Legislative Assembly

Wednesday, 24 March 2004

THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling) took the Chair at 9.00 am, and read prayers.

HEALTH SERVICES, WARREN-BLACKWOOD DISTRICT Petition Mr P.D. Omodei presented the following petition bearing 124 signatures - To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled: We, the undersigned, say:- That we, the people of the Warren-Blackwood District are deeply concerned about moves by the Premier . . . and Health Minister . . . to cut funding and services in our local hospitals. Further, many of us have great difficulty in accessing health care and services in Bunbury and Perth. Now we ask that the Legislative Assembly advise the State Labor Government that we believe that Health Care and Health Services should be restored to our towns so that the majority of people can be cared for in our hospitals close to home and family. [See petition No 316.]

EXPIRY OF NOTICES OF MOTION NOS 22 AND 23 Statement by Speaker THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling): I advise members that private members’ notices of motion Nos 22 and 23, notice of which was given on 16 September 2003, will be removed from the next Notice Paper unless written notification is provided to the Clerk requesting that the notices be continued.

FUNDING FOR SPORTING GROUPS Statement by Minister for Sport and Recreation MR R.C. KUCERA (Yokine - Minister for Sport and Recreation) [9.04 am]: Over the past couple of days in Albany, I have had the pleasure of meeting a number of accomplished and budding sports participants. They are men, women, boys and girls from all walks of life who well and truly recognise the benefits of an active and healthy lifestyle. Many of those people told me that sport is not only about playing the game, but also team building, leadership, commitment to a common goal, self-discipline and much more. Having the opportunity to meet so many active locals of Albany is very timely because recently, through the Department of Sport and Recreation, the Gallop Government provided $2 million worth of special initiatives funding for the development of sporting programs. Each year, the Department of Sport and Recreation and Lotterywest provide significant financial support to sporting bodies in Western Australia through the sports lotteries account. The package is different this year because it has been specially designed to provide funding for the delivery of targeted sporting programs, with an emphasis on increasing physical activity, which will lead to better health outcomes. Although the funding is provided to sporting groups, we are urging them to form partnerships with local governments and not-for-profit organisations. We are looking for programs that will increase opportunities for seniors to become active and for young people- particularly those at risk- to participate and to get other groups with lower than average rates of participation moving, including women, ethnic communities and people with disabilities. This funding is a golden opportunity to genuinely build better communities. More than 120 stakeholders have already signalled their interest in the possibility of developing innovative programs that will reach people who are currently inactive. Perhaps now more than ever, as an Olympic year is unfolding, we can all find the inspiration to participate. I thank Emma George, an Australian Olympian, for her magnificent effort in working with young people this week while she has been in Albany. It is important to remember that not all of us have to strive to win gold medals - we just need to become active. The Gallop Government is committed to ensuring that all Western Australians have fair access to a wide range of sporting and recreational opportunities. This funding package is a working example of that commitment. I hope that all my parliamentary colleagues will join me in actively marketing this funding package to their local sporting groups. Expressions of interest are currently being sought and formal applications will close on 31 May 2004.

1024 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

SEA TRANSPORT POLICIES Statement by Minister for Planning and Infrastructure MS A.J. MacTIERNAN (Armadale - Minister for Planning and Infrastructure) [9.07 am]: Australia occupies the largest ocean territory in the world - some 16 million square kilometres of ocean floor. Our sea links are vital to our economy, as 80 per cent of Australia’s production is exported. However, although the country is awash with land transport policies, we find that the cupboard is bare of sea transport policies. The current federal government policy on sea transport is to have no policy. The State Government has been arguing for the past two years that this must change. Half of the country’s volume of exports is exported through Western Australia, which amounts to a quarter of the value of Australia’s exports. Three of the top six Australian ports are located in Western Australia and nearly of a quarter of the commercial vessels that came to Australia called into Western Australian ports. Western Australia’s coastline is 17 000 kilometres long, which provides enormous potential for coastal shipping. The case for a strong domestic shipping policy - as can be found in most other developed countries - is based on significant strategic and economic criteria. If Australian vessels carried just 20 per cent of our overseas trade, the national fleet would number 500 vessels rather than the present 50 vessels. Enormous economic spin-offs would result from such a situation, and the benefits would impact on insurance, maritime law and shipping finance, for example. All those activities are currently exported, with damaging consequences for Australia’s balance of payments. As a result of the case being put to Canberra by many people, including Hon Peter Morris, a former federal minister, and me, the federal Minister for Transport and Regional Services, Hon John Anderson, has at last made a limited commitment to review various aspects of government policies that impact on shipping in this country. The State Government welcomes that news. However, let us hope that it is not a case of too little, too late. The Australian shipping industry is facing a watershed. Old vessels need replacing and an ageing labour force needs invigorating. Major investments need to be made to halt the downward spiral that has characterised the industry over many years. This will occur only against a background of policy certainty; it will not occur against a background of policy limbo, which is the current situation. I have recently made an approach to a major international shipping company that is keen to establish a new coastal service between Western Australia and the eastern States, which would use Australian crews. This company is facing the prospect of having to make a considerable investment to establish this service. Its decision is made more difficult by the failure of the federal Government to confirm that foreign vessels with Third World crews and costs will not continue to be given permits to carry this domestic trade. I welcome the recent acknowledgment of the needs of the Australian shipping industry, but there is much more to be done. I will continue to make the case. However, as Western Australia is the major user of shipping in this country, I hope that all members of the House will consider joining me in having the Howard federal Government understand the national importance of this issue. SOCIAL ISSUES Grievance MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe - Leader of the Opposition) [9.10 am]: My grievance is to the Premier. Yesterday in a debate on regional development and the Gallop Government’s poor performance, the response from the Premier was that it is all about social justice. I fail to see the connection, but that was his response. Yesterday the Premier chose to make another speech about Anzac Day and the Anzac tradition. I gather the Premier tried to gain some political advantage from that. However, let me comment. My father went to war, as some members in this Chamber probably did and as many of our parents did. My father was a Rat of Tobruk. He was wounded in El Alamein. My uncle was a prisoner on the Burma railway and a prisoner in Japan in coalmines. I do not think my father, my uncle or people of that generation would think much of the Premier’s social agenda. The Premier raised the Anzac tradition yesterday. I know what that generation and those who have followed would think of the Premier’s agenda. What has it been? There has been gay and lesbian reform. The Government has given homosexual couples the right to adopt children and to access in-vitro fertilisation procedures, and they have been given access to the Family Court. What does that do to the principles of marriage and family? With the Premier’s support, the Minister for Electoral Affairs sought to change our electoral system so that this Parliament would have had only 15 members from country Western Australia compared with 42 from the city. That is the Government’s idea of social justice for country people. Even now, the Government wants to remove any reference to God in our oaths. What is wrong with saying in an oath in a court or in a Parliament, “I swear by Almighty God”? I do not find that offensive. Seventy per cent of the people of Australia and of this State describe themselves as Christians - of Judaeo-Christian background. If people find a reference to God in any way offensive, they can make an affirmation. Why would the Government change a tradition and a basic pillar of our society to cater for a small minority? When the Speaker opened our Parliament this morning, he made reference to God, and he read the Lord’s Prayer. I do not think one person in this building found that offensive in any way. However, the Labor Party wants to remove any reference to God in oaths. Why? Why undermine the basic Christian values that underpin our society?

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1025

I particularly want to talk about the fact that this week this Government and this Premier have decriminalised the possession of cannabis. Of all the Government’s social agendas, that is the one that will do the most damage to young people throughout this State. The effect of cannabis on the mental health of young people is devastating. Perhaps a third of the people in our mental health system are there because of problems related to drugs, and specifically cannabis. High rates of youth suicide, particularly in country areas, are invariably associated with drugs, and cannabis looms prominently. The legislation decriminalises the possession of up to 30 grams of cannabis - about an ounce. It does not sound much. It also decriminalises the growing of two plants. About 30 grams of cannabis has a street value of about $750. This is not a small amount of cannabis. Two plants grown using conventional horticultural techniques - fertilisers and watering - can produce nearly three kilograms of cannabis a year. A chronic cannabis user can use about only half a kilogram a year. What will happen to the rest? It will be traded. There will be a substantial increase in the availability of cannabis in our community. Yet this Government tries to say that it is only extending what the previous Liberal-National Party Government did. Let us look at it. The previous Government introduced a caution system for first-time offenders only. This Government’s law provides unlimited cautioning. It can go on and on. People can be picked up every day. The law the previous Government introduced did not apply to cultivation, only possession. The current Government’s law applies to cultivation. The coalition’s law required mandatory education lessons if a person was cautioned. Under the Labor law, that is optional. The coalition did not decriminalise cannabis; this Government has decriminalised it. It has given a confused message to young people in this State. Instead of the Premier talking to his well-heeled, left-wing, drug-reformer friends, he should have gone to some of the mental hospitals. He should have gone where I went with Hon Simon O’Brien on Sunday and met a group of young girls aged 18 to 22 years. They could have been the daughters of any one of us. They were lovely young kids. We heard their stories. They all said that they started on cannabis at age 11. They told me stories about cannabis being pushed to eight-year-olds in our community. They said that if the Government goes ahead with decriminalising - they did not quite know what decriminalising meant - Mr R.C. Kucera: Nor do you. Mr C.J. BARNETT: The Government does not like it, does it? Those girls knew that the message was a mixed message. They knew that the message was that the use of cannabis is now somehow socially acceptable; it has been normalised and it is okay. The friends of my kids at school have made the same sorts of comments. Members opposite should talk to teachers, parents and other people. The Government should be helping parents to say to their kids, “Stay away from drugs. Stay away from cannabis.” However, this Government, with its left-wing social agenda on gays, lesbians and IVF, and taking God out of the oath, is now giving kids access to cannabis. That is what the Premier is on about. Yet he had the audacity in this place last night to read a written speech about the Anzacs. I can tell the Premier what the Anzacs would have thought about his social agenda and what he is doing to the pillars of Australian society. Another aspect is crime. Has the Premier heard the term rip-off? Does he know what a rip-off is now? It is a term used in South Australia where there has been an increase in home burglaries because people are raiding houses to steal the cannabis crops. Several members interjected. Mr C.J. BARNETT: Members opposite do not like it, do they? Look at them! I hope the people in the gallery see this Premier squirming and the minister laughing as young people are exposed to drugs in our society. What a performance. DR G.I. GALLOP (Victoria Park - Premier) [9.18 am]: We have just seen a desperate politician engaged in desperate politics. Mrs C.L. Edwardes: That’s what you say every time. Dr G.I. GALLOP: That is what he does all the time. I will introduce three principles to the debate on this subject. The first is the important principle of equality under the law; the second principle is the freedom of all Western Australians to practise their own religion; and the third principle is to have a commonsense approach to drugs in our community. Let us start with equality under the law. One of the great features of our society, which of course is why the great Anzac tradition is so important to Australia, is that over many decades people were willing to fight for freedom and equality. Of course, the equality we are talking about is the equality of all citizens under the law. Under the law that prevailed in Western Australia before we changed it, there were inequalities in our community based upon the sexuality of a person. My view is that there are many different types of people in our society. The way in which they express their sexuality is a matter for them. As far as I am concerned, they are full human beings who deserve equal rights with all other Western Australians; and we have done it. Mr C.J. Barnett: Do you support gay marriage? The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the Opposition! Dr G.I. GALLOP: The second principle that I would like to introduce into the debate is religion. We live in a society that is multicultural and encompasses many different religions. We should learn from all those religions. I am an adherent of the point of view taken by the great Mahatma Gandhi. Mahatma Gandhi was without doubt the greatest

1026 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] contributor to human society and human politics of the twentieth century. Mahatma Gandhi said that we should open up our windows and our doors and let the breezes of all the religions flow through and not get swept off our feet by any one religion. Several members interjected. Dr G.I. GALLOP: That is my view. The SPEAKER: Order! Members, as everyone knows, seven-minute grievances are supposed to be heard, as much as is possible, in silence. We have not had that at all since the Premier got to his feet. I warn members that I will be - Mr P.G. Pendal interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for South Perth to order for the first time. There was some limited interjection when the Leader of the Opposition got to his feet, and that should not have occurred. However, it has now reached the stage that I cannot hear the Premier. Dr G.I. GALLOP: The legislation that is before the Parliament says that the general form of the oath shall be “I swear according to the religion and the beliefs I profess”. Mr C.J. Barnett: What is wrong with God? Why can’t you say the word? Dr G.I. GALLOP: People have different religions and points of view, and we intend to respect that. Mr C.J. Barnett: That shows a lack of respect for the 70 per cent of people in our community who are Christians. The SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Dr G.I. GALLOP: No, it does not. It shows great respect for the different religions in our community. Thirdly, we come to the Cannabis Control Act. Despite the propaganda being spread by the Opposition - Mr C.J. Barnett: It is not propaganda.. Dr G.I. GALLOP: It is propaganda. Despite that propaganda, cannabis possession, use and supply remain unlawful and will be penalised in Western Australia. It is somewhat hypocritical of the Liberal Party in Western Australia to criticise this legislation when it was the party that introduced the cautioning system. I congratulate Richard Court for having the foresight to introduce that system. We are developing the cautioning system on the basis of the advice given to us by the Community Drug Summit. That summit involved all sections of the community. We need to address the issue of drug and alcohol abuse in our community with commonsense and compassion. We want to make sure that people get the option of treatment. To apply the criminal law to many small-time users of cannabis has never worked and will not work. We have introduced a system that will work. We will have the opportunity to refer people to treatment. That is a very effective way to reduce drug-related problems in our community. International evidence suggests that every dollar invested in treatment represents a $7 return in reduced drug use, improved health and reduced criminal involvement. The Cannabis Control Act 2003 is commonsense legislation that is based on the principle of compassion. Mr C.J. Barnett: No, it is not. It is sending the wrong message. It is not supporting families. Dr G.I. GALLOP: We are a Government that faces up to the challenges of our community. Firstly, we have people in our society who express their sexuality in different ways. So far as I am concerned, those people are equal under the law in Western Australia. Mr C.J. Barnett: What about marriage? Do you support marriage? The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the Opposition! Dr G.I. GALLOP: Of course I support marriage. I am proud to say that I have been a very happily married person since 1975. Mr C.J. Barnett: Where do you stand on gay marriage? The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the Opposition! Dr G.I. GALLOP: Secondly, we live in a society in which people have different religions. It is very important that people have the ability to swear an oath according to the religion and beliefs that they profess. Thirdly, we need a cannabis law regime in Western Australia that is based on commonsense and allows us to intervene in the lives of people so that we can turn around their behaviour. Mr C.J. Barnett: Get real! Get out of your academic closet and see the reality! The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the Opposition! Dr G.I. GALLOP: Members of the public might like to know that the grievance session of the Parliament is when a member of Parliament can grieve to the Government of the day and get a rational response to an issue of concern. What we are getting from the Opposition is typical of its approach.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1027

The traditional approach to cannabis control has failed. Richard Court recognised that. That is why he introduced the cautioning system. We held the Community Drug Summit. That summit recommended the changes that we have made. Those changes are supported strongly by the Police Service, because it wants to put its resources into tackling the drug traffickers in our community. Let me say finally about the cannabis issue - Mr C.J. Barnett: Organised crime will move into cannabis. Dr G.I. GALLOP: Let me make a general point - Mr C.J. Barnett: What is your view? Dr G.I. GALLOP: Let me make a general point. The Leader of the Opposition started his speech by claiming that the many Anzacs in our community would support his point of view and not the Government’s point of view. The Anzacs in our community are like the people in the rest of the community. They have different points of view. Some are on the left and some are on the right; some are homosexual and some are not homosexual; and some have certain views on patriotism and some have different views on patriotism. However, what the Anzacs all agree on is their belief in democracy and equality. I am very proud to know many of the Anzacs and to have discussed these matters with them over many years. There is clearly a difference of opinion between the Government and the Opposition on these important issues for our community. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I call to order the members for Nedlands and Kalgoorlie. I warn members that if there are any interjections during the next three grievances, I will call those members to order. WESTERN POWER, OPPOSITION’S ATTITUDE Grievance MR J.J.M. BOWLER (Eyre) [9.26 am]: My grievance is to the Minister for Energy and is about the decision of the Opposition to oppose the Government’s proposal to separate the functions of Western Power. That decision has destroyed the opportunity to create a new regional power authority that would be established in a regional centre. It has also destroyed the opportunity to establish a separate network authority that would have ensured the establishment of regional power stations, such as the one at Parkeston in my electorate. For the benefit of the people in the gallery today, the electorate of Eyre covers the goldfields. One person from the Liberal Opposition actually voted with the Government on that matter - that was my friend the member for Kalgoorlie - because he is fully aware that the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia and the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia fully support what the State Government was proposing to do, because they realise that, in the end, the disaggregation of Western Power will result in cheaper power for industry and create more jobs in Western Australia. The member for Kalgoorlie was the only opposition member who had the gumption to vote with the Government, and I praise him for that decision. The decision by the Opposition to oppose the Government’s proposal is a lost opportunity for the whole of Western Australia, particularly the people who live in the north of the State in the town of Karratha in the Pilbara. My new electorate of Murchison-Eyre will extend up to Newman, which is not quite as far north as Karratha, but even towns like Newman would have benefited from the creation of a power authority that was not in Perth but was in a regional area. Mr C.J. Barnett: There are private power supplies in that area. Do you not know that? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: The Premier called the Leader of the Opposition desperate. I call him unfortunate. The Leader of the Opposition is the best thing we have going for us. I do not know whether we will be able to keep him there for much longer, though, because there is no doubt that my friend the member for Kalgoorlie will get his position. The SPEAKER: Order! Member for Eyre, it is difficult for people to not interject when you directly attack them, so keep your grievance to the point. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: The Leader of the Opposition helps our case every time he shows his personality. The fact is that this decision by the Opposition is a lost opportunity for decentralisation. We can do anything we like from Perth, but unless we live in a regional centre and know what life is like in a regional centre we really cannot represent regional Western Australia. Some members of the Opposition who represent regional Western Australia do not live in their electorates and do not have their electorate offices in their electorates. I will not point out those members, but they know who they are. Members who represent regional Western Australia need to live in their electorates. Their offices need to be there. Their families need to be there. If they do not do that, they will not know what is best for regional Western Australia. The State Government, under its disaggregation policy, would have established the regional authority in Karratha. The people who live in the Pilbara know what is best for the Pilbara and outback Western Australia. Mr C.J. Barnett: There is private power supply in the Pilbara. The Pilbara is already private. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: As I have said, the Leader of the Opposition is the best thing we have going for us. The more he keeps interjecting, the more the people of Albany will vote for the member for Albany. However, I do not think we will

1028 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] be able to keep the Leader of the Opposition in that position until the next election. I think they will get rid of him before then. Several members interjected. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: The member wants to talk about power. I know the National Party went very close to supporting the Government, because a lot of the points that were put forward by the State Government were good for those in the bush. Maybe during the next term of this Government we can do a deal together. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Having key decision makers based in the regions means that the people there will use their best efforts for the regions. Members of the State Opposition wanted to keep the conglomerate of Western Power going - the organisation that created the fiasco on 18 March. Mr C.J. Barnett: I think the minister did that. It was a hopeless, inept performance. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: As I said to the member, he should just keep it going. Mr C.J. Barnett: It was the inept performance of the Minister for Energy. I hope he will get up in a minute. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: The member for Albany just loves the Leader of the Opposition, because his personality shines through like a beacon and that is very unfortunate. The member wants to extend Parliament, so the Leader of the Opposition should keep interjecting. Mr P.B. Watson: We love the member for Kalgoorlie. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: They will all love him in about six months. The fact is that if we had disaggregation, we would have had this facility in Karratha that would have looked after regional power. Earlier I alluded to the fact that the regional power stations could also have come online to help the crisis on 18 March. Members from other parts of Western Australia may not know that a gas power station in Kalgoorlie could have produced 110 megawatts of power on 18 March. On the day in question it was producing 50 megawatts, which is the normal requirement of the mines in my electorate and that of the member for Kalgoorlie, which left 60 megawatts spare capacity. Of that 60 megawatts, 14 megawatts were injected back into the system to help the power situation that day. The remaining 46 megawatts probably would have averted the whole problem in the State if they had gone back into the system. Why did that power not go back into the system? Because Western Power did not even want to negotiate with TransAlta Corporation. I spoke to people from TransAlta the day after the crisis, and they said they had been trying to negotiate with Western Power and had even offered to pay a part or a fair bit of that money - Mr C.J. Barnett: Where was the minister? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: As I said, the Leader of the Opposition should keep it going. It is a couple more votes. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr C.J. Barnett: Where was the minister? The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Where is the member for Albany? How much will be locked in? Will the member send him chocolates at Christmas? Beautiful. Therefore, 46 megawatts could have been put back into the system, but for $6 million to $7 million. TransAlta was even prepared to pay for part or all of that. Western Power would not even negotiate, because it wants to keep its little courtiers - people wanted to look after their jobs. If there was disaggregation, and had TransAlta been able to add to the system, not only would it have drought-proofed my home town of Kalgoorlie-Boulder and towns such as Coolgardie and Kambalda, but also it would have helped the whole state system. An effective state system will eventuate only if there is disaggregation and true competition, without the privatisation that the Leader of the Opposition has stated on several occasions that he wants, but which we do not want. Can the Minister for Energy explain to the people of Albany and the people of Western Australia where the future Gallop Labor Government is going? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I do not know whether the member for Kalgoorlie and Leader of the Opposition just did not understand what I said in relation to grievances. They are limited to seven minutes and, for as long as I have been a member of the House, it has been accepted that no interjections should be made during them. Members have consistently interjected on the member stating the grievance. That is unacceptable and I warn them once again to allow the speakers to use the limited time they have available.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1029

MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont - Minister for Energy) [9.34 am]: I thank the member for Eyre for his very pertinent remarks about electricity reform, which has two major elements. Firstly, the industry Bill establishes a head of power for the establishment of a competitive electricity market, a head of power for the establishment of a code for access to Western Power’s networks, regulated by the independent Economic Regulation Authority, and provisions for an electricity ombudsman and other consumer protection measures. The second element of the package was a Bill to separate Western Power into four new state-owned enterprises. One of those enterprises was to be a regional power corporation to handle all the power needs of the regions outside the south west interconnected system. There are 29 non-connected systems and the system in the Pilbara. It is a great tragedy that the failure of the Opposition and the Greens (WA) to support the legislation to break up Western Power into those four organisations has meant that the regional power corporation cannot go ahead. We could have had an organisation dedicated to the supply of power to the regions and with its headquarters in a region, because the government proposal was to shift the headquarters of the regional power corporation to Karratha. It would have been the biggest shift of the headquarters of a government organisation to a regional centre in living memory. The Government selected Karratha for a good reason - the growing power needs in that area. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr E.S. RIPPER: All the senior and most middle management and corporate functions would have been located in Karratha, including the top nine positions in the proposed organisation; the managing director, the manager Pilbara, the manager regional, the manager corporate and strategy, the regional asset and operations managers, and the stakeholder manager. All appropriate support staff would also have been located in Karratha. Also proposed in the arrangement was the allocation of seven - Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Also included in the proposed arrangement was the allocation of seven asset and stakeholder management positions to the regional centres of Esperance, Carnarvon, Broome and Kununurra. However, the Opposition refused to vote for the Bill that would have established the regional power corporation. The Opposition will not vote for the Bill that would have established the regional power corporation; it will not vote for the Bill that would have allowed the headquarters to be established in Karratha; it will not vote for the Bill that would have authorised the arrangement to locate these people in Esperance, Carnarvon, Broome and Kununurra; and it will not vote for the Bill that would have established a separate networks organisation. The case put forward by the member for Eyre provides a classic example of why we need a separate networks organisation. The power station at Parkston has been the subject of a long, long fight with Western Power about access to Western Power’s network. When the Government came to power there were three separate legal actions being waged between Western Power and TransAlta on getting that power into the network. Why did that fight occur? Because Parkston power station should negotiate with its competitor, Western Power, which owns the network, in order to gain access to the network. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Kalgoorlie and the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time each. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Part of the solution to this issue is to have a separate network organisation. The interest to the network organisation would be to transport as much electricity as possible. The network organisation would not have an interest in curtailing the operations of potential competitors to Western Power. Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, member for Darling Range! Mr E.S. RIPPER: On 18 February we saw a classic example of why we need a separate network organisation. If we had had a separate network organisation years ago, we would not have been in that situation with the Parkston power station, because the network organisation would not have had any incentive to stop that TransAlta power station connecting, and of course TransAlta would not have had any incentive to argue that it was being treated unfairly because its competitor owned the transport system that it needed to get its product to the market. I know that in the regions in particular there is a lot of concern about the reliability, quality, and safety of the electricity supply. We have an ageing electricity network. We need to invest more money in that network. In the history of Western Power its capital has gone to generation, because if capital does not go into generation, there are immediate power problems. If the capital does not go into networks, there is no immediate power problem but there is a gradual deterioration over the years. The chickens are now coming home to roost. We have had a gradual deterioration over a decade or more and we are now starting to pay the price for that decade or more of neglect and lack of investment in the network. How can we

1030 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] get the money for further investment into the network? How can we get more money in addition to the $1.2 billion that will be spent over five years? If we get private sector investment into generation, public money will then be available for investment into the network. At the moment, we have to put aside $100 million a year for generation development; that is, $100 million if it is provided by the private sector, which can then be invested in the network. Mr C.J. Barnett: What role did Brian Burke play in this decision? The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Mr Speaker, I have only a minute or two to go. The Liberals have sabotaged the establishment of a regional power corporation, the possibility of a station like TransAlta getting proper connection from the network and the possibility of additional investment beyond the $1.2 billion into the network to deliver a quality electricity supply that is reliable and safe and that the people of Western Australia deserve. MENTAL HEALTH FUNDING Grievance MR B.J. GRYLLS (Merredin) [9.41 am]: It is a great privilege to represent the people of the electorate of Merredin and the wheatbelt at this first sitting of the regional Parliament. My grievance today on mental health funding is to the Premier. Over the past three years, the National Party has prioritised mental health funding as one of the key issues that needs to be addressed by the current Labor Government. In referring to this, the Premier has admitted that there is a great deal of pressure on the mental health system. The chair of the Mental Health Council of Australia has been prompted by recent events to issue a statement saying that the council believes that mental health is no longer a priority of the State Government. The Australian Nursing Federation has been quoted as saying that this Labor Government has sat on its hands and would appear to have no answers. In light of these current comments, what has the Government done to address the crisis in mental health funding? The Premier’s assurance following the tragic incident at the Swan District Hospital on 6 March rings hollow to all those involved in the industry. An article in The Australian of 8 March refers to comments by the Premier. It states - “I can assure all nurses in Western Australia we will be reflecting on what has happened, and if there are any changes that are needed in the protocols or the policies or the approach, we will make sure we follow up on it,” he said. I can assure the Premier that we want more than just reflection on this issue. The mental health nurses want action, not reflection, which is what we are calling for today. I strongly encourage the Government to do more than reflect on the circumstances of what has happened. In his reply to this grievance today, will the Premier please outline to the community what this Government has done to ensure the safety of mental health nurses in the community? Given the documented evidence linking cannabis abuse to mental illness, when will this Government concede that its cannabis decriminalisation decision is flawed? Earlier today I was told that legislators who make it easier for young people to access drugs do not care about them; that is something we all need to think about. Making it easier for young people to access drugs was why the coalition voted against the legislation to decriminalise marijuana, and it is something the Premier needs to address when considering mental health services. Why are growing numbers of people in the community going undiagnosed and untreated for mental illness? Why are two-thirds of the people with mental health problems unable to gain access to appropriate care? Why are mental health workers placed in dangerous situations and forced to do more with less support? I put it to the Premier that this Government’s lack of commitment, particularly its lack of funding commitment to the state mental health plan, is causing the crisis in mental health at the moment. The Nationals strongly believe that preventive measures in mental health should be regarded as a primary health issue. I refer to the Premier’s pre-election commitment. In one of his statements in the lead up to the last election he said - We all know health services are very expensive to provide, and this Government worries more about money than people. The Premier will stand condemned for the very same reason that he launched an attack on the previous Government if he does not adequately fund mental health services. The work of the nurses and the police in our community must be commended. The police sometimes become the front line of attack in mental health issues because people who cannot front up to a dedicated mental health service front up to the local police station as the access to care. Their work needs to be commended, but, surely, in a State as prosperous as Western Australia - we all know about the strong mining and agricultural seasons we have had and the strong boost to the economy that gives - we can look after the people in our community who are least able to look after themselves. I offer the Premier a solution to help provide better access to mental health services. In Albany there is an urgent need for a short-stay hostel. At the moment, when a patient is discharged from the Albany Regional Hospital, all he or she can do is go back into their own care in the community. There is no halfway house where these people can access limited care as they move back into the community. We call for extra funding and extra support for organisations like Albany Halfway House Association and Fellowship House. Albany Halfway House was forced to close its 24-hour hostel three years ago due to a lack of funding.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1031

I welcome here today the President of Fellowship House, Hope Sharp OAM. I thank her for the tour of the facility at Fellowship House yesterday and the great work that she is doing for the community with mental health issues. Fellowship House receives $122 000 in government funding. It has over 30 clients on its support list who suffer from schizophrenia. In the past few days, Fellowship House has supported 11 patients, 10 patients, 19 patients and 12 patients. There is strong demand in a community like Albany for the support of an organisation like Fellowship House. However, as a non-government organisation, Fellowship House has been lucky until now to avoid the budget cuts suffered by non-government organisations. Without any increase in funding to meet its rising costs, it has suffered a cutback in real terms. Fellowship House relies on Lotterywest funding and service clubs such as Rotary doing a lot of its fundraising work. Organisations like Fellowship House should be concentrating on primary care rather than selling cakes at a cake stall to raise money for their work. Nurses at hospitals are under enormous pressure, and Fellowship House does much at a preventive level to keep patients out of the health system. It also supports the families of mental health patients. Non-government organisations like Fellowship House have to be recognised as providing primary health care. This is the key to this issue at present. The Labor Government is focusing on primary health in the city- based teaching hospitals. We need to make sure that we broaden that scope to include non-government organisations like Fellowship House, and allow them to provide the primary care that keeps people out of the system. In The West Australian of 12 February, Fiona Stanley states - . . . we’re so consumed with mopping up the flood that we haven’t thought to turn off the tap. Until we do, our hospitals will remain swamped. Preventive mental health measures are so very important to avoid being swamped. Prevention is better than cure. Under this Labor Government, there is too little regard for either of these measures, especially if a person is a mental health patient. DR G.I. GALLOP (Victoria Park - Premier) [9.48 am]: It is difficult for me to give the level of response that I would like to give the member today. However, I will do my best. The Minister for Health is not with us this morning and members would appreciate that perhaps my knowledge of the details of the system is not as great as his. The member raised a couple of issues; first, that we have a serious problem with accessing services for people with mental illness in rural and regional communities. Second, that we need to involve the non-government sector in finding solutions to these problems. There is no doubt that the many voluntary organisations that exist throughout Western Australia and come together to offer assistance are in a special position to help out with service delivery because they bring their own flexibility and compassion to dealing with that issue. Mental health services in Western Australia are structured around the regions. In the metropolitan area there are three mental health areas; the north, the south and the east. There is also the statewide women’s and children’s mental health service provided through King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women and Princess Margaret Hospital for Children. We have six mental health services in the regions; namely, the North West Mental Health Service, the Central West Mental Health Service, the Wheatbelt Mental Health Service, the Great Southern Mental Health Service, the South West Mental Health Service, the Kalgoorlie-Boulder Community Mental Health in the goldfields and the South East Coast Health Service. Each of those services provides an array of mental health services, including community mental health comprising mental health nurses, allied health staff - such as psychologists, social workers, occupational therapists - and other medical staff, including psychiatrists who provide direct clinical services to the local community, and general practitioners at the local hospitals and other service providers. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: In addition, the services also provide support to families and carers of people with serious mental illness who access services in their area. The services can refer people who are acutely unwell to services in the metropolitan area for ongoing care when it is appropriate. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, member! Dr G.I. GALLOP: Local mental health services in rural and remote Western Australia are based in the larger towns, including Albany, Narrogin, Katanning, Busselton, Bunbury, Bridgetown, Kalgoorlie, Esperance, Northam, Merredin, Geraldton, Carnarvon, Port Hedland, Karratha, Broome and Derby, and they provide visiting services to many of the smaller towns across the State. In addition, inpatient services are now provided at Kalgoorlie as well as Albany and Bunbury. That is the structure of the system. Regarding the issues raised by the member for Merredin, I can report to Parliament that the Office of Mental Health funds 75 non-government organisations around the State to provide non-clinical mental health support services to people with mental illness, their families and carers who live in local communities. Of these services, 16 NGOs provide specific support in regional Western Australia, and five NGOs provide support in the great southern in particular. The member mentioned one such organisation in his speech. Undoubtedly, non-government organisations play a crucial role. Funding in 2003-04 to non-government organisations in mental health totalled $18.5 million, of which

1032 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

$1.6 million was directed to regional and remote mental health programs. The great southern receives $365 000 in direct funding for services provided by NGOs. The member for Merredin will also be aware that the Minister for Health announced on 16 March that more secure inpatient beds are needed in Western Australia. The minister announced a plan publicly in debates in Western Australia by which, following appropriate preparation, wards 2K and D20 at Royal Perth Hospital and Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital respectively will be closed, and beds will be opened at the Mill Street Centre at Bentley Hospital and Graylands Hospital using the funds released as authorised under the Mental Health Act 1996 as follows: ward 2K at Royal Perth Hospital with 28 open beds will close, and 27 authorised beds will open at the Bentley Elderly Mental Health Service, formerly known as Bentley Lodge, which currently houses care-awaiting-placement patients. At lease nine secure beds will be located on-site. Ward D20 at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, with 36 open beds, will close to fund the opening of 36 authorised beds at Graylands Hospital, comprising 24 open and 12 secure beds. When we visited Swan District Hospital following the tragic incident there, the Minister for Health indicated that discussions had been held with the Department of Health about the need for more secure inpatient beds. The minister delivered on his promise made on 16 March to look into that area. Therefore, changes will be made. This will ensure that people are properly cared for with the provision of secure inpatient beds. The Minister for Health has also agreed that the Department of Health will provide $2 million in recurrent funding for the establishment of an area-based comprehensive emergency psychiatric response service. Funds have been provided to increase the clinical staff on the psychiatric emergency teams. Plans will be made to create an area-based comprehensive emergency response service to reach into emergency departments. This will operate according to an area model and act to relieve pressure on emergency departments to see people with mental illness. This approach will provide for a net gain of up to 30 secure beds, and it will be achieved through the reconfiguration of existing resources and the maintenance of close to the current total number of beds in the system. The Government recognises the importance of the issue of mental illness in our community. Mr P.D. Omodei: I don’t think you do, Premier - that’s the trouble. If you knew as much about mental health as you do about cannabis, we would be a lot better off. Several members interjected. Dr G.I. GALLOP: That is an appalling interjection. The member knows that the entire thrust of our Cannabis Control Act is to encourage people into treatment. Who will conduct that treatment? It will be provided by many people in our community who can assist people to overcome their drug abuse problems. It is hypocritical of the Liberal Party to raise that issue when it introduced the cautioning system. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: The Liberal Party introduced the cautioning system, and this has been further developed by this Government following the Drug Summit. We need commonsense on these issues. We do not need members of a political party like the Liberal Party thinking that they can scare people in the community, in an attempt to win a few votes, through their propaganda that misrepresents this Government’s actions. Members opposite think they can act in that way, but it will not work. Time moves on, and certain public policy positions used over the years have failed. People want change, and they are getting change from our Government. SCHOOL LEAVERS Grievance MR P.B. WATSON (Albany) [9.56 am]: My grievance is to the Minister for Education and Training and concerns raising the school leaving age. My grievance relates to the high percentage of regional youth not engaged in education or training who are either unemployed or not looking for work. In a close-knit community such as Albany, the availability of opportunities for young people is an issue raised consistently with me by parents and community leaders. Far too many of our young people are able to - in some cases, encouraged to - exit the school system totally unprepared for the economic and social world in which they will live. Australian Bureau of Statistics data from the August 2001 national census cites the report of a committee appointed to review the interface between education and training in Western Australia. This indicated that some 13 000 Western Australians aged between 15 and 19 years at that time were not engaged in any form of education, training or employment. Of the 14 education districts in Western Australia, the participation rate for 15 to 19-year-olds in the Albany district was 90.1 per cent - ranked seventh of all districts. Unfortunately the highest proportion of at-risk youth live in rural or remote areas, with the Kimberley recording a participation rate of only 75.2 per cent, and the rate for Esperance was 85.7 per cent. It is well documented that those who leave school early face a significantly higher risk of long periods of unemployment, earning low incomes throughout their lifetime, and undertaking low-skilled jobs when opportunities for on-the-job training are not available. They also face not entering full-time study, relying on government support, and a

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1033 reduced sense of wellbeing and self-confidence. In a nutshell, society is demanding better education from school leavers, and these demands will only increase in the future. Too many of our young people are leaving school early, thus limiting their long-term career prospects. We as a Government must ask why young people are choosing to opt out of the education system. Literature suggests that many factors are involved, including the school environment itself, whether it is teachers or fellow students; family problems, both financial or emotional; the decision to undertake other learning options such as TAFE or apprenticeships; and a recognition that learning opportunities are not meaningful - that is, students are stating that the information taught at schools is not relevant to them, so they seek part-time or full- time employment. For rural and country students, it may be that district high schools do not offer the range of education subjects desired beyond year 10. Other issues that may influence the decision of students to stay in school or training environments include ensuring quality teaching, especially in rural areas, equity in access for rural and remote students, improved numeracy and literacy skills in early years, career guidance and information, and the provision of information technology and capital works. It is our responsibility to educate and skill our current students and future generations so they can achieve their potential in their personal and working lives. Whatever their reasons for leaving education and training, we must not let these young people slip through the cracks. Some tremendous young people in my electorate are slipping through the cracks. We must look after them. I call on the Minister for Education and Training, a former Albany boy, to look at introducing flexible options in the learning environment. If young people are to be retained in year 12 or its equivalent, the education and training system must be made more flexible and relevant. MR A.J. CARPENTER (Willagee - Minister for Education and Training) [10.00 am]: I thank the member for Albany for raising this issue with me as a grievance; it is a very important issue. I acknowledge the young people and students who are in the audience today; this issue will have a direct impact on their lives. I intend to put in place a regime - a momentum for change - which will be unstoppable, no matter who is the education minister after the next election. The regime will ultimately result in what is now described as the school leaving age being raised from 15 to 17; that is, I want to see young people engaged in compulsory education, training or employment until at least their seventeenth year. To effect that change, I need community support. The Government will not do it on its own. I will give the House a few statistics. For the Albany district - that is, the area bounded by Albany, Wellstead, Walpole and Kojonup, including Mt Barker, Denmark and so on - the Department of Education and Training has produced a document called “Albany District Profile” which indicates that 345 young people - 11 per cent of 15 to 19-year-olds - are not in education, training or employment, and 73 of those young people achieved no higher at school than year 9. I believe this is a critical issue for this district, for the Albany region and for the rest of the State, and it needs immediate and urgent attention. I should have prefaced my remarks by saying that I am very grateful for the support that the shadow Minister for Education and Training has given so far to this concept; a lot of issues are to be dealt with, but I am grateful for that support. Mr J.H.D. Day: If it is such a problem, why won’t you do something about it now, or even in a year or two? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It requires legislation. Mr J.H.D. Day: You need the money and you don’t have the money. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The member for Darling Range has been in the Parliament long enough. Mr J.H.D. Day: Bring in the legislation. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I will explain to the member for Darling Range what the Government is doing; he will then understand the difference between making a good decision and making a poor decision. Providing a strong education and training system is a responsibility for all of us. We need the support of schools, technical and further education colleges, parents - I urge the parents in the audience to be a part of this - community groups, universities, employers and other training providers. We need this support from every area of Western Australia. It will manifest itself in different ways in each area. Today, on the front steps of the Albany Town Hall, I announced a process by which we will establish a series of community forums - or fora, to use the correct Latin word. Fourteen forums will be held in regional centres around Western Australia, beginning in Albany on 29 April. A lot of advanced material will be produced to inform people about what is happening and what we want to achieve. We want to bring together people from all the stakeholder groups that I have mentioned - schools, employers, training organisations; the whole gamut - to find out how we can make this change work. It will not be an argument about whether it will happen, because it will happen. Whether it happens because of me or someone else, eventually it will happen. Logic tells us that we must move forward with a new economy and we must produce young people who can become economically and socially viable citizens of the future. Albany will hold the first of 14 forums. We have been accused of being city-centric a couple of times, but I ask members to listen to where the other forums will be held: Margaret River, Geraldton, Carnarvon, Karratha, Port Hedland, Collie, Bunbury, Northam, Esperance, Kalgoorlie- Boulder, Kununurra, Narrogin and Mandurah. After that, we will hold several forums in the metropolitan area. The first 14 will happen in 14 weeks. I will attend all of them with the senior-most officials from the Department of Education and Training to discuss with the community when we will make this change, how it will work and what

1034 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] resources those communities have to engage young people in school, in training or in employment. It will happen, but we need it to work properly. That, member for Darling Range, is why I have not yet introduced legislation. I want this process to happen. I am very happy for the member for Darling Range to be a part of it because he would have a lot to offer to the debate. We will therefore have these forums. All the people in the audience and the members of the Chamber who are of more senior years know that the days of leaving school at 14 or 15 years and being able to successfully access long-term employment career options are finished. Employers do not want 15-year-olds any more. It is hard for people to get an apprenticeship until they have completed year 12. We must recognise that fact. This change should have happened in Western Australia 10 years ago, but it did not. We are lucky, in a sense, because we will go to the people who will be able to put in place this change. I intend to meet local community groups to discuss the unique needs in their region. The member for Albany mentioned that the Kimberley is one of the most disadvantaged areas for education and training. We held a trial forum there, without any notice, which was attended by more than 100 people. I anticipate that more than 200 people - perhaps 300 or 400 - will come to the Albany forum to discuss the needs of their region and the measures that are already in place to support the education and training of young people. I want to talk to all of those people about what else needs to be done in this area and how we might work together for a better result. The forum will provide opportunities for members of the public to talk about the implications of raising the age of compulsory attendance. It will not be just talk. There will be opportunities for people to provide us with written submissions on the day and subsequent to that. A web site will be produced so that people can e-mail submissions to me and to the Department of Education and Training about how they see this change positively affecting their area. I will give one little anecdote to illustrate the point. About two years ago I suggested raising the school leaving age. Initially there was a lot of negative reaction to it. People said that they did not want kids at school who did not want to be there. They did not take the next logical step and ask what those kids were doing in the community, in shopping centres and around the suburbs when no-one was at home. What are those young kids doing? They need to be constructively engaged. I visited Mt Magnet. Can members imagine Mt Magnet trying to cope with this issue? The principal of the district high school there said to me that people objected to the notion when they first heard of it. Lo and behold, when they went through the mental exercise, assuming the change would happen, they came up with a range of solutions to the different issues that would affect their young people. Positive things are starting to happen in Mt Magnet. Young people who have never been engaged before are starting to be engaged. I believe this is the most significant change in education and training that we will see in 40 or 50 years. However, we need everybody - both sides of the Parliament and everybody in the community - to work together to make it effective, and I look forward to their cooperation. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Grievances noted. NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE (PROHIBITION) AMENDMENT BILL 2003 Council’s Amendment Amendment made by the Council now considered. Consideration in Detail The amendment made by the Council was as follows - Clause 12, page 6, lines 5 and 6 - To delete “(including the Supreme Court)”. Dr G.I. GALLOP: I move - That the amendment made by the Council be agreed to. On behalf of the Government, I accept the amendment that was made in the Legislative Council to this important legislation. At the time of debate in the Council, the minister representing the Government said that we would consult with parliamentary counsel before the amendment was considered in the Assembly. We have done that and we have no objection to the change that has been put forward. In an earlier draft of the Bill, proposed section 8A simply stated that the minister may apply to the Supreme Court for an injunction. However, the State Solicitor’s Office pointed out that an injunction sought against the Commonwealth could not be heard in the Supreme Court because commonwealth-state matters are exempt from the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction. It was therefore recommended that the wording be changed to make it clear that injunctions could be sought in courts other than the Supreme Court. Parliamentary counsel settled on the current wording to achieve that objective; however, it has been achieved just as well by the new, simple wording suggested by the Legislative Council. We therefore accept the amendment that has been put forward. That is a good thing, because we are now in a position to make clear to the Commonwealth the attitude of not only the Parliament of Western Australia but also the people of Western Australia that the Commonwealth’s plans to dump intermediate-level nuclear waste will not be agreed to by the people of Western Australia, by the Parliament of Western Australia or by the Government of Western Australia. The Commonwealth still is not forthcoming on where the nuclear waste dump will be placed. It will not indicate on which sites it plans to establish the waste dump. We in Western Australia must therefore be very careful that we protect our position through this legislation. Just as the Labor Party protected the Western Australian position by putting forward legislation to ban a Pangea-style nuclear waste dump in Western

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1035

Australia that would have taken waste from overseas, we are now acting in government to ensure that any effort on the part of the Commonwealth Government to dump intermediate-level radioactive waste from New South Wales in Western Australia will not be allowed. I am very pleased that we can pass this legislation, which will send a simple message to Canberra that the people and Parliament of Western Australia are very clear on this issue. We will make sure that that view is expressed very strongly in Canberra. Mr M.F. BOARD: The Opposition supports the amendment contained in the message from the Legislative Council, which was suggested by Hon Peter Foss. As the Premier has indicated, the amendment strengthens the Bill to some degree and tidies up some slight drafting inaccuracies. It is important that members of the audience recognise what we are dealing with today in this amendment. We are dealing with a piece of legislation that clearly indicates that nuclear waste, even of a low or intermediate-level, produced outside Western Australia will not be stored in Western Australia. Nuclear waste is produced in Australia through medical, mining and a range of other technologies. Nuclear waste is produced in Western Australia by certain industries and is stored within Western Australia. This Bill clearly outlines that Western Australia will not become a place in which other people’s waste will be stored. This debate started back in 1998 when a company called Pangea Resources Australia tried to conduct some meetings in Western Australia to represent overseas interests that were looking for a worldwide storage facility for high-level nuclear waste. The Court Government clearly indicated to the Western Australian people that it would not entertain, and there would be no opportunity for, a nuclear waste storage facility in Western Australia. We felt that that message was clear, but for a range of reasons, mainly political, the then Opposition brought in a private member’s Bill in 1999 that dealt with the outlawing of a nuclear waste storage facility in Western Australia for overseas waste. That Bill was supported in a bipartisan way and was passed. It was later considered - at least by the Government - that the Bill might have been flawed, because it did not refer to waste that was generated anywhere else in Australia; it concerned only waste produced overseas. Hence, an amendment was sought to that legislation to tidy up where the waste could come from and to outlaw waste from other parts of Australia coming into Western Australia. That debate started because the Prime Minister and others were looking at developing a national facility for the storage of low-level nuclear waste in Australia, rather than it being handled in every State. I understand that discussions are still ongoing about a preferred site in South Australia, but this Bill, which is being tidied up in Albany today, strengthens the situation in Western Australia; that is, we will not accept such a facility in Western Australia. I hope that clearly indicates to members of the public what we are dealing with today. The issues raised by Hon Peter Foss pointed to some drafting difficulties with the Bill. In the debate he stated that the inclusion of the phrase “(including the Supreme Court)” in proposed section 8A was very puzzling. Hon Peter Foss made the point that if the Bill had not said anything about including the Supreme Court, one would have thought that this was the only court to which one could apply, as it would be the only court with the appropriate jurisdiction to which the Parliament could give the power. He said that the word “injunction” would normally involve an application to the Supreme Court, and he could not see how that could be conferred upon the Federal Court jurisdiction. It is clear that that is not the answer. It seems that the phrase “(including the Supreme Court)” adds nothing to the clause and that nothing would be lost if it were removed. The Western Australian Parliament cannot confer the power on the High Court or the Federal Court. It is clear that both the Government and the Opposition will support the change suggested by the upper House. Mr P.G. PENDAL: I do not want the House or any visitors today to get the impression that there is bipartisan support for the Bill. I will repeat what I said during the second reading debate on this Bill: it is a shallow and dishonest piece of legislation. This Bill has come from the Minister for Science of this State, the Premier, and is arguably one of the most anti-science Bills that the Parliament has seen for many years. The legislation will not be improved by the amendment sought in the upper House by Hon Peter Foss. Since the Premier and the opposition spokesman have said one or two things about the intent and impact of the Bill, I will remind the House of the consequences of it. Tens of thousands of Western Australians benefit each year from the use of nuclear technology when they enter the public and private hospitals of this State. What this Bill is saying is that none of the waste that results from the use of nuclear technology imported into Western Australian hospitals from the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in New South Wales shall ever be stored in Western Australia. That is how anti-science, small-minded and superficial this piece of legislation is. Four years ago the Premier, in his role as Leader of the Opposition, introduced what we then regarded as the anti- Pangea Bill. I supported him. Why would one support the now Premier on that Bill but oppose this Bill? It is because there is a world of difference between the Bills. In 1999 the member for Victoria Park introduced a Bill that said that Western Australia would not and must not become the repository of nuclear waste from other parts of the world. I supported that, because the principle at stake was that Western Australia and other places in the world should look after their own waste. I support that. I believe that Western Australia has a constitutional, legal and moral responsibility to look after its own nuclear waste. To say that we do not generate such waste is dishonest. It is generated every time a specialist refers someone to a hospital in this State and that person undergoes medical treatments that use nuclear technology. What this Bill is saying is that we will receive technology from Lucas Heights in New South Wales or the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation but that we will not have any part to play in the safe disposal

1036 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] of any waste that results from the use of that technology. I kept the Parliament going for two or three days when the Bill was in the House several months ago. This Bill reminds me of a position taken 150 years ago following the invention of the engine. People were told to fear it. Those who wanted it to be feared sent out red flags into the community, which were waved in front of the engines to keep people away from them. This is seventeenth or eighteenth, or at the very best nineteenth, century thinking. It is disgraceful that this legislation comes from someone like the Premier, who parades himself and was sworn in as the Minister for Science. Dr G.I. Gallop: Why don’t you just get up and say that you oppose it? Mr P.G. PENDAL: I oppose it - Dr G.I. Gallop: Why use all this personal abuse? Mr P.G. PENDAL: Why do I use the occasion? It is because the Premier chose that the Parliament should sit in Albany. Dr G.I. Gallop: Just argue the point. It is quite easy. Mr P.G. PENDAL: Previous occupants of the Chair have said that they will not allow interjections if the person on his or her feet is not interested in hearing them. I am not interested in hearing them, because the Premier has demonstrated that, despite all the blather in favour of his science initiative in Western Australia, this is antiscience; this is nineteenth- century thinking. It suggests that we should be able to have all the benefits of nuclear medicine in the hospitals in this State but take none of the responsibility for safe disposal of the waste. That is not forward thinking. Mr Premier, it is nineteenth-century thinking. He should be ashamed of the naked introduction of a Bill that is designed to appeal to people’s worst instincts. He should be ashamed of himself. Mr M. McGOWAN: I speak today principally because I had carriage of this Bill in the Assembly when it was debated last year. I am very interested in the remarks of the member for South Perth about interjectors. Within moments of resuming his seat, he offends. I support the Bill. The reasons behind it are quite clear. The amendment we are dealing with does not change the Bill in any substantial way. It is clarifying to a minute degree a point in order to meet the intellectual requirements of a certain member of the upper House. If that is his want, we are happy to accommodate him. The philosophy behind the Bill is quite simple. We are sending a message - Mr B.K. Masters interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN: I hear an interjector. We are sending a message to the Commonwealth Government that we do not want an intermediate level waste dump established in Western Australia - period. Over time, we have seen arguments put by certain people, principally the member for South Perth, about how, at a philosophical level, we should accept other people’s waste. Several members interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN: My argument is that we should not accept other people’s waste. We deal with our own waste; we deal with the waste produced by our hospitals such as radioactive isotopes and so forth. It is all dealt with by Western Australian institutions. We do not want to deal with waste from other States. If we follow the argument of the member for South Perth when he states that other places produce goods that are used in Western Australia, I must refer to an argument I used in the original debate. We purchase products from the United States of America. Those products are produced with electricity produced by nuclear power stations. If we follow the argument of the member for South Perth, we should accept some of that waste because we are the beneficiaries of the electricity produced by the nuclear fuel cycle. That is the argument he is running. Our argument is no, we should not. Our argument is that any waste produced by Lucas Heights or any other nuclear fuel production facility should be dealt with by those facilities. That should be a fundamental principle around the world. If people are encouraged to deal with their own waste, they will produce less of it. If we send the message to the eastern States, the Commonwealth and the world community that they have to deal with their own waste, and if they cannot ship it to some other place in the world, they will produce less waste. That is the simple philosophical argument that the member for South Perth and other opposition members should understand. I am sure that the people of Albany understand it. The member for South Perth states that Western Australia should accept a nuclear waste dump. Does he say it should be in South Perth or anywhere near any of his constituents? No. He says it should be in the electorates of the members for Eyre or Roe or other country members. He says their constituents should have a nuclear waste dump. An electorate in the inner city, such as the member for South Perth’s, contains a range of people who would be horrified by the thought of this sort of waste being stored anywhere near them. I am sure the member would tell his constituents not to accept it. At a range of levels, the arguments put forward by conservatives in this State on this issue are very fatuous and self interested. This Bill was brought into the Parliament because of a Commonwealth Liberal Government. Historically, the Leader of the Opposition has left the door open in so many ways in his comments about nuclear waste and how we need to be part of the process and the cycle. If I had my filing cabinet here, I could produce a range of newspaper clippings by the Leader

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1037 of the Opposition to that effect. We are saying no and the people of Western Australia need to know that only one Government and one Opposition has stood up and taken a firm stand on this issue in the recent history of this State. Mr J.P.D. EDWARDS: I will take only a couple of minutes because there is not very much more that can be said. The House has heard three different opinions. People in the public gallery will soon see that we seem to repeat ourselves fairly often. This is a legal issue. In speaking to the amendment I notice that some latitude has been given to members in their comments. Concerning the amendment, I have the greatest respect for my colleague in the upper House on matters legal. He saw an issue that needed correction and he corrected it. Quite rightly, this House is prepared to accept that. Passions run very high when we start talking about nuclear waste. That has been shown by the last two speakers, the members for South Perth and Rockingham. It is interesting to reflect that, at the very highest levels in the world, nuclear waste disposal is a real issue. The European Union is apparently adopting some proposals on legislation to manage radioactive waste. Although they are prepared to bury their high-level waste, many European countries are investigating whether waste can be bombarded with neutralised neutrons or some such accelerators rather than burying it. The point is that this is not just an issue for us; it is a worldwide issue. The United States is also making its own investigations. The International Atomic Energy Agency has several proposals for regional international repositories for the disposal of high-level nuclear waste. In fact, in 2003 it accepted the concept following strong endorsement by its advisers. This all relates for us in Australia to the Pangea Resources Australia issue, which has already been mentioned in connection with burying nuclear waste in the Western Australian outback or South Australia. Many of us would oppose that totally, as this Parliament already has. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: I was hoping that the member might talk about his local shires. Mr J.P.D. EDWARDS: Yes, minister. Thank you for reminding me. I am very well aware that there are councils in my own electorate that have taken a stand against any nuclear involvement. I am not sure I agree with them entirely because, as the member for South Perth has raised already, issues arise from that concerning transportation and other matters. I dare say, they could be got around. The amendment is a legal issue. I am very happy to support it. We all understand that nuclear waste is an issue that we all need to address. As a Parliament, we need to address it in the very best interests of the nation and not just Western Australia. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I take this opportunity to remind members that we are in consideration in detail and discussing an amendment moved in the upper House. Although I have allowed some latitude in the first instance, members who speak more than once must speak directly to the amendment. Mr P.G. PENDAL: I just want to demonstrate to members how shallow the clause is that we are dealing with and, for that matter, the shallowness of the response from the other place. It is quite wrong of the parliamentary secretary to pass this off as some little peccadillo of Hon Peter Foss. This amendment was passed in the upper House. If it is anyone’s peccadillo, it is that of the whole of the other place. It is therefore less than honest to try to convey the impression that one member is responsible. Let me come to the notion of injunctions that we are dealing with in clause 12 of the Bill. It shows that the Bill is nothing. I am dealing with the amendment before the House, which is to delete the words “(including the Supreme Court)”. The whole purpose of the 1999 legislation and the whole purpose of this Bill in 2004 is to prevent certain things happening. We are all agreed on that. If the legislation is worthwhile, why do we need the process of injunctions to make it work? It should be sufficient to pass the 1999 anti-Pangea Bill, which I supported. There may well be some justification on the part of the Government to seek to strengthen it by introducing this Bill in 2003, but a stand-alone statute should beat an injunction at any time of the day or night. Why then are we dealing with a proposal at clause 12 to insert a new section 8A, which will now read - The Minister may apply to a court for an injunction to prevent a person from doing anything that would involve - (a) the construction or operation of a nuclear waste storage facility in the State; (b) the use of any place in the State for the storage or disposal of nuclear waste; Paragraph (c) covers the transport of that waste across state borders or within the State. I want to know why we need a system of injunctions if the legislation is already in place. It does not make sense. It suggests to me only that we will introduce into the Bill an amended form of injunction for the courts of Western Australia, and why. By implication, it means that the legislation is not worth the paper it is written on. This was raised during the course of the less than honest remarks that have been made and continue to be made on behalf of the Premier. It is an anti-science stance to say that we do not want to be responsible for dealing with our own waste. It was less than honest of the parliamentary secretary to say that I was in favour of allowing imported waste and that we had to deal with the waste of other jurisdictions. That is untrue. It was the reason I supported the 1999 anti- Pangea Bill. It is, therefore, untrue and dishonest to say that. It reflects on this legislation as being untruthful and dishonest legislation.

1038 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

I hope the House, even at this late stage, raises questions in its own mind at this trickery by the Premier towards the Parliament, the Labor Government and, for that matter, the Opposition. Why? It is because it is like a red rag to a bull; we know that people who do not read things in detail will always be impressed by it. However, it is shallowness at its worst. It will do nothing. The very fact that we are having to delete certain words from the clause dealing with injunctions convinces me that the legislation is not worth the paper that it is printed on. I ask the House for that reason to reject it. Mr B.K. MASTERS: When I consider this legislation, the following words spring to mind: hypocrisy, double standards, nimby or not in my backyard, populist, anti-science and shallow. All these words and phrases suggest, accurately in my view, that this Bill has nothing to do with good government but everything to do with good politics and the Premier’s desperate attempts to get his Government re-elected at the next election. The storage of nuclear waste in Western Australia is not an issue of any real significance or importance in this State. If all Australia’s nuclear waste were to be stored in Western Australia, an area of less than one hectare of this State’s 260 million hectares would be required, yet the Premier is trying to indicate to us that this is a serious issue. I do not know how it could impact upon our clean and green image. The most popular tourist destination in the world is France. It has about 75 million tourists a year. Guess what? Between 40 and 50 per cent of France’s electricity is produced from nuclear power. I do not believe that there is any link in the minds of any of those 75 million tourists who visit France every year between the generation of nuclear power and the so-called green and clean image of France. France still has the world’s best reputation for wines, food and tourism. Nuclear matters are of no relevance to those consumers. I need to mention briefly some matters relating to this legislation. For example, at page 3 - Dr G.I. Gallop: We have had this debate. Mr B.K. MASTERS: I know, but I am trying to make a point. The Bill refers to the fact that we are not allowed to accept into Western Australia any nuclear materials that result from the testing, use or decommissioning of nuclear weapons, yet the Premier seems to be denying our past history when 40-odd years ago the world was at the brink of nuclear war and there were many good reasons for Australia being involved in the testing of nuclear weapons. Dr G.I. Gallop: Name one. You have lost the plot. Mr B.K. MASTERS: Let us not deny history. Dr G.I. Gallop: It was a disgraceful denial of Australian sovereignty, and you know it. It was a disgraceful denial of our sovereignty by the Menzies Government. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Mr B.K. MASTERS: South Australia has taken full responsibility for the waste materials produced by those nuclear tests, yet the Premier, through this legislation, seems to be saying that we, as a State, bear no responsibility for any of the consequences of a decision that a Government made 40 years ago in the best interests of Western Australians. The member for South Perth has quite rightly pointed out that we are using for medical purposes nuclear materials produced at Lucas Heights, near Sydney. We seem to be saying that, on the one hand, we are prepared to accept all the benefits of those nuclear materials but, on the other hand, we will not play any part whatsoever in providing for Western Australia to be a nuclear repository - if it is found to be the best place in which to locate a nuclear repository - for those domestically produced materials. Many environmentalists around the world say that nuclear power is one of the prime responsibilities that humanity must accept to overcome the greatest environmental threat that the world is facing; namely, greenhouse gas accumulation in our atmosphere. We are looking at climate change that has the potential to impact on hundreds of millions of people. Nuclear generation of electricity may be the answer to that and the Premier is trying to deny that Western Australia has a role to play in providing that answer on the Australian or world stage. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: The National Party is bemused about why this issue is being debated. There is an amendment before the Chamber, but there are two issues for the general public to consider. The first is whether Western Australia should accept the commercial activity of storing waste. I thought that, on more occasions than I would like to count, we all agreed that that would not happen. Therefore, why are we debating this issue today? The second point concerns Lucas Heights. In the time of the previous Administration - the Court-Cowan Administration - there was some talk of attempting to get that institution moved to Western Australia, for good scientific reasons. If there is a question of the federal Government wanting to place a site in Western Australia, this must be discussed some time in the future, whether or not this Bill is passed, or whether injunctions are taken in the High Court or whatever. The reality is that the Parliaments of this nation are paramount. If the federal Parliament decides that Western Australia will be a site for a Lucas Heights type facility, this Parliament will have to debate it. The National Party considers this Bill a supreme waste of time. We support, generally, the view of the member for South Perth. We are in Albany; it is a wonderful place. Why are we wasting the time of this Parliament on such a nonsense Bill?

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1039

Dr G.I. GALLOP: I indicated in my earlier comments why the Government supports the amendment. I seek the indulgence of the Deputy Speaker to make two more points before we finally vote on this matter. Firstly, the States of Victoria and South Australia have similar legislation to this. If Western Australia did not have legislation, a very simple message would be sent to Canberra - the Victorian and South Australian people, through their Parliaments, have made it clear where they stand, but Western Australia does not have such legislation, so why not place the facility in Western Australia? I was elected to the Parliament of Western Australia to defend the interests of the people of Western Australia, and that is what I intend to do. Mr P.G. Pendal: It is a small-minded measure by a small-minded Government. Dr G.I. GALLOP: The broad-minded advocate of nuclear waste over there can have his views, and he is entitled to them. I will turn now to the issue of waste. Let us get to the detail of the issue; not the rhetoric of the Independent members at the back, but the reality. Western Australia does not generate nuclear waste, as defined in the Bill; that is, waste from a nuclear plant such as a reactor. However, it does generate some radioactive waste from medical and industrial uses and, to a smaller extent, from research, as indicated by the member for Rockingham. This radioactive waste from medical and research laboratories is managed in a number of ways. If short lived, with half-lives of hours to several days, it is often stored at the owner’s premises until it has decayed to a level at which it is no longer radioactive. It can then be disposed of as normal waste that is not radioactive. Longer lived medical waste is returned to the supplier at places such as Lucas Heights. Other medical and research radioactive waste may be disposed of by supervised land fill in accordance with the 1985 code of practice for the disposal of radioactive waste by the user, described by the National Health and Medical Research Council. The disposal must be at landfill sites approved by the Western Australian Department of Environmental Protection for this purpose. Sealed sources used in industry may have ceased to be useful, and bulk waste from the mining and processing industries are disposed of either to the manufacturer, supplier, or to the Mount Walton Intractable Waste Disposal Facility, following the issue of a disposal permit by the Radiological Council. The Government accepts its responsibilities in Western Australia, but it is important that, when Canberra considers this issue, it knows where the people of Western Australia stand. The best way for Canberra to know what the people of Western Australia think on this subject is through what the Parliament of Western Australia says about it. I am pleased that both sides of the Parliament in both Houses, have supported the legislation, although members might not realise it here today, given the comments that have been made, either by way of interjection or in some of the speeches. The people of Western Australia want a Government that will do everything it can to make sure their interests are supported. It is very difficult when there is a very powerful Commonwealth Government with certain legislative and constitutional powers, but the one thing that must be done - because it can be done - is for the State to use its own Parliament to send a simple message to Canberra. Just like Victoria and South Australia, that is what the Government has done. We would be negligent in our duties if we did not do it. I am very pleased that I can now go to John Howard and his ministers and make it very clear where the people and the Parliament of Western Australia stand. That is very clear as a result of this legislation. Mr P.G. PENDAL: The Premier has mentioned the Mount Walton facility. I will ask two questions - Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE: We are dealing with an amendment from the upper House, and you have already given an indication, Madam Deputy Speaker, that, except on their first contribution to the debate, members should speak to the amendment. This is the third contribution by the member for South Perth, and he is immediately launching into something that has nothing to do with the amendment now before the House. Mr P.G. PENDAL: My response to that point of order is that the Premier, in his closing remarks, introduced for the first time the Mount Walton disposal unit in the eastern goldfields. He introduced the material and therefore I am entitled to ask two questions of him, one of which touches on that issue. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The House is considering in detail the amendment from the upper House. The rules are quite clear. I am sure the member for South Perth is quite clear about that. Given that he had only uttered a few words, I am sure that he will direct his comments to the amendment. I ask him to do so. Debate Resumed Mr P.G. PENDAL: I will do that in deference to you, Madam Deputy Speaker. My two questions to the Premier relate to clause 12 of the Bill, or the insertion of new clause 8A. Will the Premier arrange to table, when the Parliament resumes in Perth, a list of the locations of all 100 sites in Western Australia that apparently currently receive and store nuclear waste? Dr G.I. Gallop: I will take that question on notice, and answer it at the appropriate time. Question put and passed; the Council’s amendment agreed to. The Council acquainted accordingly.

1040 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS BILL 2004 Second Reading Resumed from 3 March. MR R.F. JOHNSON (Hillarys) [10.49 am]: I have been looking at the screen in the Chamber that gives people in the gallery an idea of what we are debating, and it says “Construction and Contracts Bill 2003 - Second Reading Debate”. As we are in Albany, and this is the first parliamentary sitting in a regional setting, it is incumbent on me as the lead speaker for the Opposition to explain to the public in the gallery what that actually means, because the screen does not actually tell them a great deal. In simple terms, it deals with security of payments to subcontractors in the construction and building industry. That is what we are debating today. I think all members would agree that I am a very charitable person. I will be charitable and say that the introduction of this Bill is better late than never. It has taken this Government three years to bring this very important Bill into this House. Mr J.N. Hyde: And in the four years you were a minister, you did nothing. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: To correct the member for Perth - I do that all the time because he does not know what he is talking about - I was a minister for 15 months. I was responsible for setting up the first task force into the security of payments. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: We did all the hard work. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I am hearing interjections in stereo. I can hear a high-pitched voice and a low-pitched voice. I cannot take this bullying; I am a very sensitive person. As I said, I set up the first task force to look into the security of payments. The former Government was ready to go. If we had won the last election, we would have been in a position to run with the legislation. We would have set up the legislation and introduced it into Parliament within, I suggest, six months after the election. Under the direction of the member for Perth, who was made chairman of the task force - I thought that he must know a great deal about the construction industry to be appointed as the chairman of that task force; he must really know what he is talking about - Ms A.J. MacTiernan: He knows as much as the barrow boy. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Madam Deputy Speaker, I seek your protection from the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. She insults me every day that Parliament sits. When I go home at night my wife says, “How did she treat you today, Robbie?” I tell my wife that the minister has bullied me again. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: There is nothing wrong with being a barrow boy. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: My wife tells me to stand up to that lady. I say, “What lady?” I do not say that. I told my wife that I can take whatever the minister wants to give. Several members interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Members are quite aware of how they respond to each other in this place. The member for Hillarys has the call. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank you for your patience. Mr A.J. Carpenter: You should bring your wife next time and sit her in here. She would have more bottle than you. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: My wife is a very jealous woman. Mr R.C. Kucera: I don’t know why. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: And so she should be. There is an old saying in my family, and I will tell members what it is. Mr A.J. Carpenter: Get out! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: That might be the saying in the member’s family, but it is not the saying in mine. The saying in my family is that to marry a Johnson is to win first prize in the lottery of life. Several members interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: That is the way it works. I would like members to let me get back to the Bill we are debating. Let us talk about the Bill. I have highlighted the fact that it has taken the Government three long years to introduce this Bill. In that three years, subcontractors have gone without payment for the honest work they have done and for the goods they have supplied. There is no acceptable reason for the Government taking three years to introduce this legislation. As members are aware, we have read in the newspapers and seen on television that one of the major construction companies has, to put it mildly, gone belly up. I suggest that many people in the construction industry will lose hundreds of thousands of dollars because this lacklustre Government did not introduce this legislation into

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1041

Parliament in time. Why are we debating this Bill today? I will tell members why: it is because, unfortunately, a lot of the rhetoric from the Government about the regional sitting of Parliament is, in many ways, being produced for political reasons. We have seen the Premier and his ministers release “good news” stories. They have made a lot of promises. The Government doubled back on itself last night during the debate on the Finance Brokers Control Amendment Bill. The Government did not come out of that debate looking very good because it did not address the real issues. I think the people of Albany, particularly the seniors who lost money and for whom I have great sympathy, will see the Government for what it is. It is a similar situation with this Bill today. I know that even three years ago there was a problem in the construction industry in Albany. While I was the minister in the dying days of the last Government, if I can put it that way, there was a problem in Albany with one of the schools. A major contractor went into liquidation. I desperately tried to organise matters so that the subcontractors could carry on and do their work. Unfortunately, the election was held, and that never came to pass. Therefore, the work had to go out to tender again. However, we certainly tried to look after the subcontractors who were doing the work, which, at the end of the day, was government work. Mr J.N. Hyde: Your task force never came to Albany. We did; we have listened. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: My task force, my friend, did not need to go around the State on the jolly trips that the member has undertaken. I will tell the member what we did. We lined up the importance of this area of concern - that is, security of payments - at the same time as I went around the State rolling out the buy local policy. That was to help people in Albany and other regional areas with the mandatory supply of goods and services to government departments through the buy local policy. It was accepted by everybody - Mr A.D. McRae: Was this after privatisation? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member for Riverton just talks rubbish. Mr A.D. McRae: You privatised the port here. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will ignore what he says because he is just a bit of a pain. The security of payment task force, or my task force, rather, was established - Mr J.N. Hyde: You’re still on the first sentence. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I want to give the member value for money. If he does not keep interjecting, I will get on with it. Okay? Mr J.N. Hyde: You haven’t even read the Bill, have you? ’Fess up. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member should not be so silly. Mr J.N. Hyde: How many pages does it have? The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, members on my right! Member for Perth, the member for Hillarys has the call. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As I said, the security of payment task force was established by the previous Government in 2000. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is not aware of what is in the Bill, because it is not her portfolio area. She is handling the Bill in this House for the Minister for Housing and Works. I accept that. She has picked things up very quickly. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: I ran this issue for many years during the term of your Government. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The minister did; I accept that. That is why we got on with the job. Unfortunately, we had an election, following which the lot opposite came into government. As I said, it then took three years to get anything done. The structure of the building and construction industry has changed since the early 1950s, as have the contractual relationships of persons working in the industry. The various works required to construct a building, whether it be a residence, an office or an industrial building, are subcontracted to persons who may in former times have been employees of the builder. Bricklayers, carpenters, plumbers, plasterers, electricians and other suppliers of services and materials are now usually independent subcontractors. Very often, they are the people who miss out - the ones at the lower end of the chain who are doing the manual work, the bricklaying, the carpentry, the labouring or whatever else they might be doing. They are normally the ones who miss out. Others miss out, but they are the people whom it probably affects more than anybody else. It is a bit like a pyramid. At the top there is the project manager or the builder, in the middle is the head contractor, and at the lower end of the scale, which is the base of the pyramid, are the subcontractors. If the project manager does not get paid or if the builder gets into financial difficulties, or if the head contractor uses the money to meet payments on other projects - that happens very often - the subcontractors may receive partial payment, slow payment or, on occasions, no payment at all. That becomes a security of payment issue. This Bill will address that. Let me say from the word go that that is why members on this side of the House support this legislation.

1042 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

Mr J.N. Hyde: Can we vote on it today? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will not stifle debate on this Bill. Mr J.N. Hyde: So after question time we can vote on it? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I am telling the House that we support the legislation. However, there are some areas of concern. As opposition members, we are contacted by people in industry on most Bills that go through the Parliament. The Master Builders Association supports the Bill, although it has some reservations. The Electrical Contractors Association supports the Bill, although it also has some concerns. The airconditioning industry supports the Bill. The Housing Industry Association supports the Bill. However, all of these organisations feel that this Government has misled them and has not taken adequate notice of their concerns, particularly in the past six months. They were part of the consultative process, and they had meetings with the task force; and that is how it should be, because the Government should consult with the people in this industry if it wants to get the best possible legislation. I will run through some of the concerns of these organisations. The Electrical Contractors Association is concerned that it has taken the Government this long to get to where we are today. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: They were happy you took eight years and did not get a piece of legislation into the Parliament to deal with this matter! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: What a stupid and puerile comment! The Labor Government had 10 years during the WA Inc period when it could have dealt with this matter. How far back does the minister want to go? Does the minister want to go back to Dowding, Lawrence and Burke? I started this when I became the Minister for Works and Services. Mr P.B. Watson: As usual, you were gunna do it! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No, I was not “gunna do it” at all. I actually physically started doing it. I set up the first task force. However, of course the Labor Government then wanted to rewrite history, and it took it three years to do it. Mr A.D. McRae: Did the task force report to you? Just answer the question. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Of course it reported to me. Mr A.D. McRae: Did it? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Of course it reported to me. I am sure it did. Mr J.N. Hyde: Are you sure? You can’t remember! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Come on! The member is going back about three and a half years. Mr A.D. McRae: You cannot remember that far back! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I got reports about the task force. I got them through the former Department of Contract and Management Services, which organised the task force and supplied the secretarial and research staff. Mr J.N. Hyde: But you cannot remember what was in them! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: What a stupid comment! I have already told the House that we were virtually ready to go. We had consulted widely with subcontractors in the building and development industry over the course of about six months. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: Can you just clarify one thing? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have a feeling this will be a rather nasty question! Ms A.J. MacTiernan: No. I am just wondering whether you had actually taken it to Cabinet. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will be perfectly honest. I think it may have gone to Cabinet. I set up the task force. I may have done that off my own bat. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: So you were going to introduce legislation without going to Cabinet? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: As my colleague the member for Kingsley has said, it is a ministerial prerogative to set up a task force. Members opposite have set up about 300 task forces, commissions and committees - all sorts of little quangos - in three years. That has cost millions of dollars, yet what has it achieved? Nothing! The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr J.P.D. Edwards): Member for Hillarys, I draw your attention to the fact that you should address your remarks through the Chair rather than have an across-Chamber conversation. If the members on my right wish to speak, they will have an opportunity at a later time. The good order of the Parliament needs to be respected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. I want to quote some comments from the Electrical Contractors Association, because I believe they are important. The association supports the Bill, but it makes the comment - Despite regular contact with the Government this vital piece of legislation has been delayed well beyond the promised and acceptable deadlines.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1043

That is a criticism of this Government, and probably also of the member for Perth, because he is the one who headed the task force. It then compares the situation in Western Australia with the situation in Victoria and states - The Security of Payment Task Force in Western Australia commenced within one month of the Task Force in Victoria. By contrast, legislation has been passed in Victoria and is now shortly to undergo its annual review. The legislation has been in place in Victoria for well over a year, yet there is still no legislation in this State. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Self-praise is no recommendation, my friend. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Of course they want it passed quickly. They wanted to do it a year ago, but they wanted it done properly. Mr J.N. Hyde: Well, do it today. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr J.P.D. Edwards): Order, member for Perth! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The trouble is, Mr Acting Speaker, that the Government, the minister and probably, in the chain of command, the task force chairman, the member for Perth, have not been in contact with these people in the past six months, because there are other concerns. I will tell the member for Perth something else. I read him another quote. I have a quote from Advanced Air Systems, which states - We write to express our concern at the State Government’s undue delay in passing the Construction Contracts Bill. It further states - In this financial year, Advanced Air Systems have had two (2) head contractors enter into liquidation with no recourse for us to reclaim funds due for goods and services provided under the credit terms of our standard building contracts. The resultant consequences are the builder receives payment from their customer and utilises these funds at their discretion instead of transferring funds to the indebted subcontractor. The current law, via unethical manipulation of loopholes, appears to be in favour at all times to the unscrupulous operators who fail to manage contract income for the intended purpose. This highlights what I was saying earlier. This is a critical letter from this Government. It continues - Five debtors of Advanced Air Systems have been liquidated within the last three years with all able to seek financial shelter under the current legislation. Of these five we have been unable to recover the majority of outstanding debt. Whilst the above issue does not have the electoral glamour of many of the other populist issues such as Ningaloo Reef, Southwest Forests and the Mandurah Railway - Mr A.D. McRae: It is popular. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: It must be popular if the Government is spending $1 million just to tell people they will have a rail track. It must be popular, at least in the minds of government members. it is, as illustrated, impacting substantial numbers of employers and workers. . . . We understand similar legislation was past in Queensland, NSW and Victoria, and note that once again Western Australia has failed join the progressive philosophy of these states. That is a pretty critical letter from this Government. This letter is basically saying that the Government has been sitting on its hands for three years and - Mr A.D. McRae: Are you going to table that? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No, I cannot table this stuff. Mr A.D. McRae: Why not? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Because I cannot; I am not a minister. Not yet; maybe in a few months. Point of Order Mr A.D. McRAE: The document from which the member has been quoting is vital information. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I would like to be a minister at the moment, but I am not. If ministers are quoting from official documents - Ms S.M. McHale interjected.

1044 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I can seek leave. The ACTING SPEAKER: Order, members! I will rule on the point of order. There is no point of order. The member does not have to table the document. Debate Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON: This is a very critical letter from somebody who is very active in the industry. I want to move onto the Housing Industry Association, because it obviously represents a very important group of builders. It thought this legislation would start off really well. It was really pleased that the task force was meeting, that it was consulted, that the Government was consulting and that there was an air of urgency about getting some legislation before Parliament that would actually protect their livelihood. Mr J.N. Hyde: And it will if we pass it by 5.00 pm today. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: We cannot pass this Bill by 5.00 pm today. Mr J.N. Hyde: Yes, we can. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: We cannot, because we will not be going into consideration in detail in Albany. Mrs C.L. Edwardes interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr J.P.D. Edwards): Order, members! I give the member for Perth due warning. I have given him a fair bit of latitude and I will be calling him to order the next time he interrupts. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Although we want to see this legislation go through as quickly as possible because we want subcontractors in this State to be protected, there are some deficiencies in the Bill. Some areas of concern need to be investigated, which can be done only during the consideration in detail stage. If we get back to Perth next week and the Government decides to bring on this Bill for consideration in detail, we will get on with it; we will not waste time or filibuster. However, I lay odds on the Government not bringing on this Bill for some time, regardless of whether we are back in Perth to deal with it, because there are some concerns there - Mr A.D. McRae: Tell us what they are. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will tell the House what those concerns are because it is important that the House be aware of them, otherwise it would be flying blind and it would not have a clue, and we do not want deficient legislation in this State. The Housing Industry Association - a very large organisation - has some concerns about the Bill. I have with me a three-page letter that I am more than happy for members to see because it is addressed to the minister from HIA; it is not a secret message to me. I simply got a copy of the letter that went to the Minister for Housing and Works, Hon Nick Griffiths - Mrs C.L. Edwardes: I wonder if the minister has read it? Ms A.J. MacTiernan: The minister has read it. We have had discussions with the minister and we have got a very comprehensive response to it. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I am pleased about that. Is the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure talking to that particular minister? Ms A.J. MacTiernan: I am talking to all ministers. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Are you? Ms A.J. MacTiernan: Absolutely. Several members interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Some ministers do not talk to each other - it depends on what faction they are in. I bring to the attention of the House some of the paragraphs in the letter - I will not read out the whole letter - that are cogent with regard to the concerns about this Bill. The first part of the letter from HIA to the minister tells us when the Bill was introduced and about HIA’s support for the Bill in many ways. It welcomes the opportunity and scope of the Bill, and the way in which it impacts specifically on the building and construction industry etc. The letter then states - However, the above concerns were addressed satisfactorily through the release of Draft 7 of the Bill and with the exception of some minor issues and a point of clarification Draft 7 closely resembled what HIA had contemplated for security of payment legislation in WA. The point of clarification surrounded the Bill’s incorporation of provisions for the prescription of certain matters by way of regulation. Now remember those words “by way of regulation”. The letter continues -

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1045

Significantly, one of the examples given by HIA was that it may be possible to exclude all ‘home building work contracts’ from the jurisdiction of the Act through enactment of a regulation. The response from Department of Housing and Works was that all proposed regulations are reviewed by the Standing Sub- Committee on Subordinate Legislation before being subjected to a disallowance period when tabled in Parliament. Furthermore, it was stated that these provisions are important for ‘fine tuning’ and are a quicker method when compared to changing existing legislation. Which it is, of course. It is much easier to bring in a new regulation than to make an amendment to a Bill. This is where HIA has a problem. The letter continues - On receiving clarification, HIA endorsed in principle Draft 7 of the Bill and received an undertaking from the Department of Housing and Works, that the Bill to be presented before Parliament would be based on Draft 7. HIA has not been invited to provide further comment since the release of Draft 7 of the Bill and the introduction of the Parliamentary Bill. Rather perplexingly, on reviewing the Bill introduced to Parliament, it has come to HIA’s attention that s.7 of the Bill now contains an exclusion for ‘home building work contracts’ as defined in the Home Building Contracts Act 1991. This exclusion was never advised to HIA and is contrary to this undertaking given by the Department of Housing and Works. It was always conceivable that HIA would take exception to this exclusion as HIA has already gone on record in expressing its concerns that the Bill allowed for the enactment of regulations, with these regulations having the ability to exempt certain building work, including the express example used by the HIA - ‘home building works contracts’. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: It’s your draft legislation. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No. We did not have draft legislation. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: So you were not that ready. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: We were ready to go for draft legislation the moment the election came. Mr J.N. Hyde: That exclusion is covered by another Bill already. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I am fully aware of the Bill the member is talking about. People are not happy with what this Government has done. I will explain as I go along why and what has been done. Okay? Mr J.N. Hyde: You’re being deceptive. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I would never be deceptive - never. The document further reads - If rapid duplication were to be made available in relation to ‘home building contracts’ as defined in the Home Building Contracts Act 1991, this would result in enhanced dispute resolution and relieve some of the pressure placed on the BDT. Builders, contractors and clients can then get on with the job of building new homes and renovations without the focus being on protracted litigation. They are not happy at all. The Government has not kept in touch with people. Mr J.N. Hyde: Yes, we have. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Not lately. The Government did to start with. It started with good intent - I am sure it is not a problem - for which I commend members opposite, but I am not happy that it waited so long before introducing the legislation. I paused for a moment to check whether my colleague will refer to something of great interest in this Bill, but she is happy for me to raise it. I know members opposite always love to hear me speak in Parliament. I bring to the attention of the House problems arising because this Bill did not come to the House earlier. The legislation refers to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, who may want to come back into the Chamber. I have in my possession an e-mail relating to problems that have arisen since the collapse of Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd. The e-mail reads - On the 6th February 2004, The Minister for Planning & Infrastructure, Ms Alannah MacTiernan, opened the completed Marble Bar Road. A government member: You were about to build that, too. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Yes. The e-mail continues - Late last week the Main Project Contractor Consolidated Construction, awarded by State Government in Aug 2003, to complete this project, filed for Bankruptcy. It outlined that this was less than one month after the grand opening by the minister, and that the ripple effect has hit many businesses in the Pilbara. It continues -

1046 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

Yesterday, the 4th March 2004, Carr Civil Contractors, the Project Constructor, called in the Administrators. This is the ripple effect seen when a main project corporation like Consolidated Constructions goes into liquidation and many firms under it that have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in work are affected. I remember that when I was a minister, the main contractor would not be paid by the government department under a government contract unless that firm signed a statutory declaration indicating that it had paid its subcontractors. One member opposite is nodding his head and another is shaking his head. Which one is right? I think one is right and the same member is wrong again. Mr J.N. Hyde: No, he has got the affliction. Mr A.D. McRae: I was shaking my head at you. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I know that the member for Riverton has a problem; he never knows whether he is coming or going. When I was a minister, main contractors were not paid for work done until they had signed a statutory declaration stating that they had paid the subcontractors. Mr J.N. Hyde: Yes. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I am glad that the member for Perth agrees with me. I am sure that system continues, and so it should. I want to know what has happened to this major government development. Mr J.N. Hyde: It’s because the Howard Government hasn’t enacted the bankruptcy provisions that would directly reimburse contractors. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The interjection from the member for Perth does not address the issue. This Government does not have to pay main contractors for work done by subcontractors if the main contractors have signed a full statutory declaration stating that they have paid them. I suggest that it would be fraudulent for main contractors to ask the Government to pay for work done by subcontractors if they had signed a full statutory declaration stating they had paid those subcontractors for the work done. We therefore do need some protection. Part of the Bill deals with retention moneys. I am pleased that it does, because it is very important that there be a provision for retention moneys. The question is where those retention moneys will be held. On my reading of the Bill, builders must keep retention moneys in a trust account. That is fine if builders actually do that; however, there would be a problem if they did not. A suggestion was made to me a few days ago by a company that has been on both sides of the fence as contractor and subcontractor and therefore knows about the problems from both points of view. The Government might want to consider the company’s suggestion - we can certainly discuss it during the consideration in detail stage - that the Master Builders Association of WA or the Housing Industry Association hold the retention moneys in trust. Mr J.N. Hyde: But within 28 days, not two years, a problem will be exposed. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No, not necessarily. Retention moneys are different from the normal payment flow of contractual obligations. The good parts of the Bill mean that unscrupulous main contractors cannot insert a clause in their contracts with subcontractors that they will pay the subcontractors if they are paid - in other words, “pay if paid”. That is a good aspect of the Bill. I agree that it was an unscrupulous practice. It was an important matter that I considered when I was a minister, as it was an area of concern that I had. It would have been addressed in legislation, whether brought in by my previous Government or this Government. It is a great thing to see deemed unreasonable in the Bill the provision in contracts that requires payment to be made more than 50 days after it is claimed and that such a provision will automatically revert to payment being required to be paid within 28 days after it is claimed. That is a good provision because people will get early warning if somebody is having trouble paying. One of the worst things that subcontractors go through is the delaying tactic used by main contractors in paying them. A subcontractor may be a little nervous about doing another job for a main contractor when he has not been paid for the first job. A main contractor who asks a subcontractor to do another job while waiting for his money for the first job really is using a “pay if paid” tactic and that should be illegal. Mr J.N. Hyde: It will be once we pass this legislation. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Yes, it will be illegal to do that when this legislation is passed. As I said, I support that provision because it is very important. Retention money was another area brought to my attention. The chairman of the task force gave me a strange look when - Mr A.D. McRae: Your task force or the Government’s task force? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The chairman of the task force in the Chamber today. He always gives me strange looks. Mr A.D. McRae: Who was the chairman of your task force?

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1047

Mr R.F. JOHNSON: It is not important. Mr A.D. McRae: I do not believe you. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member does not believe me? I do not believe the member either. It is mutual. As I was saying, I was referring to the present chairman of the task force. The member gave me a strange look when I mentioned an organisation holding retention moneys. As I said, retention moneys could be held for a lot longer than 50 days because it may be necessary to go to the quick resolution process, which is the rapid adjudication process. That is the other essential part of the Bill, because if there is a problem between a contractor and a subcontractor, something must be in place to allow for rapid adjudication so that the problem can be sorted out and the payments made, if they are deemed correct. It would be for the adjudicator to decide that. The adjudicator would be impartial and would say what was right and what was wrong. The concern I have is whether we will find enough people to fill that position. I suggest that there will be many ongoing problems in the building industry with the security of payments. The problem will be in finding people with sufficient expertise. They will require expertise in not only business, but also the building industry. That expertise could be in surveying, architecture or whatever. The Government must find people who can sit as adjudicators and come up with the right decisions. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: There are hundreds of these people around. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The Government must find the ones who will be prepared to sit and adjudicate. There are also hundreds of problems in the building industry. If rapid adjudication is to be successful, we must make sure that there are adjudicators who can sit and adjudicate quickly, so that these problems can be resolved. I could go on for much longer, as my colleagues know, but in deference to the chairman of that task force it would be good to get this Bill through the House as soon as possible. We may get through only the second reading stage today, but hopefully the Government will bring the Bill back on when we are in Perth so that we can consider it in detail. We will then be able to consider the clauses about which these industries have concerns. I hope that the minister who will be handling the Bill on behalf of her colleague in the upper House will take note of those concerns and be prepared to accept amendments along the way. The minister may also bring in some amendments of her own on behalf of the minister in the other place. Other members want to talk on this important issue. At the end of the day, the legislation will help people. I repeat: it is better late than never. MR J.N. HYDE (Perth) [11.28 am]: I begin by thanking members opposite, because a number of them support this legislation, as do all my colleagues behind me. An important part of the Gallop Government’s election commitments was to introduce security of payments legislation to help guarantee the timely payment of subcontractors involved in the construction industry. Soon after the election I was delighted when the Premier, Dr Geoff Gallop, appointed me chair of the security of payments task force. Consultation has been a hallmark of this Government in making sure that we get things right. During the three years of extensive consultation with the community, the task force found that subcontractors around the State were demanding new legislation. In the extensive time that this has been available for public comment, the feedback we have received from those involved with the industry has been not only rewarding, but also quite amazing: they love the legislation and want us to put it in place quickly. I think that is an indication that the construction industry in this State, and all the subcontractors, particularly in regional WA, know how important this legislation is. I welcome the comments from the Opposition that it will assist us in completing all second reading debate speeches before the Parliament leaves Albany. That will lead to the rapid progression of this Bill. Many workers in the construction industry rightly collect a weekly pay cheque, but many subcontractors in the industry are waiting up to 10 months for payment. Often, they are not paid at all or anywhere near in full. Many of the subcontractors are self-employed, but many are also small employers employing a number of workers. Their livelihoods are put in jeopardy when there is a major bankruptcy or a large company up the pay chain does not fulfil its duty. Strong unions protect the rights of workers. Western Australia has the highest rate of self-employed workers. The Gallop Government went to the state election promising to introduce legislation to provide timely payment for subcontractors and all contractors involved in the construction industry. Let it be said that many contractors and companies treat their subcontractors well. In boom times, particularly those experienced under the Gallop Government and this Treasurer, the market forces assist in ensuring that good subcontractors get paid quickly. After three years of consultation throughout Western Australia, particularly regional Western Australia, it has been genuinely shocking to see the plight of subcontractors, self-employed people and others involved - even in boom times - who are not being paid or who have to accept part payment in order to get another job from a dominant contractor. Paramount in today’s debate is that we be able to pass this legislation as quickly as possible with bipartisan support. I will not dwell on us coming into government and not finding any paperwork, fundamental legislation or cabinet endorsement to introduce this Bill to Parliament. In the past three years the Government has been stymied somewhat in the upper House with other legislation. This Bill has been going progressively up the queue. We have ended up with a piece of legislation that is the world’s best. The comments and advice we are receiving from people around the world

1048 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] on this legislation is phenomenal. It builds on the best parts of the groundbreaking United Kingdom legislation and also takes from the New South Wales and New Zealand Acts. It enhances the best parts and removes any dysfunction and lack of clarity in those Acts. The key issue we must address is that, because of the very tight margins in the construction industry, restricted cash flow and payment default can force good operators into bankruptcy. That reduces the number of skilled operators in the industry, which can then flow on to skill shortages, subsequent delays and price rises. There are macro and micro effects on the whole Western Australian economy. As chairman of the task force, I conducted a number of official interviews in Albany in late 2001. In particular, I thank Robin Knotts from Knotts Plumbing, and the local chamber of commerce and industry. The chamber has about 30 to 35 members and we met across the road in York Street. The task force received tremendous feedback. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr J.P.D. Edwards): I know that my hearing is not very good. I do not mind seeing the member’s back, but I would like him to address some of his speech to the Chair. Mr J.N. HYDE: I also thank Greg Elliott from Albany Refrigeration; Dave Palmer, who is involved in earthmoving; and a number of other subcontractors and those involved in the construction industry in Albany. I was absolutely horrified to hear of one contractor with about 34 employees in Albany who was carrying $974 000 of debt from late and non-payers. He was having to get an extra bank loan to cover payments that were not forthcoming in a timely fashion from subcontractors above him. The spin-off for the whole economy, and more importantly a regional economy in a place such as Albany, is quite profound. When everybody is paid promptly, cash turns over quickly. It means more economic development, more goods and services tax, more jobs and more money in the government system producing hospitals, police stations, schools and other infrastructure that Governments spend taxes on. Our legislation was certainly inspired by the United Kingdom Housing Grants, the Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, as well as the New South Wales Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 and the New Zealand Construction Contracts Bill 2001. The Government’s sole objective is to achieve timely payments. This legislation is fashioned in such a way that everybody involved in the construction chain can be paid in a timely fashion. It outlaws paid-when-paid clauses in contracts that mean that a subcontractor is paid at the whim of someone further up the chain. It is important that we look at Britain and how such legislation operates in the real world. A number of Australian companies, such as Multiplex, are involved in the construction industry in London. With some trepidation I visited a number of the building construction bodies in London that handled contracts and budgets that we in the antipodes can only dream about. The real advantage of this legislation is not that it is creating a massive number of adjudicators and bureaucrats or that we are playing big brother and making an impost on business. The beauty of this legislation is that it is a deterrent. In New South Wales such legislation operates with virtually one government employee. Because of such legislation, the building industry is able to self-regulate and the Government is further removed from the equation because it is not involved in checking dodgy statutory declarations or bankruptcies, such as those that occurred three years ago. The Government is made aware of problems within 28, 30 and 40 days. Because of that deterrent effect, the industry is cleaning up its act. The very fact that the Gallop Government has shown firm commitment, in not only promising this legislation but also setting up the task force within nano seconds of government and getting legislation into the Parliament, means that the industry is already self-regulating and payment in many sections has improved. Of course, for the vast majority of the industry, payment has never been a problem. When I was in the United Kingdom, I was able to speak with a major construction lawyer, Tony Bingham, QC. I guess I am in the minority as one of the few members who has not got legal experience and who has a jaundiced view of that profession, but I heard a lawyer and QC say that he loves the legislation because less work is going to the higher courts. That is what will happen in Western Australia instead of disputes over $20 000 and upwards being put on hold for two years and a subcontractor, a self-employed person, having to weigh up whether to go to the expense of going to the Supreme Court to get his money. A subcontractor must now consider whether to take two years out of his life, and put up with the expense and worry of going through this process to get what is his. Lawyers are saying that they are now being employed at the mediation stage. The moment there is a dispute between a subcontractor and a contractor up the chain, the lawyers are getting in as mediators. The result of mediation is that, as proposed under this legislation and as is the case already in the United Kingdom and to a lesser extent in New South Wales and New Zealand, disputes are not even getting to adjudication. The mediation is getting rid of the problems early. The huge benefit of this Bill, as it stands, is in the deterrence. That is why it is very important that the level of regulation be as contained in the Bill, so that the minister of the day is able to react to a number of issues that may flow from it. Again, deterrence is a huge benefit. I was able to speak with John Wright, vice-president of the Royal Institute of British Architects in London. His attitude to this legislation is that it has given the industry security. Anybody involved in the construction industry, be it in building an entertainment centre in Albany or a new high school in Mt Lawley, knows that everybody in the chain, from someone providing saws and hammers to a carpenter, will be able to be paid quickly. John Wright, and a number of people in the United Kingdom Chamber of Commerce and Industry have told me that it has now become a status symbol in the construction industry to pay somebody within 24 hours. Many firms are paying within a day. The whole system has led to quicker payment. When the turnover happens quickly, people have the money for ongoing expenses

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1049 and the investment capital to go on and tender confidently for future contracts. That is how is it possible to sustain, not a boom in the construction industry, but ongoing consistent and steady employment, and steady cement and brick production and supply. I was also fortunate to be able to visit a number of other places in regional Western Australia, including Kalgoorlie, where I spoke to the Kalgoorlie Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief executive officer Hugh Gallagher. The member for Kalgoorlie supported our visit and talks there. They have experienced the direct impact, during the establishment of the Mining Hall of Fame and other things in Kalgoorlie, of the effect on the local economy of this legislation. I was delighted when the member for Eyre joined us in a bipartisan way and was able not only to direct us to a number of local subcontractors in his electorate, but also to support some of the incidents related by the member for Kalgoorlie. It is important when members from both sides of the House, particularly in places like Kalgoorlie know they are getting a ridgy-didge fair story and realise that this legislation is very important. The construction industry has a number of groups, such as pest control, involved in it. A whole group of self-employed people and small contractors depend on a lead contractor being able to pay a lead subcontractor, so they can all be paid. A furphy given by the member for Hillarys was the example of the exclusion. This is a slight change from version 7. The legislation is already there in existing legislation brought in by the Gallop Government. In fact, I think it was my good friend, comrade and colleague, the member for Peel, who worked on this under the Minister for Housing and Consumer Affairs at the time - Ms A.J. MacTiernan: It was Yvonne Henderson. Mr J.N. HYDE: It was Yvonne Henderson originally. Those changes were brought in. Those small contracts in the housing industry are already covered and catered for. This legislation will cut down on bureaucracy, which will make for cleaner and better government. This is world-best legislation. It is something of which Western Australia should be very proud. Not only the Government but also the Parliament should be proud of it. It appears that the government has bipartisan support for it, particularly in regional Western Australia. Cabinet has accepted the recommendations of the task force. I hope that Parliament will also endorse those recommendations, which were made after the task force conducted extensive research into the industry. I pay credit to the members of the task force. The Gallop Government put on the task force representatives from the Master Builders Association, the Housing Industry Association and a number of small subcontractors. It comprised the gamut of workers in the construction industry. It was an eye-opening experience for me to work in those industries, sometimes daily. It was important for the people in those industries to see that the Gallop Government has a genuine interest in looking after small businesses and self-employed people and in making sure that their payments are made secure. It was quite rewarding to see the degree of agreement among members of the task force by the time it had drafted the seventh draft of its report. I found that process remarkably rewarding. I pay credit to the Department of Housing and Works. Many of its staff were involved when the task force was but a dream of the former Minister for Works of the previous Government, and they have seen it come into fruition under the first Minister for Works of this Labor Government, Hon Tom Stephens, and under the current Minister for Works, Hon Nick Griffiths. I thank members, a number of building industry groups, subcontractors and self-employed people for the independent support I received from them when I travelled around regional Western Australia. Most importantly, I thank the Parliament for giving a commitment to finish the second reading stage today so that this legislation can be passed quickly. I hope that Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd, which has gone bankrupt, will be the last major construction company to collapse in Western Australia. I implore members opposite to join in our recommendation, which was endorsed by the HIA, the MBA and others, to place pressure on the federal Government to introduce parallel legislation into federal Parliament so that important issues of bankruptcy can be addressed at the federal level. We must ensure that the working, payment and moral rights of subcontractors and others involved in the construction industry in regional Western Australia are respected. MRS C.L. EDWARDES (Kingsley) [11.48 am]: The purpose of the Bill is to give some security of payment to the construction industry. The previous speaker was at pains to talk about the small margins of profit in the building construction industry and some of the problems the industry faces in receiving payment for work that has been completed. He also said that he hoped the collapse of Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd would be the last one. I can tell the member that this legislation will not stop the collapse of construction companies. I hope to be able to show the member why that is the case. I will explain to him why the Government’s legislation will not provide security of payment to people in the industry. The Government has got it wrong. It does not understand. The Opposition supports that part of the legislation regarding the adjudication of payment disputes and it supports outlawing the notorious pay-if-paid and pay-when-paid clauses etc. However, the companies must have the money to pay. This Bill has come far too late for the contractors and subcontractors of Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd. It is an absolute disgrace that it went under. Members on the other side of the House should hang their heads in shame, because one of the top construction companies in this State went under, owing tens of millions of dollars to other companies and subcontractors. This legislation would not have stopped that or even helped in any way. Do members know why it would not have stopped that? It is because, under this Government, the union movement will not stop its

1050 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] intimidatory tactics on building sites. Until the Government understands that it is its responsibility to control those intimidatory tactics on building sites, collapses such as that of Consolidated Constructions will happen time and again. Let us talk about what happened with Consolidated Constructions and some of the collapses that have hit other companies. The West Australian of Friday, 12 March 2004 states that - The failure last week of . . . Consolidated Constructions has triggered the collapse of two of its suppliers on major State Government contracts and is threatening the financial health of other companies. Many contractors and subcontractors have contacted me and other members on this side of the House. Mr A.D. Marshall: And in Mandurah. Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: Mandurah, in particular. Maybe the member for Dawesville will talk about that. It is terrible when companies that have a strong record in the industry, and are like families to their workers and suppliers, no longer have the money to pay their workers and suppliers. They feel as though they are in disgrace, yet they had nothing to do with the collapse of their companies. Even today, many contractors and subcontractors are visiting liquidators. They are owed money by Consolidated Constructions, and they want to know what this means for their liquidity and when they are likely to receive payments from Consolidated Constructions. The Government’s legislation will not stop that. Until the Government takes other action in the industry, it will not help or provide security in the industry. If it were just one step along the way to providing security in the industry, it would be a good thing. However, it will not help those people who are suffering under the collapse of Consolidated Constructions. The West Australian went on to state - The directors of Karratha-based Carr Civil Contracting and Pinjarra-based AW & C Day Contractors - It cuts right across the State. It mentions Mandurah - both called in administrators this week to help them deal with the effects of more than $2 million in bills owed to them by Consolidated. Mr A.D. Marshall: Alan Day has gone for $2 million, and his family in Mandurah is shot, all because of it, and there is no recompense. Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: The member for Dawesville said that Alan Day from Mandurah has gone for $2 million, and his family is shot because of the disgrace that has come upon them. The West Australian continues - The Day, Carr and Consolidated collapses are putting pressure on other businesses. The ripple effect will be awesome. That is the major concern that this legislation is supposed to address; that is, how we can ensure that there is security of payments to companies. However, when a company goes under, it will not help at all. An article in The West Australian of 5 March states - One contractor working for Consolidated . . . who asked not to be identified, said he now had to sack all his staff and would call in an administrator. He said he was owed more than $300,000 by Consolidated and was unable to pay his major supplier, who was also likely to go into administration within days. The ripple effect of the collapse of Consolidated Constructions is enormous. The article continues - It is believed the directors have partially blamed Consolidated’s failure on a running battle with the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union over its use of contract labour. But, CFMEU chief Kevin Reynolds said the company had been undercutting rivals in contract bids by using cheap labour. What is the story? Yes, some contracts had gone bad for Consolidated Constructions - one in Perth and a couple in Sydney - so the company thought, “How can we get our head above water in this situation?” Consolidated Constructions had been recognised by the Cole royal commission as having paid the CFMEU for casual tickets. Casual tickets are tickets for union membership that can just be handed around from one person to another. They are not real membership of a union. They are just to put money into the union’s coffers. That action was a disgrace, and that was recognised by the Cole royal commission. Therefore, Consolidated Constructions said to the CFMEU, “Mate, we have been paying you for peace on building sites for about 18 months. We need a bit of help now. We need to get our head above water. We have had a few contracts that have gone bad. We have looked around at who has been getting the contracts in Perth, and they are the companies that do not have an enterprise bargaining agreement, because they are able to tender at a lower cost than we can, because we have to keep paying you.” The response from Kevin Reynolds was, “Hang on, but you have been undercutting other companies”. Yes, that is true, but the company was trying to keep its contracts. Is that wrong? The union then started its intimidating and bullying tactics on all the company’s sites, until a couple of weeks before the company went under, when the company initiated an action in the Supreme Court against the union. An article in The West Australian of 10 February states - Construction company Consolidated Constructions lodged a writ with the District Court alleging Mr McDonald and the CFMEU had unlawfully interfered with its business.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1051

The company is seeking damages and costs. The dispute was alleged to have occurred at the $32.8 million RAC headquarters construction site near the new Harbour Town shopping complex last Monday. Consolidated Constructions was one of the biggest companies in Perth. It is a Perth-based company. It has built landmark buildings in the Perth central business district. The article states also - But according to Consolidated’s writ, Mr McDonald and the union had unlawfully interfered with the company’s relationship with contractors and subcontractors and had intimidated contractors. The writ also says that they had conspired to intimidate, to cause nuisance and to harm Consolidated’s business. The company had had a pretty close working relationship with the union movement. It went to the union movement 18 months ago and said, “Mate, we have a problem. We need to get our head above water.” What was the union’s response? The union said, “No way, mate.” The union put its foot on that company’s head to make sure it would never get its head above water unless it was prepared to do things the union’s way. The company had paid for industrial peace. That was noted in the Cole royal commission report. However, as soon as the company wanted to step outside the EBA, the union movement attacked and intimidated it. Tomorrow is the 12-month anniversary of the handing down of the Cole royal commission report. The Government in this State has absolutely and totally ignored each of the recommendations of the Cole royal commission. The federal Labor Government has refused to support the Howard Liberal Government in its reform of the construction industry. The labour relations laws of this State are being totally ignored by the unlawful actions of the union movement. The Cole royal commission identified 392 separate instances of unlawful conduct, 230 of which occurred in Western Australia. What has been the Government’s response? The Government has said that it will not support the federal Government’s legislation and the task force that it has established. The Government has refused to recognise the fact that the Building Industry and Special Projects Inspectorate - BISPI - which was set up to oversee the industry after this Government had abolished the task force that we had in place, has no teeth. This Government does not want it to have teeth. It does not want it to have the resources to enforce the rule of law in the construction industry in Western Australia. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: This Bill is not about unions. This is about contractors ripping off subcontractors. Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: It is about security of payments within the industry. I am telling the minister it will not work; there will be no security of payments within the industry until such time as she gets the unions under control, because the union movement had a major impact on the collapse of Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: That is not the issue here. The problem is that the subcontractors have no union. Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: The minister should stop pussyfooting around her union mates and start taking control of industrial relations in this State. She is pussyfooting around, supporting the unions. The Premier comes out every now and then and attacks Kevin Reynolds, but it is all talk and no action. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: This is about the subcontractors who have been left unprotected because of your mates. This is about the people who funded your election campaigns, that ripped the workers off. Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: This is about security of payments in the construction industry. Point of Order Mr P.D. OMODEI: I know that the member for Kingsley can handle herself fairly well in this Parliament, but I am battling to hear what she has to say above the interjections from members opposite. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr A.P. O’Gorman): There is a difficulty in hearing the member for Kingsley. The member for Kingsley has the floor. Members on my right should please refrain from interjecting. Debate Resumed Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: After the February election in 2001 the unions started to engage in their intimidatory and bullying tactics and have continued to fly their flag of defiance ever since. I said back then it was only the tip of the iceberg. Consolidated Constructions is starting to be the iceberg - the big iceberg - because when a major company like that goes under, those on the government side ought to start hanging their heads in shame. Without government intervention, this will only continue to cause more companies to go under and more jobs to be lost. I will point out to members how bad the Building Industry and Special Projects Inspectorate and this Government are about following through on complaints by employers and contractors against the intimidatory and bullying tactics of the union movement on site. They do not want to investigate unless there is a formal complaint. A letter to the minister is not sufficient; there must be a formal complaint. What absolute nonsense! On 6 and 24 October last year there was a dispute down south and a complaint was lodged with BISPI by the Master Builders Association. BISPI started the investigation and thought it was a bit too hot and wondered how to get out of it. BISPI thought it would get advice from

1052 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] the Crown Solicitor. This is the most outstanding piece of legal advice I have ever seen, to get a Government out of investigating an industrial dispute. The advice came back that if the strike was about a political issue, BISPI had no powers. This strike that was being investigated in October 2003 was about bringing in contract labour from overseas. If that is not a dispute between employers and employees, I do not know what is, but the Crown Solicitor advised that it was not. The lawyers worked their way around it and came up with the advice that it was a political matter and, as such, fell outside the terms of dispute resolution, and BISPI had no powers. Therefore, the Government will not investigate or intervene in any strike by any union in this State based on this piece of advice: that if the strike is about a political issue, the department does not have the powers to investigate. According to the Crown Solicitor and the Department of Consumer and Employment Protection, when the union movement said over a week ago that it was going to strike about the Government’s workers compensation legislation, the Government did not have the power to either investigate or take any action over the dispute, because it would be a political strike and not an issue between employers and employees. I will read out some comments. I have with me a letter written by the Department of Consumer and Employment Protection to the Director of the Master Builders Association dated 11 March 2004. I am happy for anybody to have a copy of it because it makes simply amazing reading. On page 2 of the letter, the crown sols is quoted as saying - [Leave granted for the member’s time to be extended.] Mr R.C. Kucera: Member for Kingsley, it is referred to as the State Solicitor not crown sols. Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: The minister has raised an interesting point but it obviously has not got to the Crown Solicitor yet because the department refers to it as crown sols. Perhaps the minister would like to let it know. The letter refers to the Crown Solicitor’s Office as stating - “. . . insofar as the utilisation of the dispute settlement clause contained in an industrial agreement regulating the conditions of employment is concerned, is that there can be no outcome from that process to deal with what is a political issue. Put simply the employer is powerless to resolve the union’s dispute with the government over its legislation program concerning employment.” There is no outcome from that process to deal with what is a political issue. The letter continues - “The situation you have outlined - That is, contract labour coming from overseas - is not a dispute between employer and employee and not subject to any of the dispute resolution clauses you have provided me with.” Therefore, even if there is an agreement or a dispute resolution clause in that agreement and workers go out on strike over just about any issue whatsoever, which is then termed a political issue, there is no power and certainly no willingness on the part of this Government or the Building Industry and Special Projects Inspectorate to intervene. The letter goes on to state that it is possible under only two agreements; the electrical contracting industry award and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union standard agreements. A clause in the electrical contracting industry award refers to 24-hours notice etc. Even if 24-hours notice was not given, the department could not pursue it as a breach of the dispute resolution clause. What does the department actually do? What does a person have to do when there is a clause in an agreement that says that 24-hours notice has to be provided and it is not? With regard to the CFMEU agreement, the letter states - The DSP - That is, dispute resolution procedure - within the CFMEU standard agreements contains a clause that preserves the right to take action for matters of national or state significance with the giving of notice to the other parties. A person might think that the bringing in of contract labour from overseas might be regarded as having national or state significance. It continues - Whilst it could be claimed that this may apply to the two stoppages and therefore could be a technical breach, - So we have got that far - CSO believes this clause is still about disputes specifically between the employer and employee(s) of that employer which are of state or national significance. CSO commented “the capacity to provide for dispute resolution procedures in awards must relate to matters arising under or concerning the award between the parties or persons subject to it and an employer or employers.” Therefore, CSO believes that neither of the two stoppages falls within the scope of this provision. So the department has managed to work its way through to the nth term of those agreements and come up with the fact that if there is a strike dealing with a political issue, which can be about almost anything, then there is no role for BISPI to get involved. With regard to the CFMEU agreement, the letter states -

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1053

The CSO stated that the DSP is “intended to apply to a dispute between employer and employee which is not the case here and one relating to a matter arising under the Agreement which is of State or National significance.” The department has worked its way around the fact that it might be a technical breach but it cannot intervene because the matter does not fall within the terms of having national or state significance. The department probably said to the Crown Solicitor’s Office, “Get us out of this. We do not want to be involved in investigating this matter.” The closing statement of this letter reads - The department’s legal advice is that a dispute at a level above that of employer-employee falls outside the intention and scope of the DSPs contained in the various industrial instruments analysed. Based on this, the department is unlikely to be able to bring a successful prosecution. That was because the department did not wish to do so. It concludes - In any event, there are sufficient avenues for the MBA, the CCI and employers to pursue this under state and federal labour relations legislation and civil action. No wonder the likes of Consolidated Constructions and Pindan Constructions are taking action against the union movement; they have no support whatsoever from this Government. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: What about how we protect subcontractors? Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: The minister cannot do that until she starts to take the unions under control. That is the point. This legislation refers to security of payment to contractors and subcontractors. However, until such time as the Government gets unions under control in the building and construction industry, no form of security will be provided in the industry. The Government could bring in whatever legislation it wanted, but it will not provide security in the industry until the minister starts to take on the unions. The Government will never take on the unions. That is proved. This Government will never act. The Cole royal commission said last year that the Building Industry and Special Projects Inspectorate was a toothless tiger and lacked resources. Also, it lacked commitment to take action because this Government gives BISPI no support to carry out its role. The department stated that the employers themselves can take action, and that is exactly what they are doing. George Allingame from Pindan also issued a writ alleging that intimidation was used by several unionists at its sites over the past five months. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: What about the subcontractors, then? Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: What does the minister think is happening with the contractors and subcontractors from Consolidated Constructions? They are going under, and their suppliers are going under. Did the minister not hear a word I said? Why is that? For the past 18 months, the union movement has not let Consolidated Constructions get its head above water. People from Consolidated Constructions went to the unions and said, “Mates, we’ve been partners together. We want to know what you can do to help us.” Does the minister know the response? The unions said they would kick them even harder. Let me finish outlining these writs. They detail a history of incidents at the Perth Beaufort Central site, the Emporium Apartments site in Subiaco, the Zenith Apartments site in West Perth, and the Aria Apartments site in Rockingham. George Allingame said the action is a reaction to unwarranted stoppages. Industrial action has taken place. McDonald made comments in a response from the union movement. He said that he was amazed that companies would spend money taking on lawyers to fight the unions. Excuse me! We have seen Consolidated Constructions go right under. We have heard the member for Perth say that there is a narrow margin of profit in the construction industry. Mr McDonald has said that this industrial action has taken place, and that some builders are paying workers less than some of the reputable builders who pay properly. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: The reason we have unions is that people were not being properly paid. Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: Yeah, right! Although this legislation may sound good, it will not provide security to any major company - such as Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd, which is trying to get its head above water paying all its contractors and subbies, but which finds itself at the tip of the toe of the union movement - until this Government is prepared to intervene on behalf of employers to bring unions under control and to prevent intimidatory and bullying tactics, and until the federal Labor Party is prepared to support the legislation introduced by the federal Government to expand the task force and tighten up the law against these actions. Tens of millions of dollars - Mr R.C. Kucera: I know what else you will be doing next. Mrs C.L. EDWARDES: Yes, looking after some young head-injured people stuck in nursing homes, and I will be calling on the minister to support them. The Crown Solicitor’s advice is an absolute disgrace. The mere fact that the department is using it to delay the investigation of actions, strikes or disputes that are not resolved through dispute resolution provisions is an absolute

1054 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] disgrace. Companies in this State may take some comfort from this legislation in the knowledge that a regulator can ensure they are paid. However, I want to hear from the minister how it will help the contractors and subcontractors that are owed money by Consolidated Constructions. It will not help them. How better could this Government have responded to the cries of help from Consolidated Constructions, which lost a lot of money when it was intimidated and bullied and incurred stoppages on all its sites? How could this Government have prevented the loss of tens of millions of dollars that could have been paid to contractors and subcontractors and would have prevented them from going down the drain? The Government should hang its head in shame. MR N.R. MARLBOROUGH (Peel - Parliamentary Secretary) [12.17 pm]: Anybody listening to the member for Kingsley would think that the matters that concern the construction industry have occurred only in the time of this Government. The tragedy is that this legislation sets out to correct a wrong that has been in place in the building industry for many years. Anybody who has any understanding of the building industry would know why this legislation is needed. Even the member for Kingsley, with her biased view of the world, supports the legislation. She then takes the opportunity of attacking the trade union movement through Consolidated Constructions. I will come back to Consolidated. This legislation has been required for many years. I am a fitter and turner by trade. When I was paid by the hour, it was important to me to know that at the end of a 40-hour week plus overtime I was taking back to my home the proper award remuneration. When I was a blue-collar worker for many years, nothing irked me more than being screwed by the boss when I was not paid the appropriate award conditions. The member for Kingsley goes on about the enterprise bargaining agreement system in the construction industry that has been ticked off by the John Howard Government, as well as State Governments all over Australia. The member for Kingsley does not tell us about the hundreds of companies, many of which are key builders in this State - the Multiplexes, the Mirvac Finis, the John Hollands and the Leightons of this world - that never have any problem with EBAs. Why is that? It is because they are properly managed companies that are able to survive by running their books properly. Unfortunately, too many companies in the building industry do not run their books properly. The truth of the matter is that Consolidated Constructions has had problems for more than the past 12 months. Two years ago in federal Parliament - Mrs C.L. Edwardes: What did the union movement do? It put the head on them and made them drown. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: The member for Kingsley uses 18 months as the measure by which she says the unions have been kicking the hell out of Consolidated Constructions. I will outline the facts. Two years ago the role of Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd on Christmas Island was raised in federal Parliament. It is in Hansard. The member should read the federal transcript. Consolidated Constructions did not pay its contractors on Christmas Island. It did not pay appropriate wages to its workers. That is on the record. It is nothing to do with the unions in the past 18 months. That company has been in trouble for a long time. What the member for Kingsley would have us all believe is that this company has been brought down because the unions chased people to sign up with them and then demanded that they be paid a wage rate equivalent to an enterprise bargaining agreement that applies across Australia. She argued that the unions singled out Consolidated Constructions and brought it down. The transcript of two years ago of the federal Parliament puts a lie to that. Consolidated Constructions did not pay its contractors on Christmas Island, nor did it pay the Christmas Island workers their proper wages. I will outline the tragedy of Consolidated Constructions over the past eight months. In December, while insolvent, Consolidated Constructions was still able to trade and to win government and private contracts. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: Absolutely; that is the question. It was able to win these contracts in December, which was at a time when the member for Kingsley would have us believe the unions were absolutely killing it. The contracts that Consolidated Constructions won in December while it was insolvent were for the Osborne Park Hospital, Armadale railway, Gosnells railway and the Gosnells shire offices. That continued. It also won private contracts. The question is: why did it continue to operate? That company has a legal question to answer. I will bring members right up to date. I refer to page 53 of the business section of today’s The West Australian and to the article headed “Builder ‘saw a long decline’”, which states - VINCE YOVICH’S Consolidated Constructions had been in decline for several years and may have traded insolvently from December 31 until its collapse this month, - Mrs C.L. Edwardes interjected. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: This is what the member for Kingsley would have us believe. The article also states - More than 50 staff and 400 contractors have been hit by the failure that followed a tumultuous two years for the company - The member for Kingsley said it has been only 18 months. She has not done her research. What has happened with the member for Kingsley, because her record goes back a long way? She shares it with her husband. The member for Kingsley is now trying to handball into Parliament -

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1055

Point of Order Mr A.D. MARSHALL: We have all agreed to obey the code of conduct. For about six months we put up with the member for Peel denigrating a partner of a member of this House in a disgraceful manner. I do not want nor do I expect it to be brought up again in this debate because he lost the earlier session on unionism. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I understand that the gentleman in question is a Liberal candidate. I would have thought that his record is a perfect subject for political debate. Mr C.J. Barnett: Charming. So the sleaze machine is at work! Several members interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr A.P. O’Gorman): There is no point of order. No protection is given to people outside this Chamber for comments made in this Chamber. The member for Peel still has the floor. Debate Resumed Mr M.J. Birney: Sleaze on! Several members interjected. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: It is amazing! I am a sleaze! The member for Kingsley spent 20 minutes condemning the trade union movement, and Kevin Reynolds in particular, but when I raise the issue of the role she and her husband have played in the Liberal Party, I am a sleaze! All I was going to point out was that she would of course know all about the sorts of dealings that she accuses Kevin Reynolds of. They are the same dealings that she is now entering into to get her husband to replace her in her seat in Parliament. She would know all about it. Several members interjected. Point of Order Mr C.J. BARNETT: Everyone in this hall would know that was an attempt by the member for Peel to intimidate a female member. It was a clear attempt at bullying and intimidation. The member referred to Kevin Reynolds. People know there has been illegal, corrupt and immoral conduct in the building industry. The member implied the same. It this the standard of the Gallop Labor Government? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Clearly, the Leader of the Opposition wants to make a political point. I think it is an abuse of standing orders to make that sort of comment. My understanding of the position of a member taking a point of order is that he needs to draw attention to the particular way in which a standing order of this House has been breached. The Leader of the Opposition has made no such argument; therefore, there is no point of order. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The point of order in question is that of relevance. The member for Peel was not addressing his comments to the Bill before the House. The Leader of the House knows that and the member for Peel knows that. To make a disparaging assertion against a member opposite that has nothing to do with the Bill before the House is the point of order. I ask that Mr Acting Speaker direct the member for Peel to confine his comments to relevancy to the Bill and not enter into a slanging match and attack other members. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr A.P. O’Gorman): The member for Peel has to take responsibility for his own comments in this House. There is no point of order. I warn members that interjections are reaching an unacceptable level and I will clamp down on them. Debate Resumed Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: I thought my comments were absolutely relevant to the situation before us. The member for Kalgoorlie thinks that, on the basis of the comments I have made, I am a sleazebag. I am no orphan because most of his colleagues who have spoken to me share my views on the role of the member’s husband in politics. I tell members that. He knows that because it has been raised in his party room. When it is appropriate, I will be more than happy to name the colleagues who have told me so. What we have seen from this politically dying member of Parliament - the best thing she will do is to leave the House at the end of this term - is 20 minutes of a biased assassination of the trade union movement and a biased assassination of Kevin Reynolds of which none of the facts she used about Consolidated Constructions stands up. It was not paying contractors two years ago - Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER: The member keeps referring to the member for Kingsley as “she”. Could he refer to her in an appropriate manner? The ACTING SPEAKER: It is protocol and required in this place to refer to a member by his or her electorate. I ask that the member do that. Debate Resumed Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: I believe I have put the issue of Consolidated Constructions into perspective. It is a company that, unfortunately, the member for Kingsley used and it was unable to pay its contractors on Christmas Island

1056 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] two years ago. That is a matter on the public record in the federal arena. It was neither able nor willing to pay its workers an appropriate rate of pay. That was its decision. What concerns me is that the company has been touting for business while insolvent. Let us put Consolidated Constructions to one side; we have handled that issue. The issue facing the industry is why this legislation needs to be in place. This is how the construction industry works: a major contractor wins a contract for a multimillion-dollar job. Unfortunately, when calling for tenders, the industry plays one tenderer off against another. Many small business owners in the construction industry will state that, from the time they submit their first tender for plumbing, electrical, brick and cement work - The ACTING SPEAKER: Time, member for Peel. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later stage of today’s sitting. Several members interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER: Order, members! [Leave granted for the member’s speech to be continued.] Debate interrupted, pursuant to standing orders. [Continued on page 1063.] Sitting suspended from 12.30 to 2.00 pm QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE SOUTH WEST GAS PIPELINE 98. Mr C.J. BARNETT to the Premier: I refer the Premier to the Liberal Party commitment to extend the south west gas pipeline to Albany, bringing with it the opportunity for greater investment, value adding and more jobs throughout the south west and the great southern region. (1) Does the Premier agree with the member for Albany that such an important project is not a priority for Albany? (2) The Australian Labor Party election policy “A Fair Go for Regional WA” states - Labor believes that one important way in which the State Government can stimulate regional investments, jobs and export is to facilitate infrastructure projects that build on local strengths. In the light of that, will the Premier admit that extending the south west gas pipeline to Albany achieves precisely that objective? Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) One thing is for certain; that is, when I want to gain a view of the needs of the Albany district, I will be talking to not the Leader of the Opposition, but the member for Albany. The member for Albany is on the ground, so he knows what services and infrastructure the community needs. The Labor Government has, of course, undertaken preliminary work on the nature of such a pipeline and the corridor that would be followed should it be created. The ultimate test will be whether there is an adequate number of customers to justify such an investment. That is our approach. Let us look at the approach of the Leader of the Opposition to all these issues. How will he fund all the promises that are coming from his side of politics? The Leader of the Opposition has a huge credibility gap in what he is saying to communities throughout Western Australia. The Leader of the Opposition will be subject to the accountability test as we go into the election campaign over the next 12 months. The accountability test is that every time he makes a promise, he will have to indicate how much it will cost. He will also have to indicate where the money will come from to fulfil the promise. The Labor Government has a responsible approach to its finances. Whenever we commit to major infrastructure throughout Western Australia we make sure that the infrastructure will deliver benefits to the people of Western Australia, and indeed to the people of any region. I remind this House that this Leader of the Opposition, when he was Minister for Resources Development, spent $20 million on the ill-fated Oakajee port project in Geraldton. Now Geraldton is on the move. Why is it on the move? It is because there is a Labor Government. GOVERNMENT’S VISION FOR THE FUTURE 99. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER to the Premier: The Opposition has criticised the Government for its so-called lack of vision in the development of Western Australia. Will the Premier please explain to the House what the true situation is?

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1057

Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: Our Government has a very clear and comprehensive vision for the future of Western Australia. One way in which we could define our approach to the future of Western Australia is that we are aggressively pursuing growth with social justice. There is no better illustration of our commitment to social justice than what we have done for working people in this State. I remind everyone in the House that since there has been a change in government, the minimum wage in Western Australia has gone up by $80 a week - that is a 28 per cent increase in the hourly rate for the minimum wage earners in Western Australia. We support working people. We make sure that they get a fair deal for the work that they do for the people of Western Australia. The Government has a clear vision. It is creating jobs, investment and opportunities throughout the States. We have a balanced view; we want to make sure that the metropolitan region and all the other regions get a fair go in the development of the State. It is interesting to contrast our vision - growth with justice - with the vision of the Liberal Party. One way to determine the Liberal Party’s vision for Western Australia is to look at what it did when it was in government for two terms. There is a very simple way to define that vision. It is the “p” word - privatisation. That was the Liberal Party’s vision for the future of Western Australia. I will remind members of the state printing service, the government passenger fleet - that was a very successful privatisation, was it not - Health Care Linen, the State Government Insurance Office, Total West transport, Westrail freight and the Dampier to Bunbury natural gas pipeline - a list of assets totalling $5 billion. Of course, the previous Government had a very interesting set of policies for Main Roads. Everyone in regional Western Australia knows about this Government’s policy for Main Roads. The previous Government dismantled that organisation. The maintenance work was contracted out for 10 years to four major contractors; the geotechnical work and the design work was contracted out for three to five years. The Labor Government has come back in and put the balance back. I congratulate the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure for doing that. She has reinstated and reformed the bridge maintenance crews. She has brought a lot of geotechnical knowledge, as well as soil testing, back into the department. The previous Government was on the brink of destroying that magnificent department. We came back into government and we are restoring it to its true role in rural and regional Western Australia. That was the previous Government’s vision, and the present Opposition still has the same vision of privatisation. The West Australian exposed that last year, when the Leader of the Opposition would not rule out a comprehensive campaign of privatisation, including the Totalisator Agency Board, Western Power, the Water Corporation, the port authorities and Westrail Transwa. Mr C.J. Barnett: Why don’t you try the truth? Dr G.I. GALLOP: I could talk about Westrail and what it has meant for rural and regional customers in Western Australia. The other part of the Liberal vision for Western Australia is fascinating. It is the user-pays vision. This is a wonderful vision that affects rural and regional people throughout this great State. The Leader of the Opposition scrapped the uniform electricity tariff in 1998. We reintroduced it. Do members know what we had to do to reintroduce it? The Minister for Energy had to issue a direction to Western Power, which he did on 25 October 2001. That is how seriously the Government takes the needs of its rural and regional customers. As a result of the Government’s steps, many commercial power consumers throughout the State now pay 16c a unit for electricity, rather than the 20c they were charged under the present Leader of the Opposition. Savings of up to $480 000 were delivered to businesses and other large energy consumers in Broome, Derby, Kununurra, Norseman, Esperance, Carnarvon, Exmouth, Leonora, Laverton and Mt Magnet. The Government of Western Australia supports our rural and regional communities. We understand that privatisation madness undermines the living conditions of people in rural and regional Western Australia. We have the will and the capacity to oppose it. We understand that the uniform tariff is fundamentally important for rural and regional customers, and that is why we reinstated it. The vision of the Government is very clear for all to see, as is the privatisation and user-pays vision of the Opposition.

PETROL PRICE DIFFERENTIALS 100. Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN to the Premier: I refer the Premier to his pre-election commitment to kill the gap between the price of petrol in country areas and that in the metropolitan area. (1) Is the Premier aware that motorists in Perth today are buying fuel for 87.2c a litre? (2) Is the Premier aware that the average fuel price today in Albany is 102.3c a litre? The Premier can write this down: motorists in Albany are paying 15.1c a litre more for petrol than motorists in Perth. (3) When will the Premier meet his election commitment to kill the gap?

1058 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: (1)-(3) I have learnt that arguments can never be made based on the claims made in Parliament by members of the Liberal Party when they refer to statistics because they always get the statistics wrong. I am advised that as a result of the policies this Government has introduced, including FuelWatch and the sign boards that have been introduced throughout regional Western Australia, the gap between the price of petrol in the metropolitan area and Albany has been reduced by 4c a litre. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: The Government intervened in the market place to bring about that reduction. What did members opposite do during the eight years when they were in government? This Government has delivered a reduction in the price gap. The difference between the price of fuel in the metropolitan area and Albany is 4c a litre. I do not have the figures for petrol prices from other parts of the State available. However, I am sure that the Minister for Consumer and Employment Protection can provide those figures. This is another example of the Liberal and National Parties going on about rural and regional Western Australia, yet they never delivered. Rural and regional people know that if they want things delivered, a Labor Government must be in office.

PETROL PRICE DIFFERENTIALS 101. Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN to the Premier: I have a supplementary question. Is the Premier saying that the difference of 15c a litre in the price of petrol in Albany and Perth today - those figures were taken from the Government’s own web site - is acceptable? Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: I made it very clear that when it comes to numbers, the Liberal Party can never be trusted.

EDUCATION IN ALBANY, GREATER PARTICIPATION 102. Mr P.B. WATSON to the Minister for Education and Training: Will the minister advise the House what this Government has done to ensure greater participation in education in Albany, including at the tertiary level? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for Albany for the question and for his assistance in promoting issues concerning education. I compliment the member for Albany on his demeanour in Parliament, which contrasts with that of members opposite. Is it not a disgrace? I congratulate the member for Albany. The member would be pleased to know that this Government has done a lot of work to try to facilitate university access in Albany. It has long been a dream of the people who live in Albany to be able to either attend a university in Perth or a university course in Albany. I remember the debate in the 1970s about creating a new university, which became Murdoch University. Albany put up a very strong case for building the new university there, and the then state member, Leon Watt, promoted it in the 1970s. Unfortunately, that did not occur. However, since we came to office, this Government has worked with the University of Western Australia, Curtin University and Edith Cowan University to allow people from Albany to access university education. The Government has provided $800 000 to upgrade the old Albany post office to university level standard as the Albany base for the university. As a result, I am pleased to tell the member for Albany that there are now 52 undergraduate UWA students in Albany and 44 postgraduate students. There are 20 first-year places, which will pipeline - that is, grow - to 55 over the next couple of years. It is a magnificent development for this town. People who grew up in metropolitan Perth do not understand how important it is for regional people to be able to access university, especially at first-year level. That bridging period is very important. When young people from Albany finish high school, they can access a first-year university course in Albany without the need to relocate to Perth. When they have matured and are better able to cope with some of the things that they must deal with, they can move to the metropolitan area if they want to. It is a very good development. First-year students at the University of Western Australia in Albany can choose from 35 degree courses. It is not as though they are being offered access to only one or two; there are 35. The Albany campus of UWA offers a full arts degree, and first-year access to the other courses. The Great Southern TAFE also allows access to courses in nursing through Curtin University of Technology, and fine arts through Edith Cowan University. About 30 people are enrolled at university there. It is a very good development for the town. The member for Albany played a part in bringing that matter to our attention and in ensuring that it did not fall off the agenda. More broadly, I will just finish on this note: this Government has turned around the tragic and disgraceful decline in high school retention rates that occurred in this State under the watch of the Court Government. At the end of its term of government, fewer young people were finishing high school successfully than was the case at the beginning of its

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1059 term of government. That is unbelievable. It was a tragic development. For the first time in more than a decade, retention rates are on the increase in government schools in Western Australia, including in Albany. That is a great achievement. Every parent, including those in this audience, knows now, as do all the young people in the gallery, that it is critically important for young people to successfully complete their education. It is an issue that did not occur to the previous Minister for Education. He had no idea of its importance. When people look at the background of that person, they will understand why. He had no idea of the importance of education and being able to pull people through to the ultimate completion of their education. We are delivering. I want to ask for the help of the Albany community on one other issue. This morning I announced that we will have an education forum in this town on 29 April. I want everybody to come and discuss how we can successfully raise the school leaving age from 15, which it is now - at a Third World level - to 17, which is what it should be. I want all the people of Albany, the chamber of commerce, the local industries, the schools, the TAFE people and the local government authorities to come to our meeting and discuss how we will do it - not if we will do it, because it will happen, but how it will be done. I congratulate the member for Albany. ALBANY RESIDENTIAL COLLEGE 103. Mr J.H.D. DAY to the Minister for Education and Training: I refer the minister to the ageing and cramped facilities at the Albany Residential College, which houses 111 secondary school students from around the great southern region, and Labor’s decision to scale down and delay the facility for redevelopment. (1) Is the minister aware that the college has no facilities for children with disabilities and that students, both male and female, are forced to use curtains for walls, as well as transportable bathrooms? (2) Will the minister admit that the deplorable state of existing facilities and the limited availability of the accommodation is forcing parents to send their children to Perth schools, away from their families and homes? (3) Will the minister now commit to the immediate and full redevelopment of the hostel? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for the question. (1)-(3) Let me preface my remarks by saying that the member for Darling Range is a very good member of Parliament. He has a very good and sound interest in education, and I appreciate his involvement and interest in education. However, on this occasion I am amazed that the member for Darling Range would have the audacity and the hide to bring this issue to the Parliament in front of the people of Albany. I want to make one point clear about this issue. A couple of things happened to that hostel that severely affected the children who go there. One is that the previous Government allowed access to non-government students. It was a government high school hostel, and the previous Government allowed access to non-government students. That effectively put huge pressure on the capacity of the hostel, to the point that it is overcrowded. In the meantime, of course, as we all know, those opposite were in government for eight years. Mr J.H.D. Day: It would have been done by now if we were still in government. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It would have been done? They put in place that change, and did absolutely nothing about it. All they did was blow hard about what might happen. They did nothing. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: On every measurable criterion, the Leader of the Opposition was a failure as Minister for Education. The Leader of the Opposition knows that, and it riles him. He hates the fact that on every measurable criterion, he was a failure. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: No money was allocated to that hostel by the previous Government - none. People need to understand that Governments project their budgets forward four years at a time. The former Government put nothing in. It had no intention of ever doing anything. We now have in the budget funds for a complete refurbishment or rebuild of that hostel. It is a very big investment in that hostel. The first $500 000 of planning money is in the 2005-06 budget. In the next budget after that, the hostel will be built. It is very interesting to try to get through any sense of budgeting with the mob opposite. There is a wide misconception in the community that the Liberal Party people are the people of business. They are not. If they were, they would not be here. They are failures. The previous minister, who aspires to be the next Premier and Treasurer, blew his budget by $300 million in three to four years. He was the worst manager of an education budget this State has ever seen. He was unbelievable. Let us ask the people of Western Australia, for all that, what did they get. This project is in the forward estimates, and it will be delivered.

1060 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

REMUNERATION FOR NURSES 104. Mrs C.A. MARTIN to the Minister for Health: Will the minister please advise the House of the approach the Government is taking to ensure that nurses are well remunerated? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: I thank the member for Kimberley for this question. I advise the House that the existing enterprise bargaining agreement for nurses throughout Western Australia will expire on 1 May, some five weeks away. To date, no claim has been made by the Australian Nursing Federation for improved salaries or conditions for nurses. Accordingly, last Friday I wrote to the ANF and asked it to commence negotiations, and I am pleased to say that those negotiations are scheduled to commence this coming Friday morning. As a show of goodwill, I have directed the Department of Health to increase the salaries of all registered nurses by 3.4 per cent from 1 May. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: That is the same increase as was recently negotiated for all other health professionals who work in our public hospital system. The Health Services Union, which represents the other health professionals, negotiated with the Government and agreed on a 3.4 per cent increase for this year. Doctors have negotiated and agreed on a three per cent increase this year. In the case of the other health service professionals, the increase has applied from January, and in the case of doctors, the increase will apply from October, subject to Industrial Relations Commission ratification. I take this opportunity to table relevant documents; namely, the letter that has been sent to the Australian Nursing Federation, the letter that has been sent to the Australian Medical Association on behalf of doctors, and the letter that has been sent to the Hospital Salaried Officers Association in respect of their proposed industrial agreements. [See paper No 2199.] Mr J.A. McGINTY: Having said that, I indicate that our nurses are special. We want them, because they are the backbone of our health system, to be among the best paid in Australia. I will not accept second-rate salaries and conditions for our nurses. If we are to attract new nurses into the profession and retain those employees who are currently working in our hospitals, it is vital that we ensure that they are paid top rates. I am also very pleased to say that in the past three years since the change of government the numbers have increased to 923 - Dr J.M. Woollard: Is that registered and enrolled nurses, or just one of those? The SPEAKER: Order! I have been quite patient with the member for Alfred Cove. I cannot hear what she is saying but I know she is saying something. I call the member to order for the first time. Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am very pleased to say that in the past three years we have increased by 923 the number of full- time salaried nurses working in our government hospitals. At the same time, there has been an increase of 3 772 nurses on the register of nurses in Western Australia - a phenomenal turnaround. We want to see that continue and we hope that the nurses will accept the good faith in which their salaries have been unconditionally increased by the Government prior to negotiations even commencing. It is an unusual move, which demonstrates how much the Government values its nurses. The nurses should not feel that they must take industrial action to win fair salaries. We will make sure that our nurses are among the best paid in the country.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLIES, REGIONAL TOWNS 105. Mr T.K. WALDRON to the Minister for Energy: I refer to the Labor Party’s policy statement “A Fair Go For Regional WA”, which states that Labor is committed to securing a future for regional WA by attracting new investment and getting the environment right to allow real job creation. (1) Is the minister aware that significant projects in many regional towns are on hold owing to the lack of adequate electricity supply, including the Jerramungup industry group’s proposal to establish a $4 million stockfeed pellet mill in the town? (2) Is the minister aware that the list of projects in jeopardy also includes the Dalwallinu cedar processing facility and the establishment of a processing facility at Avon to process kaolin clay from Wickepin? (3) If so, what action will the minister take to help these towns secure a reliable energy source? (4) I have appreciated the meetings and ongoing discussions that I have had with the minister on the Narrogin oil mallee plant and was just advised at lunchtime today that we have federal funding for that plant. What level of funding can the State provide to the Narrogin oil mallee bioenergy plant to complete it to proof-of-concept stage, because the technology really has the potential to resolve some of the energy problems in the wheatbelt?

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1061

Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: The member can see the $180 million-worth of common user infrastructure that is going in on the Burrup Peninsula. He knows that the regional development policy of the Labor Party is being implemented. Only yesterday in the south east the Premier announced a $1.4 million project, involving 1 000 construction jobs and 300 permanent jobs, supported by $18.4 million of state government infrastructure commitment. I have been advised by Western Power as follows with regard to the questions asked by the Deputy Leader of the National Party, and I thank him for giving me some notice of the question. (1) Western Power has held initial discussions with the proponents’ electrical consultant and has indicated what works would be necessary to ensure sufficient supply capacity. However, no formal application for a supply has been received. Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the National Party! Mr E.S. RIPPER: To continue - (2) Based on the information provided, Western Power has not received formal application from these ventures for a power supply. (3) Western Power monitors normal load growth on the distribution network and incrementally upgrades supply capacity as required to supply the normal load growth. However, normal load growth does not usually cover new commercial industrial loads, which must apply to Western Power for connection. Mr C.J. Barnett: Why? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The Leader of the Opposition knows why, because he presided over exactly the same situation. Western Power’s reply states - Where there is a capacity shortage in the case of a prospective commercial loan, significant reinforcements may be required in excess of what is needed to supply normal load growth, and a capital contribution in accordance with supply extension policies is sought. That is a very important point, because the supply extension policies of Western Power are exactly the same supply extension policies that applied when the National Party was in government and when the Leader of the Opposition was Minister for Energy. Those supply policies provide for Western Power to offset a proportion of the capital cost of an upgrade against increased revenue, and we have a $75 million regional investment fund - Mr M.W. Trenorden: For the Burrup. Mr E.S. RIPPER: In addition to the Burrup expenditure that members opposite did not have when they were in government. (4) I have also been asked about the Narrogin oil mallee plant and the integrated wood processing plant. I want to make three important points about that plant: first, it is an experimental plant and its workability is yet to be demonstrated; second, it produces renewable energy but it is equally as important for its potential impact through the promotion of oil mallee plantations on salinity control; third, regrettably, the cost of the plant has blown out due to the necessity for design changes on what is an experimental plant. Western Power has already spent $9.2 million on this project, and has committed a further $3.75 million. It has provisionally secured a further $1 million from the Australian Greenhouse Office and it has other applications in process with the federal Department of Transport and Regional Services and the Natural Heritage Trust. I very much hope that all those applications for commonwealth funding support, for what is an important land care project, will be successful. Mr T.K. Waldron: It has today. I was advised at lunch time. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am pleased that the member has received separate advice that some of these funds might be forthcoming. I have already said to the member, and I will say it again, publicly: if the funds available from the Commonwealth are not sufficient in addition to those already committed by Western Power, I am happy to talk to my ministerial colleagues about the impact of this project on salinity, and we will discuss what additional assistance might be available. Finally, Western Power will spend $1.2 billion over the next five years on electrical infrastructure in the south west interconnected system, and a very big proportion of that money will be spent outside the metropolitan area. CANNABIS LAWS 106. Dr E. CONSTABLE to the Minister for Community Development, Women’s Interests, Seniors and Youth: I refer to the Gallop Government’s decision to give Western Australia the softest cannabis laws in the nation, and ask -

1062 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

(1) Does the minister accept the findings of Professor Sven Silburn of the Telethon Institute for Child Health Research, who is also a member of the Ministerial Council for Suicide Prevention, that smoking marijuana more than 50 times a year - once a week on average - could double the chances of youths committing suicide? (2) Does the minister grasp the fact that regional Western Australia has an alarming suicide rate that is consistently higher than that in metropolitan Perth? (3) Will the minister accept that the decriminalisation of a drug that is related to suicide, depression, schizophrenia and anxiety is clearly not good social policy? Ms S.M. McHALE replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for her question. Let me make this point clear: this Government has not and never will legalise cannabis. What this Government has done is decriminalise, and there is a big difference. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms S.M. McHALE: In 2001 we held a drug summit, at which members of the community were brought together, including young people; people opposed to cannabis and people with knowledge about mental health and depression. Out of that drug summit we developed a very sound policy - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms S.M. McHALE: The reality is that mental health is an issue for young people, that suicide in our community is an issue, and that this Government is making sure that there are services in regional WA - places like Albany and the Kimberley - to support the young people who face a range of issues. The reality in the community is that mental health and issues amongst young people have been around for a long time. To say that the Government and its policy on cannabis will increase the rate of mental illness among our young people is a fallacious argument and does not do justice to the real issues that affect young people, such as alienation, employment, unemployment and sexuality. Let us get real, Mr Speaker and members of the Opposition. Let us really understand the issues confronting young people, and stop the fallacious argument that the Government’s position will ruin the lives of young people. Issues surrounding mental health have been around for a long time. Young people need to be helped with proper services. Mental health issues should not be brushed under the carpet. LABOR PARTY, VOTE RIGGING ALLEGATIONS 107. Mr C.J. BARNETT to the Premier: I refer the Premier to allegations of vote rigging within the Labor Party, and to comments made by the Minister for Police in The West Australian today that the internal investigation into this matter has been compromised. (1) Does the Premier concede that by attempting to sweep this matter under the carpet, as he has done, he risks undermining public confidence in the legitimacy of our democratic system? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr C.J. BARNETT: Continuing - (2) Will the Premier show leadership on this issue and move to immediately establish a completely open and independent investigation into the vote rigging scandal, as the Premier of Queensland did when confronted with similarly potentially fraudulent behaviour within the Labor Party in Queensland? Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: (1)-(2) I could say that people in glasshouses should not throw stones, but I will resist that temptation. There is no doubt that from time to time political parties are subject to intensive scrutiny, and, indeed, allegations are made about the way that elements of political parties are operating. I have made it clear that Australian Labor Party members should abide by its rules, and that anyone who has a vote in a Labor Party election should have that vote legitimately. Some allegations have been made. We will ensure as a party that the facts in relation to those allegations are properly found, and that any consequences that flow from those facts will be followed up by the Labor Party. ALBANY, PUBLIC TRANSPORT 108. Mr P.B. WATSON to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: I took the opportunity of the regional Parliament sittings to invite the minister to meet the Albany public transport task force. Can the minister outline what she proposes to improve public transport in Albany?

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1063

Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Albany for his question. I also thank him for the enormous number of meetings he has organised with the community for me. It has been fantastic. The exceptionally high regard that the member for Albany is held in the community has been very evident to me and to all ministers, along with people’s appreciation for the tremendous hard work he does and his deep links into the community. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The community understands when it has a decent and committed man representing it, and it responds accordingly. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was pleased to meet the Albany public transport task force, which comprises a group of committed activist in this community who recognise that Albany is growing quite dramatically. They want the sort of sustainable transport options and transport infrastructure that they see people in the city of Perth and other towns enjoying. I was very happy to talk to them and the member for Albany about some problems we identified with the Albany bus service. A number of town centres have a bus service that has built up in a somewhat ad hoc fashion with little bits added incrementally. We find that services do not necessarily meet the current demands and have not adjusted to the changing patterns of the community. We find that services are not frequent enough, timetables are hard to read and not modern and there is a lack of route maps - all of the issues that are very important to make public transport work. In many instances buses are not appropriate for the very mountainous terrain of Albany. Mr M.W. Trenorden: I thought it would have been the Mandurah train! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: It seems mountainous to me when I go out there walking in the morning. Overall the service does not add a great alternative to car use. There are about three town bus services, 12 town school bus services and 16 country bus services. Certainly bus drivers on school bus contracts are exceptionally happy because they are getting $4 an hour more than they were previously. The Government recognises that the bus service must be revamped. I have given a commitment that the Government will undertake that revamp. We will start the process of community consultation engagement in June. We have done the same thing recently in Bunbury, where there has been an amazing turnaround in the usage of public transport. The review process for a complete re-engineering of the routes and the public transport infrastructure in Bunbury has been very well received. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Government is therefore very happy to announce that the next cab off the rank will be the wonderful town of Albany. I use this opportunity to thank the people of Albany for their fantastic hospitality; it has been a great stay. PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS Standing Orders Suspension MR J.C. KOBELKE (Nollamara - Leader of the House) [2.43 pm] - without notice: I move - That so much of the standing orders be suspended as is necessary to require by this motion that during private members’ business today, 45 minutes in total be allocated to Liberal Party and National Party members, 35 minutes be allocated to government members and 10 minutes in total be allocated to Independent members. Mr Speaker, this motion was suggested by the Opposition and is a very sensible one. I have spoken to both National Party and Independent members who are happy to support it. On that basis, I think it will help us to conduct the debate in private members’ time in a much more efficient way, giving a fair share to members on all sides. Question put and passed with an absolute majority. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS BILL 2004 Second Reading Resumed from an earlier stage of the sitting. MR N.R. MARLBOROUGH (Peel - Parliamentary Secretary) [2.44 pm]: I said before lunch that we had dealt with the issue of Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd and I put it in its appropriate context. The issue we must concentrate on is endemic to the history of the construction industry in this State and throughout Australia - that is, the business of

1064 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] putting massive pressure on small contracting companies to reduce their prices when applying for major contracts. We all know how that pressure occurs. Initially when major companies apply for major jobs in the city centre or in major regional centres, they put out their electrical and plumbing contracts for tender. From the first time that contractors tender a price on which they can earn a profit, pressure is applied to them by those major companies to reduce their price. We all know that is how the system works, whether it be by a phone call or by a letter. Unfortunately, before it gets to the situation of unions demanding that workers be properly rewarded for their work, the appropriate margin that is needed for the smaller company to continue in plumbing or electrical work is further minimised. That means that any untoward activity in the construction industry on a particular job further marginalises the profits of those people. The mentality of the member for Kingsley is such that her line is that when those big companies fall into that sort of problem, they ought to be able to operate by cutting down on the wages and conditions of the people who work for them. Ms K. Hodson-Thomas: That is not what she said. You are misrepresenting the member for Kingsley. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: That was the mentality of Consolidated Constructions when it dealt with a local plumbing company or the local electrical company. It wanted to reduce the bottom line. It said that the contract was no longer worth half a million dollars, so it would find reasons to delay paying the contractor. Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd was in that sort of situation for two years. One company that dealt with Consolidated Constructions on Christmas Island two years ago was Gregory Plumbing. That company is still owed $1.7 million. Can members imagine what that does to a small company in a regional town such as Albany? How does such a company ever start again? Consolidated Constructions went on for two years under the previous Government’s program. It still owes $1.7 million to a company that it sent broke on Christmas Island. That is how it operated. Albany, and the rest of Western Australia, is going through a boom. The Minister for Police announced a $20 million project. The Minister for Education and Training announced a half-million dollar upgrade of a local school. Co-operative Bulk Handling Ltd is increasing its work capacity. Millions of dollars of construction opportunities are coming into the town of Albany. When the big boys come to town to build - they are predominantly the ones that get the $20 million contracts - we do not want the Albany plumber or the Albany electrician to be screwed by the contracting process. This legislation will ensure that that does not happen. This legislation will never allow a large company to have a contractor on a 90-day scheme. That happens when they are running well. If such a company owes a plumbing company a dollar, it will pay it in 90 days plus. That is how most of these fellas run small businesses. In and out of politics, they are used to that system. It does not affect them and they are able to earn interest on their money. Who cares about the plumbing company or the electrical company? If that approach is multiplied by the number of contractors on site, it increases the margin. The cancer of the industry is the problem. It has been a cancer in the industry for 50 years, since the Second World War, and it has become progressively worse. Governments across Australia have had to bring in this legislation to protect small business people. Members opposite look after only the top end of town. Several members interjected. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: They talk about protecting small business, but they look after only the big end of town. The member for Kingsley runs off about Consolidated Constructions and Pindan Constructions. One never hears the member for Kingsley mention companies such as Multiplex, John Holland Pty Ltd or Leighton Holdings Ltd. Why? It is because these companies are run properly. Those who run them know what they have to pay. They do not keep their small contractors waiting. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: Multiplex is able to build a convention centre with Kevin Reynolds’ labourers on time, under cost and ready to go. That is what members opposite do not want to tell us. Some of the great things about Albany are its people and its environment. That is why we all love coming down here, whether for a political reason or just for holidays. People come from all over Australia to enjoy holidays here. During my time in Albany over the past few days I have been fortunate to meet some of those people on the streets. For example, Mary and Dennis McGowan are in the gallery. They have driven all the way from Coffs Harbour, New South Wales. It is lovely to see them here today with their son, Mark McGowan, the member for Rockingham. They have driven from Coffs Harbour to attend this parliamentary sitting and also because they love Western Australia. Mark’s father Dennis so loves Western Australia that, the last time he came to Western Australia - four years ago at the age of 62 - he cycled over! He is here today to enjoy the proceedings. However, he does not want to see Albany’s small businesses being screwed because of the way the member for Kingsley wants to see the construction industry work. This legislation protects the industry. Desperate Dan here - which electorate is he the member for? The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Peel knows that he should address members by the name of their electorate. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: The member for Mitchell, known as Desperate Dan - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Peel to order for the first time.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1065

Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The member for Mitchell intervened and said that they knew how good the legislation was and that is why the previous minister introduced the legislation. Mr R.F. Johnson: I started the process. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: Started the process. I will just finish on this point. This is how he started the process: as the minister responsible, he put in place a committee process. When that committee process reported to his caucus room, they rejected the direction in which he was going. When he was confronted with that evidence and, as the minister he had started to go down that path, he said, “Look, it was not the proper parliamentary process. As the minister, I thought there was a need to look at the issue.” That is why nothing happened for eight years. That is how he handled it. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: It went to the second room. Mr R.F. Johnson: No, it did not. How do you know? Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: It went to his caucus room. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: It went to his caucus room and it was rejected. The evidence of its rejection is simply this: how long was he the minister? Mr R.F. Johnson: Fifteen months. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: Fifteen months. He brought nothing to Parliament on this matter. My case rests. Everybody on the opposition side wants to take the opportunity of using this to attack Australian workers and their right to decent wages and conditions. They want to attack the trade union movement that supports them. Thank God we have the trade union movement in place against this mob. Thank God we have some balance in the workplace. The truth of the matter is that every small business involved in the construction industry supports the Government on this legislation. They are sick of being robbed. It is as simple as that. That is what has been happening. Mr R.F. Johnson: I agree with you. Mr N.R. MARLBOROUGH: “I agree with you”, he says. They are sick of being robbed and we will introduce the legislation that stops them being robbed. MR B.J. GRYLLS (Merredin) [2.54 pm]: A strong building and construction industry is critical to the growth of this State, and it is especially critical to the growth of regional Western Australia. We have heard many examples in this regional Parliament of regional economic growth being stifled through lack of infrastructure. I am happy to report that private enterprise and construction projects are continuing in my electorate. I am sure it is the case in many inland electorates in this State. Security of payment for construction work is fundamental to that growth and the accelerated growth of development in the regions. The National Party will support the Construction Contracts Bill 2004. It brings forward some very relevant points. The three main provisions of the Bill cover the prohibition of payment provisions in contracts that slow or stop the movement of funds through the contracting chain, which means that a party cannot make a payment contingent on its being paid first under a separate contract. Every member in the House will understand what that means; it is the pay- when-paid philosophy that so badly affects subcontractors in this world. Aside from what members on the other side said, I was a small businessman before I entered this place, so I know all about the problem. It affected my business. Government departments were usually the worst offenders when it came to getting paid on time in the small business sector. I hope that members on the other side take that into consideration. Although this is not a part of this Bill, it is very simple for government departments to be directed to make payments to small businesses promptly and efficiently, which does not always happen. Members can bring forward many examples of it. We support the legislation because it will be good if this Government can guarantee that all government departments ensure that payments are made promptly. The Bill also establishes a rapid adjudication process that will allow for experienced and independent adjudicators to review claims and make binding determinations on conflicts that arise from the methods by which contractors are paid. The National Party has gone through the Bill. We believe that it is a good Bill and we look forward to supporting it at the consideration in detail stage. We have one concern with clause 7, which has been raised already with the minister. However, rather than take up the limited time of the House, we will debate it during the consideration in detail stage when we are again in Perth. The National Party supports the Bill, which raises a very important issue. I thank the member for Peel for his interesting contribution to this debate, but it has left me somewhat confused. Members on the government side spent all

1066 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] their time yesterday blaming the finance brokers scandal on the previous minister and the previous Government. They accused the previous Government of being asleep at the wheel while innocent Western Australians were being ripped off. They said that the previous minister sat on his hands while dodgy finance brokers ripped off investors. I draw members’ attention to the collapse of Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd and refer to the press release put out by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure on 6 February in which she announced being in the Pilbara with 100 Pilbara residents, including a big group of Marble Bar schoolchildren, to attend that morning’s official opening of the sealed road from Marble Bar and again enjoy the opportunity of a photograph and story in the newspaper. At about the same time, Main Roads was making preparations for the final $1.2 million payment to Consolidated Constructions. Therefore, while the minister was enjoying the opportunity of a photo shoot, Consolidated Constructions was about to get the $1.2 million final payment on the contract. It is very important that the House recognise that the contract with Consolidated Constructions was let in August 2003. When we reflect on this we need to bear in mind the comments of the member for Peel. He spent 20 minutes explaining to us the disastrous actions of Consolidated Constructions. Consolidated Constructions still owes $2 million to Cocos Island contractors. Over two years ago the member for Peel was very aware of the disastrous activities of Consolidated Constructions, and still subcontractors are out of pocket. Obviously, the member for Peel has not managed to have a discussion with the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and has not mentioned to her the great troubles Consolidated Constructions has had in paying the accounts to its subcontractors. While the minister is here crowing about this new legislation that supports subcontractors, she was letting a contract to a business that one of her senior members of Parliament knew did not pay its subcontractors in August 2003. History tells us that, on 2 March, Consolidated Constructions was placed in the hands of liquidators. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: Are you claiming that Consolidated Constructions was trading while insolvent? Mr B.J. GRYLLS: The minister should let me get to my claims. Is the minister responsible for her department? Ms A.J. MacTiernan: Absolutely. Mr B.J. GRYLLS: The minister’s press release of 6 February supports Consolidated Constructions winning the contract. Did the minister talk to the member for Peel about Consolidated Constructions being awarded that contract? Ms A.J. MacTiernan: Of course I did not talk to the member for Peel. Mr B.J. GRYLLS: Perhaps she should have, because that could have saved these subcontractors $1.2 million. Where are the checks and balances? Ms A.J. MacTiernan: How could we have done that? Mr B.J. GRYLLS: By not awarding the contract to that company. The member for Peel has just explained to us about the debacle. He spent 20 minutes telling us it is a disgraceful company. Mr J.C. Kobelke: Is it your position that the member for Peel should have veto over all government contracts? Mr B.J. GRYLLS: I am saying that, if the member for Peel is correct in his assumptions about Consolidated Constructions, he raises some very serious allegations. If these allegations had been conveyed to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and Main Roads, I would suggest that they would have had a fairly serious impact on the decision about who would win that contract in August 2003. This obviously has not happened. While the minister posed for a photo opportunity in Marble Bar, her department was signing a cheque for $1.2 million, which should have been used for payment to a number of subcontractors. I will list the companies: Carr Civil Contracting Pty Ltd in Karratha, with 30 or 40 employees, has lost $1.6 million to Consolidated Constructions; an Albany business is owed $61 000 by Consolidated Constructions; a plant hire services company in Perth is owed $200 000; Northcoast Contractors Pty Ltd in Geraldton is owed $40 000; and RNR Contracting Pty Ltd in Perth, which laid the bitumen, is owed $420 000. Has the minister ordered an urgent inquiry into the impact of the collapse of Consolidated Constructions on subcontractors; and, if not, why not? What was the minister doing? Why did she not ensure that there was a watertight protocol to ensure subcontractors were paid? Ms A.J. MacTiernan: Are you asking a question or not? Are these just rhetorical questions? Mr B.J. GRYLLS: The minister will be able to have her say in reply to this debate. How many government contracts, in particular those of Main Roads - the minister mentioned this earlier - are currently let to Consolidated Constructions? The minister is asleep at the wheel - the very thing of which she accused the former minister over the finance brokers scandal. She has presided over a main roads department that let a contract in August 2003, to Consolidated Constructions, which is now in administration. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: You tell me what evidence was available to Main Roads in August 2003 that Consolidated was in trouble. You tell me. Mr B.J. GRYLLS: The member for Peel said that the company had been ripping off its subcontractors for two years. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: He got that material out of the paper this morning.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1067

Mr B.J. GRYLLS: The member for Peel just told us that Consolidated Constructions was a very dubious company. Is he wrong? Ms A.J. MacTiernan: There was absolutely no reason whatsoever that either Main Roads or the Public Transport Authority should not have let contracts to either of those companies on the basis of the information that was publicly available. Mr B.J. GRYLLS: So the member for Peel was incorrect. Someone is wrong - either the member for Peel or the minister’s department. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: He is making the point that it is a nonsense to pretend that the issue was the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union. Mr B.J. GRYLLS: The loss of $1.2 million to subcontractors could have been averted if the minister had not been asleep at the wheel. That is the very thing she accused the Minister for Fair Trading in the previous Government of in the finance brokers scandal. The minister is asleep at the wheel, and this issue will not go away. Hundreds of contractors will lose money from this deal that the minister signed off on in 2003. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: When did you raise this in Parliament? We raised the finance brokers issue day after day in Parliament, and the Government did nothing about it. Mr B.J. GRYLLS: My whole argument has been developed in the minute between when the member for Peel sat down and I stood up. The member for Peel made it very clear that there were major problems with Consolidated Constructions. It is obvious that the minister has not spoken to him. I would have thought that, as the member for Peel had those concerns, the minister’s department would have had a closer look at the issues. As I said, the National Party will support this legislation. However, it is very concerned that a $1.2 million contract could be let to Consolidated Constructions. The final payment was made a matter of three or four days before Consolidated Constructions went into administration. Many subcontractors have been left hundreds of thousands of dollars out of pocket. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure presided over the whole sorry process. Some $1.2 million has been lost. We have not heard the end of this. MS K. HODSON-THOMAS (Carine) [3.09 pm]: This Bill introduces security of payment legislation for the building and construction industry. I have been in contact with a number of subcontractors who have been caught up in the collapse of Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd. I will not make a long address today. I will raise a number of issues that the subcontractors have raised with me, particularly in light of the collapse of Consolidated Constructions, which we have heard a lot about today. I have received a number of e-mails from subcontractors over the past couple of weeks. I received correspondence from Mr Mark Blayney, Mr Rob Lundie, Mr Rod Evans and also from Arrowsmith Transport. I refer to these matters today because of the issues that have been raised, and to put some of the facts on the record. I will speak about the e- mails and paraphrase them as best I can. Mr Mark Blayney wrote to me on 24 March. He is the owner/manager of Carr Civil Contracting Pty Ltd, which is a civil earthmoving contractor based in Karratha. He said that the company had recently completed works in the role of principal subcontractor for Consolidated Constructions on Main Roads contract No 706/02, the Marble Bar Road, which the minister opened in February. Works on the project were completed in early February. The final process claim was for approximately $1.5 million and was due for payment on 29 February 2004. With the appointment of the administrator at Consolidated Constructions on 2 March 2004, it now appears that the company will not receive any payment from Consolidated Constructions. Therefore, the company will be out of pocket by $1.5 million. He said also that this is a major concern, given that Main Roads released payment of all moneys due and payable, including security and retention moneys, to Consolidated Constructions on 25 February, which was barely one week prior to the appointment of the administrators. However, his concern rests not solely with his organisation and his employees, but also with the myriad companies that performed works on behalf of Consolidated Constructions. He is concerned about the domino effect that will have on not only the subcontractors, but also the people who live in that region. Mr Lundie and Rod Evans wrote to me on 11 March. Their e-mail is interesting and goes to the heart of the comments by the member for Merredin. Again, I would like to place this on record because I believe it is important to do so during discussion about this important legislation. Mr Lundie and Rod Evans state - Quite a few sub-contractors undertook work on the project, including our company RNR Contracting. We are exposed to the tune of almost $400,000 through a sub-contract to Carr Civil Contractors. Carr Civil are exposed to about $1.5M, - I have already alluded to that - and have already appointed administrators. This is the important part that I want to raise -

1068 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

We pointed out to MRWA personnel that we would not be able to suffer a loss of such a magnitude, and we continued to work on the project only after first confirming with MRWA personnel that the contractors were solvent. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: What date was this? Ms K. HODSON-THOMAS: That was on 11 March. They had obviously gone to Main Roads with concerns. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: When? I am trying to get some idea of the timing. Ms K. HODSON-THOMAS: Yes. I will just read the e-mail. I say to the minister that this is only brief, and it would be important to find out what discussions they had with Main Roads Western Australia regarding their concerns about the solvency of this company. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: So you are saying that before the company went into administration - Ms K. HODSON-THOMAS: These people raised concerns with Main Roads, not about Carr Civil Contracting Pty Ltd, but about Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd. They were concerned that the company would not be solvent and that they would ultimately pay the penalty of not being paid at the end of the contract. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: Can you tell me when they raised those concerns with Main Roads? Ms K. HODSON-THOMAS: I cannot, because it is not in the detail of this e-mail. However, let me just complete what they have told me. The e-mail continues - We at times related to MRWA personnel that rumours abounded . . . They were rumours, but, as we now know, the company has gone into liquidation and administrators have been appointed. They were obviously very concerned that they would not be paid. They go on to say - . . . that rumours abounded with the considerable risk that Consolidated would not be permitted to complete the project, and that we understood that MRWA were considering taking over the management and direct sub- contracting of the works from Consolidated Constructions. We were given verbal assurances that MRWA had decided to not take over the works, and that in any event there were provisions in the contract to ensure that sub-contractors would be paid . . . We now know that that is not the case. They have not been paid. As a result, Carr Civil Contracting is now also going into voluntary administration. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: Who was the contractor who made the claims in the letter? Ms K. HODSON-THOMAS: Mr Rod Evans and Mr Rob Lundie from RNR Contracting Pty Ltd. They are owed in the vicinity of $400 000. That goes to the heart of this legislation. That is why we all support this legislation, with a view to ensuring that subcontractors are paid. We all agree that Marble Bar Road is an important piece of infrastructure. When the minister opened it, I am sure she hoped that Consolidated Constructions would honour its obligations to the small business companies, because there will be a domino effect. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: Quite frankly, if this company has traded while insolvent, I hope that the full force of the law is directed against it, that the directors who were responsible are personally taken to task under the provisions of the Corporations Act, and that any shortages in the money that is available will be reimbursed by the directors, if the directors have behaved in such a way that they traded while the company was insolvent. Ms K. HODSON-THOMAS: In seeking further information and clarification from the minister, I ask her for some assurances. In her summation of the second reading debate, I am sure that she will be able to give us some clarification of this legislation. Will it deal with those issues? Ms A.J. MacTiernan: It will deal with them in two ways. Part one is that it will enable the retention moneys that are held by the principal to be taken into account. Therefore, there will be the capacity for the retention moneys to be characterised as being in trust for the subcontractors. Part two is that because this legislation provides for a speedy dispute resolution process, there will not be a build-up of debts, and any problems will emerge much earlier in the piece. The problem was that the debts had been allowed to build up over time, and the contractors tried to cover them with cash flow, so the debt problem compounded. This legislation will prevent that debt from accumulating. Mr P.G. Pendal interjected. Ms K. HODSON-THOMAS: I am sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker. I did seek some clarification from the minister, and I apologise to my colleagues on both sides if they cannot hear what the minister is saying. I realise that members of the Albany community may also not be able to hear. I take this opportunity to also do what other members have done while they have been at the microphone, and that is to thank the people of Albany for the hospitality that they have afforded to me. Albany is a great place. I cannot wait to come back to Albany. It is a beautiful location. Do not keep it a secret. The minister will probably address my concerns later in the second reading debate, so I will conclude my remarks at this time.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1069

MR R.C. KUCERA (Yokine - Minister for Small Business) [3.16 pm]: I support the Construction Contracts Bill 2004 in my role as Minister for Small Business. Many of the issues that members have talked about today have revolved around the collapse of Consolidated Constructions. This is not an issue that I particularly wanted to raise, but I must mention it because it has been raised by many other members. The article that was referred to by the member for Peel earlier today highlights what has taken place with that company. The whole issue relates back to what the member for Merredin talked about; namely, taking on contracts on the word of the people who have applied for them. What the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure has said is quite right. If companies trade while they are insolvent, the full weight of the law should be brought to bear upon them. It is as simple as that. An article in today’s The West Australian by Neale Prior is very interesting and insightful. It states - Administrator Gary Anderson said the East Perth-based company, whose March 2 collapse has rocked the construction industry, has been operating on increasingly small margins and very high overheads. In a report recommending creditors put the company into liquidation, Mr Anderson has backed away from estimates he made after being appointed administrator . . . He estimated that the return to unsecured creditors could be in the range of 18.5¢ to 27.5¢ in the dollar . . . The key issue is how the company was trading. As has been highlighted by the member for Peel, and as is also stated in that article - More than 50 staff and 400 contractors have been hit by the failure that followed a tumultuous two years for the company . . . I thank the member for Carine for bringing the plight of small business to the Table of the House in a proper, sensible and balanced way - Several members interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA: - and without the kind of histrionics that we are hearing from members opposite, as we usually do on a Thursday. Mr M.J. Birney: You do not even know what day it is! Mr R.C. KUCERA: The building and construction industry - Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA: Obviously the member for Warren-Blackwood does not know what day it is, because he usually gets thrown out on a Thursday. However, seeing that it is a Wednesday, we will give him some latitude. The building and construction industry in Western Australia contains a vast array of small business operators who work as consultants, contractors, subcontractors and suppliers. These people build our hospitals, our schools and a range of other things, but above all they provide considerable employment for a range of young Western Australians, particularly in the regions. Security of payment is absolutely vital for the cash flow of all small business operators. This legislation is essential for those in the building and construction industry owing to the often long and complex contracting process that they are involved in, and the many links of the contracting chain. Failure to pay at any link of the contracting chain can be absolutely disastrous. Again I thank the member for Carine for highlighting that matter, particularly as it affects the smaller operators. The need for this Bill has arisen because of events like the recent collapse of Consolidated Constructions, and that has certainly been highlighted today. However, the important point is the one that was made by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure; namely, that after this legislation comes into effect, these processes will kick in after 28 days, and the build-up of debt that has occurred in the past will no longer continue to occur. After listening to this debate, the people of Albany will have a fair idea of what happens when the Opposition actually supports a Bill. They can probably imagine what it is like trying to get a Bill through the Parliament when the Opposition does not support it. [Leave granted for the member’s speech to be continued.] Debate adjourned, pursuant to standing orders. REGIONAL WESTERN AUSTRALIA, ESSENTIAL SERVICES Motion MR M.F. BOARD (Murdoch) [3.20 pm]: I move - That this House calls on the Gallop Labor Government to change its city-centric approach and ensure the provision of essential services to regional areas such as Albany. This is probably the most important motion that the Parliament will deal with in Albany, because it goes to the very heart of this Government’s commitment to regional areas. We have had the show, we have seen the government jets fly in, we have had the lunches, we have seen the mountain of press releases, we have seen the journalists supported and a

1070 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] few colour photographs taken, and we have even got to meet the member for Albany, who has made a fantastic contribution to the Parliament, but, in reality, this is all about a Government’s commitment to regional areas. In this case, it is a commitment to Albany. The people of Albany and regional Western Australia should know that this Government has been the most city-centric Government ever in the history of this State. It is a Government that has systematically gone about taking money from regional and country areas to spend on its big projects in the city. The Government is doing that because it believes it can win government in the city alone, and that the city will control the Parliament of Western Australia. That is what the Government believes and that is why it has tried to take all the seats out of the country and put them into the city. Policy after policy, government initiative after government initiative and ministerial decision after ministerial decision have systematically taken money away from the country and given it to the city. That is where the power base is, and that is what this is all about. It is fantastic for the people of Albany that the Parliament is here today, and it is fantastic for democracy, but it is a show. When these people leave, a few cheques will have been handed out, a few colour photographs will have been taken, the babies will have been kissed and what is left? We need a Government that is committed to regional areas and that is prepared to dig in and do something for the people who are generating income and who are really making this State work, and not the social engineers up in Perth who tickle the stomach of the Labor Party and the people who will benefit most from a Labor Government because they are given a free ride. Let us support the people who make this State work. If we want to examine the government’s commitment to regional Western Australia, we only have to look at the health issue. When I have visited Albany, not only this time but also all the other times over the past couple of years, people have told me that one of the biggest issues in Albany is the health issue. Why can Albany not be provided with the same health services as any other part of this State, particularly the city? Why does the hospital have to be downgraded? Why is it losing hospital beds? Mr P.B. Watson interjected. Mr M.F. BOARD: Why have we lost nurses in Albany? Why does Albany have to wait two years for public dentistry - two years, the longest time in the State? Members should think about that. Why has that come about? Why are those issues not being raised in Parliament and fought for the people of Albany? Why have there been systematic changes? Why have mental health services been downgraded? The member for Albany should go to the hospital and talk with the staff there about the number of beds they have for mental health patients and the problems they have with obstetric services in trying to get general practice after-hours care. Where do people go for after-hours care in Albany? I know where people go in the city, but that has not been fought for. There has been a systematic downgrading of these services. Why would a Government, within 12 or 18 months of coming into government, take away the power of the people to play a role in their health services? Why has this Government sacked all the country health boards in Western Australia that were made up of mayors and townsfolk, people involved in the services who raise money for the hospitals, people who build houses for the doctors and those who provide incentives for nurses to come into town? They were sacked because their voice was too loud. They were complaining that they were losing their services - hospital beds, hospital staff and the very things that kept their town alive. The Government decided to get rid of them because they were making too much noise and they were going to cause embarrassment. The Government decided to centralise services; that is, to take positions out of the country and to put them in the city. Systematically over the past three years these services have been downgraded, but why? So that this Government can spend $1.7 billion on a railway so the people from Mandurah can get to the city eight minutes quicker - that is what this Government is telling us anyway. The Minister for Health is now telling us that the people of Moora cannot have their hospital, the people of Denmark have to wait for their hospital, Albany Regional Hospital cannot be upgraded and Dumbleyung District Memorial Hospital has to close; all of these things have to change. But hang on! The Government has found $1.7 billion to build some new tertiary hospitals in - guess where? - the city! Several members interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr M.F. BOARD: Members opposite are condemned by their own actions. One need only go through what they have done. We are now in the fourth year of this Government. If we try to get over this week’s press releases and look at what this Government has done for the provision of health services in Western Australia, all we see is an increase in ambulance bypass figures and waiting lists numbers going through the roof for everything from dentistry to mental health services to elective surgery. We have not seen any real construction. When we were in government, we built four new hospitals. What has this Government built? We have had the nickel and dime stuff about $20 000 here and $30 000 there; what a load of garbage. This Government will not make a real commitment to these areas because it knows it is spending all its money on big city projects, for which this Government ought to be condemned. All members opposite have done in their first two years in government is to blame the previous Government and say, “Okay, things are bad because of the previous Government. We made commitments, but we do not seem to be able to get on with that.” After that, the fact that this Government had achieved nothing was starting to come home to roost, and it had to find some other scapegoat. Guess who? It decided to blame the Commonwealth for 12 months. Over the past 12 months the Commonwealth has been blamed for every lack of action, particularly in some of the regional areas. We have been told that it has not provided us with services, and, now, in this Government’s last year of office -

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1071 hopefully - what have we got? Hang on! This Government has not done anything for three years, particularly in the area of health, and now it has decided to come up with a big plan to get someone over from the eastern States and announce funding of $1.7 billion to build a few new tertiary hospitals in the city. Meanwhile, the people in country areas, particularly in Albany, will wait longer for every health service to which they should have access. This Government ought to be condemned. People from Albany have not had good representation. Once the people of Albany see through the press releases of the past couple of days, they will find out that if they really want to get services delivered in Albany and some money put into Albany, they should think about returning the Liberal member to the seat. MR P.B. WATSON (Albany) [3.30 pm]: Page 51 of today’s The West Australian reads “Ray White, Albany. Ready for your ‘Seachange’? Albany is booming”. The business community is saying that Albany is booming. Members of the Opposition downgraded Western Power, closed the Westrail workshops, privatised AlintaGas and gutted Main Roads, and the National Party was part of that process. I will not talk about those matters. No. Instead, I will talk about what this Government has done for Albany. I refer to the $20 million police and court complex. The previous local member and police minister under the previous Government would not provide that complex - Gallop Labor Government 1, the Opposition 0. Several members interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Kalgoorlie will come to order. Mr P.B. WATSON: Also, $50 million was allocated to Water Corporation infrastructure. That project was missed by the previous Government. It did not want to know about it. It did not realise there was no catchment in Albany, yet $50 million was allocated by the Gallop Labor Government. The small boat harbour was allocated $12 million. This Government has a vision for the boat harbour, the waterfront and Anzac Park. Members of the Returned and Services League in Albany, led by “Digger” Cleak, have a vision for Albany at Anzac Park for 2014. An opposition member: What about something solid? Mr P.B. WATSON: I hear a voice. Is this the same member who on the election trail promised a hospital for Denmark, but said no money was available for it in the forward estimates? That was an absolute disgrace. Mr W.J. McNee: You took away the Moora Hospital and then you promised one to Port Hedland. Mr P.B. WATSON: We can talk about hospitals, and the $700 000 allocated - Several members interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Albany has the call. Mr P.B. WATSON: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. When we came to power, money to run the local hospital came from the capital works fund. The allocation was $700 000. The Minister for Health in the previous Government put only $700 000 into that hospital. The Labor Government has undertaken a $1 million upgrade of the paediatric ward, and provided the new dialysis unit. It is great to see the Minister for Health in the Chamber at the moment. He put in money so that the people of Albany need not go to live in Perth. People previously had to uproot their family and move to Perth to receive treatment. Regarding the $1 million upgrade of the paediatric ward, I thank the Telethon Trekkers who did a tremendous job. It was great to see the minister open the ward the other day. Mr J.A. McGinty: It is a wonderful facility, too. Mr P.B. WATSON: That is the thing. The city-centric Liberal Party members come down here from Perth. Do not worry about the members of the National Party, as they do everything the Liberal Party tells them to do. They lie on their backs, have their tummy scratched and put their legs in the air. The Labor Party has the Country Labor Alliance, which goes into all country regions. We speak to people; we are not like these city-centric people opposite. In Caucus, city members in my party say that we give too much to the country. Ask them. We have very good country members in the Labor Party. Country people got nothing from the mob opposite. Look at them - a mob of rabble who gave us nothing! Albany now has the best hospital in the State; I would even go so far as to say the best regional hospital in Australia. The Reid report will be released by our great health minister on Monday, although it is probably the second or third release. An opposition member: The parliamentary secretary has already released it. Mr P.B. WATSON: Indeed. The Reid report will state that the Labor Government will look after regional hospitals, and boost them so that they are major hubs. Also, $5 million was allocated to clear up the waiting list for dental treatment. We do not sit around and talk in the Labor Party - we do things in the country. A call centre has been provided, and $1.5 million was directed towards the new sporting complex. One million dollars was directed to the youth centre, which was not here when members opposite were in power. Amounts were made available of $350 000

1072 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] for the port, and $100 000 for undercover areas at schools. The refurbishment took place of the Great Southern Regional College of TAFE. These things have been done. The difference between us on this side of the Chamber and you guys over there is that we have a vision for country people. MR M.G. HOUSE (Stirling) [3.35 pm]: That is a very interesting act to follow. I am pleased and privileged to be part of this regional sitting in Albany. As one of the members who represents some of the outlying suburbs of Albany and the hinterland, I am very pleased to see members in the Chamber who represent other electorates. From what I hear and understand, the people of Albany have been very pleased to welcome us to Albany. I think that is great. The members who represent city electorates will have found that there is something different about the country. One thing different is the sort of hospitality that has been offered to those who have come here. Often people who live in the city do not understand the tyranny of distance. My electorate, which is not as large as some country electorates, is quite vast, yet it includes some areas in the City of Albany. Many people in government departments sometimes do not understand the practical problems that country people face in accessing health services, power and water. Sometimes they have to battle for all the communication systems with which city people normally expect to be provided. I am very pleased that the Opposition was able to defeat the Government’s proposition to change the electoral laws earlier in its term. Country people would have suffered greatly from those changes. I will give a practical example of that. Some months ago, my wife and I came across a very serious road accident some 30 kilometres from the nearest town. It involved some young people, one of whom had died on the side of the road. We had to find an ambulance and a communication system. Our mobile phone did not work. One young person was severely injured. I have known these young men all their lives. When we were faced with the practical problem of getting to a hospital to save the lives of those who were still alive, we suddenly realised the practical difficulties we faced. The impact of those difficulties on the families of those young people was severe. When members come into Parliament and request the sort of services that people in the metropolitan area take for granted - such as a better ambulance system, a better health system, more hospital beds, more emergency services and more doctors - they do not ask for them just because they believe they are the right things to ask for; they ask for them because of an absolute need for them. That absolute need was demonstrated to my wife and me in a way that we would rather it had not been. However, I can tell members that the experience had quite an effect on a number of people. I do not usually use personal examples in the Parliament. However, that example demonstrates the fact that members do not come into Parliament to talk about the services that they believe people need but, rather, to demonstrate an absolute and real need for them. There are many such examples in the health system and the power system in Western Australia. The power system is the lifeblood by which country people operate. Electricity allows them to live an existence that is reasonably in tune with their cousins in the city. By that I mean that they have access to televisions, freezers, fridges and electric light. Quite frankly, not too many years ago those of us in rural Western Australia did not have those services. Many members recall having individual lighting plants. I can see the Treasurer out of the corner of my eye nodding his head. In fact, people in the country do not take those services lightly. A power system failure, because the system has not been upgraded or there is not enough for generation, has a dramatic effect on their lives when it prevents them from doing the simple things they expect to do. They have to send their children to boarding schools 200 or 300 kilometres away in the city, not because they want to split up their families or because they can afford to - I heard a member comment on money a while ago - but because the facilities are not available in the country to provide them with a good standard of education. Those facilities are important to all country people. Every member of this Parliament shares the concerns of their family to access those simple, basic services that many of us take for granted. There is no question that regional development does need some subsidy. If we are to create those sorts of facilities, if we are to allow business to prosper and if we are to allow jobs to be created, we will have to be cognisant of the fact that we must sometimes subsidise it. We have to allow in the budget - Several members interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Stirling, you have the call. Mr M.G. HOUSE: I notice that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is absent from the Chamber. She might have something to do with the microphone playing up from behind the scenes. She visited my farm on Sunday, which she told me about when I got here on Monday. I was very pleased that she did visit my farm, although my farm manager told me that the animals have not been too well during the past few days. Mr J.C. Kobelke: She fixes most things, but your farm problems might go a bit too far! Mr M.G. HOUSE: It seems that way. I jest. I use that as an example of a minister who has visited a small country town, albeit my home town, of which I am very proud. She told me about some of the things that she had spoken to the local people about and how passionate they were about the issues they raised with her. That is a demonstrable advantage of us going to a rural area to hold a sitting of Parliament: it lets people see that we debate things seriously and passionately. The member for Peel, for example, gave a very passionate speech earlier about things that he believes in. The fact that I do not agree with him is not the issue. The part of democracy that is important is that we can have these debates in a Chamber such as this, which allows us to thrash out our differences, and still go out on the street and communicate with people and each other. I am very proud of the system we have. Sometimes I get agitated by it and

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1073 sometimes I would like more of it. Sometimes I would like it to better serve the people I represent, as all of us would. However, the system works. I think we have been able to demonstrate that to the people of Albany today. MR A.J. CARPENTER (Willagee - Minister for Education and Training) [3.42 pm]: Everybody knows that this Government is delivering more to country and regional centres in Western Australia than did the previous Government, but members opposite have to make a political point. The facts speak for themselves. Several members interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I would like the local member for Albany to pass on a compliment from me to the staff of the Albany Regional Hospital for the outstanding health care they are giving to my grandmother at this moment. They are providing her with absolutely outstanding care. What a great hospital it is. It has dedicated staff and very good facilities. I am only acknowledging the hospital because I feel as though I should, because this is the last chance I will have to get on my feet and speak during this parliamentary sitting in Albany. I want to acknowledge the presence in the gallery of my parents, Graham and Elaine Carpenter. Through my family connections in this area over many generations, I know a lot about this region. There might be one or two members who know it as well as I do, but I doubt it. I know a lot. I used to live in the main street. My great, great-grandfather built Pyrmont House, where we held our cabinet meeting the other day. I know a lot about this area and I know a lot about the trends that have developed over the years in this area. There has never been a Government more committed to doing things for this region than this one. I have spent the past couple of days here and I have had the chance to get on my feet to talk about the programs that this Government is putting in place in education and training in this area. We are changing the very nature of the education and training opportunities in this area in a way that members opposite never dreamed of, because they did not have the imagination. From time to time under the previous Government, different places would get a new primary school, and that was good. I congratulate the former Government for doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett: High schools are the big improvement. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: High schools were improved as well. However, when the previous Government was in power, the number of young people who were engaged successfully in education until the end of year 12 declined. That was not only a state disgrace but also a national and international disgrace. In the booming heart of the Australian economy the previous Government was so blind to the future that it allowed the number of young people who were successfully engaged in education and training to decline. Less than 50 per cent of the population of some non-metropolitan schools in Western Australia were getting to year 12. When the Leader of the Opposition was Minister for Education, in some high schools in country areas only 33 per cent of boys were successfully completing year 12. That was an utter disgrace. He never had the imagination to do anything about it. We are doing something about it. We are changing the very nature of this community; we are going to change the very nature of this society because of educational opportunity. If we deny young people educational opportunities, they will not succeed in the economy and the world of the future. That is it. That is what we are doing for regional Western Australia. I have given an account of some of the things we are doing in Albany. People in Albany know; they can make their own judgments. They see what is going on. They can come to my forum on 29 April and we can talk about how we will change this community in the future. I will give a run-down of some of the things I have not mentioned. The member for Wagin asked me a few weeks ago about the breakdown of the additional money for school maintenance. The amount is $1 million a month for seven months. He asked me how much was going to country schools. I said I did not know but that I would find out. I have found out. Of the $7 million, country schools will receive $3.505 million and metropolitan schools will receive $3.495 million. Country schools will receive more. Why? Because they need it most. Good government puts the money where it is needed most. It does not do what members opposite did; it puts it where it is needed most. Information and communications technology - what a mess! Everyone knows that. What a disastrous mess the member for Cottesloe presided over. It was an absolute disaster. What have we done? We have completely changed it around. Look at the way things have changed in schools. Look at what is happening at Spencer Park Primary School and North Albany Senior High School. The schools will be completely different schools of the future. How much is the Government spending in the regions on information communications technology for projects for the future of telecommunications? Mr M.J. Birney: What about talking to us? Aren’t you here to talk to us? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: No, I am not here to talk to the member for Kalgoorlie. An amount of $14.36 million will be spent in metropolitan areas and $8.2 million in the regions. The 100 schools project includes infrastructure expenditure of $1.764 million in regional areas and $1.38 million in metropolitan areas. Is a theme developing here? Can members see a consistency? We are doing it; we are delivering and members opposite did not. That is why they were voted out. Albany has a member who is a genuine person and understands the local community. He is not a person who did not care about or understand his local community. He was not part of a Government that did not care about or understand the community of Western Australia. In their first chance to get to their feet, members opposite spoke about the Western Australian flag. They do not understand the Western Australian

1074 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] community. They think the sort of people who contact them from the Liberal Party are representative of the broader community and that the biggest issue on their mind is whether we want a different state flag. That is not the issue in which people are interested. People are interested in real things, such as the way their community is managed. The Opposition is hopeless. It was a hopeless Government, but it is a worse Opposition. It has no vision for the future of this country or the State. It has nothing to offer. However, I exclude some members of the National Party from that category, but not many other members opposite. What did their shadow police minister say when he came back from Bali? That is the sort of quality they have in their party: a person who came back and said he had been drunk for four days and he did not know what had happened! What sort of a role model does that present to young people in Albany? What sort of a role model is the member? He is a disgraceful role model. Members opposite have nothing to offer. Several members interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Government is more than just the nuts and bolts, although they are important. Do members opposite know what government is? Government represents the combined aspirations of the people. Members are elected, not because they are going to do this, that and the other, but because they have a big picture. We articulate the vision, hopes and aspirations of the people of the State. That is what government does. It is bigger than they ever imagined. It is more important than they will ever know. This Government has a vision for Western Australia, the great southern and Albany. The Government is putting it into place. This town has never been in a better position. Look at it - it is booming and throbbing! Under members opposite, it was going nowhere. The whole town is now vibrant - congratulations. I hope it continues into the future. Well done. MR J.H.D. DAY (Darling Range) [3.50 pm]: There is something appropriate about our being on a theatrical stage here in Albany given some of the performances we have seen over the past few days. Several members interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.H.D. DAY: It is part of the role of Parliament and it is good that the Minister for Education and Training is able to have his parents here today. I agree that it is very relevant and appropriate. The Minister for Education and Training was selective in his comments when making reference to the development of schools in Albany over the past few years. If he wanted to paint a comprehensive picture of what had been put in place over the past few years, and in particular during the time of the previous Government, he could have referred to the major redevelopments of Albany Senior High School, North Albany Senior High School and the construction of the new Albany Primary School. The Leader of the Opposition, the then Minister for Education, was very much involved in that. My main comments relate to the energy portfolio. The motion that we are debating refers to the need to ensure the provision of essential services to regional areas such as Albany. There is really no better example of the need to ensure that those essential services are provided than electricity supply. Most people in the community take the supply of electricity for granted. When there are problems, such as lights going out or plant not working, the community is understandably very vocal and concerned about them. Electricity is crucial to the operation of homes, businesses and farms throughout Western Australia. It is evident that there are major problems with the State’s electricity network, particularly with the south west interconnected system. It has been well demonstrated that the infrastructure is ageing, that some poles are falling over, and that wires are not up to the standard necessary to carry the amount of electricity that is being demanded. Ageing infrastructure needs large amounts of money spent on it to upgrade it to a satisfactory standard. The electricity network system capacity also needs expanding in the south west of the State. We have seen some tragic examples over the past few weeks of summer of things going wrong with the electricity system. The bushfires in Bridgetown that occurred just before Christmas were caused by the ignition of dry material on the ground after a tree came into contact with a high voltage powerline, which ignited a fire that had pretty devastating consequences. Even worse and more tragically was the fire north of Mt Barker at Tenterden in which sadly two lives were lost as well as livestock, and a large amount of public and private property was burnt. That fire was caused by conductors being blown together by strong winds, which caused sparks that dropped to the ground and ignited a fire that had devastating consequences. In very recent times in the southern and south west parts of the State, there have been some very tragic examples of the electricity infrastructure not being up to the appropriate standard. The capacity of the electricity system needs to be expanded. A very good example of that was given during a meeting that the Leader of the Opposition and I had with representatives of the Shires of Gnowangerup, Jerramungup and Ravensthorpe last week at which it was made clear that there is a need for increased capacity for the transmission line from the poly-generation power station east to Ravensthorpe. It has been estimated that to upgrade that transmission line to a sufficient capacity would cost about $42 million. The Premier was involved in the announcement yesterday

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1075 that the BHP Billiton nickel mine would go ahead. I would be very interested to hear from the Premier or the Minister for Energy whether the Government explored any possibility of interlinking the power plant at the proposed nickel mine with the electricity network. Had some interlink been provided, it would have been of benefit to the people of the Ravensthorpe area, in particular. It is really the responsibility of the Government to maximise the opportunities for the people of the State. I would be very interested to know what effort was put in, because, as the Leader of the Opposition has pointed out, it seems like a missed opportunity for the Ravensthorpe area. It would certainly be preferable if the benefit of the additional generation capacity to be installed at the nickel mine had been interlinked into the system so that at least the people of the Ravensthorpe area could encourage new businesses with a back-up power supply. It seems that the Government has missed an opportunity. There are deficiencies in the power supply to Kalbarri, as was highlighted on ABC radio earlier this week. As well as rural and regional areas, there are also major deficiencies in the metropolitan area, as reported in this morning’s The West Australian. The Government’s approach has been to spend a large amount of money on breaking up Western Power. It planned to spend $153 million over four years. The grand plan would have involved an additional expenditure of $26 million per annum. We need to hear a lot more from the Minister for Energy - probably not in this debate, but at some later stage - about the structure of the electricity market the Government intends to put in place, and its costs. The Government has put a limit on Western Power’s borrowings, because it needs to keep its debt levels under control. That is clearly directly related to the southern metropolitan railway, which is being built at a cost of $1.6 billion and, no doubt, rising. The amount of borrowings necessary for that project is impacting on the amount of money that Western Power and similar organisations are able to borrow to invest in upgrading and expanding the electricity network. It is time the Government lifted the borrowing restriction on Western Power, so that funds can be put where they are needed. I will make one final brief point, in particular to the people of Albany and the great southern. Small to medium-size businesses would have had a reduction in the cost of their electricity if it had not been blocked by this Government in 2002. Western Power proposed to reduce electricity prices by 10 per cent over three years, starting in July 2003. We know that the Minister for Energy, or his office, intervened to stop that price reduction going ahead for their own convenient political reasons. Mr E.S. Ripper: That is not the case. Mr J.H.D. DAY: If that is not the case, the minister must provide a full explanation of what intervention was provided. This motion should be supported. MR L. GRAHAM (Pilbara) [3.58 pm]: I will make a short contribution to the debate on the motion, referring to the Pilbara - not specifically the area I represent, but the generic area. It is unique in this State, in that it was not the State Government that developed the Pilbara in the 1960s; it was the resources industry. There is no other time in Australia’s history when a State Government effectively abrogated its responsibilities and allowed industry to do it in its entirety. It is nearly unprecedented in the nation. The federal Government made its contribution to those major corporations through the taxation system. The problem confronting the Pilbara now is that, 30 years on, after nearly 10 years of decline, it is in need of the State Government coming to the plate. I will talk about the iron ore industry for a minute, and provide some interesting figures. In 1976, the iron ore industry produced 85.6 million tonnes. In 1983, it produced 75 million tonnes. That was the combined effect of the contributions of the member for Riverton and me to the industry! In 1993, production went up to 116.3 million tonnes. In 2003, total shipments are estimated to be 201 million tonnes. I stress “estimated” because they are not confirmed. It is likely that, in the next five years, that figure will double. That will give members some idea of what is going on in the Pilbara. What has that meant to Governments? It has meant that State Government revenue will have nearly doubled between 1997 and 2007. Its budget income will increase from $7.6 billion in 1997 to an estimated $13 billion in 2007. It means mineral and petroleum royalty revenue increased from $570 million in 1998, which is the first year it was recorded in that way, to an estimated $1.34 billion in 2007. It has roughly doubled in that area. Iron ore royalties have increased from $171 million in 1976, to an official estimate of $298 million in 2007. It is most likely that next year the iron ore industry will pay in excess of $400 million in royalties. The official estimate has no chance of being met. It is most likely to be 50 to 100 per cent out. When the Government receives that amount of revenue flowing to it, the Pilbara will face some serious difficulties. The first difficulty is that there is simply not enough money in the Pilbara to run the area. I will go into the arguments about royalties and where they are generated from. The fact is that there is not enough money in the Pilbara to operate the communities there. The second problem - I say this is a problem, although it is a nice problem - is that the growth in China is increasing the demand for everything that is produced in the Pilbara at a rate that city folk - including most of the people in government departments and offices - simply do not understand. The growth is almost exponential. It is no longer a case of increasing by double; it is a case of how much can we get out of the ground and how quickly can we get it to China for it to use. The growth and the economic opportunity provided to the State and the Pilbara as a consequence of the growth in China exceeds the growth and the economic opportunity that was put in place during the post-war construction of Japan. This State has yet to understand the full consequences of what is happening in China. That ignores the growth that is happening consequentially in Taiwan - Mr C.J. Barnett: The point is that the whole State shares in the development.

1076 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

Mr L. GRAHAM: It is. Despite the growth in our current industries, we are losing market share in China. It is extraordinary that, although the growth in the region is almost unprecedented, we are losing market share in vital resource projects to Brazil and India. It is amazing how those countries are able to produce, respond and react. In some cases it is the same companies. Multinational companies in South America - I have no axe to grind with them - are able to respond more quickly to the demand in China than we, in the Pilbara, are able to respond. One of the reasons is that our system of government is set up for the status quo, or declining income and declining budgets. That position is changing daily in Western Australia. MR M.P. MURRAY (Collie) [4.03 pm]: I thank the people of Albany. Members have had a tremendous time here. The regional sitting of Parliament is a first for everyone, and I am glad to be part of it. I will refer to country issues. I have seen the worst of what can happen to a town when a Government does not take care of it. I was lucky enough to be elected owing to the fact that Collie was neglected by the former Government. Some 400 jobs were lost from the coal industry and 300 jobs were lost from the power industry. Things were very grim. I won a seat in what was considered in many people’s eyes to be an unwinnable seat. I am proud to represent my town and my region. When 600 jobs are lost from a town, among other things, the schools decline and the doctors leave. Country people in all parts of regional Western Australia know about those things. I have been passionate about country issues in not only my area, but also others. It is great to come to Albany because the Labor Party has a Country Labor Association, which the member for Albany is a major player in. Certainly, he has his say about his region very loudly and clearly. On many occasions we see him in the corridors with a minister jammed in the corner, trying to get a few bob out of him to further his area. At the last election, I said that my area was at its lowest ebb. Since then I have seen things improve. I am proud to say that that is mainly because ministers in my Government have come to the party and given us a hand. At times, not a great deal of help is needed in a country town. As has been said before, people in country towns do not need a lot. We want only the basics, and that is what we ask for. We do not go over the top. Many towns do not have public transport or the things associated with that. However, we do want the basics; that is, the roads and the power supply that have been spoken about by members on this side of the House. That is happening. However, it is a slow process because they have been allowed to run down over many years. I believe that successive Governments have been neglectful in the area of power supplies, and we have seen the result of that. Now it sits quite comfortably with the Opposition to blame the Government of the day. I do not see it like that. I see it as a cumulative thing, and the blame should be spread evenly. Mr J.L. Bradshaw: The reason we are sort of blaming the Government is that we actually started to fix the problem. Mr M.P. MURRAY: I did not notice that too much around my area; that is all I can say. I have been in Harvey in recent times. The people of Harvey think that the member for Murray-Wellington is a great bloke, but they ask what he has done over the past few years. It is time for change down on the flats as well, and I believe that will happen. As I said, we were ignored by the previous Government. We never saw the Premier or a minister come to town in those difficult times. I was on the Collie Shire Council on the one occasion on which the now Leader of the Opposition came into the town. We asked for a hand. He said, “I govern for all WA. Don’t think you’re special just because you have unemployment rates up around the 15 per cent mark.” At that time we were desperate, and we really needed a hand. However, that was rejected out of hand by the now Leader of the Opposition. Mr C.J. Barnett: We built a power station for you. Mr M.P. MURRAY: Half a power station. We would not have the problems we have now if the previous Government had built a full one. We all know about that. However, that is not a country issue; that is a state issue. Mr C.J. Barnett: We delivered for Collie what Premier Gallop could not deliver. We built a power station. Mr M.P. MURRAY: At the time I was on the shire council, the shire president, Rosanne Pimm, begged the minister to give us a hand. We needed just a bump to get out of the hole that we were in. We did not get that at that time. However, with the change of government, we have had that. I can say with confidence that things have changed. Real estate in Collie has gone up by 50 per cent. The appearance of Collie has changed dramatically. People who come into the town now say, “We thought it was a grubby little coalmining town.” However, it has changed, because people put their shoulders to the wheel and said, “If we don’t change, we will die anyway. Let’s get out there and do something, and see if we can get some help from the Government.” We have had that help. The number of students at school has increased. I say with real pride today that the unemployment rate has gone down. The last published figures showed a three per cent reduction in unemployment rates. I think that is tremendous. It means that the Government is supporting country towns. That helps them, and it makes me feel quite proud to serve in a Government that is willing to go to the country. Mr R.F. Johnson: What do they do in Collie? Mr M.P. MURRAY: The member would not know. He has not been out of the city to take a look.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1077

There are some projects on the table at the moment. In the future, Pinetec Ltd will relocate from the city to Collie. That will happen because, again, the Government came in to help. The federal Liberal Government certainly did not help. The State Government had to fund nearly all the relocation process for Pinetec. That will create 30 jobs. That may not sound like very many jobs, but in a country town - I am sure my National Party colleagues opposite will agree - one job counts, let alone 30. That will bring unbelievable benefits to the Collie region. Along with that, Collie has the call centre, which again was established with the help of the State Government. One was also opened in Albany. These issues were not even considered under the previous coalition Government. The jobs at the call centre are mainly part time. However, that helps those people who need a few bob. I know that a lot of the people who work at the Collie call centre were previously unemployed. It is great to walk in there and see the pride that they have from just having a job. Some people would say that it is a terrible, menial job, but by gee they are proud to have a job. That also makes me feel proud. Further down the line we will have a plant that will extract collagen. That plant has now been granted Environmental Protection Authority approval. That may help me in the future, or even now - a bit of collagen on my face may help to get a few wrinkles out of it! Due to mad cow disease, that plant will process sheepskins instead of cowskins; it is a new technology. It will employ between 15 and 20 people. Those are welcome jobs within our region. We often wonder where can we go next, and do we have the infrastructure. We have the infrastructure for about 12 000 people. However, that infrastructure is a bit run down. Therefore, we need to look at the next step - not only the jobs, but also the infrastructure that goes along with that. I am working very hard with the relevant ministers to improve the standard of the infrastructure in Collie. The state housing in Collie is in a deplorable condition. When I first came into the Parliament, the maintenance program budget for the more than 200 state houses in Collie was only $36 000. That would not fix even half of one house. That amount is now up to $500 000, again because this State Government is willing to listen and to work. That may not appear much to city people, because that may be only enough to buy one unit in the city. However, it is a lot for the people who live in the south west, because they need that boost and that help, and that is what this Government is doing. The State Government has provided $1.5 million for a Centre of Excellence in Sustainable Mine Lakes in Collie. That is supported strongly by the coal industry. Again, that will lead to jobs in the technology area and will lead to greater development in my region. I would have liked to have spoken for another hour on that matter, but I have run out of time. I thank members very much for the opportunity to speak today. MR B.K. MASTERS (Vasse) [4.11 pm]: I am sorry the Minister for Health is not in the Chamber at this time, because I want to remind the minister that in an earlier life, when he was the Minister for Peel and the South West, he said during an estimates committee hearing that my electorate and neighbouring areas were the “chardonnay coast” and were in no need of further government funding. I have tried many times in this Parliament to remind people on both sides of the political fence that my electorate is one of the fastest-growing electorates in Australia. For about five or six years, the Shire of Busselton had a population growth rate of six per cent, which made it the fastest-growing municipal area in Australia. For a number of years, Dunsborough, in the Shire of Busselton, had a population growth rate of 17 per cent. The most recent figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that the fastest growing town in Australia is Dalyellup, in the Shire of Capel, which has a population growth rate of 17 per cent. Mr A.J. Dean: That is in Bunbury . Mr B.K. MASTERS: It is near, but not in, Bunbury. The point is that the people who are fuelling this population growth are not retirees, as they might have been thought to be some years ago, and they are not the yuppies that the former Minister for Peel and the South West believed they were when he made that silly statement about the chardonnay coast. They are the typical Australian battlers. They are the ordinary mum and dad families that all of us are well aware of in all of our electorates . These families have chosen to move into my electorate, and, for better or for worse, they are bringing with them some very important needs that must be met via government funding. One area of need is education. I commend the Minister for Education for being very interested in the education problems in my electorate. There is an area in central-south Busselton that for want of a better word I will call the education precinct. It comprises a government primary school and government high school, and three private schools. There are 2 800 students in the geographic area of those five schools. That creates significant problems, such as school bus access, facilities for the high school, bridges over drains, and safety. There are enormous problems. I commend the Minister for Education for giving serious consideration to a number of important educational issues as a result of the local area education plan that is under way. I am sorry the minister is not here right now, because even though he has been supportive of the LAEP process in the past, one issue has not been properly dealt with - I will be raising this with him shortly - and that is the needs of the TAFE college in Busselton, which I understand is at capacity and is designed to be picked up and moved to a larger area. I do not believe that the LAEP process has considered the long-term needs of the South West College of TAFE.

1078 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

I could go through a long list of needs for my area. They include: energy - dairy farmers desperately need three-phase power; agriculture - I am disappointed with the response by the Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries on various aspects of the Legislative Assembly dairy industry inquiry, of which I was a member; health - the Minister for Health has unfortunately not yet put into effect certain actions relating to a study to determine whether Busselton needs a new or upgraded hospital. I point out to the minister that as of Thursday of last week the three senior nursing staff who he told Michael Moodie were not to be spilled from their positions had still not been told that their status, at least in the short term, had been protected. There are also ongoing problems with mental health nurses and staffing in both Bunbury and Busselton regional hospitals. Unfortunately, I believe that this motion is absolutely spot on when it calls for this Labor Government to be less city-centric and more country-centric. MRS C.A. MARTIN (Kimberley) [4.17 pm]: I oppose this motion. As a country member, I am offended that this sort of motion is allowed to be put on the Table, especially on such a historic occasion as this - the first Parliament to sit outside the metropolitan area. City-centric, this Government? What an indictment! How ridiculous! What a ridiculous statement to make! I cannot believe it actually. However, I thought it was time that somebody chucked a bit in about talking from the heart. Country people know about talking from the heart. Country people know what it is like to live in a community that suffers from the tyranny of distance. Most importantly, we find ways to work together. I will refer to a couple of points raised by speakers before me from the National Party. I agree: certain things need to be worked on. However, this Government has a policy called “Giving a fair go to regional Australia”. It is a policy; it is a beginning. We are actually working towards making a difference. I have heard lots of amazing statements. I would have loved this Parliament to have sat in Kununurra - can members imagine - but, no, it is sitting in Albany. It is historic, and it is the right and decent thing to do, but maybe next time we can look at the other end of the State, maybe the Kimberley, Kununurra, Broome or somewhere like that - somewhere where people will show appreciation. People have come here to witness history, to celebrate their community and to show off the amazing things that they have achieved. Their local member is an amazing person. On its inaugural trip, the Country Labor Alliance went to the other end of the State. Its purpose was to form an alliance to work together. More importantly, this Government has a Cabinet that listens. When we have issues, we take them to our Cabinet, and it follows through and does a brilliant job. When we have a need, we support each other and we take issues to the appropriate ministers. There is a bit of misinformation about and I want to correct part of it. I am a part of this history. Parliament has come to Albany, not to Perth. This is a regional centre. This is not about being city-centric; this is about bringing Parliament to the people. This is the people’s House, and it is in the country. A few statements, but, more importantly, the mean-spirited and spoilt attitude of some members opposite have clouded all the wonderful things that have been experienced here. Many children have come through the gallery. When asked about what they saw in here, they said, “Those people are really crabby.” Well, yoo-hoo, they are right. What behaviour! Mr R.F. Johnson: That’s what we think about you lot. Mrs C.A. MARTIN: These kids thought it about members opposite; so good on you! However, there are some realities to this issue. As I said, this is history so we need to celebrate it. This is not just about holding Parliament in Albany. We need to start celebrating diversity. I have heard the mucky things that have been said in here about the previous legislation and about providing a foundation for a good society that celebrates the difference in others. I know about difference, so I will always support that sort of thing. It is not hard to celebrate that. People will not be harmed by anything that is different, and that is what I want - Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mrs C.A. MARTIN: No, statements have been made. I challenge people to go back and read Hansard. The mucky things that were said by members on the other side about the legislation - things that members opposite did not feel comfortable with - Mr C.J. Barnett: What, taking “God” out of the oath? Mr R.F. Johnson: And the gay and lesbian legislation? Mrs C.A. MARTIN: And the adoption legislation. Several members interjected. Mrs C.A. MARTIN: There you go; that is what members opposite were talking about when they were carrying on. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mrs C.A. MARTIN: Excuse me, I will get back to the point now. I challenge the Albany community to do a couple of things. The most important thing to do is to check the web site and read Hansard to find out who said what in this place. This is history. It is something to be celebrated; it should never be denigrated. There is a wonderful man called the member for Albany. Do members know what he does? He inspires people. He is here to make a difference, and this community is represented by a person who will see them through. On that note I thank the House.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1079

MR R.A. AINSWORTH (Roe) [4.22 pm]: Earlier the Minister for Education and Training made a very good point in part of his speech when he talked about the need for vision. That is very pertinent regardless of which Government is in power. I have felt for a long time that government departments and Governments generally have lacked the vision they need to see development on the scale that should be happening in regional Western Australia. One of the things that they seem to lack is the ability to look outside individual government department budgets when making decisions about investment in regional Western Australia. For example, decisions have been made on the expansion of the electricity supply system in the region. I know that Western Power is not a government department but it is a government instrumentality. When the Government takes money out of that government instrumentality - an extra dividend of $20 million - it should invest some capital into expanding Western Power’s infrastructure and perhaps seeing the development of other industries in the regions. Flowing from that will be the development of other industries and some social benefits for a range of people in the regions, rather than just the customers hooking onto that expanded electricity supply system. If that type of approach were taken, we would see a different view of regional communities. At the moment, they are being held back by this narrow focus on individual budgets within government instead of taking a whole-of-government approach. Yesterday, an announcement was made that the Ravensthorpe nickel operation would go ahead in my electorate, which was a wonderful announcement and something I have been waiting for for some time. The Premier flew to my electorate without asking me to go with him or even telling me he would make a big announcement on the scene. In today’s edition of The West Australian, Chris Pointon, BHP Billiton’s Stainless Steel Materials President, is reported as saying that this was largely a China story, and I think that is correct. Of course, Governments have to play a part in making sure that this whole process gives the best social benefit to our region, which will include things like further money for the upgrade of the Esperance Senior High School. I acknowledge that money has been earmarked for upgrading now. Part of that was money the previous Government earmarked from AlintaGas sale proceeds to place a junior school in Esperance. Also, some money from the current training budget that had been combined by the minister for an upgrade was included. However, that upgrade was required, regardless of the Ravensthorpe nickel project. Now the additional population is coming into our region, and being the only senior high school for 400 kilometres in any direction, funding additional to that already in the pipeline will be needed. Again, a broader approach is needed rather than one looking only at the education budget; the whole economic and social benefit to my region must be considered when putting money into those basic infrastructure requirements. The other area that requires the same broader vision is the supply of water to the goldfields. A private project has been proposed for quite some time to desalinate sea water at Esperance and pipe it to Kalgoorlie. A recent review of that prospect was undertaken by government, and it was rejected on the basis that the water would be too expensive for the Water Corporation to purchase as the main customer from this private company. However, the sad thing - apart from the water issues relating to Perth that could have been alleviated to a small degree by taking water from Esperance to the goldfields instead of from Perth to the goldfields - is that the report stated that other social and economic benefits, outside the specific water issues involved with the project, had not been taken into account. Their presence was acknowledged, but they had not been taken into account in the decision to not support this private project. That is where the vision that the Minister for Education and Training was talking about should come into play. We should not consider only the very narrow issue of water itself, and the Water Corporation’s desire to have control of everything within that department and not be a partner with a commercial enterprise. We should consider not only the cost of water to the Water Corporation under this project, but also the broader social and economic benefits that would have flowed from that project. Everything should be considered from the aspect of security of supply of high quality water, as opposed to the current poor quality in Esperance, right through to other benefits to flow from that commercial opportunity from Esperance through to Kalgoorlie and beyond. I support the minister’s statement concerning the need for vision; I would just like to see some. MR A.J. DEAN (Bunbury) [4.27 pm]: I start by stating that one shall know people by their colours: how members opposite acted in the past is how they will act in the future. I will run through a few things members opposite did in Bunbury. Mr J.L. Bradshaw: Oppositions always act the same. Mr A.J. DEAN: I know opposition members will act the same. I thank the member for his comment. I will outline what members opposite did in Bunbury and why the previous local member was chucked out. Mr M.J. Birney: Is he going to get chucked out too? Mr A.J. DEAN: Not me, sir - not me. A bit of rubbish has been spread around in Albany over the past couple of days; namely, that the sole reason the coalition lost government at the last election was the finance brokers situation. That is not true. The record indicates that a bit of a depression was taking place at the time of the last election. State gross product was minus 1.6 per cent that year. When I doorknocked at the time, I found that the depression was impacting on the suburbs. People were hurting. There was unemployment in Bunbury, and people were feeling the pinch. In few families did all members

1080 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] have jobs - one or two members were unemployed in each family. That hurt people. That is one of the main reasons that members opposite were chucked out. It is the economy, stupid, that matters - nothing else. Mr M.J. Birney: The economy is stupid, is it? Mr A.J. DEAN: It is a quote, the origins of which I am not sure. I think it was Paul Keating - another great man. “It is still the economy, stupid - nothing else.” What did the Liberal Government do in Bunbury? First, it closed the Bunbury power station. An active power station was closed in 1999-2000, and the coalition half-built a coal power station. I have respect for the previous Leader of the National Party for his long-term views, member for Cottesloe. What did he tell the Liberal Party when it built the Collie power station? The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.W. Andrews): The Leader of the Opposition and the member for Collie will be able to discuss coal at a future date, as I am sure the member for Collie will bring it up again, but I ask them to leave that discussion until some other stage. Mr A.J. DEAN: What did the Leader of the National Party tell his Government at the time? He said that he did not trust Western Power’s estimates and that it should build Collie A and B power stations. It did not listen to him and now we are paying for the consequences. This Government is a Government of the future. We are starting to build the Kemerton power station in Bunbury - a $250 million job, which will be an enormous boost to the local economy - and in the near future we will be releasing plans for another coal-fired power station in Collie. Let us look at health. A lot of rhubarb has been spoken about health boards. Let us look at the Bunbury health board. There is an urban myth that the Bunbury health board existed for all time and delivered great decisions to the people of Bunbury. It did not exist until 1994. Bunbury Regional Hospital did not have a health board before then. In 1994, under the previous Government, the board was constituted to build a new regional hospital. Mr C.J. Barnett: Who built it? Mr A.J. DEAN: Any moron knows that the blokes opposite did. Mr C.J. Barnett: Thank you. Mr A.J. DEAN: So, big deal. The hospital was built under the auspices and direction of the hospital board and the Government thought it was such a good board that it kept it going. The Bunbury hospital board therefore did not exist before 1994. Up to that time Bunbury Regional Hospital - which was and probably still is the largest regional hospital in WA - had existed without a board for 100 years. In 2002-03 the south west health budget was $100 million; this year it is $108 million. In anyone’s terms, that is a significant increase of eight per cent. These are the sorts of things this Government is doing. It is getting on with improving the health system in the south west. I want to mention health boards again. A fellow by the name of Steve Thomas, a veterinary surgeon, has been endorsed by the Liberal Party as a candidate for Capel. I have met him a few times and he seems quite a respectable fellow. Under the auspices of the previous Government, Steve Thomas conducted a task force and wrote a report on a strategic plan for health in the south west from 1998 to 2004. I have plenty of copies of the report in my office if members want to read it. His blueprint was for one board. I suggest that if the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Murdoch want some interesting reading, they have a look at it. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: So you think there should be a board? Mr A.J. DEAN: No, I did not say that. When did I say that? Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: Why are you pushing for a board? Mr A.J. DEAN: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has selective hearing. The member for Mitchell is called 10-2. At his preselection the other night, when there was one candidate, 10 people voted for him and two voted against him. Steve Thomas wrote a report on a strategic health plan for 1998 to 2004. The day after Hon Bob Kucera released a report on the Bunbury Health Service back in 2001-02, Steve Thomas rang and congratulated Hon Bob Kucera and me for having the vision to put into practice what he had strived to do in his report. The next time the Leader of the Opposition visits Capel or when he sees Steve Thomas, he should ask him about that phone call and about the strategic plan. I would be happy to provide a copy of the plan to the Leader of the Opposition. The City of Bunbury and the south west are going through an enormous boom. Only today I had faxed to me the front page of the Bunbury Mail headed “High hopes”. I want to read some stuff from that paper, because what is going on down in the south west is astronomical, such as a $250 million upgrade to the Worsley Alumina Pty Ltd refinery. That upgrade will increase production of aluminium by only 50 000 tonnes, but the infrastructure will be there to increase it in the near future by another 600 000 tonnes so that there will be no need to go back and rebuild. That upgrade will create a lot of jobs. The Bunbury Port Authority, in conjunction with Alcoa World Alumina Australia, will put in a new loading berth at a cost of $60 million. About nine months ago I turned the first sod at the Hansol Australia Pty Ltd chip-mill, which is now up and running. Most people in Bunbury do not know that it has been running for two weeks.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1081

It is efficient and quiet. I went out to the mill a couple of weeks ago. I parked at the gate, wound down the window and then got out of the car and listened. I could not hear a thing. There was no dust and no noise. It is environmentally sensitive. That mill has been working for more than a month. A vast heap of white gum chips is there. The south west has heavy industry, light industry and tourism businesses. An announcement was made last week, or the week before, about the outer harbour development in Bunbury. The chief executive officer of the Bunbury Chamber of Commerce and Industries has estimated that it is a $250 million job. That is not my estimate; I do not have a clue about that. The Welcome Inn Motel has been granted planning approval and approval from the Bunbury City Council for its 150-unit site. That is another $15 million job. Tourism in the south west and Bunbury in particular is booming. Mr C.J. Barnett: It sounds like the mayor is doing a good job. Mr A.J. DEAN: No, the mayor congratulates the Government. I have written down many times that the mayor has said that Bunbury is a fantastic place in which to live, because Bunbury is booming. Why is Bunbury booming? It is booming because of the Gallop State Government. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. DEAN: I refer back to the front-page article of the Bunbury Mail, which states - BUNBURY business confidence is high for a big year ahead . . . That’s the opinion of more than 400 local businesses surveyed by Bunbury Chamber of Commerce and Industry. BCCI chief executive Allan Birrell told the Bunbury Mail the high level of local business confidence took him by surprise. “Overall we were surprised by how positive the feedback from the survey was. People are very optimistic about the next 12 months in Bunbury” he said. “We are pleased business proprietor confidence is strong. Business confidence will play out in a willingness to invest.” He went on to say - “With previously announced projects (such as the $275 million Worsley expansion) job prospects for the next 12 months are good,” Businesses in Bunbury back the Gallop Labor Government. It is evidenced there. Mr R.F. Johnson: Are you sure? Mr A.J. DEAN: Yes, they do. Mr R.F. Johnson: Not the ones I have spoken to. Mr A.J. DEAN: I have never seen the member in Bunbury. Mr R.F. Johnson: I have been there many times, my friend. I have had many cappuccinos. Mr A.J. DEAN: Like a thief in the night. Withdrawal of Remark The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.W. Andrews): Member for Bunbury! Mr A.J. DEAN: Yes, I withdraw unreservedly. Debate Resumed Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr A.J. DEAN: Only three. In light of what I have said, Bunbury is booming and will continue to boom under a state Labor Government. I propose an amendment to the motion. Amendment to Motion Mr A.J. DEAN: I move - To delete all words after “House” and insert instead - recognises the Gallop Labor Government’s efforts and achievements in providing essential services across all regions of Western Australia, which is evidenced by what has been done in Albany. MR A.D. MARSHALL (Dawesville) [4.38 pm]: Some projects, essential services and government facilities have been ignored or discontinued in my electorate. The seat of Dawesville is the largest country electorate in Western Australia,

1082 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] with 20 000-plus constituents. In my heyday I was known as a bit of a bullduster. I never believed that. I like to make the truth sound better than it is, and to give people a lot of pleasure. Now I have to summarise the facts to show that this Government has let down regional areas, and particularly the Peel region. The Aboriginal affairs office in the Mandurah-Dawesville area was closed only two years ago. All this has happened in the past three years. The senior administration of the Fremantle-Peel Education District Office was moved to Beaconsfield. That was a disaster. The senior administration of the Water and Rivers Commission was moved from my area to Rockingham. That was another disaster. Construction of the Mandurah to Perth rail link has been delayed for two years and could be delayed longer than that. That has cost our businesspeople. Ms A.J. MacTiernan: You have said that you don’t even want it! Mr A.D. MARSHALL: I have never said that. We got it. There has been no attempt to start the Peel deviation before 2010, yet it is the most needed, number one project in our area. There is no funding for a much-needed new aquatic centre because, I guess, there has been no pork-barrelling. A new two-lane bridge across the estuary is needed, but it is not even being considered. The Old Coast Road resurfacing needed because of the tremendous use it has had with vehicles travelling to the south west has been said to be too costly. The Peel Health Campus does not receive the same funding as the Rockingham Family Hospital because the Government says it is a private hospital and we know that this Government has a phobia about private versus public hospitals. Sewerage to Falcon was canned - a disaster. Mr A.J. Carpenter: What did you say? Mr A.D. MARSHALL: I know the minister is listening now. I said it so that he would listen. The police station at Falcon promised to me by the then deputy police commissioner, who is now the Minister for Tourism, has gone into limbo since this Government came into being. Mr R.C. Kucera: You did not deliver in the same way that you did not deliver a police station to the people of Albany! Mr A.D. MARSHALL: The legal services program has been shelved - listen and learn! Underground power has been placed in the too hard basket. Extensions to the Kwinana Freeway were classified as not being important. When the Court Government was in power, more money was spent in the Peel region than in the history of the area. Over the past three years, there has been zilch for country and regional areas. People ask me what the Government has been doing. I will tell people what it has been doing. It increased water, sewerage and drainage charges, motor vehicle registration fees, probate fees, payroll tax, court taxes, land taxes, stamp duty and motor vehicle third party costs. What is it doing with all that money? It is not putting money into regional areas. Several members interjected. Mr A.D. MARSHALL: Because I have only three minutes and I am a professional, I want to say in closing that it has been a delight to hear the Minister for Education and Training relive his heydays in Albany. My wife reiterated everything he said. We have loved holidaying here and when we get more time we will be back. In closing I acknowledge Andrew Partington, who is the Liberal candidate for Albany, and his young family. Andrew Partington is a former league footballer for Claremont - I have his gift-wrapped handbag here to give to him later! Several members interjected. Mr A.D. MARSHALL: Andrew’s 10-year-old son is also here today. He is a champion young tennis player in the making. If he likes, Andrew can send him up to Perth and I will have a look at him. I have been inspired over the past two days by meeting Andrew and if there is anything I can do to help him win the seat of Albany, he need only give me a call. MR M.J. BIRNEY (Kalgoorlie) [4.43 pm]: I was not going to contribute to this debate but the member for Albany has inspired me to do so. Sadly, I have only a few minutes to speak. I like the member for Albany as a person and I enjoy his company from time to time during the late nights in the Parliament. However, that is where it starts and stops. I certainly do not have the same level of professional respect for the member for Albany. When the member held up information about the $20 million police and justice complex that the Government is going to build in Albany as some sort of Holy Grail, I was reminded of the debate that took place a year ago in Parliament when the Liberal Party moved to immediately build a new police station in Albany. The Labor Party voted against that. One would expect the local member to vote in favour of such a proposition. When the division took place, Liberal Party members voted in the affirmative and Labor Party members voted in the negative. At that time, the member for Albany voted against it simply because his political party was voting against it. Arguably one vote, one value is the issue that has the most potential to devastate country Western Australia. There is no other issue like that. The member for Albany also voted in favour of one vote, one value. He voted himself out of a job. He is against the gas pipeline. Sadly, my time has expired and I would like to have explored those issues further. MR D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN (Mitchell - Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [4.45 pm]: We will give the whole House the opportunity to do one very positive thing for Albany in the wake of these two days of parliamentary sittings. We have had a lot of political debate but, quite frankly, not a great deal of constructive work has been done for the

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1083 community of Albany. We will move an amendment to this motion. It will give every member of this Parliament an opportunity to do something very constructive for the community of Albany. Amendment on the Amendment Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN: I move - To delete all words after “recognises” and insert the following - the need to - (a) support the extension of the south west gas pipeline to Albany; (b) reopen the 10 recently closed beds at Albany Regional Hospital; and (c) commit to meeting the $500 000 shortfall for the new swimming pool in Albany. If we agree to this amendment to the Government’s amendment, we will have done something constructive for the community of Albany. Let us put politics aside and work together in the interests of the local community. The ACTING SPEAKER: The question is that the member for Bunbury’s amendment to delete all words after “House” in the original motion be agreed to. Amendment (words to be deleted) put and a division taken with the following result - Ayes (29)

Mr J.J.M. Bowler Mr J.N. Hyde Mr A.D. McRae Mr E.S. Ripper Mr A.J. Carpenter Mr J.C. Kobelke Mr N.R. Marlborough Mrs M.H. Roberts Mr A.J. Dean Mr R.C. Kucera Mrs C.A. Martin Mr D.A. Templeman Mr J.B. D’Orazio Mr F.M. Logan Mr M.P. Murray Mr M.P. Whitely Dr J.M. Edwards Ms A.J. MacTiernan Mr A.P. O’Gorman Mr P.B. Watson (Teller) Dr G.I. Gallop Mr J.A. McGinty Mr J.R. Quigley Mrs D.J. Guise Mr M. McGowan Ms M.M. Quirk Mr S.R. Hill Ms S.M. McHale Ms J.A. Radisich Noes (19)

Mr R.A. Ainsworth Mr J.L. Bradshaw Mr M.G. House Mr P.D. Omodei Mr C.J. Barnett Mr J.H.D. Day Mr R.F. Johnson Mr M.W. Trenorden Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan Mrs C.L. Edwardes Mr W.J. McNee Mr T.K. Waldron Mr M.J. Birney Mr J.P.D. Edwards Mr A.D. Marshall Ms S.E. Walker (Teller) Mr M.F. Board Ms K. Hodson-Thomas Mr B.K. Masters

Independent Pairs

Dr J.M. Woollard Mr P.G. Pendal Dr E. Constable Amendment thus passed. Motion, as Amended The ACTING SPEAKER: Under Standing Order No 61, I now interrupt debate to take private members’ statements. Suspension of Standing Orders MR R.F. JOHNSON (Hillarys) [4.53 pm]: The motion that is before the House at the moment is a nonsense. All it says is “That this House” because the House has agreed to delete all the words after “House”. I will move that so much of standing orders be suspended to allow the voting on these amendments to be concluded. I know we want to complete proceedings at a certain time, but I do not want to see this Parliament in a stupid situation in which a ridiculous motion is before the House because of the way that the Government moved to delete all the words after the word “House”. That is all we have before us. I move - That so much of standing orders be suspended as would allow the proper processes of voting on the amendments, which the Government insisted on putting, to proceed all the way through. MR J.C. KOBELKE (Nollamara - Leader of the House) [4.54 pm]: Although it would be good to bring this to a conclusion, if standing orders are suspended, there are still considerable speaking rights, and the whole matter would

1084 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] continue for some time. Some people have made plans to do things, take up other duties or return to their own electorates. That being the case, the effect of the suspension motion would mean that we would go well beyond the time designated under the sessional order. We will have the opportunity to continue this debate at another time. That has happened with the other business we have dealt with in the past two days. Those matters will continue when the Parliament reconvenes in Perth. Similarly, this matter - which has involved a very good debate - will continue when it is brought on by the Opposition at another time. However, if we support the suspension of standing orders, all the time limits would be swept aside and we could still be here until 8.00 pm or 10.00 pm if the debate continued. That is not in keeping with what has been a very well planned and executed sitting of Parliament in Albany. This has been a historic first. However, this suspension motion has the potential to bring crashing down the excellent debate and organisation that has gone into this sitting, because members would have to continue sitting well beyond the acceptable time that was laid down in the essential order of business. Therefore, the Government will not support the suspension of standing orders. MR M.J. BIRNEY (Kalgoorlie) [4.56 pm]: That is probably one of the worst arguments I have heard in the past two days. The member for Hillarys has made a very good point: the motion before the House now reads something to the effect “That this House recognises”. Is that right, member for Hillarys? Mr R.F. Johnson: Yes. Mr M.J. BIRNEY: The motion before the House is “That this House recognises”. Which Government in its right mind would want to conclude a day’s sitting with a motion that says “That this House recognises”? It is imperative that we deal first with the member for Bunbury’s amendment followed by the member for Mitchell’s amendment. The member for Mitchell’s amendment is particularly important in light of the fact that we are sitting in Albany today. The member for Mitchell has moved that this House should support the extension of the south west gas pipeline to Albany. He has said that 10 recently closed beds at the Albany Regional Hospital should be reopened and that the Government should be committed to meeting the $500 000 shortfall for the new swimming pool in Albany. I remind government members in particular that we are in Albany. The member for Mitchell’s motion deals with three very important issues that should be dealt with here publicly in front of the people of Albany. If the Government is prepared to walk out of this place and leave a motion on the table stating “That this House recognises”, I am afraid that is an absolute indictment on all government members. Let us deal with the issues. If the Government does not want to reopen the 10 hospital beds, support the extension of the gas pipeline or provide the $500 000 shortfall for the new swimming pool, government members should have the guts to say so in front of this audience. The motion should not be left hanging. The Government should have the guts to say it. MR R.F. JOHNSON (Hillarys) [4.58 pm]: I moved that so much of standing orders be suspended to allow all the votes to be taken in relation to this motion and the amendments that have been put forward. Although my colleague the member for Kalgoorlie said that the motion says “That this House recognises”, in fact it says only “That this House”. The rest of the motion after that has been deleted. It is an absolute nonsense. We have played the game down here. We have cooperated with the Government. We have kept our speeches to a minimum to enable as many members on both sides of the House to speak. We could have hogged private members’ time but, because I suggested to the Leader of the House that we should split the time in a matter of public interest type style, that is what we did. Mr E.S. Ripper: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition just mismanaged his speaking time. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No, he did not. If the Government were serious about this amendment, it would have moved it earlier, but it wanted to be sneaky and move it as the last speaker spoke. It realised that there was no way it could get all the votes done. Mr E.S. Ripper: Your deputy leader just mismanaged his speech. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No, the Leader of the House mismanaged the time. Members opposite are the Government, and the Minister for Consumer and Employment Protection is the Leader of the House. I do not think he has done his job properly in this situation. This is a very important motion that was put forward by the Opposition. It is a very important motion about services in Albany in particular. The Government moved its amendment at the last knockings. Now we must have a vote because the Opposition has since moved an amendment to the Government’s amendment. We do not believe it is right or fair that the Government should try this trickery to try to obfuscate and not allow the people of Albany to hear what we believe should happen in Albany and what the Government believes should happen in Albany. All the Government wants to do is say what a wonderful opportunity the Gallop Labor Government has had and what a wonderful job it is doing. We do not agree with the Government. We want the people of Albany to judge for themselves, on the merits of the motion and the amendments put before this House. Mr A.D. McRae: You are already two out of 10 and you are going backwards. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will keep talking for as long as the member likes. If he wants to keep interjecting on me, that is fine. However, I am saying that I want this Parliament to run properly. This is the most historic parliamentary sitting

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1085 for 100 years because it is in Albany. I want the people of Albany to see how this Parliament should work. They will see now the sorts of tricks the Government gets up to. It just uses its numbers to bully and get its own way. Mr J.N. Hyde: That is democracy. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: That is not democracy, my friend; that is dictatorship. We are seeing the dictatorship of the Premier and his right-hand man. I am very serious about the motion to suspend standing orders. If the Government agrees, we can have the votes taken like that, so that the people of Albany can see exactly where both sides of the House stand. A member: With no debate. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No debate. I promise members that we will not be here until eight o’clock or 10 o’clock. We will have no debate. The questions will just be put and we will vote, so that the people of Albany can see what we believe in and what the Government believes in. That is all we are asking, which is our democratic right. What is the Government afraid of? Is it afraid that people in Albany will make a decision on what is being put before this House? Is that what it is afraid of? For goodness sake, it should show a bit of courage. It should stop trying to trick people. Let us have some decency in this place. This is a very historic occasion. Let us not finish the day on this sort of note. The Opposition moved a motion. The Government moved an amendment to our motion. We moved an amendment to that. By moving to suspend standing orders, all I am asking is that we allow enough time for those votes to be taken so that the people of Albany can judge what each side of the House thinks. That is all I am asking. It will take about five or six minutes to have those votes; that is all. Then we can deal with the rest of the program. Those members who are desperate to leave Albany can then go. We are not desperate. Mr M.J. Birney: Member for Hillarys, how do you think it is going to look when the newspaper reports that the Government came all the way down here to move a motion that states that “this House recognises”? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Exactly. The motion does not even say “recognises”. All it says is “That this House”. What a stupid motion. What is left on the Notice Paper? An absolutely stupid motion. Mrs C.L. Edwardes: The Government can’t manage the business of the House. Mr E.S. Ripper: If you can’t manage your own private members’ business, you are just showing what a hopeless Opposition you are. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The Government tried to be tricky and moved its amendment at the last knockings. That is what it did. We saw Labor’s trickiness when it was in opposition. Now we are seeing its trickiness in government. We know what those three government members are like. We saw them when they were in government before and when they were in opposition. Now they are in government again. I promise them that we know the whole three of them like the backs of our hands. We know exactly what they are like. They are like the three monkeys. I said it yesterday and I will say it again today. All the Opposition is asking for is to finish this parliamentary sitting in Albany in a correct and proper way. I believe there are now three votes to take place in the House - maybe even four. I am not sure about that because of the stupid nonsense of the Government. I am saying to members, let us leave the people of Albany with a feeling of commonsense. Being a Rhodes scholar does not make the Premier wise, and it does not give him commonsense. Very often that is the problem. He needs a bit of wisdom and commonsense. He is not showing that. He should have instructed his Leader of the House to run this House properly in Albany. I have moved a motion. We will vote on it. Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Yes. The gas pipeline, hospital beds and the swimming pool are very important issues. The people of Albany desperately want to know what the Opposition and the Government think about those issues. I do not want to delay the House any longer. I have moved a motion to suspend standing orders so that we can vote on a matter we have been discussing today. What a nonsense to go away and not have that vote. We have had time management today, which was agreed to by both sides, so let us not waste any more time. I hope the Government will support my motion to suspend standing orders so that we can vote on this very important issue, rather than chicken out of it and run away and leave on the Notice Paper a stupid motion that means absolutely nothing to anyone. Not one person in the world could make sense of the motion as it stands. Mr E.S. Ripper interjected. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: That is because of what it is. I have moved the motion, and I stand by the motion, for very good reason - so that the integrity of this House will remain in place and we do not run this House by trickery and by avoiding a vote on proper issues. Question put and a division taken with the following result -

1086 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

Ayes (18)

Mr R.A. Ainsworth Mr J.H.D. Day Mr R.F. Johnson Mr T.K. Waldron Mr C.J. Barnett Mrs C.L. Edwardes Mr W.J. McNee Ms S.E. Walker Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan Mr J.P.D. Edwards Mr A.D. Marshall Mr J.L. Bradshaw (Teller) Mr M.J. Birney Ms K. Hodson-Thomas Mr P.D. Omodei Mr M.F. Board Mr M.G. House Mr M.W. Trenorden Noes (30)

Mr P.W. Andrews Mr S.R. Hill Ms S.M. McHale Mr E.S. Ripper Mr J.J.M. Bowler Mr J.N. Hyde Mr A.D. McRae Mrs M.H. Roberts Mr A.J. Carpenter Mr J.C. Kobelke Mr N.R. Marlborough Mr D.A. Templeman Mr A.J. Dean Mr R.C. Kucera Mrs C.A. Martin Mr P.B. Watson Mr J.B. D’Orazio Mr F.M. Logan Mr M.P. Murray Mr M.P. Whitely Dr J.M. Edwards Ms A.J. MacTiernan Mr A.P. O’Gorman Ms M.M. Quirk (Teller) Dr G.I. Gallop Mr J.A. McGinty Mr J.R. Quigley Mrs D.J. Guise Mr M. McGowan Ms J.A. Radisich

Independent Pairs

Dr J.M. Woollard Mr P.G. Pendal Dr E. Constable Question thus negatived.

ROAD FUNDING Statement by Member for Carine MS K. HODSON-THOMAS (Carine) [5.10 pm]: Mr Speaker, there are approximately 174 000 kilometres of road in Western Australia’s transport network. In a State this size, these roads not only provide a means of transport but also are important to community development, employment, tourism and industrial growth. Nowhere is this more true than in regional Western Australia. Sadly, the Gallop Labor Government has decimated road funding in Western Australia, and the country has borne the brunt of these cuts. Labor has already cut $181 million from Main Roads’ capital works budget in its first three years. The news for regional Western Australia only gets worse. Labor intends to cut a further $160 million from road funding over the next three years. In fact, by 2006-07 the road funding budget will be a third of the amount allocated in the last year of the former Government. The impact on our road network is already showing up. Routine maintenance around our State is not being undertaken, while projects are being delayed or cancelled. Important projects that will be needed to meet huge demand will not be undertaken - projects like a ring road around Albany’s town centre to divert growing levels of freight traffic coming from the booming port. While local governments struggle with routine maintenance, important road projects are being abandoned. This Labor Government continues to pour money into its $1.5 billion metro southern rail link. An extension of our rail network is important, but Labor’s rail link, which is now $400 million over budget, is being built at the expense of country roads. It is time this Government stopped sacrificing country roads and started restoring road funding so that all Western Australia can continue to grow.

JUVENILE AID GROUP Statement by Member for Albany MR P.B. WATSON (Albany) [5.11 pm]: The Juvenile Aid Group has been a tremendous success in Albany. Young people who have been caught in cycles of family abuse and violence have been committing reckless acts of vandalism and other antisocial behaviour on the streets at night, which has caused great concern in the community. The project involved Geoff Dodson, a youth worker, and Dallas Coyne and Ted Farmer, Aboriginal police liaison officers, who patrol Albany streets and shopping centres on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights to provide support for young people at the risk of becoming victims of crime. The JAG team provides a key role in helping to redirect young people away from antisocial behaviour, involving such things as drugs, graffiti and alcohol abuse in the town centre. By building positive local partnerships between local government, police and community groups, we can keep our community safer, cut down on crime and support the youth in our communities. Today the Minister for Police gave a $40 000 grant from the Office of Crime Prevention to the City of Albany to fund a female Aboriginal worker to help JAG provide a greater support environment for young female Aboriginals in the community. So far more than 500 people have already received support and guidance from the JAG group. I am very pleased to be involved in this program. Additional funding will help expand this very successful crime fighting program.

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1087

COUNTRY SPORTS ENRICHMENT SCHEME Statement by Member for Wagin MR T.K. WALDRON (Wagin) [5.13 pm]: I acknowledge the outstanding success of the country sports enrichment scheme and strongly encourage the Government to continue the scheme and to increase its budget allocation. This excellent program, initiated by the previous coalition Government together with the Western Australian Football League, enables sporting teams from different sports in WA to travel to country centres to play state league fixtures, to compete in special fixtures and to enhance sporting development by coaching, umpiring, administration and sports trainer sessions. The value of these visits to the country regions of WA is immense, providing the opportunity for country people, particularly the young, to see elite sportsmen and women performing live. For many it is a rare opportunity and has a huge motivating effect on their sporting aspirations, their positive life attitudes and their participation. The organisational process and ongoing communications between the state bodies and the local bodies to ensure successful events is critical, and it forges new and stronger relationships, which is a huge plus for the sporting bodies and the local community. These events bring great economic and social benefits to the country communities and set up links that are critical to the sport, the participants and the community. I congratulate all those involved in the sports for their efforts and professionalism, which ensures that the visits to country centres are hugely successful. I encourage this Government and future Governments to continue to further resource the country sports enrichment scheme.

SWIM ACROSS AUSTRALIA Statement by Member for Geraldton MR S.R. HILL (Geraldton) [5.14 pm]: I inform the House of a world first and innovative project that has been developed in my electorate of Geraldton - a marathon swim across Australia. The Swim Across Australia will see a group of Geraldton residents undertake a relay swim from Geraldton to Sydney. The participants will swim in a specially designed pool, with a filtration system, that has been built on a trailer and will be towed behind a prime mover all the way to Sydney. The aim is to raise awareness and money for the Royal Life Saving Society’s Keep Watch campaign. Each year more than 50 children under the age of five die from preventable backyard pool drownings. The Keep Watch campaign aims to raise awareness of this risk and improve aquatic safety across Australia from remote communities to suburban backyards. As well as having the pool, a convoy of swimmers, student supervisors and support personnel will travel through more than 40 towns and cities on the journey and arrive in Albany on 7 April. Swimmers for the event include well-known marathon swimmer Susie Maroney as well as school students and community members. The team sets off next month and it is expected to take around three weeks to complete the journey. I believe that plans have been made to use the pool structure as a visiting swimming pool to remote communities when the Swim Across Australia event has been completed. This initiative has attracted a great deal of community, corporate and State Government support as well as local, national and international media attention. It is my hope that as well as raising money and awareness for the Royal Life Saving Society, this project will raise Geraldton’s profile. In conclusion, I congratulate Councillor Chris Gabelish from the City of Geraldton for developing this project and I wish everyone well with the event.

REGIONAL EDUCATION FACILITIES Statement by Member for Darling Range MR J.H.D. DAY (Darling Range) [5.16 pm]: Students in all regional areas of Western Australia deserve access to strong academic and vocational programs. In particular, the State Government must provide students with a genuine choice between attending a high school in their region or completing their secondary education in Perth. The Gallop Labor Government has slashed funding for education capital works in its first three budgets. There is now an $88 million maintenance backlog and expenditure on our schools is at its lowest level in four years. In short, Labor is running this State’s educational facilities into the ground. Due to the planning of the former Government, Albany has excellent primary and secondary school facilities including Albany Primary School, North Albany Senior High School and Albany Senior High School. However, the residential facilities for secondary students are far from satisfactory. The residential college, which was built in 1973, has been described by students and administrators as a disgrace. The cramped facilities mean that up to four students are sharing a room while demand for accommodation at the college far exceeds available beds. As a result, students from the great southern region are unable to attend schools in their area and are being forced to complete their secondary education away from their homes and families. This is simply unacceptable. The former coalition Government had allocated approximately $5 million for a new residential college in Albany. It is an important project that would have provided accommodation for up to 150 students, and it would have been completed by now under a Liberal Government. Under Labor, however, the new residential college project has stalled. The project has been scaled down to a smaller facility on the current site and construction is not scheduled to begin until 2006-07. The Gallop Labor Government is depriving great southern students of the opportunity to complete their secondary education in their region. It is time for Labor to abandon the city-centric approach to services and immediately fund a new 150-bed residential college in Albany.

1088 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004]

NORSEMAN TURF CLUB, 2004 NORSEMAN CUP Statement by Member for Eyre MR J.J.M. BOWLER (Eyre) [5.18 pm]: I rise to speak in praise of a club that holds one event a year, but to this club it is a very important event. I am talking about the Norseman Turf Club that recently held its 2004 Norseman Cup. To the people in Norseman, this is their Kalgoorlie Cup, which is my favourite event every year. It is bigger than the Perth Cup and is virtually their Melbourne Cup because its the one day of the year when the people from Norseman, like those in many other small country towns, get dressed, go out, kick up their heels and have a good day. Several members interjected. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Sorry, they get “dressed up” - the country boys know what I am talking about. That is why I go every year! Really, the people there have a great day and the cup is very important to them because it is their one big social event. Mr M.G. House: We are coming next year. Dr G.I. Gallop: The naturist society meets there, does it? The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I have only got a limited time to speak. I must say that I was absolutely staggered by the amount of work that the club has done this year under the guidance of President Claye Poletti. They must have worked for 12 months on it because there was a massive improvement to the course. However, this just reflects what goes on in one of many similar clubs around Western Australia. These little turf clubs are very important. Some people in the city areas say we spend too much money keeping these little clubs alive for one meeting. As the Leader of the National Party says, these meetings are their Melbourne Cup, Caulfield Cup and Sydney Cup all rolled into one. Mr M.W. Trenorden: This one sounds more exciting than ours. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: It is; come along next year! ALBANY REGIONAL PARLIAMENT Closing Statements DR G.I. GALLOP (Victoria Park - Premier) [5.20 pm]: I am extremely proud to have been part of this first regional sitting of the Western Australian Legislative Assembly. The past two days have been a wonderful experience, and I hope all those who have visited this Albany Town Hall to watch proceedings will have gained a first-hand insight into the democratic process in Western Australia. I am pleased that Albany was chosen as the site for the first regional sitting of the Western Australian Parliament. Albany has a number of firsts under its belt, which have been added to with this first regional sitting. Indeed, it was most fitting that Albany was chosen as part of the State’s 175th anniversary celebrations and, of course, as part of the Centenary of Parliament House in Western Australia. To the residents and business owners of Albany, I simply say this: thank you very much for your hospitality. Members: Hear, hear! Dr G.I. GALLOP: Many people have contributed to the organisation and running of this event. To you, Mr Speaker, thank you and the Acting Speakers for your guidance and steady hand over these proceedings. I also thank the Clerks and the parliamentary staff, including the chamber attendants, Hansard reporters, and information technology and security personnel who have all worked tirelessly and done an outstanding job. I also thank the Albany Town Hall staff who have been instrumental in getting this building ready for this sitting. I thank the ladies from Kooka’s Catering who have looked after us all so well. A special thanks also to South Coast Security and the Western Australia Police Service officers who provided security services in and around the town hall this week. I also thank the many local schoolchildren who have participated in this historic event, and the teachers who worked closely with the parliamentary education officers. We must acknowledge that a student Parliament will be held at this very site following our sitting of the Parliament. I know how important it is to keep our education program moving around the State of Western Australia. To all those participating in the Youth Parliament, my very best wishes. I return to the beginning: I especially extend our sincere appreciation to the people and businesses of Albany and all surrounding areas for their warm hospitality. I know that Cabinet very much appreciated the support it was given on holding its Cabinet meeting here earlier in the week. Ladies and gentlemen - Mr Speaker, I should say. I nearly lost the plot a bit there! Mr Speaker, and on this important occasion, ladies and gentlemen and boys and girls of Albany, this parliamentary sitting has made history. It is most appropriate that it has made history in the city of Albany. [Applause.]

[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] 1089

MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe - Leader of the Opposition) [5.23 pm]: I welcome this opportunity to make a few concluding comments. I, and I think most people, would judge this two-day sitting in Albany to have been a great success. The fact that there are still 100 or so people in the Chamber or town hall tonight is testimony to the fact that the people of Albany have come along, observed and, I hope, enjoyed proceedings. They might have found it a strange event. For members of Parliament, it has also been quite strange. Here we are, the Legislative Assembly, on a stage under floodlights. That has brought out some theatre among some members. Some lesser known actors have had a prominent role over the past two days, which is good to see. Some of you may see it as comic opera, some may see it as a Greek tragedy, and some might have thought it was The Rocky Horror Picture Show. But it was Parliament, which is an unusual creature. It is based on our Westminster system of government, and by its very nature is adversarial. If you look at it today, here are the two sides lined up like two football sides in a grand final opposing, scrutinising and challenging. Members of the public sometimes ask why members do not all just sit at a round table and all agree. That is not the nature of our parliamentary system. It is adversarial; that is, it is political, challenging and raucous at times. It was probably more raucous down here than is normally the case. It was important that the people of Albany who came along in their hundreds saw Parliament as it is. It would have been a failure if it had been a sanitised exercise. It has not been that. I suspect that a couple of lessons might be learnt. I hope this process is repeated in future years in other cities around the State. I certainly support one innovation. Although we may not like the idea of theatre lights, it is interesting that, unlike Parliament in Perth, when members have spoken in Albany, they have come to where I am now, the podium, and spoken at the Table. Most members would think that that is terrific. It has been an improvement on the formalities and procedures in the House. Perhaps a dispatch box should be at the Table, as is the case in federal Parliament. That is something we should consider when we return to Perth. If it is adopted, in one small way the Albany sitting of Parliament will have a permanent and lasting effect on Western Australian parliamentary procedure. I also thank the Clerks and the support, security and catering staff. I thank the City of Albany and all its staff, and particularly the public of Albany and surrounding areas, for their hospitality and interest. In walking around Albany and talking to people, I heard many comments, some positive and some negative, but all made in good humour. I think people have enjoyed what has been an unusual and to this point unique experience for any regional city in Western Australia. Last evening, when the Parliament sat until about 10 o’clock, a similar number of people were in this hall as there are now. That has been a fantastic thing. At one stage children were sitting in the aisles. It has been a wonderful thing to see many children from schools in this and surrounding areas come into Parliament to see democracy in action, albeit warts and all, and to know that they have formed their own opinion - good or bad. Mr Speaker, I say well done to everyone involved in this good experiment. It has not been cheap, but it has been worth it. Some day I think the Parliament, and hopefully the people of the city of Albany, will gain some fulfilment and some sense of achievement from it. [Applause.] MR M.W. TRENORDEN (Avon - Leader of the National Party) [5.26 pm]: As always, the National Party is running third in the event, which it is quite happy to do. Albany is a fantastic place and it was a good thing to hear members of this Chamber say how much they have appreciated Albany’s hospitality. It is a special place. For a start, what other city could have given us Victorian weather? The first day was very uncomfortable. It has been a pleasure being here. It has been a pleasure also to have been in the building itself. There might be a few phantoms around such an old building, but as a meeting place it has treated us well. To you, Mr Speaker, and all the people who put this event together - Albany council no doubt had a lot to do with it - it has been a worthwhile Chamber and a good place to be in. I must admit that when I walked behind those curtains for the first time yesterday, I saw how well the hall worked for holding Parliament. It has been a great exercise and it has been great to be a part of it. I will take a political shot. Another aspect of Albany that has been really good is that members talked for two days about regional issues. That has not broken the hearts of National Party members. Dr G.I. Gallop: It might not have broken their hearts but it might have stretched their intellect a bit! Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I was not going to be that nasty, Premier. However, a couple of members have said more about regional WA in the past two days than they have said in the past 10 years in Parliament. Ms J.A. Radisich: It cannot be any of us. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: That is true. It has been a good thing to have focused on the regions. It has also been excellent to see people in the Chamber as well as standing on the front steps of the town hall and listening to members who have been in Parliament for a while commenting on the proceedings of the House. As all members said initially, it is fitting that Albany was chosen for this first regional Parliament because, after all, it was the first white settlement in the State. I hope, Premier, that this is not the last regional sitting. Although, Mr Speaker, it must have taken a lot of time to get to this point, it has been worthwhile. I will probably not attend the Legislative Council sitting in Kalgoorlie, but I presume you, Mr Speaker, will be invited, just as we had that outcast here the other night! It was a terrible thing and definitely a ground-shaking

1090 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 24 March 2004] event to see the President of the Legislative Council at one of our functions! Nevertheless, I hope the people of Albany have enjoyed it. I have enjoyed it and my colleagues have definitely enjoyed it. We will enjoy it a little bit more after we have a meal, relax, stay overnight and go home tomorrow. I will not run through a list of people, but to all the people who made this event possible and who served us and the people who came into the Parliament, I thank you very much for the experience. [Applause.] THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling): Before this House concludes its proceedings for this first regional sitting, I wish to acknowledge the hospitality of the people of Albany and the surrounding districts. If I combine the number of students and others who have attended here over the past two days, more than 2 500 people have been able to watch their Parliament at work. Members have had a chance to refresh their links with this region and Albany. I, for instance, have learnt that my grandmother was born in Albany in the same year that this town hall was opened in 1888. That information is thanks to my Aunty Bethel Daniels. That is something she was proud to tell me. Parliament is not only a mere debating chamber which the people have observed, but also a robust decision-making and law-making forum. The expression of ideas in a forthright, well-argued way is vital for the political health of our great State. I thank all members and parties for their cooperation in arranging the business of the House and for putting up with the more cramped conditions of this site. One thing our Chamber has in common with this one is the lack of airconditioning, which we experienced yesterday. The successful conduct of this first regional sitting of Parliament is a result of hard work from a great number of people. I hope members will bear with me as I name quite a number of them. These people include parliamentary staff from across the organisation, plus a number of people from Albany. The staff from the Legislative Assembly were led by the Clerk, Peter McHugh. John Mandy had the prime coordinating role for this event and I thank John very much for his efforts. Others with a major responsibility were Nigel Lake, Kathy Hoare, Jane Gray, Rob Hunter, Rolf Goff, Ken Craig, Peter Pascoe and Joy Legge. Significant contributions have been made by the education, information technology, Hansard and assembly office staff of Parliament, including Geoff Watts, Gemma Broomhall, Glen Whitting, Harry Phillips, Peter Pitt, Ursula Richards, Ken Gwynne, Diane Rundin, Belinda Corey, Kylie Wild and Barbara Pickett. I would also like to thank my Deputy Speaker and the Acting Speakers for the role they played in Albany during the past two days. I thank the Albany Town Hall staff for having been very helpful, including the manager of this establishment, Stewart Gartland. He was ably assisted by Kevin Blyth, Garry Turner and Barbara Temperton. Security was provided by the Western Australia Police Service and Southcoast Security Service, plus our own security chief. In particular, I thank Superintendent John Watson and Sergeant Allan Spicer of the Albany police, Sergeant David Hooper from the state security unit, and other police officers from both Albany and Perth. I make special mention of Linda Quail-Smith, a good friend of mine, who sat in the auditorium for the full two days. I do not know how she did that, but I thank her. Security was coordinated by the police. This was complemented by Lorraine Naylor and her team from Southcoast Security Service, and we thank them very much. Catering was through Jo MacInnes and Krystal Drew of Kooka’s Catering. I also thank the professional services of two local companies, Albany Business Telephones and Albany Retravision. Those groups were also very important. I now close this sitting of the Legislative Assembly and hope that this type of sitting will become a regular feature of our calendar. I thank the people of the region for their great hospitality. Thank you very much. Members: Hear, hear! ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE On motion by Mr J.C. Kobelke (Leader of the House), resolved - That the House at its rising adjourn until Tuesday, 30 March 2004 at 2.00 pm at Parliament House, Perth. House adjourned at 5.35 pm ______