made some 18 months ago by the Local Government (Community Land Management) Amendment Act 1998. The amendments proposed in this bill seek to refine, rather than alter to any notable degree, the obligations of councils as they relate to community land management. Under the Act, all public land must be classified as community or operational land. If a council proposes to acquire land for operational purposes, such as a depot, the Act currently requires the land to be classified as operational on or before its acquisition. Otherwise the land is taken to have been classified as community land. At the same time, council must give public notice of a proposed resolution to classify land and allow at least 28 days during which submissions may be made. Often this means commencing a process of classification some months before any acquisition and possibly delaying the purchase. Item [2] will facilitate a smoother purchasing process, by allowing councils to classify land as operational within three months following its acquisition. Land not classified at the end of this three-month period will be taken to have been classified as community land. While the land remains unclassified it may not be used for any purpose other than that for which it was being used immediately before its acquisition and the council may not dispose of any interest in the land. The amendment will remove the disadvantages that councils presently face in acquiring land through negotiation or auction where prior public knowledge of the council’s interest can adversely affect the price from the council’s point of view. Item [3] omits the exemption from the need to advertise a proposed classification of land that currently applies to land acquired at public auction. This is a direct consequence of the amendment made by item [2]. One of the amendments made by the 1998 amendment Act requires councils to advertise draft plans of management, until the plan can be adopted without amendment. This means that even the most trivial of amendments requires further exhibition. Advice from councils indicates that the diminishing public response to successive notifications does not justify the associated costs. Item [4] allows a council to adopt an amended draft plan, without public exhibition, if it is of the opinion that the amendments are not substantial. Item [6] removes the need for a public hearing if land is merely being recategorised from one sub-category of natural area to another. Item [5] makes a consequential amendment. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9381

I have received a number of complaints that advertisements notifying the exhibition of draft plans of management or proposed leases of community land do not clearly identify the land involved. For example, a council might describe the land by lot and deposited plan number only. Technical descriptions are often meaningless to the general community and it might be argued that the public notice requirements can be frustrated in this way. Item [7] will remedy this concern by requiring a council, in any public notice it gives with respect to a parcel of community land, to describe the land by reference to its common description—such as its address, or the name by which it is generally known—whether or not the notice also describes the land by reference to a more formal legal description.

Items [8] and [9] relate to tendering. Tendering requirements for councils continue to be closely scrutinised by the community, business and State agencies such as my own department and the Ombudsman. Notwithstanding the high standard set by the current provisions, a number of amendments aimed at generally tightening the requirements and clarifying issues that have been of some debate are contained in this schedule. I should at this point restate quite clearly this Government's position on tendering. This Government does not support compulsory competitive tendering for local government. The amendments in this bill do not change the situation as it exists now in relation to the discretion allowed councils with respect to contracting out. That is, a council may choose not to contract out any of its functions at all.

However, if a council is thinking about contracting out any of its functions, and the value of the proposed contract is likely to be more than $100,000, a proper tendering process must be used in relation to that decision. This does not prevent council from still deciding, at the end of a tendering process, to conduct work or provide services in house. However, it does mean that when council is contemplating entering a contract worth over $100,000 it must follow the proper processes before entering such a contract. This is to ensure that the council gets the best deal for its community and, of course, it is often a matter of good practice to also use a tendering process for contracts worth less than the $100,000 threshold.

Experience over the past few years has shown that a number of matters need to be clarified in relation to what types of contracts these tendering provisions apply to. Therefore item [8] restates the requirement to tender contracts to include three additional matters. First, the subcontracting by a council of the doing of work, the performance of a service or the provision of facilities will be subject to tender. This is intended to cover the situation where a council submits a winning tender to do these things for another council, person or body, and then subcontracts part or all thereof. The second matter relates to services provided to the council. This encompasses the provision of legal services, computing services and other consultancy-type services. This is consistent with State Government requirements. Banking, borrowing and investment services are not considered appropriate for a tendering process and are specifically excluded.

Third, goods provided to a council by way of either operational or finance leasing arrangements are to be included. The distinction between the two types of leasing arrangements is a technical one, based on where the risks and benefits of ownership fall. This amendment was recommended by the Ombudsman in her report into Hornsby council in 1998 concerning procedures surrounding the council's proposed bio-remediation facility. The amendment makes it clear that a contract for the provision of goods or materials is covered, regardless of the type of financing arrangement used. Item [9] makes it clear that a council is not prevented from tendering for any work, service or facility for which it has invited tenders. Some councils are using market testing and similar techniques to ensure that their services are provided in the most effective way.

This amendment will remove any concern about councils being able to consider and accept in-house tenders. Items [10] and [11] make minor amendments by consolidating provisions regulating the installation and use of amusement devices. Item [34] makes a consequential amendment. Councils are able to issue orders to address various environmental, public health, safety and convenience issues. In particular, an order may be given to require a person to bring a structure into compliance with legislative standards. However, a gap exists in the current legislation whereby a council cannot issue an order if the standards were set under the repealed Local Government Act 1919. Item [12] will rectify this. Items [13] to [15] relate to the requirement under the Act for councils to adopt a policy concerning the payment of expenses and the provision of facilities to councillors in relation to discharging the functions of civic office.

In a recent decision, the Pecuniary Interest Tribunal indicated that a council could pay expenses and provide facilities outside the council's adopted policy. This weakens the purpose of the policy and reduces the reliance that the community may place on it. Another area of concern involves the use of these policies, by a very few councils I would stress, to allow the payment of expenses that cannot reasonably be seen as arising from the actual discharge of civic functions, as required by the Act. Contentious issues include the payment of 9382 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 partner expenses when accompanying a councillor on official business, such as to a conference; payment of employee expenses where a councillor employs a person to carry on a business while the councillor is on civic business; rights to use accumulated frequent flyer points where council pays for the flights; and payment of various legal expenses incurred by councillors, particularly as plaintiffs pursuing private legal claims.

The Act is not sufficiently clear in its dealing with these kinds of expenses and councils have been able to continue paying contentious expenses despite concerns expressed by my administration. Item [13] clarifies that councillors can be paid expenses and provided with facilities only if in accordance with the council's adopted policy. This item also creates a regulation-making power to allow refinement of expenses and facilities that may or may not fairly relate to discharging the functions of civic office. Item [14] requires that any substantial amendments to the policy must be publicly notified and item [15] provides for amendments to be discussed, considered and adopted in open council meeting, similarly to the making of the policy itself.

Item [16] makes a minor clarifying amendment relating to the appointment of staff. Item [17] extends the time within which the general manager must report to council on the implementation of council's management plan from six weeks to two months after the end of each quarter. This brings management reporting and financial reporting into line, so that the two issues may properly be considered as part of the whole planning, accountabilty and reporting process. Item [18] excludes all annual waste management charges from the calculation of a council's general income for rate-pegging purposes. Item [19] will clarify that the minister may attach conditions to special variations to rate pegging limits. Items [20] to [28] of the schedule make a number of amendments relating to offences in public places.

Item [20] extends an existing offence so as to create an offence of removing rocks or soil from a public place. Items [21], [22], [23], [26] and [27] increase the maximum penalties that may be imposed with regard to various offences. The penalty increases are to bring the Act into line with other legislation governing land used by the public, such as Crown land and national parks. Item [24] makes a clarifying amendment. At present, a council can erect a notice in a public place regulating the use of a vehicle. This amendment makes it clear that a council can also regulate the taking of a vehicle into the place or the driving or parking of a vehicle in that place. Item [25] limits this power to public places that are not roads or road-related areas within the meaning of the Road Transport (General) Act 1999. Item [28] extends the owner onus provisions in section 651 of the act to offences arising from the parking of a vehicle in a public place other than a road or road related area.

Item [29] makes an important amendment aimed at improving accountability. This amendment will have the effect of expanding the offence in section 664(2) of the Act that prohibits the use of insider information gained through exercising functions under the Act. At present it is an offence to use for personal advantage information that is not generally known but if generally known might reasonably be expected to affect materially the market value or price of any land. However, there is no reason for the information to be limited to land values. The offence should apply to the use for personal advantage of any information gained in these circumstances. Item [30] makes it clear that the offence is directed at the gaining of a financial advantage.

Item [31] inserts a note which links the power of entry provisions in part 2 of chapter 8 of the Act to council's power to give effect to the terms of an order when the person to whom the order relates has failed to do so. This is for clarification only and does not amend the provisions themselves. Items [32] and [33] contain provisions of a savings and transitional nature. Schedule 4 to the bill amends two other Acts. The first amendment, as briefly referred to earlier when I was discussing the amendments contained in schedule 2, is to the Defamation Act 1974. Currently, the Pecuniary Interest Tribunal has available to it a defence of absolute privilege for a publication to or by the tribunal if the publication is made for the purpose of the execution or administration of the Local Government Act. This amendment extends that defence to the publication of an official report of a decision of the tribunal or of the reasons for the decision, whether by the tribunal, the department or by the director-general.

Second, minor amendments are made to the uncommenced Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 as a consequence of the proposed repeal by that Act of the Construction Safety Act 1912. The amendments in schedules 2, 3 and 4 do not impact on rural communities. In conclusion, all of the amendments in this bill are aimed at improving the effectiveness of provisions upon which local councils depend. The climate within which local government operates is constantly changing and it is to be expected that the legislative base will also change. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr R. H. L. Smith. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9383

PRIVATE MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

______

CHARLES WENTWORTH HOSPITAL SITE

Ms ALLAN (Wentworthville) [5.33 p.m.]: I take this opportunity to talk about the future use of the site of the Charles Wentworth Hospital, which is causing great alarm within the suburb of Wentworthville, in my electorate. The Charles Wentworth Hospital has been operated by Alpha Healthcare since at least 1990. It is on a site, near the central business district of Wentworthville, that has been used as a hospital since the 1950s. Prior to Alpha Healthcare taking over that site it was known as the Wentworthville Community Hospital, and although it was a private hospital it was widely used by community members of western Sydney. Alpha Healthcare has relocated to the Westmead private hospital site and is now looking to the future use of the site of Charles Wentworth Hospital. Alpha Healthcare also operates a facility in Eastwood known as the St Edmunds Private Hospital, but unfortunately it has decided that it would be more practical to dispose of that site and relocate that 39-bed hospital—which is licensed for the use of general psychiatric and rehabilitation care—to Wentworthville, with more than 50 beds.

Under normal circumstances this decision probably would not have created too much community alarm, but a small and excited group—mainly driven by Graham Eames, who is tagged as the Secretary of the Holroyd Residents Action Group, which is based in Pendle Hill—has circulated a number of highly controversial leaflets arguing that the future use of this site could include a methadone clinic, drug rehabilitation clinic, psychiatric centre, halfway centre for recently released prisoners from the Department of Corrective Services, public housing, particularly flats, or a nursing home. Not surprisingly, the literature which has been circulated by Mr Eames, who is a former secretary of the local Liberal Party branch, is causing some alarm. I recently wrote to 600 local residents in the various streets affected by the possible relocation of the hospital. I received more than 120 replies, which, in the Wentworthville electorate, is a significant indication of community concern.

At the moment Alpha Healthcare has applied to the Department of Health for a licence to operate a psychiatric hospital on the Charles Wentworth Hospital site. It has indicated also that significant refurbishment and building alterations will have to be made on the site, which will be subject to approval by Holroyd City Council. I am delighted that the Minister for Health is in the Chamber because I seek a reassurance from him that the community will be consulted closely in any future redirection for this hospital facility. Mark Compton, Managing Director of Alpha Healthcare, and Neil Hooper, chief financial officer, recently met with the Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer of Holroyd City Council, together with its lawyers from Blake Dawson Waldron, to argue that they were committed to activating psychiatric care on this site. The general impression of that meeting was that they were not overly sensitive to the needs of the local community.

I believe that my local community is very tolerant. A large number of mental health facilities, particularly as group homes, are dotted throughout the area and it is close also to mental health facilities at Westmead. However, we do not want to see irresponsible or opportunistic use by Alpha Healthcare in perhaps developing a site at Wentworthville for psychiatric care and successfully disposing of its Eastwood site for a higher real estate market value, which I believe is the intention. It is important that the community is consulted on this issue. The Department of Health will have a role, as it has to issue licence approval to Alpha Healthcare. Holroyd City Council has a role, as it has to approve any material changes to the development. It is important that the Government gives an assurance that local communities will be invited to comment on the proposal and that this transfer of functions will not occur without proper community consultation.

Mr KNOWLES (Macquarie Fields—Minister for Health) [5.38 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Wentworthville for giving me the opportunity to deal with this matter in this way. At the outset I give her the assurance she seeks, at least from the Department of Health's perspective, in the assessment of any licence that may be issued following an assessment and proper consultation with local communities. Equally, under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act the council is required by law to have thorough and full consultation with its communities about such applications. It is unfortunate that, for whatever the particular reason behind this campaign by individuals in the honourable member's electorate, a range of worries have been created and a number of misleading statements have been made. The Government has no intention to either purchase or lease this site. It is not true that we will run any facilities from this site. As far as I understand, there is absolutely no intention to rehabilitate released prisoners or Middle Eastern migrants on the site. Obviously those sorts of assertions by local groups are nothing short of absurd. 9384 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

There is a genuine and necessary need to properly assess any application to either the department or the local council. The demand for general psychiatric and rehabilitation beds is as strong in the honourable member's electorate as it is in almost every other part of the State. These services are necessary. As the honourable member has properly indicated, in her electorate her community is generally tolerant and accepting of the need for the establishment of such facilities. So, with commonsense and a bit more decency than perhaps has been displayed by some individuals pushing their respective barrows, I am sure this matter will come out the right way in the end only with proper consultation. Clearly, the council must consider the scope of the activities in its assessment of the application and I assure the honourable member that so too will the Department of Health.

HOSPITAL INTENSIVE CARE BEDS Mrs SKINNER (North Shore) [5.40 p.m.]: I am sorry that the Minister for Health is leaving the Chamber, because I wish to raise a health matter. I note that he has now left the Chamber, which I find extraordinarily rude. I raise this matter on behalf of a constituent, a Mosman man who was in severe pain for hours last Wednesday night as doctors tried in vain to find a hospital intensive care bed in any Sydney hospital to admit him. There was not one intensive care bed available in the metropolitan area of Sydney except at Liverpool Hospital, but that hospital would not admit the man because he was an out-of-area patient. I stress that I know this man personally. He is a strong and active member of the community, and he is involved in a number of community-based organisations. I meet him on a regular basis. I have nothing but very high regard for him. His name is Dave Miller. When Mr Miller was picked up by an ambulance on Wednesday last he was told by the ambulance officers that they would have taken him to Royal North Shore Hospital but it was closed to all but life- threatening only patients, or LTOs as they are known. He was taken instead to Manly hospital, where the emergency doctor took Mr Miller's son Stuart aside and spelt out the potential seriousness of his father's condition. Stuart advised me that the doctors asked him whether he knew what an aneurism was. The doctor said that if his father had an aneurism there was nothing that could be done for him at Manly. I am told that the doctor on duty at Manly was on loan from Royal North Shore Hospital because of an emergency department shortage at Manly. This doctor, to her great credit, spent the next three to four hours ringing around hospitals to ascertain whether there were any beds available to take the patient. That is when she discovered that the closest intensive care unit bed was at Liverpool but that hospital would not take Mr Miller because he was out of the area. Mr Miller was transported by ambulance to Royal North Shore Hospital for tests after a conference call between the emergency department doctor and others on the basis that he would have to go back to Manly. That is what happened. When I spoke to Stuart Miller last Friday his father was still in the bloody hospital gown that he was wearing on the Wednesday when he admitted from the ambulance. The Olympics has earned Sydney a reputation as a world-class city. Yet we do not have enough beds open to treat our most seriously ill. Doctors at Manly did their utmost to get Mr Miller the treatment that they believed he required. They spent hours on the phone and made conference calls to other doctors to arrange tests and treatment. I believe that this situation is directly the responsibility of the Carr Government. The health Minister, Craig Knowles, has failed to respond to this crisis and to other recent emergency department crises except by mouthing empty platitudes and promises of inquiries. On 18 October a young man with a broken jaw did the rounds from Ryde hospital to Westmead and eventually was treated only when he visited a Parramatta doctor who ordered immediate treatment in a private hospital. The only reason this came to public attention was that the young man's father rang a radio station. The Minister's response was, "I'll look into it." Looking into it is not enough. Sufficient funds are required so that our sickest patients—and they are very sick—can get the treatment they need when they need it. Earlier this year there were many instances of operations having to be cancelled because there were not enough intensive care beds available to enable surgery to occur and patients to be cared for as they recovered. I have talked to patients and their distraught families. Operations have been cancelled three or four times. Patients have been prepared, including psychologically, for operations that then have not been able to proceed because there are not enough intensive care beds. I use the instance of my constituent Dave Miller to highlight the truly critical issue in our hospital system. I call on the Government, the Minister and the Parliament to make sure that we put in place enough resources to treat our sickest people. Ms NORI (Port Jackson—Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism) [5.45 p.m.]: I undertake to convey the sentiments expressed by the honourable member to the Minister for Health for his reply. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9385

HEALTHY CITIES ILLAWARRA AWARDS PRESENTATION

Mr MARKHAM (Wollongong—Parliamentary Secretary) [5.45 p.m.]: This morning I attended a very important ceremony at the Novotel Northbeach at North Wollongong, the eleventh annual Healthy Cities Illawarra awards presentation. The awards were given to 58 community groups and individuals. Twenty-six of the award certificates were presented to individuals and organisations in recognition of their efforts towards reconciliation throughout the Illawarra. Healthy Cities Illawarra takes in four local government areas— Wollongong, Shellharbour, Kiama and Shoalhaven. The Healthy Cities movement was started by the World Health Organisation. It is now 14 years old internationally and in Australia it has been going for 11 years. The Illawarra has one of the three longest-running Healthy Cities programs, along with Noaralunga and Canberra. There are now about 7,000 healthy cities, villages and towns throughout the world. Healthy Cities is about creating better communities where people have the opportunity to experience a high quality of life. Health to us is not simply the absence of sickness; it is about working with others to create social, economic and environmental conditions that allow us to thrive as individuals and as a community.

I had the pleasure of presenting three awards this morning. They were to the Illawarra Mercury, Michael McLeod and Kiama, Wollongong and Shellharbour city councils. The award to the Illawarra Mercury was for consistent coverage and support of the reconciliation process. The Illawarra Mercury has been critical in communicating to the wider public many of the issues surrounding reconciliation. It has consistently shown a high level of positive reporting about the reconciliation process and has not been afraid to criticise those people or organisations that retard progress towards true reconciliation. The highlight was a front page story in May, "Hands Across the Race Divide", with the headline "It's Time". The Illawarra Mercury also had a four-page liftout during the three days of the Talkin' Up Reconciliation convention in Wollongong last year.

The award to Michael McLeod and his team was for the development of koori.net. After 3½ years of unpaid work, earlier this year Michael McLeod launched this innovative project. Michael is now working full time on this project and has created a large number of partnerships that have led to the official launch by the Minister for Information Technology, Mr Kim Yeadon, last week. I was the master of ceremonies at the launch last Wednesday night. It is a very important program and it was good to see Michael McLeod and his team receive the award from Healthy Cities Illawarra.

The third award went to Kiama Municipal Council, Wollongong City Council and Shellharbour City Council for their ongoing commitment towards reconciliation and for their support of this year's National Aboriginal and Islanders Day of Observance Committee [NAIDOC] week events. The councils have demonstrated a real commitment towards reconciliation and a capacity to show that better results are achieved by working together. They were among the first to have sorry books open for signing. Their strong support of NAIDOC Week meant that significant resources were allocated to organising the best celebrations ever. I pay my respects to a number of young women involved in making sure the NAIDOC week ceremony in the Illawarra this year was the success it was.

One of those young women, Jodi Edwards from the Department of Sport and Recreation, worked tirelessly to ensure the involvement of the three councils to which I have referred in the week-long celebration in the Illawarra. Working alongside Jodi was Sharralyn Robinson, the Aboriginal Liaison Officer with Wollongong City Council; Iriaka Ross, the Aboriginal Regional Development Officer with Shellharbour City Council, and Ashley Frost, the cultural services officer from Kiama and Shellharbour councils. Sylvia Campbell from the Aboriginal Medical Centre also had input into the program to celebrate NAIDOC Week. I was proud to attend the ceremony this morning and to present certificates of recognition to those organisations for the work that they have done. I wish them well in the future. Healthy Cities Illawarra acknowledges not only the health but the social needs of its residents.

Ms NORI (Port Jackson—Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism) [5.50 p.m.]: I commend the honourable member for Wollongong for his interest in and encouragement of Healthy Cities Illawarra. We would all do well to emulate his style as a member of Parliament.

YOUTH DRIVER AWARENESS PROGRAM

Mr RICHARDSON (The Hills) [5.51 p.m.]: Honourable members will recall the horrific accident on Old Northern Road, Dural in July which took the lives of four teenagers: Rajiv Lal, Matthew Willis, Paul Rhodes and Anthony Hughes. Three of them were constituents of mine. The four boys were in a Mitsubishi Mirage that belonged to the mother of the driver, Matthew Willis. Matthew had only had his P plates for three 9386 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 weeks. For reasons unexplained, although the combination of four young men in high spirits together in the one car should not be discounted, the car veered onto the wrong side of the road on a mild corner and collided head- on with a four-wheel drive vehicle. The Mitsubishi, which police estimate was travelling at around 110 kilometres per hour in a 60 kilometre per hour zone, was virtually torn in two. Three of the lads died instantly; the fourth died later that evening in Westmead Hospital.

Because of the high proportion of teenagers in The Hills community, local families were especially shocked. After all, their own children could have been involved in the accident. The Hills Rotary clubs want to help avoid a repetition of this appalling accident in a practical way by sponsoring a youth driver awareness program in The Hills district next year. The program is to be modelled on the successful U Turn the Wheel program, which has been implemented in Goulburn, Nowra, Wollongong, Queanbeyan and Frenchs Forest. The program attempts to change the attitude of young people to their responsibilities when driving or riding in a vehicle. The program is conducted over five days in school time with each student—and year 11 is being targeted—attending for one day. Students are bussed to the former Police Driver Training School at St Ives. It is now operated by Honda Australia, which has graciously made its facilities available without charge.

The segments of the course include buying a safe used car; the physics of a crash, including video footage of crashes supplied by the Roads and Traffic Authority and the use of a crash sled so that students can experience a 10 kilometre an hour crash; discussions with police and with a young person who has recovered from a serious accident; safe celebrating; risk taking and how to resist peer pressure, an important item on the program; interaction with Paralympians who have lost limbs or become paraplegics as a result of car accidents, a topical segment of the program; hazard perception—that is, learning to recognise and respond to potentially dangerous situations; and the financial implications of motor vehicle accidents.

Graham McLean from Kellyville Rotary, an organiser of the program, told me that figures suggest that even a fairly mild accident involving a whiplash injury costs the community around $12,000. An economic figure of $911,000 has been attached to a death, but who on earth can put a value on the four lives that were lost in that horrific accident? There is even a popular competition to guess the cost of repairing a damaged car. This is a comprehensive program with a proven track record that can save lives.

The aftermath of the accident at Dural reverberated across New South Wales and led to changes to the licensing of young drivers. While the Government's motives in its recent decision to require young drivers to undertake 30 hours tuition in the company of an experienced driver were honourable, I am sceptical of the merits of this approach. In many instances it will simply pass on bad driving habits, always supposing that logbooks are not falsified. To my mind the New Zealand system, which prevents novice drivers from carrying other equally inexperienced people unless there is a mature and responsible driver in the front passenger seat, makes a lot of sense. Had this been a requirement, either Matthew's mother would not have allowed him to take her car or the experienced driver would have exhorted Matthew to slow down. The 10.00 p.m. to 5.00 a.m. curfew which is in place in New Zealand would be too restrictive, given the paucity of after-hours public transport services in many parts of Sydney. Many young people in my electorate work or attend night lectures at university or TAFE, which means they travel home after 10.00 p.m. and they would find it well-nigh impossible to do so without cars.

In the absence of legislative change the U Turn the Wheel program provides a genuine opportunity to improve young driver attitudes and save lives. The local program will cost about $60,000 for the first year to train about 2,000 students, a cost of $30 per capita. Local Rotary clubs will contribute $14,000, Baulkham Hills council has indicated it may provide $14,000 and local businesses will be asked to help. The clubs are seeking a financial contribution of $10,000 from the State Government to support this worthy project. That seems to me to be a very small commitment, given the magnitude of the tragedy that triggered the initiative. I ask the Minister for Transport, within whose portfolio road safety matters fall, to favourably consider this request from the joint Rotary clubs of The Hills.

Ms NORI (Port Jackson—Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism) [5.55 p.m.]: I undertake to pass on to the Minister for Transport the contents of the honourable member's speech. It will be a matter for him and for his department to assess the request for $10,000. I commend the community for its initiative. However, I suggest that this is an initiative of the community, police, business and schools will have the additional benefit of sending a message to young people that their community cares enough about them enough about them to want them to undertake the course. In that way the program may be an even greater success. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9387

HUNTER POLICE LOCAL AREA COMMAND

Mr BARTLETT (Port Stephens) [5.56 p.m.]: I am delighted to speak after the honourable member for The Hills, because I also wish to speak about police and young males in my electorate. Port Stephens is part of the local Hunter area command, which involves 4,000 square kilometres and incorporates the electorates of the honourable member for Cessnock and the honourable member for Maitland, as well as my electorate. To traverse my electorate by car from Cessnock to the Tilligerry Peninsula or Tomaree Head takes 90 minutes. The population growth in Port Stephens has been rapid. In 1983 the population was 30,000, in 1993 it was 38,000 and in 2000, it increased by 21,000 to 59,000. The latest prediction is that the population will increase by 1,000 per year for the next 20 years.

With the properties department of the Police Service I am looking at a short-term to medium-term plan for splitting the lower Hunter area command into a Maitland coalfields local area command and a Port Stephens local area command. Those two area commands could then address the increased population numbers and the problem created by the vast distances being driven by overseers in an attempt to cover their patch. The basic idea is to try to replace the archaic Raymond Terrace police station with a new local area command headquarters. The new local area command headquarters could perhaps be situated between Raymond Terrace and Medowie. Medowie has a 4.9 per cent growth rate and a population of 7,500, but it does not have a police station as other comparable areas do.

Perhaps the police station could be located at Lakeside. Professional police officers need proper accommodation, and the Raymond Terrace police station is certainly not up to scratch. Since 1999 the Government has brought down two record police budgets to fund extra frontline police. Since the introduction of the new Police Assistance Line [PAL], 500 police officers have been transferred from desk duty in police stations to frontline policing. We are aiming for 650 officers from that source during the term of this Government. The policy of sending newly appointed police officers to commands outside Sydney has resulted in approximately 75 newly sworn officers being allocated to the Hunter region since December 1999. These changes have impacted on some of the communities in the Port Stephens area. I would like more police officers who have been released from duties in police stations to visit the central business district to break down the barriers and isolation between police and residents.

The other issue I want to address is the alienation of young males in our community. I believe this issue needs to be addressed by the community in each area. We heard from the honourable member for The Hills about the deaths of four young men who had only just received their "P" plates. The feeling of alienation, a desire to take risks or whatever, has resulted in the loss of four young lives. Frustration, a lack of belonging and, family support and, very often, low self-esteem results from the pressures of modern society as families and especially young males react with violent and inappropriate behaviour. Programs such as the Machismo program that take a young man's love of risk taking and music and develop skills that result in positive outcomes need to be adopted so that communities can see what works and what does not work.

In the Port Stephens area the Government has appointed the Port Stephens Community Safety Officer at a cost of $52,000. I believe that the older males in the community need to liaise with the community safety officer to reassert, if you like, their claim or role in society in guiding younger people where families have failed. For fathers, I recommend reading the books by Steve Biddulph entitled Manhood and Raising Boys as an excellent way of addressing the problem of youth alienation.

GUY FAWKES RIVER NATIONAL PARK ANIMAL SLAUGHTER

Mr FRASER (Coffs Harbour) [6.01 p.m.]: I raise an issue of grave concern to my community and, I believe, to the entire New South Wales community, that is, the inhumane slaughter of horses in Guy Fawkes River National Park, west of Dorrigo, as reported in news bulletins last night. I have in my possession photographs, which I will seek to table, of horses killed by officers of the National Parks and Wildlife Service [NPWS]. In this contribution I point out that the NPWS has a responsibility to all animals. These animals, by the service's definition, were wild horses. I show honourable members a photograph of a mare foaling. She was shot and killed while she was foaling.

The NPWS decided that there were too many wild horses in the Guy Fawkes River National Park, which incorporates the Bicentennial Trail. Over many years farmers in the area have culled these horses and taken them out. Mr Dennis Betteridge from Lismore rang me this afternoon to say that even last year he had offered to take his own donkeys into the area together with his four-wheel drive and draft horses and, with the 9388 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 use of molasses, lead them out. He also offered an opportunity to the NPWS to run them down to yards at Long Gap Gully where they could have been corralled, easily captured and taken out. If there were 600 horses, valued at $400 each on the open market, there would have been a return of approximately $24,000 to the service.

If the NPWS had approached local horsemen and others to get rid of these horses within the park, I believe many would have volunteered for the sake of the experience. These horses are, or were, quiet; they were not wild in the true sense. They were used to people going past them because of the Bicentennial Trail. Mr Greg Everingham, who appeared on national news broadcasts last night, actually rode a horse into the area to have a look at what had been done.

The NPWS claims that 600 horses were shot. Local knowledge suggests that there were no more than 350 horses in the national park, a fact admitted by the feral animals officer to Mr Dennis Betteridge last year. If the service killed 600 horses, that equates with approximately 300 tonnes of horsemeat which they now tell us will be eaten by quolls and goannas. If there are so many quolls in the national park, they should not be on the endangered species list. The service had to get rid of the horses because they were polluting the waterways. On the service's own estimation, the waterways in the area will now be polluted by the rotting carcasses of 600 horses. I doubt that figure because I believe that only about 100 horses were shot.

I have photographic evidence that one horse was shot in the front leg twice, in the back leg and then in the body. Another horse was shot in the gut five times, once in the neck and once in the head. Yet another horse had two shots to the back, two in the gut and three in the jaw. That is not humane. The service ran these horses up a hill, gathered them together, immobilised them—a horse that has been shot will be fairly immobilised—and later came back, I hope, and finished them off. These carcasses will now rot into the town water supplies of Yamba, McLean and Grafton, Coffs Harbour, Woolgoolga and Sawtell. Anyone who draws water from the river will be affected. The river is also the home of an endangered species, the eastern river cod. If those carcasses rot into the river it will not do the cod any good.

This is damnable! I advised the Minister for the Environment that I proposed to make this statement tonight and I note that he is in the Chamber. I call on him to ask the RSPCA to conduct a full and independent inquiry into this matter. My photographic evidence indicates culpable findings against employees of the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the shooters and I expect them to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. What they have done is barbaric and inhumane. Other options were available but they did not consider them. There had been offers from local people to take the horses out. This is disgraceful; it is disgusting. I will not stand for it and I expect the House to support me in my call for an inquiry.

Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! Only Ministers may table documents. If the honourable member wishes to do so he may lay the photographs on the table of the House or in the Speaker's suite for the information of other members.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [6.06 p.m.]: For many years the removal of horses from Guy Fawkes River National Park has been a difficult problem. I am advised by the National Parks and Wildlife Service that various attempts to control and reduce the population of these animals have been undertaken over the past decade with little or no impact. In fact, just over 150 horses have been removed since 1992 in various doping, mustering and roping exercises. Mustering, which is a technique used very successfully in other, more open, parks such as Kosciuszko National Park, has not proved to be a successful technique in the steep and broken terrain of the Guy Fawkes River National Park. In fact, mustering has been shown to be dangerous to both humans and horses in such steep gorge country.

Mustering in these conditions means that the animals sustain injuries, such as broken legs and necks, as they fight against ropes on the steep, rocky ground. That method is stressful for the horses and I gather that many animals die from their injuries in this process. Let me be absolutely clear that I in no way condone any inhumane treatment of the animals at Guy Fawkes River National Park. I am aware of the very serious allegations that have been made concerning the manner in which some of these horses were culled. I assure the House that the service will co-operate fully with the RSPCA and provide it with all the necessary information it requires for its investigation of the matter and I will be announcing some other measures. OLYMPIC AND PARALYMPIC GAMES GOVERNMENT SERVICES DELIVERY Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle—Parliamentary Secretary) [6.08 p.m.]: The Olympics and Paralympics were a triumph of service delivery by government in New South Wales. They were a clear demonstration that 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9389 government enterprises deliver the goods. The acknowledgments by the heads of the Olympic movement that both Games were the best games ever clearly indicate that not only the private sector can deliver the goods. In this case the Government demonstrated clearly and capably that its organisations, such as SOCOG, OCA and ORTA, could develop the infrastructure, co-ordinate the services and bring together the great volunteer effort that delivered the Olympic Games and the Paralympic Games. There is no greater demonstration of this than the pulling together of the public transport system that saw a record number of patrons delivered by bus and rail to the Olympics. The editorial in this morning's Sydney Morning Herald states:

The people of Sydney saw how the rail system, when called upon and given sufficient resources, was able to meet the extreme test placed on it by the Olympic and Paralympic Games. That experience is one the State Government should capitalise on by continuing to improve rail services, as the surest way of retaining the custom of those many thousands of people who found in the past few weeks to their surprise that rail can be the way to go.

It is not only the people of Sydney who saw and responded to the efficient services that rail can provide and its unequalled capacity to move large numbers of people through a central location. The Government's move to enable free rail travel to the Olympics as part of venue ticket purchases encouraged a huge number of people from Newcastle and the Hunter Valley to take their first trip ever, or their first trip for many years, by public transport and by rail in particular. After talking to constituents, listening to comments on the radio and talking to fellow spectators at the Paralympics, I was buoyed by the positive comments that people made about their rail experience over the Olympic and Paralympic periods. This included patrons who paid for their travel during the Paralympics period. People were extremely positive about the service: it was well co-ordinated, well publicised and well promoted, and it served the needs of travellers from Newcastle and the Hunter region.

In considering the future of Newcastle's rail services, that is the approach we need to take. In my view that is a vital part of our public transport system. It links us to the growing populations of the Hunter Valley and the Central Coast. It is important that we contemplate in the future turning round the patronage figures in Newcastle and looking at ways of promoting and reinforcing the use of public transport in the area. Indeed, for Newcastle city to maintain its position as the regional capital of the Hunter, it needs to develop a public transport system that counters the parking difficulties created by the peninsula location of the city, and a system that can deliver large numbers of workers, tourists and recreators into the city to add to the dynamic residential growth that is now occurring.

No doubt with the most positive residential growth we still lack the numbers that are required for an ongoing and thriving regional capital, so we need such a public transport system to reinforce it. That requires better co-ordination between rail and bus services in the area, the continuation of a concept of increased residential densities around transport modes—the State is certainly moving in that direction—and better preplanning for public transport in those burgeoning development areas to the west of Newcastle, both in the Minmi area and in areas of the Hunter Valley. It also requires better marketing of public transport and flexibility of the transport system to react to special events as they occur, such as the Newcastle surf fest, the Australia Day celebrations, maritime celebrations or other major tourist events that occur in Newcastle. No doubt the Olympics has shown us the importance of public transport and its ability to carry large numbers of people. We need to continue to reinforce and plan for that in the development of our cities, including Newcastle and the Illawarra.

Ms NORI (Port Jackson—Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism) [6.13 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for his concern about transport issues in the Hunter. I concur with his view about the impact of the Olympics and the message sent out from that. I assure the honourable member that the Hunter will benefit enormously from the exposure that Sydney and, indeed, the State received during the Olympic Games. The tourism benefit will be enormous. I can inform the honourable member that the Tourism New South Wales web site is averaging about 100,000 hits a day and the number of hits to the regional web page has been roughly 50:50 since September. So there is an enormous amount of interest in regional New South Wales, especially internationally.

LISMORE ELECTORATE LIVESTOCK THEFT

Mr GEORGE (Lismore) [6.14 p.m.]: This afternoon I raise the issue of stock theft and rural crime in my electorate of Lismore. I appreciate that the Minister for Police and the Minister for Agriculture have established a rural crime working party. Having experience in the livestock industry, I attended a forum in Casino on stock theft. Stock theft forums have also been conducted at Yass, Narrandera, Mudgee, Coonabarabran, Walgett, Narrabri and Nyngan. Producers, police, New South Wales Farmers, representatives of Rural Land Protection Boards and local government, stock and station agents, livestock carriers, meat operators, abattoir representatives and rural counsellors generally attended these meetings. To address this age-old 9390 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 problem, the working party needs to address the following points. First, we need clarity in stock statements. This documentation is needed to describe accurately the full content and history of the movement of livestock. This received full support at the stock theft forums.

The second point which needs to be reinforced is the stock identification system. There is unanimous support for a national identification system—with emphasis on the word "national"—such as a Bolus, which can be scanned. Furthermore, a corresponding ear tag or other external form of identification is recommended. Third, the police need to establish a rural crime group, with approximately 40 squads needed across the State. This recommendation received unanimous support throughout the State. In some cases there seems to be confusion regarding the powers of police. The police need powers to stop and inspect livestock vehicles and to enter a property without a warrant. I understand that representatives of Rural Lands Protection Boards can enter a property immediately to inspect livestock but police cannot, and this needs to be addressed.

A review of the laws also needs to be addressed. The introduction of specialised magistrates experienced in rural crime is a strong recommendation. The introduction of on-the-spot fines is a possibility. The Department of Public Prosecutions or relevant agency needs access to accredited expert witnesses in livestock matters and rural crime. The need to have feral animal poaching must also be addressed. The suggestion of the possible establishment of a compensation fund was raised at a couple of meetings. I spoke to a person who had lost $40,000 worth of steers in one theft. That has had a devastating effect on the person but he has nowhere to turn for support or assistance. An article in a weekend newspaper stated that Mr and Mrs Leith Towns were devastated after cattle rustlers stole most of their herd. The article stated:

Police said they were looking for "a professional outfit" after the 245 head, valued at about $160,000, were systematically herded through thickly wooded range country on horseback.

At the stock theft forums it became evident that the rural people of this State need to use the police assistance line: 131 444. I encourage rural people to use this line, as does the rural crime working group. Its use will enable police to gather intelligence which will hopefully lead to arrests. Rural areas and police require our support in promoting this help line, because in the long run the help line will aid residents. It would be fair to say that there was 100 per cent support for the suggestions in principle at these forums. We did not get 100 per cent support mainly because of producers' concerns about the cost of implementing the recommendations. However, the industry deserves some government assistance to make sure that the problems are addressed. I lay the report on the table.

THIRROUL LEAGUES CLUB SITE REDEVELOPMENT

Mr CAMPBELL (Keira) [6.19 p.m.]: I am concerned about a proposed development on the site of the former Thirroul Leagues Club in my electorate. Unfortunately, the leagues club has gone out of business and the site is now vacant, the club building was demolished and there is a proposal for a six-storey residential development on the site. The site is zoned for commercial purposes and although that provides for mixed use no-one in his right mind would envisage a six-storey building in that location, particularly as there is no building higher than two storeys within a four-kilometre radius. The proposal would stick out like a sore thumb and there is community concern and anger about it. Many people in the community understand the need for medium- density housing and the suburb of Thirroul has undergone a transformation with medium density. However, by any measure this concept would be considered high density and takes advantage of a loophole in the local environment plan [LEP] that provides for residential use in a commercial zone. The LEP did not envisage that to be the case and, therefore, this proposal should not proceed.

There is a real need for community consultation and I am pleased that an informal planning conference has been convened by Wollongong City Council—it should be under way at this moment. The community consultation in Wollongong, through the informal planning conference process, is a good policy and I am pleased to have had a hand in writing the policy some years ago. People would be aware that I have something of a reputation for supporting development that I believe is appropriate. On occasions that has been to my political detriment. But on this occasion the proposed development is inappropriate for the site, and I do not support it. I support the community's concern and opposition to it. I acknowledge that a group of people led by David Birch, Alice Cartan and Cate Wilson with Terry Sands, the convenor of the local neighbourhood committee, oppose this proposal. They are opposing it in a reasoned and reasonable way, which is entirely appropriate.

Last Sunday they held a public meeting at Thomas Gibson Park, Thirroul, which I attended. I indicated that the proposal was a rort and an attempt to support a loophole in the LEP. I reiterate that this evening. I also 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9391 restate my view that this is a local government planning issue and should be dealt with and determined by Wollongong City Council. I am confident that the council will give appropriate consideration to any objections and I am quietly confident that at the end of the day the council will reject the proposal, but that remains to be seen. I repeat: This is a local issue and there should not be other processes to overturn the council’s responsibility to work with the community on this issue. I urge discussion to pursue a change to the proposal. Certainly there is a more relevant and appropriate development for that particular location, and clearly that would be one of medium-density housing. With some common sense that could be pursued.

I would hate to see this proposal end up in the Land and Environment Court because most people know that these days matters in that court are a bit of a lottery and we never know what may come out of them. However, with people working together sensibly at the local level a compromise will be found. In my view the bottom line is that a six-storey high-density building is inappropriate. I do not support the proposal. There is a need to find a medium-density solution which will make appropriate use of the site and provide people with access to the small businesses in the Thirroul village shopping centre and give local residents the opportunity to access the Thirroul railway station which is a hub for commuters to Sydney. Quite clearly, this high-density proposal is in what should be a medium-density zone and I urge its rejection.

Ms NORI (Port Jackson—Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism) [6.24 p.m.]: I congratulate the honourable member for Keira on standing up for the best interests of his electorate and protecting the amenity of Thirroul. I am sure that his long history as mayor of Wollongong will stand him in good stead in fighting those matters. His constituents are very lucky that he has had that level of experience and that he can contribute on that level on their behalf.

STATE NATIONAL PARKS ENTRY FEES

Mr R. H. L. SMITH (Bega) [6.25 p.m.]: I object most strongly to the decision by the Government to impose entry fees into another 23 national parks in New South Wales, some of which are within my electorate of Bega. The Bournda National Park and the Murramarang National Park are in my electorate and the Ben Boyd National Park is in the neighbouring electorate of Monaro, on the far south coast. Ever since this proposal was first made public my office has been inundated with calls and letters from people voicing their anger and outrage, and many have indicated that they have written to the office of the Minister for the Environment and also to the Premier. Local newspapers have contained many letters to the editor in relation to this subject ever since the public became aware of the proposal. This is not a popular proposal within my electorate. The introduction of the $20 single country park annual pass per vehicle, or the $6 per single visit, will have an enormous impact on the local tourist industry.

The parks attract thousands of tourists and locals each year and if an entry fee is imposed the visitors will visit other areas, putting increased pressure on parks not charging fees. No doubt those overloaded areas will impose fees at a later time. My electorate is mainly rural and we depend on the tourist dollars to sustain our area. Farmers are doing it tough since the deregulation of the dairy industry and we do not need any further setbacks to the economy on the far south coast. We need the tourist dollar. The Bournda National Park, which is only 20 minutes drive from Bega and 10 minutes drive from Merimbula, is a popular picnic area. It is extensively used for educational excursions by schools throughout New South Wales all year long. The park is set along a mostly pristine coastline, which has been used for generations as a popular tourist, local fishing and recreational spot.

I also have concerns for the members of the local boating clubs, such as the Dry River Sailing Club, a self-funded amateur sailing club that uses Wallagoot Lake most weekends during the summer months. That lake is set within the perimeter of Bournda National Park. The commodore of the club, Mr John Ford, has written of his concerns and I fully agree with him when he states that those proposed fees are an attack on the Australian way of life and will be detrimental to the viability of the small, but popular, local sporting clubs. The introduction of the fees will do very little to enhance reconciliation. It has been brought to my attention that the Koori community will be exempt from having to pay to enter national parks. That will cause resentment and will not go unnoticed by users of those popular recreational areas. Is that what we want at a time when all Australians are trying to pull together as one to reconcile our differences with our indigenous citizens?

There are many physically disabled people who use the viewing platforms at the south end of Bournda National Park, which were constructed by the National Parks and Wildlife Service. Over recent years disabled people who are unable to access the beach to enjoy the view or join in the whale watching activities when the annual migration occurs along the coastline have used that structure. Annual fees of $20 to enjoy that simple 9392 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 activity for maybe only 10 minutes at a time is an absolute disgrace. Furthermore, as the people on the far south coast pay among the highest fuel costs in the State, that entry fee will only further disadvantage many lower income families from enjoying the Australian tradition of the family Sunday drive and picnic. Surely the suggested amount of $20 per vehicle per year, or $6 per visit, will not even cover the cost of collecting those fees. How does the Minister intend to collect this money? Will National Parks and Wildlife Service staff be seated at each entrance to the parks 24 hours a day? Even the cost of installing meters at such points is ridiculous, because that then encourages vandalism and theft. This is just another petty tax-grabbing scheme from the highest taxing State in Australia. I implore the Minister for the Environment to reconsider the implementation of entry fees into the national parks in my electorate of Bega. Ms NORI (Port Jackson—Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism) [6.30 p.m.]: Clearly this matter comes under the portfolio of the Minister for the Environment. However, the honourable member for Bega has raised tourism issues, so I will respond wearing that hat. A well-conserved natural environment and good facilities are essential to providing the best possible experience for the 22 million visitors who visit national parks and reserves each year. As the honourable member said, it has recently been announced that entry fees will be collected from visitors to parks at which entry fees were not previously collected. This will double the number of parks where entry fees are charged and will cover parks that have increasing visitor numbers. Most of the existing national parks where entry fees are charged will now charge a levy of $6, an increase brought about because of the GST. I have been advised by the commercial operators that with regard to current fee structures, proposed fee structures and an implementation date, the current commercial charges are based on a number of models. The majority of the proceeds to National Parks and Wildlife Service that the honourable member has referred to will go back into local projects, and visitors to these parks and nature reserves will be directly supporting, conserving and providing better facilities. EASTERN SUBURBS POLICE AND COMMUNITY YOUTH CLUB CLOSURE Ms MOORE (Bligh) [6.31 p.m.]: I speak on behalf of many of my Paddington constituents, who are concerned about the proposed closure and sale of the Eastern Suburbs Police and Community Youth Club [PCYC]. Police and community youth clubs have a long history in New South Wales. The first police boys club was set up in Woolloomooloo in 1937, and the Paddington club was established in 1944. The Paddington club has great local significance. It was built on land donated by the council using funds raised by the community. Understandably, some 50 years later that community to which the PCYC historically, legally and morally belongs is unwilling to let the club go. The PCYC's value has continued up to the present, as demonstrated by the movement's growing appeal to girls and young women. This was recognised by the change of name in 1987 to Police and Community Youth Clubs. The continued popularity and high usage of the Paddington club demonstrates its contemporary relevance for young people. The Paddington PCYC offers its members a wide range of inexpensive activities, including kindy gymnastics, aerobics for young adults with intellectual disabilities, circus classes, trampolining, aikido, hapkido, kickboxing and boxercise, as well as the traditional boxing and wrestling. The club sleeps 60 people, providing a significant source of low-cost accommodation for young people from rural areas when visiting Sydney. It serves as a community centre, a venue for local primary and high schools, whose numbers are at capacity, for their sports programs, and a venue for local dances. Recently the role of the PCYC has expanded to include community-based policing and crime prevention programs. Police attached to the clubs work with young people to sort out their needs and develop programs and strategies with the support of the community. In Paddington, this has involved working with Woollahra council's youth development officer and with the youth safety officer from Rose Bay police on projects including anti-graffiti strategies and the "party safe" initiative. These projects are tremendously important in terms of working with young people to find out what they want, as well as to help keep them out of trouble. Paddington is adjacent to areas such as Kings Cross and Darlinghurst, which have high crime rates, and drug and youth homelessness problems. Creative crime prevention strategies are needed if local youth problems are to be minimised and prevented from spreading.

Police and Community Youth Clubs New South Wales proposes to close the Paddington club and to merge it with Maroubra PCYC in order to fund the police and community youth clubs in other areas. Closing a highly successful and much-used community centre such as the Paddington PCYC is false economy, particularly given that the club is self-funding. Young people will lose yet another place where they can meet their friends, and this could lead to an increase in local crime rates. This is particularly important given the number of families in which both parents work or which are single-parent families. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9393

The Minister for Police said that the Police and Community Youth Clubs New South Wales is a public company that is independent of the New South Wales Police Service, making him powerless to intervene. However, that is not the case. The constitution of PCYC New South Wales enables the Minister to appoint and remove board members and requires the board to report to the Minister. I urge the Minister to use the influence vested in him by the Constitution to prevent the closure and sale of this community club. I also call on the Premier to intervene, on the grounds that the club provides many sporting and other activities for young people. Following the success of the Olympics, amid campaigns seeking to reduce obesity rates amongst young people to which our Olympic athletes are lending their support, I urge the Premier to ask PCYC New South Wales to rescind its decision to close the Paddington club.

Given the level of public and community involvement in establishing the centre, the proposal by PCYC New South Wales to sell the site is outrageous. The historical "donation" of land should deter the sale. Specifically, the land was donated in perpetuity for youth facilities. On that basis, if the PCYC no longer wishes to run the club, it should revert to council so that youth facilities can be maintained. It is an indictment that there has been no negotiation or even consultation with the local community who use the facility. Paddington is an inner-city suburb with an increasingly dense population due to successive governments' policies of urban consolidation. Given the lack of open space in the inner city, the PCYC provides invaluable space for young people, and for the community in general, to get involved in activities that would not otherwise be available. I call upon PCYC New South Wales not to betray the efforts of the far-sighted people who donated the land and established the club, but to find a way to ensure that this vital facility continues its operation.

Private members' statements noted.

[Mr Deputy-Speaker left the chair at 6.36 p.m. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m.]

WATER MANAGEMENT BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 22 June.

Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt—Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation) [7.30 p.m.]: Having pre-audience under Standing Order 71 I speak again to the Water Management Bill. Honourable members will recall that on 22 June I introduced this bill and delivered the second reading speech. At that time, debate on the bill was deferred so that a further round of public consultation could take place. This latest round of consultation concludes nearly two years of review and comment on issue papers, discussion papers and so on about what is to be the State’s premier legislation for sustainable water management into the twenty-first century. Today I would like to take the opportunity to place on record the finding and outcomes of this final round of consultation. I will also foreshadow a number of amendments to the bill that the Government intends to move in Committee. First of all, let me start by assuring all honourable members that our process of consultation has been meticulous and comprehensive.

Since 22 June the Water Management Bill has been readily accessible through the Internet. Up to 10,000 copies of an explanatory brochure and summary version of the bill were also posted out to a wide range of interested individuals and groups, including all local councils across New South Wales. These documents were produced by the Department of Land and Water Conservation to help explain the main aspects of the bill and to focus discussion on the key issues. No less than 14 public meetings were chaired by the department’s Director-General, Dr Bob Smith, and staff. On top of this, 26 peak stakeholder groups were invited to attend individual meetings with the director-general. Most people took advantage of this opportunity.

Senior regional staff from the department followed up with many more meetings at the local level. All these meetings have taken place to ensure that individuals and groups have a good understanding of the key aspects of the bill and to ensure that they have the chance to discuss any concerns. Written submissions commenting on the bill were invited up until the end of August. I extended that deadline, so that all submissions up to 15 September have been taken into account. In total, more than 340 written submissions have been received from interested groups and individuals. These submissions have been closely analysed. Along with all these discussions and the submission process, a working group involving peak stakeholders was formed.

This working group comprised representatives of the New South Wales Irrigators Council, the Local Government and Shires Associations, the New South Wales Farmers Association, the Nature Conservation 9394 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

Council of New South Wales and the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council. The group met on several occasions with senior officers of the department to discuss possible amendments to the bill. I would personally like to thank each representative on this working group for their time and commitment to this important task.

The Water Advisory Council, the peak consultative body on water management in New South Wales, also met on several occasions to discuss the bill and to provide valuable feedback to the Government. I should take this opportunity to remind honourable members that this is a whole-of-government initiative. As with the drafting of the current bill, action was taken to ensure that all relevant government departments and the central agencies were closely involved in its review. There has also been correspondence with the National Competition Council about our obligations under the Council of Australian Governments [COAG] Agreement, and how our approach fits with that agreement.

I have been advised informally that the provisions in the current bill will go a long way to meeting New South Wales' commitments under the COAG water reforms. I am pleased to report that there is widespread support within the community for the need to update the existing water legislation, which is now more than 80 years old. Most of the written submissions agreed with the general thrust of the bill. The objects of the bill and the water sharing principles and priorities within it are also well supported. They will therefore remain substantially unchanged. This Government has made and will continue to make a commitment to the achievement of sustainable water sources and their dependent ecosystems. Our industries, our communities, and even our social fabric, all depend on the health of the environment for their prosperity.

The key issues arising from public consultation related to water management planning, water management committees, the access licence framework, property rights and compensation, town water allocations, basic landholder water rights, water for the environment, water trading, and indigenous rights and interests. We have considered the changes put forward by all stakeholders and, for the most part, the Government’s amendments will accommodate these views. Of course, in some cases, stakeholder views are very different and some suggested changes are at opposite ends of the spectrum. In those circumstances, the Government has made an informed judgment on the outcome.

I have no doubt that the debate in this House will also reflect the diversity and intensity of views on many elements of the bill. But I firmly believe that the Government’s package of amendments will deliver the best outcome for New South Wales as a whole. Without pre-empting the debate, it is important that I provide an overview of our amendments and outline the reasons why these changes are necessary. As I progress, honourable members will see that the Government has placed a major emphasis on those changes that are needed to meet our obligations under the Council of Australian Governments Agreement.

The Government will amend the bill to include new provisions for the establishment of a Water Investment Trust. The New South Wales Irrigators Council raised this concept, and it has been developed by my staff, other stakeholders and some members of Parliament. The trust is another strategic initiative that will put New South Wales at the forefront of sustainable water management. It will be able to hold moneys from a variety of sources, including water licence holders, conservation groups, the private sector and Government. The Commonwealth Government will be invited to enter into this new partnership. The pool of funds collected by the trust will be used for activities that result in environmental enhancement, particularly investment in water saving projects. Details of the operation of the trust will be provided in a regulation.

Other than this amendment in relation to the trust, there are seven main areas that other major amendments will affect. The first main area is water planning. The bill will be amended to provide new planning principles for water use plan components and the incorporation of indigenous issues in planning principles. It will provide more uniform and comprehensive planning provisions, which are consistent with the objects of the bill. This amendment is supported by the peak interest groups. The Government will move a further amendment to provide for the inclusion of a State water management outcomes plan. Again, this amendment is supported by the peak interest groups.

The plan will be in the form of a "statement of intent" which outlines the policy context, targets and strategic outcomes from the management and use of our water resources. It will be a whole-of-government plan that provides clear and strong guidance for water management committees when they formulate their own local water management plans. It will include targets agreed both nationally and at the State level. These targets will provide a unifying direction for water management and better integration of water management with other planning and the much broader management of our natural resources. The State water management outcomes plan will be prepared on a five-yearly rolling basis, following public consultation. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9395

A further significant amendment in this area relates to the term of the local water management plans. You may recall that these plans share water resources between the environment and consumptive use. They also set the environmental flows and mandatory conditions for water access licences. We have listened to the views of the New South Wales Irrigators Council and other water users that 15-year plans are needed to ensure a secure platform for business decisions. We have listened to representations from the Australian Bankers Association along similar lines. But we have also listened carefully to the Nature Conservation Council and other environment groups about the need for plans to be no more than five years, so that there is still flexibility to respond to the changing needs of the environment. The Government has tried to strike the right balance between these differing views.

The Government is proposing a planning horizon of 10 years. This is a huge improvement on the Water Act 1912. It also provides more security than what I understand the other States are providing. It is also a significant improvement on the current bill which provides for the Minister to make plans for up to five years, with possible extension to 10 years subject to satisfactory review of plans in year five. It is the term of a plan that really helps to define water rights, and the period of 10 years provides a much better basis for business confidence and investment. The current bill already contains strong provisions for the environment. However, we will reinforce these provisions with two other amendments.

Within 12 months of the enactment of the bill, the Minister, on the advice of the water management committee, will set the initial bulk access regime for priority water management areas. The bulk access regime is one component of the water management plan. It is essentially the pool of water that is available for consumptive use, after the environmental component has been set aside. Application of the bulk access regime determines how much water different groups of users get each year under different climatic conditions. This initial bulk access regime will provide a baseline for the first water management plan. Like the water management plan, the initial bulk access regime will have a term of 10 years.

The Minister will also be able to trigger a mid-term review of a water management plan. This includes an audit of the implementation of actions and outcomes specified in that plan. The results of the review will not change the term of the plan unless there is agreement between the water management committee and the Minister to commence a new 10-year plan. The Government will amend the bill to provide compensation based on the market value of the water forgone where there is a change in the bulk access regime within the term of the approved water management plan that reduces the diversions available to individual irrigators. It is also intended that the determination of this market value will be made by the Valuer-General. In addition to this, the current bill provides for compensation to be paid where there is a need for compulsory acquisition of water licences.

The Government will amend the bill so that the water management plans have statutory force under this legislation. This has the full support of peak interest groups. The provisions of the bill will also be enhanced to ensure that components of water management plans can be incorporated into statutory environmental planning instruments under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. This is the best way to ensure the right decisions are made at all levels of governance rather than relying on optional adoption of the recommendations of advisory plans. It also means that local government will be more involved in water management as the water plans will be explicitly linked to the environmental planning framework.

The second area where the Government will move amendments relates to the operation of water management committees. The Government will move an amendment to increase from one to two the minimum number of indigenous representatives on water management committees and the Water Advisory Council. We will also provide for the water management committees to operate on a consensus decision-making basis. The current bill specifies a majority-voting model. I am pleased to say that both these amendments are supported by all peak interest groups.

The Government has received some representations from the farming community, which has asked that the bill also be amended to ensure that the membership of these committees is drawn from the local area. However, the Government is of the view that this suggestion can be accommodated—and this is largely our intention—without prescribing it in legislation. The third area where the Government will move amendments relates to domestic and stock rights. These are the basic water rights of land-holders and were previously known as riparian rights. It is our intention to amend the bill to prescribe domestic and stock rights by purpose only. 9396 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

The current bill prescribes the potential for maximum volumes to be set as well. I acknowledge the concerns of the New South Wales Farmers Association about the difficulty of defining what basic domestic and stock water volumes should be across the State and the difficulties associated with monitoring and compliance. The shadow Minister for Land and Water Conservation has also raised similar concerns with me on a number of occasions. It should be remembered that we are talking about the rights of land-holders to take a very small amount of water from rivers and groundwater to meet their most basic home needs.

The legislation clearly excludes irrigation and commercial use and this approach should achieve what we all want. However, I should point out that the Government will amend the bill to limit the exercise of these basic rights in emergency situations: for example, when there is a risk to public health; when there is a severe water shortage; and when there is a likelihood of significant damage to the water source and/or dependent ecosystems. Such changes could be triggered by advice from the relevant water management committee. I am sure all will agree that this is a sensible and responsible approach.

Let me now turn to the fourth area where the Government will move amendments which relate to the access licence framework. Honourable members will recall that the term of access licences is another big issue for water users. The bill currently specifies that the term of normal access licences—that is, excluding utilities— will be for a period of up to 15 years. The Government intends to delete the words "up to" so that licences are for a period of 15 years with periods of less than 15 years also accommodated at the request of the applicant. The conditions of these water access licences will also be linked to the 10-year water management planning cycle. These amendments are more consistent with the Council of Australian Governments [COAG] requirement to specify water rights as clearly as possible. They also provide more certainty for water users.

The current bill contains a provision for licence holders to have priority renewal of their access licences after 15 years. However, this will now be made more explicit, with detailed criteria for assessment prior to renewal. There should be an expectation of renewal of the licence unless specific circumstances arise—for example, if licence conditions have been breached, or if there is potential for significant environmental impact. This amendment will increase the certainty of licence renewal after the 15-year period.

I am sure that all will agree that a 15-year licence with possible changes to conditions only through a transparent planning process is a big improvement on the current situation where five-year licences can be changed at any time by the Minister of the day. I should also say that the bill will be amended by the Government to change the definition of water sources to include waters on floodplains. This change will ensure that access licensing also covers floodplain harvesting. It is a clarifying amendment that is supported by all peak interest groups.

The Government will also amend the bill to provide for exemptions from access licences. This amendment is a drafting clarification to ensure that minor water extractions can be exempted from requiring a licence—for example, filling swimming pools in estuaries or taking ballast water in coastal waters. A further amendment will be moved to establish a public register of access licences and approvals as an information source only. This mechanism should meet our minimum requirements under the COAG agreement. Third party interests will only be listed on the public register by the licence or approval holder. Applicants for licence transfers will also be required to obtain the written consent of third party interests.

Another Government amendment to the bill is to replace the specific licence category of "opportunistic water" with the term "supplementary access". Supplementary access licences provide access to water that flows in a regulated system which is not captured by a dam. It includes high flows and water entering from tributaries downstream of the dam. The bill will be amended to link supplementary access licences with other base water licences on those rivers and to harmonise the term of the licences. Access will be managed through specification as shares in the available water. Rules pertaining to the access arrangements for this water will be specified in the water management plan. Supplementary access water will also be qualified by other conditions. In particular, it will not be subject to compensation for either reduction or elimination.

I now turn to the fifth area where the Government will move amendments—town water rights. This issue has been extensively discussed among stakeholders and this is also one of those areas where there are disparate views. Understandably, rural towns would like to take advantage of every opportunity for regional 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9397 growth and development. Generous water allocations would help that no end. However, there are other stakeholders who believe that towns should not have allocations that greatly exceed their needs. This seems quite reasonable when one stops to think that water use cannot continue to grow indefinitely and that, within inland New South Wales, total water extractions are subject to the Murray-Darling Basin cap.

I have considered all of these arguments, including representations made to me by the Local Government and Shires Associations and a number of local councils. The approach now proposed by the Government is for the Minister to set initial volumetric allocations for access licences for all local water utilities. The initial allocations will be based on current domestic and industrial use for each town. Provision will be made for five-yearly reviews of that allocation, with allowance for upward adjustment based on actual population growth. This approach will deliver more reasonable allocations at the highest priority and security level for genuine town water use. Regional development would still be facilitated through efficiency savings and enhanced trading opportunities. However, generally speaking, water for industrial use must be purchased on the water market. This is the current policy and it is being carried forward.

The Government will also amend the bill to provide credits for water utilities that return water extracted under their access licences for reuse. Details of this water flow credit scheme will be the subject of a regulation. The bill will also be amended to require regional water supply authorities to achieve modern business outcomes. These would be standard requirements, such as the need to prepare business plans and annual reports. Details of these requirements also will be contained in regulations. Together, the amendments relating to town water rights will provide a much better framework for the effective and efficient management of urban water services across New South Wales.

I now turn to the sixth area where the Government will move amendments, that is, in relation to the separation of water rights from land. The Water Management Bill provides for the full separation of water rights from land, allowing a water access licence to be held by anyone. This is a fundamental COAG requirement; therefore the New South Wales Government is bound by this decision. However, one of the impacts of formally separating water licences from land ownership is a change in the way land is valued. And I recognise that there are significant concerns about this in rural communities. Section 6A (3) of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 requires the Valuer-General to include the value of water rights in land valuations. The Valuer-General will continue to take account of the value of water rights in land valuations under the provisions of the Water Management Bill over the next five years. This will require initial minor, technical amendments to the Valuation of Land Act to ensure consistency with the Water Management Bill. I am confident that the provisions in the current bill for socioeconomic assessment and compliance with transfer principles and rules should address any local, short-term impacts. However, there is some uncertainty as to whether this approach to land valuation is appropriate in the long term. This is because the formal separation of water rights from land makes their continued incorporation into land valuations increasingly incompatible. I note that this is not a new issue; disconnection between water rights and land has existed since water trading began in the 1980s. It is also difficult for land valuations, which stand for four years, to take account of temporary trade in water, which constitutes the majority of current trading and occurs on an annual or even seasonal basis. These issues could be addressed by removing water rights from land valuation. However, this has significant implications for the local government rating base. For this reason, the Government has decided that other necessary amendments will need to be properly considered by the Minister for Local Government as part of a much broader review of the local government rating base. This now brings me to the seventh and final area where the Government will move amendments, that is, in relation to indigenous rights and interests. Feedback from the public was very positive on this front.

In fact, there was very strong support in submissions, peak stakeholder meetings and amongst government departments for more explicit recognition of indigenous interests in water. For this reason the Government intends to amend the bill to provide that, where determined native title rights exist, native title holders will be entitled to exercise basic rights essentially similar to basic landholders' rights and have the same priority. Where there is a determination that the relevant native title water rights are greater than basic land- holder rights, such greater rights are only exercisable if there is sufficient existing water available under the relevant water management plan. If not, native titleholders would be entitled to compensation under the Native Title Act 1993. I have just foreshadowed the major amendments that the Government will move in Ccommittee under seven main headings. 9398 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

Of course, there are other amendments to the bill that are, for the most part, not controversial, such as clarifying the licensing requirements for bore drillers to improve on provisions already included in the bill. These changes also relate to the clarification of definitions and issues, inconsistent use of terms, transitional provisions and flow-on or inconsequential amendments. In fact, many of the 160 or so amendments are the changing of a single word or phrase to merely clarify intent or correct a drafting error or omission. These are simple and straightforward amendments that have generally received support from key stakeholders. I commend the bill and the Government's amendments to the House, and move that the amendments be tabled for circulation to members to facilitate debate on this important legislation. It will certainly provide the blueprint for managing our valuable water resources for decades to come.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr D. L. Page.

BANANA INDUSTRY AMENDMENT BILL

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt—Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation) [7.53 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

This bill continues the Government's program of modernising the legislation regulating primary production in New South Wales. It also ensures that the legislation under which the banana industry operates complies with the State's obligations under the competition principles agreement. It may help honourable members' understanding of the bill if I give a brief outline of the New South Wales banana industry and of the legislation that has been enacted to assist the industry. New South Wales and Queensland are the major banana producing States in Australia. In New South Wales banana production occurs in two distinct coastal districts. These are located between Tweed Heads and Maclean in the north and between South West Rocks and Woolgoolga in the south.

Primarily as a result of disease control problems and inconsistency in product quality, statutory powers to regulate the marketing of bananas in New South Wales were introduced in 1969. In that year the Banana Industry Act constituted the Banana Marketing Control Committee. This Act was replaced by the current Banana Industry Act, which established the Banana Industry Committee, often referred to as the BIC. The BIC is provided with wide powers to regulate and improve the quality of bananas within New South Wales. It also has the power to control the transportation and distribution of bananas to various markets in New South Wales. The BIC is empowered to impose compulsory charges on growers to fund a range of functions. These include research, pest and disease control, advertising and promotion, market information and development, education, quality assurance and industry representation.

This bill proposes amendments to the Banana Industry Act in accordance with the recommendations of the competition policy review of that Act. The review was conducted in order to fulfil the New South Wales Government's commitment under the Competition Principles Agreement. The terms of reference for the review required an assessment of whether the public benefits of the legislation establishing the BIC exceeded the costs. It also required an assessment of whether the objectives of the legislation can be achieved other than by restricting competition within the industry. The review group, on which the banana industry was represented, carried out a very comprehensive review of the Act and considered the many activities of the BIC on a case by case basis. I commend the members of the review group for the thorough job that they did and for the most informative report that resulted from their work.

In carrying out its review, the review group prepared an issues paper outlining the review process and the key issues to be considered. The public was invited to make submissions to assist the review group in its deliberations and, in addition, public workshops were conducted in Murwillumbah and Coffs Harbour. In considering the benefits and costs of the Banana Industry Act, and its restrictions on competition, the review group divided the activities of the BIC into two simple categories. These were its industry service functions and its market powers. Turning first to the industry service functions of the committee, the review concluded that there was strong industry support for compulsory charge powers for industry service functions, such as research and development, and pest and disease control. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9399

It was also concluded that these activities were an effective and efficient means of addressing industry- wide problems of free-riders and spillovers, and that they yielded net public benefits. In accordance with this conclusion, the bill provides for the continuation of the committee's involvement in these areas, provided of course that there continues to be industry support. Industry support is assured by providing for polls of growers. On the other hand, the review group concluded that issues such as quality control and market assurance are primarily issues of competitive market advantage. Accordingly, it is the view of this Government that the market should be allowed to either reward or penalise growers on quality grounds and that legislation in this area is not appropriate. Regulatory intervention is therefore unnecessary and the bill proposes to repeal those provisions of the Act that give the BIC powers over such matters.

Product quality issues can be voluntarily addressed by the industry, for example by developing a quality assurance program or code of practice. Individual growers would then be free to decide whether participation in such schemes would give them a market advantage and therefore benefit their business. The bill also removes the power of the BIC to regulate the transportation of bananas. The most recent transport direction expired on 14 June and there is now general acceptance by industry that banana transport should be deregulated. No other agricultural industry in the State restricts the transport of produce in this manner, and the Government considers that there is no good reason why the BIC should have the power to do so. The power to regulate the transport of bananas is not the only power in the Act that regulates banana marketing.

Other market powers include the power to impose supply or quality controls. The review group concluded that these powers also do not yield net public benefits. It concluded that the issues these powers were originally designed to address are either no longer relevant or can be addressed by non-legislative means. As I have already mentioned, this bill provides for the removal of these powers. These amendments are necessary to ensure that this Government complies with its obligations under the competition principles agreement. However, the Government also believes that these changes are in the best long-term interests of the banana industry in New South Wales. The bill also removes the requirement that the BIC seek approval from the Minister for Agriculture for the setting of grower charges and the allocation of its annual budget. This will provide the BIC with more autonomy and increase its capacity to respond to unforeseen industry issues and demands throughout the year.

One other issue that the bill addresses relates to the voting entitlements of growers. The amendments are in the nature of Statute Law Revision and simply clarify the relevant parts of the Act. They do not have any impact on the current voting entitlement of any grower. This bill does not affect the continued existence of the BIC. It ensures that the BIC can still provide many important industry service functions to New South Wales banana growers and that the Government's commitments under the competition principles agreement are fulfilled. It also restores to individual growers the freedom to make their own arrangements with respect to supply and quality control. I am confident that the bill will assist the New South Wales banana industry in maintaining its position as a supplier of competitively priced quality fruit. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Kerr.

PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT OPERATIONS AMENDMENT (BALLOONS) BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 11 October. Ms SEATON (Southern Highlands) [8.00 p.m.]: I speak on behalf of the Opposition to the Protection of the Environment Operations Amendment (Balloons) Bill and comment from the outset that this is a typical Labor Party blunt, command control-style piece of legislation. The Government has been forced to move. It expressed a concern on this environmental issue only when dragged to do so by the initiative taken by the Coalition some weeks ago when I gave notice of a motion in this place that foreshadowed that the Coalition would be looking seriously and strategically at the broad issue of pollution of marine environments and its impact particularly on marine mammals and birds, as well as other issues of marine pollution. I foreshadowed also that the Coalition would consult with industry, the balloon industry, stakeholders and experts, ecologists, and all the people who have some expertise and ownership of the issue. I was disappointed, therefore, when the bill arrived because I was hoping to see something a little broader, produced as a result of more extensive consultation, which sought to set out some environmental objectives rather than the blunt, command control-style of legislation that specifically homes in on one particular type of event and bans it. 9400 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

The Coalition will not oppose this bill but I foreshadow that notice will be given in the other place of an amendment that I will discuss in more detail in due course. I note also the absence of the Premier in the debate on this legislation. Honourable members will recall that when I gave notice of a motion on 9 August the Premier leapt up and said that he thought what I had said was a good idea and that he supported anything that would make a difference to environmental outcomes, particularly the impact on marine mammals. I was rather surprised then on the second reading of the bill that not only was the Premier absent but the Minister for the Environment was absent and the speech was read by a parliamentary secretary.

I should have thought, with the publicity that the Premier generated as a result of trying to take ownership of this issue, that he might have followed through and given some indication that perhaps he was serious about it by taking up the bill in the House and contributing to the debate. But the Premier has not done any of those things. I am glad that the Minister for the Environment is in the Chamber this evening, but I had hoped to hear from him on the second reading exactly what the Government intended to achieve with this piece of legislation.

The Coalition initiative that I foreshadowed on 9 August was quite wide ranging and took account of the fact that there is still a good deal of research to be done, that there are a diversity of views, that there are significant employment-related issues in the balloon industry and that many retail outlets and many families are involved throughout New South Wales in the production of goods and services to do with events, with parties and with larger events that often occur in regional towns as well. I took account also of the fact that some very innovative and courageous people are involved in this debate, including Bethany Henderson of Tuross Heads, whom I have had the pleasure of meeting with. She is a very inspiring young lady, single-minded and determined to follow through on something that she believes is worthwhile doing for the environment.

The other person I have had the pleasure of meeting in the course of this debate is Lance Ferris, who is affectionately known as the Pelican Man, from Ballina. He has a very effective team of people engaged in seabird rescue based at Ballina and has been successful in establishing a number of teams along the coast of New South Wales, including on the South Coast, whom he is training to do the sort of work that he does. I would particularly like to congratulate him on the efforts that he has made and the success that he has had in the educational aspects of the work that he does.

I was inspired when I met him to discover that he has measured a 60 per cent decline in animal injuries and deaths involving fishhooks, fishing line, and all the debris that otherwise finds its way into waterways when discarded thoughtlessly by people who perhaps do not realise that it has such horrible effects downstream, particularly in the food chain. One can only wonder what effect could be achieved across New South Wales if that sort of educational emphasis could be made in many of the centres along our coast. I wish Lance Ferris great success with the work he is doing with other teams, which often rely on one dedicated person in a coastal area who will go out, often in his own boat or a boat used privately, to rescue birds and educate people about the effects of discarded fishing and other equipment.

One has to wonder how serious the Government is about this issue when the Premier is completely absent from this debate. I particularly highlight to the Government that the bill as it stands is a missed opportunity. The Government had the opportunity to take up the issue and to consult more broadly with a range of people, but it completely ignored that opportunity. I think the Premier saw it just as a race to get the bill into the Parliament regardless of its quality and regardless of the amount of thought that had gone into its production. I can understand that the industry, and particularly some of the smaller family operations around New South Wales, are angry. They feel they have not been consulted. They have information to give and some legitimate points of view, but that was something which the Government was not at all interested in following through.

From the outset I make clear that the Coalition will not oppose this legislation as we are keen to reduce the amount and source of pollution that affects marine animals and birds, and our marine and estuary environments. This legislation is not about banning balloons or denying children the fun of balloons; it is about supporting family companies that are involved in party decorations and those sorts of things, which includes the supply of balloons to be used for decoration, at fetes, parties and shows, in a responsible fashion. It is about making sure that those who are engaged in entertainment and street entertainment in our community, particularly those who do what is called balloon art, continue to have an important place in the community. Balloon art is one of the attractions of many country shows. A young woman in my area has a vibrant balloon art business and puts on many shows for children. Recently I met her at the Belgenny horse show at the Elizabeth Macarthur Farm. She makes shapes out of balloons and makes sure they do not enter the environment. Those sorts of businesses certainly deserve, and should retain, their place in our State. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9401

Balloons are used successfully also as event decorations. Balloons played an important and responsible role in the Paralympics closing ceremony. Props for the opening and closing ceremonies were large balloons containing smaller balloons, all of which were held in a contained environment. When those balloons were no longer needed, of course they would have been disposed of correctly. Thousands of people who came to the stadium were each given a white balloon and instructed at a particular time to blow up the balloon and push it down into the stadium to create the effect of a cascade of balloons. Of course, all of those balloons were in a controlled environment and all ended up on the floor of the stadium to be collected at the appropriate time and disposed of properly. Those sorts of mass events, which were greatly enjoyed by everyone who attended, are certainly not intended to be banned under this legislation.

There are many innovative and different ways for the balloon and event industry to entertain large crowds at spectacular and major sporting events other than the mass release of helium balloons. The Balloon Artists Suppliers Association [BASA] advises me that mass releases of helium balloons are a source of concern to many people and although they do not happen terribly often, of course, they are on a large scale. At the 1998 rugby league grand final 100,000 balloons were released; 72,000 were released at the 1997 Winfield Cup; and I understand that roughly 30,000 balloons are released at a time at the AFL grand final. Around New South Wales occasional events such as Australia Day celebrations or other regional celebrations release in the order of 2,000, 3,000 or 4,000 balloons at a time. Balloon releases do not happen every day, but there are legitimate grounds for concern by many people about what happens to those balloons when they take off into the air.

It is important that we understand the evidence that supports this legislation. The industry believes it takes a responsible approach because when balloons enter the atmosphere they shatter as a result of the altitude and temperature, but I am told also that balloons released from Sydney or along the coast, for example, would probably find their way to the south Pacific Ocean somewhere around Tahiti or even near Hawaii. That means once those balloons shatter and fall to the ocean we have simply moved a problem from above Sydney to above some other environment. That is why we need to understand and recognise the effect of those pieces of latex in the ocean. The industry advises also that balloons released in Western Australia are likely to fall somewhere over central Australia or even in the Great Australian Bight—again an example of a mass of material moving inland in one case and to an Australia waterway in the other.

The industry acknowledges also that balloon shards can take between one and two years to break down, depending on the atmospheric and environmental conditions in which they end up. I acknowledge also the information from the industry that a good deal of the evidence in scientific journals and collected by ecologists and conservationists is not about the type of balloon that is used in helium balloon releases but the sorts of balloons that might be used at a party or fete. The latex involved is a different formula and behaves differently. So it is acknowledged that not all balloon debris is a result of lighter-than-air balloon releases. Nevertheless, there is sufficient evidence of latex from helium-filled balloons that it is time and timely to take action against these sorts of releases.

Of course, on the other hand there is a good deal of scientific evidence that strengthens the argument from conservationists and wildlife experts that it is time to take a strong stand and make some changes. I refer honourable members to a 1990 study prepared by Allan Foley particularly about the effect of latex and other marine debris on turtles. Turtles, dolphins, whales and sea birds become victims through the ingestion of latex and other debris which, of course, blocks up their guts, making them unable to eat other food and consequently they die of malnutrition or other related causes, including gangrene. It is something against which we need to take some action. The results of the controlled experiment of the breakdown time of balloons state:

Balloons that are submerged in salt water have been found to remain intact for periods of at least one year.

The experiment points also to the fact that as many as 6.3 per cent of turtles may die with balloon debris in their gastrointestinal tracts. This is a report from a highly qualified scientist from the Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research Institute. I note also the information provided by Dr Nancy Fitzsimmons, who briefed some members of Parliament today. She spoke particularly about the effect of latex balloons on turtles. She said:

Many leather back turtles in the Pacific are in danger of extinction in less than 20 years unless protective measures are taken. Within Australia the loggerhead turtle is endangered due to population declines of 50 to 80 per cent in the last two decades.

She underlines the relationship between some turtle deaths and latex. We need to consider carefully the opinions and experience of people such as Nancy Fitzsimmons. It is true that there is not an enormous weight of statistical evidence that directly links latex balloons with the deaths of marine mammals, but there are a number 9402 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 of good explanations. Despite the fact that in many cases people point to the fact that plastic bags, bait bags and other debris floating in the ocean have contributed to the death of animals, there is still a significant number of sea animals that have died through the ingestion of latex balloons. The 1996 marine debris report by Cohen Rogers gives an example specifically of one loggerhead turtle, one risso dolphin and two fulmars, which are seabirds. Mylar balloons—the foil balloons that are acknowledged not to be the type released in helium lifts— have been found in one common dolphin and one sperm whale. It has been clearly documented that sea animals have died as a result of ingestion of such balloons. Many injured or ill birds return to land to die, and that accounts for the often greater number of birds involved. In my discussion with groups such as Orrca Inc. and the Ecological Impacts of Coastal Cities centre at the University of Sydney it has been acknowledged that very often one does not get a true indication of the effect on marine mammals. Whereas birds often find their way to land if they are injured or need to recuperate, a marine mammal that dies as a result of toxic ingestion is likely never to be found because its body would be dealt with at sea. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I am very conscious of the arguments put that the evidence is slim. However, I believe there are significant numbers of direct documented examples that we need to take very seriously. A couple of weeks ago I visited Lance Ferris at Ballina, who is best known I suppose for his work with pelicans, but it is also important to note that he is doing a lot of work with turtles, several species of which are endangered. He is working very hard to find ways to improve the environment for turtles. He talks to local fishermen. Sydney is not immune from the sorts of environmental effects we have been talking about in this debate. I received a letter from Merridy Cairn-Duff, who is the co-ordinator of the Georges River Combined Councils' Committee Incorporated. In that letter she reminds us that this sort of debris is very much in our own backyard in Sydney. She wrote:

Everybody loves the release of balloons, aesthetically it's great, but I don't think many have ever given thought as to where they end up—that is of course unless they happen to be scubadivers or regular participants in Cleanup Australia Day.

I have been diving for 14 years, primarily in Sydney Harbour. I used to be acknowledged by Australias diving magazines as a good contact for information on Sydney Harbours diving sites as I used to do a lot of writing for them on local sites. I have participated in 11 of the 12 Cleanup Australia Day campaigns, doing "underwater cleanups" in Sydney Harbour locations. In 1998 I initiated a local underwater cleanup diving group called "S.A.C.K" (the Sydney Aquatic Cleaners Klub) which met each month to do an underwater cleanup. Eventually I obtained a grant from CoastCare to take this project national. In February 1999 I was one of 5 special guest speakers at Ian Kiernans 10th anniversary launch of Cleanup Australia Day.

As you can see, I've had a few dealings directly with the harbourside pollution. If I could only show you what ends up on the bottom of the ocean you would think you'd never seen rubbish before in your life. In some areas, it accumulates very heavily due to the tides, eddies and winds which commonly prevail.

Balloons? - they sink! And when they hit the water and get washed around a bit and battered then tend to break up into smaller pieces … not only a danger to marine life but a real pain for persons trying to collect it – whether underwater or on foreshores, picking up little pieces of balloon is backbreaking work. And more often than not the pieces have entangled themselves in weeds or other marine life as the bits of string get tangled and the rubber goes kinda sticky.

Any dive site in Sydney Harbour bears lots and lots of little pieces of balloons.

I really think a good way of addressing this issue is to educate the public as to where they go and what impact they have. Most people until recent EPA campaigns didn't have the foggiest where their street drains go to … they need to be "shown".

On the technical side of things, I don't see why with modern technology we can't invest balloons which burst at a low altitude so they come down virtually above their origin point – this may even be more spectacular, like Chinese firecrackers going off. This would solve a lot of problems without needing to take away yet another thing in life which the public enjoys. That is useful evidence from someone at the coalface, so to speak, of cleaning up our marine environment, and I am very grateful to Merridy Cairn-Duff for her advice. In August in my notice of motion I tried to emphasise that I believe it is important to solve environmental problems by identifying the expected outcomes and objectives in our environment and then to let those involved in influencing those outcomes find ways to deal with them. I am disappointed with the thrust of this legislation because it is very specific and its style is to control and command. I remind honourable members that in my notice of motion I said we would consult with the industry and stakeholders. I said that I would present legislation to the House before the end of the year following consultation with industry, ecologists, event organisers and environmental campaigners. I also said that it was very important that we set very clear biodegradable objectives for balloons, plastic bags and other materials. I said that we should engage the Environment Protection Authority [EPA] much more actively in an education campaign. At the time a campaign sponsored by the EPA showed litter advertisements on television as part of the litter legislation that we supported in this place, and I thought that was an opportunity to devote one of the television commercials to the subject of balloons and their role in the chain of pollution. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9403

That initiative was ignored and was not taken up by the Government. Whilst we all saw lots of advertisements about paper litter, fast food litter, et cetera, I was disappointed that we did not see anything that gave anyone a better idea about the effects of balloons in the litter chain. I was disappointed also that in the second reading speech of the Parliamentary Secretary there was not a more specific commitment to ongoing education about the role that balloons play in out litter stream. It is also important that we focus on education. Lance Ferris has explained his experience. In his view he has seen a massive and dramatic reduction in the number of sea birds injured as a result of entanglement in fishing lines because of education, and his engagement in his community has resulted in a change of attitude. Professional and recreational fishers who enjoy fishing have made changes to the way they conduct themselves, and the environment has improved as a result.

I also acknowledge that the Balloon Artists Suppliers Association [BASA] has told me that it is keen to engage in developing a code of conduct. BASA has already made some progress, as I understand it, with organisations such as the Motor Traders Association of Australia [MTAA]. To its credit, its chief executive, Jack Gibbons, has taken the initiative of educating caryard operators who very often use balloons in their displays and promotions in their showrooms, particularly tying balloons to aerials on cars that are on display in showrooms, about the importance of making sure they do not fly away, that they are tethered securely and that they are disposed of properly. I commend the MTAA and BASA on their initiatives. I also understand that BASA is eager to continue conducting research into material that can be substituted for what is now used in balloon mass releases that might perform better in the environment.

It is also very important to set very clear environmental targets and to make sure that anybody who is engaged in any activities that impact on the environment meets those targets. I would like to acknowledge the information that conservationists and the balloon industry have given me. Honourable members must understand that latex helium balloons are different to balloons that might be used in social events and that mylar is a different substance again. I am told that in Australia helium balloon releases often do not have strings, other ties or other pieces of material attached to them. When balloons shatter and fall to the ocean they pass through a number of stages over the two years in which they take to degrade. During that time they can be eaten by turtles and other animals. Different animals take them at different places. Some animals eat them on the surface of the water, others eat them when they fall towards the floor of the ocean. They can then blanket the bottom, particularly of an estuary. They can blanket seagrass and clog up waterways and wetlands—one of the major areas of damage.

The balloon industry compares the two years it takes for a shard of balloon to decay to the two years it takes an oak leaf to decay. It is not a legitimate comparison. There are no oak leaves in the middle of the south Pacific Ocean, and the circumstances in which oak leaves fall and decay are entirely different. There is an entirely different context. Though 100,000 balloons might go into the air, burst and fall to the ground in small pieces, it would be totally unacceptable for me to cut up 100,000 chip wrappers and cast them into a waterway. So I am not convinced by the arguments of the industry that it is acceptable as a principle to have material go up into the atmosphere and then come down, regardless of how small the pieces might be. We should also address the issue of plastic bags and the many other things that find their way into waterways and ultimately into the food chain and the guts of animals. Again, that is a process of education. People should understand what happens when plastic bags blow away. We need better management of waste sites. Where possible, we should work with the production industry to produce plastic bags that decay more quickly.

I mentioned earlier a foreshadowed amendment. At this stage I can do no more than outline the upper House amendment seeking to clarify the environmental objectives expected of people introducing material into the environment. The amendment will give the industry until 1 September next year to adjust to changes that will have an impact on the industry and on employment. This reflects the spirit of the draft bill that I had prepared to set environmental objectives and expectations. If it is possible for those expectations to be met, industry or anyone else should be given scope to demonstrate and prove that.

The bill is a step forward on a very important issue but it is blunt and it misses the point. It fails to set out clear environmental objectives. It is not about stopping people, particularly children, enjoying balloons. The Opposition believes that balloons have an important and legitimate place in our community if handled responsibly. This means the Government has a role in educating people about the potential of improperly discarded balloons to affect estuarine and ocean life and the environment in general. People in our community generally want to look after our environment. They appreciate information that shows how they can take a positive individual role—for example, tying a loop on a balloon string and making sure it is attached to me or my four-year-old. To me, it means picking up the balloon if it bursts and putting it in a bin. 9404 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

It is hard to promote an education message on the safe disposal of balloons on the one hand and then, on the other hand, to explain to a child why it is acceptable in principle to release thousands of pieces of material into the atmosphere in the name of entertainment knowing that they will land somewhere, no matter how small and no matter how far away. The bill is deficient, it is blunt, it is unconsulted and it misses many positive opportunities to work with industry. But it does send a message about environmental protection, and for that reason we will not oppose the bill. The introduction of this bill is a panic attempt by the Premier to try to salvage his increasingly khaki credentials. Most people who care for our environment are resolved in their disappointment in the so-called green Premier and have already made their own judgment. Mr BROWN (Kiama) [8.35 p.m.]: It gives me great pleasure to speak in support of the bill. I am pleased also that the Opposition will support the bill in principle. However, after listening to the shadow Minister for the environment I am disturbed somewhat about the arguments she has advanced. On the one hand she said that the bill was blunt and misses the point. On the other hand she said that the bill sends a strong message of environmental protection to the community. If the point of the bill was to send a strong message of environmental protection to the community, I would assume that the bill is indeed hitting the point spot on and I congratulate the Minister and the Premier on continuing in their green objectives to make this State an environmentally friendly State. One of the many achievements of Sydney Olympic Games 2000 was that they were the cleanest and greenest Games of all time. This did not happen by accident. Like many visitors and residents of Sydney I noticed the cleanliness of the venues and the city during the Games. I was impressed with the wonderful efforts spectators made to ensure that they did the right thing and disposed of their rubbish in the many bins provided. This renewed concern did not come about by accident. The Carr Government made sure that the waste and litter management were given high priority by games organisers and ensured that its waste management agencies were fully involved in planning and implementing waste strategies. We should not ignore the other overwhelming factors in the Olympic success story. Indeed, the Carr Government's achievements in tackling the litter problem in this State include: a $60 million commitment to improve the management of urban stormwater, with a major emphasis on removing litter from our waterways; making it an offence for people to throw rubbish from motor vehicles; and this year's new Litter Act that further extends the range of litter offences and provides training to local government to properly enforce the laws. I support the new controls on balloon releases and see them as the Government responding to the wishes of the community to go further to clean up New South Wales—extending an already extensive set of regulations, laws and practices to make our State cleaner and greener. To discuss the objects of this bill more directly, the Olympics showed that we could have a great celebration without masses of balloons going into the air. While releasing large numbers of balloons makes for colourful spectacles at sporting events and the like, it contributes to a serious environmental problem. It is the case that helium balloons can either blow or wash out to sea. Although latex balloons may break down in seawater, there is evidence that they can remain intact for between six and 18 months. Of course, by then the damage may be done to marine animals. These animals that many in our community care about desperately need our help. Until this debris breaks down it becomes part of general marine debris. Such debris is recognised internationally as a major environmental problem to beaches and in coastal waters, estuaries and oceans. Studies in the United States of America have shown that marine debris threatens more than 265 different species of marine and coastal wildlife through entanglement, smothering and interfering with animal digestion. The last is a particular problem caused by balloons. After release, latex balloons tend to freeze and shatter in the atmosphere, causing widespread littering. However, tracing those responsible is almost impossible because of the distance balloons travel. These problems with balloons have received considerable attention in various countries over the last decade. Indeed, other jurisdictions have similar legislation for the same environmental protection that this bill is trying to achieve. I congratulate not only the Premier but also the Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Bob Debus, on taking this step to further protect our precious marine environments. I am pleased to speak in support of this bill. Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [8.40 p.m.], in reply: I thank the honourable member for Southern Highlands and the honourable member for Kiama for their contributions to this brief debate, expressing as I do so some mystification at some of the postures adopted by the honourable member for Southern Highlands. The subject matter of the bill is a circumstance about which there has been some debate in the media and some prominence given to one particular young anti- balloon campaigner whose cause was briefly taken up by the honourable member for Southern Highlands. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9405

When she raised the matter in the House the Premier said, as I recall, "Yes, it is a good idea, we will do something about it." It seems rather ungracious to blame the Premier for being in some way opportunistic in relation to the matter. He openly adopted the proposal that had been made at the time by the honourable member for Southern Highlands. I find it nothing more than absurd for her to suggest that he should appear in the House today, to somehow or other defend the position that he took at the time.

There is another aspect of the position taken by the honourable member that I do not entirely understand. She seemed to suggest that the bill should be cast in a way that has more to do with everyday black letter law than what is actually proposed in the bill. She seemed to be suggesting that some broader objective should be proposed in this bill. But the fact is that in my second reading speech I pointed out that this proposal was of modest dimension. I said that it was a proposal that filled a small but critical gap in the Government's comprehensive actions on litter prevention.

To have heard the honourable member in the debate one would hardly have guessed that in the past 18 months the Government has continued with its great and ongoing water and forest reforms; it has substantially reformed the pesticide legislation; it has established the alternative waste inquiry, which is leading us on to the restructuring of the whole waste management industry; it has finalised the $60 million stormwater program, which, of course, includes a large element of public education; or, indeed, that it has introduced comprehensive litter reforms that have brought about a 700 per cent increase in the number of fines and warnings issued by local government. Those litter reforms also include a substantial element of education.

The fact of the matter is that an offence such as the one with which we are concerned is one that must be dealt with by the sort of bill the Government has introduced. There is no other way to control this kind of littering—and the releasing of balloons is littering—other than to prohibit balloons at the point of release. It is clear that that is the only way one can stop people releasing balloons and having them cause the kind of damage that both speakers in the debate have mentioned. The bill introduced by the Government is entirely consistent with the way in which it has approached littering of other kinds where the source is known and where the culprits are relatively easily identified.

In addition, I refer to the honourable member's more general remarks about plastic bags. She seemed to imply that although the Government had taken some notice of the problem of pollution of littering by way of the release of balloons it is paying no attention at all to littering caused by, and consequent pollution through, the irresponsible disposal of plastic bags. Plastic bags and all plastic items are well covered by the Government's litter-related legislation. It is worth reminding the House that the principal means of achieving a reduction in the use of plastic bags and an increase in the rate of recycling of those that are used is the document known as the National Packaging Covenant.

The covenant is a national voluntary measure involving governments and industry in a process to reduce and better manage packaging waste. It was signed by Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council Ministers—that is to say, the Ministers for the Environment for Australasia—in July 1999. A large number of key companies and industry associations have since signed that covenant. All signatories are required to produce action plans that meet criteria that are determined by the National Packaging Covenant Council. Since the retail industry is well represented amongst the covenant signatories, the Government anticipates that there will be a range of initiatives dealing precisely with plastic bags. Those initiatives are likely to include programs that promote alternatives to the use of disposable plastic bags, programs that create greater opportunities for reprocessing of used plastic bags and, importantly, programs that reduce litter associated with plastic bags and other forms of packaging waste.

In addition to work being done under the auspices of the National Packaging Covenant, the Government continues to undertake activities that aim to reduce the threat of plastic bags in the environment. Ongoing education associated with the litter reduction program will include specific messages about the problems associated with plastic litter in the environment. Strong consideration is already being given to a campaign that includes a message on the harm caused by litter that makes its way into our waterways and oceans. Waste minimisation education programs are being run by the Environment Protection Authority and various waste boards will also continue to promote alternatives to plastic bag use.

Those remarks sufficiently demonstrate that, contrary to the implication of the honourable member, who seems to suggest that the Government should manage its entire program of antilitter activity through legislation on balloons, the Government is approaching the matter in a broad fashion indeed through a number of separate and appropriate instruments. The Government certainly takes these general questions seriously and, 9406 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000 as I said, it has been more than willing to take up the suggestion of the honourable member and, in turn, the suggestion of prominent members of the community that this small but critical gap in the Government's otherwise comprehensive actions on litter prevention should be filled. I commend the bill to the House. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages. FEDERAL COURTS (CONSEQUENTIAL PROVISIONS) BILL Second Reading Debate resumed from 11 October. Mr HARTCHER (Gosford) [8.49 p.m.]: The Coalition parties do not oppose the Federal Courts (Consequential Provisions) Bill. The implications of Wakim's decision in the High Court have been a disappointment to this Parliament, as I am sure they have been a disappointment to all State Parliaments. The Coalition parties have long supported the principle of cross-vesting both between the State and Federal court systems. As a consequence of the Wakim decision the Parliament passed the Federal Courts State Jurisdiction Act 1999. This bill follows on from that Act. I do not propose to canvass the points that have been already made by the Minister in his second reading speech other than to acknowledge that the Coalition believes in a co- operative Federal system. It is one of the fundamental tenets of our party that the Federal system is a highly desirable system in that it ensures that different levels of government carry out different responsibilities, yet all are accountable to the people through the electoral process. It is far more preferable that the different levels work together rather than in conflict with one another. The Wakim decision put an end to many years of successful co-operative federalism through the court process. The Coalition supports sensible measures that will ensure that cross-vesting between State and Federal courts can be reinstated in some way. If the Federal Government, with the support of the States, is prepared to move the proper constitutional amendment, I am sure that would be welcomed by the Coalition parties so long as the wording was appropriate. I anticipate that at some stage that may have to be considered, possibly not on its own but as part of wider constitutional reform. Given the enormous cost involved it is highly unlikely that the Federal Government would want to organise a referendum simply for one amendment. Having said that, I acknowledge the importance of the bill to the commercial life of Australia and of the State. The bill is not opposed by the Coalition parties. Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [8.52 p.m.], in reply: I acknowledge the brief contribution of the honourable member for Gosford. There is indeed little necessity for me to add to what he has said following the explanations given during the second reading. The bill does not, of course, deal with the major issues of future regulation of corporations that have been raised by the case of Re Wakim Ex Parte McNally. I foreshadow the strong likelihood that more legislation will be introduced into the House in the relatively near future following the fairly widely publicised meetings that have occurred between Australasian Attorneys-General in the wake of the Wakim decision. I sincerely hope that the legislation will be introduced before the end of this parliamentary session, although I cannot be definite, in large part because the Government depends upon a degree of co-operation from so many other governments. However, I commend to the House this small but significant response to the problems created by the Wakim case. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages. LEGAL PROFESSION AMENDMENT (INCORPORATED LEGAL PRACTICES) BILL Second Reading Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [8.55 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time. The bill was introduced in the other place on 23 June and the second reading speech appears at pages 7624 to 7626 of Hansard. The bill is in the same form as introduced in the other place and I commend it to the House. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9407

Mr HARTCHER (Gosford) [8.57 p.m.]: The Coalition parties do not oppose this bill. There has been enormous interest in this bill, which seeks to allow solicitors to incorporate in New South Wales under the Corporations Law subject to the various stipulations set forth in the bill, which I do not propose to go through. The Coalition received extensive representations from a number of organisations, particularly the Law Society of New South Wales, which expressed strong support for the bill. The society believes that the bill will enhance the capacity of solicitors to take advantage of Corporations Law for their own taxation and superannuation purposes, as well as allow them, in certain cases, to raise venture capital. We must acknowledge that the practice of law has changed considerably in recent years. Law firms, like so much else in modern commercial society, are massively different to what they were even 30 or 40 years ago and they need to be able to respond with flexibility to the demands of the marketplace. The bill was not opposed by any significant section of the legal community. As it is not compulsory, it gives lawyers a chance to decide whether they wish to incorporate. Some lawyers have reservations—and that is quite appropriate—but the Coalition does not believe that those reservations are such that the bill should be opposed. Sections of the community took the view that the bill somehow would not look after the interests of consumers, or clients, of lawyers, but once again on consideration we do not believe that those concerns are well founded. Clearly, that will be decided only over a period of time. If the system of incorporation is seen to reflect poorly in any way on clients or consumers, naturally the Coalition will take up their cause and seek appropriate amendments. Given the considerable advantages lawyers will gain from the scheme and given the fact that the bill contains a statutory framework for clients to ensure that professional ethical standards, professional responsibility, professional indemnity and trust accounts are all fully protected, the Coalition does not believe that people in the community have any fear that this will work to their disadvantage. The major law firms have put the view that while they support the legislation it does not necessarily mean that they will be able to take immediate advantage of it because it is not nationwide. They have indicated to me—and I accept the argument they have put—that while they think it is a good thing it will be of use to them only when it is adopted by other States. They are keen to see the legislation adopted in New South Wales because they believe that it will be a precedent for other States. Accordingly, they believe that eventually they will be able to incorporate right across Australia. They think it will be of great assistance as it will enable them to respond more flexibly to the global market in which the large Sydney firms operate, particularly in the South Pacific rim. They will be able to raise venture capital, which will enable them to expand into a wide range of legal and associated services. Lawyers are already able to perform multidiscipline partnerships and, under section 10 of the old legislation, they are able to incorporate. Therefore, the principle is not a dramatic change. This legislation sets up a fairer, simpler and more effective system of incorporation, and still provides a framework of statutory responsibility and protection. Lawyers and solicitors perform a very valuable function in our society. We are a society governed by laws and not by men. While the legal profession is not the keeper of secrets it is an intermediary that assists members of the community to understand the law and to apply it for their commercial or personal purposes. The complexities of the law can be quite challenging and daunting to the average person if they do not have the assistance of trained personnel. The personnel of the legal profession have helped the profession to develop in an evolving society over many years. Lawyers have been the great guardians of the civil rights of the community through the upholding of the common law. They have served their communities in many capacities. In any suburb or country town lawyers are not only involved in providing legal services but they work in honoury capacities for many charities and sporting groups. They effectively ensure that the network of contacts necessary in any civilised society functions. I commend lawyers for that. That great service they perform is often unrecognised. The benefits that lawyers will receive in superannuation and taxation planning, flexibility of their practices and the ability to raise venture capital are all important to them. Despite popular belief, legal incomes for the average lawyer have dropped over the past 20 years. Lawyers are not as well renumerated as they once were. That is not the case with the major law firms, but it is the case with average lawyers, and it is important to assist average lawyers. One way to assist them is to provide them with the same commercial framework that is available across the board to all the other professions and trades in our society. Put simply, this bill will ensure that lawyers have the same legal and commercial benefits that are available to other professions and trades in our society. The Coalition parties undertake that they will monitor the performance of this bill. If it is established in any way that it is working to the detriment of the public, we will voice those concerns. I hope the Attorney sees fit—or from time to time the Law Society sees fit in its annual reports—to state how the incorporation system is working, whether it is satisfactory and whether the community is benefiting from it. The Coalition parties will not oppose the bill. 9408 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

Mr KERR (Cronulla) [9.05 p.m.]: This is an important piece of legislation, as the honourable member for Gosford has said. Legal firms in the shire will have the opportunity to take advantage of it. The honourable member for Gosford mentioned a number of advantages that accrue under the legislation. Of course, it is not compulsory. For that reason, the Opposition welcomes it.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [9.06 p.m.], in reply: I thank the honourable member for Gosford and the honourable member for Cronulla for their contributions. I shall make a few observations, particularly in light of the kinds of inquiries that I have had from the public and the legal profession since the bill was introduced by my predecessor in the upper House. The bill requires any corporations providing legal services to include on their boards one solicitor director. That person is generally responsible for the arrangement of the practice. It is professional misconduct if the solicitor director fails to discharge his or her duties properly.

These duties include establishing and maintaining proper management systems, reporting to the Law Society any professional misconduct of an employed solicitor, and dealing with unsatisfactory conduct and professional misconduct of any employed solicitor. The director must also ensure that all solicitors in the practice discharge their professional obligations, and he or she can be found guilty of professional misconduct for failing to do that. The amendments make it clear that a solicitor employed by an incorporated practice is not excused from compliance with professional obligations, and these practices must carry professional indemnity insurance and contribute to the Solicitors Fidelity Fund in the same way that other law firms so contribute.

The bill provides that the Legal Profession Act prevails over the Corporations Law if there is an inconsistency. Duties to shareholders will not come first. The duties of a solicitor under the Legal Profession Act will be paramount and in that context I think it is fair to assert that the public will be adequately protected under these new arrangements. The bill protects both clients and solicitors from interference in the provision of independent legal advice. In other words, if it is asked whether owners and directors of corporations may seek to control the provision of legal services and interfere in the provision of independent legal advice, in that context one is able to assert that the bill protects both clients and solicitors from such interference.

First, the bill provides that the provisions of the Legal Profession Act and regulations that apply to an incorporated practice prevail over the Corporations Law and regulations if there is an inconsistency. Second, it requires all employed solicitors to observe all of their professional obligations, in the same way as if they were employed by a partnership. Third, it imposes onerous obligations on solicitor directors of incorporated legal practices, in relation to the management of the practices, and the conduct of employed solicitors. Fourth, it gives the Law Society Council and the Legal Services Commissioner important new powers to review the compliance of an incorporated practice with the Act. This power goes further than the powers that can be exercised over partnerships and other law firms. The Legal Profession Act does not displace the criminal law. A solicitor who commits an offence can be disciplined under the Legal Profession Act, and lose his or her right to practise. This is a completely separate matter from being prosecuted in the criminal courts. A decision whether or not to prosecute for the commission of an offence is normally a matter for the police or the Director of Public Prosecutions and a solicitor has no special protection from being charged with offences. The Legal Profession Act will not protect solicitors who commit criminal offences from being prosecuted under the criminal law. I believe that the bill demonstrates that New South Wales leads Australia in this very important aspect of the reform of the legal services market. I am able to report that the Commonwealth Attorney-General has asked for the issue to be placed on the agenda of the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General [SCAG], which is to meet in the relatively near future, with a view to promoting uniformity. The former Attorney General, my predecessor, provided a copy of the bill to all of his colleagues throughout Australasia and it is gratifying to see that the Commonwealth Attorney-General has now made that request of the standing committee. The Government of New South Wales is of the view that our model will be able to constitute a template for uniform State and Territory legislation on this very important issue. Finally, let me assure honourable members that the New South Wales bill was prepared after detailed consultation with the general public and the legal profession. I assert again that the bill strikes a careful balance. It enables solicitors to take advantage of the commercial benefits of incorporation, but ensures that consumers are protected from any departures from professional and ethical standards by solicitors and other people employed by companies. The Government recognises that it is absolutely essential for consumers to be confident that solicitors are properly regulated under the Act and the bill in no way detracts from this protection. I commend the bill to the House. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9409

PASSENGER TRANSPORT AMENDMENT BILL

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr SCULLY (Smithfield—Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads) [9.14 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time. New South Wales has a pattern of strong economic growth. New South Wales under the Carr Government has enjoyed strong economic and job growth for more than five years. New South Wales continues to enjoy higher per capita household income than any other State. This sound economic performance is expected to continue. The taxi industry plays an important part in the New South Wales economy in supporting business and residents. We are committed to seeing the taxi industry lift its game to ensure a good service for its customers. Already we have introduced significant reforms to improve service delivery and availability. The first reforms improved driver and passenger security. The Government introduced compulsory security measures with an option of either a taxi security screen or a taxi video surveillance camera. The second reforms focused on measures to provide better services. They included: a new Taxi Advisory Committee comprising the New South Wales Taxi Council, the Transport Workers Union, the Police Service, Tourism New South Wales, the Disability Council and the Country Operators Association to advise government on policy reform; more stringent driver training requirements to improve driver knowledge of key locations; English language qualifications for drivers; extended hours of operation of the taxi hotline so passengers could obtain information or register complaints; the introduction of a charter of rights outlining the rights and responsibilities of drivers and passengers; making all taxis airconditioned for passenger comfort; the introduction of compulsory global positioning systems in taxis to ensure driver safety; adding an additional 100 special taxi licences to operate during the driver changeover period of 2.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m. to increase taxi availability; increasing the maximum of the taxi transport subsidy to $30 for people with disabilities or illnesses which prevent them from using other forms of transport; and making available 400 new wheelchair accessible licences. This was just the start of our reforms. In 1999 the Government asked the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] to review the regulation of the taxi and hire car industries under the Passenger Transport Act 1990 as part of the Government's commitment to improving the industry's service levels. IPART recommended immediate and longer term actions to improve the regulatory basis of the taxi and hire car industries, an increase in the availability of taxis through releasing more taxi plates, the institution of regular public reporting of taxi service standards and the establishment of cost recovery enforcement practices. The Government supports the majority of those recommendations. Currently the taxi networks provide their members with a range of services: telephone booking, dispatch, and safety measures such as surveillance by global positioning system in the event that a driver is in physical danger. There are 14 networks in Sydney and they are 83 country networks. The networks are typically separate companies or co-operatives. In Sydney booking services are centralised with the 14 networks operating through three booking services. The networks need to be accountable for the overall service quality of the industry. The growing trend of absentee licensees, some of whom reside outside Australia and have no interest in the licence other than as a business investment, has not helped improve the standard of service. These absentee licensees need to accept their accountability to taxi users in New South Wales in regard to performance standards. This bill places the onus for the delivery of service standards on networks and operators. The Passenger Transport Act currently specifies some 120 taxi offences. Many are imprecise and are not specifically targeted to improve service delivery. None are applicable to the licensee as the legislation allows the transfer of accountability to their operators and drivers. This bill adopts IPART's recommendation to clarify these offences. It provides that the taxi networks are responsible for ensuring that network standards are met and that drivers provide a better standard of service. Currently licences are treated as investment instruments where the highest financial return is achieved through minimising costs rather than improving service. The private sale of licences occurs regularly. Last year the average perpetual metropolitan taxi licence traded for $252,000. In regional areas values vary significantly. For example, in 1999 a perpetual taxi licence in Coffs Harbour traded for $440,000, but one traded for only $1,000 in Walcha. The increase in values for taxi licences has occurred over some decades. Market values and the regulatory arrangements have allowed the trading to realise a very significant total market value today of approximately $1.1 billion for taxi licences. 9410 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

The high capital value of taxi licences poses a huge financial barrier to new entrants in the industry. In Sydney a taxi would cost approximately $40,000 to purchase and fit out, and the operator has to lease or purchase a $250,000 licence on current values. Although legislation allows short-term—annual—licences to be issued, the relevant fees have been too high to encourage new entrants into the industry and thus have limited the ability to meet growing demand. While individual values are largely a private business risk, investor outlays are an important consideration when evaluating significant reform options. This issue was acknowledged by IPART. For example, approximately 50 per cent of metropolitan taxi licences are owned and operated by individuals who have borrowed a substantial amount of money to enter the industry.

Under the new regulatory approach, the Government will set service standards that the taxi networks must deliver. This puts the onus on taxi networks to develop better business strategies to improve their service performance and attract customers. In the case of taxi availability during the changeover period, the Department of Transport will set service levels for both booking services and taxi response times. A critical part of the proposed reforms is improved auditing of taxi performance. Network standards will specifically mandate that the Department of Transport be given direct electronic access to network service performance data relating to the network's booking service and number of the taxi fleet on the road at any given time. The legislation allows for data links to be established between the department and the booking service of each network so that the department can electronically audit the service data against legislated network standards. The department will be able to view service data in real time.

Currently, taxi networks report only half-yearly on their own service performance. The establishment of modern data collection and electronic audits will ensure independent regular reports on network performance. The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal recommended regular customer service reports on network performance for public release. The Government supports this as it will create competitive pressure amongst the networks to lift customer services. Quarterly performance reports will be published for each network in the metropolitan area on waiting times for bookings, wheelchair-accessible taxis and taxis with baby capsules, waiting times for particular areas in the metropolitan area and the proportion of network taxis on the road at certain times of the day, including the traditional changeover period.

To assist networks in maintaining their service levels, drivers, when directed by a network, will have to accept a booking or provide a service at any location at any time. They will not be entitled to refuse a fare. However, networks will only be able to use this authority to meet the network service delivery standards set by the Department of Transport.Issues relating to the quality of a particular taxi vehicle are generally outside the control of the taxi networks. Therefore, this legislation will amend the Act to provide clear assignment of accountabilities for service performance and breaches on networks, licence holders, operators and drivers; strengthen penalties to enforce these through appropriate fines and suspension of individual licences; and simplify the regulatory regime to make the rules clearer and enable more effective compliance.

Taxi operators will continue to be authorised by the Department of Transport. They will be required to comply with the requirements that form part of the authorisation standards. Initial authorisation, and authorisation renewal, will depend upon the operator being a fit and proper person. Authorisation will depend on meeting the Department of Transport's requirements in relation to financial viability, vehicle safety and maintenance, driver safety—provision of a screen or camera—maintaining appropriate insurance over the vehicle and driver, and miscellaneous issues such as provision of a uniform for the driver. Operators will be required to be part of a taxi network and comply with the service requirements determined by the network. The network will be required to meet the network service delivery standards imposed by the Department of Transport.

Operators will also be required to allow access to departmental officers for the purpose of auditing records and systems and checking vehicles. These reforms will require operators to deliver a quality service. However, this must not be at the expense of drivers' pay and conditions. Therefore, another key standard is that operators must comply with the taxidrivers contract determination or face financial penalties, possible suspension or cancellation of their operator authorisation. The network and operator service standards will be finalised by the Department of Transport following consultation with the taxi industry and the Transport Workers Union.

The Government recognises the value of prior investment in current taxi licences. Therefore, to overcome an undersupply of taxis, a staged introduction of new metropolitan short-term taxi licences is proposed. I have already announced that a further 250 licences will be issued in the next 12 months. These new licences will be issued for a period of six years and will be non-transferable. Sixty of these licences have already 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9411 been released. The Department of Transport will issue further licences each year following an annual review. The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal made reference to the release of new taxi licences in rural areas but made no specific recommendations. The Government recognises the different operating environment between metropolitan taxi operators and rural taxi operators. Therefore, the Department of Transport will consult the rural taxi industry before any decision is made to release more licences in country New South Wales.

Other measures not included in the legislation are a new taxi and hire car bureau in the Department of Transport, with extra staff for extra increased on-road enforcement, complaints services and policy implementation; improved taxi infrastructure facilities throughout New South Wales; new secure taxi ranks throughout the central business district to enable safe, efficient and managed ranks at peak times; a taxi and hire car web site for consumers; data management systems to more effectively track industry performance; an improved complaints management system; and driver training schemes.

The Government's reform package provides major benefits for people with disabilities. A further 200 wheelchair-accessible taxi licences are being made available. These licences are 20-year tradeable licences as an incentive for buying the more expensive wheelchair-accessible vehicle at a cost of $80,000. Sixty of these licences have already been released and a further 60 are currently on offer. Reduced minimum operating hours have already been implemented by the Department of Transport. For rural and regional areas, the current practice of not charging wheelchair-accessible taxi licence fees will continue. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr R. H. L. Smith.

BILL RETURNED

The following bill was returned from the Legislative Council with amendments:

Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Amendment (Blood Sampling) Bill

Consideration of amendments deferred.

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AMENDMENT (COUNCIL SWIMMING CENTRES) BILL

Bill received and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield—Minister for Police) [9.27 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The bill was introduced in the other place on 12 October and the second reading speech appears at page 9182 of Hansard. The bill is in the same form as introduced in the other place, and I commend it to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr R. H. L. Smith.

ADOPTION BILL

In Committee

Consideration of the Legislative Council's amendments.

Schedule of amendments referred to in message of 10 October

No. 1 Page 5, clause 8 (2). Insert after line 25:

(d) any disability that the child has,

No. 2 Page 33, clause 58. Insert after line 31:

(4) Consent given by a birth parent who is less than 18 years of age is not effective if it appears to the Court that the birth parent did not have the benefit of independent legal advice concerning the adoption before the instrument of consent was signed by the birth parent. 9412 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

No. 3 Page 37, clause 67 (1) (c), lines 17-19. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:

(c) if the person is a parent or guardian of the child—there is serious cause for concern for the welfare of the child and it is in the best interests of the child to override the wishes of the parent or guardian.

No. 4 Page 53, clause 90 (3), line 12. Omit "make better provision for". Insert instead "be clearly preferable in".

No. 5 Page 71, clause 122 (1), line 3. Insert "(including a birth parent)" after "person".

No. 6 Page 73, clause 124. Insert after line 16:

(3) If the Court requires the attendance of a birth mother under section 121, the Court must appoint a guardian ad litem for the birth mother if she is less than 18 years of age.

No. 7 Page 105, clause 184, line 6. Insert ", or exerts any other undue influence on," after "kind to".

No. 8 Page 105, clause 184. Insert after line 16:

(2) A person who uses or threatens to use any force or restraint or does or threatens to do any injury, or causes or threatens to cause any detriment of any kind to a child with a view:

(a) to influencing the child in the expression of any wishes concerning his or her adoption, or

(b) to inducing the child to consent to his or her adoption, or

(c) to inducing the child to revoke consent to his or her adoption, is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: 25 penalty units or imprisonment for 12 months, or both.

No. 9 Page 105, clause 185. Insert after line 22:

(b) being satisfied that the person signing the instrument is doing so free from any threat, inducement or influence of a kind referred to in section 184, and

Legislative Council's amendments agreed to on motion by Mr Whelan.

Resolution reported from Committee and report adopted.

Message sent to the Legislative Council advising it of the resolution.

COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMISSION AND PRINCIPLES OF MULTICULTURALISM BILL

In Committee

Consideration of the Legislative Council's amendments.

Schedule of amendments referred to in message of 11 October

No. 1 Page 2, Preamble, lines 3 and 4. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:

(a) recognises and values the different linguistic, religious, racial and ethnic backgrounds of the people of New South Wales, and

No. 2 Page 2, clause 3, line 27. Insert "in which they may legally participate" after "public life".

No. 3 Page 3, clause 3, line 2. Omit "public".

No. 4 Page 3, clause 3, line 12. Omit "public".

No. 5 Page 3, clause 3, line 22. Omit "an overarching and". Insert instead "a".

No. 6 Page 5, clause 6. Insert after line 9:

(4) The Commission is to adopt the phrase "For a multicultural NSW" for use in conjunction with the name of the Commission.

No. 7 Page 6, clause 10, line 22. Insert "The composition of a regional advisory council is to reflect the diversity of the local community concerned." after "the council).".

No. 8 Page 8, clause 12, lines 6 and 7. Omit "regardless of their linguistic, religious, racial or ethnic background". 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9413

No. 9 Page 8, clause 12, lines 8-9. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:

(b) access to government and community services that is equitable and that has regard to the linguistic, religious, racial and ethnic diversity of the people of New South Wales,

No. 10 Page 8, clause 12, line 10. Insert "the promotion of" before "a cohesive".

No. 11 Page 8, clause 12. Insert after line 13:

(e) the promotion of the principles of multiculturalism and the advantages of a multicultural society,

(f) the promotion of social justice, community development and community initiatives for ethnic communities in New South Wales.

No. 12 Page 8, clause 13, line 30. Insert "(including, but not limited to, the objective relating to access to government services)" after "Commission".

No. 13 Page 9, clause 13, line 10. Insert "(including funds for the provision of resources to community groups that promote the objectives of the Commission)" after "objectives".

No. 14 Page 9, clause 13. Insert after line 10:

(k) to support community initiatives that promote the objectives of the Commission,

No. 15 Page 21, Schedule 3, line 4. Omit "1995". Insert instead "2000".

No. 16 Page 21, Schedule 3, line 18. Omit "1995". Insert instead "2000".

Legislative Council's amendments agreed to on motion by Mr Whelan.

Resolution reported from Committee and report adopted.

Message sent to the Legislative Council advising it of the resolution.

RURAL ASSISTANCE AMENDMENT BILL

In Committee

Consideration of the Legislative Council's amendment.

Schedule of amendment referred to in message of 12 October

Page 6, Schedule 1 [11]. Insert after line 10:

(4) Before determining that a grant of assistance to a farmer or person engaged in a rural industry be made, the Authority must consider the principles of ecologically sustainable development described in section 6 (2) of the Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991.

Legislative Council's amendment agreed to on motion by Mr Whelan.

Resolution reported from Committee and report adopted.

Message sent to the Legislative Council advising it of the resolution.

CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS (CARE AND PROTECTION) MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS BILL

In Committee

Consideration of the Legislative Council's amendments.

Schedule of amendments referred to in message of 12 October

No. 1 Page 5, schedule 1 [7], lines 16 and 17. Omit "that it would not be appropriate in the circumstances to hold a preliminary conference or".

No. 2 Page 5, schedule 1. Insert after line 19: 9414 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

[8] Section 65 (1A)

Insert after section 65 (1):

(1A) Despite subsection (1), a Children's Registrar may dispense with the requirement for a preliminary conference between the parties if:

(a) there has been a defended hearing in relation to an application for an assessment order under section 53, an interim care order under section 69, or a care order under section 70, and the Children's Registrar considers that no useful purpose will be served by a preliminary conference, or

(b) the parties consent to dispense with the preliminary conference, or

(c) there are circumstances, identified by the Children's Court Rules, in which the requirement for a preliminary conference may be dispensed with.

No. 3 Page 5, schedule 1. Insert after line 21:

[9] Section 72 Determination as to care and protection

Insert "that the child or young person is in need of care and protection or" after "probabilities," in section 72 (1).

No. 4 Page 8, schedule 1 [15], line 2. Omit "by a designated agency".

Legislative Council's amendments agreed to on motion by Mr Whelan.

Resolution reported from Committee and report adopted.

Message sent to the Legislative Council advising it of the resolution.

ROAD TRANSPORT (SAFETY AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT) AMENDMENT (BLOOD SAMPLING) BILL

In Committee

Consideration of the Legislative Council's amendments.

Schedule of amendments referred to in message of 31 October.

No. 1 Page 3, Schedule 1 [2]. Insert after line 19:

(d) give to the person from whom the sample is taken a certificate relating to the sample that contains sufficient information to enable the sample to be identified as a sample of that person’s blood, and

No. 2 Page 4, Schedule 1 [2], lines 2Β4. Omit "and on payment of an application fee of $50, or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulations".

No. 3 Page 4, Schedule 1 [3], line 25. Omit "identification.". Insert instead "identification, and".

No. 4 Page 4, Schedule 1 [3]. Insert after line 25:

(d) give to the person from whom the sample is taken a certificate relating to the sample that contains sufficient information to enable the sample to be identified as a sample of that person’s blood.

No. 5 Page 5, Schedule 1 [3], lines 2Β4. Omit "and on payment of an application fee of $50, or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulations".

No. 6 Page 6, Schedule 1 [6], line 8. Omit "identification.". Insert instead "identification, and".

No. 7 Page 6, Schedule 1 [6]. Insert after line 8:

(d) give to the person from whom the sample is taken a certificate relating to the sample that contains sufficient information to enable the sample to be identified as a sample of that person’s blood.

No. 8 Page 6, Schedule 1 [6], lines 13 and 14. Omit "the concentration of alcohol in the blood". Insert instead “whether the blood contains a drug”.

No. 9 Page 6, Schedule 1 [6], lines 17Β19. Omit "and on payment of an application fee of $50, or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulations". 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9415

No. 10 Page 10, Schedule 3 [2]. Insert after line 19:

(d) give to the person from whom the sample is taken a certificate relating to the sample that contains sufficient information to enable the sample to be identified as a sample of that person’s blood, and

No. 11 Page 11, Schedule 3 [2], lines 2Β4. Omit "and on payment of an application fee of $50, or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulations".

No. 12 Page 11, Schedule 3 [3], line 28. Omit "identification.". Insert instead "identification, and".

No. 13 Page 11, Schedule 3 [3]. Insert after line 28:

(d) give to the person from whom the sample is taken a certificate relating to the sample that contains sufficient information to enable the sample to be identified as a sample of that person’s blood.

No. 14 Page 12, Schedule 3 [3], lines 4 and 5. Omit "the concentration of alcohol in the blood". Insert instead "whether the blood contains a drug".

No. 15 Page 12, Schedule 3 [3]. Insert after line 6:

(3) An analyst to whom a sample of blood is submitted for analysis under this section may carry out an analysis of the sample to determine whether the blood contains a drug and, where required, the concentration of the drug in the blood.

No. 16 Page 12, Schedule 3 [3], lines 8Β10. Omit "and on payment of an application fee of $50, or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulations".

No. 17 Page 16, Schedule 4 [2]. Insert after line 18:

(d) give to the person from whom the sample is taken a certificate relating to the sample that contains sufficient information to enable the sample to be identified as a sample of that person’s blood, and

No. 18 Page 17, Schedule 4 [2], lines 2Β4. Omit "and on payment of an application fee of $50, or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulations".

No. 19 Page 17, Schedule 4 [3], line 28. Omit "identification.". Insert instead "identification, and".

No. 20 Page 17, Schedule 4 [3]. Insert after line 28:

(d) give to the person from whom the sample is taken a certificate relating to the sample that contains sufficient information to enable the sample to be identified as a sample of that person’s blood.

No. 21 Page 18, Schedule 4 [3], lines 4 and 5. Omit "the concentration of alcohol in the blood". Insert instead "whether the blood contains a drug".

No. 22 Page 18, Schedule 4 [3]. Insert after line 6:

(3) An analyst to whom a sample of blood is submitted for analysis under this clause may carry out an analysis of the sample to determine whether the blood contains a drug and, where required, the concentration of the drug in the blood.

No. 23 Page 18, Schedule 4 [3], lines 8Β10. Omit "and on payment of an application fee of $50, or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulations".

No. 24 Page 22, Schedule 5 [2]. Insert after line 18:

(d) give to the person from whom the sample is taken a certificate relating to the sample that contains sufficient information to enable the sample to be identified as a sample of that person’s blood, and

No. 25 Page 23, Schedule 5 [2], lines 2Β4. Omit "and on payment of an application fee of $50, or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulations".

No. 26 Page 23, Schedule 5 [3], line 28. Omit "identification.". Insert instead "identification, and".

No. 27 Page 23, Schedule 5 [3]. Insert after line 28:

(d) give to the person from whom the sample is taken a certificate relating to the sample that contains sufficient information to enable the sample to be identified as a sample of that person’s blood.

No. 28 Page 24, Schedule 5 [3], lines 4 and 5. Omit "the concentration of alcohol in the blood". Insert instead "whether the blood contains a drug".

No. 29 Page 24, Schedule 5 [3]. Insert after line 6: (3) An analyst to whom a sample of blood is submitted for analysis under this clause may carry out an analysis of the sample to determine whether the blood contains a drug and, where required, the concentration of the drug in the blood. 9416 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

No. 30 Page 24, Schedule 5 [3], lines 8Β10. Omit "and on payment of an application fee of $50, or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulations".

Legislative Council's amendments agreed to on motion by Mr Whelan.

Resolution reported from Committee and report adopted.

Message sent to the Legislative Council advising it of the resolution.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Bill: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Motion by Mr Whelan agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow the introduction and progress up to and including the second reading speech of the General Government Debt Elimination Amendment Bill.

GENERAL GOVERNMENT DEBT ELIMINATION AMENDMENT BILL

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr STEWART (Bankstown—Parliamentary Secretary), on behalf of Mr Aquilina [9.36 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The New South Wales Government has specific mid-year reporting requirements under the General Government Debt Elimination Act 1995. Under the Act the Government is required to publish in February a half-yearly statement for all general government agencies. This statement includes updated budget projections for the current financial year and an explanation of any significant variation in major aggregates from budget time projections as well as the latest economic projections for the current financial year. Under the Act the half- yearly statement is based on data collected at the end of December. The amending bill will result in the half- yearly statement being brought forward to December with data based on that collected as at the end of October. The bill also provides scope for the Treasurer to vary the time of release in the event of a late budget.

When a budget is presented between June and September, which was the timing prior to the advent of early budgets in 1996, it is quite reasonable to present a half-yearly statement in the following February. However, the Act does not adequately cater for current arrangements under which budgets are now brought down in May or June, well before the end of the preceding financial year. When the budget is presented in May or June, the release of a half-yearly statement in February is less appropriate. In those circumstances the budget update may not become available until up to nine months after the budget is delivered. The bill seeks amendments to the Act to allow for the earlier presentation of half-yearly budget updates. The Act will be amended so that when a budget is presented prior to the commencement of the financial year the Government will be required to release the half-yearly statement by the end of December. The amendment will require that the statement be based on data collected at the end of October.

There will be no changes to the disclosures within the statement. The half-yearly report will continue to report budget projections for the current financial year and an explanation of any significant variation in major aggregates from budget time projections, as well as the latest economic projections for the current financial year. A December half-yearly statement is midway between May budgets and will provide revised projections and forward estimates earlier than in the past. A December statement will help improve the coming year's budget process as Treasury will be able to fully focus on forward year expenditure and revenue options from January. Where a budget is presented after June—and this could occur in an election year—the amendment allows for the date on which the half-yearly statements are released to be varied and the effective date of the statement also to be varied. The Treasurer commends the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Debnam. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9417

SYDNEY 2000 PARALYMPIC GAMES

Debate resumed from 12 October.

Mr ASHTON (East Hills) [9.41 p.m.]: I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak about the success of the great Paralympic Games that have recently been held in Sydney. Contributions to this debate commenced in this House some weeks before the Paralympics began. After the success of the 2000 summer Games in Sydney—which Juan Antonio Samaranch declared to be the greatest ever held—we were all hopeful that the Paralympics would be as successful, and of course they were. I can recall reading that the community of New South Wales were hopeful that perhaps 650,000 people might turn up to watch the Paralympics. Of course, we now know that 1.2 million people attended the Sydney Paralympic Games. That is a tremendous achievement. Many people are aware that, unfortunately, the Paralympics in Atlanta were just not up to scratch. I do not suggest that we achieved the best Paralympics ever held because we beat the Paralympic Games held in Atlanta. The Paralympic Games held in Barcelona and other countries were also a great success. It is clear that the Minister for the Olympics, Michael Knight, and other members of SOCOG who attended the Atlanta Games learnt not what to do but what not to do to make the Paralympics in Sydney successful.

There was a commitment on both sides of this Chamber to ensure that the Paralympians received recognition for being elite athletes in their own right, without maudlin comments such as, "Aren't they doing well because they have some disability?" I wish to place on record my appreciation of the Sydney Paralympic Organising Committee, which organised the Paralympic Games here, obviously under the control of the New South Wales Government. I also pay credit to Michael Knight, who supervised overall the program of Paralympic events. Some of those events proved to be so much more popular than anyone could have imagined. Wheelchair rugby, for example, previously sometimes referred to as murderball, absolutely enthralled people. People were amazed that these athletes would use battering rams and tanks to play wheelchair rugby. Unfortunately, Australia lost to the United States in the gold medal match, but it was an incredible event to watch. In the swimming, so many different classifications were provided to give every athlete a reasonable chance to compete in an event that his or her disability allowed them to compete in.

I had the opportunity to watch many gold medal events on the last night of the swimming at the Aquatic Centre, and it was just amazing. A young American swimmer called Erin Popovich made me look like a giant of a person; she is a very small lady. She won the silver medal in her 50 metre race, and she was beaten by a lady with a similar disability. The person who beat her is about six feet tall and Erin is about four feet tall, and she was literally beaten by 0.2 of a second. What was so interesting was that there was a great harmony amongst the athletes. In the summer Games in September we saw a fair degree of rivalry. Honourable members will remember Michael Klim and our relay team strumming the guitar because Gary Hall had said that he was going to smash the Australians like guitars. In a sense that was probably just a bit of fun. These athletes genuinely enjoyed each other's company, they enjoyed the experience, and the crowd absolutely warmed to them.

I had the privilege of sitting down the front on one of the nights at the swimming. It was incredible to turn around to look behind me and see 15,000 people right at the back of the Aquatic Centre. Probably the view was not very good for some of them, yet the people were there. They enjoyed it and I am sure found the whole experience uplifting. As members know, many of the athletes who compete in the Olympics go on to have quite successful careers in sport, they end up being quite well paid for it and achieve a degree of fame. And good luck to them too, because they put in so many hours. A couple of weeks ago two Paralympians addressed this House of Parliament. Unfortunately, Hamish MacDonald's event was cancelled because there were not enough competitors and he was then unable to compete in his favourite event. However, those athletes perhaps have not received due recognition until now. I am sure that with 1.2 million people going to the Paralympics, as well as the millions who watched the events on television, it was so obvious that people really did enjoy it.

The idea of organising schoolchildren to attend the Paralympics was a great one. My daughter was involved in going along on one of the days, and she was so excited to come back and tell me that she had seen Mexico play Germany in wheelchair basketball, as well as some of the other events including the athletics. While I was not there on that day, I am sure every kid in the athletics stand knew how to sing the Australian national anthem, which is great. I am told that that also gave the athletes a lot of inspiration. Obviously there were some disappointments for our athletes—for example, Louise Sauvage in the 800 metre wheelchair event. Louise was beaten by a better wheelchair athlete on the night, by Petitclerc from Canada, but Louise took that like a real champion. Those athletes handle their disabilities very well.

Mr R. W. Turner: Your electorate agrees. 9418 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

Mr ASHTON: Exactly. Who could not admire the efforts of Siobhan Paton, who won six gold medals? I read the story of her background, that she was brought up in the Wollongong area where she suffered not only her disability but often the abuse of other kids. Kids in school can be incredibly cruel to anyone who is even slightly taller or shorter than the rest of the class. Siobhan overcame that, and she went out and competed. She was tremendous in her interviews. She said she would be happy if her victories had done just a little bit to enable kids to see that a person can have a disability, overcome that disability, and get out there and compete and be judged as a great athlete.

I attended the closing ceremonies of both the Olympic Games in September and the Paralympic Games last Sunday. I had the privilege of being down towards the front, and the party atmosphere amongst the athletes and the crowd was incredible, with many people dancing and singing to the music. I know that the Premier has been taken by the success of the Olympics and the Paralympics, and we now know that the Paralympians will receive recognition in the major capital cities of Australia, as they deserve. I am sure the other States will recognise the Paralympians, as we did in Sydney, for the great success that they have brought to themselves and to Australia. In Atlanta we came second in the medal count. While medal counts are not everything—

Mr Debnam: Yes, they are. Mr ASHTON: I agree with the interjection of the honourable member for Vaucluse in a sense. I have said this here before. Whether it be elite athletes, people with disability, second-grade players or my daughter’s 14C netball team from Revesby Workers Club, it is about playing as well as you can. But if you win you feel a bit better than if you lose. I do not want to say anything offensive about how you feel when you get home after having won, but you certainly do not have to kick the dog. Our topping of the medal count at the Paralympics reflected not only a home ground advantage but also the fact that we took these Games seriously from the day we won the bid to host the Sydney Games. I want to comment on a theory I hold, although I may be wrong. Interestingly, some of the countries that did well in the summer Olympic Games did not do so well in the Paralympics. In comparing the Games, the United States of America and France did all right, the Chinese did okay and the Russians did not do as well. Countries such as Spain and Australia did well by comparison. I believe that has something to do with the way that countries exist. Australia exists generally as a country that respects egalitarianism. We sit and argue across this Chamber about our view of politics, but there is a general view that volunteerism and egalitarianism are at the heart of Australia. There will always be people who are well off financially, physically and intellectually and others who are not. But most Australians would agree that we should try to lift people up and not drag others down to achieve that end. Some countries performed much better in the Paralympic Games than in the summer Olympics. I believe that is because in countries that achieved well in the summer Olympics there is an attitude that it is great to be a winner but if you are not a winner they do not want to know you. I do not want to be seen as being critical of the United States of America, but I do not feel that country has the same respect as we do for people with a disability. That was shown at the Atlanta games. Australia has been put on the map by our young people and our athletes. We have shown that we are competitive. But, more importantly, we have a respect for people with a disability. That has been shown not only during the Paralympics but also through government policies from both sides of this House and federally.

I re-emphasise the pride I feel that our State hosted this event and that the Paralympics did not suffer in comparison to the Olympic Games. The speeches that were made at the closing ceremony of the Paralympics were tremendous and the entertainment was excellent. The athletes enjoyed themselves as they bounced balloons and marched and paraded. At the Paralympics we were able to see new sports. I consider that wheelchair basketball is more interesting than real basketball. In basketball nine-foot people take three steps, jump up and slam dunk the ball. Then the other mob get the ball and they do the same. We may not see a slam dunk in wheelchair basketball, but we see more movement. We see passes and an ability to hold the ball. It is a tremendous game. I also enjoyed the tennis at the Paralympics. How many of us would be champions if we were allowed two bounces before we hit the ball? The reality is that the rallies were more interesting and the placement of shots was better. It was more enjoyable than watching gigantic people serving a ball at 210 kilometres an hour, knowing that they earn a couple of million dollars a year.

I congratulate all the athletes and I congratulate the 15,000 volunteers who turned up again and did not walk off the job. In this State, and in Australia generally, we can be very proud of the athletes, the organisers, the Government and the Opposition who all played a part in making the Paralympics the greatest Paralympic Games ever held. The officials did not make that statement to make us look good. They were fair dinkum! 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9419

Mr GEORGE (Lismore) [9.54 p.m.]: I, along with my colleagues in this House, am very proud of the success of the recent Olympic Games held in Sydney. I recognise the success of our athletes and also the contribution of the volunteers and students who came from my electorate to help in the opening and closing ceremonies and the conduct of the Games. Also, I acknowledge the efforts of the police who came from the electorate of Lismore to take part in the Games and also the police who stayed at home to carry out the extra duties because of the decrease in numbers. I also acknowledge the bus owners and operators who travelled from country and regional areas such as the electorate of Lismore.

Mr Nagle: And the ones from Byron Bay.

Mr GEORGE: And the ones from Byron Bay. They came from up and down the eastern coast of Australia and the inland areas. I thank all those who made the trek to Sydney to help transport our visitors to and from the Games. I also mention the Rural Emergency Services personnel from country areas who contributed to the success of the Games, and I must not forget the ones who stayed at home to carry the extra burden. On 23 August the torch came into the Lismore electorate from Tenterfield. It travelled through little towns such as Tabulam, Mallanganee and Mummulgum into Casino and on to Lismore where the cauldron was lit by Don Whitelaw, a well-respected person in the Lismore electorate.

I know that Don felt privileged to be given the honour of lighting the cauldron. While expressing my gratitude that the torch relay passed through the Lismore electorate, I pay tribute to John Bancroft, a council employee, and his willing team of volunteers who organised a wonderful day in Lismore. School students travelled from afar to witness the lighting of the cauldron in Lismore. It was a memorable day in everyone’s life who attended. I had the pleasure of accompanying Councillor Reg Baxter in the magnificent replica chariot. It was a pleasure to ride along with Reg Baxter and it was an experience that I will always treasure.

During previous debate on the Olympics 2000 the honourable member for Lachlan, the Hon. Ian Armstrong, highlighted the contribution of rural Australia. He referred to the contribution of Australian stockhorses, the superfine wool of our sheep and the Royal Agricultural Society [RAS]. The North Coast National, which is a typical country show that is held in Lismore each year, was run only two weeks ago. An event was organised to pay tribute to all the volunteers from the far north coast in recognition of their involvement at the Games. As special guests at the North Coast National the volunteers paraded around the showground. I compliment John Gibson and his willing team at North Coast National who organised the tribute to those volunteers.

In my electorate I had the pleasure of sponsoring a photograph competition through the local newspaper. All the photographs taken were entered by individuals, not professionals. The quality of the entries was such that the competition was well received and became very popular throughout the area. I also had the pleasure and honour of accompanying other honourable members of this House in welcoming the Lebanese Olympic team to Australia. It was an honour to see members of that team taking part in the Olympic Games. It was a highlight not only for me but also for members of my family and other relatives.

I join with all honourable members of this House in thanking the people who have been mentioned previously. There are too many names to mention individually so I will simply endorse the comments that have already been made in respect of those people. As the honourable member for Lismore, I simply say thank you for Sydney 2000. It has been an experience to witness the Olympic Games and the success of those Games being continued in the Paralympics. All honourable members and people of this State feel very proud of the contribution made by Paralympians and congratulate them on their recent success.

Mr NAGLE (Auburn) [10.00 p.m.]: When the announcement was made that Sydney would host the Olympic Games I was in the Sheraton Hotel in Dhaka, Bangladesh, conducting seminars for the Parliament of Bangladesh on parliamentary practice and procedure and other integral items of parliamentary debate and activity. When I heard the news that Sydney had been awarded the Games I was very disappointed because of the cost. I was also concerned about whether we could host the Games without incurring a great deal of ancillary expense. My opposition to Sydney getting the Games is recorded in this House, but after the final decision was made I accentuated the positives and eliminated the negatives. From that point on I decided that I would do everything and anything I could to ensure that the Games were a success for the State of New South Wales. I admit that I was in error, I was wrong.

The electorate of Auburn played a major part in hosting the Games. Homebush Bay is located in the electorate of Auburn. The Games were a huge success, not only for me personally but also for the people of 9420 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

New South Wales, the Government of New South Wales and the Minister for the Olympics, Michael Knight. My opposition was an error, and I accept my error in judgment in opposing the Olympic Games. Having said that, I pay a tribute to all the people who worked for the Olympic Games, particularly the volunteers who gave up enormous amounts of time and contributed an enormous effort to the success of the Games. All I can say to them is, "Thank you very much".

At the Olympic Games I had the opportunity to talk to volunteers who were drivers and who worked 14 hours a day. I also had an opportunity to talk to volunteers who were working around the Olympic site on most days when I attended the Olympic Games. I was made aware of the hours they were working and their dedication to the Olympic Games. I offer my thanks also to all the police officers and army personnel who spent hours away from their families and made a great contribution to ensuring the security of the Olympic site. I could go on for hours listing all the people who should be thanked for making the Olympic Games such a success.

I recognise that Sydney's hosting of the 2000 Olympic Games began with establishment of a committee under the auspices of a former Premier, Nick Greiner, and was carried on by his successor, John Fahey. Although their vision got the Games started, the success of the Games was achieved by the dynamic work, strength, courage and determination of the Minister for the Olympics, Michael Knight.

When the announcement was made that Sydney would be hosting the Games, I was sceptical about how it would all work out. I was fortunate to be invited to the first meeting of the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games [SOCOG], which was attended by all the organisations involved in the Olympic Games, including those that came from the Auburn electorate. At that meeting, one of the main speakers made a comment which he probably now regrets: "This is a licence to print money." I immediately thought that the project would get out of control. As everyone knows, the Olympics did not get out of control. It was kept under control and the costs were kept under control to produce the greatest event in the history of the Olympic Games, as acknowledged by Juan Antonio Samaranch. The "best Games ever" tag has also been applied to the Paralympic Games. Instead of simply enjoying great events that would last for 16 days in the case of the Olympic Games and 11 days in the case of the Paralympic Games, I decided upon a more personal commitment. I asked myself what my electorate, which was carrying the burden of the site for the Olympic Games, would get out of these events. In February 1996 and in order to find ways and means of educating the people who live in the electorate of Auburn—which includes the suburbs of Silverwater, Homebush Bay, Lidcombe, Auburn, Berala, Regents Park, Chester Hill, Sefton, Yagoona and Birrong—in February 1996 I travelled to Atlanta to examine the community programs associated with the Atlanta Games. During that week I met Danne Stone of Decatur and Kimberley Goff of the Atlanta Olympic Co- ordinating Authority. They showed me around the site and educated me about the programs. I found it to be a very instructive experience. Later in 1996 when the Olympic Games were being held in Atlanta, I returned with my wife and two children. Again I met Danne Stone but, unfortunately, not Kimberley Goff although I spoke to Kimberley on the telephone. During that visit to the Games I was able to observe the programs they had devised and put into place. In January 1997 both women came to the electorate of Auburn and conducted a series of seminars which were attended by various organisations and groups in my electorate. Their visit was made possible by donations from people who attended seminars in this Parliament and by fundraising carried out by other people who were keen to obtain an insight into the Games experience. Information conveyed by Danne and Kimberley will never be forgotten by me and is still remembered by many other people who live in my electorate. Kimberley Goff spoke about an athlete who was African and spoke French. When people spoke to him in French it appeared that he could not understand what they were saying to him. It was discovered that when he was a soldier he had been captured and burning oil had been poured into his ears, damaging his eardrums. He was taken to hospital in the United States of America where an operation was performed to restore his hearing.

Another athlete from Africa had experienced a terrorist attack on a school at which he was a student. The school was burned down and he was the only survivor. He said that he had survived by running away. He continued his running until ultimately he became a champion runner of his country. The story of those athletes is reflected even today in the Sydney 2000 Games—a story which, for each athlete who attended the Olympic Games or the Paralympic Games, is the stuff of which human drama is made. Each athlete who participated in the Olympic Games and the Paralympic Games could tell a true story of his or her journey that led to participation in the Games. 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9421

I thank all the organisations whose support and financial contributions made possible the visit to my electorate by Danne Stone and Kimberley Goff. A project in which they were involved resulted in money being raised to send poor and disadvantaged children to the Olympic Games, and I decided that I would launch a similar project for the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games. Together with some organisations such as the Arab Bank, Westpac, Raads Development, Allied Couriers, Phil Gilbert Toyota, J. McMillan Press and people who made contributions by attending functions held at Parliament House and elsewhere, I was able to raise enough money to provide 10 primary schools in the Auburn electorate with $3,000 each to enable some poor and disadvantaged children to attend the Olympic Games. We raised sufficient funds to provide tickets for the Salvation Army, St Vincent de Paul, Barnados, the Islamic Cultural Trust and the Turkish Welfare Association. By the provision of those tickets, poor and disadvantaged people were able to attend the Olympic Games.

They were there to enjoy something that they would never have been able to experience had it not been for organisations such as the Arab Bank, Phil Gilbert Toyota, et cetera. We also decided that we would do the same for the Paralympics, but, unfortunately, we were not as successful. Pat Pignatario from the Royal Oak Hotel held a series of functions in his hotel during the Olympic Games and so the Salvation Army, the St Vincent de Paul Society, Barnardos, the Islamic Cultural Centre, the Turkish Welfare Trust, Probus, the Gambouya Club and various organisations sent up to 1,000 people in my electorate, including various schoolchildren, who did not attend the Olympic Games to the Paralympic Games.

I am indebted to the organisations that participated, particularly the Royal Oak Hotel. The Olympics and the Paralympics are the stuff human drama is made of. It was an exciting experience to attend the Olympic Games and watch the world's best athletes competing. Everyone clapped the athlete who ran last in either the 5,000 or the 10,000 metres. A journalist asked him, "What does it feel like to be last?" and the athlete said, "I don’t feel as though I am last. I came here to achieve what my country asked me to achieve, and that is to finish. And I have finished."

[Interruption]

Mr NAGLE: If you want to have a caucus meeting, have it outside.

Mr Hartcher: You can bore someone else—bore Hansard. You're boring enough anyway. Tell us—

Mr NAGLE: You are one of the most vile human beings I have ever met in my entire life. I hope Hansard records that, because, mate, you are going to end up in gaol.

Mr Hartcher: Keep going.

Mr NAGLE: I have not even started.

Mr Hartcher: Keep going. Time is running out.

Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Gosford will restrain himself.

Mr NAGLE: I ask for an immediate apology. That comment is offensive and insulting, but it is indicative of this big-mouthed unthinkable human being. I demand an apology from him.

Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I am not sure that is appropriate at this stage of the evening.

Mr NAGLE: I cannot help it if he comes into this House drunk and misbehaves. Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! Unless the honourable member for Auburn insists upon an apology, the honourable member for Gosford should remain silent for the remainder of the member's speech. If he does so, other speakers will have an opportunity to take part in the debate. Mr NAGLE: Less chardonnay and a more intellectual pursuit for him would be a great advantage to this Parliament. His resignation would be even greater. The most important thing about the Olympic Games, which is being spoiled by this clown, is the effort people put in and their great achievements for the State of New South Wales. I thank them. I thank the athletes, particularly the Paralympic athletes, for their efforts in promoting this country. They did this country a great service and they did this country proud. I commend them all, and I thank them for their support in the Olympic Games. The Olympic Games would not have been successful without the tens of thousands of people who helped us out. I commend the motion to the House. 9422 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 31 October 2000

Mr MERTON (Baulkham Hills) [10.13 p.m.]: I am pleased to support the motion. It is now a matter of history. It is some weeks since the Olympics finished and only more recently since the Paralympics finished on a very glorious, successful and victorious note. Both the Olympics and the Paralympics were certainly a highlight in the history of New South Wales, as indeed they were in the history of the Australian nation. As the previous speaker said, the fact that New South Wales was successful in obtaining the Olympics goes back to the Premiership of Nick Greiner, who had the original vision and dream that we might be able to win the Olympics for New South Wales. That work was carried on very diligently by the incoming Premier, John Fahey.

Let us not forget the role played by the Minister for the Olympics, Bruce Baird, who, with his wife Judy, worked extremely hard and tirelessly night after night to ensure that the Australian case was put in the best possible way and to make certain that we had a very good chance of winning the Olympic bid. It is now a fact that the Olympics were awarded to Australia on that victorious night—which seems almost an eternity ago, but it was actually 1993. We must not, of course, underestimate the contribution made by Mr Rod McGeoch. Immediately the Games were announced in Sydney, a Hills Olympic Committee was formed. We had a number of meetings of enthusiastic residents who were anxious to share in the Olympic action. As a result I am pleased to say that many Baulkham Hills residents became involved in the home renting program. I also understand that Baulkham Hills is one of the areas that registered the largest ticket sales of Olympic tickets.

A colleague greeted me in the corridors and said that when she was at the Games most of the people she encountered seemed to come from Baulkham Hills. The people of Baulkham Hills have been very actively involved in the Olympic Games, and that includes the torch relay. The relay went up Old Northern Road. People gathered outside my electoral office at 27 Old Northern Road, complete with the plastic chairs that we supplied, and celebrated as the torch went by. I did not carry the torch but I was very pleased to pat on the back the person who did carry it.

One of the gems of Baulkham Hills was the outstanding young hurdler, Jana Pittman, who did particularly well. I have known Jana Pittman and her mother, Jackie, for some years. It is an example of the family training together staying together and finally succeeding. This family exemplifies commitment in the pursuit of elite athletic victory and success. I believe that since the Olympic Games Jana Pittman has done very well in Chile. She has broken junior records there and has been extremely successful. Jana has a tremendous future.

I am proud, as is the honourable member for Auburn, of the contribution of the people of my electorate in the event. Mr Haydon Fox from Winston Hills participated in the soccer and was a great credit to himself, his family, The Hills area and the Australian people. Trish Fallon participated very successfully in the women's basketball. The people of Baulkham Hills were right up the front. As I indicated earlier, one of my parliamentary colleagues stated that many of the people she met were from Baulkham Hills—people like Geoff and Heather Cossart, former district governors of Lions, who were actively involved as volunteers. Rhonda Close also participated as a volunteer in the Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Brian and Anne Fogarty worked tirelessly as volunteers, as did former Parramatta and Carlingford resident John Plowman, who came all the way from Tasmania at his expense to ensure that he could play his part as a volunteer. It takes spirit, commitment and a concern for others to become a volunteer. At the end of the day those volunteers were gratified and elated. They were swept up with the emotion of the activities.

The Olympics really brought Australians together. It is very important that we are brought together as Australians, even if only to give us something to talk about. The man or woman down the road are often stuck for conversation; they do not know what to talk about. But we could talk about the Olympics, and it brought people together. The added bonus was that the local electrical retailers did very well selling television sets. They say that televisions went out the door as they do on Christmas Eve; the number of television sets that were sold is amazing. Unfortunately, all too often it takes a tragedy to bring the Australian people together. But on this occasion it was the Olympics, which was a successful occasion, and a feeling of elation and happiness, that united us in a common purpose.

I am pleased that the Games went beyond all political parties and philosophies and that they were truly bipartisan as they were intended. That that is the way they ended up is a credit to every member in this Chamber. Dollars could never pay for the goodwill extended to overseas visitors and the promotion of Australia by the volunteers and those who attended the Games. The interaction of Australians with visitors was priceless and went beyond what could be spent on advertising Australia overseas, which I commend and encourage. It would be difficult to create the same atmosphere again. I congratulate the Government on the important part it 31 October 2000 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 9423 played in continuing the dream that Greiner and Fahey had of bringing the Games to Australia. The dreams were well executed and the Australian people can hold up their heads with great pride and distinction knowing that Australia had, to use the most often used expression, not only the best Olympic Games but the best Paralympics.

One could never underestimate the conviction and the commitment required by the Paralympians. They overcome obstacles that many people would say were all too difficult. But nothing was too hard for a lot of them. They just went the extra mile. Their tenacity, resilience and real drive to continue was a great inspiration to all Australians. So let me congratulate everyone who was involvedthe participants, the organisers, both sides of politics, the many thousands of volunteers who brought Australia the Olympic Games. Truly the period of the Olympic Games and the Paralympic Games has lifted the morale of the Australian people. They now know that they can do almost anything if they apply themselves. The Games have been a first-rate illustration of that. I say to all concerned: Well done. The people of Baulkham Hills proudly played their part in what has been a significant and wonderful part of the history of Australia and New South Wales.

Mr HICKEY (Cessnock) [10.22 p.m.]: It is great to speak in this Chamber of the Sydney Paralympics and the Olympic Games. Considering the wealth that the Cessnock electorate has derived from the Olympic Games, it was money well spent. At the beginning I and many other politicians questioned the benefits that would flow from the Olympics. But the addresses to this House of Hamish MacDonald and Julianne Adams about their sports put a whole new slant on the Paralympics for me. Everyone in Australia watched the participants try their hardest and do their best to overcome their difficulties. They were regarded not with sympathy but as they wanted to beas athletes. Prior to the torch relay there was a lot of negativity in the community about the Olympics, but as the torch relay proceeded communities changed their tune.

When the torch relay came to the Cessnock electorate 15,000 people assembled in cramped conditions at the Turner Park sporting complex. It was a great night for all to see the schoolchildren performing and doing their little bit in the torch relay. When the cauldron was lit the change in community attitude towards the Olympics was even more apparent. To all the volunteers who worked on the Olympics and Paralympics all I can say is thank you, which is a very small thing to do in return for what they did for the country. They sold Australia to overseas countries and visitors, and their efforts will be paid back tenfold in time to come. I saw Paralympian Stewart Pike, the swimmer from Weston, perform. I saw his elation following his performance and winning medals. Australia did extremely well in the Paralympics, as it did in the Olympics. I had the privilege of taking my children to the Olympics to watch the basketball and the soccer. They participated with other children in chasing sportspeople, who were only too keen to sign their autographs. The praise that the Olympics and the Paralympics were the best ever can only show other countries what Australia can do, but the issue of selling this country went further than that.

The Media Centre in Sydney worked to sell the regions, including the Hunter region. Some of the overseas media were taken elsewhere, but the wine country stood out. The honourable member for Port Stephens had them in his electorate inspecting the trout and barramundi aquaculture farms. New South Wales will reap the benefits in time to come from the write-ups of the Olympic media on the wine country. The New York Times put out a full-page spiel praising the Pokolbin area. It was unbelievable to see the Paralympic wheelchair basketball and wheelchair rugby. The athletes set a great example for all of us to overcome our disabilities. Australia did extremely well at the Olympic Games, and we ended up first in the gold medal count at the Paralympic Games, but the Olympics mean more than just medals. We saw our athletes competing and doing extremely well. The attendance on the Paralympics was 1.2 millionwell above the hoped for 650,000. All I can do is offer congratulations to the volunteers, the athletes and the Australian public, because they sold Australia to the overseas visitors. We will reap the benefits for many years to come.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr R. H. L. Smith.

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion by Mr Whelan agreed to:

That the House at its rising this day do adjourn until Wednesday 1 November 2000 at 10.00 a.m.

House adjourned at 10.30 p.m. ______