11282
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
Wednesday 22 September 2004 ______
Mr Speaker (The Hon. John Joseph Aquilina) took the chair at 11.00 a.m.
Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.
MINISTRY
Mr BOB CARR: In the absence of the Minister for Tourism and Sport and Recreation, and Minister for Women, who is undergoing an operation, the Deputy Premier, Minister for Education and Training, and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs will answer questions on her behalf. In the absence of the Minister for Mineral Resources, the Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Commerce will answer questions on his behalf. In the absence of the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, and Minister for Natural Resources, the Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment will answer questions on his behalf.
DISTINGUISHED VISITORS
Mr SPEAKER: I welcome to the Public Gallery Mrs Sumitra Singh, the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of the State of Rajasthan in India, who is accompanied by her son, and Mrs Harsukh Ram Poonia, Secretary of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly.
PETITIONS
Milton-Ulladulla Public School Infrastructure
Petition requesting community consultation in the planning, funding and building of appropriate public school infrastructure in the Milton-Ulladulla area and surrounding districts, received from Mrs Shelley Hancock.
Gaming Machine Tax
Petitions opposing the increase in poker machine tax, received from Mrs Shelley Hancock, Mrs Judy Hopwood and Mr Andrew Tink.
Crime Sentencing
Petition requesting changes in legislation to allow for tougher sentences for crime, received from Mrs Shelley Hancock.
Lake Woollumboola Recreational Use
Petition opposing any restriction of the recreational use of Lake Woollumboola, received from Mrs Shelley Hancock.
Breast Screening Funding
Petition requesting effective breast screening for women and maintenance of funding to BreastScreen NSW, received from Mrs Judy Hopwood.
Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre
Petition opposing the proposed relocation of health services provided by the Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre, received from Mrs Jillian Skinner.
South Coast Rail Services
Petition opposing any reduction in rail services on the South Coast, received from Mrs Shelley Hancock. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11283
CountryLink Rail Services
Petitions opposing the replacement of CountryLink train services with bus services, received from Mr Andrew Stoner and Mr John Turner.
Isolated Patients Travel Accommodation Assistance Scheme
Petition opposing the criteria for country cancer patients to qualify for the Isolated Patients Travel Assistance Scheme, received from Mr Andrew Stoner.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Reordering of General Business
Ms PETA SEATON (Southern Highlands) [11.11 a.m.]: I move:
That General Business Order of the Day (for Bills) No. 6 have precedence on Thursday 23 September 2004.
Illegal brothels are the scourge of many neighbourhoods in the city, yet the Carr Labor Government has consistently done everything it possibly can to delay and oppose the Community Protection (Closure of Illegal Brothels) Bill, which will let us crack down on illegal brothels. Why would Labor oppose making it easier for local councils to move in and shut down illegal brothels that exploit women, conduct illegal immigration, are involved in drugs and crime, and, worst of all, use young underage girls to ply this filthy trade? Why? Let us start with the Albion Park branch of the Labor Party and one Neville Hilton, the former Junior Vice-President of the Port Kembla Chamber of Commerce, part funded, of course, by the taxpayers of New South Wales, courtesy of the Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business, who represents the Keira electorate.
Neville Hilton is one of Eric Roozendaal's warriors for the dominant right faction and he has pulled strings to get many members elected to this place. There is one word for Neville Hilton, and that is "guilty". He is guilty of child prostitution offences, yet he has a cheer squad of Australian Labor Party [ALP] mates supporting him. When he was first charged his mate and ALP apparatchik, and aspirant for the seat of Throsby, Gino Mandorino, stood up for his mate. He called Neville Hilton an honourable man and is reported in the Illawarra Mercury as saying, "This man's reputation and honour are tarnished by these allegations." The honourable member for Kiama moved to shut down debate when I tried to table photographs of tents in which prostitutes are forced to live in Port Kembla, because there are not enough places in which they can live.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for East Hills to order.
Ms PETA SEATON: Today we have an opportunity to debate why Martin Pitt, another member of the ALP, said of Neville Hilton, "He probably considers the girls feral and not worth worrying about. I feel sorry for him—it doesn't diminish him, both as a friend and a colleague." Where was the outrage from Labor men and women?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Lismore to order.
Ms PETA SEATON: Just before we thought it could not get any worse, residents of the Bondi Junction area have been appalled at the increases in the illegal brothel trade and sex business. Residents are so concerned that they have been forced to engage a private investigator to get evidence that the council cannot get.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is too much audible conversation in the Chamber.
Ms PETA SEATON: I lay on the table for the information of members a videotape and reports by private investigators that give evidence of erotic massage offered for cash, sexual activity conducted for cash, and sexual activity, including sexual intercourse, all in a building that is occupied also by the honourable member for Coogee, who has turned his face and is refusing to acknowledge that those things exist. [Time expired.]
Mr CARL SCULLY (Smithfield—Minister for Roads, and Minister for Housing) [11.12 a.m.]: The Government is happy to debate the bill tomorrow, and we agree with the motion.
Motion agreed to. 11284 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Reordering of General Business
Mr JOHN BROGDEN (Pittwater—Leader of the Opposition) [11.15 a.m.]: I move:
That General Business Notice of Motion (General Notice) No. 460 standing in my name have precedence on Thursday 23 September 2004.
Last week I took an opportunity in the House to bring to the attention of all of the people of New South Wales the behaviour of the Premier when he recently visited Wollongong and confronted a protest of people with disabilities. What was his response to people who are concerned about the Government's performance in servicing and assisting people with disabilities? He called them "a rabble" and that response is from a Premier who runs the Government that has the worst record in the country in assisting people with disabilities. The Government is unwilling to support people with disabilities, to give them an equality of opportunity that every citizen in this State deserves. Later today outside Parliament House people will protest against the Government's performance and its intention to cut funding for the Adult Training, Learning and Support [ATLAS] program and the Post School Options [PSO] program. People across New South Wales understand the view of the Premier about funding for people with disabilities.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Bathurst to order.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: The Illawarra Mercury stated that the Premier is adding insult to injury, when referring to this matter. We know that the Premier is sensitive on this issue.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Bathurst to order for the second time.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: With 300 protesters confronting the Premier, did he offer them a hearing or a sympathetic word? No, not at all.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Murrumbidgee to order.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: Instead, the Premier's response to people with disabilities who protested against his cuts to ATLAS and the PSO was to call them a rabble. The Premier does not understand. They asked him to walk in their shoes, to understand what it is like to suffer life with a disability, but he offered no sympathy, no support. I call on the Premier to give a commitment to stop that approach, to get rid of his plans to abolish funding for the ATLAS and PSO programs. He calls that rubbish, but he is cutting funding to disabled people in New South Wales, it is happening. He is destroying their opportunities and their lives. I call on the House to support my motion to debate this matter tomorrow. [Time expired.]
Mr CARL SCULLY (Smithfield—Minister for Roads, and Minister for Housing) [11.17 a.m.]: The Leader of the Opposition well knows that at this point in the proceedings he is required to convince the House that his motion out of the other 474 motions is the most important confronting the House.
Mr John Brogden: Are you opposing it?
Mr CARL SCULLY: The Leader of the Opposition is still muddled and confused. The substance of the motion is not before the House; we are debating whether his motion is the most important. His performance is the least eloquent I have ever heard and he has not made out a case for priority. Therefore, the Government will not agree to it being prioritised, not because of the substance of the debate, but because he has not made out a case for priority. He should argue his case better next time.
Question—That the motion be agreed to—put.
The House divided. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11285
Ayes, 36
Mr Aplin Ms Hodgkinson Mrs Skinner Mr Armstrong Mr Humpherson Mr Slack-Smith Mr Barr Mr Kerr Mr Souris Ms Berejiklian Mr Merton Mr Stoner Mr Brogden Ms Moore Mr Tink Mr Cansdell Mr Oakeshott Mr Torbay Mr Constance Mr O'Farrell Mr J. H. Turner Mr Debnam Mr Page Mr R. W. Turner Mr Draper Mr Piccoli Mr Fraser Mr Pringle Mrs Hancock Mr Richardson Tellers, Mr Hartcher Mr Roberts Mr George Mr Hazzard Ms Seaton Mr Maguire
Noes, 48
Ms Allan Mr Gibson Mr Price Mr Amery Mr Greene Dr Refshauge Ms Andrews Ms Hay Ms Saliba Ms Beamer Mr Hunter Mr Sartor Mr Black Mr Iemma Mr Scully Mr Brown Ms Judge Mr Shearan Ms Burney Mrs Keneally Mr Stewart Miss Burton Mr Lynch Mr Tripodi Mr Campbell Mr McBride Mr Watkins Mr Carr Mr McLeay Mr West Mr Collier Ms Meagher Mr Whan Mr Corrigan Ms Megarrity Mr Yeadon Mr Crittenden Mr Mills Ms D'Amore Mr Morris Tellers, Mr Debus Mr Newell Mr Ashton Ms Gadiel Mr Orkopoulos Mr Martin Mr Gaudry Mr Pearce
Pair
Mrs Hopwood Ms Nori
Question resolved in the negative.
Motion negatived.
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE
Report
Mr Matt Brown, as Chairman, tabled report no. 7/53 (150) entitled "Inquiry into Academics' Paid Outside Work", dated September 2004, and associated minutes.
Report ordered to be printed.
Mr Matt Brown, as Chairman, also tabled the minutes associated with the report entitled "Inquiry into the Infringement Processing Bureau".
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ______
DESIGNER OUTLETS CENTRE, LIVERPOOL, CLOSURE
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: My question without notice is directed to the Assistant Minister for Planning. Has she been contacted or interviewed by the Independent Commission Against Corruption as part of its ongoing investigation into the Orange Grove outlet centre?
Ms DIANE BEAMER: I have been contacted and not interviewed. 11286 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
JAMES HARDIE AND ASBESTOS-RELATED DISEASES LIABILITY
Mr PAUL McLEAY: My question without notice is directed to the Premier. What is the latest information on James Hardie and related matters?
Mr BOB CARR: As at 11 o'clock this morning Queensland, Victoria and South Australia stand ready to join a ban led by New South Wales on James Hardie products if James Hardie does not come to the table and negotiate with victims and the ACTU on the supply of funds to compensate them for asbestos-related diseases. We will continue to pursue that issue and other relevant actions. State and Territory governments are significant customers of Hardie's products. The proportion of James Hardie output that New South Wales buys is 8 per cent, so there is considerable clout in this. I have said before that there are difficulties about boycotts, but if James Hardie does not do what I challenged it to do yesterday, it will face that ban in co-operation with other state governments, in co-operation—after 9 October, I hope—with a Federal Labor government, in co-operation with the ACTU and its international partners and, above all, in co-operation with all those little people who are victims of James Hardie.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order.
Mr BOB CARR: We will conduct a full audit of products used, an audit of contracts in force and a survey of substitute products. That will be done by the New South Wales Department of Commerce. A uniform approach from other States and Territories will represent a serious threat. We do this on behalf of the victims. The report released yesterday by Mr David Jackson, QC, highlights the need for amendment to corporate law in Australia. The Howard Government has substantial legal advice at its disposal through the Solicitor-General, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. It now must draw on all that advice. Commissioner Jackson's report found that Hardie's senior managers systematically and deliberately misled the actuaries, misled the board, misled the foundation, misled the stock exchange, misled the Supreme Court and misled victims and unions—every one of whom were assured that the foundation was fully funded. Indeed, Justice Santow of the Supreme Court asked about asbestos liabilities and was assured by the Hardie's representatives:
that JHL's ability to call on the partly paid shares would satisfy that liability.
We know what James Hardie did with the shares: grabbed them and went offshore. Any suggestion like that made by the Leader of the Opposition yesterday that James Hardie provided certain documentation to this Government is not supported by the following facts. First, the Premier's Department has advised in writing that it has no record of James Hardie's letter; secondly, the Cabinet Office has advised in writing that it has no record of James Hardie's letter; and, thirdly, my Chief of Staff has not seen it.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time.
Mr BOB CARR: The Minister for Transport Services, in his former role as secretary of the Labour Council, confirmed today that he had not seen such a submission from James Hardie. The correspondence from James Hardie is in the name of someone—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Vaucluse to order.
Mr BOB CARR: and was supplied to the Opposition by someone called Mr Greg Baxter, the Executive Vice-President of Corporate Affairs for James Hardie. He supplied it to the Leader of the Opposition. So last week Gazcorp wrote questions and supplied them through his public relations firm—speakers' notes and draft questions were produced by Gazcorp—and yesterday the Opposition criticised the Government at a press conference using documentation provided to it by the public relations man for James Hardie: Greg Baxter, the Executive Vice-President of Corporate Affairs. No-one in Australia will believe anything they say now, except the Leader of the Opposition.
Mr John Brogden: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The document to which the Premier referred was given by Stephen Loosley.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat.
Mr BOB CARR: Desperate times, desperate measures. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11287
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat.
Mr BOB CARR: He has been caught out—the document is from Mr Greg Baxter.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the honourable member for Gosford on three calls to order. A number of members have now been called to order. I deem those members to be on three calls. Members will behave appropriately during the conclusion of question time and the standards of the Chamber will be upheld. Ministers' answers will be heard in silence. The Premier may continue.
Mr BOB CARR: The document prepared by Mr Greg Baxter, Executive Vice-President of Corporate Affairs for James Hardie—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wakehurst to order.
Mr BOB CARR: and given to the Opposition by Mr Greg Baxter establishes a very interesting linkage. Mr Greg Baxter was known to the Leader of the Opposition when he was providing consultancy services to PricewaterhouseCoopers [PwC] Legal. Of all the firms out there providing legal and accountancy services, which was the one that James Hardie used? During what period did James Hardie use the services of PwC Legal? As we know, the Leader of the Opposition has never said what he did for the $110,000 he received from PwC Legal, but I can reveal to the House that James Hardie was a client of PricewaterhouseCoopers Legal at precisely the time the Leader of the Opposition received $110,000 from it.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wakehurst for the second time.
Mr BOB CARR: As the House well knows, the Leader of the Opposition has never said what he did for that $110,000—never on one occasion has he explained what he did for that $110,000. We are therefore entitled to ask whether, in wanting someone who had access to Opposition figures, he arranged the meeting held in February 2001 between James Hardie and its representatives and the honourable member for Gosford, the shadow Minister in charge of these matters at the time. It stands to reason: the firm has someone on staff who sits in the New South Wales Parliament—in fact, is a shadow Minister—and James Hardie is paying the company money for representation in politics.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting.
Mr BOB CARR: Who else would the firm go to to set up the meeting? That meeting was held in February 2001 with the honourable member for Gosford, who had shadow ministerial responsibilities at the time.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Swansea will come to order.
Mr BOB CARR: It would be stretching credibility to believe the current Leader of the Opposition did not arrange that meeting as part of his services for the firm that gave him $110,000. The correspondence involving PwC Legal—
Mr Andrew Tink: Point of order: My point of order is on the issue of relevance and of lobbying. The Premier will explain—
Mr SPEAKER: What is your point of order?
Mr Andrew Tink: —why Graeme Wedderburn—
Mr SPEAKER: What is your point of order?
Mr Andrew Tink: —was lobbied by Stephen Loosley—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The honourable member for Epping will resume his seat.
[Interruption] 11288 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Epping will resume his seat.
[Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the honourable member for Epping on three calls to order.
Mr BOB CARR: The correspondence released yesterday in the report confirms the engagement of PwC Legal by James Hardie to "provide strategic"—
Mr John Brogden: Stephen Loosley.
Mr BOB CARR: No, you were on the payroll. You got $110,000 from them and you were in the Parliament. During this period you were paid $110,000. PwC Legal was engaged by James Hardie to:
provide strategic advice to James Hardie Industries Limited in relation to the establishment of the Medical Research and Compensation Foundation.
It would do this as well:
… from time to time, other staff may be involved in the matter and would develop:
… a comprehensive program of briefings for senior … opposition figures at both state and federal levels.
It beggars belief that, in fulfilling that assignment to James Hardie, PwC Legal—which was paying the Leader of the Opposition $110,000 at the time—did not use the services of the Leader of the Opposition to set up the meeting with the honourable member for Gosford. But the correspondence gives more details. It says that James Hardie paid—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for South Coast to order.
Mr BOB CARR: James Hardie paid the firm that employed the Leader of the Opposition to provide "selected briefings with key New South Wales Opposition figures."
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of The Nationals will come to order.
Mr BOB CARR: That was PwC's obligation. Those opposite can scurry through all the documentation they like, but this comes out of the two-volume, 1,000-page report that was released yesterday. And, the paper goes on, written and telephone contact with "offices of key NSW Opposition spokespeople including key ministries"—
Mr John Brogden: Point of order: Once again my point of order relates to the standing orders and relevance. On this occasion I seek to table the copy of Graeme Wedderburn's handwritten notes relating to his meeting―
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat.
Mr John Brogden: I seek leave to table the notes.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no provision in the standing orders for the Leader of the Opposition to table the report.
Mr BOB CARR: None of this alters the fact that PwC was employed by James Hardie, that James Hardie asked PwC to set up meetings with the New South Wales Opposition, and during that time he was paid $110,000. What for?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Barwon to order.
Mr BOB CARR: Among the documents released yesterday: "An obligation to contact offices of key NSW Opposition spokespeople including key ministries of Industrial Relations and Attorney-General", that is, the honourable member for Gosford. We can only presume that the man who would later rely on the honourable 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11289 member for Gosford's backing to install him as Leader was the man paid by Hardie to ensure the Opposition Leader's silence and compliance. Do honourable members know what PwC were paid? PwC Legal was paid some $50,000 for these services, which would go a long way to meeting that $110,000 bill that he put into them.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Southern Highlands to order.
Mr BOB CARR: Last week they were revealed, raising questions in this place bowled up to them by Gazcorp―questions, material for speeches. They were revealed as being employed, actually being paid money, by the firm that was handling the PR for James Hardie and, yesterday, using that old contact, using that old friendship with the executive vice-president of corporate affairs for James Hardie, Mr Greg Baxter. I do not believe anything Mr Greg Baxter or any other PR person for James Hardie says on this or any other matter.
Mr Brad Hazzard: Point of order: Surely the victims deserve more of a statesmanlike approach from the Premier—
Mr SPEAKER: What is your point of order?
Mr Brad Hazzard: On the issue of relevance, what we require under the standing orders is that the Premier behave in a statesmanlike way—
Mr SPEAKER: What is your point of order?
Mr Brad Hazzard: —and represent the interests of people who have suffered—
Mr SPEAKER: What is your point of order?
Mr Brad Hazzard: —and not turn this argument into a trivial attack—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Wakehurst will resume his seat.
GREAT WESTERN HIGHWAY UPGRADE
Mr ANDREW STONER: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads. Given the confirmation by the honourable member for Bathurst that road deaths are required for projects to "get up in the priority list" and that nine people have already died this year on the Great Western Highway, why has the Minister deferred vital projects for that road? This is you, Minister! Road deaths are required to get up on the list!
Mr CARL SCULLY: This Government introduced the Penrith to Orange corridor upgrade, which involved $360 million over 12 years and which it commenced in 1997-98. The Federal Government discovered it and put in another $100 million—which I am pleased to say brought it to $460 million—and its $100 million contribution runs out in about June next year. Anyone who has travelled on the Great Western Highway will know what it was like before we came into government. I regard that question as a very misleading and deceptive attempt—the honourable member does not like the answer—to give the impression that this Government is not serious about road safety.
I am disappointed about that approach to what traditionally has been a bipartisan issue. The Leader of The Nationals attended the road safety summit at Port Macquarie and participated, I think in a bipartisan spirit, in a whole range of working groups that put forward a range of recommendations, which the Government is currently considering. I regard the question as untrue and offensive, and it should be completely dismissed.
Mr Andrew Stoner: Point of order: On relevance, it is simply not enough for the Minister to say he regards the question as untrue. He has got to answer the question. He has got to comment on why his own media release said that—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order.
[Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of The Nationals will resume his seat. The Minister has completed his reply. 11290 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
WATER SUPPLY
Mr PETER BLACK: My question is addressed to the Premier. What is the latest information on drought in New South Wales?
Mr BOB CARR: As of last Thursday, Sydney catchment levels were just 43 per cent. Warragamba Dam is now at 40 per cent capacity, the lowest level since it was commissioned in 1960. The last time Sydney saw water shortages like this was the drought that spanned most of the 1930s and 1940s, taking dam levels to just 12.5 per cent—so bad that in February 1942 beer production was cut by a third because of the water shortage! Sydney is on level 2 water restrictions, and thanks to the self-discipline of Sydneysiders we have saved approximately 58 billion litres of water compared to the past financial year. It is a fantastic effort that reflects enormous credit on every household.
When we have consistent heavy rain over the Warragamba catchment, we have to be prepared for a large influx of contaminants such as the droppings of native animals and cattle, as occurs after spells of very dry weather. So we will be looking to the professionalism of the Sydney Catchment Authority and Sydney Water to protect our drinking water quality when the happy day of heavy rain arrives. But until then the people of Sydney want to know the Government is securing the city's water future. I can assure the House it is doing precisely that with the Metropolitan Water Strategy, a comprehensive water plan for Sydney, the Blue Mountains and the Illawarra, which we will be announcing shortly.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of The Nationals will cease interjecting.
Mr BOB CARR: That is necessary because an even more pressing priority is the recent news that we face another El Niño event. Warming in the central Pacific, reduced trade winds, and a negative Southern Oscillation Index all point to this, and that could prolong the drought for years, so our water plan is timely. It is necessary. Would it not be good if we had a question about dam levels in the country from the Opposition? That is never raised. We never get that question.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Myall Lakes to order.
Mr BOB CARR: So let me talk about it, answering a question from Country Labor.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Murrumbidgee to order.
Mr BOB CARR: Forty per cent dam levels might seem bad in Sydney, where that has never been seen in anything like 60 years, but what members have to understand, and what the Opposition ought to acknowledge, is that in many country towns 40 per cent is a luxury and we have to be mindful of how tough country communities are doing it. For a start, 92.3 per cent of the State is in drought, up 5 percentage points on last month. The balance of the State is marginal. Not one area is categorised satisfactory, not one at all. We have been there with drought assistance worth $130 million. As I have said on many occasions, that assistance will keep flowing until the need stops. But the average level of our rural and regional dams is just 35.6 per cent and nine small towns are doing it so tough. They need water carted in, which is happening at a cost of $555,000 so far. The Government is constantly monitoring the impact of the drought on water supplies across New South Wales.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Lachlan to order.
Mr BOB CARR: We will do whatever we can to make sure that no town in New South Wales runs out of water. For example, we are test drilling for bore water in a total of 22 locations. We have got $7.7 million set aside this year for alternative water supplies for communities affected by drought.
Mr Ian Armstrong: Point of order: The Premier talks about carting water to small country towns.
Mr SPEAKER: What is your point of order?
Mr Ian Armstrong: Yet he has cut the assistance by 50 per cent—
Mr SPEAKER: What is your point of order? 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11291
Mr Ian Armstrong: —to 20 per cent for country water—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The honourable member for Lachlan has been a member of this House long enough to know that he is contravening the standing orders. I place him on three calls to order.
Mr BOB CARR: Mr Speaker, harsh as your judgment might be, at least the honourable member for Lachlan is in there, lending a hand for country New South Wales. You have got to give him that. In that, he is in stark contrast with the rest of the Opposition frontbench. As I said, we have set aside $7.7 million this year for alternative water supplies for communities affected by drought. I would like to draw the attention of the House to what is happening in some particular country centres, because I think that lends an air of reality to this debate. Goulburn's total water level is 34.5 per cent, and the local council is considering a number of other measures, including the introduction of level 5 restrictions. I am happy to say the Government is providing dollar-for- dollar funding with Goulburn City Council to see if we can tap bore water. The first test bore detected water at less than 15 metres from the surface—although the water is salty and only just meets drinking quality standards. So we hope for some better outcomes with the other bores.
In the South Coast/Eurobodalla region, where recently the Eurobodalla Shire Council introduced level 3 restrictions, the council is looking at again upgrading water restrictions, tapping underground water sources, extracting water from the Tuross River, using treated poorer quality water from Deep Creek Dam, and desalination. In fact, the council is meeting with the Department of Energy, Utilities and Sustainability today to establish an agreed program of work. On the Central Coast, honourable members would be disappointed to hear that the main dam, Mangrove Creek Dam, is at just 25 per cent capacity. However, it still has enough water for two years if residents continue to observe restrictions. They have been doing that very well. Gosford city and Wyong shire are currently on level 2A restrictions, which are likely to be upgraded to level 3 shortly. Those two councils are also looking at measures such as desalination, bore water and getting access to the so-called deep storages from Mangrove Creek Dam.
In the Lachlan, the local dam is at a meagre 13 per cent of capacity. That is why we have provided emergency drought funding to assist Parkes, Forbes and Condobolin secure alternative ground water sources. We have also provided help to the towns to access lower storage levels in the lake. And I am happy to advise the House that we have also approved emergency drought funding for the Central Darling Shire Council to secure water supplies for Ivanhoe. Our $25,000—matched dollar for dollar with the council—will go towards test drilling for bore water. I can also advise the House we are providing $50,000 to Lachlan Shire Council to repair the weir at Condobolin. The weir is leaking precious water, and we can stop that waste and boost the town's water supplies.
The flow in the lower Darling River is so poor it could stop before Christmas. Fortunately, Broken Hill has 18 months of water supply—although the quality of it, already not the best, would be likely to get worse. As a backup, Australian Inland, Broken Hill's water and energy corporation, has spent $4 million on a desalination plant, which is on stand-by if water supplies in Broken Hill deteriorate to dangerous levels. So country New South Wales faces—but faces bravely, and with our assistance—the most unremitting drought in a century. We are working hard with councils to shore up local water supplies, but we do so in the knowledge that the best solution is some decent, soaking rain to fill up those dams.
SPECIAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO THE MEDICAL RESEARCH AND COMPENSATION FOUNDATION REPORT
Mr ANDREW TINK: My question is to the Premier. Why did Graeme Wedderburn tell James Hardie that the Premier was "okay" with their Medical Research and Compensation Fund, as indicated in these documents, which were tabled at the Jackson inquiry?
Mr BOB CARR: For the reasons we have outlined publicly, the Government was briefed—
[Interruption]
We have said this publicly on half a dozen occasions. The Government was briefed—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Epping, having asked the question, will extend to the Premier the courtesy of allowing him to reply. 11292 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Mr BOB CARR: The Government was briefed, as we have said, publicly on half a dozen occasions, in February 2001―as the member for Gosford was briefed, as the Federal Treasurer was briefed, as the Prime Minister's office was briefed―on the establishment of the foundation. There was an account given to the Stock Exchange of the establishment of the foundation. At a 10-minute meeting between the State Government and James Hardie, representatives said, "We will be informing the Stock Exchange shortly of our plan to establish a foundation."
Mr Andrew Tink: Point of order—
Mr SPEAKER: What is the point of order?
Mr Andrew Tink: My point of order is that the document I referred to—
Mr SPEAKER: What is the point of order?
Mr Andrew Tink: It says "Carr okay".
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order.
Mr BOB CARR: The briefing was about the establishment of the foundation. It was not about the restructuring of the company—
Mr Andrew Tink: Yes, it was.
Mr BOB CARR: No, it was not. It was about the establishment of the foundation. The Stock Exchange was given the identical presentation, so was the Federal Treasurer, so was the Prime Minister's office. James Hardie said, "We're setting up a foundation, and we're allocating these funds to it." As the Australian said in its editorial today:
In this enterprise the company misled the share market, the directors of its own trust,—
That is, the people who joined the trust were misled—
the NSW Supreme Court and the Australian public.
What did the New South Wales Supreme Court say?
Mr John Brogden: You signed off.
Mr BOB CARR: We signed off on nothing because, lacking a corporations power, the State Government is not required to sign off on anything. Precisely the same information was given to the national government. Precisely the same information was given to the Stock Exchange. And, some months later, the same presentation was made to the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Judge Santow of the Supreme Court said—and I quoted earlier his judgement of October 2001:
James Hardie's ability to call on the partly paid shares would satisfy that liability.
So everyone was given that assurance. What James Hardie then did—after going to governments and the State Opposition, the member for Gosford, with an identical presentation in February 2001, after then going to the Stock Exchange—was go to the Supreme Court. Hardie gets their restructuring to the Netherlands ticked off by the Supreme Court, but then they remove, they cancel, those partly paid up shares, removing the capacity of the foundation to meet the liabilities. That happened after, and only after, they went to the Supreme Court of New South Wales in October 2001. In answer to a direct question from the judge, Hardie assured him that the partly paid shares would satisfy that liability. Then, after that—which is a long time after their initial presentation, their presentations to government on the establishment of the foundation—they cancelled the shares. It is an indictment of James Hardie—an absolute indictment of James Hardie. The report released yesterday makes all of that clear. And there is one reason, and one reason alone, why that report has brought all this to the surface and reached a milestone in justice for the victims, and that is because this Government set it up.
Mr ANDREW TINK: I ask a supplementary question. In the light of the Premier's answer, and flowing from that meeting, when the Premier was offered the chance to review the figures by Hardie, why did 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11293 he not do so? Why did he not review the figures when he was offered a chance by Hardie at that meeting? It was because Carr was "okay".
Mr BOB CARR: The figures, as I have said in answer to the previous question, were not given to the Government at that meeting or in any other meeting. The only suggestion that those figures were presented to the Government comes from the public relations man down at James Hardie. So the honourable member believed him! He believed Greg Baxter, the executive vice-president of corporate affairs for James Hardie?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Several members are on three calls to order, including a number of members of the Opposition front bench. I am reluctant to direct that a member who has asked a question should be removed from the Chamber; he should be able to listen to the answer. I remind the honourable member for Epping that he has been on three calls to order for some time. He knows the standing orders only too well. If he wants to remain in the Chamber I suggest he comply with those standing orders and listen to the answer in silence.
Mr BOB CARR: On the day it has been demonstrated—every newspaper in the country reported on the Jackson report—that James Hardie lied to governments, to the Stock Exchange, to courts, to its board in some respects, to the public, to the victims and to the unions, the honourable member for Epping is the only one who would quote its public relations man as the authority on any matter.
CHILD PROTECTION
Mr GEOFF CORRIGAN: My question without notice is to the Minister for Police. What is the latest information on child protection in New South Wales?
Mr JOHN WATKINS: In the last two years the Government has greatly expanded powers available to police to track, catch and monitor paedophiles even after their release from prison.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Burrinjuck to order.
Mr JOHN WATKINS: We have to recognise the simple fact that child sex offenders often cannot be cured. That is why we have introduced the nation's first child protection register, which tracks about 1,600 offenders in New South Wales and which shortly will become a national scheme. That is why we are allowing police to inform certain responsible members of the community about the location of paedophiles if children are at risk. That is why we are introducing child protection prohibition orders to gaol offenders who cannot meet the strict behavioural conditions we impose on them after their release from prison. The latest weapon in our fight against paedophiles in the community is child protection watch teams. New South Wales will, as an Australian first, allow local specialist teams to track convicted sexual predators in their area.
A six-month trial of local multi-agency teams will begin next week in south-western Sydney. The exact location will be kept confidential for the purposes of the trial. The child protection watch teams will bring together local leaders in the relevant agencies to monitor paedophiles living in that location. They will draw up management plans to keep them away from at-risk children. Following the trial, child protection watch teams will be set up throughout New South Wales. They will comprise local police, Corrective Services officers, Department of Community Services officers, New South Wales Health professionals and the Department of Housing.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is too much audible conversation in the Chamber.
Mr JOHN WATKINS: The team also can bring in members of other agencies, such as the Department of Education and Training, if they are required. Team members will work together to examine offenders' histories, risk assessments, activities and behaviour. They will provide an early warning system for inappropriate actions, associations or living arrangements. They will take proactive measures to prevent these criminals from reoffending. They will ensure that police are ready to pounce if the danger increases. In short, they will take any extra steps to protect local children who are perceived to be at risk. Such close local connections between agencies means that child protection watch teams will ensure there are no departmental communication problems that could see dangerous offenders slip under the radar.
Child protection watch teams will strengthen a range of tough new laws we have introduced already and they will strengthen the New South Wales police response to child sexual abuse. This will benefit every step 11294 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 of the chain—monitoring, intelligence gathering and sharing, and law enforcing. The teams will use the intelligence they gather to recommend that police apply for new child protection prohibition orders, which passed through Parliament last session. An example of these orders, which could be applied to paedophiles, include orders prohibiting them from going to certain places, orders prohibiting them from contacting certain people, or orders prohibiting them from taking up certain types of employment.
Similar measures to these new child protection watch teams have been introduced in the United Kingdom. They were designed in the wake of the abduction, rape and murder in 2000 of eight-year-old Sarah Payne from West Sussex. They are already enjoying success overseas, and I am convinced that NSW Police and other government agencies will be use them effectively. Currently 1,119 convicted paedophiles are living in our communities in New South Wales. No other crime has the same level of post-sentence monitoring that we apply to child sex offenders. We make no apologies for constantly ramping up the measures we take to protect our children. We have given our police the laws they need to track every one of these dangerous offenders. These child protection watch teams will ensure that all government agencies stand up to guard the barrier between children and sex offenders.
GRAIN RAIL LINE MAINTENANCE
Mr IAN SLACK-SMITH: My question without notice is directed to the Premier. With grain rail lines likely to fail during the upcoming grain harvest due to his disastrous fix-when-fail policy, will he finally intervene and implement a long-term maintenance and upgrade program for these lines?
Mr BOB CARR: I am happy to receive and examine any submission the honourable member wants to direct to me on the subject.
KARUAH BYPASS
Mr TONY STEWART: My question without notice is to the Minister for Roads. What is the latest information on the Karuah bypass?
Mr CARL SCULLY: At nine o'clock this morning the honourable member for Port Stephens, John Bartlett, opened the Karuah bypass for traffic. What a terrific project—$123 million.
[Interruption]
I am pleased to hear the interjection of the honourable member for Myall Lakes. Hansard should record his acknowledgment that this Government has probably spent more money on roads in his electorate than any other electorate. I think that was his interjection. Finally, we get acknowledgment and thanks—but not from the honourable member for Coffs Harbour. The honourable member for Myall Lakes has done well—a Labor Government is working its way up through The Nationals territory, doing the right thing—as we do for all communities. The Karuah bypass will make a big difference to the people of the North Coast. As the honourable member for Myall Lakes knows, we have concentrated north of Newcastle, around Coffs Harbour and south of the Tweed—areas that have had significant road trauma and significant traffic congestion.
Last Friday the Premier, Martin Ferguson, the local Federal member and the local State member witnessed the final preparations before the opening today. Sunday was a great community day. I understand that nearly 3,000 people enjoyed tours over the bridge, which is a great piece of engineering work. It is incrementally launched, like the Woronora bridge. I invite anyone who is thinking of going north to go as far as the Karuah bypass because it shows the skills and technologically advanced ways in which bridges are constructed. I thought the honourable member for Myall Lakes could bring himself to say thank you because the Karuah township will have its community returned to it. It still will be a service town for people travelling north. It will promote itself and make sure that people stop, revive and survive. But it is a big win: all those heavy vehicles, all that congestion, all those delays during the holidays are gone. He might be a miserable sod, but at least his community will recognise what the Government has done on their behalf.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Myall Lakes to order for the second time.
Mr CARL SCULLY: I am pleased to say that the Pacific Highway is a work in progress. As I have said before, there are many more projects to do. We look forward to signing a new Pacific Highway agreement with whoever is elected federally. I hope it is Martin Ferguson so that we can sign the agreement with a Labor 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11295 government. In any event, both sides of politics are committed to continuing significant Federal funding for the Pacific Highway. We look forward to signing a new Pacific Highway agreement. We will continue to do what we are doing. Brunswick River to Yelgun is the next big project. The Karuah bypass will be a fantastic addition. While the Government has been building and opening the Karuah bypass, the Opposition has been in full swing on the Brogden bypass. I think the House should be enlightened. Last night in the Parliamentary Bar, the Brogden bypass—
Mr Brad Hazzard: Point of order: All we want to hear about is the Hazzard bypass on the northern beaches. Give us the money and get rid of it.
Mr CARL SCULLY: There they were, a who's who of one faction of the Liberal Party in the Parliamentary Bar, scheming and plotting the downfall. Who were they? Who was in O'Farrell's little team of plotters? The honourable member for Vaucluse was there. The shadow Minister for Transport Services was there. The honourable member for Gosford was there. The honourable member for Lane Cove was there. The honourable member for The Hills—where is he, the treacherous little rotter? The honourable member for Cronulla—shame on him—where is he? The honourable member for Davidson, what was he doing there? And, of course, the Hon. Charlie Lynn, the Hon. David Clarke and the Hon. Greg Pearce. Do honourable members know how long this plotting to bypass Brogden lasted? They were there in a pack—
[Interruption]
The honourable member for Vaucluse was there, in the pack. But when two of Brogden's staffers came in, they all disappeared. We have a right to know: What are they plotting?
Mr Malcolm Kerr: Point of order—
Mr SPEAKER: Does the honourable member for Cronulla claim to have been misrepresented?
Mr Malcolm Kerr: If the Minister continues like this, we may be spared the "Scully for Premier" campaign.
Mr SPEAKER: Has the Minister completed his reply?
Mr CARL SCULLY: They all bypassed their esteemed leader as they plotted their tactics.
MISSING PERSONS ESTATE MANAGEMENT
Mr MILTON ORKOPOULOS: My question without notice is addressed to the Attorney General. What is the latest information on managing the estates of people who go missing?
Mr BOB DEBUS: I acknowledge the honourable member's question and the possible relevance of my answer to the honourable member for Coffs Harbour.
Mr John Brogden: They will laugh on the ABC.
Mr BOB DEBUS: They will laugh on the ABC, will they? The Leader of the Opposition will have to explain that to me later.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I remind the honourable member for Vaucluse that he is on three calls to order.
Mr BOB DEBUS: This is an important matter. The families and friends of people who go missing have an enormously difficult matter to deal with, including the emotional and mental toll of dealing with unresolved loss or grief that is enormous.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is too much audible conversation in the Chamber.
Mr BOB DEBUS: Although a number of support agencies are available to help people through this devastating ordeal—such as the Salvation Army, the Wayside Chapel and the Family and Friends of Missing Persons Unit within the Victims of Crime Bureau—some basic practical and legal needs are not being met. At present, family or friends can manage the affairs and estates of missing people only after obtaining a grant of 11296 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 probate from the Supreme Court. Unless there is strong evidence that the person has died, probate may not be granted until a person has been missing for seven years. That is an immensely long time for distressed family and friends of the missing person to be placed under such pressure. For that reason, the Government is moving to end this sort of anxiety and stress by establishing a new and simple scheme for managing the estates of missing people.
Amendments to the Protected Estates Act will establish a clear and simple arrangement that will take advantage of the tried and tested existing regime that is already in place to assist protected persons. The legislation will be the first of its kind in Australia. Indeed, I am aware of such a regime existing elsewhere in the world only in Canada. The new scheme to protect the interests of medium-term to long-term missing people will use the expertise of the Supreme Court to assess the need for, and the qualifications of, estate managers, as well as the experience of the Protective Commissioner to oversight the management and preservation of estates. Obviously, the views of families and friends will be considered in the management of estates. The new scheme will provide a procedure for applying to the Supreme Court for a declaration that a person is missing, similar to the existing procedure for a declaration that a person should be protected.
Next of kin, domestic partners, business partners, the Attorney General or the Protective Commissioner are among those who may apply for the declaration and seek the appointment of someone to manage the person's estate. The court will be allowed to make a declaration if it is satisfied that it is in the interests of the missing person to do so, that the person has been missing for 90 days and that reasonable efforts have been made to locate them. The court will have the power to suspend an existing power of attorney and to revoke and vary estate management orders that are already in place. At present, the Protective Commissioner requires 12 monthly accounts from private managers of estates of protected people to ensure that there are no problems with the estates. This requirement will extend to the estates of missing persons. The new scheme will be simple and flexible. I expect that it will be welcomed by people within the community who have to deal with these particularly difficult problems.
Questions without notice concluded.
BILLS RETURNED
The following bill was returned from the Legislative Council without amendment:
Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Amendment (Norfolk Island Prisoners) Bill
JAMES HARDIE AND ASBESTOS-RELATED DISEASES LIABILITY
Personal Explanation
Mr JOHN BROGDEN, by leave: During question time the Premier alleged a number of matters relating to James Hardie, his Government and me. He indicated that PricewaterhouseCoopers Legal, a firm with which I had a relationship through Northmist Pty Ltd—which is a matter of public record—had asked me to arrange a meeting with the shadow Attorney General, the honourable member for Gosford, in 2001. I confirm to the House that the honourable member for Gosford has indicated to me that he and the then shadow Minister for Industrial Relations and Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council, the Hon. Michael Gallacher, met with James Hardie on 5 March 2001 at 3.00 p.m. That meeting was organised by Mr Brian Tyson of Gavin Anderson and Company, not by PricewaterhouseCoopers Legal. I had no relationship with PricewaterhouseCoopers Legal that at any stage involved any matters in relation to James Hardie. This shows how desperate the Government has become. To ensure that the House and the people of New South Wales are left in absolutely no doubt about the Government's involvement in this matter, Mr Loosely made a statement—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition may explain how he has been misrepresented. However, he may not debate the matter or raise other issues. Has the Leader of the Opposition completed his personal explanation?
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: No. I think it is important for the House to understand that Mr Stephen Loosely—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should not include that matter in his personal explanation. He has the right to explain how he has been misrepresented, but he should not debate the matter or raise other issues. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11297
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: I am endeavouring to ensure that the House and the public do not believe the rubbish they heard from Bob Carr today. In order to do that, I am required to ensure that there is a full understanding of all the matters referred to by the Premier in relation to me. He said—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I cannot allow the Leader of the Opposition to continue. His remarks are tantamount to debating the issue. As I have said, the Leader of the Opposition may explain how he has been misrepresented, but he should not debate the matter or raise matters relating to other individuals.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: It is crucial that I refer to other individuals; the Premier named them in relation to me. For instance, the Premier referred to Mr Greg Baxter of James Hardie. Do you recall that, Mr Speaker?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will continue his personal explanation.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: The Premier referred to a document that Mr Greg Baxter, the Senior Vice- President of Corporate Affairs at James Hardie, faxed to Mr Graeme Wedderburn, the Chief of Staff of the New South Wales Premier, on 21 February 2001. In that two-page memo Mr Baxter outlined a number of matters in relation to the fund established by James Hardie. The Premier has indicated that his Government wanted to know nothing about those matters, because it now knows the trouble it is in. I want to make a point about my relationship—
Mr Carl Scully: Point of order: As I have indicated on a number of occasions, a fair degree of latitude is allowed, particularly to the Leader of the Opposition. He believes that he has been impugned. He should defend himself and sit down. He should do so promptly; otherwise we will be here all day listening to this drivel.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I again remind the Leader of the Opposition that a personal explanation should be concise. The Leader of the Opposition should get on with it. To expand his personal explanation by debating the issue is, in a sense, flouting the standing orders.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: Is "get on with it" within the standing order, Mr Speaker?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am giving the Leader of the Opposition an extraordinary amount of latitude. This is probably one of the longest personal explanations ever heard in this House.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: It is probably in direct relation to the longest slur this House has heard for a long time. The Premier named an individual, Mr Greg Baxter, whom I am not aware of meeting. I do not recall meeting him, and I certainly had no discussions with him in relation to this matter. He did not provide us with this document, as the Premier suggested, to in any way substantiate the position of James Hardie. I make it clear also that the issues raised by the Premier were a desperate attempt to hide his Government's—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition is debating the issue.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: They are so desperate that they are trying to throw mud over to this side of the Chamber. It is no surprise that the Premier is scurrying off to Hong Kong.
Mr Carl Scully: Point of order: That is disgraceful behaviour.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: He is straight out of the Chamber, off to Hong Kong. We wish him the very best, but he cannot hide from the people of New South Wales.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat.
Mr Carl Scully: Mr Speaker—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will hear nothing further on the personal explanation. 11298 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Supplementary Answer
GREAT WESTERN HIGHWAY UPGRADE
Mr CARL SCULLY: I will not respond to that disgraceful outburst from the Leader of the Opposition. Earlier today the Leader of The Nationals asked me a question in relation to projects on the Great Western Highway. On 6 April, following the mini-budget, I issued a press release. The Leader of The Nationals should be aware that some projects had to be deferred because the Federal Government allowed $376 million of the State's money to be transferred, primarily to Queensland. As a result, $50 million had to be taken out of the Roads budget, which meant that a number of projects had to be deferred, two of which were on the Great Western Highway. If the Leader of The Nationals does not like that, he should blame John Howard.
REGISTERED CLUBS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 14 September.
Mr ANDREW STONER (Oxley—Leader of The Nationals) [12.25 p.m.]: All members of this House should speak to the Registered Clubs Legislation Amendment Bill in support of clubs in their electorates and the terrific clubs movement in New South Wales. New South Wales has developed a network of clubs that provide facilities for their members and their communities, particularly those in regional and rural New South Wales. In this State clubs have enabled a lifestyle whereby people can attend clubs for sports, meals and entertainment— they have formed the fabric of our society. People with lower incomes can access the affordable sporting, entertainment and meal facilities provided by clubs. Clubs are critical to regional and rural New South Wales. I grew up attending clubs—they were part of my family's lifestyle and they are now part of my lifestyle. I am a member of many clubs in my electorate, including the Wauchope RSL Club and the Wauchope Country Club, which has a terrific golf course and is very much a part of the Wauchope community.
I am a member of the Macksville District Ex-Servicemans Club and the Urunga Golf and Sports Club, which offer terrific facilities. There are many clubs throughout the Oxley electorate, including the Kempsey Heights Grand United Bowling and Recreation Club and the new South West Rocks Country Club. I recommend that when honourable members visit the mid North Coast they go to South West Rocks and look at that terrific facility, which has a great golf club, bowling greens, tennis courts, as well as restaurant, bar and meeting room facilities. The club forms an incredibly important part of the growing community of South West Rocks. Other clubs in the Oxley electorate include the Bowraville and District Ex-Services Club, the Bowraville Bowling Club and the Nambucca Heads Bowling and Recreation Club, which is involving young people in lawn bowls—a sport for people of all ages. Every year that club conducts the Ken Howard Memorial Tournament in which people from around the State participate. The tournament contributes to the economy of the Nambucca shire, particularly in Nambucca Heads.
The Nambucca Heads RSL Club, situated on prime real estate on the coast, has sensational views. It provides pensioner meals at $4 on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. The Urunga Bowling Club provides wonderful services for people. The Comboyne Ex-Servicemen and Citizens Club is the only club in that little town where people can get a meal, a drink or entertainment. Its bowling greens are at risk of demise due to a range of factors. Clubs in my electorate also include the Camden Haven Golf Club, of which I am patron, the Kempsey Golf Club, the Scotts Head Bowling and Recreation Club and the North Beach Recreation and Bowling Club at the beautiful little town of Mylestom, near Raleigh. Those terrific clubs provide community facilities and, importantly, jobs for local people. I know a lot of people who work in clubs; clubs provide careers for their workers. However, I am troubled that the Government's policies and decisions, including this bill, are making it tough for clubs, their members and their employees.
One only has to look at the "Socio-Economic Impact Study of Clubs in NSW" produced by the Allen Consulting Group earlier this year to learn the statistics. The report makes it clear that clubs contribute $1.2 billion in wages to 52,000 workers in this State annually; contribute $969 million per year in Commonwealth, State and council taxes; and provide $5.1 billion worth of community and sporting infrastructure, including club buildings and 1,621 bowling greens. The Stuarts Point Recreation and Bowling Club has excellent bowling greens in that very desirable location. The report further states that clubs provide 338 golf courses, 102 gyms and 325 sporting fields. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11299
That is a measure of the contribution that these clubs make to our community. They also provide more than $100 million annually in additional community support. For example, the South West Rocks Country Club recently made a substantial donation to the group Macleay Options Inc., a group that works with disabled people, to enable it to purchase a bus to help young intellectually and physically disabled people undertake work programs and contribute to their communities. That is the sort of thing that local clubs do. They donate wheelchairs for young people who need that sort of equipment. They also make donations to young athletes. We have had some terrific young athletes coming out of Wauchope. When they need money to travel or to compete in interstate competitions and the like they go to their local clubs—for example, the Wauchope RSL club and the Wauchope Country Club—which are always willing to help.
I am worried about the fact that the Government's tax regime, which commenced on 1 September, is threatening people's lifestyles and the incredible contribution made by those clubs. Earlier this year the Allen Consulting Group produced another report entitled "Impact of the New Gaming Machine Taxes on Clubs in NSW", which shows that the Labor Government's new tax regime is estimated to cost 24,024 full-time equivalent jobs in our club industry. That is a tragedy. That loss of jobs would have an enormous impact on the Oxley electorate, which has the second- highest unemployment rate of any electorate in New South Wales.
The report of the Allen Consulting Group reflects the impact the tax would have on every State electorate. I will refer to some of the electorates that will be massively affected as a result of this tax impost. It is estimated that over the next seven years the Tweed electorate will lose 827 direct and indirect jobs as a result of this tax regime. The Minister for Gaming and Racing, who is in the Chamber, would be concerned to learn that it is estimated that 493 jobs will be lost in The Entrance electorate. These electorates can ill afford to lose employment opportunities for their constituents. It is estimated that 692 jobs will be lost in the Strathfield electorate. These figures are quite shocking. In the Oxley electorate it is estimated that only 32 jobs will be lost, but that electorate does not have many employment opportunities; it has intractable unemployment problems. Those job losses will only contribute even further to those problems.
It is also estimated that in the Murray-Darling electorate—a country area in the Far West and the south- west of the State that is struggling economically—270 jobs will be lost. The redistribution that is about to take place is an acknowledgement of the shrinking population, yet the Government is about to launch a tax regime that will result in the loss of 275 jobs from the western part of the State. It is estimated that 3,500 jobs will be lost in regional and rural New South Wales. These figures are concerning. The bill does not refer specifically to the increase in poker machine tax; it deals with other matters. In the June 2004 edition of Club Life magazine the Chief Executive Officer of ClubsNSW, Mr David Costello, made the following somewhat prophetic statement:
It is anticipated that the Government reply to the comprehensive reports from the Allen Consulting Group will not be negotiations on tax rates and the potential for compromise.
Instead, consistent with past experiences and using predictable media forums, reprisals designed to tarnish the image of 1500 clubs, 52 000 employees and over 50 000 volunteers will be forthcoming.
The Registered Clubs Legislation Amendment Bill is all about the Government putting the blowtorch to the clubs movement by providing enhanced powers to the Department of Gaming and Racing and enhanced powers for inquiries. Currently, the inquiry chaired by Mr Ian Temby, QC, into the Panthers club is under way. The legislation is all about reprisals. I refer again to what Mr Costello had to say in June 2004:
If this is to be the case, those responsible in Government will be guilty of blatant abuse of the political process and will surely bear the brunt of the public's reaction to these tactics.
Already there is ample evidence of ongoing harassment of a number of clubs and individuals, which certainly will be revealed shortly. The NSW Club Movement has a proud tradition and, while seeking a resolution to the issue of tax fairness, clearly has had enough of the intimidation and harassment of individuals, community organisations and clubs.
As I said earlier, the bill is all about intimidation and harassment. It gives the department sweeping powers to put clubs through the mill. Other members have spoken about issues that are associated with this legislation. I will not go over those matters, but I wish to comment on the retrospective nature of some of the powers that this bill will give to the current Temby inquiry. That inquiry will be called into doubt on the grounds of retrospectivity. The powers of an inquiry cannot be amended after the inquiry has commenced. Witnesses who have been called to give evidence cannot be told, "You thought it was an inquiry limited in its scope; it is now an ICAC-style corruption hearing. You were not aware of that at the time. I am sorry, we have changed the legislation." To do so would be unfair of the Government. It is a denial of natural justice to all those who have been involved in the inquiry to date. If those involved in the inquiry go to the Government and seek to change the goalposts after the inquiry has started, that smacks of interference. 11300 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
I refer to section 41X of the Act, which was only introduced in 2003 and proclaimed in 2004. Prior to the introduction of this bill it was never intended that an inquiry should be a corruption-style or ICAC-style inquiry. As the Panthers inquiry is already three-quarters completed, it is simply unfair to seek to change the goalposts now. There is another issue about which I am concerned. I have had a look at some of the transcripts of the Temby inquiry into the Panthers club. The chairman, Mr Temby, is stepping out of his role of facilitator, a judge-like role, into a more prosecutorial role. I refer to page 1386 of the transcript, where the chairman asks:
Q. And you had a pretty good idea at the time that the club was paying for the running of this advertisement did you, Mr Alexander?
A. I didn't think of it.
What a leading question from the chairman! Counsel for the witness then states:
I object to that question. The witness has said he doesn't know and to put it back to him as a presumption that he had a fairly good idea is, in my respectful submission, an unfair question to the witness.
CHAIRMAN: I consider myself to be cross-examining. I think Mr Alexander is handling himself just fine. I am going to press the question.
That is an example of how the chairman of this inquiry is stepping into a prosecutorial role and cross-examining, to use his own word, a witness in the inquiry. Combining that type of approach with this legislation, which seeks to change retrospectively the powers of the inquiry raises matters of concern. Similarly, on page 1698 of the transcript the chairman said:
I am going to press the question, Mr Lynch, and I am going to follow it with some other questions.
A witch-hunt is effectively under way in an attempt to influence the government of the day to produce legislation that will retrospectively give corruption-style powers, ICAC-style powers, to this inquiry. It is about time that members on all sides of politics stood up for their clubs and objected to this treatment.
Mr ADRIAN PICCOLI (Murrumbidgee) [12.40 p.m.]: It is with some displeasure that I speak on the Registered Clubs Legislation Amendment Bill. My displeasure springs from the fact that I am a strong supporter of registered clubs in New South Wales, particularly those in my electorate of Murrumbidgee. Clubs throughout the State provide terrific services and facilities to our communities, and it has been a tragedy to witness the Government's attacks on the clubs movement in the past 18 months. When the Government foreshadowed the introduction of the clubs tax after the 2003 State election we thought it was a fairly general attack and an attempt to tax clubs out of existence and fill the financial black hole in which the Government found itself because of its fiscal mismanagement. But the Government's attack on the clubs has become personal. The Premier, the Treasurer and other senior Government Ministers have launched—
Mr Daryl Maguire: It's more than personal; it's downright dirty.
Mr ADRIAN PICCOLI: Yes, it has become a downright dirty campaign against the clubs. I am not sure whether it was prompted by the Labor Party's ongoing hatred of clubs or the clubs' reactions when the new tax was announced, but the attacks have become personal. This bill is the latest instalment in Labor's hate campaign against the clubs. It relates to the inquiry into Penrith Panthers, but only a few weeks ago the Premier attacked Revesby Workers Club. I would have expected the Labor Party to support that club strongly. After all, it is a club for workers and the sort of institution that traditionally enjoys Labor support. But it seems that no club, including Revesby Workers, is immune from the hatred of the Premier and the Labor Party.
I have before me a copy of a letter penned by Revesby Workers Club in response to an answer that the Premier gave in question time a couple of weeks ago to a question asked by the Leader of The Nationals. In his answer the Premier harshly criticised Revesby Workers Club in the context of an article that had appeared in the local newspaper about a $90 million project involving the club. The Premier verbalised his hatred for the clubs movement, and particularly for Revesby Workers Club, which he ridiculed for its involvement in the project. His response gave us an insight into the force of the Premier's hatred, and that of the Labor Party, for the club movement. Before I quote segments of the club's letter I should point out that its vice-president is Daryl Melham, a Federal Labor member of Parliament, and one of its directors is Pat Rogan, a former Labor member of this place. So honourable members should not make the mistake of thinking this letter is the product of a Coalition-friendly group bent on attacking the Government. The club's senior executives include former and serving Labor members. The letter, dated 9 September, is addressed to the Premier but was sent to all members of Parliament. It states: 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11301
Dear Premier
On Wednesday, 1 September 2004, in response to a question without Notice in State Parliament, you replied to Mr Stoner, Leader of the National Party, during the course of which you made reference to Revesby Workers' Club (RWC) in the context of the unsustainable poker machine tax increase.
It is regrettable that you saw fit to brandish a copy of the local Bankstown Torch newspaper in State Parliament in a misleading attempt to justify the unsustainable poker machine tax increases on medium and large sized clubs.
Premier, these are the facts you omitted from your statement
1. Bankstown City Council requested RWC to produce a 20 year master plan before approval would be given to demolish some old buildings on the RWC site to provide much needed car parking space.
2. This master plan incorporated a development which could only proceed if a partner was found to provide the overwhelming amount of required finance.
3. No decisions have yet been taken on the form of the development, nor whether it would be aged care, strata title apartments or motel style rooms.
4. Whatever type of development is finally agreed upon, it should be viewed as a salvation plan rather than the grandiose $90 million project you sought to infer. Given the Club will be making a forecast loss of $2 million by 2011 due to your Government's tax rate increases, a development of such size or cost is clearly not possible within the scope of RWC's budget forecast.
5. Leasing Club land and becoming a minor partner in any development is the only way any such development can proceed. This is, increasingly, the only option most major clubs have open to them if they are to survive.
6. To meet the first year's payment of the poker machine impost, RWC's Board and management developed a five year business plan. This will mean a reduction in free entertainment and other member benefits to an amount of $1.3 million over the next 12 months.
7. The new Gaming Tax will, over the next seven years, have a devastating effect on the profitability of our Club. This year the Club returned a profit of $3.6 million dollars after allowing for a direct cash contribution of $407, 000, excluding in- kind donations or funding to sporting and community groups. By 2011, under the new tax regime, RWC will, on current gross income allowing for 5% growth, suffer a loss of approximately $2 million.
In discussing the poker machine tax with many colleagues within the Club Industry and Club members, most are appalled at your Government's attacks upon the Club Movement in what most perceive as a vindictive, vicious payback against clubs, incorporating mistruths, distortion of facts and a complete lack of understanding of the worth of local clubs.
It is an old wisdom worth repeating that when your opponents resort to such tactics it means they do not have a very good case or, indeed, the facts supporting their case are, at best, weak and, at worst, untrue.
Yours faithfully
The letter is signed by Edward Camilleri, Chief Executive Officer of the Revesby Workers Club. That letter is indicative of the anger in the club movement in New South Wales and particularly the anger of Revesby Workers Club, which was attacked personally by the Premier of New South Wales, of all people, in this Chamber a couple of weeks ago. The letter is forceful and direct about the club's disgust at the Premier's response, although I believe it is also quite restrained. The Premier lied and misrepresented the facts in this case. That is disgusting. As I have said before, it indicates the Government's hatred—and especially the Premier's hatred—for the club movement.
It is no surprise that when the Premier visits areas of the State—he travelled to Deniliquin in my electorate a few weeks ago—his office says, "No visits to clubs." The Premier either has no wish to visit clubs or knows that he will be greeted by objections and protestors on his arrival. That is how the club movement feels about the Premier. I am certain that the Premier was aware of all the facts set out in the letter from Revesby Workers Club. He knew that the $90 million project was part of a 20-year master plan and that the club's involvement would be only relatively minor—the letter refers to leasing club land. The Premier knew that but in order to express his hatred for clubs, especially Revesby Workers Club, he misrepresented those facts in this place.
I do not know exactly what happens in the Bankstown area, which is nowhere near my electorate. However, if the Premier intended to sell the message that day that all clubs were ravenous multimillion dollar businesses sucking money out of the local economy, he succeeded. I wondered why a club with $90 million to spare would invest in these sorts of things. The Premier put out a message that was deceptive and wrong. I thank the Revesby Workers Club for sending a copy of this letter to all members of Parliament. It enabled people like me to understand the truth behind what the Premier said. 11302 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
After the Labor Party's nine long years in government we know that we cannot believe a word the Premier says. The real damage is done when what was said by the Premier, who is not in the Chamber, gets out into the broader public. The Revesby Workers Club cannot send a letter to six million people in New South Wales to tell them the facts. However, the real damage is done when the Premier claims that all clubs are hopeless, greedy and do not want to pay their fair share of taxes; they do nothing for the community and they are only in it for multimillion developments. The Registered Clubs Legislation Amendment Bill adds insult to injury so far as the clubs movement is concerned. The powers proposed in this bill are extraordinary and, unfortunately, the clubs will be on the receiving end. [Extension of time agreed to.]
The overview of the bill sets out extra powers the Government wants to whack the clubs. It states that the objects of the bill are:
(a) to enable employee organisations— that is, the unions—
to make complaints against registered clubs …
(c) to make it clear that an inquiry under Part 4A of the Registered Clubs Act 1976 may arise out of information or allegations of corrupt or improper conduct by or in relation to a registered club made by any person,
Although the bill contains safety net provisions relating to penalties for providing misleading information, its gives extraordinary powers to anyone who makes any kind of allegation. It is disgusting that the Government wants to give anyone the power to make any sort of allegation against a club to give the Government an excuse to set up an inquiry. The objects of the bill continue:
(d) to clarify the circumstances in which a person presiding at such an inquiry may make findings as to whether there has been corrupt or improper conduct by or in relation to a registered club,
I do not know whether Ian Temby, who is half-way through the Penrith Panthers inquiry, requested that retrospective power so that he could declare that a certain person or persons acted corruptly, or whether the Premier wanted that outcome. Most inquiries are not set up unless the outcome is known. Perhaps the Premier thought it would be terrific to drive home how much he and the Government hate clubs by having Ian Temby declare, at the end of the inquiry, some person or persons corrupt. Perhaps he thought that might send a message to other clubs in New South Wales that the Government is serious about whacking them. Ultimately, the message the Premier is trying to send to the clubs is that they should stop objecting about the poker machine tax.
It is dangerous to give a person presiding over an inquiry such as the Panthers inquiry the power to make findings of corruption, because people are labelled as corrupt that label remains with them forever. The Opposition wants corrupt people identified and brought to justice. No-one claims that corruption is acceptable. However, allegations of corruption, misconduct, fraud or any type of illegal behaviour are serious allegations, and they should remain within the courts where there is a high standard of proof. In a politically charged inquiry it will be easy for a person conducting the inquiry to label people as corrupt. That label will remain with them forever. That is why I am extremely concerned about giving such power to a person conducting an inquiry. This legislation is politically charged. It seeks to fulfil a political objective, and that is why the Government has introduced it. The objects of the bill continue:
(h) to extend the current powers of the Director with respect to investigation of grounds for complaints against registered clubs to other matters for which action may be taken under the Registered Clubs Act 1976.
I understand from public statements by the Minister that paragraph (j) of the overview in relation to costs will be removed. However, it states:
(j) to enable the Director to recover the reasonable costs of an inquiry or investigation from a registered club or a licensee, manager, close associate or non-proprietary association within the meaning of the Liquor Act 1982.
That would have meant that a club that had findings made against it after an inquiry would be forced to pay reasonable costs. Although I understand that the Minister will move an amendment to remove that paragraph, it is illustrative of the thinking behind the original draft bill. The only reason the Minister intends to remove it is because of the public outcry that has resulted from its inclusion in this bill. But we know what the Government wanted to do: it wanted to whack clubs and threaten them with the possible payment of hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs. I understand that Penrith Panthers Rugby League Club has already racked up bills of several hundred thousand dollars, and to force clubs to pay costs is a good scare tactic to use against them. The objects continue: 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11303
(l) to enable the disclosure of information arising out of, or relating to, the administration of the Gaming Machine Tax Act 2001 if, in the opinion of the Minister or Treasurer, it is in the public interest to do so,
(m) to give a defence of absolute privilege in proceedings for defamation in relation to disclosures to or by the Minister or Director of a report of an inquiry under Part 4A of the Registered Clubs Act 1976,
They are some of the powers provided for in the legislation, and that is why the Opposition will not support it. Together with many other people, including those in club associations, I have grave concerns about this bill. We are also gravely concerned about the reason the Government hates clubs, and why it is doing everything it can to destroy the club movement in New South Wales.
Debate adjourned on motion by Mrs Shelley Hancock.
[Madam Acting-Speaker (Ms Marie Andrews) left the chair at 1.00 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]
CONSIDERATION OF URGENT MOTIONS
Stanwell Tops Paintball Recreation Facility Development Application
Mr PAUL McLEAY (Heathcote) [2.16 p.m.]: It is urgent that this House consider a motion calling on Wollongong City Council to reject a plan to build a paintball recreation facility at Stanmore Tops, next to Illawarra's largest wildlife sanctuary, Symbio Wildlife Gardens. This wildlife reserve is an important community asset that has been operation for 35 years. Now it is under dire threat because a neighbouring allotment is the proposed site of a development application for a paintball facility. Such a facility would have adverse impacts not only on the amenity of the area but particularly on the wildlife, including many endangered species. Last Friday night the Wollongong City Council again deferred for a month a decision on that development application. We need to make our opposition to that development very clear.
Country Week
Mr ANDREW STONER (Oxley—Leader of The Nationals) [2.18 p.m.]: The success of Country Week is extremely urgent because of the great value of such initiatives to regional development in New South Wales. The matter is urgent because, as Sydney is growing at an estimated 1,000 people a week, initiatives such as Country Week are vital to encouraging business and population growth outside the Sydney basin. This issue is urgent because the goals of Country Week—to create new industry, commerce, employment and population growth in country areas of the State—are so vital to balanced and sustainable growth in New South Wales.
Without doubt, the inaugural Country Week was a resounding success. I am extremely happy that Country Week will be an annual event on the Sydney calendar. That will go a long way to fostering among Sydneysiders awareness of the many opportunities that country New South Wales has to offer. The matter is urgent because 7,500 people—99 per cent of them Sydney residents—attended the expo at Sydney Olympic Park in mid-August. The vast majority of those people expressed an interest in living or working in country New South Wales. Almost half of those who attended the Country Week Expo were couples with children keen to look into opportunities in rural and regional areas. They were keen to take advantage of the cheaper real estate and reduced commuting times. They are also keen to enjoy the lifestyle benefits of rural and regional areas, such as the pace of life and the healthier environment in which to bring up their children.
This matter is urgent because it is vital that the New South Wales Government now works to tap into this level of interest. Country New South Wales has a great story to tell. It is a fantastic place in which to invest, live and work, and that is a message that governments must sell. The matter is urgent because hundreds of teachers, nurses, dentists, social workers, accountants, plumbers, carpenters, electricians, builders and engineers expressed at Country Week an interest in relocating to country New South Wales. As my country colleagues would know only too well, there is a desperate shortage of many of those professions and trades in rural and regional areas. The organisers of Country Week have identified an interest among such workers for a life outside Sydney. So the Government must work on selling the message.
Following on from the success of Country Week, I note that the Dubbo community has banded together to host "Dubbo Open for Inspection". The local development corporation has been in touch with my office regarding this initiative. The Dubbo Development Corporation is asking Sydneysiders to ponder why they should "wait in peak-hour traffic, or travel on congested public transport to get to work, when in Dubbo you can be at work in 10 minutes, park out the back of your office, and still get an espresso coffee on your way". Like 11304 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Country Week, Open for Inspection provides a fantastic opportunity for Sydneysiders to see first-hand the fantastic lifestyle and business and job opportunities that exist in Dubbo. Local real estate agents, employment agencies and lifestyle services will be on hand to provide visitors with information about all aspects of life in this bustling regional city.
The motion is urgent because the Open for Inspection Program initiated by the Dubbo community has set up a web site. I encourage honourable members to have a look at www.dubbo.com.au/openforinspection. I note that recently the organisers have inserted a double page spread in the Sydney Daily Telegraph. Open for Inspection is a great opportunity for Sydneysiders to discover the benefits of living, working and doing business in a terrific country community like Dubbo. Open for Inspection will be held this weekend. I encourage all Sydneysiders to jump in their cars or on the train to have a look at what Dubbo has to offer. Rex and Qantas Link fly into Dubbo airport. It is urgent because, while we have initiatives such as Dubbo Open for Inspection and Country Week preceding that, which go a long way to overcoming the perceived barriers of residing in or establishing a business outside of Sydney, the State Government also must do its bit to overcome the real barriers.
Unfortunately, a raft of recent decisions, such as cancelling the Casino to Murwillumbah rail service, the slashing of business assistance grants and other programs run by the Department of State and Regional Development, the deferral of country towns water supply and sewerage funding, extension of the land tax net, and the new stamp duty provisions do not help regional development, nor do they encourage job opportunities and economies in country New South Wales. Country Week is an example of what co-operation can achieve. I urge the Government to support this motion.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Urgent Motions: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders
Motion by Mr Carl Scully agreed to:
That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow both motions for urgent consideration to proceed at this sitting.
STANWELL TOPS PAINTBALL RECREATION FACILITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Urgent Motion
Mr PAUL McLEAY (Heathcote) [2.24 p.m.]: I move:
That this House calls on Wollongong City Council to reject the plan to build a paintball recreation facility at Stanwell Tops next to Illawarra's largest wildlife sanctuary, Symbio Wildlife Gardens.
Symbio Wildlife Gardens at Stanwell Tops, which has existed for about 35 years, is an important facility located in my electorate. The current owner and administrator, John Radnidge, purchased the zoo and wildlife sanctuary approximately four years ago. Although Symbio Wildlife Gardens is a wildlife sanctuary—it has a crocodile pit—John Radnidge is no Steve Irwin. He is a community-minded professional businessman who believes in ecology and animal welfare. He has the support and high regard of his community. Some 2½ years ago one of his neighbours submitted a development application [DA] for a paintball facility to be located just one property away from the centre and on a level access, which would impact severely on his ability to run his business.
Last Friday Wollongong City Council deferred its decision on the DA. The owners of Symbio and the community were outraged. After two years and two months the applicants asked for a deferral to enable them to provide further information. John Radnidge cannot get any acceptable information from the council. He and his park, for which he takes responsibility, have the most to lose. The community has been galvanised. The first roundtable discussions were held in November last year, following which strong representations were made about the impact of the DA. People are concerned about the amenity of the area, noise, the adverse impact of the development on Symbio and the wildlife, environmental degradation, traffic, the need for such an activity and much more. Another roundtable discussion was held in August this year and they had to go through it all again, but still nothing has happened.
The residents and Symbio's owners feel that nothing has happened. They still have no answers from the council. The applicants were supposed to provide responses to these concerns, but nothing has happened. Symbio's owners organised a public rally, which was held two Saturdays ago. Nearly 500 people attended the 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11305 rally. They have submitted petitions to council, which have been circulating for only two weeks and already they have more than 3,000 signatures. Public support is enormous. But they have had no feedback from the council. The silence is deafening. Why is it that only last week council deferred a decision because they want to carry out sound testing? Why was this not done 2½ years ago? Symbio has conducted an aggressive, yet community-focused, campaign to get the information out to the people. Clearly, overall public support demonstrates that. The people of Stanwell Park do not want war games next to a wildlife sanctuary, nor do the people of Helensburgh, the Sutherland shire, Wollongong, the South Coast and all areas of Sydney, particularly Western Sydney, where many of the visitors come from.
There are even international examples of people who do not want war games next to a wildlife sanctuary. John Radnidge has had emails of support from New Zealand, England and across the world. He has had support from Alan Jones, who aired his views and concerns on several occasions on Sydney radio. John Laws has taken up his case. He has had support from radio station 2WS. Headlines have blazed across the regions in the Illawarra Mercury, the Northern Daily Leader the St George and Sutherland Shire Leader, the Helensburgh Pictorial News and others. Even the Liberal candidate for Cunningham supports the protection of Symbio.
It is important to note that the Sutherland Shire Environment Centre has lent its support, as do all members of Parliament from the Illawarra—the Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business; the honourable member for Wollongong; the honourable member for Illawarra; and the honourable member for Kiama, together with the Labor members of Parliament from the Sutherland shire, the honourable member for Miranda and the honourable member for Menai, as well as other members who will speak to the motion. A Skirmish paintball facility already exists just two kilometres away from the sanctuary, but because it is geographically located in an isolated valley and has been there since 1993, it does not present problems or have an adverse impact on neighbours or on the environment that the proposed centre would have.
Symbio was established in 1975 as a small wildlife park and has developed to become a prominent wildlife sanctuary and tourism facility. It is set among 16 acres of natural bushland with more than 1,000 animals. Symbio places an emphasis on allowing visitors to have a personal experience with animals who are allowed to touch, feed and enjoy many native animals in their natural surroundings. It plays a vital community role. The sanctuary has a program for conservation of unique Australian wildlife. It offers a home for injured and orphaned animals and provides a home for some of Australia's endangered and vulnerable wildlife, such as koalas and cassowaries, which are similar to a large emus. It is estimated that there are only 1,200 cassowaries left in the world, and that those remaining birds face extinction owing to habitat destruction. I ask honourable members to note the irony of that. The sanctuary also houses two tiger quolls that have successfully bred. Tiger quolls are similar to the Tasmanian tiger and are also a critically endangered species. The sanctuary also houses critically endangered spider monkeys from South America.
Symbio provides an environment where people can spend the day with their family and enjoy a picnic at the barbecue area and facilities such as swimming pools. The sanctuary's trained keepers understand time limitations and have programs to facilitate enjoyable visits. A diverse range of visitors can be entertained at the sanctuary, including families, preschoolers, high school students, university students, TAFE students, senior citizens and special needs groups, and the educational programs play an important role in conservation. Visitors are able to enjoy an up close and personal experience with wildlife and are welcome to take photographs as mementos of their visit. There are thousands of Australian native, farmyard and exotic animals on 16 acres of natural bushland and parkland.
Recently the sanctuary was rated as Australia's best wildlife experience. The sanctuary is a 45-minute drive from the Sydney central business district. It is just south of Sutherland and borders on the world famous Royal National Park. It is situated in a part of the world that is very tranquil and famous for coastal villages, arts, crafts, award-winning beaches, rainforests, Kellys Falls and the famous Bald Hill hang gliding. All Labor members are playing their part in promoting northern Illawarra villages, especially while they are experiencing two years of road closures associated with the rebuilding of Lawrence Hargrave Drive. Tourism Wollongong and New South Wales Tourism have focused on the northern towns of the Illawarra area. The area also will benefit from a $2 million Roads and Traffic Authority centre. Symbio has created a relationship of mutual benefit with wildlife and is recognised for doing so. An article by Bruce Elder in the Sydney Morning Herald in 2002 states:
There is always considerable charm in artless simplicity. The Symbio Wildlife Gardens, located on Lawrence Hargrave Drive just off the F6 freeway... [is one of them.] Symbio is a near perfect example of an unpretentious zoo designed to give hands-on 11306 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
access to kangaroos and young farm animals. The emphasis is on the everyday rather than the exceptional, with sections for wallaroos, red kangaroos, swamp wallabies, emus, echidnas, wombats and dingoes...
This is the perfect destination for people wanting to pat a kangaroo, show overseas visitors a close view of Australia's funny animals, and everyone who wants to rediscover the simple pleasures of farm pets and other friendly creatures.
On 7 September the Illawarra Mercury reported on how things have changed. The article states, "One of the Illawarra's top tourist attractions will have its licence reviewed if a neighbouring paintball operation receives the green light next month." Fears expressed for the future of Symbio Wildlife Gardens by its managing director received credibility after the Illawarra Mercury contacted the State Government. The article states:
If [Symbio] was unable to negate adverse impacts on animal welfare arising from the paintball operation then it may place continuation of its licence at risk.
Those comments were made by the exhibited animals registrar of the Department of Primary Industries, Matthew Crane, in response to the community taking up the fight to make sure that commonsense prevails. He also said that if the paintball operation detracts from visitor amenity, Symbio may experience briefer visiting times and other issues.
A stop must be put to this nonsense. I call on the Wollongong City Council to reject this inappropriate development application. Symbio needs closure and finalisation of the matter. Since Mr Radnidge took over approximately four years ago, nearly $1 million has been invested in updating the park. Let us prevent Symbio going the way of the Australian Wildlife Park at Wonderland, Blue Gum Farm Zoo at Milperra, Waratah Park at Castle Hill, and several other North Coast parks. We must make sure that the sanctuary is protected and its future assured. I hope that the Wollongong City Council will exercise some commonsense.
Ms PETA SEATON (Southern Highlands) [2.34 p.m.]: There is no doubt that Symbio is one of the Illawarra's iconic tourism sites. The people of the Illawarra are extremely proud of the centre, which draws 150,000 visitors to the region a year. It is one of the most attractive destinations to people who are visiting from metropolitan Sydney or overseas. Symbio provides 15 full-time jobs and is a place where many volunteers attend to assist in caring for animals. Those people take a great interest in conservation and they want to play their part in preserving Australian native wildlife. I have had the pleasure of meeting Mr Radnidge and some residents of properties near Symbio. I did so at the request and invitation of the Liberal Party candidate for the Federal electorate of Cunningham, John Larter, who is very concerned about the future of Symbio. He arranged a meeting to seek help for the operators of Symbio in tackling what they regard as a very grave risk to the future of this wonderful wildlife park.
I have also received representations from one person who is associated with the proposal to whom I expressed my concerns and the concerns of people who are advocating in favour of the continuation of the Symbio wildlife park. It was a pleasure to meet with Mr Radnidge, who is undoubtedly a passionate defender of Australian native wildlife. He is very keen to ensure that a facility such as Symbio provides an educational resource for school children and people from throughout Australia while at the same time providing an opportunity, as the honourable member for Heathcote mentioned, for visitors to Australia to have personal experience of Australian wildlife. It is very important that wildlife facilities that are within easy reach of Sydney are never placed in doubt or have their future under threat. I am aware that rallies have taken place, which indicates a good deal of community concern over the future of Symbio as a result of the development proposal.
I gave an undertaking to Mr Radnidge and others to do whatever I can to help them make the case for the future of Symbio and to ensure that all available information is accessible so that the council will reject the proposal on merit. It is worth noting that not long ago the Federal Government made a substantial grant to Symbio so that a crocodile exhibit could be built and maintained. I understand that the new exhibit has become the centrepiece of the park and has resulted in return visits that would not otherwise have occurred. If the future of Symbio is placed at risk by the paintball proposal, the prospect of future Federal grants will also be placed at risk. Another major player that can provide Symbio with a great deal of help is the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and the Minister for Primary Industries, if he is so inclined. Symbio operates only by virtue of a licence that is issued by the Department Primary Industries. I understand that the conditions of the licence are very detailed and specific. If any threat is exposed to the environmental conditions under which animals are housed and exhibited, the future of Symbio's licence is also placed at risk, and it is possible that the department will refuse to renew the licence.
Environmental conditions affecting the licence include noise pollution. As all honourable members know, the wellbeing, longevity and successful breeding programs associated with Australian native wildlife are 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11307 closely linked to the quality of the environment in which they are housed. Stress that may be created by activities and noise emanating from the paintball centre certainly will have a detrimental effect on the wellbeing, longevity and breeding capacity of animals in captivity, according to expert scientific opinion. Symbio Wildlife Gardens is under threat on many levels. We are concerned to ensure that there is no threat to it in the long term, and that the development of any situation that impacts negatively on the gardens be given short shrift by the council.
In order to assist Mr Radnidge, concerned residents and volunteers, I undertook to do a number of things: first, I wrote to the Minister for Local Government, Tony Kelly, regarding the conditions of the licence issued by the Department of Primary Industries. I set out the reasons for concern and asked him for further details in relation to the conditions of the licence so that we can be sure that Wollongong City Council has all the necessary information it needs to make the right decision. Second, as the Federal Government had given a generous grant to the sanctuary, I wrote to the Federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage, alerting him to this new threat to Symbio's future.
Third, I wrote to the Lord Mayor of Wollongong, Alex Darling, advising him that I had taken those two steps and giving him the information I had that would assist council to make the right decision, to make sure that Symbio's future is assured. I have not visited Symbio and I look forward to doing so in the near future. It is absolutely essential that nothing should put its licence at risk. The honourable member for Heathcote mentioned Lawrence Hargrave Drive. Symbio is one of many important tourism facilities and businesses in Stanwell Park and Stanwell Tops that are accessed along that roadway. However, as a result of the Government's neglect of Lawrence Hargrave Drive over many years, that roadway has been forced to close for 2½ years and businesses in Stanwell Park, including Symbio, will be negatively impacted on during that period.
If the Carr Government truly supported tourism it would have ensured that that road never fell into such a poor state of disrepair that it had to be closed. The Government should do everything within its power to accelerate the restitution of Lawrence Hargrave Drive. I have met businesspeople from the area who have had to close their business, people who have had to make dramatic changes to their lifestyle, people who have had to make changes to the places at which their children are educated, people who are suffering extreme financial and other stresses as a result of the closure of that road. Symbio is a tourism icon in the Illawarra and it is absolutely essential that we provide whatever information is necessary to Wollongong City Council to ensure that it makes the right decision and that there is no doubt over the future of that wonderful facility.
Mr BARRY COLLIER (Miranda) [2.42 p.m.]: Bang! Bang! Bang! That is the sound that visitors to Symbio Wildlife Gardens at Stanwell Tops will hear if Wollongong City Council approves plans for a war-game paintball park nearby. That is the sound that will frighten native animals, birds and reptiles, as well as the thousands of tiny tots who visit that serene, natural habitat with their parents or grandparents. That is the sound of air rifles, incessant yelling and screaming by war-game participants that will turn away many visitors from the shire, the Illawarra, Sydney and overseas. That is the sound that will affect the 150,000 visitors to Symbio annually. That is the sound that will cause unnecessary distress to animals and their young. That is the sound that will interfere with their breeding and will adversely impact on the threatened and endangered species that are protected at the park, including red-tailed black cockatoos, gang-gang cockatoos, a cassowary and two extremely rare tiger quolls. That is the sound that will cause Symbio, the people's park, to close.
Action Paintball Games wants to set up an operation adjacent to Symbio. It has a development application before Wollongong council. If that application is approved Symbio will be forced to close. Symbio, which has operated for 30 years and has survived the downturn in foreign visitors to Sydney following the September 11 attacks and the Christmas 2002 bushfires, will be forced to close because a war-game paintball operator wants to set up adjacent to it. One of my constituents, Ms Heidi McLachlan of Gymea Bay, wrote:
I am writing to express my concerns about a paintball "war game" park wanting to be approved near the site of the Symbio Wildlife Gardens at Stanwell Tops, because I work as a Volunteer Zookeeper there. If this paintball park is approved it will force Symbio to close for good … If it is approved the animals that call Symbio home would be forced to leave, none of these animals can be returned to the wild due to living in captivity for all or most of their lives. Symbio also helps in rehabilitating many sick and injured wildlife. They also take in pets … that no longer can be kept by their owners. Another reason is that Symbio has just upgraded many of their enclosures …
Where else … can you pat a koala, feed a kangaroo or feed a baby goat?? I think closing the park will also disadvantage the public. Symbio provides the public with invaluable amounts of animal and environmental knowledge, which is … shown through the many shows commenced throughout the course of the day. I see many families arrive and depart Symbio with a giant smile on their face. Isn't this saying something? I see many little children with their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and grandparents come to Symbio for a family day out. You can see the excitement on their little faces as the baby goats run out of their pen and try to drink out of the bottle given to them by a keeper …
As you can see Symbio is a very hands on Wildlife Park … if it is forced to close it would be a shame. 11308 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
On 11 September, 200 people attended a Save Our Symbio Rally at the park. Young and old, they expressed their opposition to the proposed war-game paintball operation near Symbio. Their fears about the impact of that operation on Symbio and its animals are well founded. On 10 September the Illawarra Mercury stated:
The Department of Primary Industries has warned that Symbio's licence to exhibit animals would be at risk if it could not stop negative impacts on the animals from the paintball operation.
That department is responsible for licensing the Symbio Wildlife Gardens. On 6 September the department's registrar, Mr Matthew Crane, is reported in the Illawarra Mercury as suggesting:
The action which Symbio would have to take to minimise distress to animals could involve constructing soundproof walls, increasing veterinary attention to animals, reconfiguring the park layout, or disposing of its more sensitive animals.
To suggest that Symbio, that long-established wildlife park, should bear the costs of negating the impacts of a paintball operation on its animals, to the point of getting rid of them, is just plain crazy. The onus of proof must always be on the paintball outfit to show it would have absolutely no impact on Symbio. The best way to ensure that, of course, is for Wollongong City Council to reject the application. Mrs Kim Hall, a resident of Helensburgh, told me that her two children, Jackson and Samara, just love their visits to Symbio. She pointed out that a paintball operation is already in operation 2½ kilometres down the road. So do not feel sorry for the paintball operators or participants. Clearly, Wollongong City Council has every reason to reject this outrageous proposal for a paintball operation adjacent to Symbio. The adverse impact on animals and wildlife is enough in itself, without the loss of jobs, tourism and the amenity it would cause. Wollongong's Lord Mayor, Alex Darling, should bite the bullet and reject this ridiculous proposal. I have written to the Mayor as well as to the Minister for the Illawarra and to the Minister for Local Government seeking their support on this issue.
Ms PAM ALLAN (Wentworthville) [2.47 p.m.]: I congratulate the honourable member for Heathcote on raising this important matter in the House. It is no coincidence that it tends to be Labor members, including those presently in the Chamber, who are active and vocal proponents for a number of local environmental issues. For example, yesterday the honourable member for Campbelltown took the opportunity to assist the Government by announcing a State protection area for the Wedderburn koala colony. Of course, there has been no shortage of environmental issues in the Illawarra. The Government has had a history of protecting endangered species in the area where the privately run Symbio Wildlife Gardens now operates. There is unanimity across the Chamber that Symbio should continue its successful operation.
No-one has used this opportunity to rubbish paintball as a recreational activity. Although I have not participated in any paintball activities, I am not opposed to it per se. However, as the honourable member for Miranda said earlier, a number of noise and pollution problems will occur as a result of that facility being located adjacent to a wildlife facility. In this case, according to the owners of the wildlife sanctuary, the State government licensing authority, which is responsible for issuing licences for this sanctuary, is concerned that the licence may not be able to be continued if the paintball facility is approved. Wollongong City Council has a fine record of environmental protection. Over the years it has been active in its protection for the escarpment and in assisting in the protection of endangered species in the Illawarra region.
My colleagues, Opposition members and I call on Wollongong City Council to seriously consider the development application for the paintball facility before it decides to take any further action. It is a hard road for private wildlife sanctuaries. We have several popular sanctuaries in the Sydney metropolitan area and in the outer metropolitan area. We have the koala park sanctuary at West Pennant Hills and Featherdale Wildlife Park near Blacktown. Unfortunately, the wildlife park that was linked to Australia's Wonderland closed recently. Those parks, which have an important function in our community, are attractive for tourists and for families. In the past three months I visited the koala park with my daughter and I was quite impressed by that facility. However, it still needs—presumably as does Symbio—a huge commitment by its owners to ensure that appropriate facilities and investment are provided and that the animals in its care are looked after.
Symbio, like the koala park, has koalas but it also has tiger quolls and other endangered species, as my colleague the honourable member for Heathcote already mentioned. In the past few years it has contributed almost three-quarters of million dollars towards upgrading the facility after the current owner, John Radnidge, assumed ownership. These people, who are investing a lot of money in this facility, are already performing an important service for the area because many families and tourists are visiting it. According to recent publicity, a group of Korean journalists rated it as the best wildlife experience in Australia. Other Asian visitors rank it as amongst the best in New South Wales.
There has been an enormous amount of investment in this facility but there obviously needs to be more. More protection must also be given to the animals that are located in that facility. Symbio's owners have huge 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11309 ambitions and plans for the provision of educational programs and for the extension of their crocodile exhibit into a major reptile facility. We, as a Government, should certainly be encouraging them. Their task will be made much more difficult if this paintball facility is given approval by Wollongong City Council. My colleagues and I urge Wollongong City Council not to approve the location of this facility adjacent to the wildlife sanctuary. Let us give this sanctuary a better go. It is already doing a marvellous job. We want it to improve and we want to be able to ensure that families in the Illawarra area have the sort of recreational and environmental facility that they deserve.
Mr PAUL McLEAY (Heathcote) [2.52 p.m.], in reply: I thank all honourable members who spoke in debate on this urgent motion. In summary, the honourable member for Southern Highlands said that there is no doubt that this site is an icon in the Illawarra region. She appeared to be knowledgeable about many aspects relating to this wildlife preservation facility and she was aware of the impact that the proposed paintball facility would have on the 150,000 visitors, 100 staff and the many volunteers at that park. The honourable member was also aware of the recent public rally, the fact that other political players have been making their voices heard, and the fact that there is support for Mr Radnidge and others. She claimed that she has given Mr Radnidge a commitment that if council rejects the paintball facility development application on merit she will do what she can to assist the wildlife facility, which is pleasing. She said that Symbio was under threat and that she had made representations to the appropriate Ministers, for which I thank her.
As always, the honourable member for Miranda did a lot of research before speaking in debate on this motion. He has spoken to me on several occasions about this issue, in particular, when it was first referred to in the local shire papers. He referred to endangered species and to the impact that the proposed paintball facility will have on jobs, children and their families. He referred also to the outrage that had been expressed in the shire and he said that he had made representations to the Minister. My colleague the honourable member for Wentworthville, a former environment Minister who has a good understanding of this area, said that Wollongong City Council had a fine record in environmental protection but she had called on it to address this issue seriously before it took any further action. As she said, it is a hard road for private wildlife facilities. She called on Wollongong City Council to reject the development application, for which I thank her.
If a private company wanted to establish a wildlife sanctuary next to a paintball facility it would be laughed out of town. However, in this case the application is for a paintball war games facility to operate next to a wildlife sanctuary. Council is going through the motions and it is granting all the exemptions and extensions that appear to be required. If it were the other way around such a facility would not even get a look in. A paintball facility wishes to operate war games next to a wildlife sanctuary and council is going through the appropriate motions. The existing operator who has been in that area for nearly 35 years is the person who is being penalised. The Department of Primary Industries said:
Licensing conditions and standards require the licensee to ensure the welfare of the animals in their collection and to provide various visitor facilities. The licensee is concerned that the proposed paintball operation will adversely impact on the welfare of the animals and on the amenity of visitors.
To meet its legislated responsibility the licensee of Symbio will have to take action if the paintball operation causes distress to animals. This could conceivably involve construction of soundproof walls, increased frequency of veterinary attention, a need to reconfigure the layout of the park and perhaps it being forced to dispose of its more sensitive animals.
The Animal Welfare Unit of the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries licenses animal displays such as Symbio and monitors the welfare of exhibit animals via a regime of inspectors and reviews of animals and veterinary records maintained by the exhibitors. Adverse impacts on the animals can be revealed by behavioural abnormalities, for example, increased fear, panic aggression, lethargy and other stereotypes and increases in disease and injury and/or death rates in the animal collection.
If the paintball operator detracts from visitor amenities, Symbio may experience briefer visitation times, lower repeat visitation and possibly an overall decline. It is apparent that Symbio is highly concerned about the situation and it is prepared to do what it can to ensure that it meets its prescribed welfare standards. However, if it is unable to negate adverse impacts on animal welfare arising from the paintball operation then it may place the continuation of its licence at risk. The New South Wales Department of Primary Industries is unable to licence exhibits that do not or cannot comply with required welfare standards.
Therefore, we find ourselves in this perverse situation. An existing community-minded, family-run and ecological business is being placed at risk because a developer who is located 100 metres away wants to destroy it for his own ends. I call on Wollongong City Council to display some commonsense.
Motion agreed to. 11310 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
COUNTRY WEEK
Urgent Motion
Mr ANDREW STONER (Oxley—Leader of The Nationals) [2.58 p.m.]: I move:
That this House:
(1) notes the resounding success of Country Week and congratulates the organisers; and
(2) calls on the Labor Government to tap into the interest shown by thousands of Sydney residents in moving to country New South Wales and to better encourage population and business growth in rural and regional New South Wales.
I have often said, as many country people do, that there are a great number of benefits to be derived from living and working in country New South Wales. Another thing that I have said, and that many other people will also say, especially those in the country, is that we need in this State a vision for the decentralisation of the population and the economic opportunities that go with that right around the State. Sydney has water shortages, traffic congestion, waste disposal, pollution problems and so on. Yet every week 1,000 people move to the city. Maybe the solution to Sydney's woes would also solve some of the problems of country New South Wales. We should pursue proactively decentralisation policies that will encourage people to live and work in country areas. That is why this motion congratulates the organisers of Country Week.
Country Week was a promotion—an expo—held last month at Homebush at which various shires throughout regional and rural New South Wales were given the opportunity to sell to a metropolitan audience the benefits of living and working in those communities. Every year city people flock to the Royal Easter Show—they love the country—to see the animals and produce from all parts of the State. It is the best produce in the State and therefore the best in Australia and the world. Country Week allowed the shires, via various displays, to provide information about community life in rural and regional New South Wales.
Participating shires included Armidale, Barraba, Bathurst, Berridale, Bingara, Boorowa, Condobolin, Cooma, Coonabarabran, Dubbo, Glen Innes, Severn in the Glen Innes area, Gunnedah, Guyra, Inverell, Manilla, Moree, Muswellbrook, Nambucca, Nundle, Oberon, Orange, Singleton, Tamworth, Taree, Uralla and Warialda. Each of those places had great stories to tell about relatively stress-free country lifestyles—no worries about traffic jams, crowded public transport or the impact of pollution and the like on young children. It is a great lifestyle for families, businesses and anyone else who chooses to move out of the city. The shires sold themselves brilliantly and, as a result, Country Week was an outstanding success. Some 7,500 people visited the expo and looked at the displays of produce and the various facilities available in townships around the State.
As I said, the promotion was a huge success and I will mention the organisers by name because they deserve our congratulations. Peter and Jenny Bailey, Peter Lloyd, Graeme Mitchell, Alan Hardy, Dave Crosston, John McFarlane and Jim Bellshaw displayed tremendous initiative and worked hard to get Country Week off the ground. Their work is continuing through the efforts of communities such as Dubbo, which has launched a spin- off campaign on the back of the expo's huge success. I acknowledge the efforts of the State Government in helping to fund Country Week. I understand that the Director-General of the Department of State and Regional Development, Loftus Harris, offered great assistance to the organisers. I also congratulate the Minister for Regional Development on his involvement. Country Week is all about selling the huge positives that life in country New South Wales has to offer. I will quote from the responses of some Country Week participants. Wayne Cooper from the Oberon shire said:
Fantastic … Mind blowing. People in Sydney are very disillusioned.
Andrew Mitchell from Boorowa said:
Outstanding. Bad luck for those who didn't come. We'll be first in next year.
Dallas Byrnes, who represented the Cooma-Monaro and Snowy River shires, said:
Very positive. We have the situation where we are sending additional information to 300 people, all of whom have made genuine inquiries.
Kevin Anderson from New England Health said:
We've been delighted and overwhelmed with the genuine inquiries from people interested in changing their lifestyle. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11311
Jeff Caldbeck from Dubbo said:
The response has been mind-blowing, to say the least.
Sally Taylor, a local government representative from the electorate of the honourable member for Orange, was also part of the expo. She described the event as "Overwhelming … very positive." That is only a sample of the reactions from participating shires. Glen Inglis from Tamworth said:
Very pleased and impressed with the response. There have been many genuine inquiries and we are now in discussion with six companies interested in moving to the Tamworth area.
What a success story and a great way of encouraging people to consider living in country New South Wales. Interestingly, Bernard Salt, the demographic forecaster and commentator, has coined the term "tree change"—as opposed to "sea change"—to describe people who are interested in moving west of the range. Although coastal shires and areas were represented at the expo, there was also strong representation from communities west of the range. A tree change is occurring as people discover the beauty of inland New South Wales and of townships such as Orange, Dubbo, Bathurst, Tamworth and Armidale—I could go on and on. They are beautiful places to live with great climates, great produce and great opportunities for young families. That was the story told at Country Week.
I mentioned that the Dubbo City Development Corporation has organised a spin-off event following the success of Country Week. It is conducting a targeted media campaign "Dubbo: Open for Inspection", and this weekend real estate agents and others will continue to sell the benefits of living in a great regional community like Dubbo. Some positive initiatives have been taken and The Nationals would like to see this trend continue. We would like to see government make a greater commitment to country New South Wales. It could start by having a vision of decentralising the State and telling people that opportunities are available in rural and regional New South Wales. We must get infrastructure issues right. This week water is a very topical issue. A lack of water will limit a country centre's ability to grow—townships without the requisite water capacity will be unable to sustain population growth. We must consider infrastructure issues such as water and transport, whether road or rail. We need policies that recognise the efforts of companies that are willing either to grow in regional areas or to move to the regions. As I said, Tamworth has lined up six businesses that want to move to that city.
I note that the Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business is in the Chamber and obviously intends to contribute to this debate. His department can play a major role in this area and I am pleased that it has offered some assistance to Multinail Australia Pty Ltd, which is a successful business in my community of Wauchope. That is the sort of assistance we need to underpin growth in regional areas and to underpin the vision of decentralisation. We need jobs, services and facilities in the bush. With the assistance of positive programs such as Country Week, we will be able to sustain strong growth in rural and regional New South Wales.
[Debate interrupted.]
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Urgent Motion: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders
Motion by Mr David Campbell agreed to:
That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow an additional two speakers to the motion for urgent consideration.
COUNTRY WEEK
Urgent Motion
[Debate resumed.]
Mr DAVID CAMPBELL (Keira—Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business) [3.08 p.m.]: I move:
That the motion be amended by leaving out paragraph (2) with a view to inserting instead: 11312 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
(2) congratulates the Government for tapping into interest shown by thousands of residents in moving to country New South Wales through its support for Country Week and its support for regional business growth in country New South Wales.
The Government has strongly supported Country Week, which I was fortunate enough to launch at Parliament House in February. I did so because the Government is committed to country New South Wales and to supporting jobs growth in regional New South Wales. Nearly 1.7 million people live, work and raise families in country New South Wales, which is a significant contributor to business and industry across the State. The theme of Country Week—"A fresh new start for you and your family"—was entirely appropriate. It was a grassroots strategy driven by the private sector to encourage regional growth and to highlight the benefits of moving to regional areas. The Government contributed $100,000 to Country Week to ensure that the expo held at Homebush Bay a few weeks ago could go ahead. On 30 August Peter and Jenny Bailey, the driving force behind Country Week, wrote to me at its conclusion this year. They stated:
Dear David,
I write to thank you for all you have done for us since you launched the Country Week concept in February and which culminated in the very successful Country Week Expo.
You may have caught up with some of the media relating to the event which exceeded our wildest expectations in terms of the numbers of people attending and the fact that the vast majority of them were there to check out the details of a relocation rather than just "having a look". All that coupled with the fact that we have since had word of actual relocations taking place vindicate our decision to run with the idea. With such great results, we plan to run the whole program again next year with many new ideas to enhance it even further.
We thank you for all the interviews you gave which contributed to such a successful event. We trust we may have the opportunity to work together again next year on what has been a very exciting outcome for regional New South Wales.
Would you please pass on our thanks to Agnes, Ingrid and your Department staff for their amazing support. We could not have achieved the results without them.
I acknowledge the comments of the Leader of The Nationals, who congratulated me, the Government and the Department of State and Regional Development on their support of Country Week. I will certainly support a similar concept next year and look forward to working with the organisers. The commitment of the Carr Labor Government to regional jobs growth and regional development does not begin and end with Country Week. That is only part of a suite of initiatives that we support to encourage growth.
Through our network of regional development boards—most particularly the Murray Regional Development Board, in consultation and conjunction with the Central West Regional Development Board—the Government has pledged support for the establishment of a Seachange Bureau, which is a play on words. It is about working with those two regional development boards and local government authorities such as Griffith, Tumut and Coolamon councils, with funding from the Government's Country Lifestyles Program, to ensure that there is a Seachange Bureau—a metropolitan-based mobile unit staffed by a promotions officer and offering information through touch screens and other material. Representatives of all of the participating local councils, who have first-hand knowledge of their particular locations, will staff the unit in rotation. That is aimed at encouraging people who live in Sydney to look for opportunities to take their business, technical or service industry skills and relocate to become part of vibrant regional country communities. That will certainly encourage the growth and professionalism that exists in country New South Wales.
The New South Wales economy is the largest in Australia and accounts for 35 per cent of Australia's national output. The State Government's regional development programs are aimed at ensuring that regional areas continue to contribute to, and enjoy the benefits of, this strong economy. Our regional development initiatives are targeted to capitalise on emerging opportunities and to help cushion the effects of industry change on regional communities. Since April 1999 the Government has helped secure in the order of $3.5 billion worth of investment for regional New South Wales through the various programs and services of the Department of State and Regional Development. That means that more than 21,000 jobs have been created and maintained across rural and regional New South Wales.
The Regional Economic Transition Scheme, which was introduced by the Australian Labor Party in 1998, assists communities to recover from major changes in traditional industries. Since the scheme began it has benefited more than 20 regional communities from Kempsey to Cobar. The Regional Business Development Scheme remains a major catalyst for encouraging regional growth by attracting firms from domestic and offshore locations to start up, expand in or relocate to regional New South Wales. In addition, crucial services are provided to help secure projects, and funding is provided by the Government on the basis of the value of new investment and employment generated. Approximately 100 companies receive assistance under this 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11313 program each year. The region-specific Hunter and Illawarra Advantage Funds were introduced to attract new businesses to those regional areas of New South Wales.
In 2000 the Government extended the range of its spending to assist regional firms by introducing the New Market Expansion Program, which was directed at helping firms to develop the networks and skills necessary to pursue new domestic markets. The Main Street/Small Towns Program helps regional communities to plan and implement a strategic and proactive approach to their economic future. Many communities are undertaking more sophisticated marketing activities as one of their strategies to raise their profiles and stimulate additional business activity. In July 2003 the Government introduced the Towns and Villages Futures Program, building on the work of the Townlife Development Program, which was introduced in 2000. The program is an additional commitment to communities in regional New South Wales and is specially targeted to small centres with populations of 2,500 or less.
The commitment of the Government to regional New South Wales also extends to assisting to identify and develop sustainable value-adding and alternative agribusiness opportunities through a network of agribusiness development managers. Regional food and wine marketing strategies and the development of culinary tourism have been one key focus of the program. A number of our current initiatives are targeted at actively promoting regional locations and counteracting perceptions that regional locations do not offer business and other opportunities to the same degree as metropolitan areas. On 19 July I announced the Government's Food and Wine Strategy—Putting NSW on the Menu. This new statewide initiative will help regional New South Wales realise the potential of this industry.
Initiatives such as the Country Lifestyles Program and the Building Regional Towns Tour involve showcasing the benefits and strengths of country locations. Examples of recent major projects secured or retained for country New South Wales are the establishment of Scone Concrete Industries, a fence post manufacturing plant with an investment of $760,000 by a Victorian-based company and the creation of 10 jobs; Blue Stripe Meats at Tamworth, delivering high-quality beef products to retailers and consumers with an investment of $4 million and the creation of 60 jobs; Pat Hogan Electrics, electrical service operations servicing the Cadia Mine at Orange and Hyne and Sons new timber mill at Tumbarumba with an investment of $1.4 million, creating 40 jobs; Secret Creek Sanctuary, an eco-tourism facility in Lithgow with an investment of $2 million and 22 new jobs; and EJT Packers at Wentworth with an investment of $1.6 million and 10 new jobs.
By any measure a number of programs of the Carr Labor Government have had a great deal of success in encouraging economic growth in regional New South Wales. That will continue. We look forward to the opportunity to work with Country Week next year and to support the overall thrust of the initiatives of the Government. As we are now in September, I refer briefly to Small Business September, which is the only celebration of small business as an economic driver in Australia. It is organised by the Government and will involve about 360 events focused at small business growth and information throughout the State, particularly regional New South Wales.
Mr RUSSELL TURNER (Orange) [3.18 p.m.]: I have pleasure in speaking to this urgent motion on Country Week moved by the Leader of The Nationals. On the first day of Country Week I spoke to many of the 60 exhibitors. I understand that by the weekend some 10,000 people had gone through Olympic Park to see what the country has to offer to those who are prepared to move out of Sydney. Country Week had a great response, given that this was its first year. Councils and other organisations, including the Rural Doctors Network, from New England, the North Coast, the Central West, the Riverina, Western New South Wales and the South Coast, took part.
I place on record the support of the Department of State and Regional Development and of the Minister for the first Country Week at Olympic Park. I heard some interesting comments out there. A father and his five sons, who were all married and had children, had expressed a desire to move to somewhere in the country. The father was going round local government stands to determine which one he would recommend to each son when he returned home. He certainly had a big and responsible task. I hope that at least some of his sons settle in a regional area. As has been mentioned today, there are enormous employment opportunities in regional New South Wales. I might add, as I have on other occasions, that I saw the light some 32 years ago and moved from Sydney to the Orange district and have never looked back. My family have enjoyed a great lifestyle. We have worked very hard, but we have had rewards too because this is a great area in the Central West.
The Central West, like most other regional areas of New South Wales, presents fantastic opportunities for tradespeople, such as builders, bricklayers and engineers in both agriculture and industry. It offers 11314 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 opportunities for nurses, medical practitioners, retailers, solicitors, teachers, computer experts, surveyors and architects—for whatever trade or profession, there are employment opportunities somewhere in regional New South Wales, especially in the Central West. At the moment Orange and district can boast unemployment of barely 4 per cent for the whole area. That is considerably less unemployment than there is in the city. It is the old story: If we could get people to come to regional areas and experience country life, they would probably never want to return to Sydney. There are many examples of that. Unfortunately, first we must break down perceptions of distance and lifestyles that do not match those of Sydney. Many of those perceptions are attributable to what appears in Sydney media, which highlight things such as the drought and portrays an image that the only things west of the mountains are dried paddocks, empty dams and dead sheep.
A few months ago the New South Wales softball championships were held in Orange. Some 200 participants and family members gathered there that weekend. They were amazed to be playing on a green oval. The perceptions and stories they had been told led them to believe they would be playing on a dust bowl. That changed their image of a regional area. I hope one day some of those softball players will have the opportunity to return to live in a regional area. I take this opportunity to thank Peter and Jenny Bailey and others who were involved in organising and running Country Week. I understand Peter and Jenny travelled more than 40,000 kilometres going to country centres to talk to councils and chambers of commerce and inviting them to be part of Country Week. Some comments made in this debate today confirm that all those who attended the Country Week Expo were very pleased with the results they got and have said overwhelmingly that they will come back again next year.
Mr STEVE WHAN (Monaro) [3.23 p.m.]: I thank the Leader of The Nationals for giving this House the opportunity today to talk about Country Week and the success of that innovation. I also congratulate Peter Bailey and his team for putting so much work into making this event such a great success. That 7,500 people attended the expo I think exceeded everybody's wildest dreams. The Monaro shires that attended—Cooma- Monaro and Snowy River—were pleasantly surprised by the number of visitors who came to their exhibition. I also had the pleasure of being there on the opening morning and seeing the number of people who turned up on a working Friday. Even then I thought that showed it would be a great success.
I spent a couple of hours with staff from Cooma-Monaro and Snowy River talking to some of the people who came by. That again was a positive experience. Many people seemed genuinely interested in the lifestyle, in that case, of the mountains. One person was particularly interested in painting interesting Australian trees. I was able to assure him that there were a lot of interesting Australia native trees in that area for him to paint. Hopefully, he will get there to find out. But it was an initiative that the Government was pleased to support. Country Labor had the pleasure of Peter Bailey and his team coming along to our regular Thursday morning meeting to do a presentation aimed at getting government support. Country Labor was pleased to lend its support and talk to the Minister about providing the financial assistance that he mentioned of $100,000. That was significant financial support. This initiative promoted what is a fantastic lifestyle in country New South Wales. People who saw the Cooma-Monaro and Snowy River stall would have seen that. I am hoping that next year Queanbeyan, Bombala and Palarang—as it will hopefully be called then—will come along to next year's Country Week to promote the lifestyles available in the Monaro.
I support the Government's amendment, but the original motion notes that there is still work that we can do to make country New South Wales even more attractive. The Government has been working hard to do that. In Monaro, of course, the great lifestyle in the Snowys will be enhanced by the better educational opportunities from the new Jindabyne Central School, and the extensions to Cooma North School. We are making some of these towns even better places to live, with new water supplies at Dalgety, Adaminaby and Captains Flat—all provided by the Government. Bombala and Nimmitabel recently received assistance to deal with difficulties they have experienced due to the drought. Cooma and Berridale are benefiting from new sewerage schemes—again, an important part of ensuring these are good places to live.
When you talk to people who want to move to country New South Wales, they often speak about transport links. The Monaro region is well serviced by CountryLink. We have good services to Queanbeyan and regular bus services to the mountains. The Government is also investing money in the Monaro Highway and other highways in the area. We are assisting with development opportunities in the region through initiatives such as the new threatened species legislation amendments to try to make it a little easier for people in country New South Wales to work their way through the development processes.
One thing that businesses considering relocation or people who want to work from home will ask about are the communication facilities in country New South Wales. The New South Wales Labor Government has 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11315 helped many towns improve their telecommunications with things like community technology centres. Recently I had the pleasure of attending the opening of the Bombala Community Technology Centre. Many people ask whether they will be able to work from home, whether they will be able to access broadband in the country. Broadbanding is one of the facilities that has to improve if we are to continue this great work of promoting country New South Wales.
Perhaps it is coincidental, but it is also convenient that there is a Federal election in a couple of weeks. One of the key questions for country New South Wales has to be the retention of Telstra in public ownership. That is critical to our ability to attract to country New South Wales business and those who want to do business from home. We need to improve broadband communication links for the towns that I represent so that people can get on line and have quick communications access. So often they say, "I live 30 kilometres from town, and the copper cable just does not hold up for ADSL," and they cannot find another source of broadband access. Some still have difficulties in their areas with mobile telecommunications coverage. Through the next Federal election we need to ensure Telstra is kept in public ownership and that we have improved communications, because that will help the work that the State Government and Country Week are doing to make country New South Wales even more attractive places for people to live.
Mr GREG APLIN (Albury) [3.28 p.m.]: I support the motion of the Leader of The Nationals, which is in these terms:
That this House:
(1) notes the resounding success of Country Week and congratulates the organiser;
(2) calls on the Labor Government to tap into the interest shown by thousands of Sydney residents in moving to country New South Wales and to better encourage population and business growth in rural and regional New South Wales.
I join with him in congratulating Peter and Jenny Bailey, Peter Lloyd, Graeme Mitchell and their supporters on the organisation of Country Week at Sydney Olympic Park between 13 and 15 August. As all honourable members are aware, Country Week allowed us to focus on the opportunities of living in country New South Wales. It was designed to build an awareness within metropolitan Sydney of the opportunities awaiting Sydney businesses and residents by relocating to country New South Wales. It was a co-operative effort to build growth and employment prospects in various country regions. It would come as no surprise that we on this side of the House support Country Week. Last year prior to the election, as noted in the Sydney Morning Herald of 13 March 2003, the Opposition announced that it would pump a further $10 million into the State's tourism industry to attract conference goers and lure tourists into rural and regional New South Wales. Part of the announcement included the Country Week promotion. We are glad that this has come about through the efforts of the Armidale-based consultancy.
This year the theme of Country Week was "A fresh new deal for you and your family". It was aimed at getting metropolitan industries, companies and families to consider a new lifestyle in country areas. It was designed to highlight cheaper living expenses, affordable homes, lower costs of doing business, availability of labour, lower crime rates and the advantages of family life. It was one way of curbing the population drift and helping to increase the population in country areas. We are all too well aware of the young people who drift away from country towns to city areas and the fact that Sydney is growing by 1,000 people per week. Country Week was the first campaign of its type that involved a united approach by groups from country areas and replaces what, up until then, had been a fragmented and largely unsuccessful approach. The convener, Peter Bailey, has always had a passion for regional development. He is the former president of the Tamworth and District Chamber of Commerce and Industry and former chairman of the Armidale and District Development Corporation.
Peter Bailey was joined by Australian New Frontiers Pty Ltd, trading as ANF Agritours. The company, which is now Armidale based, began its life in Albury, where I got to know Peter Lloyd and Graeme Mitchell when they first worked out of that southern city—a city somewhat neglected in terms of State Government expenditure. It is of interest to note that the company was responsible for the organisation of the Royal Agricultural Society of the Commonwealth's conference, which was held in Albury earlier this year and opened by our Governor-General. It was a great success and brought people from all over the Commonwealth and, therefore, around the world. Country Week culminated with the 13, 14 and 15 August display, with 7,500 people visiting the expo at Olympic Park. The event was a partnership endeavour which, as the Minister alluded to, enjoyed the support of the Department of State and Regional Development and the Federal Government. 11316 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
The Minister announced that the Federal Government would grant $110,000 under its regional partnerships program. New South Wales Senator Sandy Macdonald announced the grant to be used to subsidise exhibitors at Country Week's major expo at Sydney Olympic Park. Visitors would be able to walk through New South Wales in a matter of minutes with displays by government departments, local government councils, big and small business and many other organisations. But it was not only governments that supported the expo. The Rural Doctors Network threw its support behind Country Week and the Australia Dental Association also supported it. But several problems arose. In a letter written to me in May this year Peter Bailey said:
Publicity worth more than $250,000 was generated and the website has had in excess of 150,000 hits. We have already had inquiries from people wishing to relocate and the feeling is very positive.
Unfortunately, we have not been able to sign up as many Councils as we had previously hoped. This has mainly been due to the uncertainty for many Councils as to their future with amalgamations continuing around the State.
This is a serious issue because councils were unable to commit, not knowing where their futures lay in the entity that they currently enjoyed. I call on the Government to assist next year to ensure that councils have that certainty and that they participate for the benefit of regional New South Wales.
Mr PETER BLACK (Murray-Darling) [3.33 p.m.]: I support the amendment moved by the Minister. I am somewhat surprised that the original motion was moved by the Leader of The Nationals when one considers what The Nationals have not done or are doing—it is a dichotomy—to regional and rural New South Wales. I totally congratulate and endorse the remarks of the honourable member for Orange and his positive spin on the benefits that have flowed to people who have relocated to Orange. I have to say with some regret that the Broken Hill City Council—through the mayor, I am told—resolved not to participate in Country Week. As has been said previously, Peter Bailey addressed one of our Thursday morning Country Labor caucuses. It was a good presentation and we were more than happy to support him. With that support flowed the dollars that were referred to earlier by Minister Campbell. The positives of Country Week are that over the past two years individual local government areas in western New South Wales have received increased funding of between $7 million and $8 million per local government area.
Mr Steve Cansdell: Thanks to Roads to Recovery.
Mr PETER BLACK: They are New South Wales Government dollars, Roads and Traffic Authority dollars, flying out to the shires that I represent. The honourable member for Clarence interjects and refers to Roads to Recovery, which is an interesting concept. Fancy interjecting about Roads to Recovery when the bottom line is that we had to campaign vigorously through the Shires Association of New South Wales, with which I was proud to be associated, to get rid of the sunset clause to ensure that the program was extended. The fact of the matter is that the campaign was endorsed by Country Labor. We had to fight for it and we did it well. In relation to tourism, we are now seeing the benefits to Orange and Broken Hill of the Year of the Outback. The honourable member for Orange nods his head. That initiative in 2002 was hugely successful. Through the Hon. Sandra Nori, the Minister for Tourism and Sport and Recreation, we have established all sorts of tourist routes, such as the River Run. I am pleased to say that it was a bipartisan initiative. The Leader of The Nationals nods his head.
The budget for the Year of the Outback was $2.3 million and we are now seeing the tourism benefits of that initiative. The grey nomads are going out to the west and up and down the Darling. It has taken some time to see the results, but they are out in the bush with their four-wheel drives towing the caravan and seeing what our country lifestyle is all about. We have gone a long way down the road with respect to catchment management authorities, which are working absolutely splendidly at this early stage. They are a huge improvement on the ridiculous regional native vegetation set-ups that were designed to drive people like me mad. I suspect that some Nationals might agree with me—but they would be far more expert on the subject of sanity than people on my side of the House. Against a lot of these positives there are six negatives, and I will go through them. This week we had the statement about Regional Express, known as Rex. I was at Dubbo on Monday morning for the funeral of our late member Tony McGrane, when I read the headline. Bang! They were guaranteed slots in Mascot, but they were not guaranteed appropriate terminal facilities. John Anderson persistently runs away from aviation matters.
Mr Andrew Stoner: What's this got to do with Country Week?
Mr PETER BLACK: Country Week has everything to do with promoting the country. We want to make sure that people can get to the country by plane. That is what it has to do with Country Week. That is the point of it. We want Rex to continue to fly. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11317
Mr Steve Cansdell: You missed your plane.
Mr PETER BLACK: I have not missed a plane at all.
Mr Thomas George: You missed your plane, Blacky.
Mr PETER BLACK: Yesterday I was at another great part of this country to welcome the crew of HMAS Rankin. Not one member of The Nationals in this Chamber turned up to that magnificent ceremony. I am very proud that I was able to represent country New South Wales yesterday. [Time expired.]
Mr STEVE CANSDELL (Clarence) [3.38 p.m.]: It gives me great pleasure to participate in this debate. I congratulate Peter Bailey and his wife, Jenny, as well as his support team on Country Week. What a great initiative! In an article that appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald on 29 February 2004 Alex Mitchell wrote:
[The centre] will be the first campaign of its type involving a united approach by groups from country areas and replaces what has been a fragmented and largely unsuccessful approach in the past.
I have had the experience of having been involved in the Grafton City Council for 10 years as a councillor. Approximately three years ago Grafton City Council, in conjunction with the Maclean and Copmanhurst shires, undertook a city living and country lifestyle promotion at the Country Embassy in George Street. The contribution of $20,000 by small councils represents a big investment, but the councils received very little return because of the fragmented approach that was adopted. The exhibit failed to attract the attention of the majority of people living in Sydney. In contrast, the exhibit organised by Peter Bailey has been a success.
Peter first mentioned the proposal at the end of last year, and I thought it was a fantastic idea. I realised that it would take a lot of work and I wished him well. He stuck to his guns and negotiated funding from the Government. A colleague of mine mentioned that Peter travelled 20,000 kilometres, but I think it was more like 80,000 kilometres. Peter travelled throughout the State to organise grants from country councils, but the process of forced amalgamations upset the applecart a little. I am aware that as a result of the merger of a number of councils to form the Clarence Valley council and an administrator being appointed, the council was not in a position to participate. That council missed a great opportunity. More than 7,500 people attended the Country Week event. The theme "A Fresh New Deal For You and Your Family" placed the emphasis where it should be—on encouraging families, businesses, industry and tradespeople to come to country New South Wales.
In the Clarence electorate, there is a major shortage of tradespeople, particularly in the building industry, as is the case in most country areas. Because the Clarence is one of the highest areas of unemployment in New South Wales, there is also a need to attract industry to the area. One way in which to do so is by showing industries that living in the country does not just mean water restrictions, which also apply in Sydney anyway, unemployment and hard times. Country areas of the Clarence electorate enjoy a wonderful environment and are only 30 minutes from the beach and 30 minutes from rainforests. The area boasts one of the best all year round climates in New South Wales and has a low rate of crime. The Clarence electorate is one place that could benefit from the promotion associated with Country Week.
The whole idea of Country Week is to attract people to the expo so that they can examine different options that are available in country areas of New South Wales. It is a great concept and attracted more than 60 exhibitors from local government and State Government departments, rural community organisations and business groups. Exhibitors said that they were overwhelmed by the number of genuine inquiries from businesses and people who wanted to move out of Sydney. The event made people realise that they had a choice of where they want to live. Many of the exhibitors said they instructed staff in Sydney to follow up the thousands of calls, inquiries and business transactions arising from Country Week. That shows that there are great benefits to be derived from an event such as Country Week, and it is up to businesses and industry to promote themselves.
Incentives for industry and business people to relocate to country areas of New South Wales include cheaper living expenses, affordable homes, lower costs of doing business, and the availability of labour in country areas. As I said, the lower rate of crime in country areas of New South Wales offers advantages for families. Country Week also highlighted the choices available in education in country areas of New South Wales. There are many private schools to choose from as well as public schools that offer a great range of educational opportunities. Doctors, nurses and other professional people who were considering moving to the country visited the exhibition to familiarise themselves with the facilities that are available. I fully support 11318 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Country Week and I hope that rural New South Wales gives the event its full support to ensure that it is held again next year. [Time expired.]
Mr ANDREW STONER (Oxley—Leader of The Nationals) [3.43 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members who participated in this debate to sing the praises of Country Week and the lifestyle and opportunities that exist in the great communities of regional and rural areas of New South Wales. One of the interesting features of Country Week was the statistical data collected by organisers of the event. This morning The Nationals were briefed on the successes arising from the promotion. More than 7,500 people attended the expo and 66.4 per cent of those expressed a genuine interest in moving to country areas of New South Wales, which is enormously encouraging. A large proportion of the respondents—95.5 per cent—were Sydney residents, which indicates that many people who live in Sydney are seriously considering moving to country areas of New South Wales. The Country Week web site scored more than 220,000 hits in just the first two weeks of August, which also indicates a high level of interest.
Of the people who attended the expo, 33 per cent were employed, with children; 29.3 per cent were employed, without children; and 7.9 per cent were self-employed. Those who attended were not just baby boomer retirees who are thinking of making a sea change or a tree change, but included people with families and people who are working. Among the criteria indicated by respondents was a place that combined rural life, access to health facilities, education services and entertainment. In fact, 57 per cent of respondents indicated that they were the most important criteria. That was followed closely by the criterion of a place being within driving range of Sydney. There are certainly plenty of regional and rural communities in New South Wales that fit the latter description, especially as roadways are being improved. The Nationals remain committed to substantial upgrading of the Great Western Highway to take advantage of the strong desire of people to live and work in country areas of New South Wales.
The statistics also indicated that 35.5 per cent of the respondents would consider living in the central western areas of New South Wales; 33.8 per cent would consider living in the Hunter area; 47.8 per cent would consider living in the North Coast region; 33.7 per cent indicated an interest in living in the South Coast area; 32.8 per cent nominated New England; 7.8 per cent nominated the far western areas of New South Wales; 20.2 per cent nominated the Riverina; and 7.9 per cent nominated the far south-western areas of the State. Obviously, some respondents indicated an interest in more than one area. The original motion called on the Labor Government to tap into the interest shown by thousands of Sydney residents in moving to country New South Wales to better encourage population and business growth in rural and regional areas of the State, but an amendment has been moved to congratulate the Labor Government on tapping into the interest shown by thousands of Sydney residents in moving to country areas. I state clearly that the Opposition will not support the amendment simply because it is merely self-congratulatory on the part of the Government.
The Minister for Regional Development is patting himself and the Government on the back, but I do not think any of us have done enough. I think we can all improve our efforts in better promoting life in rural and regional areas of New South Wales or improving the services that are provided to the people of New South Wales. It is arrogant for this Government to suggest that it should be congratulated for all it has done, per se: We should all strive to do better. The Minister argued that the Government has tapped into the interest shown by Sydney residents in living in country areas of New South Wales, and I would like to see the proof of that statement.
All the Government has done is provide $100,000 to support Country Week, which is a private sector initiative that has been organised and run by the private sector with financial support from the State Government and Federal Government. Is that tapping into the interest generated by Country Week? I do not think so. I think the Minister should take a leaf out of the Victorian Government's book. Victoria provides for and runs a $1 million-plus program of marketing the benefits of living and working in country Victoria—and it is working. Country Victoria now has a very strong population and economy growth rate. The New South Wales Government can do better. For that reason, I do not support the self-congratulatory and arrogant amendment.
Question—That the amendment be agreed to—put.
The House divided. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11319
Ayes, 48
Ms Allan Ms Hay Mr Price Mr Amery Mr Hunter Dr Refshauge Ms Andrews Mr Iemma Ms Saliba Mr Black Ms Judge Mr Sartor Mr Brown Ms Keneally Mr Scully Ms Burney Mr Lynch Mr Shearan Miss Burton Mr McBride Mr Stewart Mr Campbell Mr McLeay Mr Tripodi Mr Collier Ms Meagher Mr Watkins Mr Corrigan Ms Megarrity Mr West Mr Crittenden Mr Mills Mr Whan Ms D'Amore Mr Morris Mr Yeadon Mr Debus Mr Newell Ms Gadiel Mr Orkopoulos Mr Gaudry Mrs Paluzzano Tellers, Mr Gibson Mr Pearce Mr Ashton Mr Greene Mrs Perry Mr Martin
Noes, 34
Mr Aplin Ms Hodgkinson Ms Seaton Mr Armstrong Mr Humpherson Mrs Skinner Mr Barr Mr Kerr Mr Souris Ms Berejiklian Mr Merton Mr Stoner Mr Cansdell Ms Moore Mr Tink Mr Constance Mr Oakeshott Mr Torbay Mr Debnam Mr O'Farrell Mr J. H. Turner Mr Draper Mr Page Mr R. W. Turner Mr Fraser Mr Piccoli Mrs Hancock Mr Pringle Tellers, Mr Hartcher Mr Richardson Mr George Mr Hazzard Mr Roberts Mr Maguire
Pair
Ms Nori Mrs Hopwood
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Amendment agreed to.
Motion as amended agreed to.
REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICES
Matter of Public Importance
Mr ROBERT OAKESHOTT (Port Macquarie) [4.00 p.m.]: My matter of public importance today relates to the provision of health services in regional New South Wales. People on the mid North Coast and throughout regional New South Wales are waiting for much-needed operations. There are lost opportunities for health services in regional areas. We continue to hear much rhetoric about the development of centres of excellence in regional areas and about the reduction of the number of people on waiting lists. We continue to hear about the provision of additional funding for regional health services when in reality the need in regional and rural areas far outstrips the funding and resources that are being supplied.
Something is wrong when the Federal Government announces an $8 billion surplus and there are four- year public dental health waiting lists on the mid North Coast. Something is wrong when taxes are high at both a State and Federal level, economic times are supposedly good but the New South Wales Government is 11320 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 compelled to cut back disability services by up to 20 per cent throughout the State. Our Treasurer and Treasury are crying poor. Today over 1,500 people demonstrated outside Parliament House against the impact that these cuts will have on their lives. Something is wrong when a medical centre in Port Macquarie that opens from 8.00 a.m. until 8.00 p.m. is screaming out for a general practitioner.
We cannot seem to achieve area-of-need status in our local area, which places an even greater demand on general practitioners and on the emergency department at the State hospital. As the State member of Parliament for the Port Macquarie electorate I have heard both the State Government and Mayne Health state over a period of seven years that they are working towards resolving the involuntary mental health patient problems at Port Macquarie Base Hospital. To date, after a period of seven years, not one involuntary patient has been admitted at Port Macquarie Base Hospital and there is still no resolution to this dispute. If there is a need for involuntary care and for someone to be scheduled, he or she is taken in the back of a paddy wagon either to Taree or to Newcastle, which clinically is a completely inappropriate level of care.
After seven years of hearing all the rhetoric that the Government is working on this problem, it is high time that something was done. Something is wrong when the resource distribution formula for the mid North Coast was 3 per cent, which equates to about $9 million pre-amalgamation. Post-amalgamation that figure appears to have at least doubled, so I understand that the new North Coast Area Health Service is nearly $20 million behind in equity. After all the spending in the south-western Sydney region and after all the issues relating to the Camden and Campbelltown hospitals it is time to deliver fairness and equity on the North Coast. That would assist in the provision of a whole range of services, not least some basic elective surgery operations on the North Coast of New South Wales where population growth is higher and demands on health services are high.
Something is wrong when we have to fight tooth and nail for an additional $3 million this year for Port Macquarie Base Hospital, based on complaints from the Medical Staff Council, local management, Port Macquarie Base Hospital and the community. We fought hard to get that much-needed funding for elective surgery for people on those waiting lists. Between now and June 2005 a whole range of services will be delivered as a result of this additional $3 million in funding. I acknowledge the State Government's commitment to this issue. That funding will go, for example, towards 97 knee replacements, 24 hip replacements 12 other major joint operations and 47 cataract operations. Something is wrong when the chief executive officer and managing director of Mayne Health, Stuart James, who is ultimately in charge of Port Macquarie Base Hospital, receives a salary package increase of over $3 million for the year. That chief executive officer now has an annual salary of $4.6 million.
The Port Macquarie community, the local Mayne Health management team and the Medical Staff Council are fighting tooth and nail in the State Parliament for an additional $3 million in funding to deal with the elective surgery backlog at Port Macquarie Base Hospital and the managing director and chief executive officer gets a $3 million bonus. It is ironic that that amount of $3 million has been replicated. That is the amount for which we fought so hard at a local level and that is the amount that the chief executive officer, who is based in Melbourne, creamed off the top as a salary bonus. On Friday Supreme Court action commenced between Mayne Health and the State Government. Arguably, that company has been put in court on the Port Macquarie Base Hospital issue. We still have not seen a resolution to the important issue of the location of the radiotherapy unit.
The dispute continues about whether to locate it on Mayne Health land or on council land. The issue to which I referred earlier relating to involuntary mental health patients has also not been resolved. There are many outstanding and unresolved issues, but this chief executive officer is receiving a $3 million bonus. Surely something is wrong. What can be done to resolve these issues? I hope that the managing director puts his money where his mouth is and considers making a personal contribution in an attempt to reduce the waiting lists at Port Macquarie Base Hospital. He would do so if he genuinely believed in the future direction of his company and in the role that is being played in the community by Port Macquarie Base Hospital. A salary increase of $3 million in one year is an outrageous amount.
Over 2,500 people in the Port Macquarie and mid North Coast region are waiting for elective surgery. What else can be done to resolve these issues? The Government and Mayne Health should resolve their dispute as a matter of urgency. They are going to court on Friday 24 September. This is a longstanding dispute between the State Government and Mayne Health. It goes back to the original contracts and to the first public-private hospital facility. One way or the other we are looking for a better deal as a result of this agreement. Regardless of whether the Government decides to go with Affinity Health, to stay with Mayne Health or to bring it under State control, I urge it to give the community a better deal. That is the bottom line. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11321
A corporate service centre for Port Macquarie should be considered now that the head office is moving to Lismore as part of the amalgamation process. The old base hospital site looks as though it will be emptied of staff. Hopefully, some staff will move to Port Macquarie from Taree, but a corporate service centre would be a good use of that facility. I also strongly encourage the Government to establish a deputy chief executive officer position based in Port Macquarie for the Mid North Coast Area Health Service. I have been urging equity in the resource distribution formula for a long time. Everyone acknowledges that that is needed desperately but no-one is willing to make the hard decisions about redistributing funding on an equal basis. This is the Government's formula but funding is not being allocated appropriately. All we are asking for is our slice of the pie. A fair and equal formula would deliver nearly $20 million to the North Coast.
State and Federal disputes must be resolved, led by the Federal Government. The Commonwealth has an $8 billion surplus. The Federal Minister for Health and Ageing advocates a federalist view of health but he seems unwilling to take the next step and deliver it. I strongly encourage him to do so. Health services in rural New South Wales are in trouble. The State and Federal governments can take steps to improve those services and I urge them to do so.
Miss CHERIE BURTON (Kogarah—Parliamentary Secretary) [4.10 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Port Macquarie for raising this issue in the House. As to State and Federal responsibilities and funding, the Federal Government loves it—Government members rub their hands together with glee—when media and the community complain about buck passing between the States and the Federal Government. There is no buck passing in health: The State and Federal governments have very clear responsibilities for funding our health systems. I will outline today how the Federal Government has, by stealth, tried to wash its hands of its responsibility for public health by blaming the States, claiming that we get a huge influx of goods and services tax payments, and that we should provide the necessary funding. The Federal Government has definite responsibilities in this area and its abrogation of those responsibilities has placed an additional burden on our health system and the State budget.
This year the New South Wales health budget tipped $10 billion, which is one-third of the entire State budget. It absolutely not true to claim that we have decreased health funding. For example, the 2004-05 health budget for rural and regional New South Wales is $181.5 million more than last year, which represents an increase of 7 per cent. Since 1999-2000 recurrent funding has increased by $908.6 million, which is a 48.5 per cent increase. Since 1994-95 recurrent funding for rural New South Wales has increased by $1.4 million, or 106.3 per cent. No-one can say that the State Government is not doing its fair share and meeting the expectations of people in rural and regional areas.
On the other hand, the Federal Government has cut funding to New South Wales and other States for public hospitals. In 2002-03 the Commonwealth Government took almost $1 billion from its own budget estimates. The current agreement for the years 2004 to 2009 offers $278 million less than a simple rollover of the previous 1998 to 2003 arrangement—and that is not including the increase in the cost of, and demand for, health services not only in rural and regional New South Wales but throughout the State. If New South Wales had refused to sign the agreement it would have incurred losses of up to $1.1 billion. That is a fact. The Federal Government had us over a barrel: Would the New South Wales Government refuse to sign the agreement and miss out on that $1.1 billion, which would hurt public hospital patients in this State, or look after those people, sign the agreement and forego a minimum of $278 million in entitlements?
The agreement contains an arbitrary Federal Treasury formula that does not provide adequate indexation for population, wages and health costs. This shifts those costs to the States. Before signing the agreement the States and Territories made it clear that its indexation was insufficient and used a meaningless formula that has no regard for cost and wage pressures in health. The honourable member for Port Macquarie acknowledged the contribution of the New South Wales Government to health. It is a constant battle to keep up with costs and demand, and the State Government desperately needs extra money. In the past year the Howard Government has twice reduced payments under the health agreement. This means that New South Wales funding will decline by a further $109 million over the five years of the agreement. The Howard Government is giving New South Wales hospitals less, not more. It does not recognise that public hospitals across the country are under more pressure, not less. This is a phenomenon not just in New South Wales; it is a national problem. So who is responsible? It is the Federal Government, with its $22 billion surplus that should go to health.
To add insult to injury, the Commonwealth has used the funds it cut from public hospitals to fund its Medicare Plus package. It is a disgrace that people cannot access bulk-billing in country areas and must front up to already overstretched hospital emergency departments for health care. The Federal Government feigns 11322 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 concern and has given a commitment to increase the rebate to general practitioners [GPs] to encourage bulk- billing. But it is taking those funds away from hospitals: it is taking with one hand and giving with the other. There has been no increase in health funding and no commitment to fix Medicare. In the past year we have tried to convince the Commonwealth to support the establishment of after-hours GP clinics in or near emergency departments. That is a simple proposition that would remove a lot of pressure from emergency departments and deliver quality care, particularly to those in rural and regional areas. But of course the Federal Government has not come to the party.
We have been working with general divisions of practice to find suitable locations in and near public hospitals that would enable the provision of good after-hours GP services. This would help to relieve the pressure on emergency departments in our public hospitals caused by the decreasing availability and affordability of GP services. So far the Federal Government has failed to deliver a package for GP clinics that would be sufficient to attract GPs on a sustainable basis. Opposition members moan and groan but the facts are there for all to see. Recently released bulk-billing figures for the June 2004 quarter reveal that there were 600,000 fewer GP consultations in 2003-04 than in the previous year. Despite an increase in population there was no corresponding increase in the number of GP consultations from the June 2003 quarter to the June 2004 quarter. I could list many ways in which the Federal Government has failed to help New South Wales deliver quality health care, particularly in rural and regional areas.
I have some information about Port Macquarie Base Hospital for the honourable member for Port Macquarie. Port Macquarie Base Hospital is a private hospital that provides services to public patients on the mid North Coast. A 20-year service agreement is in place between Mayne Health and the New South Wales Health Administration Corporation. The contract was signed by the previous Coalition Government in 1992 and commenced in 1994. The contract was the subject of extensive criticisms by the Auditor-General in his 1996 report to Parliament and was so bad that he stated that the deal struck by the Coalition meant that New South Wales was paying for the hospital twice, and giving it away.
Mayne Health is required to seek the consent of the Health Administration Corporation to transfer the operations of Port Macquarie Base Hospital to another party, such as Affinity Health. That is a legal requirement under the service agreement signed in 1994 between Mayne and the Health Administration Corporation. Legal proceedings have been filed in the New South Wales Supreme Court and are scheduled to resume later this month. Given that this matter is the subject of legal proceedings, I cannot comment further. I am sure that in due course we all want an outcome for the benefit of the people of Port Macquarie.
In relation to the resource distribution formula [RDF], I am pleased to advise that the Carr Government has worked hard to improve the equity of health funding allocations across the State. The high-growth areas of the Northern Rivers and mid North Coast have been the beneficiaries of the Government's investment in health. The Northern Rivers Area Health Service has moved from 14 per cent below the RDF allocation in 1994-95 to 1.2 per cent in 2003-04, and its recurrent allocation has increased by $165 million. The mid North Coast has moved from 27 per cent below RDF allocation in 1994-95 to 3.5 per cent in 2003-04.
Ms KATRINA HODGKINSON (Burrinjuck) [4.20 p.m.]: Health services are important in regional New South Wales. For the most part, I will comment about health services in the southern region of New South Wales, which is my part of the world. There is no doubt that health continues to dominate as an issue of concern within my electorate and beyond. Recently I joined the honourable members representing the electorates of Wagga Wagga, Murrumbidgee, Albury and Bega in opposing the amalgamation of the Greater Murray Area Health Service with the Southern Area Health Service [SAHS]. On 1 January 2005 a new Greater Southern Area Health Service will be formed, which will incorporate in the order of 400,000 people, including 44 public health facilities.
There was absolutely no consultation in the Burrinjuck electorate in relation to that amalgamation. We are suspicious—as I am sure one can imagine. That suspicion is further fuelled by what can only be described as a token effort in relation to public consultation, held in the guise of the Clinical and Community Advisory Group consultations. Not one meeting was held in the electorate of Burrinjuck and totally insufficient notice—in some cases only four days—was given in relation to the closest meetings. Goulburn is a city comprising more than 20,000 citizens. The people of Goulburn had to travel more than 100 kilometres to Queanbeyan, in the middle of a working day, to have a say about the future of their health services. Similarly, the residents of Gundagai and Tumut had to travel more than 100 kilometres to attend the nearest meeting at Wagga Wagga—if they found out about the poorly advertised meeting. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11323
The changes announced by the Minister for Health will mean the further alienation of public health services from rural areas. Patients will have to travel further for even minor procedures. Those least able to afford the travel—the elderly, disabled, unemployed and low income earners—will be the ones most hurt by the callous changes made by this Labor Government. This is a bad move for the provision of local public health services and should be scrapped by the Government in favour of properly funding existing local health services. Today I note that there are 344 people on the waiting lists in my electorate of Burrinjuck, which is up 45 people, or 15.1 per cent, since July 2003. Goulburn hospital has 317 people on its waiting list, which is up 41 people, or 14.9 per cent, since July 2003. The Government promised to halve waiting lists after it came to office. I distinctly remember the press release where the Deputy Premier and the Premier signed that promise in blood. There are long waiting lists in country areas, areas that can least afford it and are continuing to have their health facilities cut.
The five-year contract of Dr John Docker for pathology services in the Goulburn Base Hospital was only recently renewed for 12 months. Uncertainty surrounds the review by Paxton Partners of pathology services in New South Wales. It will reduce the number of pathology services from 18 to 3. I am worried about the future of St John of God Hospital in Goulburn because on 1 December it will be transferred to the management of the Southern Area Health Service because of the refusal of the SAHS to provide sufficient funds to meet the aged care, palliative, brain injury and dementia care requirements of the Goulburn region. It is most concerning that the chief executive officer of the SAHS has said that he is unable to guarantee retention of existing services at the hospital. Last Wednesday I raised that matter with the Minister for Health in a meeting. I implore the Minister to ensure that we do not lose any of those services because we are desperate for them in our region. I refer to Crookwell hospital, where questions still need to be answered about the replacement of staff and the requirement to come in on budget, which effectively means a cut of $274,000 over last year's actual expenditure. There has been concern about the Dynamap machines. I am pleased that after I raised the issue with the Minister he made a commitment to have them replaced.
The Tumut hospital upgrade is on the backburner and has not been allocated any funding priority by the Greater Murray Area Health Service. There is asbestos in the building. The merger with the Southern Area Health Service will bring even more medical centres into competition for the funding dollar. Tumut hospital has security issues. Mental health patients have to be admitted to the children's ward and the children are then moved to a general adult ward. The mental patients are then too close to the maternity ward. The existing hospital site has a very steep slope. Yass hospital is about to lose its maternity services, operating theatre and another 10 to 12 beds. Health is in a total mess across the southern area of regional New South Wales. This Government stands condemned for its treatment of health services and patients across the southern part of New South Wales.
Mr ROBERT OAKESHOTT (Port Macquarie) [4.25 p.m.], in reply: I thank the honourable member for Kogarah and the honourable member for Burrinjuck for their contributions to this important debate. On behalf of the Government, the honourable member for Kogarah referred to the lauding of the 106.3 per cent increase in funding for rural and regional health services in New South Wales. Therefore, I ask the Government the obvious question: Why are there continuing problems? If the Government talks about how much money it has put in and how successful it is, why do we have someone like the honourable member for Burrinjuck and me, as an Independent, talking about increased waiting lists and times in our local hospitals? Why is there a four-year emergency dental health care waiting list in my area? It is a having a huge impact on the daily lives of people. I am sure it is the same in many other rural and regional areas.
I have been asking the obvious question for seven years: Why do we not have a resolution to involuntary mental health care in Port Macquarie and on the mid North Coast? While people clinically do not get the level of service that could be made available to them, why cannot a couple of people sit around a table and start thinking of patient care rather than ideologies and arguments 10 years ago over contracts to do with Port Macquarie Base Hospital? I also state in relation to what the honourable member for Kogarah said regarding the resource distribution formula that the Northern Rivers is now 1.2 per cent behind on equity and the mid North Coast is 3.5 per cent behind. That equates to just under $20 million. While it does not sound like much in percentage figures, it is a significant amount in dollar terms. I am not asking for more than my fair share. It seems that a real Animal Farm argument is being used by the Government—the honourable member for Kogarah is saying that we are all equal but some are more equal than others. I am supposed to exert some sort of argument that the North Coast Area Health Service should the happy that it is 4.7 per cent behind in equity, that it should be happy to be $20 million behind.
I accept that these are hard decisions for the Government to make because they involve reallocating portions from the one pie. But surely we on the North Coast have a right to equity and fairness. It is unjust, 11324 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 unfair and inequitable that $20 million of North Coast money would be spent elsewhere in the health sector. I do not accept that, and I hope the Government would be keen to demonstrate that it is a government for all people, not just for those in certain areas of the State, and also would not accept that. This has been a worthwhile debate. It raises once again important issues in rural and regional health in New South Wales. I hope it will give some direction from those on the ground about what we are all seeking so desperately. If the court case starts on Friday regarding the relationship between the Health Administration Corporation and Mayne Health, I sincerely look forward to a resolution of that matter as quickly as possible. I would prefer the matter to be resolved outside the court process, through negotiated settlement.
I repeat the three obvious options that are available: for Mayne to continue to deliver the contract, for Affinity Health to pick up the contract, or for the State Government to buy out the existing contract. Whichever of those three paths the Government chooses, whether through negotiation or legal proceedings, I, on behalf of the community of Port Macquarie and the mid North Coast, ask the Minister for Health to make sure we will have a better deal than the one we now have. Any of those options that the Minister would choose is a better deal. I regard inclusion in that arrangement of many community health services—in particular, the issue of involuntary mental health patients—as critical to deciding whether it is a better deal. I thank all honourable members who took part in the debate. I trust that the Minister for Health has not only listened to the debate but that he will act on many of the suggestions that have been put forward in it.
Discussion concluded.
REGISTERED CLUBS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from an earlier hour.
Ms PETA SEATON (Southern Highlands) [4.32 p.m.]: There have been many examples of bullying by the Carr Government in a range of sectors and portfolios, but the Registered Clubs Legislation Amendment Bill almost takes the cake. The Registered Clubs Legislation Amendment Bill is one of the most breathtakingly heavy-handed pieces of legislation that many people have seen in a very long time. It calls to mind the developing reputation of the Government for bullying anybody who happens to take a contrary view to it on whatever subject. We all recall the treatment of the brave whistleblower nurses who spoke up about practices at Camden and Campbelltown hospitals. We all recall the aspersions cast on whistleblowers in the transport sector who dared to speak out and were accused of having mental health problems and all sorts of other things. Most recently, when revelations about sexual activities in a juvenile justice centre on the Central Coast were raised, the Government did not immediately seek to fix the problem, or to apologise, or to acknowledge it had lost control of the situation; instead, it sent in the police. This is a continuing development of the way the Government deals with anybody who speaks out against it or dares to express a contrary view.
I congratulate the New South Wales clubs on the fantastic job that they do, not just in providing services and facilities in their local areas but in their extraordinary level of community work and support and sponsorship. I acknowledge the great work of a number of clubs in my area, including the Oakdale Workers Club, which is the scene of many local activities. In particular, when we were threatened by dreadful bushfires on the edge of the national park in recent years, the Oakdale Workers Club was a focus for community activity and for lifesaving operations. The Picton Bowling Club is the focus every year for Anzac Day activities in Picton. The club goes above and beyond the call of duty to make sure that people are looked after, particularly our veterans.
The Bargo Sports Club is another wonderful club in my area. It is in a town with one school that does not have a hall. The Bargo Sports Club is a place where many school activities are held because the school does not have a gathering place for school concerts and the like. The Mittagong RSL Club is one of the largest clubs in New South Wales. It has made considerable investments in our community. It has invested in new facilities and is doing a fantastic job. The Moss Vale Services Club recently renewed some of its facilities. The Bowral Bowling Club, even though relatively small, is on the Government's hit list for additional taxes, as are the Bundanoon Club and the Kangaroo Valley Bowling Club.
I also had the opportunity recently to accompany the Leader of the Opposition, John Brogden, on a visit to a number of Illawarra clubs and to attend a meeting convened by Lord Mayor Alex Darling and hosted by Peter Newell, chairman of the Steelers Club. There we had the chance to hear first-hand from many Illawarra 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11325 clubs what the impacts of the Government's tax would be. We were quite astounded to discover the extent of the sponsorships that the Illawarra clubs make to their communities. These are not special amounts given to sports clubs and the like; they are sponsorships that provide lifesaving facilities and services in the Illawarra. As an example, I refer to the Wests Illawarra 2003 annual report, which lists some of the charities to which it makes contributions. I understand Wests donates considerably more than the amount it is required to donate, simply because the club believes that is important for the community. It would be nice to see some of the Labor Illawarra members speak up on behalf of their clubs and speak out against this government tax. Sadly, we have had nothing but silence from them. Time after time Illawarra Labor members have hidden when the club tax issue is raised.
Some of the registered charities that have been supported by Wests Illawarra include Aerial Patrol, Australian Red Cross, the Salvation Army Bushfire Appeal, the Shepherd Centre, Youth off the Streets, Relay for Life, the Ted Noffs Foundation, Recycling for Adolescents, the Smith Family, the Australian Volunteer Coast Guard, the National Breast Cancer Foundation, Bernardo's, Royal Volunteer Coastal Patrol, Southern Youth and Family Services, Lane Beachley's Reach for the Stars Foundation and, interestingly, the Westpac Lifesaver Rescue Helicopter. I have been waiting to hear from the Minister for the Illawarra, or indeed any Labor members in this place who represent Illawarra electorates, about the crisis facing the Westpac Lifesaver Rescue Helicopter. That helicopter has been grounded for at least 23 days because of an impasse between the New South Wales Health Service and the New South Wales Ambulance Service about issues to do with winches and the rescue equipment on that helicopter.
As late as yesterday the Civil Aviation Safety Authority [CASA] reaffirmed its approval of all of the safety equipment and mechanisms on that helicopter. CASA gave it the all-clear to fly, as indeed had always been the case. That had never been in doubt. But, despite CASA's all-clear, and the helicopter being put back in action, when it went on a training trip to Sydney and some Sydney-based paramedics were asked to board the helicopter for a training exercise, the paramedics again refused to get on the helicopter, and it was again grounded. This has left lives at risk in the Illawarra, in parts of Sydney, in the Southern Highlands and in the Southern Tablelands area, because we now have no rescue helicopter facility in that area. The Government will say that is not so, but the truth is that the only helicopter retrieval facility available at the moment is that of a neonatal service and helicopter services that take patients from a hospital to another hospital.
But what would happen in the event of an incident like that which occurred today at Wooli, north of Sydney, where five people were involved in an accident in the ocean? Heaven help anyone to whom that happens in our region because there will be no capacity for any rescue service to winch people out of the water, winch people out of a national park, or winch people from an accident scene on the Princes Highway or any of our other roads. This is an urgent issue. It is a crisis. Lives are at risk. Unless the Minister for Health realises that this is a problem and sits down at a table with the people involved and finds out what are the problems, and why they are not flying in this helicopter, people's lives will continue to be put at risk.
Where is the Minister for the Illawarra? He should beat a path to the door of the Minister for Health, beat on that door and demand that his colleague the Minister for Health solves this problem. The Minister for the Illawarra is nothing more than a passenger on the Premier's Labor blunder bus. It is an absolute disgrace. The Minister for the Illawarra is doing nothing but standing on the sidelines twiddling his thumbs. The Minister for Health is refusing to solve the crisis that puts at risk lives in the Illawarra, the Southern Highlands, the Southern Tablelands and parts of Sydney. It is a disgrace that the State Government is refusing to do something that the people of the Illawarra, the Southern Highlands and the southern New South Wales region have backed with cash through community donations and which clubs, like Wests Illawarra, also have backed to the hilt. We must have emergency helicopter retrieval services on line and in place urgently. There is absolutely no reason why the Minister for Health should delay any longer. He is putting lives at risk. He must act.
Mrs SHELLEY HANCOCK (South Coast) [4.40 p.m.]: I support my colleagues in vehemently opposing the Registered Clubs Legislation Amendment Bill. I support the comments made on both sides of the House during this debate and others about the pivotal role clubs play in their communities and the contribution they make to individuals, service clubs and sporting organisations and, as the honourable member for Southern Highlands said, helicopter services in the Illawarra. By way of preamble to my comments about the legislation, I will comment briefly, as others have done, on the increased poker machine tax that has resonated in my electorate as it has in every other electorate throughout the State. The real problem is that this insidious tax increase was imposed without the promised consultation. The Government promised that there would be discussion about the proposed increase. The denial after the election of that promise is what has hurt the most. 11326 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
The increased poker machine tax is relevant to debate on the Registered Clubs Legislation Amendment Bill because the bill has been dressed up to look as though it is about transparency and accountability. But it is nothing more than an attempt by the Carr Labor Government to punish the clubs for daring to voice their concerns about the new tax, for supporting their members, for organising rallies in their local electorates and for turning out in their thousands at the recent tax rally outside Parliament House. The honourable member for Southern Highlands referred to members representing electorates in the Illawarra. Recently I attended a huge rally at the Shellharbour Workers Club. I boarded the bus with people from my South Coast electorate to join them in voicing their concerns. It was sadly ironic that the only member from the Illawarra who attended was the honourable member for Illawarra, who, I am sure we all know, has not been well recently. Sadly, neither the Minister nor other members representing electorates in the Illawarra turned up to answer the concerns raised by those in the crowd—people like university students, who are concerned about the loss of part-time employment, which can be crucial as they make their way through university.
Further by way of introduction to the bill, I place on record some brief comments about the effect of the proposed tax increase on some people in my electorate. If I were to talk about all the clubs in my electorate I would be here all night highlighting their contributions to the community. None of the clubs in my electorate are large and none of them are wealthy, but almost all of them—90 per cent the last time I looked—will pay more tax. Having spoken to club directors and club members, and having looked at the records they have freely made available to me, it is clear that the clubs in my electorate are contributing more to their communities than they are required to do under the community development and support expenditure requirements. It is important to note that they are giving more than they are required to give. As I said earlier, an enormous number of organisations and people have benefited from grants from clubs. Should clubs find it necessary to reduce their contributions to such organisations, many people will struggle to survive.
On Saturday I attended an annual general meeting at Culburra, where a tribute was paid to the Shoalhaven Ex-Servicemen's Club for donations to the community bus. As honourable members would know, my area does not have public transport. Elderly patients are transported via a community bus to medical centres in Nowra. That is just one example of the benefits of club grants, but a wide variety of children participate in representative sport or cultural activities and their parents struggle to find the funds to enable their children to continue with those activities. As honourable members would know, country kids are often disadvantaged because of distance from sporting or cultural venues. Often clubs are requested to assist, and indeed they do in the South Coast electorate, over and above the requirements of the current legislation.
We have heard much about the pivotal role that clubs play in country areas and the important role they play in providing social and cultural opportunities—not to mention the provision of low-cost meals to many people in country areas who would otherwise be isolated. Ex-servicemen's clubs, such as those in my electorate, also play a significant and crucial role in supporting the many returned servicemen and women. Further to my introductory comments on the bill, I wish to place on record the anger and disillusionment of the members of the South Coast branch of Surf Life Saving New South Wales. Some months ago they contacted me to tell me that their funds from ClubsNSW have been cut by $200,000. It is sadly ironic that only yesterday they sent me a letter saying that on Monday Minister Sandra Nori presented them with a statewide award for their education programs. The letter states:
Mark Taylor CEO accepted the Award on behalf of South Coast Surf Life Saving, beating a host of contenders for the coveted award. Presented to coincide with Water Safety Week, the awards are one of the highlights of 12mth of hard work and dedication by many organisations.
The South Coast Education Program has been presented to over 15,000 school students this year alone and is booked out until the second term of 2005.
Mr Taylor, who spoke to me yesterday, points out:
We are finding it harder and harder to present our Education program, because of the "pokie tax" Clubs NSW have ceased their support for Surf Life Saving South Coast to the tune of $200,000.
How are people in coastal areas supposed to run programs and save lives on the beaches? This service is crucial. Surf Life Saving has been treated unfairly by the Government. It relies on donations from clubs, ClubsNSW and individual benefactors. I am at a loss to know how they will survive and continue their vital role. Having provided some kind of context for my comments on the legislation, I am absolutely astonished that some members on the other side have spoken about the need for accountability and transparency. They seem to think that is what the bill is about. I have checked Hansard and most of them have conveniently ignored the sinister aspect of the bill, which is its retrospectivity. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11327
As the honourable member for Upper Hunter noted, the bill was introduced suddenly when an inquiry in relation to Panthers Rugby League Club was three-quarters completed. The bill will allow the chairman at that inquiry to make a finding of corrupt or improper conduct after witnesses have already appeared and given evidence under terms of reference they read and understood at that time. That is the major issue. It is a denial of natural justice. It changes the goalposts and it has the potential to change the range of the inquiry and the opportunity to present new submissions when the inquiry is almost complete.
The bill is utterly bad legislation. As a relatively new member of this place, I am at a loss to understand how the Government could have put this bill before the House. As I said before, it is dressed up as a bill that is about openness and transparency. That is a joke. The Government has the numbers to push through this legislation; there is no doubt that it will be passed. However, I doubt that any Government members will respond in any way to the concerns raised by me, the honourable member for Upper Hunter or any other Opposition member in highlighting the absolutely insidious nature of this bill. Government members have focused on openness and accountability—no doubt under instructions from the Premier and the Treasurer—but have not responded to very real concerns, particularly those relating to retrospectivity and fees and costs recovery.
I find extraordinary some of the comments made by Government members during the debate. I have the greatest respect for the honourable member for Camden but he simply said, "I leave it to the Minister to give a fulsome and honest response to the assertions made by the honourable member for Upper Hunter." It is extraordinary that in speeches made by members opposite they have not acknowledged that there is a problem with this bill or found some way to justify their actions. The honourable member for Blacktown made an extraordinary contribution to the debate and denigrated clubs in his area. In fact, he denigrated clubs generally. Some of his comments were simply beyond belief. He said, "Guidelines had to be laid down and this legislation sets out guidelines for these people". For goodness sake, clubs already have clear guidelines on accountability, openness, transparency and their responsibilities to their members. This legislation is not about setting out guidelines. But one of the most telling parts of his speech was revealed recently when there were thousands of protesters outside Parliament House. He said, "There is a nuisance factor in respect of clubs that we have to deal with."
Government members have referred to clubs as a nuisance factor. Anybody who cares to look will see the 170,000 letters that have been written by people from areas throughout New South Wales. I have continually presented petitions in this House from people who are concerned about this tax and about not having been consulted in relation to the bill's implementation. People are also concerned that nobody, including their local parliamentary representatives, has bothered to address their concerns. The honourable member for East Hills also made an extraordinary contribution, although he tried to come to terms with some aspects of the bill. He reminisced about the wonderful times he has had at the Revesby Workers Club. He said:
… of which I am still the patron, we had some great acts in the old days by performers such as Tom Jones, the legendary Roy Orbison, whom I saw five times at the club—he would still be there if he were alive—and Tina Turner. Poor old Roy died on 6 December 1988.
That extract indicates the level of contribution from Government members, who simply do not know what to make of this legislation. They simply do not know what to do or how to respond to concerns raised by Opposition members relating to the insidious provisions of this bill. [Extension of time agreed to.]
Members of the Opposition cannot argue against the principles of openness and transparency, and of course we do not, but we recognise that extensive rules and guidelines pertaining to clubs already exist to ensure that they operate in an open and transparent manner. I know that to be the case because of the representations that clubs have made to me about current requirements. I argue that stringent requirements already exist to make clubs accountable to their members and to provide for transparency in relation to their financial dealings. This bill is not about accountability and transparency but about smacking the clubs for being naughty children.
The bill is about intimidating the clubs, moving the goalposts, and searching for corrupt conduct somewhere by using the current Panthers inquiry with the aim of generally blackening the reputation of clubs everywhere in New South Wales. But it will not work. The Government has lost the debate on this issue, and this legislation will not improve the Government's position. This legislation is dreadful and it will be recorded in the history of this House as an unprecedented attack on the registered clubs of New South Wales, which continue to support their communities and play a crucial role in the lives of many people in this State. This bill is shameful and indicative of the lengths to which the Carr Labor Government will go to seek revenge and intimidate those who hold opposing views to its own. 11328 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Mr GRANT McBRIDE (The Entrance—Minister for Gaming and Racing) [4.54 p.m.], in reply: This amending bill is not about the tax debate, as members opposite have claimed. It is about the ongoing reform of the club industry in this State. The Opposition continues to mislead the Parliament and the people of New South Wales through a campaign of misinformation. For example, last week the honourable member for Bega, who could not even name the 27 clubs in his electorate, listed 10 New South Wales clubs that he claimed had closed as a result of the club tax, a tax for which the first payment is not even due until December this year.
The honourable member for Bega rattled off a number of clubs that he claimed had been forced to close because of the increases in tax. The member might want to do his own homework next time, rather than just read out what he has been handed. Here is the real information: Parramatta Masonic and Community Club, which closed with debts of about $2 million, would have paid less tax. The Adamstown Rosebud Sport and Recreation Club would have paid less tax. The Gunnedah Bowling Club would have paid no tax. The Hurstville United Legions Sports Club would have paid no tax. The Gosford Masonic Club would have paid no tax. The Mittagong Bowling and Recreation Club would have paid no tax. The Glenmore Country Club would have paid no tax. The Epping Bowling Club would have paid no tax. The Beverly Hills Bowling and Recreation Club would have paid no tax.
I do not know about the honourable member for Bega, but I see a pattern here. The only club mentioned by the honourable member for Bega as having shut down which may have paid more tax was the Wagga Leagues Club, a club that had been in trouble for more than two years before recently shutting its doors. All I can say to the honourable member for Bega is, "Check your homework before you speak in the House." To say that the Government's club tax is responsible for these clubs closing is wrong, wrong, wrong. The honourable member for Bega would be better off learning the names of his local clubs during one of his rare visits to his electorate. Sadly, comments such as those made by the honourable member for Bega—the city blow-in who could not even tell the House how many holes were on the course of the Merimbula Golf Club, despite being an honorary member—are far too common.
Another contribution to the debate was made by a member universally respected on this side of the House, the honourable member for Lachlan, Ian Armstrong. He also mentioned struggling clubs in rural areas that would be affected by the tax increase. I am sure he will be pleased to hear the good news that I have for him. Cootamundra Country Club will pay no tax. The Young Golf Club will pay no tax. The Crookwell Services Club will pay less tax. The Harden District Bowling Club will pay less tax. I wonder where the Opposition could be getting its information. Our entertaining friend from Sutherland, the honourable member for Cronulla chose to embark on a union-bashing exercise instead of debating the bill's amending provisions. As always, he was light, fluffy and entertaining: But again, there was no substance. His local paper contradicts everything he said in the House.
On 9 September the St George and Sutherland Shire Leader covered two stories about the Cronulla Sutherland Leagues Club. Its page 2 story outlined the club having to "put up beer prices and cut out a bingo session", yet on page 11 the very same newspaper profiles the club "taking its first step towards rezoning of its site at Woolooware for a big redevelopment... a draft plan would be prepared for hotel, aged care, residential and conference facilities and a small amount of retail space". That is hardly the sign of a struggling club or a club that is not profitable. I have those extracts among my papers. The simple fact is that large clubs can afford to pay more tax, and it is interesting to hear what ordinary people think about this issue.
For example, a straw poll taken by the Parramatta Advertiser on 8 September resulted in the following comments: Sergio Morales of Liverpool, "No, it doesn't affect me"; Courtney Sarah-Smith of Newport, "I hate pokies … It doesn't really bother me if they tax them"; Jenny Wakeling of West Ryde, "I go to Ryde-Eastwood once a fortnight but the tax doesn't bother me one way or another … I can't see how it should affect the clubs"; Mica Muzika of Parramatta, "It really doesn't affect me … I know all about the tax but I don't really care either way". Obviously, the club tax is not a burning issue for the people of Parramatta, but word on the street is very different from the comments heard in this Chamber. It would do the honourable member for Gosford good to talk to people on the streets—that would certainly be a first. I question his commitment to the people of Gosford. In the past two redistributions he tried to have people living around Gosford's Central Coast Leagues Club cut from his electorate. He has made getting coastal suburbs and his home within his electorate a priority over representing the people of Gosford city.
It was left to the honourable member for Blacktown to bring some sanity back into this debate. He used the example of Blacktown Workers Club. He said that the club was threatening funding of sporting groups and even local bingo. Then we were told that the Blacktown Workers Club was buying the Parramatta Masonic Club 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11329 at a cost of $7 million, which included $2 million of debts and a proposal for a $5 million renovation. That is not the act of a financially struggling organisation. It is no wonder that only about 50 people out of that club's membership of 55,000 turned up to a recent well-advertised club tax protest meeting, a meeting at the club that lasted a whole 10 minutes. It is time some reality was brought back into this debate.
Turning to the substance of the debate, I thank honourable members for their contributions: the honourable member for Upper Hunter, George Souris; the honourable member for Camden, Geoff Corrigan; the honourable member for Epping, Andrew Tink; the honourable member for East Hills, Alan Ashton; the honourable member for Gosford, Chris Hartcher; the honourable member for Heathcote, Paul McLeay; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and honourable member for Ku-ring-gai, Barry O'Farrell; the honourable member for Blacktown, Paul Gibson; the honourable member for Clarence, Steve Cansdell; the honourable member for Hornsby, Judith Hopwood; the honourable member for Burrinjuck, Katrina Hodgkinson; the honourable member for Ballina, Don Page; the honourable member for Cronulla, Malcolm Kerr; the honourable member for Coffs Harbour, Andrew Fraser; the honourable member for Wakehurst, Brad Hazzard; the honourable member for Willoughby, Gladys Berejiklian; the honourable member for Bega, Andrew Constance; the honourable member for Lachlan, Ian Armstrong; the honourable member for Lismore, Thomas George; the honourable member for The Hills, Michael Richardson; and the honourable member for Baulkham Hills, Wayne Merton. I always enjoy listening to the honourable member for Baulkham Hills—we were almost converted!
I thank also the honourable member for Orange, Russell Turner; the honourable member for Wagga Wagga, Daryl Maguire; the honourable member for Hawkesbury, Steven Pringle; the honourable member for Albury, Greg Aplin; the Leader of The Nationals and honourable member for Oxley, Andrew Stoner; the honourable member for Murrumbidgee, Adrian Piccoli; the honourable member for Southern Highlands, Peta Seaton; and the recent contribution by the honourable member for South Coast, Shelley Hancock. Of course, some contributed vastly more than others. I indicate that I will move amendments in Committee to rectify a couple of matters that were not picked up at the drafting stage. The amendments relate to the power to require a club to pay for part or all of the cost of an investigation or inquiry.
The amendments will make it clear that investigation or inquiry costs can be awarded only if a court finds that the director's case has been proven. Even then, it will be up to the court to determine whether any of the director's costs are to be paid. I also take this opportunity to clear up misinformation that was reported in relation to the provisions contained in the bill. On 8 and 9 September the Sydney Morning Herald published two articles that criticised certain aspects of the bill. Several errors of fact were included in those reports. One article stated that the bill would allow the director-general to recover costs for the current Temby inquiry. That is not the case. The transitional provisions included in the bill ensure that the new cost recovery power will apply only in respect to investigations or inquiries instigated on or after the commencement of the bill, thus excluding the Temby inquiry.
I note that the reason the rapidly shrinking Deputy Leader of the Opposition opposed this legislation was because of its retrospective nature. He argued both for and against. He is becoming so slim and youthful looking that on some occasions it is hard to tell the difference between him and the Leader of the Opposition. I assume he will now get off the fence and back the amendments. Another error in the Sydney Morning Herald articles related to a statement attributed to the head of ClubsNSW, Mr David Costello. It was claimed there was no precedent for having to pay for the Government's legal defence. Honourable members would be aware that most courts, including the Licensing Court, can order legal costs in favour of the successful party.
Another mistake was the claim that the provision relating to the disclosure of information would effectively wipe out the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, a claim the Sydney Morning Herald made yet again last Monday. Let me put this confusion to bed once and for all. That is simply not the case. The new provision in relation to the disclosure of information is in addition to, not instead of, the current power to access information under a freedom of information [FOI] application. The Minister, the Treasurer and the director-general will be able to provide additional information that is deemed to be in the public interest. The current FOI laws will not be affected. The bill actually seeks to improve communication with the public about gaming-related matters.
The suggested changes ensure that more, not less, information will be publicly available. The bill arises, in part, as a result of legal issues pertaining to the current section 41X inquiry. The Government decided on new legislation that clarifies the intent of that section of the Registered Clubs Act. On this issue, the honourable member for Heathcote presented clear arguments that were acknowledged and endorsed by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. How can the Opposition argue against confirming that a presiding officer with 11330 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 similar powers contained in the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act or the Casino Control Authority Act can make findings or recommendations as a result of a section 41X inquiry? This bill clarifies the original legislation.
Many clubs do the right thing, but some do not. Clubs are community organisations responsible for the community's money. Just as important, the bill seeks to give employees whistleblower protection and to duplicate the rights a union currently has under the Liquor Act. Those measures are strongly supported by the liquor and hospitality division of the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union. Club chief executive officers, workers and directors who make legitimate complaints about corrupt or improper behaviour need to be adequately protected. It is as simple as that. I assure honourable members that I have been working hard to improve the future of the club industry through this ongoing reform process. I am proud that we are modernising and providing a strong future for clubs through consultation with industry representatives.
The club industry task force is looking at how to intervene to assist smaller struggling clubs across New South Wales, especially those in regional and rural areas. I inform members opposite that I was approached today by representatives of the club industry in regard to a club that is in that situation. The task force is looking at reporting standards, amalgamations and club elections, to name a few issues. The bill is not an attack on the club industry. It is part of an ongoing reform process to rebuild the industry that began last year soon after I became Minister. Throughout that time I have had experienced industry advice through the club industry task force, which I established last year, and the special ministerial advisory group that I set up in July this year. We will continue to work together on reforming the club industry. Members can expect more legislation—the Government is doing things in this portfolio. I commend the bill to the House.
Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put.
The House divided.
Ayes, 45
Ms Allan Ms Hay Mr Pearce Mr Amery Mr Hunter Mr Price Ms Andrews Mr Iemma Dr Refshauge Mr Black Ms Judge Mr Sartor Ms Burney Ms Keneally Mr Shearan Miss Burton Mr Lynch Mr Stewart Mr Campbell Mr McBride Mr Tripodi Mr Collier Mr McLeay Mr Watkins Mr Corrigan Ms Meagher Mr West Mr Crittenden Ms Megarrity Mr Whan Ms D'Amore Mr Mills Mr Yeadon Mr Debus Ms Moore Ms Gadiel Mr Morris Mr Gaudry Mr Newell Tellers, Mr Gibson Mr Orkopoulos Mr Ashton Mr Greene Mrs Paluzzano Mr Martin
Noes, 34
Mr Aplin Ms Hodgkinson Mrs Skinner Mr Armstrong Mr Humpherson Mr Slack-Smith Mr Barr Mr Kerr Mr Souris Ms Berejiklian Mr Merton Mr Stoner Mr Cansdell Mr Oakeshott Mr Tink Mr Constance Mr O'Farrell Mr Torbay Mr Debnam Mr Page Mr J. H. Turner Mr Draper Mr Piccoli Mr R. W. Turner Mr Fraser Mr Pringle Mrs Hancock Mr Richardson Tellers, Mr Hartcher Mr Roberts Mr George Mr Hazzard Ms Seaton Mr Maguire 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11331
Pair
Ms Nori Mrs Hopwood
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! It being after 5.15 p.m. the House will now deal with private members' statements.
PRIVATE MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
______
MR BEN HARRISON CAR ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION
Mr BARRY O'FARRELL (Ku-ring-gai—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [5.19 p.m.]: Tonight I raise an issue on behalf of a local constituent. This is probably the most serious issue that I have ever raised as a private member's statement over the past nine years. I raise this issue because of my failure to obtain information required by my constituents through the usual approaches to government. On the evening of 29 October 2001, on the Pacific Highway adjacent to the Pymble Hotel within my electorate, 20-year-old Ben Harrison was struck by a car. Earlier in the evening Ben had left his family home at Warrawee after dinner, picked up his girlfriend and went to the hotel to collect some keys from a friend. Ben had two drinks while at the hotel.
While crossing the road with his girlfriend and two male friends Ben was hit by a car. There is a separate story to be told about when the police will do something to improve the state of safety in the underpass that might otherwise have been used. Ben suffered catastrophic injuries and was clinically dead when he arrived at the hospital. It took weeks before it became clear that Ben would survive the accident and his injuries. In all, Ben spent 10 weeks in intensive care. He suffered injuries to his brain and will require full-time care for the rest of his life.
No person should have to go through Ben's experience. Equally, no person should have to go through the experiences of Ben's parents, Patrick and Bonita Harrison, firstly, on the night of the accident and during its aftermath as their son's life hung in the balance; and, secondly, during their attempts to discover the cause of the accident. It is through the Harrisons' efforts to discover the cause of the accident that I came to learn of Ben's accident and the extraordinary obstacles being encountered by the Harrisons. The third anniversary of this accident will occur in five weeks. The significance of this anniversary is that it marks the end of the period during which legal action can be taken in relation to the accident. It is that impending deadline that causes me to raise these matters this evening.
For more than two years Ben's father, Patrick, has endeavoured to learn the facts of the accident. He has been met with obfuscation, obstacles and obloquy. What should have been a simple matter of seeking and being provided with information from NSW Police has proved the opposite. When Mr Harrison first came to see me in July 2002 he was frustrated at his inability to obtain from police something as simple as the details of the driver and car involved in the accident. Mr Harrison also had other concerns about the investigation of the accident. For instance, despite "alcohol" being listed as an associated factor on the incident report, Ben Harrison's blood test was negative. I think most reasonable members of the community would be concerned about these events.
From the moment Patrick Harrison started to inquire into the accident he became more and more concerned about the thoroughness—or lack thereof—of the investigation of the accident. As a result, Mr Harrison sought information to try to clear up those concerns. It seemed that the case might simply have been stereotyped as that of a careless, alcohol-affected pedestrian stepping out in front of a vehicle on a main road. Yet that stereotype did not fit with the recollections of witnesses present at the scene, the results of Ben's blood test or the extent of the injuries suffered. The results of an initial investigation report commissioned by Mr Harrison also suggested that, given police accident markings and skid marks at the site, the speed of the vehicle involved in the accident might have been a contributing factor. These are matters that are best decided in court, 11332 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 where evidence can be presented and tested. That is all Mr and Mrs Harrison want: Patrick Harrison told me today that he simply wants the truth revealed.
Yet that cannot happen if the Minister for Police refuses to act to provide the contact details of two of the police involved in the investigations into Ben's accident so that they can be interviewed for the court action. Detective Richard Layton and Probationary Constable Simon Boxsell either attended the scene or undertook investigations into the accident. Both have since left the force: Detective Layton left for what I understand were medical reasons and Probationary Constable Boxsell left apparently to join the defence forces. Despite repeated requests neither the Harrisons nor their legal advisers have been provided with the contact details of either man. In other circumstances such a lack of co-operation could be seen as obstruction of justice or an attempt to pervert the course of justice. It beggars belief that NSW Police would not have contact details for each person and it is a breach of public trust that, when confronted with a simple request, the Minister for Police would not ensure that the information was provided speedily to the Harrisons.
Mr Harrison's dealings with regard to this affair regrettably reveal all that is wrong with this Government: an absence of transparency, a lack of accountability and a failure to put the public interest ahead of sectional interest. There are many matters in this affair that I may one day come back to in this House— photographs that were originally claimed not to exist that finally materialised, witnesses who recall providing statements that do not seem to have been recorded or kept, and files on the case that were not filed but kept in the personal possession of people who moved on to other roles in the police service. But this afternoon I have a simple request to make on behalf of Ben Harrison. I have a photograph of Ben before the accident and another of Ben during his 10 weeks in intensive care. On behalf of Ben Harrison, I ask the Minister for Police to provide the information requested so that the legal action that Ben is entitled to can proceed, so that the circumstances of the accident can be assessed, so that his future care can be determined, and most of all so that Ben, his family and his friends can get on with their lives.
BLACKTOWN HOSPITAL CHILDREN'S WARD CLOSURE
Mr PAUL GIBSON (Blacktown) [5.24 p.m.]: The decision to close the children's ward at Blacktown Hospital is a very serious issue for the people of Blacktown. In fact, an article in the Blacktown Advocate of 25 August stated:
The Blacktown community is preparing for the biggest fight of its life to stop the hospital's children's ward from closing and moving to Mt Druitt …
By mid-2005, children from the age of four weeks to 16 years will no longer be admitted to Blacktown if they need to stay in hospital overnight.
However, children will still be treated in Blacktown's emergency department and the special-care nursery will continue to care for babies aged up to four weeks.
A partnership has existed for a long time between Blacktown Hospital and Mount Druitt Hospital, which have worked hand in hand. For example, pregnant women would travel to Blacktown Hospital to have their babies delivered and people in need of palliative care would go to Mount Druitt Hospital. There is some evidence to suggest that some services overlapped. In February this year senior doctors and nurses and board members and executives of the Western Sydney Area Health Service decided to consider ways of improving services at both hospitals. They published their findings in a brochure entitled "The Way Forward". They decided that the emergency department at Mount Druitt Hospital should be closed and relocated to Blacktown Hospital. To overcome any potential problems they then decided to close the children's ward at Blacktown Hospital and move it to Mount Druitt. So in attempting to solve one problem it has created another. I am on record as saying that it is a case of medicine gone mad.
Blacktown is the largest local government area in New South Wales and the third-largest LGA in Australia. On average, the populations of Blacktown and Mount Druitt are the youngest of any in New South Wales—and Australia, for that matter. Everybody is very proud of Blacktown Hospital, which was built a few years ago at a cost of well over $100 million. Now, only a couple of years down the track, the Western Sydney Area Health Service is considering closing its children's ward. Our area will continue to have one of the State's youngest populations, on average, for many years and I believe it is ludicrous even to think about closing the ward. I wrote to the Minister for Health about this issue. He is a good friend and I think he has done a great job in the health portfolio. I received a response from him, in which he said:
Professor Steven Boyages, Chief Executive Officer, WSAHS … informed me that a final decision about the mix of services between Mt Druitt and Blacktown Hospital campuses is still pending. The WSAHS is currently engaged in a consultation process, which has involved members of the local community, doctors and other health care professionals. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11333
I would have thought the local member of Parliament could have been included in those discussions. But unfortunately that was not the case. I have spoken to the Minister about this and tonight I am putting the matter on the record for the benefit of the people of Blacktown and Mount Druitt. I urge the Western Sydney Area Health Service to rethink the situation. If a problem exists, why solve it by creating another problem? As I said, it is a case of medicine gone mad. "The Way Forward" document points out that children's services will be increased at Mount Druitt. That is fine for the people who live at Mount Druitt. But the simple fact is that late at night it takes 15 minutes to drive from Blacktown to Mount Druitt. In peak hour that same drive can take 20 or 30 minutes. The 300,000 residents of Blacktown deserve a local children's ward. The area, which has one of the youngest populations in all of Australia, deserves a children's ward. I have no doubt that if the children's ward at Blacktown Hospital is closed in three, five or 10 years there will be campaign to build another one. I ask the Minister and the professionals who made this decision to have a rethink and do the right thing.
DISABILITY PROGRAMS FUNDING
Mr THOMAS GEORGE (Lismore) [5.29 p.m.]: In July it was well and truly documented that the Government slashed money for people on the Adult Training, Learning and Support [ATLAS] and Post School Options [PSO] programs. After persistent pressure from the community and Opposition the Government realised its error and announced that those on the PSO program would retain their current funding. In a remarkable about face, the Government then decided to reassess the 1,400 recipients on the PSO program with a view to reducing numbers in the program. How does the Minister plan to assist people who are deemed ready for work and are unable to find appropriate employment? Those people will have nothing. The Government still plans to scrap the ATLAS program, replacing it with two new programs but with less funding.
I am concerned that young people with disabilities will not be able to access the learning opportunities they deserve. The reforms of the Government to the ATLAS program will affect everyone who entered the program after 1998, and all new participants. Families who care for young people with disabilities could be forced to breaking point. Today outside Parliament House large numbers of people gathered to let the Government know of its heartless decision. I support those who made the effort to come down from Lismore, in particular, Theo McPherson, Zion Stewart, Julie Rose, Natasha Ulyatt, Toby Gulliver and Mathew Wiggins, who were supported by three volunteers from Realising Every Dream [RED] Inc. who came with them, that is, Carl Paola from Ocean Shores and Luke Wiggins and Perry Libeau from Lismore. They asked me to present a big heart, a metre high, to the Premier, which I have assured them I will do in three weeks time. Their photographs are on the heart and on the back is the following letter:
Dear Mr Carr,
We know that no-one with a heart could have made the recent decision to cut individual funding levels for young adults with disabilities. And we also know how important it is to help people who are in need. So we decided to make a heart just for you.
Once you have a heart again we know you will feel differently about cutting back the amount of support that so many of us young people and our families rely on.
Thanks Mr Carr from young adults with a disability in the Lismore region.
People from around the State rallied at Parliament House today as part of a statewide program to pressure the Carr Government to reconsider proposed cuts to individual funding levels for programs for young adults with disabilities. Amongst those who spoke was Mathew Wiggins, who has Down syndrome and who presented that large heart to me, which was made by his friends to present to the Premier. Mathew said that he is sure that the Premier, once he has a heart again, will change his mind about cutting their funding. Tomorrow at 11.00 a.m., at the corner of Magellan and Carrington streets, Lismore, young adults with disabilities will sing out in protest in a karaoke event against the cuts by the heartless Carr Labor Government. Sadly I cannot attend as I will be working hard in Parliament. I know that it will be a great rally organised by RED. It would do us all good to be able to attend to see what these young people have to offer.
The last round of protests resulted in the Government reversing its decision. That decision was welcomed by Mr Perry Libeau and Jenny London. However, we now have the ludicrous and inequitable situation where there are huge discrepancies in funding levels between those receiving the PSO program funding and those who will be moved to the new service model. The only difference between participants in the PSO and ATLAS programs is the year they left school. How can that be justified? The Carr Government is wrong if it thinks that it only has to ride out the storm and people with disabilities will give up. People with disabilities and their carers are not going to simply capitulate and give up the small gains they have made in recent years. 11334 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
EPSOM ROAD, ROSEBERY, DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Ms KRISTINA KENEALLY (Heffron) [5.34 p.m.]: I refer to concerns of residents in Heffron about development application 431/04 currently before the City of Sydney council. This is a development application for a master plan at 87-103 Epsom Road, Rosebery, to erect a mixed residential and commercial complex. The developers have proposed a mainly residential development of 927 apartments spread across 11 buildings. I understand the main feature of this proposal is a 30-storey tower containing 266 apartments on the northern end of the site. The other 661 apartments are proposed for the opposite side of Epsom Road in buildings of between 6 and 10 storeys. I believe this master plan is a clear case of overdevelopment and ought to be rejected.
Such a building is completely inappropriate for this location. It is immediately next door to one- and two-storey residential homes in Kensington, and will be 30 per cent higher than the tallest buildings in the adjacent Victoria Park development. A building of this magnitude would bring significant problems of overshadowing and privacy. A development of this magnitude would also negatively impact on local traffic, and pose a potential air safety risk as it is under flight paths. What is more, Rosebery and Kensington residents have had very little notification of this proposed development application. Mindful of community concerns about overdevelopment, I recently wrote to several thousand residents in Kensington, Zetland, Victoria Park, and Rosebery to let them know how they could have their say about this proposal. Many wrote back thanking me, and told me that despite their proximity to the site on Epsom Road they had heard nothing from the City of Sydney council about this proposed master plan. Interestingly, a quick web search found a web site which criticised the former South Sydney Council on this very point, that is, the notification of development applications. The web site states:
Many residents and ratepayers believe that council's notification procedures are inadequate, and my office consistently receives complaints from residents who were not notified about a development which they believe will impact on their amenity, neighbourhood or suburb.
I am sure honourable members are interested to know whose web site it is. It is the web site of the honourable member for Bligh, who is now the Mayor of the City of Sydney, the very council which has not adequately notified its own residents, much less residents in the adjoining Randwick council area who are immediately impacted on by this proposed development. The web site of the honourable member for Bligh goes on to state that the council ought to notify owners and residents of all potentially affected properties in a precinct. She also said notification should be generally provided to local resident/community groups, the local State member of Parliament—in this case, myself, the honourable member for Heffron—and other relevant bodies, particularly when a development application is likely to be of general community concern. In this case that has definitely not happened.
Finally, the honourable member for Bligh states that an advertised summary of all current development applications should be readily available to residents and ratepayers on request, by post, fax, email and/or on a web site. The only place residents can view this development application is by going down to council's one-stop shop in Sydney Square in the Sydney Town Hall or to the Redfern Neighbourhood Centre. Fortunately, following my letter, many residents have made the effort to ensure the council knows their views on this development application. Two such residents are Alan and Sue Karam of Rosebery, who wrote to the mayor urging her to take into account the impact on traffic and parking in the area and urged her to reject the master plan. Another resident is Leonardo Gasparre of Rosebery, who wrote:
Kristina thank you for your concern regarding the blatant over development at Epsom Rd Rosebery. THIS DEVELOPMENT will totally over shadow our already too large block and create the beginnings of the future slums of Sydney. The values of our properties are already sliding because of fear of this type of development.
In addition, a group of concerned residents have come together to improve our local community and tackle these issues. That group is Rosebery Residents Against Overdevelopment, convened by Rosebery residents like Michael Comninos, Belinda Campbell Clark, and Eunice Hadris. Kensington residents like Geraldine Wylie have joined in the fight. Rosebery Residents Against Overdevelopment have letterboxed flyers throughout the suburb. They have started a petition calling on the Federal Government to uphold the Commonwealth airports regulations 1996 stipulating that immediate airspace around the Sydney airport must be protected from incompatible development. This Dolina Epsom Road site development will infringe upon airspace by 70 metres. In conclusion, I urge Heffron residents who are concerned about this clear case of overdevelopment to make their views known by contacting the Lord Mayor of the City of Sydney. With the support of local residents, we successfully knocked back 35-storey towers in the Victoria Park amended master plan. Working together with local residents we can fight this kind of overdevelopment and improve our local community. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11335
RYDE AQUATIC FESTIVAL
Mr ANTHONY ROBERTS (Lane Cove) [5.39 p.m.]: It is with great pleasure that I speak about the Ryde Aquatic Festival, which took place last Sunday 19 September by the banks of the Parramatta River in Bennelong Park, Putney, which is in Waterview Street, Putney. The day-long festival is staged by the Rotary Club of Gladesville, with all proceeds going to life education and children from disadvantaged local families. The festival is held annually to celebrate the historical significance of the waterways to the City of Ryde, whose boundaries are mainly surrounded by the Parramatta and Lane Cove rivers. During the summer months of the 1850s and the 1860s crowds in excess of 100,000 journeyed by boat and horse-drawn vehicles to the Parramatta River at Putney and gathered on its shores to witness the World Rowing and Sculling Regatta, which was then Australia's premier sporting event as it was long before we played Test cricket, Australian rules, rugby league and rugby union. This was a staggering number of spectators, especially considering the infancy of our population, as the Colony of Sydney was only 80 years old at that time.
Sunday's activities began at 9.00 a.m. when I had the pleasure of firing the starting gun and beginning the Fun Run & Walk, which are over 5 kilometres and 10 kilometres respectively, around the picturesque Putney area in my electorate. This was followed at 9.45 a.m. by the official opening of the 2004 festival by the festival's chief patron and Federal member for Bennelong, the Hon. John Howard, MP, Prime Minister of Australia. This hugely enjoyable family day out included the billycart derby, the picnic races, with good old- fashioned family races, including the egg and spoon and three-legged races. There was also a talent quest sponsored by the Macquarie Community College, which showcased some truly outstanding talent that would put some of the better entrants in Australian Idol to shame.
The highlight of the day, however, is always the dragon boat races. Those races involve professional crews and teams from local schools, business and charities, and take place on the water throughout the whole day. The dragon boat races began at 9.00 a.m. and ran throughout the day, culminating in the 2.00 p.m. finals, with the Caltex High Octanes winning the community/corporate races. I pay particular tribute to John Thorpe, national president of the Australian Hoteliers Association, for helping with sponsorship of this great event. I have met this gentleman on a number of occasions, and I am always impressed by his integrity, intelligence, professionalism and devotion to the organisation that he leads so successfully.
I pay tribute also to the organising committee for the day: Councillor Victoria Tagg, chairman; Robert Erskine; Councillor Connie Netterfield; Paul Wynn and Jim Caward from the Rotary Club of Gladesville; John Booth, manager and editor of the leading newspaper in the community the Weekly Times, and his partner Ulrica, both tireless workers in our community; Derek McCarthy from Ryde Council City Partnership; George Papallo, chief executive officer of Macquarie Community College and Ryde Business Forum; Reg Cain, president of the Gladesville Chamber of Commerce and director of Betta Electrical; Alan Ford, Australian Volunteer Coast Guard; Stephen Sim, promotions manager, who did a fantastic job as master of ceremonies on the day; Sandra Donovan and Bob Lindsay from the Concord Ryde Sailing Club; Melanie Cantwell, president of Dragon Boats NSW; Councillor Ivan Petch from Ryde City Council; Ron Bradbury and Ray Wilson from Hunters Hill Rotary; Lydia Scuglia, president of the Eastwood Chamber of Commerce; Councillor Sue Hoopmann, Mayor of Hunters Hill; Linda Winnell, a general consultant; David Orr and Ernie Kidd from the Ryde Lions Club; Ric Retas from Hunters Hill SES, which on the day again did a magnificent job, ably assisted by members of our local Police Force; Barry Cole, part of the organising committee, who was the fun run organiser, and always does a magnificent job; Sue Ford, the treasurer of the organising committee; and Marlene Cole, who looked after the stalls.
The festival patrons included the Hon. John Howard, MP, Prime Minister; Mr John Watkins, MP; myself; Angela D'Amore, MP; John Murphy, MP; Joe Hockey, MP; Andrew Tink, MP; Councillor Terry Perram, Mayor of the City of Ryde; Councillor Sue Hoopmann, Mayor of Hunters Hill; Councillor Angelo Tsirekas, Mayor of the City of Canada Bay; Councillor Ian Longbottom, Mayor of Lane Cove; and Councillor Maire Sheehan, Mayor of Leichhardt. All of those people, together with community members, with the support of a huge number of hours of work done behind the scenes, made sure that the Ryde Aquatic Festival for 2004 was such a successful event. It is an event that I look forward to having a great deal of involvement with in the future.
ILLAWARRA REGIONAL FORUM ON AGEING
Ms MARIANNE SALIBA (Illawarra) [5.44 p.m.]: I wish to speak today about a forum I conducted recently in my electorate, the forum on ageing. I had received correspondence from the Minister for Ageing 11336 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 advising that the State was to hold a forum on ageing in Parliament House in September. Often people in regional and country New South Wales feel that their views are not being considered, even though I know full well that that is not so. Therefore, I organised an Illawarra regional forum to which I invited people from throughout the region. There was a good turnout to the forum, with representatives from a number of groups as well as individuals. We based our forum on the model of the New South Wales forum to be conducted in Parliament House.
The Illawarra forum commenced with an address by Mr Tom Glenn, a senior citizen of the Illawarra community. Tom is very active and involved with issues in the local community. He is associated with a number of committees, and I know he represents the honourable member for Wollongong on the Wollongong City Traffic Committee. Tom spoke about his commitments to the community and the fact that his involvement keeps him going. He feels that just because people reach a certain age does not mean they are no longer worthwhile or do not have significant contributions to make to their communities.
The working groups set up by the forum related to safe mobility, location of accommodation, age- related discrimination, healthy ageing at work, gender equity, and community participation and engagement. A number of issues were raised, but even more interesting were the recommendations that came from that forum. Some of the issues considered by the working group on safe mobility for older people included the questions: What would help you to be able to be more physically active? What transport options would help you get about better? Often those transport options are not necessarily public transport—it could be community transport, private vehicles, minibuses and other transport modes used to assist older people. One recommendation was that the local council conduct an impact study as there are no direct bus routes to the city of Wollongong from outer suburbs, accompanied by a comment that numerous bus services had been cut out with the restructuring of local bus services.
Another recommendation was that transport needs to be regular and go where the public wants it to go, and that the bus companies should possibly conduct a market survey. Another recommendation was that easy access is required on buses—for example, step lifts or buses that lower, as is the case with Sydney buses. I should note that our local bus company, as it renews its fleet, is taking those issues on board. A further recommendation was that duplication of some services needs to be rectified. Those recommendations will go to the New South Wales forum to be held in Parliament House in September. If I am able to attend that forum, I will present those recommendations personally. Otherwise, they will be put in the form of a communiqué to the forum, in the hope that the views of regional New South Wales will be considered by the Government in developing future policy directions.
I thank Shannon Wright, a project officer with the Office of Ageing. Shannon was very helpful in organising the forum that I convened. She was also very helpful in ensuring on the day that everybody had their say and that all views were considered. I acknowledge Tom Glenn's contribution to the Illawarra Regional Forum on Ageing. The views he put to the forum stimulated others to express their thoughts about their involvement within the community and how they could be more active in the community. I acknowledge a lot of my ethnic groups, which were well represented. I really appreciate their support.
GOOBANG CREEK WEIR REPAIRS
Mr IAN ARMSTRONG (Lachlan) [5.49 p.m.]: I refer to the water supply in the Lachlan River, particularly that servicing the town of Condobolin in the Lachlan shire. As honourable members may be aware the Wyangala Dam, which services the top of the Lachlan River, is at 10.2 per cent capacity. If we do not get good rain between now and the end of October we will face the rather dire prospect, according to the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources [DIPNR], of not being able to provide water for stock and domestic services after Christmas. This year the valley has a zero water allocation for irrigation. The town of Condobolin depends on the Goobang Weir, an old weir that has served the town well, for its water supply. Condobolin is the home of Shannon Noll, the successful singer. Recently he held a concert in his hometown that raised $60,000, which he has put back into about a dozen or so charities in the town.
Condobolin is a great town with a great community. It is self-sufficient. It does not ask for very much, but it does ask for potable water and water for its population of about 4,000. The weir is leaking an estimated 23 megalitres of water per day, which means that an awful lot of water is being wasted. The irony is that at this stage we cannot determine whether it is owned by the shire of Lachlan or DIPNR. We wrote to the office of New South Wales State Properties, the conservation officer of Narrandera Fisheries Centre and the project manager of the New South Wales Department of Commerce, Wagga Wagga, seeking urgent repairs to Goobang 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11337
Creek Weir. About a week ago I spoke to the Minister for Energy and Utilities to ask that the ownership be cleared up and that funds be made available to stop the leakage of 23 megalitres of water a day. It is absolutely atrocious that the town weir is leaking so propitiously in this time of need.
It is extraordinary that title to such a weir cannot be established easily. The Department of Lands, the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, et cetera, have been keeping records for a long time. Yet it appears that many quasi Crown properties either have not had title issued or have not had it recorded. The weir seems to be one of those facilities. It is a matter of urgency that we establish the ownership so the rightful owners can be called upon to repair the weir and stop the leakage. I would then call on the Government to assist the rightful owners, be it one of their departments or the Lachlan Shire Council, to pay for and effect those repairs in the public interest and the interest of conservation of water in potentially one of the toughest times we have ever faced for the supply of water for people, livestock and the environment in New South Wales history.
BESLAN AND JAKARTA TERRORIST ATTACKS
Ms VIRGINIA JUDGE (Strathfield) [5.53 p.m.]: I express my grief for the victims of the Beslan tragedy and those injured in the recent bombing of the Australian Embassy in Jakarta. I have a large number of residents of Russian and Indonesian decent in my electorate. Together with the Premier and other members of Parliament, I signed the condolence book at the Russian Embassy after hearing of this terrible tragedy. My duty today saddens me greatly. There is not one person among us who was not absolutely gripped with shock and grief upon hearing of the terrible news of the siege and the occupation of a Russian school filled to the brim with innocent lives. I cannot help but ask what the point of this violent and barbaric siege could have been. How could anyone ever imagine that the premature snatching of so many lives could have any purpose for advancement or progress in our world? I cannot begin to answer these questions because I sincerely believe that there is no legitimate answer to such processes.
Some 338 souls were officially declared deceased and another 191 people remain missing, perhaps never to be recovered. So many people were lost from the 1,180 innocents taken captive. The images from the siege will remain vividly in the minds of many of us: The timber floors of the school hall soaked in blood, surrounded by many dazed and terrified children; the faces of those children, many of them barely six or seven years old; and the shock and disbelief that has taken hold of those little faces that have been, by rights, listening to their teachers lessons, chatting happily between themselves or playing their childhood games outside. Much of our world has been tarnished through this act and much dignity has been lost. This betrayal of everything good, right and decent in our world was quickly followed by another attack on our global community, but it fell much closer to our geographical home. I refer to the bombing in Indonesia, which targeted the Australian Embassy in Jakarta.
An estimated 15,000 Australians travel to Indonesia each month, even after the devastation of the Bali bombings in 2002. In the context of such a close and emotional bond between nations, a car bomb was planted near the embassy on Thursday 9 September, killing up to 11 people and wounding approximately 139. Australians travel to Indonesia for business, friendship and recreation. Many Australians have been hurt by this attack, including Elisabeth Manuela Bambina Masu, the daughter of a New South Wales police officer. I am sure our sympathies are with her and her family as they feel keenly the misery and pain that echo and gather momentum around the globe. Our sympathies and those of everyone, I am sure, also are with the victims and families of the Indonesians, many of whom worked tirelessly for the Australian Embassy. What they have lost we cannot regain.
I concur with Peter Hartcher of the Sydney Morning Herald in his assessment that "terrorists win if they destroy friendship". I hold great hope that the Australian and Indonesian governments can recover from this mutual devastation through mutual support and confidence. We must answer this terror with friendship and support. Violence is not a solution. War is not an end in itself. If we take a moment to reflect we know this to be so. Violence does not suit those who have been victims of violence. Violence does not mend wounds. It cannot heal a community. Nor will it bring an end to bloodshed. Violence is never the solution. One of the greatest minds on this world belonged to Gandhi. He was a great man who still has a thriving legacy. Gandhi spoke largely of non-violence. Sadly, his words seem to become more relevant as the years pass. Gandhi once said:
Wherever there are wars, wherever you are confronted with an opponent, conquer him with love.
In a very crude manner I have tried to apply that to my daily life. It does not mean that all my difficulties are solved and many times I have failed. But this law of love has answered; the law of destruction never has. Gandhi's answer to violence silences those who practise it in a way that violence never could. The loss of the 11338 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Russian and Indonesian people tarnishes the whole world. As a species we are compromised for the weakness that has been discovered within us. The worst of humanity has been revealed glaringly, and it is indeed a dark place. However, we realise the fault and together as people we can grow wiser and more resilient. We must reject the temptations of violence, for death and loss lie down that path. We will not succumb to violence because we are stronger than that. We must seek to redeem our world, to strive for justice for all, and to promote the values of tolerance, compassion and decency. I have faith that we can redeem our world and that hand in hand we, as a global community, will find the courage to do just that.
CHATSWOOD PRIMARY SCHOOL CAPITAL WORKS
Ms GLADYS BEREJIKLIAN (Willoughby) [5.58 p.m.]: I endorse the nomination of Chatswood Primary School by the Department of Education and Training for much-needed capital works and I implore the Minister for Education and Training to direct that the project scope be confirmed as soon as possible. Permanent structures within the school grounds need to be built to provide the extra accommodation so badly needed for the growing number of students. Currently there are insufficient classrooms to house all the children. The library, school hall and toilet facilities are inadequate both in size and quality to cater for the number of enrolled students. The number of current demountables also is impacting on the already limited playground space. Class sizes in many instances are also very large due to a lack of adequate accommodation.
As the State member I can state unequivocally that Chatswood primary has a strong and vibrant school community that enables the students to excel in all facets of student life, whether it be academic, music, the arts or the sporting field. I have no doubt that many of the students currently at the school will go on to make an enormous contribution to their chosen careers. We need to ensure that these strengths are nurtured. The school has an outstanding band, consistently does well in statewide academic competitions and strongly supports its sports stars.
More than 60 per cent of the school students are from a non-English-speaking background. In fact, in recognition of this, the school newsletter translates items into Mandarin. The school does an outstanding job promoting a sense of community. The weekend before last I witnessed approximately a hundred parents, teachers and students, including the principal, participating in a working bee to ensure that, notwithstanding the school's limited space, it would look as green as possible. The day was sponsored by Bunnings and demonstrated to me how devoted the community is to the school. Last Saturday I attended the official opening of the Chatswood Organic Food and Farmers Markets, which will be held every Saturday in the school grounds. That is another example of the wonderful co-operation between the school and the community.
Therefore, it is in the interests of students, teachers, parents and anyone who cares about the future of Chatswood to ensure that any delays in meeting demands for new buildings and facilities at the school are mitigated. We need to be ever mindful of the impact on the school of the increasing population of the area. As I have mentioned quite a few times in this Chamber, the construction of three additional towers—totalling up to 60 additional storeys of residential accommodation—will soon be built in the Chatswood central business district, literally a stone's throw from the school site. It will put pressure on already increasing student numbers. Therefore, from a planning perspective alone, the capital works project is imperative. I reiterate to the Chatswood primary school's community that this, too, is an issue I feel strongly about. I first made representations to the New South Wales Department of Education and Training regarding this matter in December 2003, and I formally raised the issue in this House in February 2004.
In May this year I wrote directly to the New South Wales Minister for Education and Training. On that occasion, the Minister advised that he will "consider the request in the context of future capital works priorities". I again place on the record, on behalf of the Chatswood school community, our request to the Minister that his consideration of this matter result in a project whose scope will deliver much-needed capital works upgrades as soon as possible. I thank the scores of parents at the school who have taken the time to write, phone, fax and email my office to share their concerns about the current lack of facilities. I have been overwhelmed by their dedication. I send special thanks to the school's parents and citizens association, which has kept in regular contact with me on this matter. I will continue to work closely with the Chatswood school community until the request for funding comes to a satisfactory conclusion. In the meantime, I thank the principal, parents, teachers and students for making Chatswood primary the wonderful place that it is. The challenge for us is to ensure that dilapidated and demountable buildings become a thing of the past so that the school meets the challenges of a growing and diverse population while maintaining its strong sense of community. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11339
EDUCATION WEEK ACTIVITIES
Mr BRYCE GAUDRY (Newcastle—Parliamentary Secretary) [6.02 p.m.]: During Education Week it was a great pleasure for me to visit several schools in the Newcastle area and to open school extensions in Temora on behalf of the Minister for Education and Training. It gave me an opportunity to observe the wonderful work that is being undertaken in our public school system. The theme of Education Week was "Values", and my observations at all the schools I visited confirmed the demonstrably high quality of teaching and the tremendous achievements of students. I began the week at Waratah Public School in the Newcastle electorate. The school celebrated 140 years of public education on the site and has a great sense of history. On the day I was at the school it was visited by many men and women who had undertaken their early education at the school. Many of them were inducted into the school's hall of fame in the assembly hall.
On the Tuesday of Education Week it was my pleasure to host a visit by 65 year five students from The Junction primary school to Parliament House. They undertook the program that has been designed for schools. They role-played as members of Parliament under the direction of Peter Tuziak, who does a great job. They later visited the Legislative Council and undertook a tour of Parliament House. On the following day it was my pleasure to visit Temora West Public School in the company of the honourable member for Lachlan. On that occasion I opened some new improvements to the school comprising two new classrooms and a historically restored staff room. One could not but be impressed with the teaching standards of the school and its sustainable environmental programs. There was a strong sense of community involvement in the school that was evidenced by parents who visited the school and by the facilities that have been provided through the assistance of parents.
On the Thursday the Newcastle school education area celebrated public education at the Newcastle City Hall. The occasion was marked by a commendable display of the tremendous competence of the students of schools in the Newcastle school education area. Liam Bird, the captain of Adamstown Public School, and Hayley Watson, the captain of Callaghan College, were the chairpersons. The whole program was organised by the students. Awards were presented to teachers, parents and members of the community who had made valuable contributions to schools throughout the Newcastle area. The director of the Newcastle school education area, Wayne Ible, gave the opening address and focused upon all the values that are being espoused in the public education system.
The event featured a display of wonderful musical talent of students throughout the area and featured the Hunter School of the Performing Arts mass choir's performance of The River. Emily Rex of Newcastle High School performed. The performance of the Hunter School of the Performing Arts Aboriginal Dance Group was enthralling for the teachers, parents, distinguished guests and students in attendance. The young students made the award presentations. In particular, I mention Zachary Welsh, Ben Matthews, Aidan Bailey-Coles and Liam Bird, who were winners in the Newcastle school education area's public speaking presentation. I thoroughly enjoyed a great week of displays of public education achievements.
ALCOHOL AND DRUG SERVICES
Ms CLOVER MOORE (Bligh) [6.07 p.m.]: Tonight I again draw to the attention of the House the urgent need for expanded alcohol and drug services in the light of newly published evidence-based research. This is important in my electorate, particularly in the Redfern and Kings Cross areas, where residents face drug dealing and related crime, overdose deaths, health problems and associated human misery. Five years ago the New South Wales Drug Summit recommended effective action to reduce drug problems. The Summit asked for ongoing policy reviews to ensure that every level of service achieves best practice and maximum cost effectiveness, and that resource allocation was based on evidence-based outcomes. The Government acted on the Summit's recommendations, culminating in a decision to trial the Kings Cross Medically Supervised Injecting Centre, which has been proved to save lives, reduce overdoses, improve amenity and assist injecting drug users to obtain help.
The Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy has published a comprehensive evaluation of international drug harm prevention measures. The review was carried out by independent researchers and funded by the Commonwealth Government. Entitled "The Prevention of Substance Use, Risk and Harm in Australia: A Review of the Evidence", the study evaluated programs that prevented drug supply, use and harm, and endorsed the Drug Summit recommendations of a comprehensive health-based approach to drugs. The report shows that investment in the early years of life in matters such as parents' support, education, and school and community support programs gets results. I ask the Government to increase funds to its Families First and Pathways to Prevention programs. Universal and targeted drug and health education programs in schools and communities 11340 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 work, and they should be expanded. Acting on homelessness and mental illness has been shown to have prevented drug problems from occurring. It reinforces the need to expand mental health services and help people to get off the streets.
Evidence shows that methadone maintenance programs are one of the most effective treatment programs. They prevent overdoses and help opiate users to sustain a more stable lifestyle as well as reduce drug- related crime. However, methadone services are restricted and few people who seek treatment actually get it. There may be an estimated 9,000 people in New South Wales who are waiting for methadone treatment. Drug detoxification and rehabilitation services reduce drug demand, crime and health problems, but they are chronically underfunded.
Inner-city service providers tell me that about half the people who seek help are turned away, and that St Vincent's Hospital's Gorman House has funds only until the end of December before it will be forced to reduce its detoxification service again. I call on the Government to expand inner-city detoxification services. There is also a dire lack of culturally appropriate, accessible detoxification facilities for indigenous communities, a particular concern in Redfern. I have asked the Minister for Health to provide a comprehensive health service that is culturally appropriate and meets their complex needs. Regulation and law enforcement are the main strategies to reduce drug supply, and that report shows that restricting alcohol and cigarette advertising, special taxes, liquor accords, and targeting drug dealers rather than drug users work. I am pleased that the Government will put more effort into liquor accords following the Alcohol Summit, but I believe that they should be mandatory and enforceable.
Diversion programs instead of gaol for first-time or second-time offenders are known to work, offering the hope of rehabilitation rather than a criminal life. Evidence shows that much cannabis-related harm is linked to its legal status rather than the effect of the drug, and that reducing penalties for cannabis use may reduce harm without increasing use. Therefore, the Government should reform legal penalties for cannabis use. The report entitled "Prevention of Substance Use, Risk and Harm in Australia: A Review of the Evidence" shows that safe, supervised injecting facilities and needle and syringe exchanges prevent the spread of blood-borne diseases, as do hepatitis B vaccinations, and I call on the Government to make that help more accessible.
Evidence shows naloxone can prevent drug overdoses for opiate users, although this has not yet been used in Australia. I call on the New South Wales Government to introduce that treatment. One of the most interesting findings of that research was that Australian governments spend the majority of their funding on law enforcement: 84 per cent goes to policing and corrective services, while only 10 per cent is spent on research, and a pathetic 6 per cent goes to drug treatment. The evidence in the Commonwealth Government's report demonstrates that that is an ineffective distribution of resources. This new evidence requires the Government to increase support for health and social interventions and prevention strategies such as those to which I have referred. Only then will drug users, potential drug users, families and communities see real reductions in the levels of drug use, risk and harm, and neighbourhoods will see reductions in crime and violence.
MULLUMBIMBY HIGH SCHOOL
Mr DONALD PAGE (Ballina—Deputy Leader of The Nationals) [6.11 p.m.], by leave: On behalf of the staff, students and school community of Mullumbimby High School I make a plea for the completion of stage two of the refurbishment of that school. For years staff and students of Mullumbimby High School have endured poor facilities and makeshift classroom accommodation. Mullumbimby High School is located in the Brunswick Valley in the popular and growing Byron shire. Therefore, there is an ongoing need for expanded school facilities in the area, and the Brunswick Valley community has been fighting for improved high school facilities over an extended period. In response to this community need and after several years of investigations of suitable sites, a proposal for a second high school in the Brunswick Valley was discarded in favour of a proposal for the expansion and upgrade of the existing Mullumbimby High School.
Following that decision a commitment was made to upgrade the school in two continuing stages. Stage one of the high school upgrade has been seamless and is due for completion ahead of schedule at the end of this term. Despite the disruption to the school during the past 18 months the school community is very appreciative of the new building and facilities, which cost $9 million. The first stage of the upgrade has involved the replacement of 15 of the school's 35 demountables with permanent buildings. The new three-level block includes a new canteen, industrial arts, visual arts and science laboratories, as well as a staff room and improved staff accommodation. There is also a new playground, landscaping and more seating for students. The upgrade allows students of all levels to mix during breaks and has opened up the school. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11341
Despite the imminent completion of the first stage, the school continues to operate on two sites: the school site and an adjacent piece of land leased from the local bowling club. As a result, the school is split administratively and this impractical arrangement will not be resolved until the second stage of the school's upgrade is completed. Students are also forced to take classes in rooms with specialised facilities. For example, maths classes are being held in old classrooms that were designed for classes such as science or art. Despite those arrangements students from the school, to their credit, and to the credit of the staff and parents, continue to achieve excellent results. There are also occupational health and safety issues associated with the incomplete works. It is not satisfactory for an entire school to operate on a half-built site. Earlier this year, the Mullumbimby High School council made a submission to the Minister for Education and Training alerting him to the early completion of stage one, and the need for the swift commencement of stage two.
Already the students and staff have endured the inconvenience associated with the building upgrade and are keen to have the school upgrade completed as quickly as possible. Stretching the process further will only lead to greater inconvenience for the school community and higher costs in the long run. Despite receiving a submission from the school, the Minister failed to include stage two of the Mullumbimby High School upgrade in the 2004 budget capital works program. At times it is difficult to understand the funding priorities of the Government. Schools such as Mullumbimby High School are in urgent need of the basic levels of facilities. For years it has operated out of 35 demountables on two sites, yet no money is forthcoming this year to complete the upgrade of the school.
Instead, staff and students are left to operate in a half-completed upgrade. Whilst staff, students and the community are appreciative of the work completed to date, the continuation of the current arrangement will have a major impact on their morale. I am further disturbed to learn that despite the stage one contractor completing the project ahead of time, and having done an excellent job, the company is unable to tender for stage two. Surely there are financial efficiencies to be gained by allowing the successful builder of stage one to at least tender for stage two. Apparently the tendering rules of the Department of Education and Training do not allow that. What a ridiculous state of affairs!
The contractors are familiar with the site, the design specifications of the first stage and what is generally involved in stage two. Regardless of who is allowed to tender for stage two, the bigger issue is that stage two should proceed as soon as possible after the completion of stage one, which is imminent. On behalf of the Brunswick Valley High School community, I urge the Minister to include funding for the stage two development in the next budget. The development application for stage two has been approved, plans have been completed but without further funding final planning cannot be undertaken. The school needs an allocation of funding now to enable the detailed planning to be done as soon as possible.
Funding for stage two must surely come in the next budget. Students and staff of Mullumbimby High School should not have to operate in a half-completed school. It is unreasonable to expect them to do so and there should be no further time delay on the project. I ask the Minister, through the Parliamentary Secretary, the honourable member for Newcastle, to immediately approve the small amount of money necessary to enable detailed planning for stage two to commence straight away. I ask also that funding for stage two be included in the next budget. It is important that the inconvenience and disruption caused by the redevelopment of Mullumbimby High School be minimised for the benefit of students, staff and the school community.
Private members' statements noted.
BILL RETURNED
The following bill was returned from the Legislative Council without amendment:
Local Government Amendment (Discipline) Bill
[Madam Acting-Speaker (Ms Marie Andrews) left the chair at 6.17 p.m. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m.]
HEALTH LEGISLATION FURTHER AMENDMENT BILL
Bill introduced and read a first time.
Second Reading
Mr MORRIS IEMMA (Lakemba—Minister for Health) [7.30 p.m.]: I move:
That this bill be now read a second time. 11342 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
This bill proposes amendments to a number of pieces of health legislation, namely, the Dental Technicians Registration Act 1975, the Health Services Act 1997, the New South Wales Institute of Psychiatry Act 1964, the Optical Dispensers Act 1963 and the Public Health Act 1991. The bill also proposes the repeal of the Nursing Homes Act 1988. I commence with the repeal of the Nursing Homes Act and the associated amendments to the Public Health Act. The Nursing Homes Act was enacted in 1988 and requires all nursing homes in New South Wales to obtain a licence to operate from the Director-General of Health. The Act does not apply to those facilities that were previously known as hostels.
The Nursing Homes Act predates the Commonwealth Government's Aged Care Act 1997, which establishes a comprehensive funding and regulatory regime for aged care facilities for both nursing homes and hostels. Therefore, nursing homes in New South Wales are currently regulated by both State and Commonwealth governments. This is in contrast to other States, where the Commonwealth alone regulates nursing homes. As part of the Government's obligations under the competition principles agreement the Department of Health conducted a review of the Nursing Homes Act. That review concluded that as the Commonwealth's Aged Care Act provides a comprehensive regulatory and funding system for aged care the Nursing Homes Act adds an additional and unnecessary layer of regulation to the aged care sector.
There has long been concern by nursing home operators that duplicate State Government regulation of nursing homes places additional barriers to the opening of new places by service providers. The repeal of the Nursing Homes Act demonstrates the Government's commitment to remove any obstacles to bringing new aged care places on line and it will assist families in securing a place for a family member who requires dedicated professional care. While the Commonwealth regulatory system is comprehensive and incorporates a wide range of powers to sanction poor performers there is one area where the Government is concerned that Commonwealth regulation is inadequate and where it is necessary to retain State Government regulation. This is a strong commitment from the Government in the area of professional nurse staffing.
Under the Nursing Homes Act all licensed facilities are required to employ a chief nurse to be responsible for the overall care of the residents of a nursing home. Licensed nursing homes are also required to ensure that there is at least one registered nurse on duty at all times in the facility. The Commonwealth's legislation does not include requirements for minimum nurse staffing. Therefore, cognate to the repeal of the Nursing Homes Act, amendments to the Public Health Act have been prepared to carry over the current staffing requirements from the Nursing Homes Act. For that purpose a definition of "nursing home" is to be included in the Public Health Act. That definition includes any facility that is currently licensed under the Nursing Homes Act or that was approved in principle for licensing, any facility that in the future is granted high-care residential places under the Commonwealth's Aged Care Act and any other class of facility prescribed by the regulations.
This comprehensive definition is designed to retain the status quo in relation to nurse staffing. The inclusion of any facility that in the future is granted an allocation of high-care places is intended to ensure that there is a level playing field and that residents in a facility that would have been required to be licensed under the Nursing Homes Act will be guaranteed the same minimum staffing levels as those facilities that were, in fact, licensed. The power to make regulations to include additional classes of facilities in the definition of "nursing home" will provide a mechanism to quickly respond to any changes in the way the Commonwealth allocates aged care places. This is particularly relevant, given the recent Commonwealth review of aged care funding.
I take this opportunity to provide the House with an undertaking that the Government will monitor developments in the Commonwealth's classification of aged care places and will regulate as required to ensure that any changes do not allow facilities providing care to the most dependent residents to avoid their obligations to have a registered nurse on duty at all times and to appoint a director of nursing. Officers of the Department of Health have undertaken detailed consultation with peak aged care industry bodies and the New South Wales Nurses Association on these matters. It is important to acknowledge that all participants in these consultations have acted in good faith and done their best to reach agreement on the most appropriate mechanism to meet the Government's commitment to maintain nurse staffing levels for the benefit of nursing home residents.
The proposed amendments to the Public Health Act achieve an appropriate balance. It is further proposed to amend the Public Health Act to delete section 52. This section requires the Minister to approve crematory equipment and apparatus. Consistent with the Government's commitment to the competition principles agreement, the Department of Health undertook a review of the Public Health Act, which recommended removing that section. It was found to be overly regulatory. The Environment Protection Authority has oversight of industry operations with its regulations governing equipment and omissions. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11343
The next proposed amendment is to the Dental Technicians Registration Act 1975 to bring the maximum penalties for breaches of the Act and the regulations into line with the penalties that apply under other health professional registration Acts in New South Wales. The proposed increase for penalties for an offence under the Act is from five penalty points to 50 penalty points or from $550 to $5,500. It is proposed to increase the penalties that can be imposed by regulation from two penalty points to 10 penalty points, or from $220 to $1,100. It is important to ensure that the penalties remain comparable to, and consistent with, similar penalties applying to other health professionals.
It is proposed to amend the Health Services Act 1997 to support NSW Health's shared corporate services program. The report of the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal entitled "New South Wales Health: Focusing on Patient Care" confirmed that the potential exists for significant savings to the health system through consolidation of corporate services and other support functions and it recommended that a shared corporate services entity be established. There already has been significant work undertaken to reform the delivery of corporate services across area health service boundaries. In order to make further progress in the efficient and effective provision of corporate and health support services, amendment of the Health Services Act is now required to establish a shared corporate services vehicle for the public health system. The proposed vehicle is through the establishment of a Public Health System Support Division of the Health Administration Corporation, a corporation established under the Health Administration Act 1982.
The concept of shared corporate service delivery is now being embraced here and overseas, in both the public and private sector, as an effective means of improving corporate and business service delivery within a large organisation. In NSW Health, the Shared Corporate Services Program will drive this process. Included in the program are all health support services such as linen and catering services, as well as traditional corporate services such as human resources, finance, information technology, asset management and administrative services. The program will see services delivered through local and regional networks by public sector staff under an umbrella service delivery structure in the form of a Public Health System Support Division of the Health Administration Corporation. This structure will provide maximum flexibility so as to allow the delivery of services in the most efficient manner.
The bill includes provisions to facilitate the transfer of public health system staff engaged in corporate and health support service delivery to the Public Health System Support Division of the Health Administration Corporation, or the use of such staff by the Health Administration Corporation. I emphasise for the benefit of members that any employee of a public health organisation who is transferred to the Public Health System Support Division of the Health Administration Corporation will retain all existing entitlements and employment conditions. Like all other staff in the public health system, employees of the Health Administration Corporation engaged in the Public Health System Support Division to provide health support and corporate services within that system will be employees of NSW Health.
These proposals are about achieving the maximum benefit to the public health system by establishing a division of the Health Administration Corporation as the public sector provider of health support services. Proposed section 126G ensures that the shared corporate services program can be implemented in a consistent manner across the public health system, and that maximum benefit of the program can be realised. This clause provides that compliance with Ministerial directions concerning the provision and use of corporate and health support services under the new shared model does not expose public health organisations or the Health Administration Corporation to potential action under Part IV of the Commonwealth Trade Practices Act. Section 51 of the Trade Practices Act permits the statutory authorisation of conduct that might otherwise fall under Part IV, and there is precedent for its use in these circumstances in the form of section 134O of the Victorian Health Services Act 1988.
I turn now to the proposed amendments to the New South Wales Institute of Psychiatry Act 1964. The purpose of these amendments is to ensure that the institute may operate outside the territorial boundaries of New South Wales without seeking Ministerial approval, and to address administrative difficulties experienced by the institute in relation to the incurring of expenditure and the employment of staff. One of the primary roles of the institute is the provision of education and training to health professionals and other members of the community in the field of mental health. For over 30 years the institute has been engaged in providing education and training to individuals, both interstate and overseas, and has been recognised by the World Health Organisation for this role. However section 4 (3) of the Act requires Ministerial approval before the institute may operate outside the borders of New South Wales. In order to facilitate the institute's ongoing collaborations with other jurisdictions and to remove unnecessary administrative impediments to those collaborations, it is proposed to remove the requirement that Ministerial approval be obtained before the institute operates outside New South Wales. 11344 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
The second series of amendments to the Act is to allow the institute, subject to the Minister's approval, to arrange for the employment of its own staff. This amendment will, if approved, make administration of the institute more efficient. Finally, it is proposed to provide the institute with a general power to delegate its functions to its staff. This power of delegation will allow the administration of the institute to be undertaken in a more effective and efficient fashion.
The bill also contains proposed amendments to the Optical Dispensers Act 1963 to address serious concerns about the health risks associated with coloured and novelty contact lenses. The Optical Dispensers Act restricts the dispensing and sale of optical appliances. The Act currently defines an optical appliance as an appliance designed to correct, remedy or relieve any refractive abnormality or optical defect of sight. This definition does not include coloured or novelty contact lenses that serve no corrective purpose. Therefore, any person, irrespective of their training or expertise in eye care, may carry out the sale and dispensing of those contact lenses. The United States Food and Drug Administration [FDA] issued a consumer warning on the dangers associated with such lenses. The FDA warned that improper use of such lenses could lead to loss of sight and it recommended that consumers should only obtain lenses following proper fitting by an eye care professional.
It is therefore proposed that the Optical Dispensers Act be amended to ensure that novelty and coloured contact lenses may be obtained only from registered optometrists and licensed optical dispensers. The proposed amendment will ensure that the supply of lenses remains within the purview of regulated health professionals and helps to ensure that lenses are properly fitted and that consumers receive proper attention and advice when purchasing lenses. While the proposed amendments will ensure that those lenses can be retailed only by optometrists and optical dispensers, there will be no requirement for purchasers to obtain a prescription. The proposed amendment will not affect current business practice and will not disadvantage manufacturers or suppliers who have advised the Department of Health that their lenses are distributed only via optical dispensers and optometrists. I commend the bill to the House.
Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Daryl Maguire.
REGISTERED CLUBS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
In Committee
Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.
Mr GRANT McBRIDE (The Entrance—Minister for Gaming and Racing) [7.48 p.m.], by leave: I move Government amendments Nos 1 to 6 in globo:
No. 1 Page 10, schedule 1 [14]. Insert after line 3:
(b) the Licensing Court, in the case of a complaint in relation to a registered club, determines that the ground on which the complaint is made is made out or, in the case of a complaint in relation to the secretary or a member of the governing body of a registered club, makes a declaration under section 35, and
No. 2 Page 10, schedule 1 [14], lines 7-9. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:
(2) The Licensing Court may, in addition to any such order as to costs, order that the person liable for those costs pay to the Director a specified amount in respect of all or any of the reasonable costs incurred by the Director in connection with the investigation or inquiry.
No. 3 Page 10, schedule 1 [14], lines 10 and 11. Omit "a notice given". Insert instead "an order made".
No. 4 Page 14, schedule 2.3 [1]. Insert after line 3:
(b) the Licensing Court determines that the ground on which the complaint is made is made out, and
No. 5 Page 14, schedule 2.3 [1], lines 7-10. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:
(2) The Licensing Court may, in addition to any such order as to costs, order that the person liable for those costs pay to the Director a specified amount in respect of all or any of the reasonable costs incurred by the Director in connection with the investigation or inquiry.
No. 6 Page 14, schedule 2.3 [1], lines 11 and 12. Omit "a notice given". Insert instead "an order made". 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11345
Mr GEORGE SOURIS (Upper Hunter) [7.48 p.m.]: I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the Government amendment to this bill. As I said in my second reading speech, the moving of the amendment is really strange and I think it simply highlights the disarray within the Government that the day that the second reading of the bill commenced was the day on which the Government provided a first print of an amendment to its own bill. In the words of the Minister when replying to the second reading debate, these amendments are necessary to rectify things that were missed in the initial drafting of the bill. I find that extraordinary. It points to how hastily the bill was drafted. The Government launched its attack on registered clubs in New South Wales and threw together flawed legislation.
These amendments address only one of the easily identifiable flaws. Although they improve the original amending bill in a single respect they will be part of legislation that, in its entirety, is regarded as obnoxious. The bill has no morality and seeks to persecute and vilify clubs in New South Wales. The clubs are engaged in a do-or-die struggle with the Government, particularly over the extraordinary tax increases that are being imposed upon them. The tax was levied on 1 September this year and will increase in seven annual increments until it peaks at 49.9 per cent of gaming revenue for clubs with the highest turnover. I point out the distinction that the tax will be applied to gaming revenue not turnover, which will be a serious financial imposition on clubs and virtually destroy their ability to contribute to the community in the way that we have come to expect.
The original bill contained new section 206B, which provided that if a magistrate in a case before the Licensing Court awarded costs against a club the costs of the departmental investigation and inquiry would also flow automatically—we are breaking new ground here—to the club. This would allow the Government to persecute clubs—with the threat of significant financial penalties in the form of the combined costs of investigation and inquiry and potentially the costs awarded by the Licensing Court—over any number of issues. It would not be hard to uncover several issues for inquiry—it is a bit like the referee blowing the whistle at every line-out during a rugby union match. Any recalcitrant club or any club that had the audacity to fight the Government over the clubs tax could find itself the victim of an inquiry and be subject to the imposition of significant costs for the departmental investigation, the subsequent inquiry and any other inquiry under section 41X. In some cases that would break the club in question, regardless of any other legal or moral considerations in respect of the Government's approach.
These amendments to the bill provide that costs will not flow automatically to the clubs. Clubs will now be liable for the associated costs if the Licensing Court makes an order of costs against them. We must accept that if a magistrate awards court costs against a club in many ways he or she will be compelled to make a similar order regarding the costs of the investigation and inquiry. It will not happen automatically but there will be strong pressure on any magistrate who awards court costs against a club to award investigation costs against it as well. These amendments improve the bill marginally but retain the court's ability to award costs for departmental investigations. As a consequence the Government will be able to force clubs to pay any additional costs incurred—which would be a significant imposition—and thus find a way of running an investigation by removing any potential financial impediment. The Government—and particularly the Minister for Gaming and Racing—will no longer have to consider cost when deciding whether to initiate an investigation of or inquiry into any club. It will be easy to ensure that the inquiry's terms of reference allow sufficient grounds for a magistrate to award costs against the club concerned.
So these amendments do not alter the bill very much in principle. They provide a mechanism for involving magistrates rather than making an automatic imposition, which in many respects improves a bad bill. In this context I commend the actions of ClubsNSW, the Registered Clubs Association and services club in their campaign against the tax, which they launched soon after the bill surfaced. Their efforts have ensured that these amendments at least are made to the bill. The Opposition objects to the concept of imposing costs and enabling the court to impose investigation and inquiry costs on clubs. Although we understand that these amendments improve a bad piece of legislation, costs may still be charged against clubs and we regard that as obnoxious. It is a very strong weapon to put in the hands of the Government to use against clubs.
I will take this opportunity to respond to a remark by the Minister in replying to the second reading debate. As far as I can tell, the amendments before the Committee do not remove new section 26B (3), which states that it will have effect despite any other law. If that new subsection remains, this bill will override all other laws—as is clearly stated—including freedom of information provisions. The Opposition's objections in that regard stand. I ask the Minister to respond to that point when he replies to my remarks in Committee.
I will take additional licence—it will save a lot of trouble later if I do it now—and ask the Minister not to be as dismissive as he has been of the grave issues that I raised with regard to the current inquiry into the 11346 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Panthers club, how this bill surfaced initially and what communications or representations have occurred between the Minister, his staff, departmental officers, officers associated with the inquiry and the legal counsel connected with the Panthers inquiry—from the presiding officer to the department's involvement. The Minister did not address that issue in his reply. Therefore, he should take the opportunity in Committee to make good his obligation under the Westminster system. In other words, I ask the Minister, pursuant to his obligation under the Westminster system, to guarantee that there has been no unethical communication between the inquiry, him and his department in producing this bill in the first place. It is a vital question that I would like to hear the answer to.
Mr ANDREW CONSTANCE (Bega) [8.00 p.m.]: As the shadow Minister for Gaming and Racing indicated, the Coalition is concerned about the cost imposition on clubs. We are particularly concerned that if, for example, a club employee were to falsify his or her name, and that activity resulted in an inquiry, the club would face a heavy cost imposition. Apart from tax avoidance, I cannot fathom the reason why a person would want to falsify his or her name to work in a club. Of course, such activity would necessitate a significant investigation. The amendments are designed to make a bad bill marginally better, particularly given that the bill gives the Licensing Court magistrate discretion if awarding court costs in relation to investigation costs. Regarding the concept of employees in the club movement utilising false names, for whatever reason—I suspect for tax avoidance—if their actions were to be thoroughly investigated by the department the cost imposition on clubs could be excessive—
Mr Daryl Maguire: Through no fault of their own.
Mr ANDREW CONSTANCE:—through no fault of their own and would be detrimental to a club. For a person to falsify his or her name so he or she can be on the payroll of a club is totally irresponsible. Of course, I advocate that such activity should be thoroughly investigated by the Australian Taxation Office. I note that the Sunday Telegraph of 1 August 2004 reported that a senior New South Wales Minister is facing allegations for utilising a false name when employed by a club—
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! I concede that until now the contribution of the honourable member for Bega has been relevant to the amendments. However, he is now moving well away from the amendments to a different category of issues.
Mr ANDREW CONSTANCE: I seek the Minister's explanation as to the cost imposition upon a club if an employee falsifies his or her name. As I said, I can only presume that tax avoidance would underpin that. On 1 August 2004 the Sunday Telegraph published an interesting article in relation to this point—
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! I have ruled on the matter to which the honourable member for Bega is referring. If he wishes to pursue that matter, he cannot do so in Committee.
Mr ANDREW CONSTANCE: I am simply trying to explain the context of the amendments—
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! I have ruled on the matter. Any attempt by the honourable member for Bega to explain it will amount to cavilling with my ruling. I suggest that he not go down that path.
Mr George Souris: Point of order: Mr Temporary Chairman, I seek your clarification and ruling. Even in debate in Committee, if the Minister interjects, the member with the call has the right to respond. These were direct interjections.
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! I am happy to concede that the member with the call is entitled to respond to interjections. Frankly, the Minister has so far been remarkably restrained. The honourable member for Bega has the call.
Mr ANDREW CONSTANCE: As I said, the amendments make a bad bill marginally better, particularly given that the bill gives the Licensing Court magistrate discretion if awarding court costs in relation to investigation costs. I reiterate the shadow Minister's comments on the bill. This is bad legislation from a bad Minister, a Minister who has falsified his name in the club movement. I suspect we will hear more about that in future.
Mr GEORGE SOURIS (Upper Hunter) [8.06 p.m.]: I demand the right to respond to the Minister's interjection when he said that I lack the courage to do this myself. If he means I lack the courage to accuse him 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11347 of working in a club under a false name, while boasting about it at two separate meetings, failing to declare that to the Premier when he was appointed Minister, and showing no contrition whatsoever, I believe that the Minister has abrogated the right to hold the portfolio relating to the responsible service of alcohol and responsible gaming. How could the industry have any confidence in a Minister who boasts about having worked under a false name in the club industry?
The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! The honourable member for Upper Hunter will come to order. His remarks are not only outside the leave of the amendments, they also breach the convention that such allegations should be made by way of substantive motion.
Amendments agreed to.
Schedules 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.
Bill reported from Committee with amendments and report adopted.
ANTI-DISCRIMINATION AMENDMENT (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 16 September.
Mr MALCOLM KERR (Cronulla) [8.08 p.m.]: I lead for the Opposition on the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill and indicate that we will not oppose it. The purpose of the bill is to make miscellaneous amendments to the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977, which relate to the making of complaints of unlawful discrimination and the investigation of them by the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board, and to the review of the President's decisions by the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. The bill addresses recommendations made by the New South Wales Law Reform Commission in report 92, which is titled "Review of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977", and more recent recommendations that resulted from consultations with the New South Wales Ombudsman and the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board.
The amendments will allow a complaint to be made by an agent of a person or by the parent or guardian if the person lacks legal capacity. The president of the board will have increased powers to ensure that complainants have consented, where possible, to complaints being made on their behalf. The president will also have the power to appoint another person to act on their behalf if the president believes the person's best interests are not being served. The bill also will enable a person who has consented to a complaint being made on his or her behalf to withdraw the consent. Other amendments will enable the president to assist a person to make a complaint, including people with special needs such as dyslexia. Under the bill people will not be prevented from making a complaint if they have prosecuted the subject matter of the complaint in another jurisdiction, whether in New South Wales or elsewhere.
The amendments provide for electronic lodgment of complaints and clarify the president's power to accept, dismiss, refer and terminate complaints both at the outset and during an investigation. A decision by the president to decline a complaint is not reviewable by the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. The bill sets out the president's power to acquire the relevant information required to conduct an investigation into a complaint and to endeavour to resolve a complaint by conciliation at any stage. The amendments in the bill broaden the power of the president to delegate his functions. They set out the circumstances in which a complaint may be referred to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal, either by the Minister, the president or a party to the complaint.
The bill widens the circumstances in which the tribunal can make interim orders and makes it an offence to refuse or neglect to comply with certain orders or an interim order of the tribunal. The bill empowers the tribunal to order apologies and retractions, and gives the president power to enforce orders of the tribunal in the public interest. The bill also will allow the Anti-Discrimination Board to charge fees for services or materials it provides while exercising its educational functions under the Act. The bill also contains a minor substantive reform, which extends the protection from disability discrimination arising out of the use of disability assisting aides—human, mechanical or electronic. This brings the Anti-Discrimination Act into line with the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992.
It is the understanding of the Opposition that the amendments in bills are essentially procedural changes, which stem from recommendations made by the Law Reform Commission, to improve complaints 11348 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 handling and review processes for discrimination matters in New South Wales. Recommendation 14 seeks to repeal the small business exemption but this is not covered in the bill. If there are any matters that have not been correctly represented by me, I rely on the Attorney General to cover them in his reply.
Mr ALAN ASHTON (East Hills) [8.14 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Cronulla for his contribution to this bill. Discrimination law is a relatively new concept: It has existed in this country for less than 30 years. For some of us 30 years might appear to be a reasonable amount of time, but 30 to 40 years ago if it was not legal to discriminate against certain people, discrimination certainly was very obvious. I am happy to say that it is usually a Labor government that has introduced discrimination laws. Australia's first such law, the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975, was an initiative of the Whitlam Government. The Whitlam Government was one of the first governments to actually set out complete policies and plans of what it would do before it was elected. One of its key policies was to recognise discrimination against Aboriginal people and to make considerable progress in the area of world heritage and the environment.
Many people thought that the Racial Discrimination Act had to be virtually abolished to cope with the upset, for some people, of the Mabo and Wik decisions, but that was not the case. Much of the credit for that must be given to the Paul Keating Government at the time, barrister Michael Finnane and a parliamentary colleague of mine Daryl Melham, who closely examined the Racial Discrimination Act. They were able to find ways in which this country could keep the Act in place without destroying what was achieved in Mabo and Wik. In 1975 the progressive Dunstan Government in South Australia introduced the Sex Discrimination Act and the Racial Discrimination Act 1976. The first attempts to pass comprehensive discrimination laws in New South Wales, not surprisingly, were introduced into this Parliament in 1976 by Premier Neville Wran—the very year Neville Wran was elected with a one-seat majority—and took effect the following year. Many of us still see Neville Wran as one of the great icons of this Parliament, and it was a tremendous achievement that we still remember so fondly.
Every State and Territory now has anti-discrimination laws and, with the exception of the Northern Territory, all were introduced by the Australian Labor Party. However, a bipartisan approach is taken to discrimination laws. I give credit to the Coalition parties because, on most occasions, they, too, have accepted the need for anti-discrimination laws and some, including the former Coalition Government in New South Wales, have acted to strengthen them. Indeed, I pay tribute to the former Greiner and Fahey governments for that.
Mr Bob Debus: Hannaford did some very good work!
Mr ALAN ASHTON: Yes, as the Attorney General has mentioned, John Hannaford was very good in that area. This bill makes a number of practical changes to ensure that our system works better, and that is what governments are about. This Government will always amend Acts that need improvement. In this bill the time limit for making complaints has been increased from six months to 12 months to give people more time to think about how the discrimination happened and what are the ramifications of complaining. That measure is a positive move. Amendments to clarify the president's powers to accept, dismiss, refer or terminate complaints will make the process more efficient. Often complaints go on forever without a final decision, leaving all parties aggrieved. It is of no benefit to either party for a discrimination complaint to be deferred, revisited and again deferred.
The bill will allow agents to lodge complaints on behalf of people with disabilities or those without the capacity to do so, and to represent others in the tribunal. Many of us believe that if we suffer discrimination we could lodge and present our own case at the tribunal. Unfortunately, many in the community would be intimated at the idea of appearing in front of a tribunal. People with disabilities may feel that complaints they make with respect to discrimination would carry little weight, while others lack the capacity to appear. Allowing them to have a representative is a very important part of these amendments, and I congratulate the Attorney General on introducing them.
Also, for the first time the Act will allow for the electronic lodgment of complaints, which will create a more efficient process. Further significant amendments create offences for breaches of secrecy requirements governing complaints and provide for limited delegation of the president's powers in certain circumstances. The last thing people in a work environment, or wherever they feel they are being discriminated against, need is for others to say, "Guess what? So and so has made a complaint, and everybody is talking about it at the barbecue or the office water cooler." It is important that that safeguard has been built into the legislation. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11349
Further significant amendments create offences in other areas as well, which simply tighten up the complete raft of anti-discrimination legislation. A further important category of amendments contained in the bill concerns the role of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal [ADT] in resolving disputes that cannot be conciliated. A lot of times when people go to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal it is a matter of conciliation, and sometimes people walk away having had their case heard and dealt with by way of conciliation. In Australia if matters are not conciliated they are usually arbitrated. Hopefully, in the case of discrimination we can get more conciliation and not so much arbitration.
The bill makes a number of changes that enable the ADT to make interim orders, which gives people a clear idea of where they are going with their claim; empower the ADT to order apologies and retractions— people will realise that that is important if it is well known and understood—require the ADT to notify the Industrial Relations Commission of any relevant orders; and empower the Anti-Discrimination Board to enforce orders of the ADT where appropriate. It is important that the Anti-Discrimination Board will be able to enforce those orders. It is not much good simply having recommendations and decisions if there is no final power to enforce decisions of the ADT. The Anti-Discrimination Board will uphold decisions of the ADT, and the bill provides for sanctions.
In conclusion, it is important that the Government keeps statutes such as this under review and makes improvements from time to time to ensure that the system operates smoothly and equitably. As I said, Labor governments in particular have been responsible for anti-discrimination laws and their role in protecting the human rights of all Australians. This bill continues that tradition by making a number of improvements to the complaints and resolution system to ensure that these laws, so innovative in their day—they were innovative at that time—continue to remain relevant in the twenty-first century, and that both sides of the Parliament understand that simply because a law was carried nearly 30 years ago does not mean it is not subject to constant revision and review by whoever is in government, even over the next 30 or 40 years. I commend the bill to the Parliament.
Ms VIRGINIA JUDGE (Strathfield) [8.22 p.m.]: I commend the Attorney General and his hardworking staff for introducing the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. Basically, my brief presentation will cover the ways that complaints have been handled to ensure that in the future they will be handled fairly and expeditiously by the board. In summary, the purpose of this bill is to respond to a number of recommendations that were made by the New South Wales Law Reform Commission in 1999 in report No. 92 on the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. One main purpose of this bill is to improve and streamline the ways in which the Anti-Discrimination Board receives and handles complaints of unlawful discrimination. The board is an independent statutory body charged with a number of important tasks and functions that seek to eliminate discrimination and promote equality and equal treatment for all human beings. I am sure all members of this House, and hopefully the wider community, support that.
As a local member, I am pleased to know that when people come to see me with a problem I can send them to the Anti-Discrimination Board and their matter will be heard in that fashion. The complaints handling process is crucial for people who allege that discrimination has occurred as it provides the initial forum in which the circumstances of the alleged discrimination can be aired. The investigation and conciliation processes that the board undertakes seek to establish the facts of a situation and to find a successful resolution between the parties wherever possible. An important feature of this bill is a change in the period in which people can lodge complaints. Currently, people can lodge a complaint up to six months of the alleged discrimination occurring. That is a fairly short time in which to bring a complaint to the board's attention, especially when a potential complainant is still in regular contact with the alleged perpetrator, for example, in an employment situation. One can imagine how much more difficult it would be for a person from a non-English-speaking background to lodge a complaint; trying to find one's way around the system is hard enough.
This bill extends the time limitation to 12 months, which is the same time for lodging complaints in other anti-discrimination jurisdictions in Australia. So it is good that we have a whole-of-nation approach. This consistency in approach makes it much simpler for complainants to make decisions about where best to pursue their complaints. Another new feature is the capacity of the president of the Anti-Discrimination Board to decline part of a complaint. This will give the president greater flexibility to investigate breaches of the Act if and when they have occurred, even when other conduct that is not unlawful discrimination under the Act is included in the initial complaint. This bill gives complainants the capacity to amend their complaints in certain circumstances. This will also bring greater flexibility to the investigation process. Given that the aim of this important statutory regime is to bring to light unlawful discriminatory practices in a relatively informal, non- threatening environment, the increased flexibility in complaints handling which the bill introduces should be greatly welcomed by all. 11350 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
I shall mention briefly one final issue. The board has often been hampered by an inability to consider documentation that could shed light on potential acts of discrimination. This bill empowers the president to compel documents that could assist in trying to assess and handle complaints more thoroughly. Obviously, such evidence is necessary. A person who fails to comply will be guilty of an offence. When there is non-compliance the president may also refer the complaint to the tribunal. In addition, the president will be able to require the production of a transcript of a broadcast that has given rise to a vilification complaint or an allegation that a serious vilification has been committed. Failure to do so will involve a criminal sanction in the form of a monetary penalty. In summary, these provisions will ensure that the most accurate information is made available to the president during the investigation or conciliation of a complaint. This will produce better, more balanced outcomes for complainants and respondents. Obviously the Government is committed to ensuring that the board is truly able to do its job in promoting equality and equal treatment for all members of our community. I am pleased to support the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.
Mrs BARBARA PERRY (Auburn) [8.27 p.m.]: The Anti-Discrimination Act is a cornerstone of our commitment to human rights. A fair, just society must be able to protect its members from discrimination, prejudice and bias. For more than 25 years the Anti-Discrimination Act has stood as a testament to the fact that this Parliament rejects discrimination, harassment and vilification. Over the years significant changes have been made to the Act, widening its grounds and areas of operation. The Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill may be seen from one perspective as implementing a range of changes that are minor and technical in nature. However, the bill's focus is on streamlining the system of complaints and improving the ability of both the Anti-Discrimination Board and the Administrative Decisions Tribunal to bring justice for people who experience discrimination.
This bill will make a real difference to the processes that apply to anti-discrimination complaints. An important element of the bill is its focus on the confidentiality of complaints. This is crucial to both the board and complainants. Although our system tries to resolve complaints by conciliation, rather than confrontation, it remains the case that many people would be deterred from pursuing their legal rights without mechanisms to protect their confidentiality. The existing policies of the Anti-Discrimination Board respect the privacy of complainants. However, for the first time, the bill contains a specific provision to protect their confidentiality. This provision sets out the statutory duties and obligations of employees and agents concerning personal information about a person's affairs that they acquire when working as employees or agents of the board.
At present, information acquired or held by the board about a complaint can normally be subpoenaed by a court or be subject to a request for production pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act 1989. At present the board has only limited grounds on which to oppose production under existing laws. The bill will make it an offence for a member or officer of the board to make a record of, or disclose or communicate to any person, information concerning the affairs of any person obtained while exercising the functions under the Act, unless it is already publicly available or where the disclosure is required under the Anti-Discrimination Act or authorised by any other relevant law.
The provision is designed to protect the integrity of the complaint resolution process, while at the same time encouraging people to bring complaints. The exception under the Freedom of Information Act 1989 for documents containing "confidential information" also does not adequately protect information provided to the board to assist in investigating a complaint. In order to do so, the bill contains an amendment to exempt the president of the board from the operation of the Freedom of Information Act in relation to the president's complaint handling, investigative and reporting functions while the complaint is in the course of being dealt with by the president. This does not prevent freedom of information applications being dealt with in the usual course by the board, but simply prevents the confidentiality of a complaint when that complaint is on foot.
This brings the president of the board into line with other New South Wales government agencies with similar functions, such as the Independent Commission Against Corruption and the Office of the Ombudsman. As I was a lawyer prior to coming into this House, it is quite clear to me that these provisions—and I commend the Attorney General in this regard—will go a long way towards circumventing some issues that have confronted complainants. Knowing that their confidentiality will be protected will be very significant. Therefore, it must be recognised that these are significant and important provisions to safeguard the rights of complainants. As such, I commend the bill to the House.
Ms LINDA BURNEY (Canterbury) [8.32 p.m.]: I welcome the chance to speak on the Anti- Discrimination Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. One reason that I welcome this opportunity is that I spent five years as a member of the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board and, therefore, I have a very 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11351 clear understanding of its workings, its frustrations and its strengths—at least when I was a member of the board. As the Attorney General mentioned in his second reading speech, the capacity of an individual or a group of individuals to lodge a complaint of unlawful discrimination is crucial to the protection of their human rights. The Anti-Discrimination Board plays a pivotal role in ensuring that the voices of disadvantaged groups in our community are heard and that discrimination in the public sphere is brought to a halt. I can attest that many instances of discrimination are still occurring on the basis of someone's race, sex, sexual orientation, age or disability.
We need only think of some celebrated cases over the past few years in New South Wales where there was clear evidence of discrimination. This was made very clear in some elements of the real estate industry, the taxi industry and the hotel industry. I am not saying that discrimination is rampant in those industries, but not so long ago some celebrated cases involved those three industries. I have experienced, as I am sure many other people would have, discrimination on a personal level. From personal experience that discrimination is demoralising and infuriating, and it also has an enormous effect on power relationships and one's own self- esteem. Over my life I have experienced many instances of being overlooked and not served in stores. I remember as a young person over the age of 18 years living in the west being served alcohol through a window at a hotel because Aboriginal people were discouraged from being in hotels or it was not felt they could be served within the hotel. There have been many experiences in my life where I have felt strongly the awful cold fingers of discrimination.
Many vulnerable people in our community experience discrimination, not now and again but on a very regular basis. They need a lot of help, especially in actions required to assert or protect their rights as citizens. This bill assists such people in a number of ways. For example, it allows a complaint to be made by an agent, or by a parent or a legal guardian, if the person lacks legal capacity. It seems almost unnecessary to say that those who are often the subject of discrimination are also people in our community who are very much disempowered, be it through their race, religion or the fact that they have a disability. Many of the people in those groups do not have the interaction with government that many other people have and therefore do not understand the way in which government operates. Nor do they understand that they have at least some rights, because very often their rights are trampled, not only by discrimination but in many other ways. It is important to understand that those who often seek the support of the Anti-Discrimination Board are frequently people who are incredibly disempowered in many ways.
The bill also gives the president of the Anti-Discrimination Board the capacity to assist a person to make a complaint. This is extremely important. These legislative changes give the president an active role, but empower the board to assist people who need assistance to make complaints. This is an important way to assist people who struggle with writing or reading English, or understanding the law, or even accessing government agencies. It is easy to say, "Just go and look it up on the web site." Because I have been a person who has suffered from discrimination, I know that for a person who is often at the end of the pecking order, that is easier said than done. It is easy for people to give glib advice to these people to "just do it through the Internet" or "just do it by coming into office" but it must be understood that many of the people that we are talking about here have had difficult experiences with government, and often have had government interference in their lives, for good or bad reasons, over a long period. There is not an atmosphere of trust, and they do not necessarily have the capacity to easily access the sorts of services and support mechanisms that are generally available.
The bill also makes it clear that a complaint must be in writing, but it does not require it to be in a particular form. That is absolutely fantastic. The purpose of lodging a complaint is to act as a trigger for investigating and refining the circumstances of the alleged acts of discrimination. This amendment will help many people, as I said, from groups that are often at the end of the pecking order. Our Government is committed to finding ways to eliminate discrimination in the public sphere. Assisting complainants to bring complaints in the ways outlined in this bill is designed to bring to light more instances of discrimination and to help improve the lives of the most vulnerable in our community. I assure honourable members that discrimination happens every day in many ways, not just in the city but right across the country.
The bill will also provide for registration and enforcement, in the Administrative Decisions Tribunal, of an agreement reached after successful conciliation. This new aspect of the conciliation process means that people who have come to an agreed understanding about the complaint will not be able to walk away from it easily. Either party will be able to apply to the tribunal to have the agreement registered within six months of it being struck. If the tribunal registers the agreement, it is taken to be an order of the tribunal and can be enforced accordingly. This is another important change to give some teeth and real meaning to the board in its very important work. This will ensure that outcomes that are negotiated in good faith between the parties can be 11352 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 seriously pursued. It will help both complainants and respondents to understand their responsibilities, to change their actions, and to understand that these are not one-off issues.
These issues really affect the lives of people. By improving the mechanisms for determining discrimination disputes, we ensure that people who do not easily access the tribunal or have the skills or background to be able to pursue the discriminatory issues they are facing in our community can obtain fast, effective resolution of their issues—a resolution that will mean something. It hurts to be discriminated against. It affects the way you see yourself and the way you feel about the community you are part of. These changes will go a long way towards making many people feel that they are part of the franchise and that they can no longer be pushed around and discriminated against, which happens so regularly and improperly in our community.
Mr DARYL MAGUIRE (Wagga Wagga) [8.42 p.m.]: I begin by concurring with the honourable member for Canterbury. As a member who represents many people who have challenges in their lives, I agree completely with what she said. Today some 1,000 people outside Parliament House protested against the cutbacks to the Adult Training, Learning and Support Program. Some of those people were the most vulnerable in the community. Daily, as a member of Parliament, I have to deal with community members who are severely disadvantaged through discrimination. Sometimes I am appalled when I hear from members of my community about the circumstances they face.
I did not intend to speak on this bill, but I feel I must because of the effect it will have in our community. This bill will make miscellaneous amendments to the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 relating to the making, and the investigation by the president of the Anti-Discrimination Board, of complaints of unlawful discrimination, and to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal reviewing the president's decision. The bill addresses recommendations made by the New South Wales Law Reform Commission in its report No. 92, a review of the Anti-Discrimination Act, and more recent recommendations that resulted from consultation with the New South Wales Ombudsman, and the current President of the Anti-Discrimination Board, Mr Stepan Kerkyasharian. The amendments will allow a complaint to be made by an agent of a person, or by the parent or guardian if the person lacks legal capacity. The president of the board is also given powers to ensure that complainants have consented, where possible, to the complaint being made on their behalf and to appoint another person to act on their behalf if the president believes a person's best interests are not being served. This is important, because from time to time I have come across circumstances where this was a critical issue.
The bill will also enable a person who has consented to a complaint being made on his or her behalf to withdraw the consent. It will also enable the president to assist the person to make a complaint. This will assist those with special needs, such as dyslexia. The bill also provides that a person is not prevented from making a complaint because he or she has prosecuted the subject matter of the complaint in another jurisdiction, whether in New South Wales or elsewhere. It will provide for electronic lodgment of complaints. It will clarify the president's powers to accept, dismiss, refer, or terminate complaints, both at the outset of and during an investigation. A decision by the president to decline a complaint is not reviewable by the Administrative Decisions Tribunal.
Other amendments in the bill set out the president's powers to acquire the relevant information required to conduct an investigation into a complaint and to enable the president to endeavour to resolve a complaint by conciliation at any stage. They will broaden the power of the president to delegate the president's functions and set out the circumstances in which a complaint may be referred to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal, either by the Minister, the president, or a party to a complaint. They will widen the circumstances in which the tribunal can make interim orders and make it an offence to refuse, or neglect, to comply with certain orders or an interim order of the tribunal. They will empower the tribunal to order apologies and retractions and enable the president to enforce orders of the tribunal in the public interest.
I just want to touch on apologies and retractions. Quite often the person against whom a statement is made wants an apology. It is not about money or monetary recompense. It is about pride and one's standing in the community, and about how hurtful some comments can be. The bill will also allow the Anti-Discrimination Board to charge fees for the services or materials it provides while exercising its education functions under the Act. When the Minister replies, I would like him to expand on this point and inform the House whether there is a schedule of fees and how it will operate. I do not know whether I have seen any source from which the general public or members on this side of the House can learn how these fees will be applied.
The bill also contains a minor substantive reform that extends protection from disability discrimination arising out of the use of disability assisting aids—human, mechanical or electronic. This brings the Anti- 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11353
Discrimination Act into line with the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992. The amendments in the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill are essentially procedural changes that stem from recommendations made by the New South Wales Law Reform Commission to improve complaints handling and review processes for discrimination matters in New South Wales. As I said at the outset, I concur with the comments made by members on the Government side and by the honourable member for Cronulla, who led for the Opposition in this debate. This legislation is obviously designed to ensure that people who are discriminated against have every opportunity to have their complaints heard, to be treated in a dignified way, and to have the opportunity to receive an apology or to right the wrong.
As I said, some of the people outside Parliament House this morning were from Wagga Wagga— people with whom I have lots of interaction and for whom I have compassion because of the challenges they face. As circumstances permit, I visit the organisations they frequent or of which they are members. Recently many delegations from such organisations have come to see me. I have a great understanding of the challenges faced by people with a disability in my region. My commitment to them is that I hear what they tell me and I will work with them to ensure their rights are upheld; and when there is a problem, such as discrimination, I will ensure they are treated fairly and equally with all others in society, because that is the right and just thing to do. I look forward to the Minister's response about fees and charges and their impact.
Mr PAUL LYNCH (Liverpool) [8.50 p.m.]: I support the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. Anti-discrimination is a comparatively new field of law, but it is now generally regarded as a central component of a civilised society. No society would want to be seen to be based on anything other than egalitarian values, with equality between various citizens of the State. It is interesting to note that for a long time Australians as a nation have talked about giving people a fair go and about mateship, and there has been an acceptance, at least in our self-image, that Australia is a very egalitarian society. Historians and writers such as Russel Ward have talked about that for some time.
The great irony, and indeed tragedy, is that for a long time those concepts of egalitarianism were restricted only to particular sections of our community. For example, someone who was not white did not seem to be included in that discourse of an equal and an egalitarian society. This type of legislation is a useful way of overturning those sorts of traditions. It was introduced by, and was one of the significant achievements of, the Wran Government. It is an indicia of a civilised society to have this sort of legislation. I note in passing that some of the proposals in the bill relate to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal, which is another significant element of law reform and another significant and progressive step in this State. My only regret is that its jurisdiction is not considerably wider. There is a fairly good argument for extending its jurisdiction.
The legislation flows significantly from report No. 92 of the Law Reform Commission, following the usual consultation and so forth that accompanies reports from that body. A large number of the provisions are procedural and sensible, such as a six-month limitation on lodging complaints, with discretion to extend the time, the complainant being able to amend the complaint, the president being allowed to assist the complainant, and the new secrecy provisions. Those sorts of provisions, and others, are commonsense and helpful additions.
The legislation maintains the provision that one needs leave for legal representation on the basis that many people who might appear, especially complainants, are not able to afford legal representation but their opponents may well be able to do so. Therefore, it would be unfair for one side to be legally represented and the other not to be represented. That is not an absolute bar on legal representation. I could certainly imagine situations where, if there were a complete bar on legal representation, a complainant would not have legal representation but the body complained about would have it, because its officers are well versed in these sorts of matters and would, de facto, provide legal representation. It is important to maintain a provision for legal representation in particular cases.
The other provision that is worth noting is proposed section 94C, which gives the president of the tribunal a broader power to delegate, that is, to delegate to a specified person or the holder of a specified office the exercise of such of the president's functions, other than his power of delegation, as may be specified in the delegation. The provision stems directly from recommendations from the Ombudsman arising out of matters involving Mr Puplick, and it is one that certainly ought to be adopted. I commend the bill to the House.
Mr BOB DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment) [8.54 p.m.], in reply: I thank the honourable members representing the electorates of Cronulla, Strathfield, East Hills, Auburn , Wagga Wagga, Liverpool and, perhaps most particularly, Canterbury for their contributions. As I said 11354 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 during the second reading speech, there is now plenty of evidence that the anti-discrimination legislation that has been in place for the past seven years has had a powerful effect on attitudes within our society. I acknowledge that support for the legislation is now very much a bipartisan matter. However, at the same time I indicate that on this side of the House there is a special pride that still resides in our understanding of the history of the legislation and its origins, particularly in the administrations of Gough Whitlam and Don Dunstan, and Neville Wran in this State.
This is now a matter that has strong bipartisan support within the Parliament, and it is only appropriate that we should substantially renovate the legislation at this time. After all, during the past 30 years we have learned a thing or two about how we might specifically administer legislation of this kind, and how we might specifically improve the administration of the various bodies responsible for the application of the law. As a number of speakers have said, the legislation is, in large part, a consequence of the deliberations of the New South Wales Law Reform Commission as found in its report No. 92. The Government's response to the Law Reform Commission's deliberations took place in a number of stages. In the first stage the Government amended the Anti-Discrimination Act to prohibit discrimination on the grounds of a person's responsibility as a carer in relation to employment.
In the present stage the Government has responded to something like 60 recommendations in the Law Reform Commission's report. The general renovation of procedures for complaints handling and review under the Act will make the most substantial improvement to the way the Act operates on a day-to-day basis and, therefore, will directly improve the capacity of the board and the tribunal to make effective interventions on the part of those who have been discriminated against. That is, the legislation will have a most substantial effect over time on the lives of those who may generally be regarded as the least privileged or the most disadvantaged in this society.
I shall mention just two matters that were raised by members opposite. The honourable member for Cronulla asked me to comment on small business exemptions within the legislation. The bill makes no change at all to the existing small business exemptions within the legislation as it now stands. The honourable member for Wagga Wagga asked about fees. The Anti-Discrimination Board has been charging fees for a number of years, but its legislative power to do so has not been entirely clear. That is why we clarified that aspect in the bill. There is no schedule or scale of fees. The fees charged are designed simply to cover the board's costs in providing services and materials in the various campaigns it conducts within the community. Not too much should be read into the capacity to charge fees. It merely clarifies a practice that already exists. I again thank members for their contributions and, indeed, for the high standard of the contributions made in support of this fundamentally important bill, which I have great pleasure in commending to the House.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.
THREATENED SPECIES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 1 September.
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON (The Hills) [9.01 p.m.]: I lead for the Opposition in this debate. I say at the outset that we are yet to determine our position on the bill. The bill represents an attempt by the Carr Government to correct its flawed threatened species legislation, which was rushed into this Parliament at the end of 1995 and has been the subject of strident criticism ever since. The bill before the House was brought about by three things: last year's natural resources legislation, the problems associated with the creation of the Hunter Economic Zone near Kurri Kurri, and the impracticality of having to deal with more than 800 threatened species and threatened ecological communities simultaneously. The Minister referred to that issue in his second reading speech. The major thrust of the bill is to allow threatened species issues to be considered on a regional or catchment basis, rather than piecemeal, and up front instead of at the end of the approval process. Interestingly, considering threatened species on a regional or catchment basis was always an aim of the original threatened species legislation. The then Minister, Pam Allan, said in her second reading speech:
To maximise certainty for development proponents, it will be possible to identify the existence of declared critical habitat early in the planning process, ideally during the preparation of local environmental studies or plans or regional environmental plans. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11355
The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and that desire has been honoured more in the breach than in the observance. In fact, it is not the case that local environmental studies or plans for regional environmental plans have tended to take into account threatened species issues, though threatened species issues have been dealt with at the end of the process. As a consequence, all of the threatened species legislation appears to have done is to have put unnecessary buffers in the way of farmers and developers. I must say that the Threatened Species Act has proved to be something of a flop all round. I quote from the second reading speech by the honourable member for Bankstown on behalf of Minister Debus when the Act was last amended on 31 May 2002. He said:
It has been alleged that the Threatened Species Conservation Act and the processes it sets up are impeding, and in some cases preventing, sensible development proposals from being approved. That is not so. The evidence does not support such a proposition. More than 100,000 development applications are submitted to councils every year. That means that since the Threatened Species Conservation Act commenced, there have been around 700,000 development applications. Of these, only a very small proportion require any more than a preliminary assessment due to the likely presence of threatened species on the affected land.
I am advised that only 212 development applications required the Director-General of National Parks and Wildlife to issue director-general's requirements for species impact statements. Of these, only 45 required formal concurrence by National Parks and all but five of those were granted. And of those five, three were subsequently approved with amendments—that is out of 700,000 development applications. This proves that the consultative approach adopted by National Parks is working very well.
One could equally say that it is not working very well: the threatened species are losing out and the proponents of developments are also losing out because of the additional costs that are being incurred. One would have to say that the existing legislation has been a monumental flop. Indeed, I understand that of the 185 applications to harm or pick threatened species since 1996 only one has been refused. So one would have to wonder what on earth the fuss is all about. Currently, councils are meant to go through the eight-part test for each development application. When a council forms an opinion that a development is likely to have an impact on threatened species it writes to the Department of Environment and Conservation and the department instructs the council what has to be done in the species impact statement. It is the council that is required to form the view, not the Government. If a development application comes before a council and the council chooses to ignore the fact that there are threatened species, that is the council's decision. Problems only arise when a third party says that the council was wrong, after the development application is approved. That is why the current Act is largely ineffective.
Australia is home to more than one million species, many of which are found nowhere else the world. About 85 per cent of our flowering plants, 85 per cent of our mammals, more than 45 per cent of our birds and 89 per cent of our inshore temperate zone fish are found only in Australia. After William Dampier reached the coast of Western Australia, saw kangaroos and went back to England with drawings of them the English did not believe that such creatures existed. Almost all of our mammals are marsupials and we also have monotremes, echidnas and platypuses. There is no question that our wildlife, having developed and involved remote from the rest of the world for something like 90 million years, is unique. It is also vulnerable as a consequence of Europeans coming to this country only a couple of hundred years ago.
The existing Act has not protected these animals; it has delayed a number of sensible development proposals and created further animosity between farmers and the National Parks and Wildlife Service. I am sure that the honourable member for Coffs Harbour will have something to say about that later in this debate. That has certainly not been desirable. It is not in the best interests of the environment, because to preserve and conserve the environment landowners and the authorities have to work together co-operatively. As a result of the existing legislation farmers who might have been content to leave a threatened species alone are more inclined to get rid of it once it is discovered. Indeed, during debate on the original bill in 1995 and 1996 we warned of that occurring.
It is not only farmers or the development industry that have been disadvantaged by the existing legislation; it is ordinary community-minded citizens trying to do something for their local community and their local school. I draw the attention of the House to the sad, sorry case of Belrose Public School. What happened there is an object lesson in the problems that have been thrown up by the existing legislation. In 1989 a request for a school hall was listed on the Department of Education and Training minor capital works program. A consultant's report indicated that no threatened species of flora and fauna were recorded on the site. Land was to be sold off and the money used to build a new hall and administration block. It is not a difficult concept. The same thing was done at Castle Hill High School in my electorate, but it did not encounter these problems. In 1997 the then Minister of Education and Training, Mr John Aquilina, approved the sale of a parcel of land on Ralston Avenue in Belrose and the use of the money to build the new hall and administration block. In 1998 the Public Works Department completed plans for the subdivision. A rezoning application was put in to Warringah Council. 11356 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Then in 2001 all hell broke loose. A plant named grevillea caleyi was discovered on the Ralston Avenue land and the National Parks and Wildlife Service placed a ban on the sale of the land. The plant was not a living specimen, but the National Parks and Wildlife Service said that single dead plant might germinate. In 2002 the tender on the sale of the land closed and the highest offer was $3.1 million. The sale was withdrawn because of the discovery of grevillea caleyi, and the National Parks and Wildlife Service even threatened to take legal action against the Department of Education And Training because the slashing and clearing of undergrowth from the land might have affected a so-called seed bank on the land. The solution was that 2,000 square metres of soil would be removed and taken to the Mount Annan Botanic Garden, where an attempt would be made to propagate some of the mythical seed bank. How much did that cost the school community?
Mr Andrew Fraser: Tell us.
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: It cost the school community $500,000. How many seeds came up from 2,000 square metres of soil?
Mr Andrew Fraser: Ten?
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: No, not 10.
Mr Andrew Fraser: Five?
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: Not five.
Mr Andrew Fraser: Three?
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: Not three.
Mr Andrew Fraser: Two?
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: Not one. Half a million dollars was spent and the delay in the completion of the school hall persisted for years. I understand that Belrose Public School will get its hall, but toilets and all types of add-on facilities will be taken out of the plan to compensate for the $500,000 that was lost. To add insult to injury, any nursery on the northern beaches has for sale grevillea caleyi. These are the difficulties that the Opposition warned the Carr Government about when the original threatened species legislation was passed. The threatened species legislation has created a monster. It has not benefited biodiversity or the conservation of flora and fauna. Rather, it is an obstacle to the orderly development of the city of Sydney and to farmers when they are carrying out their agricultural activities. The Minister stated in his second reading speech:
The major lesson of the past decade is that too often a threatened species decision involves the winner taking all—only one side of a dispute usually wins.
I am not quite sure whether that was the case with Belrose Public School. I do not think anybody won in that scenario, but perhaps the Minister was not thinking of Belrose Public School. However, the Minister went on to concede:
The current Act no longer provides the best mechanism to resolve this kind of dispute in which one side or the other prevails— either the development has to be substantially reconfigured or the threatened species has to be sacrificed to social or economic needs.
The reason for that is the narrow focus on single areas rather than on the big picture. The problems have been drawn into stark relief by the difficulties associated with the rezoning of the Hunter Economic Zone. This 3,200 hectare site is largely covered with spotted gum ironbark woodland, which in itself is a threatened ecological community. Conservationists claim that there are no fewer than 28 threatened species in this area, including the swift parrot and the regent honeyeater. But the Hunter Economic Zone is extremely important economically to the Hunter region. In fact, the process for creating it began under the Greiner Government. Ultimately, the issue came down to which parts of the bushland should be preserved and which should be rezoned for industrial development. There are significant differences of opinion over that issue. The Government claimed that it worked out what parts of the habitat are the most valuable and should be preserved, and that amounts to 70 per cent of the area. However, a lot of local people believe that too much of Cessnock shire has been locked up. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11357
Conservationists claim that there are thousands of hectares of disused, already cleared land in the Hunter that could be used instead, including the nearby Bloomfield colliery site, rather than destroying the precious Tomalpin bushland. The fact is that proper surveys of threatened species had not been done up front, which made the decision-making process under the existing legislation extraordinarily difficult. I understand there will be ongoing problems with development in the Cessnock area because of the lower Hunter spotted gum. Hardie Holdings carried out an evaluation of the lower Hunter spotted gum ironbark forests and made a submission on the preliminary listing of that ecological community. Hardie Holdings pointed out that the lower Hunter spotted gum ironbark forest is widespread throughout the central to lower Hunter Valley, with the peak of distribution occurring between Beresfield and Cessnock. It estimated that over 32,000 hectares of this forest type remain.
In fact, the lower Hunter spotted gum ironbark forest's spatial extent is over six times larger than any other endangered ecological community previously declared east of the Great Dividing Range. Approximately 85 per cent of that type of forest occurs in the Cessnock local government area [LGA]. Numerous other similar types of spotted gum ironbark forests occur throughout the Hunter Valley in adjacent regions which offer very similar habitat for native flora and fauna. The combined impact of the proposed listing and other existing listings, such as Hunter lowland red gum forests and Kurri Sand Swamp Woodland, would lead to over 36,000 hectares of the Cessnock LGA being affected by endangered ecological communities. One might ask: so what? I am sure that people in the Maitland electorate of Mr Deputy-Speaker would be concerned about this issue. Councillors of the Cessnock council are concerned about the fact that more than 80 per cent of the Cessnock LGA is likely to be locked up under the proposals contained in this legislation.
What solution did Hardie Holdings come up with? It recommended that the vast majority of lower Hunter spotted gum ironbark forest that is currently within the State forests system, but particularly in the Aberdare State Forest, should be included in the national park estate. That may well be worthy of consideration. But certainly what needs to be established is a balance between the threatened ecological community and the needs of people for housing, industry and jobs in the Hunter Valley. The bill seeks to rectify these shortcomings, but it remains to be seen how well that objective will be achieved. The bill integrates threatened species conservation with New South Wales natural resource management and land use planning systems, consistent with the Native Vegetation Act 2003, the Catchment Management Authorities Act 2003 and the Natural Resources Commission Act 2003.
It provides for 10-year biodiversity certification by the Minister for the Environment, or the Minister for Primary Industries in the case of fisheries, of the native vegetation reform package which consists of by the Native Vegetation Act and regulations, statewide standards and targets under the Natural Resources Commission Act, catchment action plans, and any environmental planning instruments such as local environmental plans, regional environmental plans and the proposed new regional biodiversity agreements.
During that 10-year period, third party appeals and further assessment will be precluded as long as development applications are in accordance with the approved plan. That will not come to fruition without cost. There are problems associated with the proposal and I will deal with those in more detail shortly. The Minister said that the priority focus for the new environmental planning instruments will be areas of high population growth, including the far North Coast, the Sydney metropolitan area—I assume that includes my electorate of The Hills because it is one of the fastest-growing areas of New South Wales—the lower Hunter, the South Coast, the Illawarra and the Sydney-Canberra corridor, and that $700,000 will be made available from the ill- fated PlanFirst levy for this purpose.
I am sure all honourable members remember the PlanFirst levy, which resulted in $21 million flowing into the Government's coffers. The money was supposed to have been used by local councils for planning purposes but has never been applied to that purpose. I suppose the best that we can say about this legislation is that at least some of the money will be put to good purpose. The difficulty is that drawing up environmental planning instruments will require much more than $700, 000, which is a drop in the ocean compared to what is needed. Indeed, the Local Government and Shires Associations pointed that out to me in a letter. They expressed their serious concerns about the level of resources required to implement the changes and sought a commitment from the New South Wales Government that the Department of Environment and Conservation will have responsibility for the management and implementation of changes, including the provision of data and an appropriate scale for development of the plans leading to accreditation.
The letter also states that the local government sector seeks further clarification on the use of the PlanFirst levy because there are already a number of completing demands on these funds—there are always 11358 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004 competing demands by the Carr Government whenever it identifies a hollow log of one sort or another—to implement planning reforms, including proposed regional strategies, funding for councils' local plans and the implementation of the proposed local plan template. There is a need for more details, the exact amount being considered, and any eligibility criteria being developed for councils. The provision of maps, data and information, including lists of actions required to protect communities, is required by councils and essential if local environmental plans are to accurately identify species. It is understandable that local government demands assurances that adequate funds will be allocated by the New South Wales Government to prepare new biodiversity certified environmental planning instruments, particularly considering the high level of flora and fauna survey and assessment that would be required. In other words, councils will not spend millions of ratepayer dollars to draw up new local environmental plans. There must be some sort of incentive for them to do so.
We must also consider the farmers. This is a crucial issue for honourable members on this side of the House. I suspect that it is also crucial for the Government. The bill provides that farmers who have had a property vegetation plan approved by their local catchment management authority, which in turn has had its catchment plan signed off by the Minister, will not need a threatened species licence to carry out routine agricultural management activities such as fencing, putting in roads and spraying noxious weeds. They will also be able to obtain consent to clear native vegetation without having to prepare a species impact statement. However, the Minister can withdraw biodiversity certification from specific areas if the catchment management authority fails in its job of protecting threatened species. Of course, all of this is highly theoretical because there are no certified property vegetation plans as yet.
A catchment management authority officer will visit a farm with his laptop under his arm. He will survey the farm with the farmer and use a scoring system. Sophisticated software has been developed to assist in this process. The authority also has a statewide manual of threatened species, with photographs and text, broken down into sub-catchment regions. An officer will know that he is scheduled to visit a property in the Central West region and will be able to take pictures and compare them to what is on the property and say that it is home to a threatened ecological community. If the farmer disagrees, the dispute will be settled by experts from the Department of Environment and Conservation.
Each assessment will be done on the basis of the impact that the property will have on the catchment as a whole. A property vegetation plan will have to maintain or improve environmental outcomes, taking into account salinity, soil, water and biodiversity. It will be based to a large extent on satellite mapping, but there is no substitute for an on-ground survey. The property will also be subject to ongoing inspections. That is an important issue. I reiterate that one of the biggest problems in the Hunter Economic Zone was that the surveys were not done up front. I understand that the intention is to do 100 field trials of the software across the 13 catchment management authorities. Only after they have been completed will property vegetation plans start to be drawn up. What happens if the trials are not successful is anyone's guess.
The catchment management authorities will receive funds from four sources: the Environmental Trust, the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources, the Commonwealth Natural Heritage Trust and the Salinity Fund. I understand that the agreement between the Commonwealth and the State is quite prescriptive about how that money should be spent to deal with issues such as soil conservation, salinity, native vegetation conservation and so on. New South Wales farmers are very concerned about certain aspects of these proposals. First there are routine agricultural management activities. At the moment farmers are exempted from the need to obtain a licence under the Threatened Species Conservation Act if they are carrying out a routine agricultural management activity. The routine agricultural management activity also provides a defence to harming or picking a threatened species. However, the bill abolishes the exemption, so that, henceforth, under proposed section 118G, the routine agricultural management activity will provide only a defence to prosecution under the National Parks and Wildlife Act.
Proposed section 118G lists routine agricultural management activities as the construction, operation and maintenance of rural infrastructure, including dams, permanent fences, buildings, windmills, bores, airstrips, stockyards and farm roads, but not including rural infrastructure in areas zoned as rural residential under environmental planning instruments or on small holdings as defined in the regulations; the removal of noxious weeds under the Noxious Weeds Act 1993; the control of noxious animals under the Rural Lands Protection Act 1998; the collection of firewood; the harvesting or other clearing of native vegetation prior to commercial purposes; the lopping of native vegetation for stock fodder; traditional Aboriginal cultural activities; the maintenance of public utilities; and any activity reasonably considered necessary to remove or reduce an imminent risk of serious personal injury or damage to property. There is nothing in proposed section 118G about routine agricultural management activities such as ploughing, sowing, irrigating or spraying insect pests. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11359
Mr Andrew Stoner: Such as locusts.
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: They are unquestionably pests. We know this Government does not care about the locust plague. It does not want to help farmers carry out routine agricultural management activities. This legislation will certainly not help them. These routine agricultural management activities are identical to those in the Native Vegetation Act. I cannot understand why the other examples I have provided— and there are many more—cannot be listed in the legislation. Apparently, under proposed section 118G (d) these things may be included in the regulations.
I think honourable members can understand why farmers are concerned about the bill. Not only will they no longer be exempted from the need to get a licence under the Threatened Species Act for carrying out these routine agricultural management activities—this legislation will provide them with a defence only if what they doing has harmed threatened species—but all the normal activities carried out on a farm are not listed. Farmers are concerned that they might need a licence to pick up a piece of wood from the ground, given that clearing deadwood—an activity that would be quite useful for the Government right now—is listed as a key threatening process.
They also want to know whether farmers will still need to obtain a licence to harm or pick a threatened species. That means there is less certainty under this legislation than there is under the existing legislation. Farmers are also concerned about the Minister certifying the native vegetation reform package. They do not trust this Minister. That is their major concern. It is not the fact that a Minister will certify the native vegetation reform package but that this Minister will certify it. Quite frankly, that is a vote of no confidence in him by the entire rural community.
Mr Bob Debus: No, not the entire rural community.
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: Only 98 per cent. I apologise to the Minister for exaggerating. None of the catchment action plans can take effect until the entire native vegetation reform package has been signed off by the Minister. Division 5 provides for biodiversity certification of local environmental plans, regional environmental plans, and regional biodiversity agreements, but not of catchment action plans. I received a letter from the Minister about this issue last week, and it states:
The provisions relating to the certification of the Native Vegetation Reform (NVR) package underpin much of the Bill. Certification enables the Minister for the Environment to, in effect, switch off threatened species licensing with the assurance that threatened species have been appropriately integrated within the new natural resource management framework.
It is important to stress that the Bill allows the Minister only to certify the package for purposes of threatened species and biodiversity conservation.
This should not be confused with concurrence. Adopting the various components of the native vegetation reform package will remain, quite properly, the responsibility the Minister for Natural Resources.
I understand that concerns have been expressed that certification could delay on-the-ground implementation of the natural resource management reform package. This is not the intention. I would be willing to consider ways in which to ensure this does not occur unintentionally.
It is essential for the successful implementation of the reforms to the TSC Act that the Minister for the Environment certify the regulatory package under the NV Act … as well as the Standards and Targets being developed by the Natural Resources Commission.
It is possible, however, that the Bill could be amended to allow the Minister for the Environment to be able to certify other parts of the package as they are developed, e.g., if some CMAs do not have their Catchment Action Plans (CAPs) ready this should not prevent the Minister for the Environment from certifying CAPs that have been completed by other CMAs, thus allowing the threatened species reforms to come into effect in those CMAs. Such an amendment could also allow the Minister to give certification subject to conditions.
The question is: Why has legislation that is so obviously flawed and so obviously incomplete been introduced in that state? Why should it be up to the Opposition to point out these obvious flaws to the Government before and during debate on the bill?
Mr Milton Orkopoulos: What flaws?
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: Why should the Opposition have to do this? Why was the bill not introduced in a more or less complete form? The honourable member for Swansea asked, "What flaws?". The flaws are these— 11360 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Mr Andrew Stoner: The third, the fourth, the fifth.
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: There are many flaws. The major flaw is that the Minister would have to sign off on the whole of the Native Vegetation Act, rather than sign off on an individual catchment action plan. One could have a catchment management authority down the south of the State, in the Murray, that does the right thing, draws up its catchment action plan and has it ready to go, but cannot get it certified. So all those property vegetation plans cannot be put into effect because somebody up in the Border Rivers/Gwydir, or somewhere around there, is dragging the chain and takes five years to complete its catchment action plan. I hope the honourable member for Swansea is taking all this in. That is a major flaw in this legislation, a major flaw.
It is interesting to note that the Minister is effectively asking this House to fix up this legislation. Certainly, the Opposition would be happy to provide an amendment along the lines he has suggested. Farmers also want to know what will happen when the Minister withdraws biodiversity certification from the catchment management authority. The Minister said that it would not affect property vegetation plans already issued but that it would mean that no new property vegetation plans, even those almost completed, would be certified. A failure by a catchment management authority to manage biodiversity issues properly could create all sorts of problems for farmers trying to do the right thing to maintain their properties and conserve flora and fauna on those properties. They would suffer as a result of that failure by the catchment management authority.
This bill is, above all else, supposed to provide a mechanism for turning off the threatened species licence consistent with the Natural Resources Management Act, but what will happen if certification is withdrawn? This is a question that farmers should, and indeed must, have answered. It is not only farmers that have concerns about this legislation. The North Coast Environment Council is also concerned about the biodiversity certification process. John Jeayes, the Secretary of the North Coast Environment Council, whose office is in Crescent Head in the electorate of Oxley, has written to me about this issue. He stated:
The State Government had earlier promised … to carry out a coastal audit to complement the Coastal Guidelines and thus protect the coast from inappropriate development. The audit was begun but seems to have sunk without trace along with the Coastal Council Planfirst.
That word "Planfirst" keeps cropping up. Mr Jeayes went on:
Therefore we are very concerned that appropriate rigour and thoroughness will be employed in the "Biodiversity Certification" process. The temptation to fall back on desktop analysis with no new survey work will be tempting in the rush to implement the new scheme. If the Government could not find the resources to properly carry out an audit of the coast how will they resource a study of the whole State?
We note that this matter of resources, funding, keeps coming up. Mr Jeayes continued:
… There is very little data about threatened species locations for private land, particularly threatened plants which need to be surveyed for in order to be found.
There are no specific criteria for biodiversity certification of an LEP. It appears that much of this will be found in regulations which are not yet available.
Unfortunately there is not widespread engagement with the planning process, particularly at the LEP level. It is only when a particular place is threatened that many people are prompted to take action. Until that time they rely on the system to save it. We are concerned that where a council has applied for Biodiversity Certification for an LEP there will not have been wide public awareness or concern to make input. … There is no opportunity to challenge the Minister's certification and it would appear that once the decision is made, there is no further voice for threatened species.
Mr Jeayes continued:
It appears likely that new declarations of TS [threatened species] or EEC [Endangered Ecological Communities] will not affect development applications or property development plans where biodiversity certification is in place. Approval can be given to clear land and if species that inhabit that vegetation are listed as threatened before the land is cleared the land-clearing approval holds and cannot be challenged.
That is an ongoing issue of concern to the conservation movement. One of the purposes of this legislation is to deal with those third party appeals up front. Mr Jeayes continued:
National Parks do not protect large enough populations of threatened species to ensure their survival over time. There was always meant to be sympathetic management of vegetation on private land. As pockets of remnant vegetation are approved for clearing more and more species will become restricted in distribution, individual populations will disappear, and over time their viability as a species will diminish. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11361
Mr Jeayes suggests there should be performance indicators attached to recovery or threat abatement plans. He stated:
It would be desirable to see plans achieve such excellent results that perhaps some TS could be removed from categories. The new Priorities Action Statement may just be a way of giving the appearance of action on some species—picking winners or iconic species—while many languish.
Multi-species recovery plans may be needed in the short term where the actions they suggest are not mutually exclusive and the species they deal with have similar habitat requirements. Multi-species recovery plans should be interim plans while progress is made on the rest of the 700 approx. TS.
We believe there are 800 threatened species. The letter continued:
There still does not seem to be any mechanism whereby Recovery or Threat Abatement Plans are integrated into the planning system.
They are some of the concerns that conservationists have expressed. I share those concerns about the certification process and, indeed, about drawing up environmental planning instruments. I understand that a lot of data has been collected in the Regional Forest Agreement process and elsewhere, but is this enough? Is there enough data available to draw up the environmental planning instruments and catchment action plans that the Government wants, and to establish realistic standards and targets?
Farmers are also concerned about the way in which the Scientific Committee has been doing its job. They cite a number of cases where the committee has listed a threatened ecological community, for example, coolibah blackbox, which has turned out to be pretty much as plentiful as spinifex. No-one would argue with the notion that threatened species—
[Interruption]
The honourable member for Swansea should be aware that coolibah blackbox has been withdrawn from listing because the Scientific Committee got it wrong. OK? No-one would argue with the notion that ecological communities and threatened species should be listed on scientific grounds. The Scientific Committee does not have a monopoly on wisdom and there should be an appeal mechanism against such a listing. That is provided for under the legislation.
Mr Milton Orkopoulos: We are actually providing for that.
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: To an extent. Proposed section 23A allows the Minister to refer a final determination on a threatened plant or animal back to the Scientific Committee for reasons of a scientific nature, but that is as far as it goes. The Scientific Committee can ignore that referral if it wishes. The whole process could take up to five months. A second opinion should be provided by the restructured Biological Diversity Advisory Council, which is to be set up under section 141B. The Opposition has some confidence in that new council because its composition changes dramatically under this bill. Previously the council consisted of 15 members drawn from local government, the Aboriginal community, the conservation movement and scientists. Under this bill, sections 137 to 139 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act will be deleted, the new Biological Diversity Advisory Council has no fixed number of members, and all members are to have expertise in biological or environmental science. The Opposition supports that change because it will provide greater scientific rigour in relation to decisions taken under the Threatened Species Conservation Act.
The new composition of the council gives the Opposition confidence in the Minister referring a listing to the council for a second opinion. The Opposition will propose amendments along those lines in the other place. Under proposed part 5A the Scientific Committee will be required to provide a threatened species priorities action statement, which will establish priorities for recovery plans and threat abatement plans. That is needed because fewer than 60 recovery plans and just two threat abatement plans have been approved so far. The Minister said in his second reading speech that this process has become an ineffective way of achieving recovery for threatened species. Some people might go further than that and say, particularly in view of the statistics given by the honourable member for Bankstown two years ago, that the Act has been a monumental flop. That would be uncharitable.
We on this side of the House support the protection and recovery of endangered species. We recognise the critical nature of habitat in ensuring species of animals, birds, fish and insects do not become extinct. We will support any reasonable attempt to achieve that goal. Under the proposals both the Natural Resources 11362 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Commission and the Minister will be able to recommend investigations into threatened species in specific regions of the State. That is a good move.
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! The honourable member for Strathfield and the honourable member for Blacktown will stop making animal imitations.
Mr MICHAEL RICHARDSON: This section of the bill is an improvement and we applaud it. The bill introduces new categories of critically endangered species and critically endangered ecological communities consistent with the new emphasis on priorities. The Opposition would not argue with that proposal. New section 141C of the bill establishes a statutory Social and Economic Advisory Council, which may advise the Minister and the Natural Resources Commission on the likely social and economic impacts of actions under the Act. I assume that the major role of that committee would be to advise the Minister on the impact of the declaration of critical habitat, as under section 44 of the Act the Minister can reject a recommendation for the declaration of critical habitat on the basis of the social and economic consequences of such a declaration. However, I have not seen too much evidence of that happening to date.
Schedule 2 to the bill amends the Fisheries Management Act to ensure that it is consistent with the Threatened Species Conservation Act. That is certainly less controversial than the land-based amendments; in fact, I have not received any representations on that aspect of the bill. However, in order that it remains consistent with the Threatened Species Conservation Act, schedule 2 would also have to be amended so that the Minister could seek a second opinion so that he would be able to refer a final determination and listing by the Fisheries Scientific Committee to the Biological Diversity Advisory Council for consideration. So where does that leave us? It leaves us waiting for some response to the issues I have raised tonight, and which will be raised also with the Government before we decide our position on the bill. Ultimately, our position will depend on the final shape of the bill and how accommodating the Government will be to our amendments.
In conclusion, I thank Ted Plummer and Mark Aarons from the Minister's office for their assistance. One difference between this bill and the bill introduced in 1995 is that this time the Government has been consultative. Over the years one of the great concerns of the Opposition has been that the Government has refused to consult; in fact, when the original threatened species legislation was introduced we believed that we were going to debate it at 4 o'clock in the morning, which was about six hours after it was introduced. The then Minister for the Environment, the honourable member for Wentworthville, saw the error of her ways. We are glad that she did, although the bill that was ultimately passed left a great deal to be desired.
Ms VIRGINIA JUDGE (Strathfield) [9.45 p.m.]: I support the Threatened Species Legislation Amendment Bill. I commend the Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Bob Debus, his ministerial staff, the staff of the Department of Environment and Conservation and the staff of the Department of Primary Industries for providing such terrific support and advice. I am proud to be part of this Government. The Minister with those portfolio responsibilities is very proactive and progressive, and introduces a lot of legislation into the House. If one looks strategically at the bill, one would say that it is upfront, transparent and has been inclusive in that it has resulted from consultation. One of the primary purposes of the bill is that it spells out the required planning legislation for a building development in a residential area. A farmer would want that certainly; he would want to know what sort of scenario he would face in carrying out his daily work. That certainly would apply to residential developments as well.
The bill is quite significant in that it cuts red tape and confusion around the work of farmers and builders on land that is occupied by threatened species and their habitat. Another excellent provision in the bill, which is progressive, is that it is habitat based, not species based. Of course, if the habitat is destroyed the species will be lost. It is no good crying crocodile tears or being airy-fairy, as was the contribution of the honourable member for The Hills. If habitat is destroyed it is no use crying about what happened to the tiger quoll or the green and golden bell frog—it is then too late to save them. The bill has been made possible by the Government's decision to end broad-scale land clearing. I heartily applaud the Government for that wise and environmentally sound decision.
More than 80 species of native plants and animals that used to exist in New South Wales are now extinct, and more than 800 species are on the path to extinction. Perhaps that is the path that the honourable member for The Hills wants to take, because in his contribution he was very indecisive. While I am speaking about our precious animals the honourable member for The Hills is interjecting, because he knows that what I am saying is the truth. He should allow me to finish this part of my speech. By resolving confusion over farmers' rights and endangered species listings we can simplify the entire relationship between farmers and native animals. This legislation will achieve that objective. 22 September 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 11363
Six key areas of reform have been identified in the document produced by the Department of Environment and Conservation entitled "Threatened Species Conservation in NSW Reform Proposal". Those six key areas of reform are: in urban and coastal areas, better biodiversity outcomes are to be achieved through integration with better strategic land use planning, changes to the development assessment process, and accreditation of flora and fauna consultants; in rural areas, threatened species conservation to be embedded with native vegetation protection to deliver a simpler and more supportive system of conservation incentives for landholders; listing of threatened species is to be maintained as a scientific process, with enhanced credibility and transparency; actions for recovery and threat abatement will be better prioritised; enforcement and compliance provisions will be upgraded; and expert advisory councils will be established to advise the Minister on social and economic implications and biological diversity. What could be better than that?
In the Strathfield electorate, which I am privileged to represent to the best of my ability, one endangered species will directly benefit from the Threatened Species Legislation Amendment Bill. I am referring, of course, to the green and golden bell frog or, to use its scientific name, litoria aurea. The green and golden bell frog, which in my estimation is a truly national species given its great patriotic colours, is almost extinct in the Australian Capital Territory. Sadly, it is vastly in decline in New South Wales. It is reportedly secure in Victoria, for which I am thankful. I have tried to establish whether that Olympic icon was used as a logo in the Homebush Bay area.
I am honoured that the green and golden bell frog is still to be found in my electorate. It has a patchy distribution along the New South Wales coast due to the destruction of its habitat, mainly semi-permanent water, including marshes, dams and side streams. As those habitats disappear the frogs can now more often be found in abandoned building sites, council tips and mines, which is just where the golden bell frogs are located in my electorate. In the Strathfield municipal area green and golden bell frogs are to be found in an old tip just near the Enfield marshalling yards, which caused a huge problem as the site was bought by a developer who wanted to reclaim the land.
When I was the mayor of council the developer was instructed to build special ponds and to plant hundreds of native grasses in that area so that that little frog could be protected. This bill will make it easier for councils to make those sorts of decisions. Further up the road from the marshalling yards is the old Bankstown depot. I wish the honourable member for East Hills was in the Chamber as he knows all about this issue. He used to live in the Bankstown council area. At some stage Strathfield council acquired the old depot. The developer who bought the site wanted to build a factory right in the middle of this site that contained grasslands and beautiful native vegetation and that had an old creek winding its way through the area.
I was really concerned because most of the councillors said, "Go for it. Go into the area and build. Bring in the trucks and jeeps and squash the green and golden bell frog." At the end of the day council got the developer to comply with its requirements. However, it was a difficult process. It would have been much easier if this legislation were in place at that stage. All council could do was try to create a buffer zone around that site, which was not the best solution but, in the circumstances it was the best that it could do. In order to protect a threatened species, corridors and pathways have to be built to enable the species, as part of its lifecycle, to move from one end of the area to the other.
[Interruption]
I suggest to those Opposition members who are expressing some concern in relation to this matter that they should go and see The Lion King, which is all about life cycles. It is important to build corridors and pathways in these areas—something that is provided for in this legislation. This legislation is not about preserving only small areas of habitat.
[Interruption]
Opposition members are attempting to interject, as they do not want to hear the truth. This legislation will enable us to provide corridors and better protection for our endangered species. For the edification of Opposition members I will give them a few more facts. The Threatened Species Legislation Amendment Bill is significant in the protection of the green and golden bell frog and many other species. I am an eternal optimist. I retain a spark of hope that perhaps just once Opposition members will listen to what I have to say.
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! Members on both sides of the House will come to order and cease interjecting. 11364 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 22 September 2004
Ms VIRGINIA JUDGE: I commend this bill to the House. Once again I thank the Minister for bringing these important matters to our attention. This legislation is all about preserving our future. What is more important than our environment and our biodiversity?
Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Andrew Stoner.
JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON ELECTORAL MATTERS
Membership
The Clerk-Assistant (Committees) informed the House of correspondence nominating the following members of the Legislative Assembly as members of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters:
Mr Corrigan; Mr Pearce; and Ms Saliba.
Message sent to the Legislative Council advising it of the nominations.
COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE
Membership
Motion, by leave, by Mr Carl Scully agreed to:
That Barry Joseph Collier be appointed to serve on the Committee on Children and Young People in place of Linda Jean Burney, discharged.
Message sent to the Legislative Council advising it of the resolution.
LEGISLATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
Membership
Motion, by leave, by Mr Carl Scully agreed to:
That Linda Jean Burney be appointed to serve on the Legislation Review Committee in place of Barry Joseph Collier, discharged.
Message sent to the Legislative Council advising it of the resolution.
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Mr Carl Scully agreed to:
That the House at its rising this day do adjourn until Thursday 23 September 2004 at 10.00 a.m.
The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m. until Thursday 23 September 2004 at 10.00 a.m. ______