ABORIGINAL FLAG ...... 17499 ADJOURNMENT ...... 17547 ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE ...... 17499, 17499 AGRONOMIST PAUL PARKER COMMENTS ...... 17518, 17519, 17526 ASSENT TO BILLS ...... 17499 AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS ...... 17501 BUDGET ESTIMATES AND RELATED PAPERS ...... 17547 BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE ...... 17504, 17506 CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE ...... 17526 COAL SEAM GAS EXPLORATION ...... 17516, 17525, 17531, 17532, 17549 COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE ...... 17538 COMMITTEE ON THE OMBUDSMAN, THE POLICE INTEGRITY COMMISSION AND THE CRIME COMMISSION ...... 17503, 17503 COMMUNITY HOUSING ...... 17519, 17521 COMPULSORY THIRD PARTY INSURANCE PREMIUMS ...... 17514, 17514, 17515 CONTEMPORARY IDEOLOGIES...... 17551 COURTS AND OTHER LEGISLATION FURTHER AMENDMENT BILL 2012 ...... 17547 CRISIS, HOMELESS AND YOUTH SUPPORT SERVICES ...... 17534 CRONULLA FISHERIES RESEARCH CENTRE ...... 17535 DEATH OF DETECTIVE INSPECTOR BRYSON ANDERSON ...... 17535 DEATH OF DOUGLAS DE LANDELLES ...... 17550 DEATH OF THE HONOURABLE FLORENCE VIOLET LLOYD, OBE, A FORMER MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ...... 17499 DEFERRED ANSWERS ...... 17526 DISABILITY SERVICES ...... 17532 DROUGHT ASSISTANCE...... 17547 ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENDERS OFFICE ...... 17527, 17529, 17530, 17534 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND PACIFIC HIGHWAY ...... 17506 FIREFIGHTER TRAINING INCIDENT ...... 17527 FOREST AGREEMENTS AND INTEGRATED FORESTRY OPERATIONS APPROVALS ...... 17501 GAME COUNCIL NSW STAFFING ARRANGEMENTS ...... 17518, 17526 GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 2 ...... 17501, 17503, 17504 GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 3 ...... 17502 GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 4 ...... 17502 GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 5 ...... 17502 GRAFFITI HOTLINE ...... 17528 GUN OWNERS DETAILS ...... 17523 GUYRA SHOW ...... 17552 HEAVY VEHICLE ROAD SAFETY ...... 17522 HOSPITAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE ...... 17534 INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION ...... 17500 INSPECTOR OF THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION ...... 17500 JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE NSW WORKERS COMPENSATION SCHEME ...... 17504 JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON ELECTORAL MATTERS ...... 17502 JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE OFFICE OF THE VALUER-GENERAL ...... 17544 LEGISLATION REVIEW COMMITTEE ...... 17501 LOWER HUNTER WATER PLAN ...... 17524 M5 SOUTH WEST MOTORWAY WIDENING PROJECT ...... 17518 M5 SPEED CAMERAS ...... 17531 MENTAL HEALTH ...... 17526 MINING ROYALTIES ...... 17527 MOTORCYCLE CARRIAGE OF ANIMALS ...... 17529 MOUNT PENNY EXPLORATION LICENCE ...... 17506 MURRAY-DARLING BASIN PLAN ...... 17533 NATIONAL PARKS PEST MANAGEMENT ...... 17533 NATIONAL PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT ON HOMELESSNESS ...... 17535 NATURAL DISASTERS ...... 17500 NEWCASTLE RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE ...... 17523 NSW POLICE FORCE RESOURCES MINISTERIAL AUDIT ...... 17517 OMBUDSMAN ...... 17500
PARKES ELVIS FESTIVAL ...... 17548 PETITIONS ...... 17504 POLICE RADIO SCANNER APP ...... 17521 POLICE TRANSPORT COMMAND ...... 17529, 17534 POVERTY ...... 17550 PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLMENTS ...... 17528 PUBLIC TRANSPORT INFRINGEMENT NOTICES ...... 17533 PUBLIC TRANSPORT TICKETING SYSTEM ...... 17528 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ...... 17514 SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CRONULLA FISHERIES RESEARCH CENTRE ...... 17503, 17540 SHOALHAVEN DISTRICT MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ...... 17535 STANDING COMMITTEE ON LAW AND JUSTICE ...... 17505 STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL ISSUES ...... 17536 STATE AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE ...... 17504 STATE EMERGENCY SERVICE BUSHFIRE RESPONSE ...... 17520 SURF RESCUE EMERGENCY RESPONSE SYSTEM ...... 17528 SYDNEY HARBOUR FLOATING HELIPORT ...... 17534 SYDNEY WATER EMPLOYEES HEALTH AND SAFETY ...... 17531 TABLED PAPERS NOT ORDERED TO BE PRINTED ...... 17501 TABLING OF PAPERS ...... 17535 TAFE NSW ...... 17531 TRANSGRID AND MANNING ALLIANCE ...... 17526 WASTE LEVY ...... 17534 WOODBURN STORM DAMAGE...... 17533 17499
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Tuesday 19 February 2013
______
The President (The Hon. Donald Thomas Harwin) took the chair at 2.30 p.m.
The President read the Prayers.
The PRESIDENT: I acknowledge the Gadigal clan of the Eora nation and its elders and thank them for their custodianship of this land.
ABORIGINAL FLAG
The PRESIDENT: On Thursday 22 November 2012 this House resolved that the Aboriginal flag be displayed in this Chamber. I am pleased to inform members that the Aboriginal flag is now permanently displayed in the Chamber. It is particularly appropriate that this takes place from the first sitting day of this year, the 225th anniversary of European settlement in Australia.
ASSENT TO BILLS
Assent to the following bills reported:
Miscellaneous Acts Amendments (Directors' Liability) Bill 2012 Parliamentary Electorates and Elections Amendment (Redistributions) Bill 2012 Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Further Amendment Bill 2012 Ombudsman Amendment Bill 2012 Ports Assets (Authorised Transactions) Bill 2012 Saint John's College Amendment Bill 2012 Emergency Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 Game and Feral Animal Control Further Amendment Bill 2012
ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE
The PRESIDENT: I report the receipt of the following message from the Hon. Justice James Allsop, Administrator of the State of New South Wales:
J Allsop Office of the Governor ADMINISTRATOR Sydney 2000
The Honourable Justice James Allsop, Administrator of the State of New South Wales, has the honour to inform the Legislative Council that, consequent on the Governor of New South Wales, Professor Marie Bashir, being absent from the State, he has assumed the administration of the Government of the State.
Friday 18 January 2013
ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE
The PRESIDENT: I report the receipt of the following message from Her Excellency the Governor:
Marie Bashir Office of the Governor GOVERNOR Sydney 2000
Professor Marie Bashir, Governor of New South Wales, has the honour to inform the Legislative Council that she has re-assumed the administration of the Government of the State.
Monday 21 January 2013
DEATH OF THE HONOURABLE FLORENCE VIOLET LLOYD, OBE, A FORMER MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
The PRESIDENT: I announce the death on 11 February 2013 of Mrs Florence Violet Lloyd, OBE— known as Mrs Vi Lloyd—aged 92 years, a member of this House from 1973 to 1981. On behalf of the House the deep sympathy of the Legislative Council in the loss sustained has been extended to the family.
Members and officers of the House stood in their places as a mark of respect.
17500 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
NATURAL DISASTERS
The PRESIDENT: I inform the House that on behalf of members of the Legislative Council messages of condolence have been sent to the following:
1. Prime Minister of Samoa expressing sympathy to the relatives and friends of the people who were killed, injured or displaced by tropical cyclone Evan.
2. President of the Legislative Council of the Parliament of Tasmania expressing sympathy to the hundreds of people who have been affected by devastating bushfires.
3. Speaker of the National Parliament of Solomon Islands expressing sympathy to the relatives and friends who have suffered the loss of loved ones during the recent earthquake and tsunami.
Members and officers of the House stood in their places as a mark of respect.
INSPECTOR OF THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION
Report
The President tabled, pursuant to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, the report entitled "Report of an audit of applicants for and execution of Search Warrants by the Independent Commission Against Corruption", dated November 2012, received out of session and authorised to be made public on 23 November 2012.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Michael Gallacher.
INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION
Report
The President tabled, pursuant to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, the report entitled "Investigation into the smuggling of contraband into the Metropolitan Special Programs Centre at the Long Bay Correctional Complex", dated January 2013, received out of session and authorised to be made public on 25 January 2013.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Michael Gallacher.
OMBUDSMAN
Reports
The President tabled the following reports of the Ombudsman:
1. "Oversight of the Public Interest Disclosures Act 1994—Annual Report 2011-2012", dated November 2012, according to the Public Interest Disclosures Act 1994 and the Ombudsman Act 1974, received out of session and authorised to be made public on 29 November 2012
2. "Denial of rights: The need to improve accommodation and support for people with psychiatric disability", according to the Ombudsman Act 1974, received out of session and authorised to be made public on 29 November 2012
3. "Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997—Annual Report 2011-2012", dated December 2012, according to the Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997 and the Ombudsman Act 1974, received out of session and authorised to be made public on 11 December 2012
4. "Responding to Child Sexual Assault in Aboriginal Communities: A report under Part 6A of the Community Services (Complaints, Reviews and Monitoring) Act 1993", dated December 2012, according to the Community Services (Complaints, Reviews and Monitoring) Act 1993 and the Ombudsman Act 1974, received out of session and authorised to be made public on 31 January 2013
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Michael Gallacher. 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17501
FOREST AGREEMENTS AND INTEGRATED FORESTRY OPERATIONS APPROVALS
Amendments
The President announced, pursuant to section 69H (3) (b) of the Forestry Act 2012, (formerly section 21 (3) of the Forestry and National Park Estate Act 1998), the receipt of Amendment No. 3 to the Integrated Forestry Operations Approval for the Southern Region, including a statement of reasons for lateness, dated 18 December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be made public on 8 January 2013.
The President further announced that it had been authorised that the documents be made public on 18 December 2012.
TABLED PAPERS NOT ORDERED TO BE PRINTED
The Hon. Greg Pearce tabled, pursuant to Standing Order 59, a list of all papers tabled since 13 November 2012 and not ordered to be printed.
LEGISLATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
Report
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps tabled the report entitled "Legislation Review Digest No. 30/55", dated 19 February 2013.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps.
AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS
The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act, of the following reports:
1. Financial Audit report, "Volume Seven 2012, focusing on Law, Order and Emergency Services", dated 28 November 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 28 November 2012
2. Financial Audit Report, "Volume Eight 2012, focusing on Transport and Ports", dated 5 December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed 5 December 2012
3. Financial Audit report, "Volume Nine 2012, focusing on Education and Communities", dated December 2012 , received out of session and authorised to be printed on 11 December 2012
4. Financial Audit report, "Volume Eleven 2012, focusing on Health", dated 18 December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 18 December 2012
5. Financial Audit report, "Volume Ten 2012, Half-yearly Review 2012-13 Engagement", dated 20 December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 20 December 2012
GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 2
Report: Budget Estimates 2012-2013
The Clerk announced the receipt of Report No. 39 of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 entitled "Budget Estimates 2012-2013", dated 30 November 2012, together with transcripts of evidence, tabled documents, correspondence and answers to questions taken on notice, received out of session and report authorised to be printed on 30 November 2012.
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA (Parliamentary Secretary) [2.42 p.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Marie Ficarra and set down as an order of the day for a later hour. 17502 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 3
Report: Budget Estimates 2012-2013
The Clerk announced the receipt of report No. 27 of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 3 entitled "Budget Estimates 2012-2013", dated 30 November 2012, together with transcripts of evidence, tabled documents, correspondence and answers to questions taken on notice, received out of session and report authorised to be printed 30 November 2012.
The Hon. NATASHA MACLAREN-JONES [2.44 p.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones and set down as an order of the day for a later hour.
GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 4
Report: Budget Estimates 2012-2013
The Clerk announced the receipt of report No. 26 of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 4 entitled "Budget Estimates 2012-2013", dated 30 November 2012, together with transcripts of evidence, tabled documents, correspondence and answers to questions taken on notice, received out of session and report authorised to be printed on 30 November 2012.
The Hon. SARAH MITCHELL [2.46 p.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Sarah Mitchell and set down as an order of the day for a later hour.
GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 5
Report: Budget Estimates 2012-2013
The Clerk announced the receipt of Report No. 36 of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 5, entitled "Budget Estimates 2012-2013", dated 14 December 2012, together with transcripts of evidence, tabled documents, correspondence and answers to questions taken on notice, received out of session and report authorised to be printed on 14 December 2012.
The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK [2.48 p.m.], on behalf of the Hon. Robert Brown: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Robert Borsak and set down as an order of the day for a later hour.
JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON ELECTORAL MATTERS
Report: Administration of the 2011 New South Wales Election and Related Matters
The Clerk announced the receipt of Report No. 2/55 of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters entitled, "Administration of the 2011 New South Wales Election and Related Matters", dated December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 11 December 2012.
The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK [2.50 p.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Robert Borsak and set down as an order of the day for a future day. 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17503
COMMITTEE ON THE OMBUDSMAN, THE POLICE INTEGRITY COMMISSION AND THE CRIME COMMISSION
Reports
The Clerk announced the receipt of the following reports:
1. Report 1/55, entitled "Report on the first general meeting with the Convenor of the Child Death Review Team", dated 12 December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 12 December 2012
2. Report 2/55, entitled "Report on first meeting with the Information Commissioner and the Privacy Commissioner", dated 12 December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 12 December 2012
3. Report 3/55, entitled "Report on the twelfth general meeting with the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission", dated 12 December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 12 December 2012
4. Report 4/55, entitled "Report on the 17th general meeting with the NSW Ombudsman", dated 12 December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 12 December 2012
5 Report 5/55, entitled "Report on the 13th general meeting with the Police Integrity Commission, dated 12 December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 12 December 2012
The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK [2.54 p.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the reports.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Catherine Cusack and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
COMMITTEE ON THE OMBUDSMAN, THE POLICE INTEGRITY COMMISSION AND THE CRIME COMMISSION
Report: Report on the Use of Anti-personnel Spray and Batons by Police Integrity Commission Officers
The Clerk announced the receipt of report No. 6/55 entitled "Report on the Use of Anti-personnel Spray and Batons by Police Integrity Commission Officers", dated December 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 19 December 2012.
The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK [2.56 p.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Catherine Cusack and set down as an order of the day for a later hour.
GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 2
Government Response to Report
The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to standing orders, of the Government's response to Report No. 38 of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 entitled "Education Amendment Ethics Classes Repeal Bill 2011", tabled on 30 May 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 4 December 2012.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CRONULLA FISHERIES RESEARCH CENTRE
Government Response to Report
The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to standing orders, of the Government's response to the report of the Select Committee into the Closure of the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence entitled "Closure of the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence", tabled 23 October 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 14 December 2012. 17504 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE NSW WORKERS COMPENSATION SCHEME
Government Response to Report
The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to standing orders, of the Government's response to Report No. 1 of the Joint Select Committee on the NSW Workers Compensation Scheme entitled "NSW Workers Compensation Scheme", tabled 13 June 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 17 December 2012.
STATE AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Government Response to Report
The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to standing orders, of the Government's response to Report No. 36 of the Standing Committee on State Development entitled "Economic and Social Development in Central Western New South Wales", tabled 31 May 2012, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 15 January 2013.
PETITIONS
Cobar Ambulance and Nursing Staff
Petition requesting that proposals to remove ambulance officer and nursing positions from Cobar and to change rostering arrangements of ambulance officers and nursing staff at Cobar Hospital not be implemented, received from the Hon. Steve Whan.
Education Funding
Petition calling on the Government to stop cuts to education, TAFE and school funding, received from the Hon. Steve Whan.
Religious Discrimination
Petition supporting the proposition that the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 be amended to include religion as a ground of discrimination, and requesting that the House support the amendment to the Act to make it unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of religious belief or absence of religious belief, received from the Hon. Shaoquett Moselmane.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Postponement of Business
Committee Reports Order of the Day No. 5 postponed on motion by the Hon. Robert Borsak.
GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 2
Reference: Inquiry into Drug and Alcohol Treatment
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: In accordance with the resolution of the House establishing general purpose standing committees, I inform the House that on 21 November 2012 General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 resolved to adopt the following reference:
1. That General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 inquire and report on the effectiveness of current drug and alcohol policies with respect to deterrence, treatment and rehabilitation, and in particular:
(a) the delivery and effectiveness of treatment services for those addicted to drugs and/or alcohol, including naltrexone treatment, with reference to the welfare and health of individuals dependent on illicit drugs and the impact on their families, carers and the community having regard for:
(i) the need for appropriate human research, ethics and Therapeutic Goods Administration approval for use of new treatments in clinical trials,
(ii) the current body of evidence and recommendations of the National Health and Medical Research Council,
19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17505
(b) the level and adequacy of funding for drug and/or alcohol treatment services in New South Wales,
(c) the effectiveness of mandatory treatment on those with drug and/or alcohol addiction, including monitoring compliance with mandatory treatment requirements,
(d) the adequacy of integrated services to treat comorbid conditions for those with drug and/or alcohol addiction, including mental health, chronic pain and other health problems,
(e) the funding and effectiveness of drug and alcohol education programs, including student and family access to information regarding the legal deterrents, adverse health and social impacts and the addictive potential of drugs and/or alcohol,
(f) the strategies and models for responding to drug and/or alcohol addiction in other jurisdictions in Australia and overseas, including Sweden and the United Kingdom, and
(g) the proposed reforms identified in the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Amendment Bill 2012.
2. That the committee report by Thursday 29 August 2013.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL ISSUES
Reference: Inquiry into Same Sex Marriage Law
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: According to paragraph 5 (1) (b) of the resolution establishing standing committees, I inform the House that on 6 December 2012 the Standing Committee on Social Issues resolved to inquire into the following terms of reference from the Premier, the Hon. Barry O'Farrell, MP:
1. That the Standing Committee on Social Issues inquire and report on issues relating to a proposed same-sex marriage law in New South Wales, and in particular:
(a) any legal issues surrounding the passing of marriage laws at a State level, including but not limited to:
(i) the impact of interaction of such law with the Commonwealth Marriage Act 1961,
(ii) the rights of any party married under such a law in other States and Federal jurisdictions,
(iii) the rights of the parties married under such a law upon dissolution of the marriage,
(b) the response of other jurisdictions both in Australia and overseas to demands for marriage equality,
(c) any alternative models of legislation including civil unions, and
(d) changes in social attitudes (if any) to marriage in Australia.
2. That the committee report by Friday 26 July 2013.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON LAW AND JUSTICE
Reference: Inquiry into Racial Vilification Law in New South Wales
The Hon. DAVID CLARKE (Parliamentary Secretary) [3.10 p.m.]: According to paragraph 5 (1) (b) of the resolution regarding the establishment of standing committees, I inform the House that on 17 December 2012 the Standing Committee on Law and Justice resolved to inquire into the following terms of reference from the Premier, the Hon. Barry O'Farrell, MP:
That the Standing Committee on Law and Justice inquire into and report on racial vilification law in New South Wales and, in particular:
(a) the effectiveness of section 20D of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977, which creates the offence of serious racial vilification;
(b) whether section 20D establishes a realistic test for the offence of racial vilification in line with community expectations; and
(c) any improvements that could be made to section 20D having regard to the continued importance of freedom of speech.
17506 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
MOUNT PENNY EXPLORATION LICENCE
Production of Documents: Correspondence
The Clerk informed the House that on 4 December 2012 he received correspondence from the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham expressing concern that relevant documents may not have been included in the documents returned in response to an order for papers under Standing Order 52 in November 2009 relating to the exploration licence at Mount Penny. According to the practice of the House, the Clerk referred the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham's correspondence to the Director General of the Department of Premier and Cabinet for a response. The response was received from the Director General on 21 January 2013. The Clerk tabled the documents.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders: Conduct of Business
Motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay agreed to:
That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow the moving of a motion forthwith relating to the conduct of the business of the House.
Conduct of Business
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads and Ports) [3.14 p.m.]: I move:
That consideration of the document under Standing Order 57 be conducted as follows:
1. When the order of the day for consideration of the document is called on, any member may speak on matters relating to the document for not more than 20 minutes.
2. After two hours has elapsed, or if there are no further speakers, the matter will have concluded and the House will proceed to the next item of business on the Notice Paper.
3. If the matter is interrupted by the operation of any standing or sessional order of the House, it will be set down on the Notice Paper for the next sitting day at the beginning of all other business.
Because of the importance of this issue I have moved that the debate be conducted over two hours, which is a substantial period. I point out to members that if we have another debate that relates to Standing Order 57 the duration of this debate will not set a precedent. This is a matter of great importance, but the next debate relating to Standing Order 57 might be set down for 30 minutes, one hour or some other period.
The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO [3.15 p.m.]: I concur with the comments made by the Deputy Leader of the Government. However, it would be more appropriate for the Procedure Committee to deal with the way in which we address these matters so that members can have some certainty rather than the duration of debate being decided on the basis of the topic.
Question—That the motion be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND PACIFIC HIGHWAY
Consideration of Extract from House of Representatives Hansard of 21 October 2010
The PRESIDENT: For the guidance of the House, in debates relating to Standing Order 57 no member has the carriage of the debate and any member may seek the call to be the first speaker.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads and Ports) [3.16 p.m.]: With due respect to those who have lost their lives on the Pacific Highway and the loved ones they have left behind, my address today will be devoid of political rhetoric; I will let the facts speak for themselves. First, I will step back to 12 June 2009 when the then Minister for Transport, David Campbell, and the then Minister for Roads, Michael Daley, signed an updated memorandum of understanding with regard to the National Partnerships Agreement on Implementation 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17507
of Major Infrastructure Projects in New South Wales. The updated memorandum of understanding had been signed a week earlier, on 4 June, by the Federal Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, Anthony Albanese, who is now the Federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport.
I use the term "updated memorandum of understanding" because an earlier memorandum was signed by the same Federal and State Ministers for Transport and Ministers for Roads in February and March 2009 respectively. That memorandum is due to expire on 30 June 2014. The updated memorandum of understanding included funding arrangements for the continued upgrade of the Pacific Highway to a dual carriageway. Significantly—and this is crucial—the memoranda established a baseline funding ratio split of 83:17 for new projects on the highway. In dollar terms, the funding ratio equated to a $2.451 billion contribution from the Australian Government and $500 million from the New South Wales Government, giving a grand total of $2.951 billion for new projects.
At one stage there had been talk of the New South Wales Government contributing $800 million for projects under the memorandum of understanding. However, that was torpedoed seven months earlier. On 11 November 2008 the then Treasurer of New South Wales, Eric Roozendaal, announced in his mini-budget— we all remember the mini-budget—a reduction in funding for the Pacific Highway of $300 million. The disappointment of the Federal Minister about that $300 million reduction in the State Labor Government's funding commitment was evident in a letter to the then State Minister for Transport, David Campbell, dated 28 January 2010. For the benefit of members, I will quote directly from Minister Albanese's letter to Minister Campbell. It provides interesting insights into the intrigues of the Labor Party. Minister Albanese stated:
I would also like to draw your attention to the funding negotiation for the Nation Building Program that I undertook with your two predecessors, the Hon. Eric Roozendaal and the Hon. Michael Daley, throughout 2008 and early 2009.
In these negotiations, the NSW Government scaled back its contribution for the Pacific Highway from $1.45 billion to $800 million. The subsequent NSW mini-budget, in November 2008, saw the NSW Government cut its commitment to the Pacific Highway by a further $300 million to $500 million.
They are not my words; they are the words of Anthony Albanese. The Minister continued:
The Australian Government did appreciate the difficult financial circumstances the NSW Government faced in its mini-budget, but was nevertheless very disappointed in the decision to reduce its funding further. You would be aware that commitments were subsequently made to reverse this decision and reinstate the $300 million.
Had the NSW Government not reduced its contribution to the Pacific Highway in the mini-budget, there would be more than sufficient funding to undertake the planning work you have identified.
As a matter of fact, if the NSW Government had maintained its original commitment, work on the Pacific Highway would have been much further progressed by the end of the current Nation Building Program in 2013-14.
As everyone knows, State Labor never reinstated the $300 million. Its original offer of only $500 million remained in place to the bitter end. The letter continues:
On 9 December 2009 I noted with interest Premier Keneally's statement about the Half Yearly Review of the 2009-10 Budget. It showed the NSW Budget will be back in surplus in 2010-11, one year earlier than forecast. In that statement, Premier Keneally also points out that supporting jobs is the NSW Government's key priority. As you are aware, investment in—and the construction of—transport infrastructure is a key contributor to creating and supporting local jobs.
Premier Keneally would have witnessed this first hand in December last year when she turned the sod on the Banora Point Upgrade of the Pacific Highway, a $310 million project to which the Australian Government is contributing $298 million.
NSW will again benefit from our unprecedented Nation Building agenda when construction on the Hunter Expressway commences in the first half of this year. This $1.65 billion project—of which the Australian Government is contributing $1.45 billion—will help take the pressure off the New England and Pacific highways.
That letter reinforces the fact that Federal Labor was contributing more than 80 per cent of funding—indeed, on some projects nearly 100 per cent—towards upgrading the Pacific Highway. Interestingly, between the signing of the initial memorandum of understanding and the final updated memorandum of understanding Federal Labor contributions increased to such an extent as to lift the overall funding split from 83:17 to 86:14. For instance, in April 2009 $48 million of additional Federal funding was committed towards the Grenugie upgrade, while in the May 2009 Federal budget $618 million was allocated towards the 100 per cent federally funded dual-carriageway bypass of Kempsey and Frederickton.
Further, three months after the updated memorandum of understanding was signed, and only two weeks after the 2010 Federal election, an arrangement with the Independent member for Lyne, Robert Oakeshott, 17508 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
resulted in the Gillard Government allocating $35 million to accelerate planning work on the Pacific Highway from Kempsey to Port Macquarie. As is clearly evident from the letter I referred to earlier, the notion of the New South Wales Government providing 50:50 matching funding was non-existent when the Gillard Government was cutting deals with its State Labor colleagues and the rural Independents. The 86:14 split proved to be the high watermark in Federal Labor funding of the Pacific Highway. In summary, this funding ratio equated to $3.152 billion contributed by Federal Labor and $500 million by New South Wales Labor, resulting in a total of $3.652 million for the duration of the memorandum of understanding.
Acting on an election commitment to help fast-track upgrades to the Pacific Highway, the O'Farrell-Stoner Government in its first budget in September 2011 committed an additional $468 million for the term of the memorandum of understanding. That extra funding lifted the overall New South Wales Government contribution to 20 per cent of total funding and in the process reduced Federal Labor's contribution to 80 per cent. In its May 2011 budget, Federal Labor also announced $1.02 billion in funding for the highway. However, that was creative accounting at its very best. Of the $1.02 billion, $400 million had been brought forward from 2014-15 and $270 million had been redirected from the proposed extension of the M4 East. We estimate only about $300 million was new money in the 2011 Federal budget, although it was welcomed. All up, over the course of 2010-11 the contribution of Federal Labor reached $3.872 billion whilst the contribution of New South Wales rose markedly to $968 million—a clear 80:20 split for the duration of the memorandum of understanding. In other words, the O'Farrell-Stoner Government had lifted its share of Pacific Highway funding by 6 per cent compared to the contribution of the former Keneally Government, which had hovered at only 14 per cent.
We often hear the Opposition say that under the Howard Government's AusLink agreement the funding split for the Pacific Highway was also meant to be an immovable 50:50 ratio. That does not reflect the level of Federal Labor funding for the Pacific Highway, which I have just described in detail, nor does it reflect funding agreements for other major national highway upgrades. For example, for the Hume Highway upgrade the Federal Government provided 100 per cent of funding for such key projects as the Tarcutta and Woomarga bypasses. This level of infrastructure funding is totally appropriate when one considers the Commonwealth's huge revenue base, not to mention the amount of money it collects each year in fuel excise. While Federal Labor currently receives more than $14 billion every year from petrol and diesel excise, New South Wales received just $1.7 billion in roads funding in 2011-12. That means Federal Labor allocated just 12 per cent of the excise towards building roads in New South Wales, despite New South Wales being home to more than 30 per cent of the population of Australia and contributing approximately 30 per cent of Australia's gross domestic product, as well as New South Wales roads carrying more than 60 per cent of the national road freight task.
Further, the signing of the AusLink agreement is misleading because it does not reflect the funding arrangements outlined for the new projects in the 2009 memorandum of understanding which was signed by the Federal and State Labor Ministers. No matter how the maths is done, the dollar figures in the 2009 memorandum of understanding equate to a baseline funding ratio of 83:17. As I explained earlier, this funding split morphed over the next two years to 86:14. The signed memorandum of understanding states:
This MoU supersedes any bilateral agreement in place between the Commonwealth and New South Wales for the implementation of the AusLink National Land Transport Plan.
Labor's attempt to evoke the AusLink agreement has no relevance because the 2009 memorandum of understanding signed by Federal and State Labor Ministers supersedes it. Disappointingly, Federal Labor contributions to the Pacific Highway only started to reduce dramatically when the O'Farrell-Stoner Government was elected to office in early 2011. I will now explain in detail how the Federal Government has rapidly moved away from the baseline 83:17 funding split, as agreed in the 2009 memorandum of understanding, and what that means for future Pacific Highway upgrades.
In our 2011 bid to the Federal Government it was estimated that an additional $7.7 billion in funding was needed to complete the full duplication of the highway beyond the current memorandum of understanding period, which is to expire in 2014. If an 80:20 funding split were adhered to—a larger contribution than by any previous State Labor government—the Australian Government would contribute $6.16 billion and the New South Wales Government $1.54 billion. Happy to honour the 80:20 funding ratio split, the New South Wales Government in its 2012 budget announced an additional $1.54 billion funding beyond the current nation building memorandum of understanding. Combined with its 2011 budget commitment of an additional $468 million, this would bring the State Government's additional commitment to a total of $2.008 billion— a record level of State funding for the Pacific Highway. But in order for the full duplication of the highway to be completed as soon as possible, and for the funding split to remain intact at 80:20, Federal Labor needs to contribute $6.16 billion. 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17509
What happened? Federal Labor announced in its 2012 budget a funding allocation of just $3.56 billion. With the $300 million in new money from the 2011 Federal budget the total is $3.86 billion—$2.3 billion short of the required $6.16 billion, about the same amount of money that Federal Labor squandered on its pink batts fiasco. Worse still, it has become apparent through various media announcements that Federal Labor is now willing to allocate only $1.54 billion of the budgeted $3.86 billion. This means that Federal Labor reduced its ratio of the required funding from 80 per cent to 50 per cent and now to 20 per cent. In real dollar terms this equates to $6.16 billion reduced to $3.86 billion and now $1.54 billion. To add insult to injury, Federal Labor is telling people it is doing the right thing by matching the New South Wales Government's funding for the Pacific Highway.
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: Cynical.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is cynical because we need to forensically analyse the funding flows over time. This textbook Labor spin has yet to be properly exposed to the community, albeit this debate has provided an important start. Prime Minister Gillard would do well to remember her statements in Federal Parliament on 21 October 2010 when she promised Mr Oakeshott:
I say to the member who has raised this question that I can very much commit to him that the Government is committed to duplicating the Pacific Highway by 2016.
She also stated in the House:
We will continue making this work a key priority in the next funding program and we will deliver the Pacific Highway by 2016.
When the Prime Minister made that statement Federal Labor was providing more than 80 per cent of funding towards the highway: at no stage did she mention a 50:50 funding split with New South Wales. The only way for the Prime Minister to honour this promise is for the Federal Government to return to an 80:20 funding ratio. It is worth noting that last year Federal Coalition Leader Tony Abbott committed to restore the 80:20 funding partnership with New South Wales.
In the meantime, to at least utilise the funds currently on the table, not to mention the army of people and machines working on the highway as we speak, in October last year I wrote to Minister Albanese to request the following arrangement: Federal Labor to provide $1.54 billion of the $3.86 billion budgeted, along with the $270 million reallocated from the M4 East extension, plus another $450 million up to 2013-14. This, together with the $2.008 billion from the New South Wales Government, will provide funding of $4.27 billion to continue upgrading the Pacific Highway. Do not get me wrong, the New South Wales Government will continue to seek an 80:20 funding split, but in the meantime the O'Farrell Government is determined to get on with the job of improving the Pacific Highway and saving lives.
The Hon. LYNDA VOLTZ [3.36 p.m.]: The Minister for Roads and Ports said he was not going to give any political spin to this debate but his contribution was nothing but political spin. Why is it that for the first time ever we are considering a document under Standing Order No. 57 that was tabled by the Minister in this Chamber? That document concerned a reply by Prime Minister Gillard on 21 October 2010 to a question without notice. The Minister tabled the document on the last sitting day of this House in 2012 during his answer to a question by the Hon. Mick Veitch as to whether the O'Farrell Government would commit to Treasurer Baird's announcement that the State Government would match the Federal Government's funding offer for the Pacific Highway. The Hon. Duncan Gay said:
By 2016 the Federal Government needs to contribute the 80 per cent that it and the Prime Minister spoke of.
When the Minister was challenged about this claim of 80 per cent that the Prime Minister spoke of he said:
It is the Prime Minister's claim and it is in Hansard.
When the Minister was then challenged about the validity of his claim that the Prime Minister had spoken of an 80 per cent contribution he responded:
Just calm down. Doubt has been cast on the Prime Minister's commitment and to make sure that everybody is on the same page I would like to table an extract—
When he was further challenged as to whether the Government would honour the Treasurer's commitment to match funding on the Pacific Highway he said:
To the point of order: The member challenged the validity of the answer I was giving to the question. I was just about to table evidence to back up the validity of the statement I was making.
17510 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
As I have said, the Hon. Mick Veitch's question concerned the Treasurer's announcement to match the Federal Government's funding for the Pacific Highway. The Minister responded that the Prime Minister needed to contribute the 80 per cent she had spoken of and that is recorded in Hansard. Where in either the Prime Minister's speech or any speech recorded in Federal Hansard has this 80 per cent funding commitment been given? The answer is: Nowhere. As usual, the Minister for Roads and Ports has fudged his answer and was being mischievous when he said the contents of the document he was referring to included that statement.
The Hon. Duncan Gay: I do not believe that.
The Hon. LYNDA VOLTZ: The Minister should go back and check Hansard. What the Prime Minister said was:
I say to the member who has raised this question that I can very much commit to him that the Government is committed to duplicating the Pacific Highway by 2016. I would note for the member and for other members of the House who are interested in this question that the Government is investing more than twice as much funding in half the time as the previous [John Howard] Government. We are investing $3.1 billion over six years. I am sure that the members interjecting would acknowledge that that is the largest investment in a single road. This compares to a track record over 12 years in office of $1.3 billion. So investments and financial allocations are being made and being made quickly.
From where does the Minister for Roads and Ports get the impression that this commitment has been given in the Federal Parliament and is recorded in Hansard? It cannot simply be the mention of 2016 because that date has been given by both sides of politics. Prior to the 2007 election John Howard made the same statement. The Coalition's election policy at the time stated:
The Coalition is committed to fast tracking this work and is willing to commit funds to fully duplicate the Pacific Highway by 2016 …
That is where 2016 comes from. But, wait for it, the policy went on to state:
… if New South Wales matches this commitment.
The date was set by the Howard Government with a view to 50:50 funding. Indeed, the Howard Government had earlier expressed that view in the AusLink White Paper of 2004. The document states:
The Howard Government's objective is to duplicate the Pacific Highway by 2016, in Partnership with the NSW Government by investing an additional $480 million in the Pacific Highway in the five year period. The NSW Government will be expected to at least match this level of funding.
But even the Minister's Federal colleagues agreed with this view of matching State and Federal funding and the State responsibility for this road. On 27 February 2006 Mr Ian Causley said:
Most people would remember that I was for seven years a minister in the Greiner and Fahey governments in New South Wales— and guess what? In those days, the Pacific Highway was a state highway, and it still is …
On 23 May 2006 he said:
I am pleased that there is more money for the Pacific Highway. The Pacific Highway, of course, as is often forgotten, is a state highway, and the amount of money that the federal government has been able to inject into that highway over the last 10 years is quite considerable … we already committed last year to $660 million, and the state has matched that funding.
On 21 May 2007 Bob Baldwin said:
I can remember meeting and talking to the community—Patricia Michelle, Lenny Roberts and others—after they had been down to speak to Michael Costa, who was the then roads Minister. He said, "If only the federal Government would kick in extra money." In that budget year we upped the funding for the Pacific Highway by an additional $160 million, and to their credit they matched that!
That is what Bob Baldwin said about Michael Costa and the New South Wales Government. On 27 February 2006 Ken Ticehurst said:
The Australian government entered into a 10-year agreement with New South Wales in 1996 to fund the Pacific Highway upgrading program. Under the program, the Australian government has contributed $60 million per annum—indexed—while the New South Wales government matched this funding and provided a further $100 million per annum—not indexed—for upgrading and maintenance of the highway. As the member for Gorton mentioned, the New South Wales government has indeed contributed $1.6 billion and the Australian government $656 million. But this is their road to maintain and upgrade.
On 21 May 2006 Luke Hartsuyker said:
I would like to particularly note the $160 million being contributed by this government for the upgrade of the Pacific Highway which is being matched by the New South Wales state government.
19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17511
Even in this Chamber and from the Minister's mouth we heard the same thing. On 17 November 2005 Michael Costa said:
Yes, we are concerned about the state of the Pacific Highway. That is why both governments are investing large sums of money to upgrade that highway, and those funds are being proportionately shared between the two governments. We have said on many occasions that, from the New South Wales Government's point of view, we would like to see more Federal funds allocated.
But what was the interjection from the present Minister for Roads and Ports on 17 November 2005? He said:
It is a State road.
There you have it. At the slightest suggestion from Michael Costa that the Labor Government would like to see more Federal funding from the Minister's leader in the Federal Parliament, John Howard, the Minister is in no doubt whatsoever that the Pacific Highway is a State road, deserving of funds proportionately shared between the two governments. That is what he said when he was in this Chamber. On 25 February 2005 the Minister's erstwhile colleague the Hon. Rick Colless said:
We all realise that the State Government has spent more than that on the Pacific Highway over the same period—and so it should have. The Pacific Highway is a State funded road, as defined by the Keating Labor Government in 1991.
So we have it from the Minister for Roads and Ports and the Hon. Rick Colless that the Pacific Highway is a State road. On 10 March 2004 in the other House the Hon. Don Page said:
The matter is urgent because the Minister has spent too much time washing his hands of responsibility for the parlous state of the highway and too much time flicking blame elsewhere, notably the Federal Government. The Pacific Highway is a State responsibility. The Government's inaction and never-ending buck passing must come to an end.
Coalition members in this Chamber and in the other place have said that the Pacific Highway is a State responsibility but there is never-ending buck passing to the Federal Government. Indeed, while there was a Federal Liberal-National Government in Canberra, I defy any member to come up with just one quote in Hansard from the anti-Jungists on the other side of the Chamber—the Coalition members of this Government— who argued for Federal Government funding above 50:50. Members will not find one. Indeed, they will find the opposite; they will find that members opposite argued that it was a State Government responsibility. On 27 February last year the President of the NRMA, Wendy Machin, said:
It was the Howard Government that set the 50/50 funding split for the Pacific Highway … While in opposition the current NSW Government frequently called on the NSW Labor Government to match federal funding for the Pacific Highway dollar for dollar … To now suggest that funding should suddenly be reverted to an 80/20 model would ensure further long delays in finally upgrading this dangerous highway.
If members opposite are committed to the Pacific Highway, as they have professed in the past, they will stop this nonsense and heed the words of their colleague Warren Truss in 2006, when he thought that a New South Wales Coalition Government may be as good as its word. In 2006 he said:
So it was really refreshing over the weekend to hear the New South Wales coalition state that, when they are elected to government after the next election in New South Wales, they will commit to work cooperatively with the federal government to get on with the task. They are going to stop the blaming and they are going to work constructively. What a refreshing change it will be to have a government that wants to work with the Commonwealth government to make sure that these vital road projects in New South Wales are actually built.
Oh dear, Warren, if only that were true.
The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY (Parliamentary Secretary) [3.46 p.m.]: I will contribute to debate on the Pacific Highway following the tabling of an extract of the House of Representatives Hansard of 21 October 2010. In the context of the debate it is important to highlight the passage from the Hansard extract of Thursday 21 October 2010, when the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, said:
I thank the member for his question. I know this is an issue that is raised consistently in this Parliament and beyond, and is campaigned on and it is one of the key concerns to the community that he represents in this Parliament. This is the point. I say to the member who has raised this question that I can very much commit to him that the government is committed to duplicating the Pacific Highway by 2016.
That is the Hansard extract from Thursday 21 October 2010, and it is the extract that was referred to during the debate. I take members back to 1989 when the Kempsey bus crash occurred. Two full Denning Landseer tourist coaches, each travelling at 100 kilometres an hour, collided head-on on the Pacific Highway at Clybucca Flat, 12 kilometres—7.5 miles—north of Kempsey. The collision killed both drivers instantly. The impact snapped 17512 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
seats from their anchor bolts. Seats and passengers were thrown about the vehicles with a terrific amount of force, which also trapped people and their luggage against the back of the bus. Thirty-five people died and 41 were injured. A fleet of air ambulances and helicopters carried the injured to hospitals at Kempsey, Port Macquarie, Coffs Harbour and Sydney.
The New South Wales Coroner's inquiry into the collision found that the driver of the McCafferty's coach fell asleep at the wheel. Of course, this followed the Grafton bus crash the previous year. On 1 June 1990, in a seminal coronial recommendation, the Coroner at the time, Kevin Waller, endorsed the recommendation made following the Grafton bus-semitrailer crash that substantial resources be set aside immediately by the Commonwealth Government with a view to construction within the next 10 years of a dual highway between Hexham and the Queensland border. This suggestion was met with enthusiasm by almost everyone. Most people seemed to find merit in the proposal.
The one notable dissenter from this was the Commonwealth Government, represented by the Minister for Land Transport, the Hon. Bob Brown, a Labor MP. In order to meet objections the Coroner formulated some methods of financing such a huge project, which at the time was quoted at $180 million a year. Over the past five years both the State and Federal governments have contributed something like $1.6 billion. That puts into context the figures of 23 years ago. It is fair to say that an enormous amount of work has been done, and is being done as we speak. We have a goal to reach in 2016. In a letter dated 11 December 2009 to his Federal Labor colleague, the Hon. Anthony Albanese, David Campbell, the then Minister for Transport, and Minister for the Illawarra, said:
Dear Anthony.
The NSW Government, through the Roads and Traffic Authority, remains able to manage delivery of the Pacific Highway upgrade to meet the Australian Government's objective of completing a four-lane divided highway in 2016. Given recent intense community and media interest in the Pacific Highway upgrade, it is timely to provide you with an updated advice on requirements to ensure completion by December 2016 remains achievable.
Completion by the end of 2016, seven years from now, only remains achievable if our governments make an early decision to proceed with the necessary pre-construction activities, and subsequently decide to fund construction over at least five years.
The letter continues but the most important part of that letter is the following paragraphs:
If the commitments detailed above are not made within the timetable outlined, the opportunity to complete the upgrade in 2016 will quickly become unachievable.
Subject to your agreement to the above course of action, I will undertake to seek confirmation of a 20 per cent NSW Government commitment to the additional funding required. This would be consistent with the funding arrangements on many other National Land Transport Network projects in New South Wales and our recent agreement for funding preconstruction for Frederickton to Eungai.
As we have discussed, New South Wales remains able to manage delivery of the Pacific Highway upgrade to meet the Australian Government's objective of completing a four-lane route in 2016. However, to meet that objective, the additional funding required to complete the remaining projects would need to be committed as proposed having regard to the time constraints outlined.
That request was essentially met. It was not until the election of the O'Farrell-Stoner Government in 2011 that the Federal Government's commitment in terms of that 80:20 funding ratio diminished.
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: Your commitment has disappeared.
The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY: Our commitment has not disappeared. I challenge the shadow Minister for Transport to take a drive up the Pacific Highway in order to see the massive amount of work and investment that is taking place at the Federal and State level. Early completion of the four-lane divided highway between Hexham and the New South Wales and Queensland border remains an important issue for all local communities and is a priority for the Government. This is evidenced by the speech by the Minister for Roads and Ports, the leader of The Nationals and Deputy Leader in the upper House. It was a speech that was clear of political point-scoring but outlined the facts. Those opposite may chortle, but I look forward to the response of the Hon. Penny Sharpe to the speech of the Minister for Roads and Ports. The member opposite appears very confident but the facts remain and the figures are outlined in the budget. The Minister for Roads and Ports has been able to describe, chapter and verse, where the money has come from and the history of the funding over the past five years. We are contributing almost $1.6 billion at a Federal and State level and doing what the communities on the North Coast expect of us. 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17513
The member has tried to get some guarantees from the Federal Labor Government to meet the commitment made by the Prime Minister that this road will be completed by 2016. The New South Wales Government's money is there—20 per cent of the funding is on the table. It is now up to the Federal Labor party to match the commitment of 80 per cent that has been made by the Federal Opposition. I look forward to hearing from those opposite on the success that they have had in convincing Wayne Swan, Julia Gillard and Anthony Albanese to match the commitment from the Federal Opposition. The people of New South Wales now have something to look forward to—September 14, the date of the Federal election, where we have an opportunity to have cohesion on the Pacific Highway funding proposals and where we have a commitment by the Federal Opposition leader Tony Abbott—the next Prime Minister—as well as The National's leader, Warren Truss, to ensure that we have $5.6 billion to complete the Pacific Highway.
The Hon. John Ajaka: Point of order: It is impossible to hear the member speaking with the interjections. Those opposite will have the opportunity to speak.
DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! I remind members that interjections are disorderly at all times.
The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY: In terms of context, it is important to highlight that by the end of 2014 63 per cent of the Pacific Highway will be open to a four-lane divided highway standard. A further 16 per cent will be under construction and the remaining 21 per cent will be fully prepared for construction. There is one thing still missing: We have a commitment from the New South Wales Coalition, we have a commitment from the Federal Opposition but we do not have a commitment from the Federal Labor party. Communities on the North Coast know that the only thing standing in the way of a timely finishing of the Pacific Highway dual carriageway is the game playing by Anthony Albanese and the Federal Labor Government. I plead with those opposite to put the pressure they are attempting to exert on me on to Anthony Albanese—their factional inner western Sydney colleague and mate.
We have a commitment from the future Coalition government—the government that will be elected on 14 September—to provide $5.6 billion to complete the duplication of the Pacific Highway and restore the 80:20 funding partnership with the New South Wales Government that was outlined in the letter from David Campbell, the then Minister for Roads, in 2009 to the Federal Minister for Roads, Anthony Albanese. I return to the Coroner's recommendation entitled "The duel over the dual Pacific Highway". He highlighted that because of the resources that are required to complete the upgrade of the highway it was imperative that the Federal Government should take their part in the upgrade. That is something that the Australian people expect. As the Minister has highlighted, the Hume Highway was 100 per cent Federally funded. Sixty per cent of the road freight transport of this country uses the Pacific Highway.
The people of the North Coast, the people of New South Wales, the people of Australia recognise that the labelling of a road is not important; it is the funding commitment that matters. I implore members opposite to do what they can to at least get a commitment from their Labor colleagues to match the commitment of the Federal Opposition so that we can get a timely completion of the Pacific Highway to dual carriageway standard.
The Hon. MICK VEITCH [3.58 p.m.]: Together with the Minister for Roads and Ports I pay respect to those who have lost their lives on the Pacific Highway. I also think of those who have had their lives ruined by terrible injuries in motor vehicle accidents along the Pacific Highway. I advise the House of an interest in this matter. My brother is employed as a truck driver with one of the subcontracting companies in the Sapphire Beach section of the Coffs Harbour duplication work. I cannot speak for people who reside in Sydney about roads in metropolitan Sydney with a great deal of authority but I can say that in country areas people have a real focus around their road networks and the standards of their road networks: it is a subject of conversation in many places in country New South Wales.
Nowhere is this a more important issue than along the Pacific Highway. People in Coffs Harbour and Grafton tell me they just want this roadwork finished. They want the Pacific Highway finished. They do not care whether the work is done by the State Government or the Federal Government, they want the darned thing finished. The Pacific Highway is a critical road into Queensland but there are other roads in New South Wales the funding for which has been held back because of funding commitments to the Pacific Highway. Whether it be the Barton Highway, the Kings Highway or the Princes Highway other roads need funding as well. The sooner we finish the Pacific Highway and the sooner we finish bickering over who is responsible for what, the sooner those other roads will receive the attention they deserve. 17514 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
The political bickering means that none of us is held in good stead with the public. Regardless of the politics and who said what—we will hear the detail of who said what and who promised what—the reality is that this road needs to be finished. Commitments were made about the financing ratios. The Commonwealth is pouring a lot of money into this road and it needs to be built.
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted at 4.00 p.m. for questions.
Item of business set down as an order of the day for a future day.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ______
COMPULSORY THIRD PARTY INSURANCE PREMIUMS
The Hon. LUKE FOLEY: My question is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. Were the increases in premiums on third party green slips announced recently due to the Government's decision to remove journey claims from the workers compensation system, pushing costs from insurers to families?
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: No. The increases that were announced recently related primarily to flaws in the compulsory third party scheme that was introduced by the Labor Party in 2000. I am very grateful to David Shoebridge for some of his work and that of the Standing Committee on Law and Justice. It disclosed that the scheme introduced by the bunch of incompetents opposite led to insurers receiving windfall profits of up to 30 per cent. Now we have a situation where prices have increased in the past four or five years from an average of less than $300 to an average of over $500. That happened on the Hon. Walt Secord's watch. Not only that, under the scheme that the mob opposite presided over contested claims took on average three to four years, and sometimes five, six, seven or eight years, to be concluded. That was the scheme given to us by the mob opposite.
Then we have the legal costs. There is example after example of legal costs taking the vast majority of the funds that are finally awarded to people who are injured in accidents. I am grateful to the Sydney Morning Herald for highlighting some of those examples. In June 2008 the Sydney Morning Herald reported on a case about a law firm that deducted $278,000 from a damages award of $650,000 to a man who had suffered numerous fractures and brain damage when a van collided with his motorcycle while he was riding to work in 2003, five years previously. In June 2008 the Sydney Morning Herald wrote about another injured person who received less than one-third of the $150,000 damages awarded for leg and internal injuries stemming from an accident in Surry Hills in 2002. In April 2009 the Sydney Morning Herald wrote about a person injured in a bus crash in the Southern Highlands who was offered $120,000 plus costs only to find her claim had been $385,000 and the law firm involved had taken $250,000.
That is the scheme that those opposite gave us, and that is the scheme we now want to fix. The Sydney Morning Herald reported on many other examples. Recently I wrote to the Sydney Morning Herald to try to correct an error the newspaper had made in one of its more recent articles. It did not print my letter and said in response, "We did not print it because a recent article by Andrew Clennell in the Telegraph spoke of the Minister making a decision." So the Sydney Morning Herald was relying on an article in the Daily Telegraph as the basis for its research. The Sydney Morning Herald was relying on Andrew Clennell as its source. The earlier examples are much more compelling. [Time expired.]
COMPULSORY THIRD PARTY INSURANCE PREMIUMS
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. Can the Minister update the House on what the Government is doing to keep compulsory third party insurance affordable in New South Wales?
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: That is a good question and it was well put by the Parliamentary Secretary. We currently have a scheme that is full of complexity and where costs and disputes are blowing out at the expense of the motorists who fund it and the injured people who are meant to benefit from it. On Sunday the Premier announced the Government's response to the problems in the scheme. The Government is prepared to make some tough decisions, if they are necessary, to give motorists in New South Wales a more accessible, more affordable and more efficient compulsory third party scheme. Currently we have a scheme that is designed to care for injured people but is delivering only 50 per cent of the premium dollar collected from motorists back to the injured as benefits. 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17515
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call Mr David Shoebridge to order for the first time.
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: We have a scheme that has seen prices increase by around 70 per cent since 2008, with further increases predicted during the year. We have a scheme where injured people often have to wait many years to get their benefits paid. We have a scheme left to us by Labor where more is paid in legal fees than in treatment and rehabilitation. In short, we have a scheme that is currently not fair, efficient, affordable or sustainable. The Government has published a policy paper for comment until 5 April. The key potential reforms to the scheme include making it principally a no-fault scheme so that almost anyone injured in a motor vehicle accident can claim benefits. This would allow an additional 7,000 people a year to access the scheme and would remove for most claimants the often lengthy and expensive arguments over who was responsible for the accident.
The potential reforms also include the introduction of a first party system where injured people simply claim against their insurer, much like comprehensive insurance, rather than trying to find who caused the accident. Again, this reduces time, anxiety and cost. Another potential reform is a defined benefit system where insurers can start paying claimants their lost earnings or other expenses on a regular ongoing basis soon after a claim is made rather than waiting, in some cases many years, to settle the claim and pay this in a lump sum at the end. The proposals will also provide certainty for injured people as to their entitlements and greater certainty for insurers as to their liabilities.
People with more serious injuries due to the fault of another driver will still be able to access modified common law damages. A simpler, less adversarial claiming system will reduce time and costs for both injured people and insurers. Opponents of reform are giving a green light to the cost of compulsory third party insurance premiums continuing to grow. Opposing reform will mean that New South Wales will continue to have the least affordable compulsory third party insurance of any State in Australia. It will also mean that insurance companies will continue to operate in the system put in place by members opposite where it is possible to make super profits.
Opposing reform will mean that many accident victims will continue to spend too much on legal fees compared to their benefits. Opposing reform will continue to see the full range of benefits denied to approximately 7,000 people in the current system. The Motor Accidents Authority is working with shareholders, including insurers and the legal profession, to develop the new procedures and processes required to deliver this new and important scheme. Those who are interested to contribute to debate can have their say by visiting the website: www.haveyoursay.nsw.gov.au/ctpstrategy.
COMPULSORY THIRD PARTY INSURANCE PREMIUMS
The Hon. ADAM SEARLE: My question is directed to the Minister of Finance and Services. In light of the Minister's earlier answers today that insurers in the compulsory third party scheme have received windfall or super profits, why did he not demand to see insurance companies' books before approving a 10 per cent increase in premiums for third party green slips?
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: One would have thought that the Hon. Adam Searle would have understood a little bit about the scheme that the Labor Party left in place. Under the scheme—this is a fundamental point—I do not approve insurer premiums; the Motor Accidents Authority does. I can point to the legislation so that when the Hon. Adam Searle gets time, he can look at the section, read it and do some research. The Hon. Walt Secord was one of the authors of the original scheme so he ought to know that I am advised by the Motor Accidents Authority of premium increases it is considering for which insurers have asked. Occasionally, I am able to use my influence to prevent or to influence those premiums. In 2011 I convinced the insurance companies not to proceed with average 15 per cent premium increases while we tried to work out what we would do in the longer term. Of course, the insurance companies have implemented the increases. As I said earlier, I am very grateful to Mr David Shoebridge for pointing out the super profits that have been made. Unfortunately, Mr David Shoebridge has been a little bit loose with the truth. I remind members of the expression: There are lies, lies, and damn statistics.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister should be careful not to transcend the standing orders.
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Mr David Shoebridge has taken the damn statistics. He has misrepresented the figures because he has done two interesting things. First of all he has misrepresented the figures. For example, he has failed to take into account that the figures for 2011 include approximately 17516 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
25 per cent of claims because of the defect in the scheme given to us by the mob opposite. The defect is that it takes three to four years, sometimes eight or nine years, for claims to be determined. That is why Mr David Shoebridge has been caught out. From now on, every time I have one of those opposite caught out telling a lie, I am going to give them an award.
Mr David Shoebridge: Point of order: The Minister has just accused me of lying.
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: No, he did not.
Mr David Shoebridge: He did. He made the aspersion, "When one of these people is caught out with a lie", and that was clearly a reference to me, and the Minister should withdraw his comment because I was relying on the well-known Motor Accidents Authority figures that are published.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I have the gist of the member's point of order. The remark was not personally directed at the member, and I am sure Hansard will show that clearly. However, the Minister is sailing close to the wind, and I remind him of my earlier caution in that regard.
COAL SEAM GAS EXPLORATION
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE: I wish to ask the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, a question without notice. Is it a fact that the State Cabinet agreed on Monday 18 February to ban all coal seam gas activity within two kilometres of residential areas in New South Wales in view of the widespread community concern? Is it a fact this new ban will apply only to cluster areas identified in the Government's Strategic Regional Land Use Policy? Is it a fact that the spokesman for the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association said that this ban would lead to higher energy prices? Will this new policy lead to any compensation claims by coal seam gas companies?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I thank the honourable member for his question. The short answer is, yes, it is true that Cabinet yesterday approved a raft of new measures relating to an area that was of concern prior to the election—an area that had been missed. We put in place the best strategic lands policy in this Commonwealth, something that the previous Government had neither the wit nor the guts to implement. This Government actually put in place the toughest strategic plans process ever seen in this country, if not the world. As good as the strategic plans process is as it relates to agricultural areas, it is silent with regard to residential areas. I know it is difficult for people to believe that these companies and the Labor Party would want this to happen in a residential area, but it was happening and we had to stop it. Whether we are talking about a residential area in Broke, Bourke or Camden, these things should not go on.
[Interruption]
The Hon. Steve Whan enters the debate. May I remind him that on 31 January in a media release referring to Minister Goward he said:
What the Minister should be doing is explaining how she will advocate within the O'Farrell Government to ensure New South Wales secures reliable, affordable gas supplies.
He supported it on that day, but when it suits him he is against it. In February 2010, when the Hon. John Robertson was the minister, the Hon. Steve Whan was reported in Hansard as saying:
The New South Wales Government is not ignoring gas and renewables. The policy settings for these important energy sources are central to the Government's clean energy policy that is currently being developed. New South Wales has very significant renewable resources and potentially very significant coal seam methane gas reserves. And we are already seeing strong development of gas and renewables on the ground.
And there is more. In December 2009 Dr John Kaye told that right wing tabloid from the North Coast, the Echo News—
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Point of order: The Minister is required to be generally relevant in his answers. Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile asked specifically about western Sydney.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The member will resume his seat. There is no point of order.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE: I ask the Minister to continue to elucidate his interesting and entertaining answer. 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17517
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Dr John Kaye stated in December 2009:
The potential for local gas generation should be factored into any planning for the Far North Coast's energy strategy.
That is our Dr John.
The Hon. Marie Ficarra: No, he is their Dr John.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Yes, he is their Dr John.
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: What was that Duncan? I missed it.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: There was too much noise and I apologise that my voice does not carry as well as it did. I repeat, in 2009 Dr John Kaye stated:
The potential for local gas generation should be factored into any planning for the Far North Coast's energy strategy.
He also said in this place that a national gas scheme with appropriate regulations will benefit New South Wales substantially, not only because we do not have large natural gas reserves within the State's borders but also because there are other opportunities for coal seam methane gas to become part of the national gas grid. A queue of luminaries has supported it, including Kristina Keneally, whom I am more than happy to quote. However, the key to this issue is that the Government is getting on with protecting communities in the bush and the suburbs. We are looking after the people of this State. People told the Government that a section of the community was not protected under the existing scheme and we moved to protect it. Whether it be Camden— [Time expired.]
NSW POLICE FORCE RESOURCES MINISTERIAL AUDIT
The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: I direct my question to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Will the Minister update the House on the Government's and the NSW Police Force's response to the ministerial audit of police resources?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: The NSW Police Force and the Government are getting on with the job of responding to the ministerial audit of police resources. The audit undertaken by Mr Peter Parsons, a former assistant commissioner with 36 years of experience in the Police Force, made 22 recommendations. Since the report was handed down, the Commissioner of Police has provided the Police Force's formal response to the recommendations. The Police Force is continuing to work hard to implement a number of reform proposals and to address areas of concern raised by the audit.
I remain very aware that arising from the audit process and the development of the Police Force's response there remains a real commitment within the force to look to the future of the organisation and how it can do an even better job to serve the community. I inform the House that 11 of the audit's recommendations have been either implemented or are in the process of being implemented, and a further six recommendations have been endorsed in principle or have been referred to separate review processes. Key reforms arising from the audit that have already been implemented include the adoption of the 90 per cent operational strength goal for all frontline commands, and a major new training program for police leaders commenced in March 2012. Recently the Police Force and the Government announced that over the next two years 20 local area commands in the Sydney metropolitan area will be merged into 10. This year it is proposed to merge eight commands into four, and after that first stage is implemented and assessed it is proposed that a further 12 commands will be merged into six.
I will come back to the House with more information about this important reform, which I know is of great interest to all members. However, I indicate that the NSW Police Force has and will continue to consult with local police and the community about the proposed mergers. They are important reforms that in the first and second stages will return more than 100 senior management and other support officer positions to the frontline. Officers currently in command headquarters and support positions will be put back into operational positions as constables and sergeants working on the frontline. As I said, the NSW Police Force has committed to consulting with all local communities and councils that are covered by the proposals. I make it very clear to everyone: No police officers will be retrenched, nor will any police station be closed as a result of these mergers. This Government is committed to delivering the reforms that build and strengthen the NSW Police Force and that deliver a better result for the community. I look forward to continuing to update the House over the coming days about the NSW Police Force's response to the ministerial audit. 17518 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
GAME COUNCIL NSW STAFFING ARRANGEMENTS
Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Primary Industries. Will the Minister update the House on the current employment status of the Game Council's communications manager and acting chief executive, Greg McFarland? Has his employment been terminated or suspended and have any charges been preferred or advanced against him in relation to his hunting of animals?
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: I saw him coming out of a police station the other day.
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Were you reporting in on bail?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I acknowledge the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham's interjection.
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: We will call him "the defendant" from now on.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I also acknowledge that interjection. I am unaware of Mr McFarland's status. I point out that he was appointed by the former Government and is a former employee of Fairfax Media Limited. We will wait and see. If the member has asked a sensible question, I will get a sensible answer.
AGRONOMIST PAUL PARKER COMMENTS
The Hon. MICK VEITCH: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Deputy Premier and Minister for Trade and Investment. How much did the State Government spend on private investigators engaged to follow Mr Paul Parker, a respected agronomist with almost 40 years of experience in the public service, after his comments about the State budget were reported in the Young Witness?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I have no idea. However, I will forward the question to the Deputy Premier and obtain a response.
M5 SOUTH WEST MOTORWAY WIDENING PROJECT
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports. Will the Minister update the House on progress towards widening the M5 Motorway?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is fitting that one of the first questions I have been asked in 2013 is about delivery, and I am about to deliver. It is a very good question about the Government getting on with the job of delivering its election commitment to widen the M5 Motorway. Delivering the widening was a key Coalition commitment to western Sydney motorists. We secured a deal with the proponents within nine months of coming to government—something the Labor Government could not do during 16 years in office. One would think that members opposite were not really trying. They know nothing about delivery. Work on the M5 Motorway widening is well underway.
The Hon. Greg Donnelly: You are editorialising.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Was that the defendant again? Who turned on the tap? The Premier and I turned the first sod in August 2012 and major work started two months later, including drainage work, the relocation of services, construction of temporary access lanes, excavation and stabilisation work in the median and construction of sediment basins. In December last year work started on laying the first bit of asphalt and trenching for the installation of the intelligent transport system cable. Work is now full-steam ahead on widening the roadway, with a target completion date of 2014. Approximately 300 people have been working on the project since major work commenced and a further 200 workers will join them before the project is finished.
The widening includes an additional lane in each direction on the M5 for the majority of its length, approximately 18 kilometres of new and improved noise walls along the motorway at various locations, a new operations management control system, including a new control building at Hammondville, and variable message signs on the motorway and surrounding arterial roads. Once completed the M5 West widening will mean faster journeys for the 90,000 motorists who use it each and every day. Of course, it is the first step in delivering WestConnex, the completion of an integrated motorway involving major upgrades to the M4 and M5 corridors, and linking western Sydney with the international gateways in Australia's busiest airport and 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17519
second largest container port. It is estimated that an expansion of the M5 corridor alone would result in approximately $6 million in travel time savings over 30 years. With the benefit of their years of experience running this State into the ground, surely those opposite can now recognise the difference between broken promises and delivery.
COMMUNITY HOUSING
The Hon. JAN BARHAM: My question is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. Will the Minister provide advice on the progress of the transfer of public housing to community housing organisations? Was the transfer of 7,000 properties, initiated by the previous Government, achieved by June 2012? If not, what is the projected timeline for the current Housing NSW target?
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I could advise the member but I am not going to because I am not ready to do so. We are very—
The Hon. Walt Secord: You are so arrogant, Greg.
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I am trying to answer the question. We have undertaken an extensive review of the program and of various community providers. We are just about there on nine of the providers and we are still seeking information and working through the other half a dozen. As I said earlier, I cannot provide the full answer because I have not quite got it yet. We are working on it and I will be able to answer it very soon.
The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: It has taken so long.
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: It has taken so long because the former Government messed it up so badly. You guys were a disaster in community housing as well as everything else you did. You messed it up. You left us such a disaster.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Sophie Cotsis to order for the first time.
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: You left us such a disaster that, yes, it is taking us some time to make up for the 16 years that you tried to destroy this State.
The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: You are a disgrace.
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: You tried to destroy the State's economy and you tried to destroy public housing providers and community housing providers. You just watch it. What I am going to tell you is—
The Hon. Steve Whan: Point of order: I draw your attention to the rather disorderly conduct of this Minister in threatening a member across the Chamber. He said, "You just watch it" to the Hon. Sophie Cotsis when he was answering the question. I ask you to bring him to order.
The Hon. John Ajaka: To the point of order: Clearly, the Minister was responding to the comment made by the Hon. Sophie Cotsis, who said, "He is a disgrace." In response the Minister said that she should watch what she was saying.
The PRESIDENT: Order! There was a heated exchange between two members. Both members went further than they should have. I propose to take no further action. As it was based on an interjection, and a response to an interjection, I remind members that interjections are disorderly at all times. Where they lead is often unsatisfactory.
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I reiterate that we have been working hard to get a good outcome in this area. We are close. We will make the announcement as soon as we can.
AGRONOMIST PAUL PARKER COMMENTS
The Hon. STEVE WHAN: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Deputy Premier. Given recent comments by the editor of the Young Witness that revealed that private 17520 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
investigators were "ambushing people around town" during the investigation of Mr Paul Parker, a former Department of Primary Industries staff member, will the Minister confirm that that is standard practice when investigating public servants? Does the Minister endorse that type of practice?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I believe I answered this question earlier. It is obvious that the Hon. Steve Whan, a former Minister for Primary Industries, is asking questions out of his personal experiences. That is the standard—
The Hon. Steve Whan: Point of order: I asked the Minister a clear question about an action that has been undertaken by his Government. The Minister has sought to insult me by making a reference across the Chamber about something that I certainly would not have done. I ask you to bring the Minister back to order.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister has the call.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I clearly indicated that a similar question was asked of me earlier. In good faith I undertook to get further information and I took the question on notice. If the Hon. Steve Whan had been paying attention, instead of trying to make another political point, he would have heard my answer. My earlier comments stand. I will take the question to the relevant Minister and endeavour to get an answer.
STATE EMERGENCY SERVICE BUSHFIRE RESPONSE
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: My question is addressed to Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Will the Minister update the House on the fantastic work undertaken by our Emergency Services personnel over the summer to fight bushfires?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: Members of this House and the wider community watched in awe and horror as large parts of the State were consumed by bushfires over the summer. Our State has faced one of the most challenging periods of bushfire threat seen for many years and towns and hamlets across the State were suddenly under threat, whether it was Coonabarabran, Cessnock, Deans Gap, Mates Gully, Yarrabin, Coolamon, the Bega Valley, Sussex Inlet or Jugiong. The statistics are staggering, but one major statistic is to be cherished: there was no loss of life. And for that we are all grateful.
In just two weeks from 7 to 21 January a total of 1,348 000 calls were received in relation to bush and grass fires and the NSW Rural Fire Services and other agencies attended more than 300 bush and grass fires, which burned more than 650,000 hectares. More than 10,500 firefighters were deployed from the NSW Rural Fire Service, Fire and Rescue NSW, the National Parks and Wildlife Service, and Forests NSW. They were ably assisted by State government agencies and local councils, including the police, the State Emergency Service, Family and Community Services, NSW Health, NSW Ambulance, the Department of Primary Industries and our community partners including the Red Cross, the Salvation Army and the Adventist Development and Relief Agency.
Since the start of January 71 local government areas have been declared disaster zones because of bushfires. The fire in Warrumbungle National Park destroyed 53 homes, burnt in excess of 56,000 hectares and damaged facilities at Siding Spring Observatory. Tuesday 8 January was one of the worst days New South Wales has experienced in respect of fire weather. Hot, dry and gusty winds led to catastrophic fire danger ratings being declared for the Illawarra, Shoalhaven and southern ranges. It was the first time since December 2009 that New South Wales had seen a catastrophic fire danger, and the first time ever that this rating had been used across a large urban centre. On 8 January a number of significant fires developed, including those in the Shoalhaven, Cooma and Yass areas. It is testament to the work of firefighters, incident management teams and aviation support that the number of property losses was small.
Friday 18 January was another day of terrible weather conditions, with temperature records being broken in many places. Fires in the Shoalhaven, Bega Valley and Cessnock areas, as well as those already burning, received significant focus. Our farmers suffered large losses of stock, fencing and farming equipment. In such threatening conditions we had to make sure the community knew what dangers they potentially faced. The Rural Fire Service placed a major focus on getting information and warnings to affected areas. There were 99 activations of the emergency alert telephone warning system, including 43 uses of the new location-based warning system for mobiles.
Between 7 and 21 January the public website of the Rural Fire Service had nearly one million visits, 8.5 million page views, 12,000 downloads of the "Fires Near Me" app and 50,000 downloads of the "Bush Fire 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17521
Survival Plan". There were more than 27 million visits to its Facebook page and 15 million references on Twitter. The Rural Fire Service bushfire information line received more than 26,000 calls. Between 7 and 21 January there were eight days where total fire bans were declared, including four State-wide declarations. The Rural Fire Service State Air Desk coordinated more than 650 aviation tasks, which involved more than 100 aircraft.
While the statistics are impressive, it is worth remembering the most important figure: no loss of life was reported. That was due to the outstanding work of the volunteers and staff who were involved in the firefighting effort across the State, as well as the continued focus of the Rural Fire Service on planning and preparation. But the summer is not over yet. Communities and individuals throughout the State should remain ever vigilant in the face of this season's challenging weather conditions.
POLICE RADIO SCANNER APP
The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Is the Minister aware that people who buy iPads can apparently receive a free app— namely, a police radio scanner app with which they can select an area command and scan all networked transmissions for that area, including any reports by police who are completing firearms safe storage inspections at addresses particularly in country areas? What assurances will the Minister give that the safety of firearm owners and the wider community is not compromised by people being able to listen into police radio frequencies in circumstances such as this?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I am aware of such an app—it is even available on mobile phones—and it not only shows New South Wales but also other jurisdictions. It shows our firefighters and many emergency services, including New York and Los Angeles police, as well as other international police agencies.
The Hon. Steve Whan: Is it legal or illegal?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I will seek some advice—
The Hon. Steve Whan: I am just downloading it.
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: We have another defendant. There is no statute of limitations.
The Hon. Steve Whan: You had better tell me quick before I press "proceed".
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I would hand it to Amanda really quickly. I will seek some advice from police in relation to it. I understand it would be impossible to get through the digitally protected radio network of policing agencies, particularly in the metropolitan area. The member is obviously referring to a number of questions asked last year in relation to country and regional areas. I will seek some advice in relation to the question and report back to the House.
COMMUNITY HOUSING
The Hon. SOPHIE COTSIS: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Finance and Services. At a public housing meeting held on 18 December 2012 with residents of Ivanhoe Estate, Macquarie Park, a representative from the Land and Housing Corporation advised residents that revenue from the proposed sale of the estate will be used to build more social housing. Will the Minister commit to ensuring that all the revenue received will be put back into social housing?
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I was not present at that meeting or aware of it. The former Labor Government had a disastrous public housing policy. The former Labor Government sold public housing—
The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: Point of order: These people are worried—
The PRESIDENT: Order! The member will refrain from making a speech. What is her point of order?
The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: My point of order relates to relevance. If the Minister does not know the answer he should take advice on the matter and report back to the House. 17522 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order.
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Essentially the former Labor Government was selling public housing stock and then using the money to reinvest in new public housing—that makes good sense so far. However, the former Labor Government was selling lots of public housing for about $300,000 per property and then building new housing at about $500,000 per property. The State was going backwards at a pace that is even inconceivable for a Labor Government program. What did those opposite do? The formula of those opposite was to sell a place for $300,000 and then spent $500,000 to rehouse the same people. The O'Farrell Government is looking—
[Interruption]
Do you remember Joe Tripodi? I remember the story where Joe Tripodi was caught out buying properties and then on-selling them the same day for millions of dollars to the Department of Housing.
The Hon. Steve Whan: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The Minister was asked a specific question about a meeting that occurred on 18 December. The shadow Minister was present at that meeting—
The PRESIDENT: Order! I have the gist of the member's point of order. The Minister should not respond to interjections.
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I was responding to the question as to what happens to the proceeds of public property sales. The former Labor Government was throwing the proceeds away—except when they had the intervention of Joe Tripodi and his mates. It was hard enough to buy properties in the morning, they then had to sell them to the Department of Housing for millions more in the afternoon. Good work if you can get it.
HEAVY VEHICLE ROAD SAFETY
The Hon. RICK COLLESS: I address my question without notice to the Minister for Roads and Ports. Will the Minister update the House on the reduction in heavy vehicle speeding?
[Interruption]
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Those opposite do not want to hear good news a second time.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Amanda Fazio to order for the first time.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: When a member of the Labor Party refers to a matter of road safety as a dog going back to its box—
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: I am talking about a Minister, not about road safety.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I remind the Minister and the Hon. Amanda Fazio that I have dealt with this matter. The Minister will confine his answer to the question he was asked.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Those opposite keep saying it. I believe—with the exception of the Hon. Amanda Fazio—that most members in this Chamber would be pretty excited about the great set of numbers that we saw yesterday. Truck speeding is down 79 per cent compared to what it was a little over 12 months ago. That is the result of police and Roads and Maritime Services working together. Sadly, the genesis of this concerted effort resulted from a tragedy that occurred on the Hume Highway at Menangle, where a family died. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services and I, as the Minister for Roads and Ports, indicated that we would fix it and yesterday's figures demonstrate that it is currently going well.
We have also been supported by the great bulk of the industry and the Transport Workers' Union has been absolutely outstanding. In this work technology has been used that that has never been used before and any irregular vehicular patterns detected through our point-to-point cameras and through police work have been followed up. Many people across this State did not believe we would be able to fix this problem. Indeed, members are constantly asked why something cannot be done about trucks speeding, particularly at night. We hear the story from our constituents day after day. Despite that will, even our people were worried that we 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17523
would not make it. But make it they have. The big challenge they now face is to keep the speeding at this level or lower. The second challenge we face is that it be done with goodwill. Gone is the aggression between the police, Roads and Maritime Services and the trucking industry. It has been replaced by these three groups working together.
The challenge for us in the future is to ensure that we keep it at this level without the return of that angst. That is a real challenge, and my department and that of the Minister for Police and Emergency Services appreciate that. Geoff Crouch, who was with us yesterday, indicated the willingness of the trucking industry. Geoff had a tough time; he went out of his way to join us and it was appreciated. I congratulate the police, Roads and Maritime Services, the unions and the trucking industry on something that is fantastic for people surviving on our roads. [Time expired.]
GUN OWNERS DETAILS
The Hon. ROBERT BROWN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Will the Minister provide the House with details of all the contacts over the past two years, apart from one token telephone call from Acting Deputy Commissioner David Hudson, with the person who provided information about the compromising of the personal details of licensed gun owners in New South Wales? What further information has that person been able to provide to investigators, and what action has the department taken?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: The Hon. Robert Brown has asked a detailed question, which I suspect will require a discreet answer if there is an ongoing investigation. I will refer the question to the police and seek an answer, and then refer that answer to the House as much as I am in a position to do so.
NEWCASTLE RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE
The Hon. PENNY SHARPE: My question is addressed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, and Minister for the Hunter. Why is the Government spending at least $120 million of Hunter infrastructure funding to remove rail services in the Hunter when the Hunter Regional Organisation of Councils unanimously endorsed completion of the Glendale interchange as the most important transport priority for the Hunter? Has the Minister made representations to the Minister for Planning and the Minister for Transport on behalf of these councils and their public transport priorities?
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: The Government's priority is the renewal of the Newcastle central business district. It is about creating jobs. It is about creating and building a Newcastle economy, and therefore a Hunter economy. I will continue to do everything I can to advocate on behalf of the local members of Parliament who represent not only Newcastle but also the surrounding communities to ensure that everything we can do as a government to create jobs and a future is being undertaken. The Hon. Penny Sharpe referred to cutting rail services into the Hunter. That is misleading, but I let it go. What is being proposed—
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: That's what you are doing.
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: It is not about cutting services. It is about allowing the city to grow.
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: It's about stopping trains from getting into the city.
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: We have had 55 reports since 1990. If one laid out the reports over the two kilometres of railway line that we are talking about, one would trip over one report nearly every 50 metres. During 16 years in office Labor, with more than 50 reports, did absolutely nothing. Glendale has been on the debating table for years but the former Labor Government did absolutely nothing about it. Members opposite have now found Glendale but they are not prepared to talk about what needs to happen in Newcastle. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Infrastructure New South Wales has given the people of Newcastle and the surrounding communities the first time in a generation to dream about what the city will look like for the next 100 years.
Members opposite want to keep Newcastle as it was 100 years ago. They do not want the city to grow. Now they have found Glendale and decided to discuss it. They must explain to the people of Newcastle, who 17524 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
overwhelmingly voted for an independent mayor who stood on the grounds of "I will rejuvenate this city. I want the railway line cut." The people of Newcastle spoke loud and clear at the local government election. Now members opposite have found Glendale some kilometres away.
The Hon. Penny Sharpe: You forgot about Newcastle.
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: The Australian Labor Party now says that we forgot about Newcastle. Is there an issue? Do we need a plan for Newcastle? Yes. For years demands were made of the Labor Government. That is why members opposite failed so badly at the last State election. In 16 years the Labor Government did absolutely nothing about it. The worst thing was the internal fighting between members and their inability to make a decision; the whole thing just froze, like their new-found location of Glendale. Glendale is an issue, and it has been an issue for many years. Equally, rejuvenation of the city of Newcastle is a priority for the people of Newcastle. The people of New South Wales want the second biggest city in the State to have an opportunity to develop. As I said, Glendale is an issue. That is why I have been on the record talking about Glendale. Members opposite cannot debate public transport in the Hunter until they have the courage to say what they would do in Newcastle if they ever have another chance. The fact is that they will never have another chance.
LOWER HUNTER WATER PLAN
The Hon. NATASHA MACLAREN-JONES: My question is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. Will the Minister update the House on the progress made in developing the Lower Hunter Water Plan?
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: The Lower Hunter Water Plan is being developed to provide water security for the people of the lower Hunter region in the event of drought and for the longer term. Led by the Metropolitan Water Directorate, work has been progressing on refining water demand and supply forecasting for the lower Hunter. This is a critical part of the planning process. To secure our future water needs, we need first to understand how much water we have available and how much water we will need in the years ahead. A new demand forecast model for the region, which has been independently peer reviewed, is strongly indicating that a major new water supply to cater for population growth is unlikely to be needed for at least 20 to 30 years. However, it also shows that the region is vulnerable to severe drought.
This new demand forecast is significantly lower than forecasts used in previous planning processes, and there are several reasons for this. First, recent population and housing projections are lower. Secondly, the model is forecasting lower water consumption due to the installation of more water efficient appliances. Thirdly, we now have a better understanding of large industrial water users' needs and expected business growth. The result of this supply-demand balance work is significant for the Lower Hunter Water Plan planning process. The Metropolitan Water Directorate has made it a priority to convey the outcomes of this modelling to the broader community. We want to ensure that the community has confidence in the work done to date and in the process used.
An initial round of community workshops was held last December to discuss the community's values and priorities related to water planning. I am pleased to inform the House that several thousand visitors have accessed the Government's "Have Your Say" website to review the Lower Hunter Water Plan information and to provide comments. The strong response from the Hunter community to the first round of engagement was that people care about a safe and secure water supply and making the most of recycling and reusing water. They want a water supply that is affordable and available to all, and they care about our rivers and streams. I could not agree more with those sentiments.
Over the next couple of weeks there will be further workshops in the lower Hunter so that the planning team can check back with the Representative Community Group and broader stakeholders. At these workshops the team will be discussing the results of the demand and source modelling studies to date, and updating the community on progress on the planning process. I encourage all residents of the lower Hunter region to take part in the workshops or to visit the Lower Hunter Water Plan website at www.haveyoursay.nsw.gov.au/lowerhunterwaterplan.
The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: Another "have your say".
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Yes. We encourage dialogue with the community, unlike the mob opposite. A further series of workshops will be held in April or May. This will be an opportunity for the community to discuss the range of options that will be considered as part of the plan. The project team will then 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17525
develop a discussion paper and the community and stakeholders will be given a chance to comment on the direction the plan is taking. All this feedback will be considered as part of the preparation work on final recommendations to Government which are due at the end of this year.
COAL SEAM GAS EXPLORATION
The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Resources and Energy. The Minister for Resources and Energy said on ABC radio today that the new coal seam gas regulations announced by the Government would "ensure that all farmland is protected". Is Minister Hartcher's statement an accurate reflection of the Government's latest coal seam gas announcements and, if so, what action is the Government taking to ensure that all farmland is protected?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I thank the member for his question but to take his word for something that was said on ABC radio is a bit of a stretch for anyone. All I can say is what I said earlier: we have fixed an area that was missing and was a matter of concern.
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Sydney?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: We have fixed the issue relating to regional New South Wales. The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham would not know about regional New South Wales. He spends his time in his staff car cruising around the inner west, looking after the gas wells at St Peters. That is where he is camped most of the time. The only time he ventured out of there was with a film crew, and when they left somebody left the tap on. It is interesting that the member referred to comments on ABC radio. I am reminded of an earlier interjection by the Hon. Steve Whan, which is relevant.
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Point of order: The point of order relates to relevance. The question specifically related to farmland.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister is meandering. He will confine his remarks to the question.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It will all become clear. On February 2011, on ABC radio—the member asked about ABC radio—the Hon. Steve Whan said, "The majority of coal seam gas exploration does not involve fracking, which has a bad reputation but undeservedly. Coal seam gas is no different to any other type of mineral production".
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Point of order: The point of order relates to relevance. I believe the member is flouting your ruling. We are now halfway through the time allocated for the answer and the Minister has not mentioned farms or how Minister Hartcher's statements relate to these new protections.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I encourage the Minister to be generally relevant in the time he has remaining.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: If the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham had been listening earlier, rather than receiving commands from North Korea, he would have heard me talking about strategic lands and farms. I am now talking about coal seam gas. One of his great supporters, the Hon. Steve Whan, said on ABC radio that coal seam gas is no different to any other type of mineral production. We are piping gas from South Australia and our oil is imported at a high environmental cost. We must go ahead, with caution, to meet the need for new energy. I refer to another supporter who does not believe there are any problems with fracking.
The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: What about the Hunter Valley vignerons—a $2 billion industry and you are destroying it.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The member will come to order.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: My only advice to the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham is to light it, don't sniff it.
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: If members have further questions they should put them on notice. 17526 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
GAME COUNCIL NSW STAFFING ARRANGEMENTS
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Earlier in question time I was asked a question by Mr David Shoebridge regarding allegations of illegal hunting against two Game Council NSW employees. I am advised that following the Government being made aware of the allegations of illegal hunting that had been made against the two Game Council employees on Tuesday 22 January, the Minister for Primary Industries requested that the employees be stood down. One of the two employees was reinstated on Friday 25 January after he was able to prove beyond doubt that he was in Sydney at the time of the alleged events. The other employee continues to remain stood down from duties whilst a NSW Police investigation continues. I am advised that Game Council NSW is cooperating by assisting NSW Police in the investigation. The Minister has also indicated an internal fact-finding investigation to operate alongside the formal police investigation. It is entirely appropriate to await the outcomes of these investigations before making any other comment.
AGRONOMIST PAUL PARKER COMMENTS
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Earlier I was asked questions by two members regarding Paul Parker. The Minister advises me that the department's response to this matter was consistent with the requirements of the Public Sector Employment and Management Act. While it is clearly an operational matter, I advise that, in accordance with the public sector guidelines, an independent investigation was conducted into comments in the press attributed to a Department of Primary Industries staff member. The department has a long-established policy that staff should not speak to the media on issues outside their areas of expertise or responsibility. All interaction with the media must follow the department's media policy which states that when approached by the media employees are to direct any inquiry to their relevant media team. It is not uncommon in the public sector to engage an external provider to conduct such investigations to ensure a fair process that is at arm's length of the department and the individual. The process is designed to ensure natural justice and consistency in handling matters of this nature. The investigation has been finalised. The staff member has since retired from the department and the Minister advises me that the cost of the investigation was $7,684.09.
DEFERRED ANSWERS
The following answers to questions without notice were received by the Clerk during the adjournment of the House:
TRANSGRID AND MANNING ALLIANCE
On 13 November 2012 Dr John Kaye asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, a question without notice regarding TransGrid and Manning Alliance. The Minister for Resources and Energy provided the following response:
Grid Australia is a peak body that represents both private and Government owned transmission companies across Australia.
Views expressed by Grid Australia do not necessarily represent the views of any one member and do not represent the views of the NSW Government.
I am advised that Grid Australia has withdrawn the threatened legal action and has apologised to Mr Robertson.
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE
On 13 November 2012 the Hon. Paul Green asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Education, a question without notice regarding child sexual abuse. The Minister for Education provided the following response:
The Premier has provided Bravehearts with $100,000 to trial the program in 20 NSW government schools.
Officers from the Department of Education and Communities are working with representatives of Bravehearts to oversight an evaluation of Ditto's Keep Safe Adventure to be delivered in 2013. An independent consultant has been engaged and will be evaluating the pilot in 2013.
MENTAL HEALTH
On 13 November 2012 Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, representing the Minister for Mental Health, a question without notice regarding mental health. The Minister for Mental Health provided the following response:
I am advised:
The New South Wales Government has established the Mental Health Commission with the key objective to improve the experience of mental health care for people with mental health problems and their carers. In addition to actively consulting with consumers and carers, the Commission will engage with the wider community to combat the stigma that can act as a barrier to people seeking mental health care, and use a whole of community approach to improve the mental health outcomes for people across New South Wales.
19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17527
Initiatives targeting awareness of mental health workplace issues include:
• The NSW Anxiety Awareness Campaign, which was launched in April 2012. The campaign, delivered in a number of community languages, aimed to raise awareness of anxiety conditions and to encourage more adults with symptoms of anxiety to seek support and professional assistance. Importantly the campaign creative images portray a series of scenarios and symptoms that some people regularly experience including a workplace setting. The creative concepts minimise stigma by highlighting that anxiety is a condition people can take steps to control or manage.
• The New South Wales Ministry of Health funds the Workplace Health Promotion Network through the Mental Health Association NSW. This network brings together human resource and occupational health and safety professionals from across government agencies, NGOs and private companies for regular seminars and networking events focused on promoting all aspects of employee health and wellbeing.
• The New South Wales Healthy Workers Initiative aims to promote health and wellbeing in the workplace and assist in preventing lifestyle related chronic disease in working adults. While not specifically focusing on mental health in the workplace, the targeting of health and wellbeing will also lead to improvements in the general wellbeing of the workforce.
• Mental Health First Aid Training is promoted across New South Wales Government organisations, both to support greater access to services for people with mental illness and to increase the mental health literacy of the community.
• Specifically for the health workforce, a Stress Management for Nurses booklet has been developed to heighten awareness of the mental health needs of nurses and provided useful exercises to manage stress at work. The booklet contains evidence based coping strategies relevant to the health workforce and relaxations techniques.
• The Employee Assistance Program is an initiative available to all organisations to provide employees with confidential counselling and support for workplace and personal issues. This includes depression and anxiety, emotional difficulties, downsizing and redundancies, mental health and other personal stressors.
FIREFIGHTER TRAINING INCIDENT
On 13 November 2012 the Hon. Walt Secord asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services a question without notice regarding a firefighter training incident. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services provided the following response:
The NSW Rural Fire Service [RFS] has advised me that its report on this incident is expected to be finalised by the end of December 2012. The NSW RFS advises further that the incident occurred during a fire fighting operation, rather than a training exercise, and the substance dropped on fire fighters was "secondary treatment" water, not untreated sewage.
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENDERS OFFICE
On 14 November 2012 the Hon. Robert Brown asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, representing the Attorney General, a question without notice regarding the Environmental Defenders Office. The Attorney General provided the following response:
I am advised:
The Environmental Defenders Office [EDO] is a community legal centre and has a tripartite Service Agreement with Legal Aid NSW and the Commonwealth Government.
Under the Service Agreement it is not the role of Legal Aid NSW to approve legal advice activities conducted by the Environmental Defenders Office. Details of costs incurred for funding workshops or attendance numbers at these events are not reported to Legal Aid NSW.
I am aware that the Environmental Defenders Office has held a range of community workshops across New South Wales. Details regarding these workshops are published in the Environmental Defenders Office's Annual Reports and are available on the Environmental Defenders Office website.
MINING ROYALTIES
On 14 November 2012 the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Primary Industries, a question without notice regarding mining royalties. The Minister for Primary Industries provided the following response:
The New South Wales Government is well aware of the broader impact of the mining boom on the New South Wales economy and is canvassing potential actions in key sectors through the development of industry action plans. We are also actively participating in relevant research, such as a current national project looking into impacts on the tourism sector.
17528 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
SURF RESCUE EMERGENCY RESPONSE SYSTEM
On 14 November 2012 the Hon. Steve Whan asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services a question without notice regarding the surf rescue emergency response system. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services provided the following response:
As previously announced, following this incident State Emergency Management Committee chair Phil Koperberg was appointed to oversee and report on the implementation of new emergency response protocols for inshore water rescues. That report has now been presented to Government and its findings are currently under consideration.
GRAFFITI HOTLINE
On 14 November 2012 the Hon. Paul Green asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, representing the Attorney General, a question without notice regarding the graffiti hotline. The Attorney General provided the following response:
I am advised:
The New South Wales graffiti hotline was established on 1 March 2012 to provide a single point of referral for the removal of graffiti across the State. The allocated budget for the operation of the hotline in the 2012-2013 financial year is $267,569.
As at 30 November 2012 the hotline had received 1,661 calls resulting in 1,438 referrals to councils and government agencies for graffiti removal and clean up. Reporting to the hotline continues to provide the Government with important statistics on the extent of the graffiti problem in New South Wales. A review of the graffiti hotline is planned in 2013.
PUBLIC TRANSPORT TICKETING SYSTEM
On 14 November 2012 the Hon. Penny Sharpe asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Transport, a question without notice regarding the public transport ticketing system. The Minister for Transport provided the following response:
The New South Wales Government is committed to delivering the modern, efficient electronic ticketing. The Opal electronic ticketing system will be gradually introduced to Sydney's transport system, with the trial on Sydney Ferries beginning on 7 December 2012. The system is simple to use, provides value for money, is convenient for customers, and is safe and secure.
PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLMENTS
On 14 November 2012 Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Education a question without notice regarding public school enrolments. The Minister for Education provided the following response:
The Department of Education and Communities actively monitors demographic trends and plans ahead for future education needs. The department can meet education demand in 2013.
The department will use the following strategies to manage future public education need:
• provide demountable classrooms and specialist spaces
• provide permanent classrooms and specialist spaces
• change/adjust school catchment boundaries
• expand school sites by acquiring adjoining land
• redevelop existing schools
• construct new schools
For schools in the North Shore area, I have asked the department to set up a working group to help address the issues. This working group will be chaired by the department's Deputy Director-General of Corporate Services, Mr Peter Riordan, and will include representatives from the Northern Sydney Regional Council of Parents and Citizens Associations; local school principals; and the department's planning and demography experts.
The New South Wales Government has reached agreement in principle for a land swap which will provide a major boost to public school capacity in Northern Sydney.
The Department of Education will acquire land and facilities used by the University of Technology Sydney [UTS] Ku-ring-gai campus for use for school educational purposes.
The department will now consult with the community and plan for the future use of the site.
19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17529
POLICE TRANSPORT COMMAND
On 15 November 2012 the Hon. Adam Searle asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services a question without notice regarding the Police Transport Command. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services provided the following response:
The NSW Police Force has advised me:
The Police Transport Command Gosford Office, operating from Gosford railway station, rosters staff in response to intelligence and the requirements of servicing the commuting public. Staff may be rostered on a 24 hour basis to service specific operations, risks and large events. The Brisbane Water Local Area Command, located in the same street, is staffed 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
MOTORCYCLE CARRIAGE OF ANIMALS
On 15 November 2012 the Hon. Penny Sharpe asked the Minister for Roads and Ports a question without notice regarding the motorcycle carriage of animals. The Minister for Roads and Ports provided the following response:
I am advised:
Statistics for specific traffic offences are available from the State Debt Recovery Office.
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENDERS OFFICE
On 15 November 2012 the Hon. Robert Borsak asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, a question without notice regarding the Environmental Defenders Office. The Minister for Resources and Energy provided the following response:
The comments referred to the authors of the anti-coal strategy document—"Stopping the Australian Coal Export Boom"—who work to roadblock and delay the development of resources projects across the State.
The campaign document lists the Environmental Defenders Office as a contributor.
See attached list of Environmental Defenders Office activities.
Environmental Defenders Office—Current proceedings
Activist Group Nature of litigation
Yass Environmental Responsibility Network Challenging a land subdivision in Yass to protect a species of striped legless lizards
Sweetwater Action Group Challenging rezoning of land for the development of the Huntlee Town Centre for 20,000 residents to protect Persoonia pauciflora, a native shrub
Barrington-Gloucester-Stroud Preservation Challenging approval of Gloucester Gas Project (coal seam gas) Alliance
Bulga Milbrodale Progress Association Challenging approval of Warkworth coal mine in the Hunter Valley
Hunter Environment Lobby Challenging proposed expansion Ulan coal mine's underground mining operations and new open cut mining operation
Ironstone Community Action Group Challenging the recent approval for the extension of an open cut coal mine between Stroud and Stratford in the Barrington Tops area
Camberwell Common Trust Challenge to a licence to Ashton Coal to facilitate its plans for an open cut coal mine
Ned Haughton ("a student and environmental Challenging the Minister for Planning's approvals of two new coal or activist") gas fired power stations
Coastwatchers Association Inc & Challenging the establishment and operation of a gold mine near South East Region Conservation Alliance Majors Creek
Hunter Community Environment Centre Inc Challenging approval for the rehabilitation of Munmorah Power Station (on grounds it did not provide a proper assessment of air quality or greenhouse gas emissions)
Snowy River Alliance Challenge to variation of Snowy Hydro's variation of licence
South East Forest Rescue Incorporated Challenge to a pilot wood pellet manufacturing plant at the Eden woodchip mill
Western Sydney Conservation Alliance Challenging subdivision of land
17530 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
Sandon Point Aboriginal Tent Embassy Challenging approval of a major project
Moree Murri Taskforce Challenging the sale of a site to Woolworths on grounds that it is situated near a burial ground for the Gomeroi nation and has other significance for local indigenous people
Blue Mountains Conservation Society Private enforcement proceedings for Water Pollution
Catherine Hill Bay Progress Association Challenging residential subdivision
Nature Conservation Council Judicial review of a GIPA application decision
Political action workshops1
Date Location Event
11 March 2012 Kyogle Memorial Hall, Kyogle Sue Higginson, senior EDO solicitor was the presenter for the following:
"The Kyogle and Richmond Valley Groups Against Gas are holding a non-violent direct action training day to provide information on non-violent direct action and the law."
23 March 2012 Room 423, Charles Sturt University, "The Inland Rivers Network has organised a workshop on Dubbo caring for critical aquatic inland habitats, as part of the Federal Government's Caring for our Country grants program.
"EDO NSW will be presenting on how to write an effective submission in the context of consultations currently being held on the draft Murray Darling Basin Plan"
25 March 2012 Mullaley Hall, Nombi Street, "workshop to explain how the exploration and extraction of Mullaley coal seam gas (CSG) is regulated in NSW, with a focus on landholder rights and advocacy strategies. The workshop will address current CSG titles that apply in the region."
25 March 2012 Grafton Community Centre, "The Clarence Alliance Against CSG has organised a Duke St, Grafton non-violent direct action training day to provide information on non-violent direct action and the law.
"EDO NSW Senior Solicitor Sue Higginson will be one of the presenters on the day."
29 March 2012 Twilight Room, Broken Hill "free information session in Broken Hill to explain the key Musicians Club, environmental features of the draft Murray Darling Basin 276 Crystal Street , Broken Hill Plan, including the sustainable diversion limit, infrastructure constraints, groundwater and water quality targets. The session will also include tips on how to write effective submissions."
17 April 2012 Pokolbin Community Hall, "EDO NSW will hold a free workshop to explain how the McDonalds Rd, Pokolbin exploration and extraction of coal seam gas [CSG] is regulated in NSW, with a focus on landholder rights and advocacy strategies. The workshop will address current CSG titles that apply in the region"
26 April 2012 HJ Central Library in "free community workshop to explain how the exploration Campbelltown and extraction of coal seam gas [CSG] is regulated in NSW, with a focus on landholder rights and advocacy strategies" ______
1 Refer to notices in various weekly bulletins: http://www.edo.org.au/edonsw/site/bulletin/bulletin.php
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENDERS OFFICE
On 15 November 2012 the Hon. Robert Brown asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, representing the Attorney General, a question without notice regarding the Environmental Defenders Office. The Attorney General provided the following response:
I am advised:
The Environmental Defenders Office [EDO] is a community legal centre and has a tripartite Service Agreement with Legal Aid NSW and the Commonwealth Government.
19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17531
However, under this Service Agreement it is not the role of Legal Aid NSW to approve case work conducted by the Environmental Defenders Office.
Legal Aid NSW does not hold information about each case that the Environmental Defenders Office takes to court.
The Environmental Defenders Office publishes Annual Reports that include information about cases it has been involved in.
COAL SEAM GAS EXPLORATION
On 15 November 2012 the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, representing the Minister for Health, a question without notice regarding coal seam gas exploration. The Minister for Health provided the following response:
NSW Health has an advisory role when development applications submitted to the Department of Planning are available for comment. NSW Health ensures that the application contains a sufficiently detailed health risk assessment for a proper assessment of the risk to human health to be determined. For each major development application, NSW Health provides comment on the adequacy of the health risk assessment, the potential impacts on human health, and recommends requirements for the development to ensure public health, as appropriate.
In the event that evidence of the presence of pollutants at levels likely to affect human health arises, NSW Health works with the Office of Environment and Heritage [OEH] and the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] to identify the type, source, potential exposure pathways and level of pollutant to assess human health risks from the identified pollutants. NSW Health has not been notified by the Office of Environment and Heritage or the Environmental Protection Agency of any pollutants of concern associated with the AGL's existing Camden gas project.
SYDNEY WATER EMPLOYEES HEALTH AND SAFETY
On 20 November 2012 the Hon. Luke Foley asked the Minister for Finance and Services a question without notice regarding Sydney Water employees' health and safety. The Minister for Finance and Services provided the following response:
Sydney Water is currently assessing a request from staff in its mechanical and electrical maintenance area for health and safety testing. Previous studies indicate no increased health risk to sewer workers (above the general population) with existing safety procedures.
M5 SPEED CAMERAS
On 20 November 2012 the Hon. Adam Searle asked the Minister for Roads and Ports a question without notice regarding the M5 speed cameras. The Minister for Roads and Ports provided the following response:
I am advised:
The enforcement cameras in the eastbound and westbound tunnels operated for approximately 40 days less in 2004 than they operated in 2011 as a result of system reliability and tunnel access issues.
If a comparison is made between the average daily number of infringements recorded on a year by year basis, the number of infringements has actually dropped by 13 per cent over the period stated.
The number of infringements detected in a tunnel may also be affected by maintenance and safety related incidents, when lower speed limits are needed to ensure the safety of personnel working in the tunnel and the general safety of the travelling public.
The maintenance activity in any motorway tunnel also changes on a year by year basis, causing differences in infringement levels. The cameras in these cases also have the important function of safety by ensuring speed compliance in a potentially more risky tunnel environment.
TAFE NSW
On 20 November 2012 Dr John Kaye asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Education, a question without notice regarding TAFE NSW. The Minister for Education provided the following response:
With a reduction in GST revenue of over $5.2 billion over the next 4 years, all New South Wales Government agencies have to make tough decisions to ensure the State is living within its means.
The New South Wales Government is committed to delivering high quality education and training and driving better education outcomes across the State but the reality is that New South Wales is facing very difficult economic circumstances.
The Minister knows these are tough decisions, but the Minister would not have made them had they not been absolutely necessary.
Budgetary decisions that may have been made by the previous Government remain the responsibility of the previous Government.
17532 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
COAL SEAM GAS EXPLORATION
On 20 November 2012 Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, a question without notice regarding coal seam gas exploration. The Minister for Resources and Energy provided the following response:
The Camden Gas Project has been producing gas from coal seams at Camden for over 10 years.
AGL is the operator of the existing Camden Gas Project in the Camden, Campbelltown and Wollondilly local government areas, which consists of approximately 130 gas production wells, low-pressure gas gathering lines and a gas processing plant.
Exploration is assessed under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. As part of the approvals process, proponents are required to submit a Review of Environmental Factors that addresses all potential impacts of the proposal, including potential impacts on the environment, water resources and the community. The Environment Protection Authority, Office of Environment & Heritage, NSW Office of Water, Department of Planning and Infrastructure and the Sydney Catchment Authority [SCA] (where applicable) are consulted as part of the assessment process for coal seam gas exploration.
The Sydney Catchment Authority (SCA) has a statutory responsibility to protect drinking water catchments that supply Sydney, the Blue Mountains, Illawarra, Shoalhaven and the Southern Highlands. Mineral and petroleum exploration and extraction activities in the Sydney water catchment are referred to the Sydney Catchment Authority where appropriate.
Production proposals are assessed by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. As part of this process, proponents are required to prepare and submit a comprehensive environmental assessment that addresses all potential impacts of the proposal. The planning process also allows for community and agency consultation.
The Government's Strategic Regional Land Use Policy introduces a comprehensive range of environmental protections. This includes an independent scientific assessment process for major resources projects, greater protection for our groundwater sources through the introduction of a new Aquifer Interference Policy, and certainty for industry by establishing clear rules and transparent assessment processes.
The New South Wales Government has also implemented two new Codes of Practice that require world's best practice for coal seam gas hydraulic fracturing and well design. The new Codes of Practice were independently peer-reviewed by the Chief Scientist and Engineer, Professor Mary O'Kane.
The Codes will ensure licence holders are both aware of, and adhere to, the high standards expected of them.
The Codes of Practice establish a leading practice framework covering:
• hydraulic fracturing;
• the use of chemicals in fracturing fluids;
• water sourcing and the protection of aquifers;
• well design and construction;
• well monitoring and maintenance;
• management of flow-back water; and
• preliminary activities and requirements.
All coal seam gas exploration and production licences will be subject to the new codes of practice, which will also be included as a title condition. Failure to comply with title conditions can result in enforcement action against the holder, including prosecution and title cancellation.
DISABILITY SERVICES
On 20 November 2012 the Hon. Jan Barham asked the Minister for Finance and Services, representing the Minister for Disability Services, a question without notice regarding disability services. The Minister for Disability Services provided the following response:
Access to and provision of mainstream chronic disease management and out-of-hospital programs for people living in New South Wales, including people with disability, is the core responsibility of the Minister for Health.
Ageing, Disability and Home Care [ADHC] has in place health related policies, such as Epilepsy, Nutrition and Swallowing, Medication, and Palliative Care. These policies are designed to ensure that people with disability residing in an accommodation support service are supported to maintain good health and wellbeing.
Ageing, Disability and Home Care's health care policy is currently being reviewed with the aim of developing an overarching person-centred health and wellbeing policy framework. The framework incorporates all existing health related policies and aligns with the health and wellbeing outcome area in the 2010-2020 National Disability Strategy— "People with disability attain highest possible health and wellbeing outcomes throughout their lives".
19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17533
The new policy framework will include a single comprehensive practice guide that will cover all aspects of maintaining good health and wellbeing, including health promotion and disease prevention.
Revised health care planning procedures will reinforce the role of the General Practitioner to co-ordinate and manage a person's health and wellbeing, including better and more consistent use of the Medicare Benefits Schedule [MBS] items relating to the management of chronic disease and complex health problems.
PUBLIC TRANSPORT INFRINGEMENT NOTICES
On 20 November 2012 the Hon. Penny Sharpe asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services a question without notice regarding public transport infringement notices. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services provided the following response:
I am advised that 16,274 transit related infringements have been issued by the Police Transport Command in its first six months. Police do not have access to statistics on infringements issued by transit officers.
WOODBURN STORM DAMAGE
On 20 November 2012 the Hon. Steve Whan asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services a question without notice regarding Woodburn storm damage. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services provided the following response:
I am advised that an assessment form was received from Council on 19 November 2012 and a revised assessment form was received on 20 November 2012. I approved a natural disaster declaration for the local government areas of Richmond Valley, Lismore and Ballina on 21 November 2012. This demonstrates the Government's timely response to these communities. The Natural Disaster Declaration made available a range of support and assistance measures to those affected by this event.
NATIONAL PARKS PEST MANAGEMENT
On 20 November 2012 the Hon. Robert Borsak asked the Minister for Finance and Services, representing the Minister for the Environment, a question without notice regarding national parks pest management. The Minister for the Environment provided the following response:
Yes I am aware of the Auditor General's statement in the report.
I am advised as follows:
All National Parks and Wildlife Service [NPW]) regions had Regional Pest Management Strategies covering the period from 2008 to 2011. These strategies standardised and prioritised pest management for the National Parks and Wildlife Service. Prior to this, pest management strategies were developed separately in each region, consistent with existing management plans for parks and reserves in that region.
The number of key pest animal species known to have been removed from National Parks and Wildlife Service managed parks and reserves can only be accurately determined for techniques such as shooting and trapping for the last two financial years. For key techniques such as baiting, ripping of rabbit warrens and exclusion fencing, the numbers of animals removed cannot be accurately known.
Figures for 2010-11 and 2011-12 are presented below.
Dogs Goats Foxes Pigs Cats Horses Donkeys Cane toads Deer Cattle Total 2010-11 1,050 26,418 2,446 10,280 103 471 5 16,428 395 50 57,646 2011-12 1,104 33,916 2,754 15,354 242 735 0 6,897 670 48 61,720
MURRAY-DARLING BASIN PLAN
On 20 November 2012 the Hon. Robert Brown asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Primary Industries, a question without notice regarding the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. The Minister for Primary Industries provided the following response:
The New South Wales Government has made it clear that it cannot implement the basin plan if the Commonwealth does not agree to address the key issues NSW has identified that are essential to ensure a balanced plan.
Firstly, New South Wales requires a limit on buyback of water licences of 3 per cent of current extractions per valley per decade, to allow communities and industries time to adjust. This limit will also create an incentive for the Commonwealth to prioritise infrastructure to meet the water recovery targets, and to implement measures to better use the substantial volumes of water that will be recovered to achieve the Plan's environmental outcomes.
Secondly, the Commonwealth Government must show a genuine commitment to helping communities adjust to the changes imposed by the Plan. The recent announcement of a conditional $100 million regional diversification grant program for the entire basin falls extremely short of what is required, and reduces the funds available for water infrastructure investment.
Thirdly, the current arbitrary extraction limits placed by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority on brackish and saline groundwater systems in the Basin Plan are not supported by science, are unreasonable, and are not acceptable to New South Wales. These limits will threaten proposed developments in regional and remote New South Wales that have the potential to generate billions of dollars for the regional and Australian economy.
This Government is prepared to impose the 3 per cent buyback limit unilaterally and will not sign the Basin Intergovernmental Agreement if the Commonwealth fails to address our key concerns.
17534 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
HOSPITAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE
On 20 November 2012 the Hon. Greg Donnelly asked the Minister for Finance and Services a question without notice regarding hospital radioactive waste. The Minister for Finance and Services provided the following response:
There have been no breaches of Sydney Water's official licences since April 2011.
In 2011, Sydney Water engaged a specialist radiation consultant to develop and implement a sampling and monitoring program. The monitoring has shown that there is not a threat to workers or the environment.
WASTE LEVY
On 21 November 2012 the Hon. Paul Green asked the Minister for Finance and Services, representing the Minister for the Environment, a question without notice regarding the waste levy. The Minister for the Environment provided the following response:
No.
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENDERS OFFICE
On 21 November 2012 the Hon. Cate Faehrmann asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, representing the Attorney General, a question without notice regarding the Environmental Defenders Office. The Attorney General provided the following response:
I am advised:
The Environmental Defenders Office [EDO] is a community legal centre and has a tripartite Service Agreement with Legal Aid NSW and the Commonwealth Government.
However, under the Service Agreement it is not the role of Legal Aid NSW to approve case work conducted by the Environmental Defenders Office.
Legal Aid NSW does not hold information about pro bono assistance provided by the Environmental Defenders Office.
POLICE TRANSPORT COMMAND
On 21 November 2012 the Hon. Penny Sharpe asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services a question without notice regarding the Police Transport Command. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services provided the following response:
The NSW Police Force has advised me that its records indicate 66 per cent of incidents recorded on the COPS database, which occurred on the rail network between 1 May 2012 and 27 November 2012 were responded to by the Police Transport Command, with a further 28.2 per cent responded to by Local Area Command officers. The remaining 5.8 per cent of incidents were either identified as being responded to by specialist officers, or the information is unavailable.
CRISIS, HOMELESS AND YOUTH SUPPORT SERVICES
On 21 November 2012 the Hon. Jan Barham asked the Minister for Finance and Services, representing the Minister for Family and Community Services, a question without notice regarding crisis, homeless and youth support services. The Minister for Family and Community Services provided the following response:
Benchmark costs for different types of specialist homelessness services at a state-wide level are listed in the SAAP Standard Service Specification available on the Community Services website. These are currently used as a starting point when negotiating contracts for services.
In July this year, the New South Wales Government announced the Going Home Staying Home program of reform to specialist homelessness services to improve lives. One objective of the reform is to ensure better planning and resource allocation between regions.
SYDNEY HARBOUR FLOATING HELIPORT
On 22 November 2012 the Hon. Cate Faehrmann asked the Minister for Roads and Ports a question without notice regarding the Sydney Harbour floating heliport. The Minister for Roads and Ports provided the following response:
I am advised:
Roads and Maritime Services considered the application by Newcastle Helicopters for an aquatic licence in accordance with the Marine Safety Act 1998 and Marine Safety (General Regulation) 2009.
The operation and regulation of the airspace is a matter for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17535
CRONULLA FISHERIES RESEARCH CENTRE
On 22 November 2012 the Hon. Steve Whan asked the Minister for Primary Industries a question without notice regarding the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre. The Minister for Primary Industries provided the following response:
The Select Committee Inquiry into the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre closure was published on 23 October 2012. On 22 November 2012, employees were advised that all further decommissioning of the site at Cronulla would be placed on hold until such time the Government responds to the recommendations made by the Committee's report and that no individual would be forced to make a decision, including to transfer or exit. However, where a staff member has already agreed to relocate, the Government has a duty of care to support them in their move at this time, and is therefore unable to simply cease offering this support. Similarly, the Government remains committed to a Decade of Decentralisation and recruitment for positions in regional locations needs to continue irrespective of the Government's response to the Committee's report. The Deputy Premier and Minister for Primary Industries announced the Government response on 14 December 2012.
SHOALHAVEN DISTRICT MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
On 22 November 2012 the Hon. Paul Green asked the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Health, a question without notice regarding Shoalhaven District Memorial Hospital. The Minister for Health provided the following response:
Both the Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District and the Shoalhaven District Memorial Hospital have received increased funding in 2012-13 to allow them to treat more patients.
NATIONAL PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT ON HOMELESSNESS
On 22 November 2012 the Hon. Sophie Cotsis asked the Minister for Finance and Services, representing the Minister for Family and Community Services, a question without notice regarding the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness. The Minister for Family and Community Services provided the following response:
As is noted in the communique that was released at the conclusion of the 16 November Select Council on Housing and Homelessness, Ministers agreed that, subject to their Cabinet processes, they would enter into negotiations for a new National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness, and while that Agreement is being negotiated to work on a one year transition partnership agreement for 2013-14.
Questions without notice concluded.
TABLING OF PAPERS
The Hon. David Clarke tabled the following papers:
1. Public Defenders Act 1995—Report of Public Defenders for year ended 30 June 2012.
2. Legal Profession Act 2004—Report of Office of the Legal Services Commissioner for year ended 30 June 2012.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. David Clarke.
DEATH OF DETECTIVE INSPECTOR BRYSON ANDERSON
Ministerial Statement
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER (Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Minister for the Hunter, and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [5.09 p.m.]: I make a ministerial statement regarding the tragic death in the line of duty of Detective Inspector Bryson Anderson. At 3.30 p.m. on 6 December 2012 the people of New South Wales lost a fine officer and beloved husband and father. Words alone could never adequately tell of the heartache felt by his loved ones, his colleagues and the State that he swore to keep safe. Policing is a dangerous job. It calls upon those sworn to serve to place themselves in harm's way.
I know when I speak of the dangers that police and other emergency services officers face I often make reference to the situations that we ask such officers to run into while others would run from them. That is exactly what Detective Inspector Bryson Anderson did. From what we know of that day, he died trying to protect his fellow officers from harm. But the real mark of the quality of this man's character is that he died trying to save alleged offenders from themselves by defusing a violent confrontation. It is tragic but the incident to which Detective Inspector Anderson responded is not unique. Police risk their lives to save others every day. The poet John Keats said:
… there is continually some birth of new heroism. The pity is that we must wonder at it, as we should at finding a pearl in rubbish.
17536 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
Detective Inspector Anderson was a hero, but we should not wonder at his heroism: his record of service, his dedication to his office and his love for his family make clear that he was. On behalf of a government grateful for Detective Inspector Anderson's service, I extend my deepest condolences and sympathy to his family, friends and colleagues and, indeed, the State of New South Wales.
The Hon. LUKE FOLEY (Leader of the Opposition) [5.11 p.m.]: I rise on behalf of the Labor Opposition to express our condolences to the family of Detective Inspector Bryson Anderson. As the Leader of the Government said, Detective Inspector Anderson was fatally wounded on 6 December last having come to the aid of fellow officers at the scene of a neighbourhood dispute. He was the 252nd police officer in New South Wales to lose his life in the line of duty.
Having joined the New South Wales Police Force in 1986, Bryson Anderson served in Parramatta, Granville and Ermington. He became a detective in November 1993. He displayed an aptitude for criminal investigation that was recognised by his commanding officers. He was promoted more than once and in December 2010 he returned to Hawkesbury in the role of duty officer of the local area command. It would be his last posting and one he served with distinction until 6 December last year. Detective Inspector Anderson was awarded numerous medals in the course of his police career. Two awards were conferred on him posthumously—the National Police Service Medal and the Commissioner's Valour Award. The thoughts and prayers of all members of the House are with Detective Inspector Anderson, his wife, Donna, his three children, Olivia, Darcy and Cain, and his father, mother and brothers. May he rest in peace.
Pursuant to sessional orders debate on committee reports proceeded with.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL ISSUES
Report: Domestic Violence Issues and Trends in NSW
Debate resumed from 16 October 2012.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [5.13 p.m.]: As I had almost concluded my remarks when we last debated this report I indicate my deep concern about the amount of domestic violence that is occurring in our society and the amount of time that police officers spend in dealing with it. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has just referred to one of those situations. I know it is impossible to stop domestic violence by simply raising a hand or banning it, but I believe there should be further investigation into the causes. One of the causes of domestic violence, which I am aware of personally, is the impact of alcohol particularly on some males. They may have a very gentle character but once they start drinking the alcohol changes their personality and where they would not normally raise a hand against their wife or partner they become very violent and physical under the influence of alcohol. I know it is difficult to ban alcohol—I would like to do so—but we should bring in further controls over alcohol and its availability. We also need education campaigns to help teenagers who engage in binge drinking, which is another social problem, to refrain from engaging in those activities. [Time expired.]
The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO [5.15 p.m.]: I support the recommendations contained in the report of the Standing Committee on Social Issues entitled "Domestic Violence Issues and Trends in New South Wales". The work that is done by committees such as the Standing Committee on Social Issues on these sorts of issues produces results that members of the public expect of members of Parliament—a thorough and comprehensive review of an issue that has an incredible impact across all strata of society and all regions in New South Wales. It is obvious to anyone who has had a good look at the report that the Standing Committee on Social Issues went into a great deal of detail in looking at these matters, and that is to be commended. The fact that the committee has produced so many recommendations and put a trigger in the report so that it reviews the implementation of these recommendations in two years is also worthy of comment.
The way that society in general is approaching domestic violence these days is the way we should be pursuing this very serious issue. For so long women who were involved in domestic violence suffered at the hands of violent perpetrators. Women and children, rather than male spouses, are the victims in the majority of cases. Now we are providing support to the victims and turning the tables on the perpetrators. Women used to have to leave their homes and uproot their children from school because they were the victims of a crime. Now the emphasis is on trying to keep those women in their homes and the perpetrators, rather than their victims, are being punished for their behaviour. 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17537
That is a very good turnaround because we are all aware of the impact of domestic violence on family stability and on children. The report goes into this issue in some detail. The less disruption there is to those families and children the better it will be for our society in the longer term. The way we are responding to these sorts of issues now is a very good development. The fact is domestic violence is not seen these days as a woman's issue, which was the case in the 1970s and 1980s. Then women were concerned with women's refuges and domestic violence. Now it is seen as a legitimate community interest and one that definitely has engaged legislators not only at the State level but also at the Federal level.
When members drive through local municipalities they may see signs proclaiming that that council area is a nuclear-free zone or that it has pristine water. Some small councils, often in country areas, have a sign as one enters the town saying that domestic violence is unacceptable in all circumstances. That goes to show that the level of awareness of the problem of domestic violence and the fact that we have to change our behaviour has permeated all levels of society.
As Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile said, drugs and alcohol precipitate many incidents of domestic violence. Addressing this issue is not simply a matter of limiting the availability of drugs and alcohol; it is a matter of changing people's thinking. For far too long many men have been brought up with the idea that they somehow possess the women with whom they are involved, whether they are married to them or live in the same premises. They see women as their property. We all have a responsibility to ensure that such behaviour does not continue and that such an idea about the role of women in society is eradicated. All people, men and women, have the right to live safely in our community. The worst circumstance for children and women, and in rare circumstances men, is to feel unsafe in their own home because they are unsure about the behaviour of their spouse or partner or parent. As a society we know that people are living in such circumstances, and to not do anything is a poor reflection on us.
I commend the committee for the bipartisan way in which it worked on this comprehensive report. It must be a record for the Standing Committee on Social Issues to come up with 89 recommendations. I hope the Government responds positively to the committee's request in recommendation 4 that it be given further terms of reference in order to review progress on this issue. This comprehensive review of domestic violence trends and issues in New South Wales deserves to be followed up in order to see what improvements have been made to protect children and families in New South Wales from domestic violence and the services that are available to remedy the ills of victims of domestic abuse. I commend the committee members and secretariat for their hard work on this report.
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR [5.21 p.m.], in reply: I thank all those who have participated in this take-note debate. The report was an important body of work and I am sure that all members are appreciative of the input from the Hon. Helen Westwood, the Hon. Greg Donnelly, the Hon. Cate Faehrmann, Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile and the Hon. Amanda Fazio. Before I sum up the issue I want to acknowledge the secretariat staff, particularly Rachel Simpson. Unfortunately, she has moved on to the Legislative Assembly committees, but we are comforted in her replacement, Stewart Smith. I am sure he will do a great job. I also thank Merrin Thompson, Miriam Cullen, Kate Mihaljek, Lisa Scheikowski and Shu-fang Wei for their hard work. I will reiterate some of the points made by the Hon. Amanda Fazio. This inquiry represents the best type of work that members of Parliament undertake. We have the time and resources to examine an issue in great depth and, to a large extent, we put aside our political differences.
I am honoured to say that I am a member and chair of the Standing Committee on Social Issues. Domestic violence is a blight on our society. Until it is accepted by everyone within our society that domestic violence in all forms and in all relationships is unacceptable and until that philosophy is entrenched in our homes, our workplaces, our schools and all aspects of our society, governments will have to work hard to stamp it out. But putting an end to domestic violence is a responsibility of everyone in our community. The Standing Committee on Social Issues highlighted a number of areas to be addressed in the legal system, support networks and policing. I am pleased with this substantial report of the committee. But it does not end here; this is where it starts.
It was made clear during the inquiry that New South Wales is potentially decades behind other States when it comes to addressing the issue of domestic violence. It is a greater problem in some areas of the State, in some types of relationships and in some ethnic groups. We do not have a silver bullet that will automatically change the perceptions, attitudes and behaviours of everyone in our society and put an end to this issue. Hopefully, a victim-centred approach from all government agencies will drive a cultural change. Such an 17538 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
approach will remove the silos, those government agencies that do not consider it is their problem. We must take a victim-centred approach that indicates it is a problem for all of us and puts the needs of the victim and their family first.
Hopefully, this is an issue that will empower government agencies to bend the rules and question the way they do business so that safety is paramount and the needs of the victims and their families are at the forefront. I hope this report leads to a change in the thought processes of and culture within our government departments. I hope that this report forces those who make the decisions around government policy to think outside the box. Too many excuses have been made in the past. Too many times victims have been pushed from one department to another. The committee heard some harrowing stories. I particularly remember victims in Forbes in central western New South Wales who told us their stories about falling through the cracks of government departments. I hope this report achieves an outcome that victims' needs are put first.
I want to highlight to members something the committee did, with a level of caution. Towards the end of our deliberations many of the stakeholders were brought back to take part in a roundtable discussion. An inquiry this long and a report this size involve a great deal of information. The committee was unsure as to the way in which some of its recommendations would be received by stakeholder groups. Ultimately, we did not want a report that would fail and sit on a shelf because that would mean a missed opportunity. The committee took the brave step of holding a roundtable discussion with some of the stakeholders in order to test the mood in relation to the recommendations and the cultural change required to ensure the recommendations would be a success.
I commend all of the stakeholders involved not only for respecting the need for confidentiality but also for their open-minded approach to the roundtable discussion. They held differing views but expressed them in a way that was both respectful and considered and backed them up with evidence and arguments. I believe that the quality and strength of this report is largely due to the roundtable discussion. A roundtable discussion would not be appropriate in every inquiry. This was a unique experience, but I believe we succeeded. I thank the stakeholders, the committee secretariat and the committee members for taking this brave step to achieve a successful outcome.
No-one could be proud of domestic violence in our society. Domestic violence is a blight on our society. It is always the duty of the strong to look after the weak. Unfortunately, many people are put in a weakened position within relationships as a result of domestic violence. We must all take it upon ourselves to work hard to stamp out domestic violence regardless of the circumstances. I am proud of what the Standing Committee on Social Issues has achieved with this report. I commend the motion to the House.
Question—That the House take note of the report—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE
Report: Review of the 2009-2010 Annual Report and the 2010-2011 Annual Report of the Commission for Children and Young People and the 2009 Reports of the Child Death Review Team
Debate resumed from 13 September 2012.
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR [5.32 p.m.]: I speak as a member of the Committee on Children and Young People on the report entitled "Review of the 2009-2010 Annual Report and the 2010-2011 Annual Report of the Commission for Children and Young People and the 2009 Reports of the Child Death Review Team". I acknowledge the contributions made in the other place by the chair of the committee, Andrew Cornwell, and my fellow committee members Melanie Gibbons and Dr Andrew McDonald. I also congratulate them on their contributions to the report. Like them, I congratulate Megan Mitchell, the Commissioner for Children and Young People, and her staff on the excellent work that they do. I also thank the committee secretariat staff for the tremendous work they did in compiling the reports.
I reiterate the chairman's statement that the conduct of the annual report reviews as the first item of business for the committee in this Parliament was beneficial. The changes to the working with children check are essential and the suggested changes to the way in which the commission communicates with children and young people through social media should generate increased participation. Those areas have been at the centre 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17539
of much the commission's work, particularly over the past 12 months. The changes to the working with children check will be beneficial for not only employers but also employees as they move from one job to another. A portable check will mean that they will not be required to repeat the application process each time they change jobs. My record is four checks within 12 months because of the different type of work I was doing with sporting and other organisations.
During the public hearings I had the opportunity to raise an important issue that I wanted to ensure was being addressed by the Commissioner for Children and Young People. I have previously told the House that I have a young son who enjoys riding motorbikes and horses and who participates in team sports. I encourage him to get outside as much as possible and to climb trees, to go fishing and to do all the other things that a young boy growing up in a regional area should do. As a parent I am aware of the risks involved in these activities, but I also believe that a life spent in front of a computer or a television poses a much greater risk to my son's long-term health and wellbeing than trying to jump a motorbike or a horse. I asked the commissioner what control mechanisms the commission had put in place to ensure that hospital admission and injury data relating to children did not stop kids being kids. I suggested that the data would probably target horse riding, motorbike riding, playground activities and weekend participation sports. I was concerned about what the commission had done to ensure that the project did not adversely affect children being involved in outdoor recreational activities. The commissioner replied:
The scoping paper talks about that philosophical challenge. While we want to prevent serious injuries such as kids losing their eyes, having disabilities and those sorts of serious consequences, the commission acknowledges the importance of kids taking risks, playing sports, being healthy and developing as a normal child. It is really important to get that balance right and to not fall into the trap of over-regulating children's lives. It really is about serious child injury.
The commissioner also assured me that the commission considers risk and examines to what extent we are preventing normal, healthy development through overregulating our kids, and the impact that can have on their lives. The commission does consider whether such measures impede brain and other normal development. Following the release of the committee's report last year I read what I believe was a tongue-in-cheek opinion piece written by Barclay Crawford and published in the Daily Telegraph under the headline "Suffer the children, at least a little".
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: An excellent piece.
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: Like me, Crawford is concerned that we are developing a nanny state culture that includes extreme measures being taken to avoid all risk. I acknowledge that some members enjoyed the article more than others, and particularly the references to stamping out the nanny state.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: I think I got a mention in that article.
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: I acknowledge that interjection. I think the honourable member was specifically mentioned. That view has struck a chord in society and I am glad that the commissioner put my concerns to rest by assuring me that the commission is considering only very serious injuries and that it is trying not to impede our children's normal physical development. While I was reading that article the term "helicopter parents" came to mind. It refers to parents who hover over their children and do not allow them to make mistakes or to have accidents. I had the opportunity on the weekend to meet Mr Riley Batt, the captain of the Australian wheelchair rugby team. Riley was born without legs and with three fused fingers on both hands. He represented Australia in wheelchair rugby at 13 and participated in his first Paralympics at 15, won a silver medal at the Beijing Paralympics at 19 and led the Australian wheelchair rugby team to a gold medal at the London Paralympics. He is regarded as the greatest wheelchair rugby player in the world and plays professionally in the United States and Australia. He is an inspirational person.
There is nothing Riley cannot do. He told me last weekend that when he was four years old his parents took him to the beach. While all the other children were playing in the water his father put him down on the sand. He wanted to go for a swim but his father told him that he would have to get to the water by himself. His parents never wrapped him in cottonwool; they always encouraged him to have a go himself. His motto is "Never give up", and that is something he certainly lives up to. He said that he dragged himself down to the water and, in his words, looked like a crumbed cutlet by the time he got there. That demonstrates his determination. Until he was 12 he refused to use a wheelchair; he got around on a skateboard. He was introduced to wheelchair rugby when he was 12 and, as they say, the rest is history.
My questioning to the commissioner and the subsequent article from Barclay Crawford are a good reminder that we should look at what is dangerous and what leads to serious injury to our children, but it should 17540 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
not come at the cost of impeding them from having life experiences and being exposed to risk in a controlled way. They should be able to fulfil their dreams, just like Riley. I was heartened by the response of the commissioner. I congratulate the commissioner and her staff on their work and I look forward to our next hearing to ensure that their great work has been continued. I commend the report to the House.
Question—That the House take note of the report—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CRONULLA FISHERIES RESEARCH CENTRE
Report: Closure of the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence
Debate resumed from 23 October 2012.
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA (Parliamentary Secretary) [5.42 p.m.]: Minister Katrina Hodgkinson together with Minister Andrew Stoner, the Deputy Premier, announced on 8 September 2011 that the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence at Hungry Point, known as the Cronulla Fisheries site, was to be closed and its roles and functions were to be decentralised to regional coastal locations. Indeed, Associate Professor David Harley, AM was appointed by the Department of Primary Industries director general to assess the future usages of the site under specific terms of reference.
This was a very controversial move that caused angst in the shire. Time has passed. Hundreds of submissions were made both to the parliamentary inquiry headed by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile and through rounds of consultation conducted by Associate Professor David Harley. I commend Associate Professor David Harley, who is a zoologist, a medical doctor, an epidemiologist and a public health physician. He was appointed as an associate professor at the National Centre of Epidemiology and Population Health in the medical school at the Australian National University. He is a very qualified man who delivered a very good report on recommendations for the future use of the valued area of Hungry Point in November 2012.
His report and the public inquiry showed that the community definitely did not want any large-scale commercial development on the site. Naturally, many people wanted the Centre of Excellence maintained. However, if that was not to be then they made it clear that they did not want large-scale commercial development of hotels and high-rise structures on the coastal foreshore. It was clear that most of all they did not want the site to be sold off under any circumstances; they wanted the site kept for open public access all year round. I have a conflict of interest as my husband put in a submission that reflected our viewpoint, and that of the a majority of people, that we wanted the public walkway extended around the Cronulla foreshore to include this site in order to provide enjoyment for everyone. Activities on the site should enhance public and community usage.
There should also be a respectful reminder of the scientific fisheries heritage and, very importantly, the Indigenous Tharawal tribe heritage of the site. The Aboriginal history of the site definitely needs to be preserved and protected. I find some remarks of Professor Harley in his report very touching. For example, "The site is a magnificence precinct and in undertaking this task I have attempted to touch this site with the wings of a butterfly." Indeed, he respectfully consulted with the Sutherland Shire Council, major community groups and residents of the area. The three-hectare Fisheries site is a spectacular piece of land that juts into Gunnamatta Bay, which has very precious Aboriginal heritage, historic buildings and classical landscape features. The site sits amongst and alongside the Cronulla streetscapes and adjacent houses, although one house abuts the site. Definitely, as quoted in Dr Harley's report, "It is part of Cronulla—geographically, emotionally and physically."
The Fisheries site was established at the beginning of the last century and has a wonderful history of excellence in marine scientific research. It has been home to the CSIRO and was used as a centre for refugees during World War II. Most importantly, it has shaped and determined some of the greatest marine scientific output that we have seen. Unfortunately, that role there has now ceased and has been decentralised to other areas within New South Wales. I pay special homage to Professor Steven Kennelly, Chief Scientist of the Department of Primary Industries at the site, who retired at the end of last year. He embodied everything that was truly excellent about the site. He led the team of dedicated scientists at the centre. The scientific staff at Cronulla had in excess of 500 years of experience in fisheries research and they held more than 50 science degrees.
Professor Steve Kennelly led the fisheries scientists for more than 12 years at Cronulla and at other locations in New South Wales, including Port Stephens, Narrandera, Coffs Harbour and Batemans Bay. He built 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17541
up fisheries research in New South Wales to its highest level in its 100-year history with more than 100 scientists and technicians and more than $10 million in funding, the majority of which came from external grants. He was also in charge of high-level strategic work on scientific matters for the entire department, enhancing the overall quality of science done as well as administering the research scientist classification for the entire New South Wales public service. I know that Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile wants to pay special attention to his achievements, so I will not state them.
The staff were proud of their collaboration with major universities in New South Wales, including Sydney University, the University of New South Wales, Macquarie University, the University of Western Sydney, the University of Technology, Wollongong University and the Sydney Institute of Marine Science. I know that Professor Steven Kennelly spent a lot of time coordinating all of his research scientists to be involved in so many of these research projects to help students, whether they be studying for their PhD, masters or honours degrees to receive their qualifications and to produce very well-respected scientific theses.
Its scientific determinations were published in respected journals. Indeed, the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence was globally renowned. The universities relied on the research centre to obtain federally funded university linkage grants. The University of Sydney, the University of New South Wales, Macquarie University and the University of Technology were receiving $1.26 million in various grants due to their partnerships with scientists at the research centre. The staff at Cronulla supervised 25 Masters of Science and PhD students. It also ran the highly regarded Science in the Suburbs schools program for year 11 students.
All the recommendations contained in the report—understandably with the exception of the recommendation about the closure—have been well received by the community. The Government, the council and the newly formed Hungry Point Reserve Trust are working through the recommendations. The community is enthusiastic to see some public usage of this site and that the heritage of the site, including the Indigenous heritage and that of the explorers Bass and Flinders, is maintained. Bass and Flinders developed a very good relationship with the local Dharawal people when navigating around Australia. It is hoped that the community will continue to enjoy these facilities well into the future and that the site will always remain in public hands.
The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO [5.52 p.m.]: I speak to the report of the Select Committee on Cronulla Fisheries. I was not a member of that committee but a very interested observer of this whole process, which would have to involve one of the worst political decisions I have seen in a very long time. This was a bad decision by a bad Minister. The committee really got to the nub of the issues in its report: no consultation was undertaken and no business case was presented. Nothing that would be expected in a normal decision-making process happened. Unfortunately, members of Parliament and the public are still in the dark as to why the decision was made to close the centre. The basis of that decision is still unknown. For all we know someone could have got up one day in a bad mood and said, "I think we will close the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence today." We are no closer to the basis of the decision-making process involved in what has proven to be a very bad decision.
I share the outrage of Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, the chair of the committee, as to the Government's response to the report. The Government said it did not matter what the committee came up with because it was too late and nothing would be changed. That is typical of this Government's attitude in refusing to listen to the people of New South Wales, particularly to the people of Cronulla. This decision will not only impact the people of Cronulla. The Hon. Marie Ficarra has outlined the significance of this research centre to the local area. This decision also affects one of this State's biggest industries: the fishing industry. We have lost the best fisheries centre of excellence in this country because of an unjustifiable decision by this Government.
We need to look after our fishing industry. In addition to issues of sustainable catchment a range of other issues in fishery research need to be looked at. These days there is a lot of emphasis on harvesting from the oceans to feed the world. That must be done in a responsible and sustainable way. Equal weight must be given to research on inland fisheries and ocean fisheries. As was said earlier, 500 years of combined research skills at the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence has been lost to the people of New South Wales because of this stupid decision. I cannot reiterate enough that this decision was completely unjustified.
The Government has not even made a decent attempt to explain the Minister's actions. The Nationals have closed ranks around a Minister who, at best, is underperforming and, at worst, is totally incompetent. She is completely out of her depth. As a result of the Minister's total incompetence the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence has been closed: it is a fait accompli. It is clear that the New South Wales fishing industry, the scientists involved in this industry, the workers at the research centre, the Department of Primary Industries 17542 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
and the local community were all opposed to the decision. It seems that the only people in favour of closing the research centre were Ms Katrina Hodgkinson and Mr Andrew Stoner—when he was not doing one of his multiple overseas trips to Manhattan. This centre with an international reputation for excellence was closed by two people who are clearly incompetent and out of their depth. It demonstrates that the promise of this Government to the people of this State in the lead-up to the 2007 State election to be open and accountable was more than a sham; it was an outright lie, a total deceit.
There is no happy outcome from this decision. The committee made a number of recommendations, the first one of which was that the Government should reverse its decision to close the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence and not proceed with the closure. What happened? The Government sat on its hands and gave its response to this report at the last possible minute. It then said it was all too late and nothing could be done to reverse it. That is an example of government at its worst. It is no wonder that the public in general holds such a low regard for politicians and State governments when this sort of decision is made and after an in-depth parliamentary inquiry that says the research centre should not be closed the Government says it will not do anything about it.
There has certainly been no public support for the closure of this research centre. The Government proceeded with the closure simply to back up a lame duck Minister. It had no justification for the closure. The people of New South Wales, the fishing industry, the level of expertise in the Department of Primary Industries and the people of Cronulla are the losers in this. There are no winners. Everyone knows that the Minister for Primary Industries, and Minister for Small Business made a bad decision. The Minister had to be dragged kicking and screaming to give evidence at the inquiry. The Premier had to intervene to make the Minister give evidence at the inquiry. The whole process has been a disgrace.
The people of New South Wales thought that the O'Farrell Government was going to be open and accountable. Instead they got a dud government that will go to any lengths to cover up a bad decision. There is no way that this Minister should stand after any reshuffle. Katrina Hodgkinson does not deserve to retain her position after having made this bad decision, which was ill-informed and has had such a negative impact on the people of New South Wales. I commend the Select Committee on Cronulla Fisheries, which has called for this appalling decision to be overturned. I condemn the Government for failing to act on the committee's report.
The Hon. STEVE WHAN [5.59 p.m.]: I participated in this inquiry as a committee member. Indeed, I moved the original motion to establish an inquiry. First, I commend the inquiry staff from the Legislative Council. The inquiry was undertaken in a fairly rushed time frame as required by resolution, and the staff worked diligently and produced a high-quality report on a difficult issue. I commend the committee chair, Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, who did a good job and went through some emotional issues with people who worked at the Cronulla facility. The report is probably one of the most damning reports we will see in this place. It is scathing about the Minister's handling of this process.
The Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre had a huge international reputation with respect to fisheries research around the world. As we heard from one Government member of the committee, the facility had at least 500 years' worth of expertise. Most importantly, from the point of view of efficient decentralisation policies, most of the Cronulla staff lived near where they worked. They were part of the community; they had been there for a long time. The facility had been in Cronulla for 100 years. The committee's findings were scathing. Paragraph 5.3 of the conclusions stated:
This process has been an example of how not to undertake decentralisation. There was no proper planning or consultation. The Committee concludes that the Minister's administration of this process has failed to meet the required level of Ministerial responsibility or accountability.
We determined that the rationale provided by the Minister and the department justifying the closure of the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre to be wanting in a number of respects. We empathise with stakeholders' frustration in regard to ascertaining the impetus for, and the reasons behind, the decision. It was frustrating to question departmental officials when we consistently did not get any cost-benefit analysis. We received no analysis of the planning that went into the decision. The decision seemed to have been made overnight. The department attempted to put the decision in place and justify what was happening. We had the bizarre experience of departmental officials turning up to hearings with a one-page economic assessment of the move, which they later admitted had been completed that morning—and which looked like it.
The assessment concluded that there was some economic cost benefit in closing the facility, but it relied on not filling a number of unfilled positions for achieve that. Those positions were not related to whether 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17543
or not the facility was at Cronulla, so they should have been taken out of the equation. That would mean that the cost-benefit analysis for the closure would have been negative. We had no evidence of a strategy relating to the decision. It is damning of the Government to talk about having a decade of decentralisation, yet in this process we have seen a number of staff move to Mosman. The people who previously lived near the Cronulla site must now battle city traffic or further overload the public transport system.
The Mosman decentralisation was determined after the decision to close the Cronulla facility was made. They have entered into a contract costing about $190,000 a year to move to the Sydney Institute of Marine Science [SIMS] facility at Mosman. Up to this point that arrangement has been so bad that the research equipment used by researchers at Cronulla is still sitting in two containers on the old Cronulla site because there has not been an agreement with the Sydney Institute of Marine Science at Mosman about where to put the equipment. So a serious problem is emerging. First, a badly thought-through decentralisation decision has centralised some people to Mosman. I understand that only two staff from Cronulla have relocated to Port Stephens. Altogether, 24 out of 150 staff at Cronulla have relocated out of Sydney. Importantly, for the long-term future of this industry, the stock reports that the Government is obliged by legislation to provide is being put in danger. In order to undertake catch management in New South Wales waters it is necessary to have a scientific basis for the catch history, and that needs to be based on research.
As a result of the incompetence of this decision we have lost most of the expertise that undertook that work. Because the move was hasty, no proper planning was undertaken to ensure that that knowledge was passed on to new staff. So we have had a massive brain drain in NSW Fisheries as a result of this botched decision. The Government has rejected many of the committee's recommendations, which is disappointing to the many staff who played a big part in this campaign. One recommendation about planning for decentralisation was acknowledged. I urge the Government to take into account the evidence of Peter Bally from the Foundation for Regional Development who talked about good decentralisation: consultation with communities and staff, and working out what receiving communities need, as well as planning properly and over the right time frame for the decentralisation.
The Minister made an appalling effort at justifying her decision when she simply did not have a justification. That put at risk a range of expertise in NSW Fisheries. It is revealing that during the planning process and looking at new facilities for the research staff the Minister and her department did not bother to consult the Director of Research for NSW Fisheries, Professor Steve Kennelly. Admittedly, he ran the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre and did not want the facility to close, but his expertise should have been used to determine the suitability of new facilities. New South Wales has some great research facilities, including Port Stephens and Coffs Harbour, but they have been set up for different purposes. The staff have never been satisfied that the research undertaken at Cronulla could be carried out adequately at other facilities, in particular the vital work on catch histories and management of the resource.
The Cronulla facility also provided an educational function for recreational fishing. Most of the recreational fishing administration occurred at Cronulla; there was no reason to move that function. Administration of recreational fishing was undertaken in a facility owned by the department; it was efficient and provided great value to the community. Many of the staff must now travel long distances to engage in their employment and they contribute to congestion in central Sydney as they travel to their new workplaces. The committee chair detailed some of the recommendations in his contribution. The committee's first recommendation was that the decision to close the Cronulla facility should be reversed. That has been rejected by the Minister.
The committee then recommended returning some functions to Cronulla should the Government reject the first recommendation. That has not been accepted. We did not see a comprehensive economic appraisal of whether to close the Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence. We did not see a detailed analysis of the economic and non-economic value of the science carried out at the centre. We certainly did not see appropriate work to ensure that we had succession planning for the scientific knowledge that would be lost as a result of this process. The process has been disgraceful—the Government should hang its head in shame—and incompetently handled by the Minister. Unfortunately, she is now doing exactly the same thing in terms of setting up the local land services, changing the drought policy and a broader issue relating to fisheries restructures in New South Wales. I pay credit to the staff at Cronulla who invested a lot of emotion into a campaign to keep the facility open. They were devastated by the Minister's decision. They worked hard to have the decision reversed; they put up a fantastic case. They argued their case on the basis not only of emotion but also of fact, of scientific knowledge. It is unfortunate that their efforts met such a brick wall in a Minister who simply was not willing to listen. 17544 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
The union, led by Shane O'Brien, was fabulous during the process; he did a great job. Professor Steve Kennelly provided the knowledge. Many other staff at Cronulla, such as Dr Matt Ives and Dr Vic Peddemors, who undertakes a lot of the shark research that members may have seen on ABC television—the other staff are too numerous to mention—invested a huge amount of effort in this campaign, and it is disappointing that their calls have been ignored by the Government. This has been a disgraceful episode from the Government in terms of how not to conduct decentralisation. If we learn only one thing from this, I hope that we learn how to do it better and how to avoid it. Perhaps a starting point is not to put Katrina Hodgkinson in charge of any of it.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Steve Whan and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE OFFICE OF THE VALUER-GENERAL
Report: Report on the Eighth General Meeting with the Valuer-General
Debate resumed from 25 October 2012.
The Hon. SCOT MacDONALD [6.09 p.m.]: It gives me pleasure to continue my speech on the report entitled, "Report on the Eighth General Meeting with the Valuer-General". I think it is fair to say that the Joint Standing Committee on the Office of the Valuer-General is probably the elephant's graveyard of committees in this House—or it was. Under former governments if one was lost one probably ended up on this committee. The former chair, Marie Andrews, and the former deputy chair, Kayee Griffin, have left this place and they have left their mark on the committee. We have lost their deep corporate knowledge. However, the history of this committee was not stellar.
Things have changed under the new chair, Mr Matt Kean, the member for Hornsby. It is now probably fair to say that the committee is on steroids. Our chair is determined that the Valuer-General does the right job for the citizens and taxpayers of this State, because accurate valuations are critical when setting council rates and land tax, and when negotiating land resumptions.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: How much is land worth in the Bylong Valley?
The Hon. SCOT MacDONALD: That is something the committee might turn its mind to down the track. That is not the purpose of this inquiry and report. I thank all members and staff of the committee. The staff is led by John Miller. I think he was the only member of the staff who was not pregnant. At one stage we suffered a changeover in committee staff, but they have all served us well. The committee has performed in a non-partisan way, with Mr Clayton Barr, Eric Roozendaal and Leslie Williams as members. To the chair's credit, he put a number of unexpected questions to the Valuer-General that looked at contract valuations going back a number of years. I do not think that type of question was asked in the past.
Matt Kean did his own analysis of it and asked for further work to be done by the Valuer-General. When that work was returned by the Valuer-General it was found to be deeply and seriously flawed. The mistakes added up to $26 million worth of errors. So we were faced with a breakdown in procedures, data gathering and organisation. The committee resolved to ask the Auditor-General to step in and review our work and the work of the Valuer-General. The Auditor-General did that and found a similar situation where a lot of the data was not retrievable. It was not held in a manner that enabled people to draw conclusions or make comparisons. The committee was looking in particular for variances in which contractors had a range of work in order to ascertain whether the value of that work had changed substantially over a period of time. The committee wanted to have confidence that the work done by the Valuer-General—which is largely now contract work—is done in a proper, transparent and fair manner.
The Auditor-General agreed with our findings that there were serious problems in the construction of the Valuer-General's database and with the systems and quality control procedures. This vindicated the chair and committee, and seven findings and four recommendations came out of that. The findings revolve around material misstatements, a financial management environment that was not conducive to analysis and errors in the compilation of data. One might say: It is data; does it matter? It does matter because, at the same time, the Sydney Morning Herald reported on some fairly wide fluctuations in valuations. Some people had the means and the resources to challenge those valuations and some were subsequently reviewed. We need to remove the question marks that hang over valuations. People need to have confidence that valuations are not just a beast of the rich in our society, those who can get a better outcome if they choose to challenge a valuation. We need to 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17545
know that valuations are done professionally and consistently and that across the State there is not a wide variation of methodology and accuracy. Unfortunately, the information that we came across leaves some doubt in our mind.
This inquiry and report has concluded because it was fairly self-contained. The report contains four recommendations. The recommendations request that the Valuer-General go back and look at his quality control procedures and to share the lessons learned with Land and Property Information. We have to review existing quality control measures, come up with proposed improvements and look at the appropriate reporting tools to be developed so we can have confidence in those systems.
Although this will be the subject of a future inquiry, it has come out of our work and I do not think it is inappropriate to discuss it briefly: We have flushed some serious flaws and failures out across the State, as a number of members are now aware, including John Williams in Murray-Darling, Andrew Gee and Paul Toole, and a number of members on the coast. A number of valuations have been found to be seriously flawed. When corrections have been made they have raised implications for a wide range of people. There are land tax implications, but there are also implications for local councils. The committee has found circumstances in which some councils may have to repay money. That is not good enough, in anybody's view of the world. Landholders need to have confidence that land valuations are accurate. Councils need confidence that future revenue is sound and will not vary, and that they will not have to refund money.
I commend the chair, Matt Kean, who has overseen a committee that has had a fairly dry and unexciting history. The Parliamentary Secretary suggested that there was not a great will to look at things such as valuations, including valuations of mining land or commercial leases on the Sydney Harbour foreshore. We have a committee and a chair that is able to do that work. Earlier today I heard that we are losing one of our members, the Hon. Eric Roozendaal, but he will be replaced by the Hon. Adam Searle. I am sure he will bring a good mind to the committee. I do not have anything further to add, except to say that I look forward to our site visits and the next inquiry. I commend the report to the House.
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX (Parliamentary Secretary) [6.19 p.m.]: I find this report quite disturbing. As a former member of this committee in the previous Parliament and someone who has served as a secretary of committees in the Federal Parliament for a number of years, I found the report quite damning of a public officer of this State. When one reads some of the findings of this report it is alarming to see that the Valuer-General has performed very poorly with regard to the work that was requested by the committee. As members will be aware, this committee oversights the role of the Valuer-General and in doing so it put a range of questions to him in relation to tenders won by private valuation firms. The Valuer-General's response to those questions was very poor and it is instructive to review some of the findings made by the committee as a result of the information provided by the Valuer-General. I refer particularly to finding No. 1:
That the Valuer-General submitted inaccurate and substantially erroneous material to the Committee.
Any public officer has a duty to submit to this Parliament the finest quality information at his disposal rather than information that is clearly erroneous. Indeed, in this case the information had been provided to the Sydney Morning Herald and the Valuer-General realised that that material was erroneous but failed to bring that matter to the attention of the committee. Only after further questions from the committee did the Valuer-General admit that the material was erroneous. I find that breach of duty alarming to say the least. There are other findings that are also concerning. Finding No. 2 states:
That the errors in the material provided to the Committee should have been obvious to the Valuer-General and those preparing the material, and that there was a serious lapse in quality control.
It is pretty clear after having come to government almost two years ago that there are serious problems with some of the financial reporting systems that we have inherited from the previous Government. It has been very clear in compiling the budget that there are some inadequacies with the current financial systems. This is another example of poor systems being put in place to produce information that is fundamental to the carriage and discharge of services provided by the Valuer-General. Sadly, that seems to be a problem across a range of government areas, which we are moving very quickly to address. A number of other findings point to various material misstatements in information and inadequate quality assurance procedures. Finding No. 7 states:
Despite repeated requests, the Valuer-General failed to provide information regarding one of his office's main areas of expenditure between 2002 and 2007.
17546 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
I find absolutely scurrilous the failure to comply with the reasonable requests of a committee whose responsibility it is to oversight this important position. That any public servant let alone a statutory officer should behave in this way is almost unprecedented in my time in this place. There are a number of recommendations flowing from the report. The Valuer-General must formally share any lessons learnt from his failures with Land and Property Information, the committee and the Auditor General by the end of the year. This will be an ongoing review and the Auditor General will look again at the information provided by the Valuer-General's office. I note that some of the information requests were reviewed in the first instance by the Auditor General and he also found the information provided by the Valuer-General to be insufficient and erroneous. The final recommendation, No. 4, states:
That appropriate financial reporting tools be developed, so that the Valuer-General can oversight the value of contracts entered into for the purpose of property valuations.
Again, that points to a lack of basic and proper processes within the Valuer-General's department to ensure that very important contracts worth many millions of dollars to the private sector to provide services to the Valuer-General are properly held accountable and administered by the Valuer-General's office. It can only be said that this is very much a damning report of the Valuer-General's office. A wide range of work needs to be done to bring the Valuer-General's office up to a respectable level of reporting as well as to ensure that the Valuer-General is able to discharge his important public duties both to this Parliament and the people of this State.
I congratulate the chair of the committee, Matt Kean, the member for Hornsby, who has done a wonderful job with the committee in investigating the wide range of erroneous material and following it up to ensure that we ultimately have a real oversight of these important public official positions. At the same time people in those positions, such as the Valuer-General, must be held accountable for their conduct and the information they provide to this Parliament. It is an excellent and incisive report which deals with a wide range of material that I think will provide the basis for an ongoing review of the Valuer-General's office. It will ensure that performance is improved over time and that accountability is enhanced across this important function. I commend the report to the House.
The Hon. PAUL GREEN [6.26 p.m.]: I speak on the report of the Joint Standing Committee on the Office of the Valuer-General and take up some of the points raised by the Hon. Scot MacDonald, in particular property valuations in coastal areas in the light of climate change. I refer to the situation of people who may have bought a fishing shack in 1950 for a small sum of money, never dreaming that they would still be there in 2013, and who now face the complex issues of climate change and the measures being put in place by local councils relating to people's entitlements. Climate change is a new issue that the Valuer-General's office needs to take into account in assessing the value of land. Many people are living on property that is still being valued in the millions of dollars but that cannot be built on because of restrictions on development applications as a result of climate change and lines that have been drawn on maps which now sterilise the land.
There are many pensioners living in coastal areas who bought these fishing shacks and have had this type of valuation applied to their properties without an adjustment being made to take into account the new information that has been placed on council books relating to development application requirements. The person who pays for this is the pensioner who bought the shack in 1950 to use it as a holiday house. Now they suddenly face a massive bill and are unable to pay their rates because the valuation methodology has not been restructured to take into account climate change issues. Many of them considered the properties to be their retirement nest egg and sold them to people who knocked down the fishing shacks and built McMansions that took up all the land apart from a 90-centimetre wide strip of land on the property boundary so that they could make money on the property.
Climate change and its consequences for development applications have begun to sterilise the value of those properties. People who expected to sell those properties as part of their retirement or superannuation plans or to raise cash to see them through their twilight years are suddenly finding out they cannot get the price they want. People will not buy them without some assurance that they can build on those blocks. The Valuer-General has to monitor the situation across the coastal villages because many of our ageing population live on blocks in coastal areas. It is important that this report looks into all aspects of this issue. It has been noted by the Office of the Valuer-General, and I hope the committee in its terms of reference will look closely at this issue.
At the end of the day someone will have to pay the bill for the long-term care of these people. Many people hope to sell their property, buy a Winnebago and head around Australia in search of a nice address to 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17547
enjoy their twilight years. That will not be possible if they are unable to receive fair compensation for their coastal blocks. Those issues and others such as bushfire zones have to be taken into account when considering the risk of valuing these blocks of land. Most of the valuations have been completed on vacant blocks. Where a house is built on the land higher rates will apply. [Time expired.]
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
Pursuant to sessional orders debate on budget estimates proceeded with.
BUDGET ESTIMATES AND RELATED PAPERS
Financial Year 2012-13
Debate called on, and adjourned on motion by the Hon. Lynda Voltz and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
COURTS AND OTHER LEGISLATION FURTHER AMENDMENT BILL 2012
Bill received from the Legislative Assembly, and read a first time and ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay, on behalf of the Hon. Michael Gallacher.
Motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay agreed to:
That standing orders be suspended to allow the passing of the bill through all its remaining stages during the present or any one sitting of the House.
Second reading set down as an order of the day for a future day.
ADJOURNMENT
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Minister for Roads and Ports) [6.32 p.m.]: I move:
That this House do now adjourn.
DROUGHT ASSISTANCE
The Hon. STEVE WHAN [6.32 p.m.]: I speak tonight about the Government proposal for a new drought support package. For some time the Federal Government and the State governments have been moving to change the way that drought assistance is provided in Australia. That means moving away from the exceptional circumstance declarations at the Federal level and attempting to help people to better prepare up-front. That is a worthwhile objective and one about which the previous Government was engaged in negotiations with the Federal Government. However, I am concerned when that process comes into contact with a cost-saving objective. That will skew the process in New South Wales to the point where I am not confident that New South Wales farmers will receive drought assistance.
Without knowing the extent of drought assistance that will be provided by the Federal Government, the State Government is moving to implement several measures: to eliminate the declaration of droughts altogether and replace them with seasonal condition reports; to establish a regional assistance advisory committee to provide feedback on vulnerability in rural areas; and to abolish existing measures for drought support and focus on a pre-drought farm business and farm management preparedness and resilience program. That sounds acceptable but we have seen nothing new in the way of assistance for the farmers of New South Wales, not even in the preparation area. However, we have seen cuts to future assistance and drought support.
The Minister has talked about people obtaining loans to prepare their properties. Those loans were available under the previous Government and are being continued. There has been talk about farmers accessing educational programs, which also were available previously. The Minister in his response does not talk about the provision of new assistance for those who need it or efforts to make the loans more affordable. Transport subsidies are going. The vast majority of the $535 million that the previous Government provided to farmers during the 10 years of drought was for transport subsidies for fodder and for animals going to agistment. 17548 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
The change to be introduced by the Government is that transport subsidies will be available only for the removal of livestock from situations of significant animal welfare threat and only where the animal ceases to be part of the farming operation. That means that in limited circumstances the Government will assist the farmer to sell stock that is in poor condition. As everyone knows, that is the worst time for farmers to sell their stock. They will get a low price and they will receive no assistance from the Government to help them keep vital breeding stock alive. Previously, people in drought-declared areas could get a 50 per cent fodder transport subsidy or could use the transport subsidy to take stock for agistment. The Government has made an announcement that that measure will not be available.
In response to my concerns, the Minister's office said that fodder assistance will be available in limited circumstances. That has not been detailed in the announcements and is contrary to the specific announcement that fodder transport will not be made available. Yet again the Minister has made an announcement about an issue that has not been properly thought through and with key details missing. The committee set up by the Minister seems reasonable. At last night's opening of the NSW Farmers new headquarters the Minister said, "You won't have to wait for a drought to be declared to get assistance." The problem is there is no assistance available for farmers, so there is no point in their waiting for it.
Farmers can access existing loans for work on their property, special conservation loans and existing courses, but that is not new assistance. A further problem is that drought declarations are no longer made. Farmers know when they are in drought, but it is important for the public to know which areas have been declared drought areas. It is important for the media to know in order to make comparisons to previous droughts and to raise awareness in the city when farmers need assistance from the rest of the community. I fear that this information could be lost in the process. Much of the information is available in the new seasonal condition reports, including the comprehensive drought status reports. I am concerned that this is another way of simply hiding the information when people need assistance.
PARKES ELVIS FESTIVAL
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR [6.37 p.m.]: On 11 January my family and I hopped in the car and headed west to the great electorate of Dubbo to support their excellent local member, Troy Grant, and attend the infamous Parkes Elvis Festival. The Elvis Festival began as a one-night-only event in 1993, attracting 200 people. Since then, more events have been added to the program and the number of people attending has increased dramatically. The festival is getting bigger every year. This year the five-day festival program featured a dazzling array of more than 150 events.
Highlights of the 2013 program included a top-quality Elvis tribute show in the Keno Feature concert series, the Elvis gospel church service, the iconic Elvis street parade—which I was lucky enough to participate in and donned a wig and glasses—the crowning of Miss Priscilla, the Cars of the Era, the Renewal of Vows with Elvis ceremony, and the Elvis Poet's Breakfast. The festival now attracts more than 15,000 people, more than doubling the population of Parkes. This year's theme was Hawaiian, so there were plenty of Hawaiian shirts, Elvis wigs and Elvis impersonators on every corner of the street. Certainly, a great time was had by all. The event now injects millions into the local economy and is an example of a great regional festival. I was in Port Macquarie on the weekend. Apparently it is jumping on the bandwagon—pardon the pun—and will hold a Beatles festival next month.
The second world record event was an attempt in Parkes to convert a standing crop of wheat into a baker's dozen in less than 18 minutes. The record was broken by the MSM Milling and Manildra Group on 11 January. The paddock-to-plate event was judged by the Leader of The Nationals, Warren Truss, radio broadcaster Alan Jones and the Mayor of Parkes, Ken Keith. Farmer Neil Unger, who organised the event and hosted it at his property Wimmera, was elated to secure the services of such high-profile judges, who donated their time to be part of the world-record attempt.
The team, led by baker Morten Staer and Mr Unger, took only four minutes and 25 seconds to get the Livingston variety of wheat stripped and the loaves into the oven, which put it in a good position to break the record. The team opted to bake a flat, unleavened bread that did not include yeast. The loaves were cooked for 11½ minutes using a portable oven built for the record-breaking attempt. The official time of 16 minutes, 30.87 seconds should earn the Parkes team a spot in the Guinness World Records once the details, videos, affidavits and reports are verified and officially recognised by the Guinness World Record Corporate. The event also raised $10,000 for Currajong Disability Services at Parkes. This record demonstrates that all fast food is not necessarily unhealthy, and I was told that the bread was quite tasty. 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17549
The events held that weekend demonstrate to me that some of our regional communities are looking outside the box for different ways to attract visitors. The Elvis Festival and the paddock-to-plate world-record attempt are examples of how local councils can extend themselves and hold different events to entice visitors. The Elvis Festival was the brainchild of Parkes restaurateurs who wanted to attract customers in the slow period in January. As I said, it is now a highly successful event that I recommend to all members. The vibe, the Elvis music playing in the main street, the street parade, the cars and costumes must be seen to be believed. I will certainly attend the festival again one day.
COAL SEAM GAS EXPLORATION
The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM [6.42 p.m.]: I once again draw the attention of the House to coal seam gas.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Oh, no.
The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: I knew members opposite would groan because they think I sound like a cracked record going on about coal seam gas. They might be sick of hearing about it, but the people of New South Wales are sick and tired of coal seam gas projects coming to their neighbourhoods, their farms and their communities. While Coalition members have been having a nice break over the summer, probably jetting around the world on study tours or doing whatever Government members do during parliamentary breaks, and while Labor members have been skiing or whatever they do, I have been touring New South Wales and visiting communities that have established blockades against coal seam gas exploration. There are ongoing stand-offs at Spring Ridge and in that heart of Communist ideology, Sutton Forest, which is in the electorate of Pru Goward. There is a blockade at Fullerton Cove and massive and very concerning blockades at Grafton and outside Casino at Doubtful Creek. The Glenugie blockade at Grafton lasted for 50 days before the Government sent in a riot squad comprising more than 70 police officers to allow Metgasco to access the site. That operation resulted in 18 arrests on 7 January.
The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Were you one of those arrested?
The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: No, I was not. The protesters were local people and they were charged and dragged into court. The 300 people who gathered at Doubtful Creek included farmers and landholders. More than 70 riot squad officers were sent in to ensure that Metgasco could access the site. What did that cost the State and the community? I will be asking questions about that. Protesters have been camping out at Leard State Forest opposing the destruction of an ecological icon based on a dodgy development application lodged by Whitehaven and Boggabri Idemitsu. The application states that the company should be able to destroy a State forest and offset that destruction with barren farmland. That is a joke. The community is letting the Government know that it is losing.
The Hon. Scot MacDonald: You are losing it.
The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: We are not. A poll conducted in Lismore revealed that 87 per cent of the local population oppose coal seam gas exploration. There are CSG-free community groups rolling out across New South Wales. Mullaley is a very conservative area but 98 per cent of the local population have signed up to oppose coal seam gas exploration. Despite that, this Government has announced a strategic regional land-use plan that is an absolute failure. It will go down in history as one of the greatest debacles in planning legislation and public policy in this State. Has anyone seen Land and Water Commissioner Jock Laurie? He has been on the public payroll since 8 December but no-one has seen him; he has not struck a blow and his website became available only last week. It is his job to create template access agreements between miners and gas companies across the State but no-one has seen him. He is the commissioner but he has done nothing despite the blockades in place across the State.
We have seen yet another kneejerk policy response from the Government today and it has been panned. The mayor of Gloucester—another conservative area—asked about his local area and the Hon. George Souris has come out of hiding and said that this new policy will not stop any gas developments. I visited Hunter Valley vignerons last week, who are a very powerful group. According to the Government's most recent announcement, coal seam gas exploration will be permitted on their boundaries. The wine industry is a $1.8 billion a year industry and it includes people such as Bruce Tyrrell and Graham Gibson. We have some of the best vineyards in the world and they attract an enormous number of tourists. The industry is outraged by this Government's 17550 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
recent policy announcement. It is yet another kneejerk response and it will be a failure. Coal seam gas exploration is unsafe in the suburbs of Sydney and it is unsafe everywhere else. Sooner or later this Government will have to wake up and smell the gas. [Time expired.]
DEATH OF DOUGLAS DE LANDELLES
The Hon. LYNDA VOLTZ [6.47 p.m.]: I pay tribute to Douglas De Landelles, who sadly passed away last year. Doug was not only a fine Labor man but also a stalwart of the Department of Veterans' Affairs and the Returned Services League. Doug would have been no more than 18 years old when he joined the Royal Australian Air Force in 1944 when only Rome had fallen to the allied troops, the first Axis city to do so. On his discharge in 1948, Doug joined the Repatriation Department, which was later renamed the Department of Veterans' Affairs, and was employed there for 43 years. On his retirement, he was the last veteran employed by the department. Doug considered it a privilege to care for veterans, and particularly First World War veterans like Charlie whom he accompanied to the Sydney Olympics in 2000, which he said was a highlight of his life. Doug held many positions in the Repatriation Department. He became the country visits officer in 1983 and remained in that position until his retirement in 1991. On his retirement the Narrandera RSL Sub-Branch noted:
Doug De Landelles is a very personable individual who cultivated many contacts and friends due to his efficiency, kindness and courteous manner when dealing with so many varied problems, from so many requiring that confidence that he would only be too pleased to give.
His cheerful attitude and the personal drive to help those who required his assistance have earned him friendship and respect from all those who knew him.
Likewise, the Warren RSL Sub-Branch said.
As is well accepted Doug has been an outstanding and most dedicated officer of your department. His patience and pleasant manner could not be surpassed. As secretary and Pensioners Officer of the Sub Branch I could not have had a more sincere and reliable person to have worked with for the benefit of Veterans. He will be a great loss and very hard to replace.
Sid Thode, the director of Merrylands RSL, recounted what an exceptional welfare officer Doug was for the Department of Veteran's Affairs. According to Sid, "If you had a hard or difficult case, then Doug was the man to fix it". As far back as the 1960s Doug would assist returned veterans and their widows in his own time, including taking time to visit people at the home or in hospital. Upon retirement Doug took on his own club's welfare officer role for some years until his own health began to fail him. He received life membership of the Repatriation Bowling Club, the Merrylands RSL Club and the Returned Service League of Australia. He also received life membership of the Labor Party where he was also a stalwart. Doug was a member of Merrylands West Branch from the early 1960s and an active campaigner, particularly alongside Jack Ferguson and Mary Ferguson. He was also a stalwart at the elections of Tom Uren, Laurie Ferguson, Kim Yeadon and John Brown.
Doug was instrumental in the group that saw Neville Wran elected to the seat of Bass Hill and the election of the Wran Government in 1978. He was always first to the booth on voting day at Ringrose Avenue, South Wentworthville, taking up the best spot at 6.30 a.m. and he would stay there the whole day and also complete the scrutineering. Whilst he was also the branch returning officer and State Electoral Commission delegate, it was his friendly, open, compassionate manner for which Doug will be most remembered by the Australian Labor Party. Just as he had looked after veterans, Doug was also a great source of help in the Labor Party. After Jack's death, Doug took particular care of Mary Ferguson, making sure she had help when required. There is no greater tribute to the man that Doug was than his response when asked how he had managed to help so many people for so long. Doug simply answered, "You become a better listener than a talker." Doug will be greatly missed by all but particularly by his dear wife, Dot, and his children.
POVERTY
The Hon. JAN BARHAM [6.51 p.m.]: While overcoming poverty in the world's poorest countries is a responsibility we and the rest of the world must address, we also must recognise that poverty in Australia exists and is deeply hurting too many Australian adults and children. The Australian Council of Social Services defines poverty as the pronounced deprivation of wellbeing or the inability to satisfy one's basic needs. People in poverty aspire to a normal life where income is secure and where they are respected and have a place in society. Those affected by poverty include an over-representation of women, both mothers and older women, Aboriginals, people from other cultures, especially those who are on bridging visas, people with disabilities and their carers, and people who happen to live in areas of very high social need. The impact of poverty is not limited to adults—UNICEF indicates that 11 per cent of Australia's children live below the poverty line. 19 February 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 17551
I invite members to imagine spending more than a third of their pension or part-time salary on rent, putting aside what they need to pay next month's electricity bill and finding that the money that is left will not buy food or enough food or nutritious food for them and their children. They dread the possibility that their ancient fridge or washing machine might stop working or that a family member has a birthday or desperately needs a dentist. My federal colleagues Rachel Siewert and Adam Bandt took the test by attempting to live on $35 a day and found it impossible.
An Anglicare report titled, "When there is not enough to eat" found that of the 45,000 households that accessed their emergency relief services three-quarters did not have enough money to adequately feed their families and half reported that they went without food for a whole day during most weeks. While many parents reported that they preferred to go without, almost one in 10 children also did not eat for a whole day on a regular basis. This resulted in frequent school absences. In its 2012 paper "Poverty in Australia", the Australian Council of Social Services showed that the worst affected of all the recipients of benefits were those receiving Newstart, or what we used to call the dole. As of January this year, 60 000 more single parents across Australia now find themselves on Newstart as they have lost access to single parent payments with their youngest child being aged eight years or older.
Contrary to popular myths, these single parents are not totally reliant on their meagre Newstart pensions. According to the Consumers Federation of Australia, approximately 60 per cent of single mothers are in the workforce but many of them are only in part-time or casual work. Many spend a significant proportion of their wages on child care. A low-paying, part-time salary does not lift them out of poverty. Let us not forget the impact of an increasing casualised workforce and the poverty and the working poor that exist within that category. Let us consider the single parent looking for work and trying to decide what they will sacrifice so they do not go further into debt. The sacrifice will not be a cup of coffee or a movie because they could not remember the last time they had such a luxury. It could well be the price of a train ticket to the city, which means that they have drawn a tighter circle around the area they can access when applying for jobs.
The Australian Council of Social Services report refers to findings from the Salvation Army which showed that half of its parent client group said they could not afford to pay for out-of-school activities for their children and 40 per cent could not afford for their children to participate in school activities. Research by the Social Policy Research Centre and the Smith Family found that children tend to cover up about the inability to pay for activities by saying they do not like them. They also said that they were ashamed of their poverty and that their parents were treated badly by school staff. There are pockets of children who do not learn to swim, do not play sport, do not have music lessons and do not do the things that many other children take for granted. We have parents who struggle and sacrifice to provide what they can and search to break out of the cycle of poverty for themselves and their children. The Chief Executive of St Vincent de Paul's National Council, Dr John Falzon, summed up the situation well when he said:
It is a matter of deep shame for a wealthy nation like ours that our unemployment benefits, for example, have been kept deliberately low as a means of humiliating the very people they were originally designed to assist.
The issue of poverty is one for all of us. It is urgent that we address the plight of these people before we see high levels of intergenerational poverty, when it is even harder to lift the spirits and hopes of those people and regain the loss of their wellbeing.
CONTEMPORARY IDEOLOGIES
The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS [6.56 p.m.]: This speech may well be entitled, "What other people did on my summer holidays". I start with the interesting conclusion of the Australian Museum which rejected applications for funding of fossil expeditions in favour of what the director called "future extinctions and climate change". The director is the same person who publicly described climate change sceptics as "deniers" and then feigned shock by saying he did not realise the implied comparison between that and Holocaust "deniers". Unfortunately, the Australian Museum, which was once a great institution, has become a bastion of green Leftism. Why would that be? Well, the money implication is always at the heart of such decisions.
During the summer break, Dr Karl Kruszelnicki, when speaking about United Kingdom Meteorology Office figures, twice mentioned that there was a 0.3 per cent growth in temperatures per decade when the figures from the United Kingdom show that it is only 0.03 per cent. Dr Karl is out by a factor of ten. He can do that once as a slip of the tongue but when he has done it twice it raises all sorts of questions about what is happening amongst these climate change extremists. Maybe it is not scary enough to say that only one-third of a degree per century is the likely outcome rather than the scarier three degrees per century. This scary language plays into the hands of the Lysenkoist planners.
I have spoken many times before on Fascistic impulse amongst scientists and health experts. In this regard, I refer to an article in the recent Sunday Telegraph entitled, "If I were king of the world, what would 17552 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19 February 2013
I do?" Dr Cindy Pan, a medical doctor said, "Get everyone to stop smoking and drinking alcohol". A nutritionist said, "Ban junk food and soft drinks". A naturopath said she would ban sugar. Ban, ban, ban. That is the smiley face of totalitarianism staring down upon us today, but at least they have an ideology. During the summer, Australian Labor Party Vice-President Tony Sheldon said Labor's core values are a fading memory, having been replaced by a morality-free brand of B grade politics. He said:
The truth is that our party is in a very serious and potentially catastrophic situation …
Our crisis is more than just a crisis of trust brought on by the corrupt behaviour … It's a crisis of belief brought on by a lack of moral and political purpose …
The memory of what we once stood for has started to fade.
We want a difference. We want to go back to the ideals that we have and strongly hold within this party.
There is one ideal that every member of the Labor Party signs up for, the Socialist Objective, which is that:
The Australian Labor Party is a democratic socialist party and has the objective of the democratic socialisation of industry, production, distribution and exchange.
I say to members opposite, listen to Tony Sheldon. You should be talking more about socialism, the socialism that lies at the heart of your party's philosophy. In every speech Labor members should talk about nationalisation, collectivisation and confiscatory tax rates. I say that Tony Sheldon is absolutely right. Let us have more Labor ideology being put on public display. But we do not know what Labor stands for because on the one hand the Hon. Steve Whan says, "We are all proud socialists" while the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in this Chamber says, "There are no Marxist's left in the party." What is it going to be? Do we have socialism without Marx, which is an interesting philosophical position to take given the primacy of Marx in socialist theory? Maybe they are talking about general redistributions of wealth. I do not want to go into too much detail but Macca and Eddie certainly had an idea of redistribution of wealth. They redistributed the wealth of the people of New South Wales to themselves—traditionalist socialist expropriation to themselves.
To combat this, what did the Leader of the Opposition in the other place suggest? He suggested a new set of anticorruption rules to force people to disclose what their spouse and their kids earn. I look forward to that. I look forward to Eva Cox, Sarah Maddison, Catherine Lumby and all the other usual suspects who no doubt will be outraged at this return to women being considered the goods and chattels of their husbands and their husbands being able to demand that they hand over their financial details. Good old Robbo is returning to the 1950s. I look forward with mirth to the inevitable debate that will result and I say to him: Bring it on. The LOLs will be going on that one. [Time expired.]
GUYRA SHOW
The Hon. SCOT MacDONALD [7.01 p.m.]: I recently had the pleasure of attending the opening of this year's Guyra Show with Mr Richard Torbay, who did a wonderful job of sashing Courtney Ross, Miss Guyra Showgirl 2013. It was a wonderful show in our usual rainy and cold environment. I congratulate President Chris Sole and all committee members, including Mrs Rita Williams, should be congratulated on this wonderful community event with many great exhibitors.
KOREAN LUNAR NEW YEAR FESTIVAL
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA (Parliamentary Secretary) [7.01 p.m.]: I take this opportunity to congratulate the organisers of the Korean Lunar New Year Festival, which was held last weekend. In particular I congratulate Mr Kim from the Sydney Korean Community Festival Committee and Mr Luke Song, the President of the Sydney Korean Business Association. I also thank Ms Clover Moore, Lord Mayor of the City of Sydney, for her assistance to the Korean community in holding this truly wonderful festival in the Year of the Snake.
[Time for debate expired.]
Question—That this House do now adjourn—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
The House adjourned at 7.02 p.m. until Wednesday 20 February 2013 at 11.00 a.m.
______