DOCSLIB.ORG

4432 Questions and Answers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
4432 Questions and Answers 4432 PROOF LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 2019-20-21 FIRST SESSION OF THE FIFTY-SEVENTH PARLIAMENT QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS No. 107 TUESDAY 4 MAY 2021 The Questions and Answers Paper is published at the end of each sitting day and will contain, by number and title, all unanswered questions, together with questions to which answers have been received on that sitting day and any new questions. Consequently the full text of any question will be printed only twice: when notice is given; and, when answered. During any adjournment of two weeks or more, a Questions and Answers Paper will be published from time to time containing answers received. 4433 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Tuesday 4 May 2021 Publication of Questions Answer to be lodged by Q & A No. 98 (Including Question Nos 5122 to 5150) 23 March 2021 Q & A No. 101 (Including Question Nos 5275 to 5338) 20 April 2021 Q & A No. 102 (Including Question Nos 5339 to 5386) 21 April 2021 Q & A No. 103 (Including Question Nos 5387 to 5456) 22 April 2021 Q & A No. 104 (Including Question Nos 5457 to 5499) 27 April 2021 Q & A No. 105 (Including Question Nos 5500 to 5545) 28 April 2021 Q & A No. 106 (Including Question Nos 5546 to 5593) 29 April 2021 Q & A No. 107 (Including Question Nos 5594 to 5686) 8 June 2021 4434 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Tuesday 4 May 2021 16 MARCH 2021 (Paper No. 101) * 5275 RANDWICK BOYS HIGH SCHOOL AND RANDWICK GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL UPGRADES—Dr Marjorie O'Neill to ask the Minister for Skills and Tertiary Education, and Minister for Sport, Multiculturalism, Seniors and Veterans representing the Minister for Education and Early Childhood Learning— (1) Considering the commitment to upgrade facilities to Randwick Boys' High School and Randwick Girls' High School was made in 2018, why are the projects still listed as being in the 'planning phase' on the NSW Schools infrastructure website (as at 16 March 2021)? (a) What planning has been done over the past three years? (b) Given that the NSW School Infrastructure website lists this project as being 'prioritised for planning', and that it has been in planning for three years, how many more years should the communities of these schools expect the prioritised planning stage to take? (c) After touring the School with the Member for Coogee in October 2019 and seeing firsthand the need to upgrade facilities, what steps were taken to fast track the upgrades of these schools? (d) When will the project move out of the planning stage and into the design phase? (e) When will the project move to the 'in progress' phase? (f) When can these school communities expect these upgrades to be completed? (g) Will the Government re-announce these upgrades in the lead up to the 2023 Election? (h) Can a child born in the Coogee electorate in 2021 expect these upgrades to be completed before they enter high school? Answer— The final business case has been submitted to NSW Treasury for consideration. Further updates and information relating to the project will be communicated via the School Infrastructure NSW website at https://www.schoolinfrastructure.nsw.gov.au/. * 5276 REGIONAL SENIORS TRAVEL CARD—Ms Jodie Harrison to ask the Minister for Customer Service— (1) From 1 January to 30 November 2020, how many people from the following post codes applied for the Regional Seniors Travel Card: (a) 2280; (b) 2282; (c) 2285; (d) 2289; (e) 2290; (f) 2291; (g) 2305; (h) 2306? (2) Since 30 November 2020, how many people from the following post codes applied for the Regional Seniors Travel Card (to 16 March 2021): 4435 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Tuesday 4 May 2021 (a) 2280; (b) 2282; (c) 2285; (d) 2289; (e) 2290; (f) 2291; (g) 2305; (h) 2306? Answer— (1) (a) – (f) No data (g) – (h): Grand Total 13,825 2280 3,858 2290 3,768 2285 3,012 2282 2,256 2289 454 2306 363 2305 114 (2) (a) – (f) No data (g) – (h): Grand Total 11,031 2280 3,094 2290 2,898 2285 2,460 2282 1,850 2289 310 2306 303 2305 116 * 5277 REGIONAL SENIORS TRAVEL CARD REJECTIONS—Ms Jodie Harrison to ask the Minister for Customer Service— (1) From 1 January to 30 November 2020, how many applicants for the Regional Seniors Travel Card from the following post codes have had their applications rejected: (a) 2280; (b) 2282; (c) 2285; 4436 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Tuesday 4 May 2021 (d) 2289; (e) 2290; (f) 2291; (g) 2305; (h) 2306? (2) Since 30 November 2020, how many applicants for the Regional Seniors Travel Card from the following post codes have had their applications rejected (as at 16 March 2021): (a) 2280; (b) 2282; (c) 2285; (d) 2289; (e) 2290; (f) 2291; (g) 2305; (h) 2306? Answer— This question should be referred to the Minister for Regional Transport and Roads. * 5278 INTERSECTION OF ST JAMES ROAD AND RAILWAY—Ms Jodie Harrison to ask the Minister for Transport and Roads— (1) Noting the intersection of St James Road and the railway at Adamstown, and the significant traffic blockage presented by the crossing, what steps is the Government taking to address this issue? (a) When was the most recent traffic survey of this railway crossing undertaken? (b) What were the results of the most recent traffic survey? (c) What is the Government's preferred solution to the ongoing traffic issues in this area? Answer— I am advised: Issues relating to the roads and traffic surrounding the Adamstown level crossing, including St James Road, are matters for Newcastle City Council. The surrounding roads are local roads under the care and control of the Council. * 5279 TAFE ENROLMENTS—Ms Jodie Harrison to ask the Minister for Skills and Tertiary Education, and Minister for Sport, Multiculturalism, Seniors and Veterans— (1) In 2011, how many residents of the following post codes were enrolled in TAFE courses: (a) 2280; (b) 2282; (c) 2285; (d) 2289; (e) 2290; 4437 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Tuesday 4 May 2021 (f) 2291; (g) 2305; (h) 2306? (2) In 2021, how many residents of the following post codes were enrolled in TAFE courses (as at 16 March 2021): (a) 2280; (b) 2282; (c) 2285; (d) 2289; (e) 2290; (f) 2291; (g) 2305; (h) 2306? Answer— I am advised that due to the commercial environment in which TAFE NSW operates, it would be inappropriate to provide student data at a locational level. I am also advised that TAFE NSW provides enrolment and course information in its annual report, which can be found at www.tafensw.edu.au/corporate/annual-report. * 5280 PROTECTIONS FOR STAFF AND MEMBERS OF THE PARLIAMENT OF NEW SOUTH WALES— Ms Jodie Harrison to ask the Premier representing the Leader of the Government in the Legislative Council, Special Minister of State, Minister for the Public Service and Employee Relations, Aboriginal Affairs, and the Arts, Vice-President of the Executive Council— (1) Noting any processes or procedures which may be in place to address allegations of an unsafe workplace at the Parliament of New South Wales, what procedures or processes are in place to support an employee of the Parliament should they report an unsafe work place? (2) What procedures or processes are in place to address the concerns of an employee should they experience workplace harassment? (3) What procedures or processes are in place to support an elected Member of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council should they report an unsafe work place? (4) What procedures or processes are in place to address the concerns of an elected Member of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council should they experience workplace harassment? Answer— Questions concerning the New South Wales Parliament are best directed to the Presiding Officers. However, I am advised that the NSW Parliament has a number of policies which deal with standards of conduct in the Parliamentary workplace, and procedures relating to workplace safety. For example, the Harassment Free Workplace Policy applies to members' staff and staff of the Department of the Legislative Assembly, Department of the Legislative Council and Department of Parliamentary Services. The New South Wales Parliament also has an Anti-Bullying Policy and the Grievance Policy. Staff employed in a Ministerial Office are also subject to policies and procedures set out in the Ministers' Office Handbook including policies relating to bullying, harassment and discrimination, and work health and safety. 4438 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Tuesday 4 May 2021 The Government has zero tolerance for bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct in the workplace. All Government workplaces should be places of safety and respect, including the workplaces of staff employed by political office holders. The Hon. Pru Goward has been engaged to review the adequacy of policies and procedures concerning bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct in Ministerial offices, and will report her findings and any recommendations to the Premier. * 5281 OPALPAY FOR BUS SERVICES—Ms Jodie Harrison to ask the Minister for Transport and Roads— Noting the plans to switch payment for On Demand bus services in the Hunter to the Opalpay smartphone app, what steps are being taken to ensure that people without credit cards or smartphones are not excluded from the service? Answer— I am advised: On Demand services in Sydney and surrounds are moving to a new online booking and payment platform called Opal Connect. Opal Connect provides customers easy access to a single online platform to book and pay for public and private transport services as well as access to additional benefits such as travel credits. As part of this change, OpalPay will no longer be available on these services.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • State Heritage I Inventory Project D
    I I I I I I I :1 PYRMONT POINT PRECINCT I Archaeological and Heritage Assessment ,I Report prepared for I Property Services Group I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd I Howard Tanner and Associates Pty Ltd I I March 1993 I I I 'I ;1 ·1 :1. , ~ :1 I I I I CONTENTS Page I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1.1 Context of the Report 1 1.2 Objectives 1 I 1.3 Historical Context 1 1.4 Heritage Resources 2 1.5 Statutory Controls 3 I 1.6 Management Recommendations 3 2.0 INTRODUCTION 5 2.1 Background 5 I 2.2 Study Area 5 2.3 Author Identification 6 2.4 Methodology 6 I 2.5 Umitations 6 3.0 HISTORIC CONTEXT 8 I 3.1 The Development of Pyrmont 8 3.2 1788 - 1840 Early Settlement and the Macarthurs 9 3.3 Subdivision, Settlement and Community (1840 - 1910) 11 3.4 Reconstructing the Point: Port Wharfage (1910 -1970) 13 I 3.5 Derelict, Demolished, Developed (1970 - 1992) 14 I 4.0 LANDSCAPE 31 5.0 BUILT ENVIRONMENT 33 I 6.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 36 6.1 Preamble 36 6.2 The Value ofArchaeological Material 37 I 6.3 Existing Information 37 6.4 Potential Historical Archaeological Sites 38 6.5 Significance 39 I 6.6 Procedures 40 I I I I I I I I I I CONTENTS Page 7.0 ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANT ITEMS 42 I 7.1 Recording Methodology 42 7.2 Basis for Assessment of Significance 42 7.3 Contribution to the Overall Significance of Pyrmont 45 I 7.4 Results 46 7.4.1 Heritage Items Recommendedfor the Retention, Conservation and Inclusion on the Heritage Schedule I ofREP 26 46 7.4.2 Items Which Contribute to the Overall Signifcance ofPyrmont 47 7.5 Review of Specific Items, with Reference to the
    [Show full text]
  • Pyrmont Peninsula Place Strategy
    Pyrmont Peninsula Place Strategy December 2020 Acknowledgement of Country The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment acknowledges the traditional custodians of the land and pays respect to Elders past, present and future. We recognise Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ unique cultural and spiritual relationships to place and their rich contribution to society. Aboriginal people take a holistic view of land, water and culture and see them as one, not in isolation to each other. The Pyrmont Peninsula Place Strategy is based on the premise upheld by Aboriginal people that if we care for Country, it will care for us. Published by NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment dpie.nsw.gov.au Pyrmont Peninsula Place Strategy December 2020 ISBN: 978-1-76058-406-1 Cover image sources: Destination NSW and Shutterstock Artwork (left) by Nikita Ridgeway © State of New South Wales through Department of Planning, Industry and Environment 2020. You may copy, distribute, display, download and otherwise freely deal with this publication for any purpose, provided that you attribute the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment as the owner. However, you must obtain permission if you wish to charge others for access to the publication (other than at cost); include the publication in advertising or a product for sale; modify the publication; or republish the publication on a website. You may freely link to the publication on a departmental website. Disclaimer: The information contained in this publication is based on knowledge and understanding at the time of writing (December 2020) and may not be accurate, current or complete.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of Pyrmont Peninsula 1788 - 2008
    Transformations: Ecology of Pyrmont peninsula 1788 - 2008 John Broadbent Transformations: Ecology of Pyrmont peninsula 1788 - 2008 John Broadbent Sydney, 2010. Ecology of Pyrmont peninsula iii Executive summary City Council’s ‘Sustainable Sydney 2030’ initiative ‘is a vision for the sustainable development of the City for the next 20 years and beyond’. It has a largely anthropocentric basis, that is ‘viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and values’(Macquarie Dictionary, 2005). The perspective taken here is that Council’s initiative, vital though it is, should be underpinned by an ecocentric ethic to succeed. This latter was defined by Aldo Leopold in 1949, 60 years ago, as ‘a philosophy that recognizes[sic] that the ecosphere, rather than any individual organism[notably humans] is the source and support of all life and as such advises a holistic and eco-centric approach to government, industry, and individual’(http://dictionary.babylon.com). Some relevant considerations are set out in Part 1: General Introduction. In this report, Pyrmont peninsula - that is the communities of Pyrmont and Ultimo – is considered as a microcosm of the City of Sydney, indeed of urban areas globally. An extensive series of early views of the peninsula are presented to help the reader better visualise this place as it was early in European settlement (Part 2: Early views of Pyrmont peninsula). The physical geography of Pyrmont peninsula has been transformed since European settlement, and Part 3: Physical geography of Pyrmont peninsula describes the geology, soils, topography, shoreline and drainage as they would most likely have appeared to the first Europeans to set foot there.
    [Show full text]
  • Contested Territorialities in Millers and Dawes Points, Sydney, Australia
    Contested Territorialities in Millers and Dawes Points, Sydney, Australia Helen Karathomas A thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences Faculty of Science University of New South Wales September 2015 THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES - Thesis/Dissertation Sheet Surname: Karathomas First name: Helen Abbreviation for degree as given in the University calendar: PhD School: Biological Earth and Environmental Sciences Faculty: Science Title: Contested Territorialities in Millers and Dawes Points, Sydney, Australia. Abstract (350 words maximum): Millers and Dawes Points are two harbour side, inner city suburbs of Sydney that have been subject to contests over space. Because of Millers and Dawes Points’ histories, the area contains some of Sydney’s oldest residential housing. More recently, certain areas within Millers and Dawes Points have experienced residential and commercial gentrification. This thesis extends existing gentrification studies through a middle range framework, which includes the concepts of ‘territoriality’, ‘sense of place’ and ‘placelessness’. This theoretical framework increases our understandings of the changes occurring in local areas. Nestled within the suburbs of Millers and Dawes Points are pockets of social housing occupied by residents who are dubbed the ‘traditional community’. The traditional community live cheek by jowl with some of the area’s wealthier residents who reside in the suburbs’ ‘privatopias’ (McKenzie 1994, 9). These wealthier residents are gentrifiers who I have labelled as the ‘new community’ in this thesis. This thesis identifies how these communities have developed distinct senses of and attachments to place that have been constructed and manifested within Millers and Dawes Points’ complex and contested terrain.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcript of Proceedings Transcript in Confidence O/N H-1074608
    TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS TRANSCRIPT IN CONFIDENCE O/N H-1074608 GREATER SYDNEY COMMISSION STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS PYRMONT PLANNING REVIEW PANEL: DANIELLE SMALLEY STEPHANIE BARKER DAN BRIGHT INTERVIEWEES: ELIZABETH ELENIUS BILL D’ANTHES LOCATION: UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, SYDNEY DATE: THURSDAY, 12 SEPTEMBER 2019 .ELEIUS_D'ANTHES 12.9.19 P-1 Transcript in Confidence Introduction and disclaimers spoken by Danielle Smalley at the beginning of each meeting: Thank you very much, first of all, for coming today. I just want to let you know that, as you were advised when you registered, that we will be recording the session and then we’re going to make the transcripts publicly available. So first of all I just want to check that you’re comfortable with that. [All attendees agreed] My name’s Danielle Smalley and I’m the chief operating officer at the Greater Sydney Commission. This is Stephanie Barker and she’s acting Executive Director City Strategy and she’s leading the review for the Commission, and Dan Bright is our senior project officer with the Commission. Renee Attard is taking some notes for us today. Lara Irwin is recording it for us. And we also have behind us Chris Leeds, who is from Procure Group and he’s our probity officer, so he’s here today just in case there’s any probity issues that arise. If you leave this session and feel that there are probity issues that you’d like addressed, Meredith outside has Chris’ card and you can contact him directly. All Greater Sydney Commission staff complete a conflict of interest and make an annual declaration and anyone working on this project has also declared any conflicts of interest in relation to Pyrmont and they have recused themselves from being involved.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeological Program for 50-72 Union Street, Pyrmont
    ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROGRAM Pyrmont & The Macarthurs The only early industrial activities on Macarthur's grant were the windmill, near the corner The derivation of the name Pyrmont has been 50-72 UNION STREET, PYRMONT of Church and Mill St (now cleared down to bedrock), attributed to parallels with the spa town of Pyrmont in and a salt-boiling works. Macarthur went into exile in Why Undertake an Archaeological Germany although there has been some suggestion 1808 for his role in the Rum Rebellion and it was Excavation that it is similar to the Aboriginal name for the eight years before he returned to Sydney. Some peninsula, Pirrama. The archaeological program at Union Street is time after Macarthur returned to Sydney he planned undertaken as part of the redevelopment of the site. The Pyrmont Ultimo peninsula consisted of a to build a large home in Pyrmont from local stone. The developers, PDP Union Pty Ltd, are required rocky sandstone ridge forming a spine along the While the stone was quarried no dwelling was under the NSW Heritage Act 1977, to gain approval length of the peninsula with numerous freshwater erected. The stone was removed to Parramatta for from the NSW Heritage Council to disturb relics. As streams running down off the ridge. The Pyrmont extensions to Elizabeth Farm. part of this process an Assessment report was end of the ridge formed two separate headlands. John Macarthur died in 1834 and left his estate written identifying the nature and extent of any Macarthur's grant was on the eastern headland. to his wife and children.
    [Show full text]
  • Pyrmont Peninsula Place Strategy — Final Report
    Pyrmont Peninsula Place Strategy— Final Report Report prepared for Department of Planning and Environment NSW—October 2020 GML Heritage For Information – Not Government Policy Pyrmont Place Strategy—Final Report, October 2020 Children at the edge of a demolition site (Source: Sydney City Archives) 2 GML Heritage Pyrmont Place Strategy— Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Study Report Register The following report register documents the development and issue of the report entitled PyrmontPeninsula—Place Strategy, undertaken by GML Heritage Pty Ltd in accordance with its quality management system. Job No. Issue No. Notes/Description Issue Date 20-0155 5 Final Report October 2020 Quality Assurance GML Heritage Pty Ltd operates under a quality management system which has been certified as complying with the Australian/New Zealand Standard for quality management systems AS/NZS ISO 9001:2016. The report has been reviewed and approved for issue in accordance with the GML quality assurance policy and procedures. Copyright Historical sources and reference material used in the preparation of this report are acknowledged and referenced at the end of each section and/ or in figure captions. Reasonable effort has been made to identify, contact, acknowledge and obtain permission to use material from the relevant copyright owners. Unless otherwise specified or agreed, copyright in this report vests in GML Heritage Pty Ltd (‘GML’) and in the owners of any pre- existing historic source or reference material. Moral Rights GML asserts its Moral Rights in this work, unless otherwise acknowledged, in accordance with the (Commonwealth) Copyright (Moral Rights) Amendment Act 2000. GML’s moral rights include the attribution of authorship, the right not to have the work falsely attributed and the right to integrity of authorship.
    [Show full text]
  • Csr Site, Pyrmont Archaeological Investigations
    Report Summary REPORT SUMMARY BACKGROUND During October to December 1996 Casey & Lowe Associates undertook the archaeological excavation and testing of areas within the then CSR site (Figs 1.1, 1.2). This site was acquired by Lend Lease to develop into residential accommodation and is now called Jackson’s Landing. The potential archaeological remains of the whole of the CSR site were addressed in an archaeological assessment written by Casey & Lowe Associates in August 1996, ‘Archaeological Assessment CSR Site, Pyrmont’, for Howard Tanner & Associates on behalf of Civil & Civic. This report identified the potential survival of archaeological remains in a number of areas throughout the CSR site. Those sections where the remains were considered to have the greatest potential for survival and were accessible were tested. Three areas were found to have considerable remains and were excavated. Two other areas were found to have limited archaeological remains and were also excavated. Area A contained the remains of four houses, Houses 15 to 21 New Street, Pyrmont (Plans 1, 2, Photo 1). Area B contained the remains of three houses, Houses 67 and 69 Bowman Street and 2 New Street, Pyrmont (Plans 5, 6, Photo 2). Area C contained the remains of four houses, Houses 1 to 7 McCredie Street, a footpath and roadway, Pyrmont (Plans 9-12, Photo 3). Area D contained limited remains associated with a dairy, 69 John Street (Plans 14-16, Photo 4). Area E contained the remains of a single terrace house, 17 Mount Street (Plan 17, Photo 5). Other potential remains in Area E did not survive twentieth-century use as a truck parking area.
    [Show full text]
  • European Heritage
    Pyrmont Peninsula Place Strategy— Final Report Report prepared for Department of Planning and Environment NSW—July 2020 GML Heritage For Information – Not Government Policy Pyrmont Place Strategy—Final Report, July 2020 Children at the edge of a demolition site (Source: Sydney City Archives) 2 GML Heritage Pyrmont Place Strategy— Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Study Report Register The following report register documents the development and issue of the report entitled PyrmontPeninsula—Place Strategy, undertaken by GML Heritage Pty Ltd in accordance with its quality management system. Job No. Issue No. Notes/Description Issue Date 20-0155 4 Final Report July 2020 Quality Assurance GML Heritage Pty Ltd operates under a quality management system which has been certified as complying with the Australian/New Zealand Standard for quality management systems AS/NZS ISO 9001:2016. The report has been reviewed and approved for issue in accordance with the GML quality assurance policy and procedures. Copyright Historical sources and reference material used in the preparation of this report are acknowledged and referenced at the end of each section and/ or in figure captions. Reasonable effort has been made to identify, contact, acknowledge and obtain permission to use material from the relevant copyright owners. Unless otherwise specified or agreed, copyright in this report vests in GML Heritage Pty Ltd (‘GML’) and in the owners of any pre- existing historic source or reference material. Moral Rights GML asserts its Moral Rights in this work, unless otherwise acknowledged, in accordance with the (Commonwealth) Copyright (Moral Rights) Amendment Act 2000. GML’s moral rights include the attribution of authorship, the right not to have the work falsely attributed and the right to integrity of authorship.
    [Show full text]