Legislative Council
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
7750 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Wednesday 31 March 2004 ______ The President (The Hon. Dr Meredith Burgmann) took the chair at 11.00 a.m. The Clerk of the Parliaments offered the Prayers. FAIR TRADING AMENDMENT BILL Bill received, read a first time and ordered to be printed. Motion by the Hon. John Della Bosca agreed to: That standing orders be suspended to allow the passing of the bill through all its remaining stages during the present or any one sitting of the House. Second reading ordered to stand as an order of the day. GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 4 Report: Budget Estimates 2003-2004 The Hon. Jennifer Gardiner, as Chairman, tabled report No. 9, entitled "Budget Estimates 2003- 2004", dated March 2004, together with transcripts of evidence, tabled documents, answers to questions taken on notice, and relevant correspondence. Report ordered to be printed. The Hon. JENNIFER GARDINER [11.04 a.m.]: I move: That the House take note of the report. Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner. PETITIONS Freedom of Religion Petitions praying that the House reject legislative proposals that would detract from the exercise of freedom of religion, and retain the existing exemptions applying to religious bodies in the Anti-Discrimination Act, received from the Hon. Patricia Forsythe and Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Withdrawal of Business Private Members' Business item No. 26 outside the Order of Precedence withdrawn by Ms Sylvia Hale. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Postponement of Business Government Business Notices of Motions Nos 1 and 2 postponed on motion by the Hon. Tony Kelly. 31 March 2004 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 7751 BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders Ms LEE RHIANNON [11.06 a.m.]: I move: That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow a motion to be moved forthwith that Private Members' Business item No. 90 outside the Order of Precedence, relating to an order for papers for any contract between the Government and the Axiom Education consortium, be called on forthwith. Contracts between the Government and the Axiom Education consortium need to come into the public domain as there is information that was not provided by the Government in its release of documents yesterday, and therefore the motion needs to be debated. Motion agreed to. Order of Business Motion by Ms Lee Rhiannon agreed to: That Private Members Business item No. 90 outside the Order of Precedence be called on forthwith. AXIOM EDUCATION CONSORTIUM CONTRACTS Ms LEE RHIANNON [11.08 a.m.]: I move: That, under Standing Order 52, there be laid upon the table of the House within 21 days of the date of the passing of this resolution the following documents in the possession, custody or control of the Department of Education and Training or New South Wales Treasury: (a) any contract between the Government and the Axiom Education consortium of ABN Amro, St Hilliers, Hansen Yuncken and SSL Facilitates Management (Spotless), including annexures and attachments, excluding any technical drawings, plans, designs or specifications, for the construction of Horsley Public School, Mungerie Park Public School, Perfection Avenue Public School, Shell Cove Public School, Mataran Road Public School, Rosebery Road Public School, Poole Road Public School, Glenwood Public School and Horningsea Park Public School under the "New Schools Privately Financed Projects", and (b) any document which records or refers to the production of documents as a result of this order of the House. Nine school contracts have already been signed and four are now operational. The contract with Axiom Education consortium runs until 2032—nearly 30 years—with only minor options for variation by the State. We clearly have a responsibility to get this contract into the public domain to show what it is. Yesterday the Minister released a summary of contracts dated 2002. It is interesting that the Government has sat on it for 10 months. We have to ask why members of the public were kept in the dark. Payments to the contractor already add up to $9.492 million per year for all nine schools. That is an annual return on investment for the contractor of between 10 and 20 per cent, so we are looking at a pretty good financial arrangement. It is an excellent return on investment, especially given that many of the major risks are still taken by the Government and not the contractor. That is why we need to see this contract, and it has to be in the public domain. The community should be able to expect the highest quality service. The summary of contracts states that payments to the contractor—monthly service fees—are performance based. That is, payments are reduced when performance does not match the requirements set out in the concession deed. There is also the issue of benchmarking and market testing. Every five years the contractor conducts a benchmarking exercise on which it can adjust up payments it receives from the Government if it can show that the cost of services in a comparable industry is higher. We believe this presents a massive opportunity for rorting—another reason this contract should be in the public domain. This contract should be in the public domain also because of the issue of child care. At the moment the arrangements whereby the contractor pays the Government a fixed amount of $350 per student per year but keeps the rest of the profits seem to be very generous. The full details of the contractual arrangements should be in the public domain to secure against rorting. It should be in the public domain also because of community access to schools. The summary of contracts describes the arrangements for three classes of access to schools: school, community and third party. The contractor keeps 50 per cent of revenue from the third party and thus could be a 7752 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 31 March 2004 massive source of additional creaming of profits to the contractor. While it is the lowest priority of the three classes of uses, it is not clear from the summary of contracts how conflicts between these classes of uses would be resolved. They are additional reasons to get this matter in the public domain. It is essential that these contracts are available not only for members but for the public so that their operation is fully accountable. I commend the motion to the House. Motion agreed to. ADMISSION OF THE TREASURER INTO THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Consideration of the Legislative Assembly's message of 30 March. The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Rural Affairs, Minister for Local Government, Minister for Emergency Services, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Natural Resources (Lands)) [11.13 a.m.]: I move: That this House agrees to the request of the Legislative Assembly in its message dated Tuesday 30 March 2004 for the Honourable M. R. Egan, MLC, Treasurer, Minister for State Development and Vice-President of the Executive Council, to attend at the Table of the Legislative Assembly on Tuesday 6 April 2004 at 11.00 a.m. for the purpose of addressing the House. The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER (Leader of the Opposition) [11.14 a.m.]: This motion is, without a doubt, one of the biggest stunts we have seen in this House for some time. The motion should state that the Leader of the Government, the Treasurer in this House, be dragged before the Legislative Assembly to explain to the people of New South Wales where the money has gone. The Government had a record budget in New South Wales. But why? Because it has been sucking the money in from every person at every opportunity—looking under every stone, looking up every pipe, looking into everyone's pockets to drag in the money. Now it is saying, "We have been ripped off by the Grants Commission and we are going to have to extract more money, more blood from the people of New South Wales." But it comes down to one thing: The Government has mismanaged the budget of this State, and the Treasurer should be in the Legislative Assembly today apologising to the people of New South Wales for what the Government is about to put them through. To make out that this is some sort of formal process and that the House is being recalled to consider a mini-budget is a completely false proposition being put out by the Government. There is no appropriation bill and there is no legislation. What we have is a media stunt, with members of the Legislative Assembly being used as props for a press conference. It is nothing but a ministerial statement dressed up as a press conference for the purpose of giving some legitimacy to what the Government and the Treasurer are about to inflict on the people of New South Wales. It is absolutely pathetic for the Minister to suggest that this is a legitimate process. And what is even more pathetic is that the Minister believes that this House will actually swallow it. There is no basis for recalling the Legislative Assembly next Tuesday at who knows what cost to the people of New South Wales. There is absolutely no benefit in doing that. It is nothing more than a press conference. The Government is using the forum of the Legislative Assembly as a prop to legitimise its incompetence in dealing with the budget. The Treasurer should be here apologising to the members of this House for his mismanagement of the budget, and he most certainly should be dragged before the Legislative Assembly to explain why he has so fraudulently perpetrated this as an emergency measure to try to recoup some money when it all comes back to the fact that the Government has totally mismanaged the many taxes it has inflicted on the people of New South Wales.