6927
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Tuesday 6 May 2008 ______
The President (The Hon. Peter Thomas Primrose) took the chair at 2.30 p.m.
The President read the Prayers.
The PRESIDENT: I acknowledge the Gadigal clan of the Eora nation and its elders and thank them for their custodianship of this land.
ASSENT TO BILLS
Assent to the following bills reported:
Food Amendment (Public Information on Offences) Bill 2008 Gaming Machines Amendment (Temporary Freeze) Bill 2008 Housing Amendment (Tenant Fraud) Bill 2008 State Emergency and Rescue Management Amendment (Botany Emergency Works) Bill 2008 Totalizator Amendment Bill 2008 Criminal Case Conferencing Trial Bill 2008
ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE
The PRESIDENT: I report the receipt of the following message from His Excellency the Honourable James Jacob Spigelman, Lieutenant-Governor of the State of New South Wales:
Office of the Governor J. J. Spigelman Sydney 2000 LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR
The Hon James Jacob Spigelman, Chief Justice of New South Wales, Lieutenant-Governor of the State of New South Wales, has the honour to inform the Legislative Council that, consequent on the Governor of New South Wales, Professor Marie Bashir, having assumed the administration of the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia, he has this day assumed the administration of the Government of the State.
20 April 2008
ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE
The PRESIDENT: I report the receipt of the following message from the Honourable Justice Keith Mason, Administrator of the State of New South Wales:
Office of the Governor K. Mason Sydney 2000 ADMINISTRATOR
The Honourable Justice Keith Mason, Administrator of the State of New South Wales, has the honour to inform the Legislative Council that, consequent on the Lieutenant-Governor of New South Wales, the Honourable James Jacob Spigelman, being absent from the State, he has this day assumed the administration of the Government of the State.
22 April 2008
ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE
The PRESIDENT: I report the receipt of the following message from Her Excellency the Governor:
Office of the Governor Marie Bashir Sydney 2000 GOVERNOR
Professor Marie Bashir, Governor of New South Wales, has the honour to inform the Legislative Council that she re-assumed the administration of the Government of the State on 4 May 2008.
4 May 2008
6928 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
STATE EMERGENCY AND RESCUE MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT (BOTANY EMERGENCY WORKS) BILL 2008
Message received from the Legislative Assembly agreeing to the Legislative Council's amendment.
TABLING OF PAPERS NOT ORDERED TO BE PRINTED
The Hon. Eric Roozendaal tabled, pursuant to Standing Order 59, a list of all papers tabled in the previous month and not ordered to be printed.
TABLING OF PAPERS
The Hon. Eric Roozendaal tabled the following papers:
1. Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Act 1984—Report of Game Council for the year ended 30 June 2007.
2. Report of the Independent Transport Safety and Reliability Regulator entitled "Implementation of the NSW Government's Response to the Final Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Waterfall Accident— Reporting Period January-March 2008", dated April 2008.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Eric Roozendaal.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON LAW AND JUSTICE
Report: The Prohibition on the Publication of Names of Children Involved in Criminal Proceedings
The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to standing orders, of report No. 35, entitled "The Prohibition on the Publication of Names of Children Involved in Criminal Proceedings", dated April 2008, together with transcripts of evidence, tabled documents, submissions, correspondence and answers to questions taken on notice, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 21 April 2008.
The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON [2.35 p.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Christine Robertson and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORT
The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, of a performance audit report of the Auditor-General entitled "Working with Hotels and Clubs to Reduce Alcohol-related Crime: NSW Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing, NSW Police Force", dated April 2008, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 23 April 2008.
LEGISLATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
Report
The Clerk announced the receipt, according to the Legislation Review Act 1987, of the report entitled "Legislation Review Digest No. 5 of 2008", dated 5 May 2008, received out of session and authorised to be printed on 5 May 2008.
MR JOE SCIMONE EMPLOYMENT
Production of Documents: Return to Order
The Clerk tabled, pursuant to resolution of 3 April 2008, documents relating to an order for papers regarding the employment of Mr Joe Scimone received on 17 April 2008 from the Director General of the Department of Premier and Cabinet together with an indexed list of documents. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6929
Production of Documents: Claim of Privilege
The Clerk tabled a return identifying those of the documents that are claimed to be privileged and should not be tabled or made public. The Clerk advised that pursuant to standing orders the documents are available for inspection by members of the Legislative Council only.
The Clerk also tabled correspondence received this day from the Director General of the Department of Premier and Cabinet relating to the index of documents for which privilege is claimed.
DR GRAEME REEVES APPOINTMENT
Production of Documents: Return to Order
The Clerk tabled, pursuant to resolution of 9 April 2008, documents relating to an order for papers regarding the appointment of Dr Graeme Reeves received on 23 April 2008 from the Director General of the Department of Premier and Cabinet together with an indexed list of documents.
CATHERINE HILL BAY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Production of Documents: Return to Order
The Clerk tabled, pursuant to resolution of 9 April 2008, documents relating to an order for papers regarding Catherine Hill Bay received on 23 April 2008 from the Director General of the Department of Premier and Cabinet together with an indexed list of documents.
Production of Documents: Claim of Privilege
The Clerk tabled a return identifying those of the documents that are claimed to be privileged and should not be tabled or made public. The Clerk advised that pursuant to standing orders the documents are available for inspection by members of the Legislative Council only.
WORLD YOUTH DAY 2008
Production of Documents: Return to Order
The Clerk tabled, pursuant to resolution of 9 April 2008, documents relating to an order for papers regarding World Youth Day 2008 received on 23 April 2008 from the Director General of the Department of Premier and Cabinet together with an indexed list of documents.
PETITIONS
Camden School Development Application
Petition requesting that an inquiry be held into the development application to Camden Council for a primary and secondary school and calling for suspension of the application until the identity, funding sources, capacity, ideology and competency of the landowner and prospective school proprietor are fully ascertained, received from Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Postponement of Business
Business of the House Notices of Motion Nos 1 and 2 postponed on motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay.
EXECUTIVE MANAGER, PARLIAMENTARY SERVICES, APPOINTMENT
The PRESIDENT: I advise that on 30 April 2008 the Administrator, on the advice of the Executive Council, appointed Mr Brian Ward to the new position of Executive Manager, Parliamentary Services. The position was advertised nationally, and a selection panel convened by the Speaker and me, and including the two 6930 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
Clerks and an external panel member, recommended Mr Ward's appointment. I further advise that the position would lead and manage a new Department of Parliamentary Services, comprising the Parliament's current joint services. Mr Ward will commence duty on Monday 2 June 2008.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders: Order of Business
Motion by the Hon. Robert Brown agreed to:
That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow a motion to be moved forthwith that Private Members' Business item No. 103 outside the Order of Precedence, relating to the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Election Bill, be called on forthwith.
Order of Business
Motion by the Hon. Robert Brown agreed to:
That Private Members' Business item No. 103 outside the Order of Precedence be called on forthwith.
PORT MACQUARIE-HASTINGS COUNCIL ELECTION BILL 2008
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 10 April 2008.
The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY [2.47 p.m.]: On behalf of the Opposition I am pleased to support the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Election Bill, which was introduced by the Hon. Robert Brown. It will see the return of democracy to the people of Port Macquarie—which was taken from the people of Port Macquarie in the most underhand manner, denying them a say in what is best for their community. It is the height of hypocrisy that the Government, given its track record, should act in such a paternalistic manner. The performance of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council has many positive features, and is in stark contrast to the utter incompetence of the Iemma Labor Government and the incredibly hypocritical actions of Minister Paul Lynch. The State Government has presided over a billion dollar blow-out on the Pacific Highway upgrade, has wasted hundreds of millions of dollars on the Kurnell desalination plant and has botched hospital upgrades at Bathurst and Orange, yet it has the hide to sack a high-performing council for cost blow-outs that have been caused in part by State Government regulations.
To add insult to injury, the Government will effectively take over the handling of local government in the region until 2012 via a Labor-appointed administrator. This administrator recently introduced car-parking fees at Port Macquarie airport. The sacking of the council is a downright denial of democracy and reflects the way in which the Government's lack of transparency and accountability is conducive to corruption. If ratepayers objected to the Glasshouse project, they should have been allowed the democratic right to elect a new council after six months at the next scheduled council elections. The Government has failed the people of New South Wales by taking away their freedom of choice, their freedom to vote and their freedom to make decisions that affect their own community. The Minister for Local Government and the Government stand condemned for their paternalistic approach to this matter, and others involved in this process stand condemned by the local community. Irrespective of people's opinions about the Glasshouse development, the ratepayers should have the right to make up their own minds about the processes and accountability of council and vote accordingly in September. That right has been taken away from them.
During the last sitting week the House amended the Local Government Amendment (Elections) Bill 2008 to include provision for local government elections next September in Port Macquarie, Wollongong and other areas throughout New South Wales. I commend the Hon. Robert Brown for keeping up the pressure by introducing this bill. Ostensibly, two bills dealing with this issue are now before the Parliament: this bill and the Local Government Amendment (Elections) Bill 2008, which is being debated in the lower House. Ironically, we have not heard anything from the Minister about further consideration of the bill in the lower House. His silence is deafening. The Minister's response to the amended bill has been extraordinary. This is indicative of the Labor Party in complete disarray. The Minister for Education and Training is nodding in agreement, and may well he nod.
The Hon. John Della Bosca: I was not nodding. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6931
The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY: You did nod, and I acknowledged the nod. The member for Port Macquarie shares responsibility for this disgraceful state of affairs. Following a request by this Chamber for the tabling of papers, documents were produced showing that the member for Port Macquarie was up to his eyeballs in the instigation of the inquiry conducted by Commissioner Frank Willan.
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Shame! Shame!
The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY: I acknowledge the interjection by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile drawing attention to Robert Oakeshott's shameful participation in activities behind the scenes to embarrass good, hard-working members of the community because of his long-held biases and grudges against them. The member reaffirmed his role in the sacking of the council when he failed to turn up to debate the Local Government Amendment (Elections) Bill 2008, which relates to State council elections. At this point the people of Port Macquarie are ineligible to vote in those elections. I am concerned that the local member did not take the opportunity to talk about the sacking of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council and the inability of the people in his electorate to exercise their right to democracy on 13 September 2008.
Following the return of the Local Government Amendment (Elections) Bill to the lower House for consideration—Minister Lynch has yet to make up his mind about that—the member for Port Macquarie said, with all the fortitude he could muster, "I will weigh up the opinions of the local people before I make a decision on whether they are able to vote in September." The member is still weighing up the matter in an attempt to determine the court of public opinion. Well, I know what public opinion is in Port Macquarie. Irrespective of their opinion about the Glasshouse inquiry, the people are not happy that their right to democracy has been stolen and snatched away by the Labor Party. As to the concerns of the local community, I refer to many letters from irate citizens that have dominated the Letters to the Editor page in the Port Macquarie News. Under the heading "They sacked the wrong people", Mr Rob Cannon of Port Macquarie wrote:
To divert attention away from the obnoxious smell emanating from Macquarie Street in Sydney, the local government minister has in his infinite wisdom sacked our local council. The figure, an estimate of $6 to $7 million for the Glasshouse, was when it was originally recommended about 15 to 20 years ago.
Does our esteemed minister, who is in the state of NSW (who we recognise as being Newcastle, Sydney and Wollongong) live in a perfect world without cost increases, hardly look at the mess they have got hospitals into, and education, and public transport? Let them who live in glass houses stow their throne.
The state government blatantly ignored all the cost over-runs on their unwanted and costly tunnels, the over-runs on the new trains, yet to be delivered, the cost blow-out on the ticket scheme, now cancelled, and they have the bloody gall to criticise a council that has done a good job and, according to the auditors, is financially sound.
I say let's sack the NSW state government for the complete incompetent way they are trying to run this state, not just a couple but the whole bloody lot.
Mr Rob Cannon of Port Macquarie articulated the points very well in his letter.
The Hon. John Della Bosca: And he's obviously a big gun!
The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY: He may not be a big gun but he has a right to voice his opinions in the local newspaper. And the Minister for Education and Training stands condemned for undermining Mr Cannon's right to exercise democracy. Further, Krissa Wilkinson of Port Macquarie wrote:
After the sacking of council we can only wonder at what wheeling and dealing behind the scenes delivered this decree. Any notion of it being a democratic process is delusional.
Approximately 70,000 people live in the Port Macquarie Hastings municipality and yet a debate involving a fraction of our community has robbed us of our right to vote and decide for ourselves.
The paternalism is nauseating. Anyone with a genuine interest in the community and democracy could have been organising and recruiting candidates for the September election where we would have known, once and for all, whether the majority of residents wanted to oust the council. Instead we have been subjected to a war of words and innuendo.
Could someone please explain to those of us not worthy of a vote, and to 18-year-olds now robbed of their first chance to vote, how this manipulation is justified? It seems we've gone from the Glasshouse to the out-house. For four years at least we are the refuse of an already on the nose state government.
I could read many more letters from concerned people voicing their opinion. I want to refer, as the Hon. Robert Brown did in his second reading speech, to the level of management and capability of Port Macquarie-Hastings Council. As a member of the upper House I travel extensively throughout New South Wales, and I have 6932 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
consistently argued that Port Macquarie-Hastings Council is one of the better-managed and better-performed councils in New South Wales. My community of Coffs Harbour does not have cultural facilities on a scale similar to those that are found in Port Macquarie. Although my community desperately wants such facilities, we cannot afford to build them. Many people are envious of the Port Macquarie community and the cultural facilities the council has been able to provide and effectively manage.
The Hon. John Della Bosca: What about the debt equity?
The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY: The Coffs Harbour net debt servicing ratio is 22 per cent of revenue. That is largely because of the enormous water and sewerage infrastructure costs resulting from a commitment made by former Premier Bob Carr prior to the 1995 election. If the people of Coffs Harbour want to look at cultural facilities, they go and look at the deepwater ocean outfall. The Government said Coffs Harbour would never have an ocean outfall, but we do. It could be argued that the outfall is our cultural facility, and that is simply because the council cannot afford to build the type of cultural facilities that are available at Port Macquarie. In contrast, the net debt-servicing ratio of Port Macquarie-Hastings Council is 6 per cent to 7 per cent of revenue. It is relevant to point out the financial capability of Port Macquarie-Hastings Council. It has very strong assets and enormous investments and landholdings to back up that performance. Its ratio of assets to debt is better than that of many other communities and councils.
I was sad to learn recently that the General Manager of Port Macquarie-Hastings Council, Bernard Smith, has tendered his resignation. He is another casualty in this entire debauched process. Paul Lynch made it very clear during debate on the Local Government Amendment (Elections) Bill earlier this year that it took quite a while to get to this situation. He said it had taken from 2005 to dismiss Port Macquarie-Hastings Council.
It is pretty obvious that the Labor Party, in cahoots with the local member, for a long time has been gunning for the council, and they have got what they wanted. We support the bill of the Hon. Robert Brown and I commend him for putting it forward. The bill may be debated very soon in the lower House and we await with bated breath the results of Paul Lynch's negotiations and the decision that is made on the bill about giving the people of Port Macquarie a vote in September. I commend the bill to the House.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [3.01 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Election Bill 2008 introduced by the Hon. Robert Brown, and we congratulate him on his perseverance in this matter. The object of the bill is to ensure that a fresh council election is held for the local government area of Port Macquarie-Hastings in conjunction with the next ordinary election of councillors in accordance with section 287 (1) of the Local Government Act 1993. Under that section the next ordinary election of councillors is to be held on the second Saturday in September—13 September 2008.
Under the bill the administrator will cease to hold office immediately before the first meeting of Port Macquarie-Hastings Council held after the fresh council election, unless the administrator ceases to hold office under the Local Government Act 1993 before that time. I have had contact with Port Macquarie-Hastings Council over the years and I have made many visits to Port Macquarie. I have been very impressed with the regional centre, which has a population of more than 70,000. It is a very important region that has made much progress with shopping centres, housing, and holiday accommodation. It is obvious that for many years the council has been doing a very good job in administering the area.
In this debate there is no comparison of Port Macquarie-Hastings Council with other councils. There is a tendency now to treat all councils that have been dismissed as if there were some allegation of corruption. Port Macquarie-Hastings Council is not Wollongong Council, which was the subject of an ongoing Independent Commission Against Corruption investigation, with allegations of developer donations and corruption. I accept that the situation warranted the council's dismissal. Port Macquarie-Hastings Council has operated over the years with extremely high standards of administration, including financial administration. The council, in its diligence, saw the need for the conference centre—which is nicknamed the Glasshouse—with all the cultural facilities.
Why should regional centres not have the sorts of cultural facilities available in Sydney and in other parts of the State? Why should country people have to forgo modern facilities? The council set out in good faith to develop the conference centre with an art gallery and other facilities. Other facilities such as coffee shops and so on were added to service the community. The blow-out in the budget—and that is the only criticism that can be directed at the council—can be seen to have been beyond the control of the council. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6933
For example, Port Macquarie is a very historic centre and archaeological evidence of the early settlement was found. As normally happens with such discoveries, heritage and preservation orders were placed on the area involved. The council rightly accepted the responsibility to treat the archaeological findings with respect and to make them available to the community. Encasing them in glass so that visitors could look at the historic remains added millions of dollars to the project. When extensions were being undertaken to the New South Wales Conservatorium of Music similar archaeological discoveries were made and it was agreed then that they should be encased in glass so the public could view them. That added millions of dollars to that project but the Government rightly agreed to that. Why should Port Macquarie-Hastings Council be criticised for doing the same job of preserving historic archaeological findings?
The council is providing the conference centre for the ratepayers. The council could have been inefficient, it could have lacked foresight, or it may not have been able to take on such a large project, but it did—not for the council or the councillors but for the people of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council area. The facilities also benefit the citizens of other parts of New South Wales who visit the area. I support the bill and call on the Government to make a special concession for Port Macquarie-Hastings Council by supporting the bill and allowing the original election date of 13 September to apply to Port Macquarie-Hastings Council.
Of course, it is up to the citizens of Port Macquarie-Hastings: if they believe the council has been inefficient and that the individual members have not carried out their duties they will vote them out. That is the whole purpose of a council election. The local ratepayers will decide the future of the council, not the Government of New South Wales. I urge the Government to allow the ratepayers of Port Macquarie-Hastings to have that opportunity on 13 September.
The Hon. DON HARWIN [3.08 p.m.]: My colleague the Hon Melinda Pavey has indicated that the Opposition will support the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Election Bill 2008 so I do not need to add very much to what she has said. She also drew attention to the fact that the local government legislation, which we amended in Committee recently, is still in the other place. It is worth pointing out that the amendments to that bill—which as soon as today may come before the lower House—would achieve everything that this bill seeks to achieve. It would be remiss of me as a resident of the South Coast not to point out that the amendments the House has already passed also cover councils in Wollongong and Shellharbour.
The fact that the Hon. Robert Brown is pursuing this bill today suggests that he will adhere to the view he expressed during the Committee stage of the debate on the bill. I hope that the principles in his bill are reflected in the lower House's agreeing to the amendments we have already passed in this place, which seek to cover those councils as well. Like the people of Port Macquarie, the people of Shellharbour and Wollongong are, of course, absolutely committed to the restoration of democracy at a local government level as soon as possible.
Some mischievous people are suggesting that the fact that this bill is being debated today before the other bill has been resolved in the other place indicates that perhaps a special deal has been done for Port Macquarie-Hastings. I am sure that is not the case. I ask the Hon. Robert Brown to put that issue to rest, because I know that is not the approach he takes to public policy. It would be worth his while to reassure the House that that remains his view.
Ms SYLVIA HALE [3.11 p.m.]: I support the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Election Bill 2008. In doing so I restate the Greens' commitment to the principle that all people in New South Wales whose council has been sacked, not only the people of Port Macquarie-Hastings, should be given the opportunity to vote in fresh elections. The Greens believe that where a council has been sacked a democratically elected regime should be reinstalled at the earliest opportunity.
The point has been made that the difference between the situations in Port Macquarie and Wollongong is that Port Macquarie council was dismissed because of maladministration whereas the issues in Wollongong involve corruption. The reality is that councillors never act independently of council officials: they are always influenced by reports presented by the general manager, the various directors of departments and the council officers. I believe that that is the case in Wollongong. Clearly, former general manager Rod Oxley was very much involved in corruption. Equally, charges of maladministration at Port Macquarie-Hastings can be sheeted home to the now former general manager because of the inadequate oversight of the Glasshouse project. That seems to be at the heart of the issue; that is, the failure by the council and the council officials to keep a very close watch on what was happening and expenditure of government moneys. It is inaccurate to suggest that somehow there is a qualitative difference between what happened in Port Macquarie and what happened in Wollongong. 6934 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
However, they do have in common the fact that residents who have endured the regimes in Wollongong and possibly in Port Macquarie-Hastings are being made to suffer. They are the victims, because they did not connive in whatever the councillors did and they did not condone maladministration or corruption but they are being denied the right to vote. When it comes to the question of a council being dismissed and an administrator being appointed one cannot be a little democratic. One cannot say, "We will be democratic here and ensure that these people have an election because of what happened in their council area, but another council was involved in different activities so its constituents will be denied the right to participate in elections."
We need to adhere to principle, to be consistent, and to take a genuine approach to matters of concern. I concede that many people in the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council area are deeply concerned about what has happened, and there is undoubtedly huge concern in the Illawarra about what has been happening in Wollongong and Shellharbour. However, in the interests of genuine democracy all constituents should be allowed to vote in council elections at the earliest opportunity.
If we are genuinely interested in good governance, what is the point of dismissing a council, sending in someone supposedly to patch it up, and eight years down the track having fresh elections? Surely the point is to have elections as soon as possible and for the Department of Local Government to provide ongoing mentoring to the new council so that the new councillors are thoroughly aware of, and on top of, what went wrong with the preceding administration? If that does not happen the only people who will learn any lessons will be the administrators. The election of a new council at the earliest opportunity will allow new councillors to benefit from the experience of the outgoing council. We should be able to rely on the nous and acumen of the electorate to ensure that the councillors found to be thoroughly culpable—whether they have been involved in corruption or otherwise—are not re-elected. We must put our faith in the people and set up a regime that will provide adequate advice to councillors. Council procedures should ensure openness and transparency about the way councils conduct their business. That is necessary if we are to eradicate the problems of councils behaving improperly and inappropriately.
The Greens support this bill, but it does not go far enough. Its provisions should extend across the State and should include areas in which councils have been dismissed. I repeat the request made by earlier speakers that the same consideration be given to the people of Wollongong and potentially Shellharbour as the Hon. Robert Brown is extending to the people of Port Macquarie.
The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Lands, Minister for Rural Affairs, Minister for Regional Development, and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [3.18 p.m.]: The Government does not support the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Election Bill 2008. Port Macquarie-Hastings Council was dismissed because of its handling of the Port Macquarie-Hastings conference and entertainment centre, known as the Glasshouse, but only after three years of attempts to demonstrate that its handling of the project was inadequate, at best. The decision to dismiss it was prompted by recommendations in the report published by Commissioner Frank Wilhelm. The inquiry was conducted after a long and extensive review process dating back to 2005, when the council and the Department of Local Government conducted a Promoting Better Practice review.
Promoting Better Practice reviews act as health checks on councils' operations. They are designed to alert a council to the weaknesses in its systems and processes so that it can address those issues and avoid a recommendation to remove the councillors from civic office. At the same time the Promoting Better Practice review was being conducted the Department of Local Government was receiving numerous complaints and letters of concern about council's management of the Glasshouse project. The department spent some time monitoring that project before a public inquiry was called. The department has written to council on a number of occasions expressing concern about the additional cost of parking facilities and safeguarding the archaeological remains on the site. The council failed to heed these warnings or adequately respond to the concerns of the department or its community.
In October 2006 an investigation under section 430 of the Local Government Act was announced. In view of the investigation, the department wrote to council in October 2006 asking that it not enter into any further contractual commitments or carry out significant works in relation to the project until the investigation results were known. Council declined to accede to this request. The investigation team raised a number of concerns regarding council's management of the Glasshouse project, including the escalating costs of the project and the lack of community consultation. The council still failed to take notice of the concerns raised. The Minister for Local Government was not persuaded by the council's response to the section 430 investigation report that a public inquiry would not be in the public's interest. As a result of the section 430 investigation the Minister accepted the one recommendation, that is, to hold a public inquiry under section 740 of the Act. This was announced in July 2007. Press advertisements called for written and oral submissions to the inquiry. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6935
Public inquiry hearings were conducted over two months, between October and December 2007. The public inquiry was headed by Frank Willan, a respected former public servant with experience in local government as an administrator of Glen Innes and Tweed shire councils. The inquiry wrote to local members of Parliament, both Federal and State, the mayor and each of the councillors, as well as the general manager, to advise them of the inquiry and its terms of reference and inviting them to make submissions. Over 800 submissions were received. The public inquiry allowed all members of the public, councillors and staff the opportunity to present their views. The inquiry conducted public hearings over 20 days, commencing with a preliminary hearing on 11 September 2007 and concluding with a right of reply session during the week ending 13 December 2007. There were 90 oral presentations at the eventual hearing sessions. Speakers included the mayor and councillors, the council's general manager or past general manager, past and present senior members of council staff, council's professional advisers and consultants, representatives of the various interest groups, a former member of Parliament, and members of the public and other witnesses.
The inquiry concluded that council, represented by both councillors and staff, failed to demonstrate adequate diligence when dealing with the financial management of the project. In particular, it failed to adequately acquaint itself with the project and its costs. It also failed to impose adequate financial controls over the project or to recognise and consider the financial and other implications of the substantive changes to the project brief. Council excused its failures on the basis that the financial issues were operational issues falling outside its role.
The commissioner noted that in 2004-2005 the council needed a special rate increase to catch up with the broad range of infrastructure and maintenance jobs, with the Glasshouse being but one of those projects. He found that because council had never been in control of the Glasshouse cost—both capital and operational— essential and discretionary services were being impacted upon by the uncontrolled escalation of the cost to build the Glasshouse. Specifically, he found that the operations of the Glasshouse would adversely impact on the provision of works and services from the council's general fund. I make the point that one of the previous speakers mentioned the cost of water and sewerage compared with cultural works. They are two discrete funds and they cannot subsidise each other.
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: They can have an impact on the debt-servicing ratio of the council, though.
The Hon. TONY KELLY: That is not the point I made. One cannot subsidise the other. Considering the real cost of operating the Glasshouse, the centre will require major community subsidy, even if it is able to attract major shows and conferences 365 days a year. The Glasshouse theatre and conference centre cannot generate enough income to cover its long-term costs of operation. The annual financial shortfall when all legitimate costs are considered will consume the bulk of the 2004 and 2005 special rate variations.
The commissioner found that council's communication strategies drove its processes and overtook and subverted genuine community consultation. Councillors have failed to fulfil their role as elected persons and particularly to facilitate communication between the community and the council. The community had been consistently and constantly misled by council regarding the Glasshouse. The commissioner makes the point that he specifically found that the council failed to involve the community in its planning and funding for the centre; or to consult the wider community, preferring the views of project reference groups and industry providers. He also found that it failed to recognise and consider community concerns, denigrated individuals criticising the project, provided misleading or incorrect information, and improperly used its support group to campaign against critics rather than adopt proper consultation policies.
The commissioner concluded from the council's right of reply submission that it was difficult to see the council learning from its past mistakes. The Minister then accepted Mr Willan's recommendation and made a recommendation to the Governor that the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council be dismissed. The council may not have engaged in ostensibly corrupt conduct; nevertheless it failed completely to represent the interests of the residents and ratepayers in a responsible and accountable manner. The council had plenty of time to deal with the warnings it had been given. Council clearly failed to demonstrate any capacity to hear other than what it wanted to hear. The concern now is that the residents and ratepayers of Port Macquarie-Hastings Council face disruptions to works and services because of the shortfall in council funds because of the costs of the Glasshouse project. This may not be corruption; however, it is a serious situation for the community to now find itself in. Mr Dick Persson was appointed as administrator. He has extensive experience as an administrator at Warringah Council.
The Hon. Marie Ficarra: Yes, and he was hopeless there too. 6936 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
The Hon. TONY KELLY: That is not what the community has said. Mr Persson will need to call on that extensive experience as he now has the task of rebuilding the fundamentals of council and helping to reunite the local community. Mr Persson now has a challenge of refocusing Port Macquarie-Hastings Council on its basic mission statement—better services for ratepayers and stability of the wider community. This work will take more than just a few months. Unfortunately, the community now has been informed of further cost blowouts and the inability to complete the facility this year, and the consequent cancellation of the events program.
Mr Persson has already commissioned a further number of reports into the Glasshouse project. Many of the concerns raised by Mr Willan in his report have now been confirmed in the reports received so far. Mr Persson has already put in place measures aimed at ensuring that council learns from its mistakes and has proper processes in place to ensure that such failures do not occur in future. This work must be allowed to continue in the interests of the residents and ratepayers so that when a new council is elected in 2012 the councillors will not have to clean up the mess of those who have been removed. I urge all honourable members to oppose the bill.
The Hon. ROBERT BROWN [3.27 p.m.], in reply: I need only say a couple of things in reply. This is a very simple bill, a bill based on natural justice and a return of democratic processes to Port Macquarie. Firstly, I thank honourable members for their contributions. I thank the Hon. Melinda Pavey for going into so much detail. The Opposition Whip raised the question whether Robert Brown or the Shooters Party had done any deals with the Government in relation to this bill versus the amended bill still being considered by the Parliament. I give the House a clear assurance: The Minister has not been anywhere near my office, he has not been on the telephone, he has not emailed me or written me—no little fancy notes, no cosy lunchtime conversations over little white coffee tables—nor has his staff contacted any of my staff. My colleague the Hon. Roy Smith also has not been contacted. In other words, the Hon. Paul Lynch has just ignored us. So, there are no deals, but if the Hon. Paul Lynch wants to talk in the future my office door will always be open to him.
Secondly, I reiterate—and I think this was supported by the Minister—there were no findings of corruption in relation to Port Macquarie in either the section 430 investigation or the subsequent section 740 public hearings and report by Mr Willan. I have received four or five letters telling me to keep my nose out of Port Macquarie, but I have had a dozen or more saying, "Thank you for sticking your nose into Port Macquarie". I introduced the bill on the basis of the petition I presented with more than 1,000 signatures from Port Macquarie citizens the day before the council was dismissed asking the Government not to dismiss the council. I disagree with Ms Sylvia Hale; I do see differences, particularly between the Wollongong and Port Macquarie issues. I hope that bringing Bernard Smith's resignation into the debate is not in any way intended to vilify Mr Smith. I have met him only a couple of times. I wish Mr Smith well. I am sorry that the matter has caused him to resign. It probably would have been better for the people of Port Macquarie had he stayed and assisted Mr Persson.
Although I concede there is an argument that Mr Persson should stay longer, the question is how long? Certainly it does not take four years to sort out the minor problems. The Glasshouse will be built. It is not going to be pulled down; Mr Persson has said that. This is about the people of Port Macquarie having the right to decide who will run their local government area. Currently they do not have that right with an administrator. They deserve the right to have their elections. People from Port Macquarie have said, "Look, even if we don't get our local government elections in 2008, can we have them in 2009?" That is not an unreasonable request, but 2012 is an unreasonable request. I hope the crossbench members and the Opposition support the bill.
Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put.
The House divided.
Ayes, 23
Mr Ajaka Mr Gay Ms Parker Mr Brown Ms Hale Mrs Pavey Mr Clarke Dr Kaye Mr Pearce Mr Cohen Mr Khan Ms Rhiannon Ms Cusack Mr Lynn Mr Smith Ms Ficarra Mr Mason-Cox Tellers, Mr Gallacher Reverend Dr Moyes Mr Colless Miss Gardiner Reverend Nile Mr Harwin 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6937
Noes, 18
Mr Catanzariti Mr Macdonald Mr West Mr Costa Mr Obeid Ms Westwood Mr Della Bosca Ms Robertson Ms Fazio Mr Roozendaal Ms Griffin Ms Sharpe Tellers, Mr Hatzistergos Mr Tsang Mr Donnelly Mr Kelly Ms Voltz Mr Veitch
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted for the third reading of the bill to proceed forthwith.
Third Reading
Motion by the Hon. Robert Brown agreed to:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Bill read a third time and transmitted to the Legislative Assembly with a message seeking its concurrence in the bill.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Postponement of Business
Government Business Orders of the Day items Nos 1 to 7 postponed on motion by the Hon. John Della Bosca.
BOARD OF ADULT AND COMMUNITY EDUCATION REPEAL BILL 2008
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 9 April 2008.
The Hon. ROBYN PARKER [3.39 p.m.]: The Board of Adult and Community Education Repeal Bill 2008 contains measures to give effect to the disbanding of the Board of Adult and Community Education and to replace it with a New South Wales Advisory Committee on Community Education. The Coalition does not oppose the bill, but recognises that we have a long way to go to address the issue of adult literacy and numeracy.
It has taken a year for the bill to eventuate following a period of consultation with the adult education sector in June 2007. At that time the Board of Adult and Community Education decided unanimously to disband and to be replaced with a New South Wales Advisory Committee on Community Education. The board took that action having been beaten into submission. It had no alternative because the pathetic amount of funding going into adult and community education is almost at the point of demise. The board was designed to promote the provision of adult and community education in New South Wales, to allocate Government funds to adult and community education providers, and to advise the Minister on the needs and trends in adult and community education. The replacement advisory committee should meet twice a year and will consist of nine members, including a representative from community colleges—a positive step because the board did not have that membership.
The aims of the advisory committee do not include the board's aim of allocating Government funds to adult and community education providers. No doubt that is because the Government has effectively halved funding for community colleges since 2002-03 from $9 million per annum to about $4.3 million per annum, which leaves very little work for the board in terms of funding allocations. There would hardly be an adult in New South Wales who has attended a community college who would not see the huge benefit of community 6938 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
colleges. The community colleges I have visited do wonderful work: they encourage people to get out of their isolated communities to attend a college where they meet other people. We cannot look at community education in isolation: Its multiple benefits lead people into education and it is often a pathway for people who left the education system early or who have not been involved in education for some time.
I refer in particular to the wonderful adult and community education programs I have seen at Port Stephens in the Tomaree Community College. We should remember that often people in Port Stephens have relocated from other communities and when they attend community college the soft approach is to undertake a craft-type course, which often leads to something else. The college also offers great services in adult literacy that lead people into other educational pursuits. The Government's lack of commitment to financing adult and community education colleges is very disappointing because they are of great value. We have had estimates hearing after estimates hearing in which we have asked questions as to why community colleges do not receive their allocation of funding until almost the end of the year. The colleges do not know what they are doing, and it is hard to allocate teachers and provide the sorts of services they ought to provide to the community with such lack of detail.
There was an agreement in principle from the board in June 2007, and in May 2008 we are debating the legislation. We have heard lots of rhetoric, including motherhood statements about education coming from the Rudd Labor Government, but no meat on the bones when it comes to policy. We have yet to see anything from the education revolution of the Rudd Government for adult and community education. The last Australian Bureau of Statistics survey on adult literacy and life skills showed what Adult Learning Australia called:
A very challenging picture for the engagement of Australians in the workforce and in their general contribution to the Australian economy.
The 2006 survey found there has been no real improvement in the 10 years since 1990, when it was estimated that 6.2 million Australians had problems with literacy and numeracy. It also found that literacy decreases with age, particularly digital and financial literacy, which has significant implications for people trying to maintain skills and stay in the workforce. Australia was ranked behind Canada in the survey, which describes its situation as "a call to arms". Adult Learning Australia, the national peak body representing organisations and individuals in the adult learning field, said this about the statistics:
This situation costs Australia at individual, family, economic, political and social levels. The world is getting more complex and sophisticated every day. People need equally complex and sophisticated skills to keep up. Education, as well as skills development, is required for the health and well-being of the Australian society. Current skills shortages will not be fixed with a call for higher-level qualifications.
The 2006 Australian Bureau of Statistics survey found that approximately 46 per cent of Australians, or 7 million people aged 15 to 74 years, had the lowest level of literacy in the level one and two band; 37 per cent of Australians, or 5.6 million people, were in the level three band; and 16 per cent of Australians, or 2.5 million people, were in the level four and five band. On the numeracy scale even more people were on the lowest levels, with 53 per cent of Australians, or 7.9 million people aged 15 to 74 years on the level one and two band; 31 per cent of Australians, or 4.7 million people were on the level three band; and 16 per cent of Australians, or 2.4 million people were on the level four and five band. Of the seven countries involved in the survey it was interesting to see where Australia was positioned. Norway was ranked the highest, with 76 per cent of people aged between 16 and 34 at literacy levels of three or above, compared with Australia at around 60 per cent.
The survey also ranked the Australian States and Territories. Unfortunately, while New South Wales has the highest population we do not have the highest levels of adult literacy and numeracy. We were beaten by the Australian Capital Territory, Western Australia and South Australia. It also found that people who were unemployed generally had the lowest levels of literacy and people who had higher literacy levels were more likely to have access to the Internet. The relevance of the survey is that there is a strong association between educational attainment and literacy levels, which shows the importance of adult learning. The survey found that people who had completed a qualification generally had high literacy scores. What else do we need to prove that education is a worthy investment? When I see people undertaking computer skills courses at community colleges I see people improving their overall understanding of how computers work and the Internet. Certainly for people in the older age group this keeps their minds active.
As to the history of adult education, there was little in the way of adult education before the establishment of the University of Sydney in 1812. In the 1830s the Sydney Mechanics Institute and the School of Arts opened and held public lectures, and in the 1860s adult evening classes commenced. Today adult education and learning colleges are right across the State. The most recent Adult and Community Education 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6939
report states that 59 non-profit community-owned and managed organisations deliver courses throughout New South Wales. In 2003 more than 310,000 individuals enrolled in a unit, or competency or module of study and more than 150,000 people aged over 15 years were enrolled. More than half of the enrolments were in vocational-related courses. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students accounted for 3.1 per cent of all students and unemployed students accounted for 10 per cent of all students. About 14 per cent of students were aged over 60. The range of courses offered includes management and commerce, society, health, creative arts, agriculture, engineering and information technology.
Last year I attended a graduation ceremony at the Montefiore Home for aged care where participants had undertaken a number of adult education courses. Across the community we see engagement, involvement and enthusiasm in adult and community education. I hope that the reorganisation of this education sector is not a precursor for the Government to further reduce funding. When we look at the Government's actions in relation to the Open Training and Education Network and TAFE-delivered vocational education and training, there seems to be a reduction in overall support for services, particularly in rural and regional communities. I ask the Minister for Education and Training to assure the House that this change does not mean a lack of support for adult and community education. I ask the Government to embrace adult and community education. I would be delighted, as would the many people in New South Wales who attend adult and community education services, to see increased funding in the budget, increased enthusiasm for adult and community education and more support for the great work of the people involved in this area. On behalf of the Coalition, I indicate our support for this change and our support for adult and community education generally.
Dr JOHN KAYE [3.52 p.m.]: I speak on behalf of the Greens to the Board of Adult and Community Education Repeal Bill 2008, which will formally disband the Board of Adult and Community Education and repeal the legislation that governs the State's community colleges. The Minister for Education and Training introduced the bill with a 151-word second reading speech. I congratulate the Minister on his economy in the use of the English language when dealing with an institution that delivers hundreds of thousands of hours of adult and community education through community colleges. He has made a substantial and far-reaching change to the way in which the institution is governed by the use of a mere 151 words. In his speech the Minister justified the change by citing the 2006 decision of the board to request that it be disbanded and replaced by an advisory committee. As the Hon. Robyn Parker pointed out, replacing the board with an advisory committee has a major impact, that is, the allocation of funding amongst and between colleges will rest in the hands of the Minister and the department. A step of consultation will be removed.
Prior to the effective demise of the board, the funding formula was developed by the Minister and then went to the board for consideration and from the board to the department. This procedure provided an opportunity for a further level of consideration and input from professionals and practitioners in the adult and community education area. Following the passage of the bill, the advisory committee effectively will have policy input into the management of adult and community education from the Government's perspective. It will not see or deliberate on the funding formula. We will lose a very important layer of accountability in the way in which this incredibly important sector of the economy is managed. In the mere 151-word speech the Minister graced the Chamber with, he failed to tell us the real reason behind the board's decision to dissolve itself. He failed to tell us that the decision was made in sheer and utter frustration at the dwindling availability of funding to adult and community colleges in New South Wales.
The Greens have been through the budget with a fine-toothed comb. The budget clearly shows that during the period 2002 to 2006 the total number of student contact hours in community colleges grew by 6.8 per cent. At the same time, the Government slashed funding for adult and community colleges by $29 million. For the year 2006-07 funding was 30.6 per cent less than it was in 2002-03, after adjustment for inflation. The New South Wales Government's financial contribution to community colleges declined by a massive 57.1 per cent during that period. The consequences for community colleges are dire. Colleges throughout New South Wales are in crisis. Over the last three years at least nine colleges have been forced to close, almost entirely due to a lack of funds. The Iemma Government has deserted the entire community education sector. It hopes that no-one will notice that an important pathway into vocational education and training and further education is being squeezed out of existence by a Government that simply does not care.
In his 151-word speech the Minister did not tell us about the remarkable history of the community college movement and the way in which the community connections, the community management and the community responsiveness of those colleges led to a particular and unique form of education and training delivery. Adult and community colleges play a role that serves the non-English speaking background community, the elderly, people on low incomes, and people with literacy and numeracy issues. They serve the 6940 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
community in a unique way. Starting in the 1830s with the Sydney Mechanics Institute and the School of Arts, community colleges have grown throughout the State to a network reaching a peak in 2005 of 62 not-for-profit community-owned and managed organisations that provide adult education and training services that complement TAFE and universities. By 2008 those 62 colleges had dwindled to a mere 55 colleges.
In 2005, 161,829 residents of New South Wales were enrolled in the community college sector. The courses they took covered numeracy and literacy, general education, vocational and pre-vocational courses, and leisure and cultural enrichment. The community nature of the colleges enables them to reflect local needs and provide a less formal pathway into education and training. By creating this less formal pathway, individuals who would otherwise be excluded from opportunities in education and training have a pathway into formal education. The colleges are managed largely by volunteer committees. Most of the courses attract fees to help cover payroll and other costs. It is impossible to underestimate the amazing job done by community colleges during a period of funding constraint and at a time when the State Government has entirely deserted them. They have continued to struggle through and do the best they can. The teachers and volunteer managers of the colleges have put their shoulders to the wheel to keep the colleges going. But it is entirely unreasonable to expect the community members who run those colleges and the teachers to continue to sacrifice themselves to compensate for the loss of funding from the State Government.
Adult and community education is jointly funded by the State and Federal governments as part of their allocations to vocational education and training. In 2002-03 funding from the State Government was responsible for 36.8 per cent of the total adult and community education budget. By 2006-07 the Iemma Government's commitment had fallen to a mere 22.8 per cent. While both levels of government have slashed their funding in real terms, the Carr-Iemma Governments have been responsible for the overwhelming proportion of the cuts. Indeed, questions surround the way in which the State Government may have redirected Federal funds earmarked for adult and community education to other purposes.
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted and set down as an order of the day for a later hour.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ______
ELECTRICITY INDUSTRY PRIVATISATION
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: My question without notice is directed to the Treasurer. Does the Treasurer recall that at a Labor Council meeting on 12 February 1998, in his position as Acting Secretary, he moved an executive recommendation that, "Labor Council reaffirms its opposition to the Egan electricity privatisation proposal"? Does the Treasurer further recall that at a Labor Council meeting on 21 October 1999, in his position as Secretary of the Labor Council, he moved an executive recommendation that, "Labor Council continues its campaign against contracting out government employees' work and jobs"? How does the Treasurer reconcile the positions he actively advocated and supported back then against his current decision to sell-off this State's electricity assets?
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: Colleagues, it was not a Dorothy Dixer—I did not ask the Leader of the Opposition to ask me that question. I am glad the honourable member has asked the question because it gives me an opportunity to clarify the difference between the two positions. The Greens should listen because I note that Dr Nick has been getting confused about this as well. The Egan-Carr position they took to the conference I think in 1997 was a position to sell-off—
Dr John Kaye: Actually, it was Paul Keating who was confused, not me.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: If it is a choice between Dr Nick and Paul Keating—what a choice—
The Hon. Duncan Gay: I wouldn't take either of them.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I would certainly take Paul Keating—the best Treasurer this country has ever seen.
The Hon. Duncan Gay: He was even worse than you. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6941
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I hope I am as bad as he was. That is something to aspire to. The 1997 package had very clearly a sale of the whole of the electricity industry including the distribution and transmission. Yes, it is true that I opposed it because I thought it was the wrong policy, and I still think it is the wrong policy to privatise a regulated monopoly in the form of transmission and distribution. This particular policy is a very sensible policy: it seeks to strike a balance; it rejects the proposal of the past. The balance is between keeping the assets in public ownership and ensuring that we avoid $15 billion of unnecessary expenditure in this sector over the next five or seven years.
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: It is your neglect.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: It is not our neglect; it is due to changes in the national electricity market. It has absolutely nothing to do with investment in the area; it has to do with the national electricity market. You should read Paul Keating's article. We now have electricity supplied by both the private and public sectors across State boundaries, and that is the difference: we are now in a different marketplace. It does not make sense to stay in the business of electricity generation in the current form.
What I find interesting is that the Opposition does not have a policy on this. One side of the Opposition, The Nationals, as I understand it, has rejected any reform of electricity, yet Barry O'Farrell is saying he will wait for the details. We know the Opposition is intellectually bankrupt in relation to electricity reform; we know Nick Greiner is supporting what the Government is doing; we know John Hewson is supporting what the Government is doing; and we know that even Malcolm Turnbull is supporting what the Government is doing, yet we have an Opposition in utter policy confusion. It has one side that does not want to do anything and the other side is too scared to come out and tell the public what they are on about. We have an Opposition that is nationally in disgrace.
I refer the House to the editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald today to see what the public says. The editorial states that the Opposition is an absolute disgrace; it shows no leadership; it is confused and does not deserve government—certainly not at the next election and well beyond it.
TEACHER QUALITY
The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO: My question is directed to the Minister for Education and Training. Could the Minister outline plans for improving the quality of teaching in New South Wales' classrooms?
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I thank the honourable member for her question and for her ongoing interest in the quality of teaching in New South Wales. Teacher quality and the strength of school leadership are recognised as among the greatest determinants of educational success. Some studies claim 40 per cent of the variation in student performance is a result of teacher quality. Attracting, retaining and keeping a high-quality teaching workforce is central to a world-class education system.
At the recent meeting of Australia's education Ministers, New South Wales advocated strongly for a greater focus on the quality of teaching. The paper I presented to the ministerial council sought an increased Commonwealth contribution to education, highlighting teacher quality as an important factor in student performance. I am delighted that the Rudd Labor Government has responded positively to the initiatives advocated by New South Wales. I congratulate Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard on her recognition of the critical need to address this issue, acknowledging the valuable role teachers play in improving student performance.
The Commonwealth has agreed to recommend to the Council of Australian Governments a national partnership payment for the development of teacher quality. Issues that States would seek to address include ensuring new teachers are well prepared for the classroom; rewards and incentives to ensure that the teachers stay in the teaching profession; attracting quality teachers to hard-to-staff schools; ensuring high-quality teacher pre-service training; incentives to ensure there are enough teachers of specialist subjects such as mathematics and physics; and the status of the teaching profession.
In New South Wales we have recruitment strategies and professional development opportunities to attract the best school leavers to teacher education courses. New South Wales actively promotes teaching as a career through the successful teach.NSW campaign, teacher education scholarships, accelerated teacher training programs, retraining programs and an attractive range of employment conditions. New South Wales teachers have long been the best paid in the nation. The new Victorian agreement announced yesterday gives an increase 6942 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
of $10,000 to the top of the pay scale to bring Victoria up to the equivalent New South Wales levels. Experienced Victorian teachers, with their $10,000 pay rise, will earn a grand total of $3 a week more than their counterparts in New South Wales, and we are about to negotiate a new agreement.
The New South Wales Institute of Teachers also has an important role with regard to the status of the profession. The Professional Teaching Standards and the associated accreditation processes demonstrate to the community the quality of the teaching profession, advancing its status and standing. New procedures that commenced this term allow schools more of a say in selecting teachers and gives qualified teachers more opportunities to apply for suitable positions. It is a policy, like many others, that the Opposition cannot decide whether it supports or opposes.
In February the member for Oxley told the Daily Telegraph he had long supported such a policy, while the member for Murray-Darling said he was totally opposed to it. The member for Orange attacked teachers for opposing it, while the member for Oxley said their concerns were valid. Which is it? Do members opposite and their colleagues in another place support it or oppose it? They do not have a policy and I have not heard them say anything that makes sense. They are never prepared to tackle the hard decisions. The New South Wales Government is implementing a range of initiatives and working cooperatively with the Commonwealth to encourage quality teaching in New South Wales classrooms.
The Hon. Duncan Gay: You aren't getting on well with Costa, are you?
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I get on very well with him.
ELECTRICITY INDUSTRY PRIVATISATION
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: My question is directed to the Treasurer. Can the Treasurer inform the House why the negotiations between him, the Minister for Education and Training, the Minister for Energy and the unions were unsuccessful? What was demanded of him that he found unpalatable? Can the Treasurer inform the House why retaining the overwhelming majority of base load power generation in public hands is, as far as he is concerned, a bridge too far? Will the Treasurer confirm that the issue of electricity is too important to the people of New South Wales for egos to get in the way of a successful resolution of the matter?
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition—
[Interruption]
Will members listen to the answer? This is another demonstration of the Coalition's bankruptcy. It cannot agree on a fundamental policy that will secure this State's electricity supplies. Today's newspaper contained letters from Labor luminaries giving comfort to the Government in the direction it has taken. I welcome that and I know many of the authors personally. We should consider the views of the Liberal Party's luminaries.
The Hon. Duncan Gay: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The question was discrete and asked what the Treasurer found unpalatable in the negotiations. He is not within a bull's roar of that.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Treasurer will be generally relevant.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: As I said, it is instructive to look at what some Liberal Party luminaries think of the Government's policy.
The Hon. Duncan Gay: Point of order: The question was specific and the Treasurer is still nowhere near it.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Treasurer will be generally relevant.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I am surprised that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is taking points of order. He asked me about public ownership of electricity, and I am quoting Liberal Party luminaries' views about this issue.
[Interruption] 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6943
Mr Greiner said, "Therefore, Mr Costa is right about the need to sell at least the generators to electricity retailers." Those were the words of Nick Greiner on 10 February. Malcolm Turnbull said on 3 May that businesses are better off run by the private sector at this time. What does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition have to say about that? Those are the words of Malcolm Turnbull, the Federal shadow Treasurer. Brendan Nelson says, "Generally speaking, as Liberals we believe that where the private sector can provide essential services, that is something that should be considered." Those are the words of Brendan Nelson. What did the Leader of the Opposition in the other place have to say? We have heard from Nick Greiner, Malcolm Turnbull and Brendan Nelson. I could also quote Jeff Kennett, but I am more interested in the Leader of the Opposition's response.
The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox: Point of order: The Treasurer's ego has obviously gotten in the way of his answering the question. He has not made one relevant point.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I understand the point, and I ask the Treasurer to be generally relevant.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: Members opposite cannot even remember the question. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition asked me about public ownership, and I am addressing that issue. I am quoting people such as Nick Greiner, Malcolm Turnbull and Brendan Nelson. They are clearly at odds with this Coalition. I will turn to the Leader of the Opposition in the other place. He illustrated the confusion in his party when on 2 May he said that some assets will be sold and some should never be sold—there is a brilliant policy. They asked for details, but that was their leader's response: some assets will be sold and some should never be sold. What kind of position is that? It is the position of a bankrupt bunch who have no policy direction or future, and certainly no political future.
EATING DISORDERS FOUNDATION
Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: I direct my question to the Minister for Lands representing the Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (Mental Health). Is the Minister aware that eating disorders such as anorexia, bulimia and binge eating affect approximately 330,000 people in New South Wales of both sexes, all ages and every social and economic background? Is he aware that a not-for-profit New South Wales organisation with highly qualified staff is providing support, information, referral and advocacy services to people impacted by eating disorders? In particular, is the Minister aware that, unlike its counterparts in Victoria, South Australia and Queensland, the Eating Disorders Foundation of New South Wales receives no government funding? Will the Minister indicate whether there is any potential for the New South Wales Eating Disorders Foundation to receive State Government funding in the future for the vital work it does for the people of New South Wales?
The Hon. TONY KELLY: I thank the member for his question and undertake to get a speedy response from the Minister responsible.
JOB AND INVESTMENT GROWTH
The Hon. HENRY TSANG: I direct my question to the Minister for State Development. Will the Minister inform the House what the Iemma Government is doing to stimulate jobs and investment in New South Wales?
The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: I thank the member for the question and his interest in the economic issues facing New South Wales. I am pleased to be able to report that the number of jobs in this State has grown by more than 100,000 over the past year. Sydney's Daily Telegraph of Saturday 26 April says it all:
New South Wales enjoys jobs boom ... New South Wales is in the grip of an employment boom with more than 100,000 jobs created in the past 12 months.
Significantly, this strong growth is being enjoyed in regional New South Wales as well as in Sydney. There were 6,200 new jobs on the Central Coast, 27,000 in the Hunter, 22,000 in the Murray and Murrumbidgee areas, 17,600 in other areas, including the North Coast and Central and Far West, and more than 51,000 in Sydney. These are good figures by anyone's yardstick, except of course the Opposition's, which was quoted in the same article as not being impressed. Of course, members opposite would not be impressed by good news for the people of New South Wales.
The Leader of the Opposition in the other place is more intent on running down the State—as he has done in interview after interview—or criticising, but never coming up with any solutions. On the other hand, the 6944 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
Government is impressed that New South Wales has benefited from 101,400 new jobs to February 2008. That is a growth of 3.1 per cent from last year. The news gets even better with the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures revealing another 34,800 jobs created in New South Wales in March.
These new jobs are a cause for optimism across a number of industries and are proof of the New South Wales Government's commitment to building a strong State economy. Over that period, the Iemma Government successfully secured investment projects in the Sydney metropolitan area which are valued at $1.1 billion and which will employ 2,312 people.
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: There is a spark in the air.
The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: It is very sparky. The news is just as good in regional New South Wales with the Government's winning investment projects valued at a further $1.6 billion. This figure breaks down to 4,125 new pay packets for people living in the regional cities and towns of our State. The jobs boom covered many sectors, with 36,000 new jobs created in the retail trade sector and a further 21,700 jobs in the transport and storage sector. Health and community service jobs increased by 19,700 over the 12-month period, while manufacturing jobs increased by 18,000 and the construction sector benefited from an extra 13,900 jobs. The highest level of jobs growth in percentage terms was recorded in the transport and storage sector, which has increased by 14.2 per cent. Employment in the retail trade sector has increased by 7.7 per cent, while the health and community services sectors have increased by 5.7 per cent. Employment in the manufacturing sector has increased by 5.5 per cent and construction has increased by 4.8 per cent. Personal and other services rose by 4.7 per cent, while education is up by 4.8 per cent. These are some examples that even The Nationals can understand, as well as the Leader of the Opposition.
In 2006-07 State regional development attracted investments worth $254 million and helped to create 545 jobs in the logistics and transaction services sector alone. During this time New South Wales won three film projects, bringing investment of $66 million to the State. The New South Wales Government also helped Aboriginal building companies to secure more than $4 billion in subcontracting work, which created more than 150 jobs. Another success was the announcement on 31 March by Virgin Blue that its new international airline V Australia had chosen Sydney for its operational headquarters in Australia. This win for Sydney ahead of Brisbane and Melbourne means more than 1,000 new jobs, $44 million in investment and a huge boost to the New South Wales tourism industry.
MARIJUANA SALE RECOMMENDATION
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE: I ask the Attorney General a question without notice. Is it a fact that Dr Alex Wodak, the director of the alcohol and drug service at St Vincent's Hospital, has recommended that marijuana be legally sold at Australia Post because it has offices across Australia? Will the Government oppose this irresponsible policy? Has Dr Wodak ignored all the recent scientific evidence on the harmfulness of marijuana, especially in regard to mental illness? Will the Government review Dr Wodak's role in advising the Government on New South Wales drug policy?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: The answer to the first question is yes. The answer to the second question is a matter for the Minister for Health.
EMISSIONS TRADING SCHEME POLICY
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I direct my question to the Treasurer. Is he aware of comments such as those raised by Morgan Stanley before the Owen inquiry that, "… there is a risk that the private sector will not invest in the face of considerable emissions policy uncertainty" and "It should be self-evident that this policy uncertainty ultimately will come at a higher cost to the community (in terms of price and reliability) …"? What progress has the Treasurer made in lobbying his Federal colleagues to grandfather New South Wales electricity generators from the proposed emissions trading scheme? Has he convinced Mr Unsworth or Professor Ross Garnaut to reverse their positions, and what will be the impact on the transaction proceeds if his Government proceeds with the privatisation of the generators before the introduction of the emissions trading scheme or without free permits?
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: This is a very good question. It is a pity it was asked and answered in the lower House about an hour and a half ago. I will also answer this question because it is important. I am not aware of the Morgan Stanley report but I am aware of many investment analysts making comments about 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6945
uncertainty associated with emissions trading—it is not just in generation; it is across the range of business sectors. That is why Professor Garnaut, the Federal Minister Penny Wong, the Federal Treasurer and others are discussing at the moment what sort of framework we should have on emissions trading.
The New South Wales Government is taking a view on this, not only as a responsible citizen in terms of environmental policy but also as an owner of assets and a promoter of business investment within the New South Wales economy. Whatever system is put in place has to recognise existing balance sheet values and our traded goods sector and the importance of ensuring that those jobs in the traded goods sector are protected. That is the position of the New South Wales Government. We will continue to talk to the Federal Minister, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer about the emissions trading regime.
Let me get to the question of electricity assets. One thing that is absolutely clear—if honourable members had read the Owen report they would have recognised this—New South Wales is in a fortunate position because its generators use much cleaner coal than the Victorian generators, which are using dirty brown coal. The modelling shows that New South Wales generators will change relative to themselves in the merit order but will move up the merit order and remain in the middle relative to the Victorian generators.
[Interruption]
Listen, Dr Nick, you will get a chance later. This morning he criticised Keating. He said Keating is including the whole of the electricity industry and what he has been saying is outrageous. Yet last week he used selective statistics to say that we are selling off the whole of the electricity industry when we proposed a particular deal with the unions. There is very little credibility in what Dr John Kaye has to say.
It is an important issue, and I can tell the House, because I have had discussions with people who are interested in our electricity industry, that they are very aware of how they can manage their carbon risk, and this is part of the reason the New South Wales Government has taken action. We have to operate in the national market. We have to be able to spread our risks across State boundaries in the national market to ensure we have the head position, particularly as new technology that has a different carbon profile comes on line. This is the argument for doing precisely what we are doing. We need to mitigate these risks by using strategies across State boundaries as part of the national market and we are not in a position as a single owner of assets in this State to do that. Rather than fewer jobs in this sector, more generation means more jobs. I tried to make this point on a number of occasions. We are talking about building more generation capacity, which means more jobs and industry to support those jobs as well.
YOUNG DRIVER ROAD SAFETY
The Hon. HELEN WESTWOOD: My question is addressed to the Minister for Roads. Will the Minister update the House on the latest initiative to improve road safety for young drivers?
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: The Iemma Government has implemented major reforms to young driver rules over the past two years. We are getting on with the job of improving road safety. I am pleased to advise the House of the Iemma Government's latest initiative—Geared Online. This is a $480,000 program for young drivers in New South Wales which I recently launched and which is based around a new website, geared.com.au. It is designed to give young New South Wales drivers improved advice on road safety and on getting their driver's licence.
New South Wales has more than 237,000 learner drivers and 375,000 red and green P-plate drivers. Geared Online is designed to help these young drivers to get their licence and, importantly, it provides them with more information on becoming a safer and better driver. This website is an important way of communicating with young people about issues which affect them, like cars, driving and road safety. Young drivers will find information on this new website on a range of issues like road trip holidays; buying and selling a car; do-it-yourself car maintenance and, of course, safe driving. Geared Online is divided into three main sections to help young drivers in making their initial automotive decisions about licensing, cars and driving.
As many members would be well aware, about one-quarter of all road crashes involve young drivers even though they represent only 16 per cent of the total driver population. That is why we introduced major changes to young driver rules. New South Wales now has some of the toughest P-plate reforms in Australia. Other States are copying those because the new rules are working. It is encouraging that New South Wales recorded 22 fewer red P-plate deaths on our roads in 2007 than in 2006, but we need to do more. Every death on our roads is a tragedy. 6946 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: You need to do a hell of a lot more, Eric.
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: I cannot believe that the member is laughing while I am talking about this important issue. It means that 22 families in New South Wales were potentially spared that horrible knock at the door to be confronted by police and hopefully were saved from the heartache of losing a loved one, which stays forever. Our P-plate reforms are extensive: Night-time peer restrictions for red P-plate drivers; zero tolerance for speeding for all P1 drivers—caught speeding and they lose their licence for at least three months; a ban on all mobile phone use while driving for red P-platers, including hands-free and speaker phones, so they keep their eyes on the road, not on the phone; and new rules for learners, which mean 120 hours of supervised driving, including 20 hours at night.
Geared Online is a $480,000 Iemma Government initiative in partnership with carsguide.com.au, NRMA Free2go, Toyota and Austereo. I commend these organisations for supporting this worthwhile initiative and for their worthy efforts to improve young driver safety in New South Wales. I am advised more than 11,000 people have already logged on to the Geared Online website since the launch. The community called for reforms to young driver rules, and the Iemma Government listened and acted. We need to be fair to young people as well as keep them safe on our roads, and geared.com.au will go a long way towards encouraging drivers to improve their behaviour and learn how to be better citizens and drivers on our roads.
CANYON COLLIERY GROSE RIVER CONTAMINATION
Ms LEE RHIANNON: I direct my question to the Minister for Mineral Resources. Does the Minister stand by the statement he made in the House last month that he has not heard of any serious breaches of the environmental protection arrangements in the Lithgow or Hunter mining areas, given that excessive zinc contaminated water from the disused Canyon colliery has been flowing into the Grose River each day for many years at levels up to 500 times greater than what is considered safe—
The Hon. Michael Costa: Why do you hate the CFMEU so much?
Ms LEE RHIANNON: I do not hate it. I have actually worked closely with that union and I was at a meeting in Newcastle with members last night. I return to the question: And given that the national pollution index records Lithgow as having the second highest rates of zinc contamination in New South Wales at 4 per cent of the State's total, with that same index showing Muswellbrook as the only mining community reporting higher levels of zinc contamination at 14 per cent.
The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: I am aware of the issue.
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: Thanks to Tony.
The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: No, not thanks to Tony; thanks to an article in the Sydney Morning Herald recently, would be a more appropriate response. Although I do not have responsibility for this matter, I will make the following observation: I have found that when I read the Sydney Morning Herald I see the latest research of the Greens in one form or another, and I am a bit sceptical. For instance, today Greenpeace told us authoritatively that clean coal technology cannot work, despite the fact that many other organisations such as the World Wildlife Fund have signed up to it. I treat that claim with a deal of scepticism, as I did with the reference to zinc in the water. I have sought further data in relation to this matter and in due course I will have that research, which I suspect will contain a bit of exaggeration. That data will give an appropriate scientific appraisal of the river and its systems.
ELECTRICITY INDUSTRY PRIVATISATION
The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: Can the Treasurer inform the House what bag of rights are to be assigned to the purchasers or lessees of the State-owned power generators? Given that the operating life of the generators is about 30 years at most, what rights are to be attached to the 99-year leases that operate beyond the life of the power stations? Is the Treasurer contracting away the right to generate power in New South Wales to the exclusion of all other players, both private and public? Are there or will there be provisions in place to prevent lessees assigning their rights to third parties, or can a potential situation arise whereby the 99-year lease to provide power to New South Wales is assigned to power generation facilities in Victoria or some other State?
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: To be frank, I do not understand the question; it does not make sense. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6947
The Hon. Duncan Gay: It's a worry that you are privatising electricity.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: It is a real worry that somebody has actually written that question for the honourable member because he obviously does not understand it either. A question about assigning the rights for generation to other States is bizarre. We live in a national market and the generation goes into the national grid. Whether it is generated out of Queensland, New South Wales or Victoria is largely irrelevant.
Dr John Kaye: What a load of nonsense! What about the transmission constraints?
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: Yes, there are some transmission constraints and that is why there is a grid, but it is largely irrelevant in terms of the national market. Anybody who thinks that the electrons they get are generated in the location from which they are drawing the electricity are fooling themselves. Obviously the member does not understand electricity.
The Hon. Duncan Gay: No, the case is that you don't understand it.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I understand it very well. These transactions are about financial flows and lease arrangements. We have not made a decision about lease conditions. Therefore, the question is hypothetical.
The Hon. Duncan Gay: And this is the bloke in charge! He is an idiot. He is unbelievable.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: Members of the Opposition do not understand; they are a pack of fools. They do not understand the electricity market. Clearly they do not understand the national market, in a physical sense, a financial sense or a structural sense. They have absolutely no idea. The notion that somehow people—
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: You've got no idea.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: The Leader of the Opposition has absolutely no idea. He is in contradiction with his Federal leader and the Federal shadow Treasurer.
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: You are in contradiction with your entire party.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: The Opposition has no idea how the market works. We will go ahead with these important reforms to ensure electricity supply in New South Wales. The international situation is such that everybody is facing a challenge with carbon trading, as I explained in answer to a previous question. All those factors will be put into play when the final framework is in place. The Government has not made any decisions about terms of leases or length of leases. The premise that somehow generators only last 30 years is an absolute nonsense. It shows that the Opposition does not even have technical knowledge of generating capacity. These plants have a longer life span than that suggested by the honourable member.
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: How long?
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: In many cases they have lasted more than 40 years and they can be retrofitted to last even longer. But this shows that members opposite know nothing about the technical, physical or financial components of electricity, and they certainly do not understand the national market. Not one of them has a policy on this issue because they are all confused. The Nationals are in confusion and the Liberal Party is in confusion. The Federal Liberal Party has a different position from that of the State Liberal Party. Confusion reigns across the board. It is a policy-free zone on the Opposition benches. They will be exposed and the public will reject them.
The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: I ask a supplementary question. What, if any, leasing terms have been decided?
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I refer to my previous answer on this matter. We are sitting down with our advisers and working out a strategy on electricity reform. The broad outlines of that policy have been announced. They involve the leasing of the generators and the sale of retail, but they do not involve the confusion that we see opposite. Members opposite are in absolute confusion. The Federal Liberal Party has a different position from that espoused by the State Liberal Party. They are confused, they are lacking in policies and they are foolish in their approach to this question. Is it any wonder they are being rejected by the public on this issue? 6948 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
JURY SYSTEM REFORM
The Hon. PENNY SHARPE: My question is addressed to the Attorney General. Can the Attorney please give the House an update on current reforms to the New South Wales jury system?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: The Government has a strong commitment to the jury system and recognises its role as the cornerstone of the criminal justice system. Part of this commitment is a concerted effort to maintain and improve the jury system, ensuring the system remains an effective and sustainable part of the modern legal system. Recent legislative changes to the jury system have included the introduction of majority verdicts in criminal trials involving New South Wales law, a new offence making it illegal for jurors to conduct their own investigation into a case on which they are serving as a juror, and new legislation to allow three additional jurors to be empanelled on lengthy criminal trials thus lessening the danger that long and complex trials will be aborted.
Last week I was pleased to build on these existing legislative initiatives by announcing reforms aimed at ensuring that trials can continue in circumstances where individual jurors are discharged. This follows on from recommendations contained in the Law Reform Commission's jury selection report, which was released in January. For the first time in New South Wales, judges will have a range of new powers expressly included in the Jury Act. These powers will help to ensure that court resources are not wasted on unnecessary retrials— retrials that have been ordered simply because of circumstances that affect only one or two jurors and pose no threat to an accused's right to a fair trial.
Under the reforms, verdicts will also be preserved in instances where it is discovered that a juror was empanelled by mistake or became ineligible to serve on the jury after it was empanelled. Jurors will also be given the power to report any reasonable concerns they may have about the conduct of a fellow juror, including misconduct, a refusal to take part in deliberations, an incapacity to take part in the proceedings, or an inability to be impartial. These reforms have met with praise from the New South Wales Law Society. President Hugh Macken described the reforms as "wonderful", saying they would "add to the public confidence in the jury system … [and] enhance and enshrine the jury system as one of the absolute pillars of the criminal justice system in New South Wales. And we welcome that."
It must be remembered that juries are made up of private individuals, many of whom have little or no knowledge of the legal system. As such, the Government is dedicated to efforts that are aimed at improving people's understanding of the jury system and their experience when serving as a juror. A range of improvements is underway to achieve this. These initiatives include a comprehensive review of all educational and induction material provided to prospective and empanelled jurors, including the preparation of a new "plain English" jury summons and a new jury information brochure that has been developed for distribution with all summonses. The brochure is designed to answer many of the questions prospective jurors often have about jury service.
Other initiatives include the overhaul of the jury telephone system, including the introduction of a 1300 number. This new number will ensure the jury information line is more accessible to people living in regional and rural New South Wales, by allowing them to call the information line for the cost of a local call. Further initiatives include the creation of a new website, www.sheriff.nsw.gov.au, which contains easy access to comprehensive information on jury service in New South Wales; an upgrade of furniture and equipment used by juries at courts throughout New South Wales; improvements to the food and beverages provided to jurors; and the development of a new customer service charter and training for court staff to improve service standards across all courts in New South Wales. The Government is continuing consultation with the public and stakeholders on the other recommendations contained in the jury selection report. Further work will be undertaken throughout 2008. I look forward to keeping the House informed of changes that will ensure that New South Wales continues to have an effective and sustainable jury system for the twenty-first century.
MANILDRA ETHANOL PRODUCTION
Mr IAN COHEN: My question is directed to the Minister for Lands, Minister for Rural Affairs, and Minister for Regional Development. In a Sydney Morning Herald article of 10 April the Minister was reported as stating, "The only ethanol producer, the Manildra mill at Nowra, used waste from the starch-making process." In the last session of Parliament the Minister stated, in response to my alleged Dorothy Dix question, that "The majority of the ethanol that is produced in the Manildra plant in Nowra comes from flour." Can the Minister confirm that up to 50,000 tonnes of wholegrain, and not starch product, is used by Manildra every year to make 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6949
grain-derived ethanol? Can the Minister inform the House what percentage of total inputs this 50,000 tonnes of wholegrain source would represent in the production of ethanol at Manildra? Does the Minister still assert that the food versus fuel debate is not relevant in New South Wales because, as the Minister said, "The current plant and most of the proposed plants that I am aware of are looking to produce ethanol as a by-product"?
The Hon. TONY KELLY: I thank Mr Ian Cohen for his second Dorothy Dixer on this issue. As I have stated in the past, the Manildra mill produces most of its ethanol not from flour but from flour waste products—in other words from starch waste. I am aware that at times the mill uses molasses as well. Generally, ethanol plants proposed for construction only in New South Wales because no other State has an ethanol mandate. Therefore all the ethanol-producing companies are concentrating their work in New South Wales, and that will mean that all the employment associated with these plants will come to New South Wales.
The Hon. Don Harwin: Like at Nowra.
The Hon. TONY KELLY: Yes, I think 260 people in Nowra depend on ethanol production.
The Hon. Don Harwin: It's the biggest employer in the town.
The Hon. TONY KELLY: And it is likely that even more companies will relocate to Nowra because that ethanol company is there. Hopefully I will be able to inform the House more about developments in that regard in the near future. The other ethanol-producing plants in the State of which I am aware include one at Coleambally, which is owned by a company that plans to build a 10,000-head dairy. The company will feed the cattle in that dairy—
Mr Ian Cohen: With 50,000 tonnes of wholegrain.
The Hon. TONY KELLY: The 10,000 head of cattle must eat grain of some description. They must eat something in order for Mr Ian Cohen to get milk to drink—if he drinks milk. Those cattle will eat distillers' grain. Ethanol is a by-product of the manufacture of distillers' grain. Unless those 10,000 head of cattle are not going to be fed, the food for fuel argument is irrelevant. Another ethanol-producing plant is proposed for Junee. Distillers' grain will also be used to produce muesli bars—for people to eat. Last weekend I visited Moama. There is a proposal—
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Weren't you at the Labor Party conference?
The Hon. TONY KELLY: I was there for part of the time, but I missed most of the fireworks. I went to Moama—
The Hon. Duncan Gay: Which way would you have voted?
The Hon. TONY KELLY: The same way I have voted all the time: with the Government. I visited Moama, where there is a proposal for another ethanol-producing plant. I understand that it is a feedlot, and that already the cattle need to be fed. As I said with regard to the plant at Coleambally, the company will be using distillers' grain, and again ethanol will be a by-product of that. There has been a deal of confusion about the suggestion that a feedlot is to be built at Rockdale.
[Interruption]
A particular member thought that a feedlot was going to be built in his electorate. But the Rockdale feedlot is situated in the southwest of the State, and it will also use distillers' grain—and again ethanol will be a by-product. Feedlot companies have at times argued that ethanol production increases the price of their feed. However, I have referred to two feedlot companies that are going to produce ethanol themselves because they see it as a way of using their by-product. I repeat what I have said—and I will continue to do so for as many times as people will listen, but I particularly hope that the Greens listen. I find it quite incongruous that every time we come up with an alternative energy proposal, whether it be wind power or ethanol, the Greens find some reason to oppose it. The Greens oppose absolutely any job-creation proposal in the State.
ELECTRICITY INDUSTRY PRIVATISATION
The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK: My question is directed to the Leader of the Government, Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister Assisting the Minister for 6950 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
Finance. Does the Minister recall drafting and moving a motion that unanimously passed the 1997 New South Wales Labor Party conference, stating there was "overwhelming opposition to electricity privatisation" across the Labor Party and that the issue could only be revisited—
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: Point of order: Under the standing orders questions may be directed to Ministers in relation to their role as Ministers. It is inappropriate and out of order for a question to be asked of a Minister about activities that he may or may not have been involved in years before he became a member of Parliament. Therefore I ask you to rule the question out of order.
The Hon. Don Harwin: To the point of order: It is inappropriate that the Hon. Amanda Fazio should seek to take up all the time the Hon. Catherine Cusack has to ask her question. The question is in order as it relates to the Minister's official duties.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I will hear the Hon. Catherine Cusack's question and then I will rule on the point of order.
The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK: Does the Minister recall drafting and moving a motion that unanimously passed the 1997 New South Wales Labor Party conference, stating there was "overwhelming opposition to electricity privatisation" across the Labor Party and that the issue could only be revisited once "a broad party consensus has emerged"? Does the Minister stand by his 1997 position regarding his opposition to the privatisation of our electricity assets, or has he satisfied himself that "broad party consensus has been achieved and that overwhelming opposition to electricity privatisation" is no longer the case?
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Amanda Fazio correctly stated that Standing Order 64 (1) provides that questions may be put to Ministers relating to public affairs with which the Minister is officially connected, to proceedings pending in the House or to any matter of administration for which the Minister is responsible. The Minister may answer any aspect of the question he wishes, but in doing so he should bear in mind Standing Order 64 (1), by which he is constrained.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I have a profound respect for the standing orders, Mr President, and I wish to be courteous to the Hon. Catherine Cusack. Accordingly, I will attempt to steer the difficult course between courtesy to the Hon. Catherine Cusack, dedication to my adherence to an accurate recollection of history, and respect for the standing orders. I do not claim to have a perfect memory, but I suggest I have a very good memory. Now that the Hon. Catherine Cusack has asked me the question, I have to say that the answer to the first matter referred to is no, I cannot recall specifically drafting a resolution. However, I can recall the matters that she spoke of and, bearing in mind the President's reminder about the constraints of the standing orders, in that regard I state—as I have in answer to a similar question asked before today—that the matters that were before the Australian Labor Party conference at the time were very different from the those that are now before the people of New South Wales, this Parliament and the Australian Labor Party for consideration. In fact, both the economic context and the policy context—
[Interruption]
If members of the Opposition are going to make the Hon. Catherine Cusack ask a silly question, they will have to behave themselves and listen to a little of the answer. I have already said that I am answering it to be courteous and respectful to the Hon. Catherine Cusack—although I am not sure why I am bothering. I simply point out for the education of the House, and the Hon Catherine Cusack in particular, that the gulf between the events of 1997—just about 11 years ago; is that right?—is considerable. The Hon. Michael Costa has already pointed out—
[Interruption]
I have longevity. I have been relevant for 11 years longer than the Leader of the Opposition has been.
[Interruption]
Mr President, I am answering the question only as a courtesy to the members of the Opposition. If they do not want me to continue, I will not. There is an enormous difference in the policy context of the proposal before the ALP conference at that time, which was the privatisation of all the electricity industry, and the proposal being considered today. The present proposal, which has been debated and discussed and has been in 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6951
the public arena, at no time contained a suggestion that involved the privatisation of the transmission and distribution industries. In other words, there is an enormous difference. It is a completely different policy proposal for a starter. Secondly, there is a national electricity market and the greenhouse effect has entered into the policy debate— [Time expired.]
RESERVE TRUST VOLUNTEERS
The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON: My question is addressed to the Minister for Lands. Can the Minister inform the House about how the Government is recognising the good work of volunteers on reserve trusts across the State?
The Hon. TONY KELLY: The Iemma Government appreciates and values the work of the volunteers who keep our reserve trust system operating. That is why late last year I was pleased to announce a new category—the Crown Reserve Trust Award—of the Australian Capital Territory and New South Wales Regional Achievement and Community Awards. This will be the sixth year that the Department of Lands has sponsored these awards and their profile and success grows year by year. The awards have proved to be an excellent way to acknowledge those who do so much for rural and regional towns across New South Wales. This year for the first time an award will recognise the most outstanding contribution made by Crown reserve trustees.
Earlier this week I launched the search for candidates for the Crown Reserve Trust Award. Crown land is reserved throughout the State to meet a wide range of community needs. Sporting, recreational, environmental, historic and social are just some of the purposes for which a considerable amount of important public land has been set aside—reserved from sale—over the past two centuries. New South Wales has more than 30,000 Crown reserves that have been set aside for public use. While many of these are under the control of local councils as the reserve trustee, more than 750 are managed by community volunteers through reserve trusts.
Over the past year the Iemma Government has launched a campaign to encourage people to become trustees under the banner "It only takes a small effort to build a community." Trust membership is an interesting and valuable voluntary role. This new award will help put the spotlight on some of the great contributions made, and selfless work carried out by, the trustees to better their communities.
The new Crown Reserve Trust Award will have two categories—community and local government. The reserve trusts that are managed by local government, or perhaps football organisations or corporate organisations, will be separate from the truly volunteer reserve trusts. Nominations are now open for these awards, and they close on 8 August. I urge everyone who helps manage a reserve trust or knows somebody who does—whether they be individuals, community groups, administrators or local governments—to enter or to encourage others to enter for these awards. The awards are supported by the Department of State and Regional Development, which sponsors the Business Enterprise Award, which recognises businesses working in partnership. The Events/Tourism Award is for positive economic and social impacts on regional communities. The Iemma Government sponsors four of the six awards, and that reflects this Government's commitment to recognising the great work that goes on in rural and regional New South Wales.
This commitment goes hand in hand with our efforts to secure investment and jobs and to work in partnership with local communities in improving community facilities—whether it be through the $4.5 billion in investment and the more than 20,000 jobs in regional New South Wales secured through the Government's business investment programs or the funding directed each year by the Department of Lands to support economic, social, environmental and sporting projects in country and coastal New South Wales. There is also the ongoing important work of the Regional Communities Consultative Council and the Office of Rural Affairs in facilitating whole-of-government responses to issues in the bush.
The awards are just one way of paying tribute to the efforts of those who make a living in the country or on the coast even better. This year's Regional Achievement and Community Awards winners will be announced at a dinner function in Coffs Harbour in November. I am sure that all members here know a deserving trust member, particularly volunteer members, or an organisation worthy of nomination. I urge every member of this House to encourage their local reserve trust to put itself forward for this award.
ROZELLE HOSPITAL VETERANS
Ms SYLVIA HALE: I address my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Health. Despite the assurances given by the former Minister for Health, namely the Minister now representing the 6952 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
Minister for Health, at a budget estimates hearing on 4 September 2006 that "We have made it quite clear that the veterans who are currently at Rozelle hospital will remain", those veterans have now been moved from the hospital. Did the Minister representing the Minister for Health make any representations to the current Minister for Health on this matter to ensure that the commitments given by the former Minister for Health, namely himself, were honoured?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I will refer the matter to the Minister for Health. The member would also know that the Minister has already made extensive comments about this matter and I refer member to the Minister's comments.
ELECTRICITY INDUSTRY PRIVATISATION
The Hon. DON HARWIN: My question is directed to the Treasurer. How can the Government claim to be dealing openly over the sale of this State's electricity assets given that, firstly, there is no mention of it in the State Plan; secondly, there is no mention of it in the State Infrastructure Strategic Plan; thirdly, the Premier kept the planned sell-off secret from the New South Wales public in the lead-up to the 2007 State election; and, fourthly, the Government conspired with Kevin Rudd to keep the sell-off on the backburner until after the Federal election?
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: In the time that I have been in Parliament, or in the time I have been around the Labor movement, I cannot remember this much exposure or debate of a policy matter.
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: This lack of consultation, honesty and transparency.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: I suggest that members of the Opposition read the Owen Report. I suggest also that they read Barrie Unsworth's report. I further suggest that they read the National Market Report. When Barry O'Farrell was asked, "What will you do?" he said, "There will be some assets that are sold and some assets that will never be sold." What kind of a policy position is that? You people are a joke. The Government has conducted itself in an open, transparent and consultative manner.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I suggest that if members have further questions, they place them on notice.
AUTOPSY COMPLETION DELAYS
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: On 1 April 2008 the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner asked me a question in my capacity as the Minister representing the Minister for Health regarding autopsy completion delays. The Minister for Health has provided the following response:
There is a worldwide shortage of forensic pathologists and Australia is no exception. To this end I have placed the forensic pathology workforce issue on the agenda for the National Health Workforce Taskforce to look at workforce needs in this sector.
In addition to the information provided by the Attorney General, I am advised that in non-metropolitan New South Wales there are currently 16 Coronial Medical Officers providing services to the Coronial Justice system.
I can also advise that the Government funded two extra forensic pathology registrar training positions at the Glebe and Hunter forensic facilities, which have now been filled.
GARDASIL VACCINATION
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: On 1 April 2008 Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes asked me a question concerning Gardasil vaccination. The Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (Cancer) has provided the following response:
I am advised the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination Program is administered by the Commonwealth Government and aims to offer a three dose course of vaccine to all females aged 12 to 26 years between April 2007 and June 2009.
The vaccine used in the national program is Gardasil which provides protection against four HPV genotypes.
All vaccines licensed in Australia are manufactured according to strict safety guidelines that are elevated by the Australian Government Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA).
Reporting of adverse effects following immunisation is provided to the Australian Drug Advisory Committee which in turn provides feedback on vaccine safety to the TGA.
6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6953
New South Wales understands that the Commonwealth is developing an HPV Vaccination Program register to monitor the number of women being vaccinated and completion rates for the program.
Information in relation to data on adverse events, as well as campaigns designed to ensure that women receive all three doses of the vaccine, should be directed to the Federal Minister for Health.
PAID MATERNITY LEAVE
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: On 3 April 2008 Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes asked me a question in my capacity as the Minister representing the Minister for Women concerning paid maternity leave. The Minister for Women has provided the following response:
I am advised that the Iemma Government is well aware of difficulties facing New South Wales mothers in relation to the lack of paid maternity leave and is also aware of Associate Professor Baird's research that highlights that around two thirds of women in Australia have no access to paid maternity leave.
Our Government believes the situation is detrimental for women, for families, for our community and, moreover, detrimental for our economic productivity.
We applaud the Federal Rudd Labor Government's recent announcement of a Productivity Commission inquiry into the pressing issue of paid maternity, paternity and parental leave.
This is an area where Federal leadership has long been lacking. After the 11 years in Government and a detailed and costed report from the former Sex Discrimination Commissioner, and now shadow Minister for Women, the former Howard Government completely ignored calls to introduce paid maternity leave.
It is simply disgraceful that as a result of the Coalition's inaction Australia, alongside the United States, is the only western country that does not offer paid maternity leave. Along with the United States, this has placed us in the company of Lesotho, Swaziland and Papua New Guinea as the only five member countries in the International Labour Organisation that do not provide paid maternity leave.
New South Wales is very pleased that the Rudd Labor Government is remedying 11 years of inaction by putting this issue high on their agenda.
Australia needs a national scheme of paid maternity and parental leave that ensures the cost burden on business, including small businesses, is not excessive, and that ensures all women have access to paid leave on the birth of the child.
The Minister for Women and the Minister for Industrial Relations are working together to provide imports from New South Wales into the Productivity Commission inquiry and we will be continuing to take a prominent role in pushing for national reform for the benefit of all women and working families in New South Wales.
The Iemma Government firmly believes that paid maternity leave is important and has been prepared to lead by example. The New South Wales public sector is one of the most generous employers in terms of parental leave benefits, offering all permanent employees with at least 12 months continuous service prior to the birth of their child, 14 weeks paid maternity and adoption leave at the usual rate of pay and one week's paid parental leave for partners.
There are compelling reasons why women choose to take time away from work after the birth of a child—physical recovery from pregnancy and childbirth, establishing breast-feeding routines and, of course, the opportunity to bond with our babies. The lack of access for many women in Australia—the two thirds of working women—to paid maternity leave compromises these basic human needs.
The Iemma Government will continue to promote and identify strategies that assist both men and women to balance paid work, family and caring commitments ultimately to the benefit of the whole community.
DEFERRED ANSWERS
The following answer to a question without notice was received by the Clerk during the adjournment of the House:
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA GAMBLING DECLARATION
On 1 April 2008 Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile asked the Minister for Primary Industries, representing the Minister for Gaming and Racing, a question without notice regarding the High Court of Australia gambling declaration. The Minister for Gaming and Racing provided the following response:
1. In essence, yes.
2. It is not clear what is meant by a "review". The High Court's decision is final unless leave is sought to reopen it in some future case. Any such leave is considered unlikely given that it was a unanimous judgement.
3. The national market in gambling is a form of interstate trade to which section 92 of the Constitution applies.
4. This matter is currently being examined.
Questions without notice concluded. 6954 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
TABLING OF PAPERS
The Hon. John Della Bosca tabled the following paper:
Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Act 1984—Report of the Parramatta Stadium Trust for year ended 30 June 2007
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. John Della Bosca.
BOARD OF ADULT AND COMMUNITY EDUCATION REPEAL BILL 2008
Second Reading
Debate resumed from earlier hour.
Dr JOHN KAYE [5.07 p.m.]: Both levels of government have slashed their funding. In real terms the Carr-Iemma Government has been responsible for the overwhelming proportion of cuts in funding to the adult and community education sector since 2002-03. Questions surround the way in which the State Government has redirected Federal funds earmarked for adult and community education to other purposes. In theory, money from the Federal Government is paid to the New South Wales Government in respect of student contact hours in community colleges—
[Interruption]
Pardon? Can you say that again? Sorry, I did not hear that.
The Hon. John Della Bosca: It is all right.
Dr JOHN KAYE: After what the Minister has just done he should not talk about preferences. In theory, money from the Federal Government is paid to the New South Wales Government and directed through the State budget. We understand that, while Federal moneys are indexed for salary increases indexation, amounts have not been passed on to community colleges.
Community Colleges New South Wales alleges that, while the New South Wales Government receives more than $40 million from Federal funds in respect of student contact hours in community colleges, it passes on less than $18 million to those colleges. In any case the funding levels are below sustainable levels, with at least nine colleges forced to close over the last three years due largely to a lack of funds. The colleges were: Corindi, Outback ACE at Bourke, Gunnedah, Barrington Tops, Cooma, Lower Clarence in Yamba, Gravesend, Balranald and Kincumber. Neighbouring colleges now support some of those areas. For example, students from Gunnedah undertake courses organised by the Barraba Community College. Many other colleges are in severe financial distress and face a very uncertain future with some of the course offerings having been reduced to cut costs.
Community colleges are now set to lose any legislative recognition and a board with the power to stand up to the Minister. The Iemma Government has deserted the community education sector. The budget has been slashed by $29 million over the last five years. The New South Wales Government shrank its financial commitment to community colleges by a massive 57.1 per cent over that period, nine colleges have closed and others are teetering on the edge of collapse. The Iemma Government has been hoping that no one will notice it has driven the adult and community education sector to the edge of collapse.
Despite providing essential education and training opportunities, as well as massive cultural and health benefits, community colleges are under the knife of the Treasurer and the Minister. This is a mean-spirited attack on an essential ingredient for a healthy society. Colleges are already struggling with less than sustainable funding levels and now they will lose what little protection they had under legislation. The Government's action mocks its rhetoric about social inclusion in communities. This is a body blow to the elderly, the unemployed and people seeking to improve their lives and broaden their economic opportunities.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [5.09 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports the Board of Adult and Community Education Repeal Bill 2008. It is a very simple bill that will repeal the Board of Adult and Community Education Act 1990 and formally disband the Board of Adult and Community Education. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6955
The Minister's second reading speech referred to an advisory committee. The bill does not refer to the body that will take the place of the board; it simply disbands the board and leaves us in limbo. We only have the reference by the Minister in his second reading speech that there will be an advisory committee with wide representation from the sector and from Government departments involved in adult and community education. There is no indication as to who those persons will be or what their representation will comprise. The briefing paper provides the additional information that the advisory committee is to meet for the first time later in April and will be chaired by Dr John McIntyre. Dr John McIntyre is an Australian researcher and policy consultant in the area of adult learning.
It would have been helpful to the House to have details of the advisory committee that is to replace the board. The House would then know about the advisory committee even if it did not vote on it. Issues such as the membership and role of the advisory committee and where that role will be defined then arise. Do the matters raised play any role in relation to grants? As we have heard, there has been a dramatic reduction in grants, which may have caused the board to see its role as pointless. Disbanding the board and not giving any great importance to an advisory committee appear to suggest a downgrading of the importance of adult and community education. The Government seems to be downgrading the importance of adult and community education. In fact, it seems to be the Government's policy. That is the wrong direction for the Government to take. The Government should increase funding and place greater importance on adult and community education. Many adults want to take up further education, even in their senior years following retirement. With the dramatic increase in life expectancy due to improvements in health, people are looking to adult education to make their lives more fulfilling. I ask that the Government respond to the matters I have raised.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for the Central Coast, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Finance) [5.12 p.m.], in reply: I thank the House for its contributions to the Board of Adult and Community Education Repeal Bill 2008. Over the past 17 years of the existence of the Board of Adult and Community Education it has supported and promoted the adult and community education sector. It has provided direction and assisted the sector to understand its role in a changing education and training environment.
The Hon. Robyn Parker: Is this a second reading speech?
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: No, it is the speech in reply. This is the time for the speech in reply. The members of the Board of Adult and Community Education were wise in understanding that a new mechanism was required to link the sector more broadly to government departments and non-government agencies. In unanimously agreeing to disband the board and recommending the establishment of an advisory committee the members set a new direction for the sector. The first meeting of the New South Wales Advisory Committee on Community Education, which took place on 16 April and was chaired by Dr John McIntyre, established the committee's agenda by outlining the issues that face the sector: credibility in policy, client focus, capability, collaboration and certainty in funding.
The Hon. Robyn Parker: They have already had a meeting?
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Yes, and I was at that meeting. The Government values the roles that community colleges play in the vocational training landscape and in their local communities and supports the agenda of the New South Wales Advisory Committee on Community Education.
The Hon. Robyn Parker: How can the committee meet when we have not passed the legislation?
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: This legislation is about abolishing the board. The Opposition raised the issue of funding. We have cut funding but we have increased the number of student contact hours. That means the method by which we deliver the service is vastly improved. In 2003 Adult and Community Education delivered 3.5 million hours of vocational education and training. In 2007 it delivered 5.9 million hours of vocational education and training. The facts speak for themselves. I commend the bill to the House.
Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted to proceed to the third reading of the bill forthwith. 6956 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
Third Reading
Motion by the Hon. John Della Bosca agreed to:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Bill read a third time and transmitted to the Legislative Assembly with a message seeking its concurrence in the bill.
NATIONAL GAS (NEW SOUTH WALES) BILL 2008
Bill received from the Legislative Assembly, and read a first time and ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. John Della Bosca.
Motion by the Hon. John Della Bosca agreed to:
That standing orders be suspended to allow the passing of the bill through all its remaining stages during the present or any one sitting of the House.
Second reading set down as an order of the day for a later hour.
EDUCATION AMENDMENT BILL 2008
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 2 April 2008.
The Hon. ROBYN PARKER [5.15 p.m.]: The Liberals-Nationals Coalition does not oppose the Education Amendment Bill 2008. However, I note that when the bill was introduced there was a great deal of media attention on education. Unfortunately, the media attention was not about the many great things in public education. All members regularly visit public schools and we support the work of public schools and teachers. At the time the bill was introduced the media attention related to an attack at Merrylands High School which resulted in five teenage boys being charged with 100 offences; a survey released by the Public Schools Principals Forum showing that some schools in New South Wales had been waiting for up to 10 years for repairs to crumbling buildings, trip hazards, leaking roofs and putrid toilet facilities; teachers taking strike action; the Minister's suspension of a fingerprint roll call at Ku-ring-gai High School following complaints by parents about a failure to consult; and the new policy to jail parents of truanting students. I am sure that the Minister for Health, the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Community Services were relieved that their portfolios were off the front pages that week courtesy of the education stuff-ups. In the meantime the daily newspapers have not written much about education because it has been school holidays, not because there is nothing to report. The media reports show that there is no portfolio in the Iemma Government that is immune from Labor incompetence. They show how out of touch the Government is with the people of this State.
The Hon. Tony Catanzariti: You are always negative.
The Hon. ROBYN PARKER: It is not a negative comment about this Government; it is the truth. It is the public's perception. It is what people read day after day. They cannot wait until March 2011 for a change of government. They know that the headlines are only scratching the surface. Day after day, week after week they read negative comments in the media about the Government and its stuff-ups. The education portfolio has been providing a diversion for the Department of Community Services and the Department of Health and now the electricity privatisation debacle is in the headlines. One day after another something goes wrong. I feel sorry for the people who work in the education system because they have to deal with these issues on top of working in an environment that needs attention. But what we get from the State Government is the same thing we get from the Rudd Government. It spent $100 million on political advertising but cannot inject the same level of funding into the education sector to fix maintenance problems.
Little has changed since Morris Iemma took over from Bob Carr. What we have seen is just spin doctoring and hundreds of thousands of dollars spent each year on employing public relations staff—former Labor candidates. The story goes on. Meanwhile, schools in New South Wales have leaking roofs, cracked concrete, rising damp and an $86 million backlog in maintenance. No money can be found to inject into solving those problems but money can be found to put into political advertising and spin doctors. It is not acceptable. The taxpayers of New South Wales do not think it is acceptable and certainly those teaching in the education system do not think it is acceptable. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6957
Whilst the Opposition does not oppose this legislation, there are significant points to make about education during this debate. The bill confirms that overseas students may be required to pay fees in order to attend government schools; it gives principals of government schools the power to require proof of a child's name, age and residential address prior to the enrolment of that child at the school; it adds the Department of Corrective Services to the list of agencies that may be asked to provide certain information about students in relation to health and safety at schools; and it makes other minor amendments regarding admission to government schools, exemption from attendance, district councils and adult students.
Thousands of overseas students come to Australia each year to attend schools and universities. Research from the Australian Department of Education shows that the two largest markets for the school sector are China and the Republic of Korea. In 2006 students from those countries accounted for 60 per cent of international school student enrolments in Australia. But students come from many other countries, such as Vietnam, Germany, Japan and Malaysia, as well as Hong Kong. The latest statistics in January 2008 show a growth in enrolments and commencements in the school sector of 14.4 per cent and 18 per cent respectively.
International student numbers have also increased in other education sectors. There has been a strong growth in the vocational education and training sector with increases in enrolments of 41.8 per cent and commencements of 44.5 per cent. The markets contributing to this growth were India, Nepal and China, with growth also from Thailand, Pakistan and the Republic of Korea. The most popular fields of study were management, commerce, food, hospitality and personal services.
One can understand from that growing market for overseas students in the tertiary sector that many students and their families believe that coming to Australia and undertaking their final school years here can ease them into our lifestyle and way of life before undertaking studies in their chosen careers. In that regard I consider it relevant to discuss the boost in skilled migration to this country and the increase in the number of temporary work visas for workers and their families. A recent survey from the Sydney Chamber of Commerce shows that a shortage of skilled workers is causing major concern for three-quarters of the companies surveyed. Almost half the businesses surveyed said they are being forced to look overseas to fill job vacancies.
The chamber executive director, Patricia Forsythe, knows a great deal about education, being a former educator from the Hunter region who taught in high schools and also a shadow Minister for Education for some time in this place. Another former member from the Hunter region, Virginia Chadwick, had also been an education Minister. In Patricia Forsythe the Sydney Chamber of Commerce saw someone with a huge skill set, a great talent and a great deal to offer. The contribution she is making is outstanding. We should pay attention to what she says because she knows what she is talking about. She said:
For companies wanting to grow with a strategy of expansion, having to face issues of skills shortages is an issue of real concern because clearly it impacts on their strategies of going forward.
This year the Federal Government has issued 457 temporary work visas for approximately 87,000 workers and their families. The families coming to Australia, particularly New South Wales, find that the fees they must pay for their children to attend school can be thousands and thousands of dollars. For some the fees may well be out of reach.
The problem needs to be looked at from a broad perspective. New South Wales should be made attractive to skilled overseas workers. People consider what is best for their families when deciding whether to come to Australia. Consideration is not limited to just school fees, it includes vocational education and training and TAFE. Overseas workers need to be able to afford to have their whole family in Australia. I was interested to read an article in the Australian last year that coincided with the Australian International Education Conference in Melbourne in October. The article stated that some schools in Australia are paying thousands of dollars to foreign education agents to lure foreign students. They go to international education fairs just as agents for universities do. The article stated that overseas students come to Australia to go to school for a number of reasons, including to improve their English language skills, to get a high-quality education and to get into university.
Overseas students schools have achieved fantastic results in their Higher School Certificate examinations, with 120 international students appearing on the 2007 Higher School Certificate Honour Roll for achieving more than 90 per cent in at least one subject. This equates to 25.8 per cent of international students who sat the Higher School Certificate last year, which is a fantastic result. International students were listed on 6958 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
the honour roll in 39 subjects in 2007 compared with 22 subjects in 2006. The feedback from the students is also fantastic. Alex Ding, who came from China in 2006 and undertook his Higher School Certificate in 2007 with a university admission index of 99.8, said:
Studying at a New South Wales government school helped me enormously as a person. I have learnt about other cultures and about how big the world is. Blakehurst High School is a multicultural school and the principal encourages students to learn about other cultures, promotes tolerance, harmony and understanding.
Julia Lee from Korea, who is studying at Ryde Secondary College, said:
My English language skills were not very good when I first arrived, but studying in English has made it easier now. When I finish my HSC, I hope to continue studying Hospitality Management at an Australian university.
While there is a positive side to attracting overseas students to Australia and our State, where do those fees go that are collected? We all want to know what has happened to the revenue that the Department of Education and Training has received from overseas students for many years. Indeed, for the past five years the department has received $150 million. In its own briefing note on this bill the department said:
It is considered prudent in view of the financial risk to NSW of losing this source of revenue to amend the Education Act 1990 to provide a legislative basis for collecting these fees.
This is the legislation we are debating today. Is the money going back into supporting students who have English as a second language? Is it going back into providing more teachers to boost support for students who have English language needs? Anecdotally, that is not what we hear. We want to know where that money is going, because it is certainly not going towards school maintenance and it is certainly not going to rectify some of the other huge problems in public education. We want to know where that $150 million has gone and how much of it has gone into spin doctors.
The Public School Principals Forum has told us over and over again about school maintenance problems. We constantly hear stories about maintenance having to be carried out under the Investing in Our Schools Program, which I note the Rudd Federal Government has cancelled, so I do not know how those maintenance problems will be resolved. Those funds were available to every primary and secondary school, and they will be greatly missed. That funding was flexible and school communities could decide where to spend it.
The Hon. Tony Catanzariti: Ask John Howard.
The Hon. ROBYN PARKER: It was a great Howard Government initiative and it is a positive story. The funding made up for the shortfalls in maintenance allocations from the State Government. It was spent on great initiatives such as providing computers and, sadly, on basic things such as fixing up toilets and walls rather than on educational needs. The only negative about the Investing in Schools program is that the Rudd Government has cancelled it and provided nothing in its place. The Rudd Government has also done a backflip on computers. Students will now have access only.
The amendment addresses education and will ensure that we know where fees collected from overseas students will be spent. It is certainly appropriate to talk about where funding is not going. As I said, the legislation deals with enrolments and proof of age. A child's age is important when enrolling students, particularly gifted students who want accelerated progression. The amendment is positive in that it addresses those details. However, the Opposition wants the Government to make it clear where overseas student fees will be spent. It certainly wants to ensure that the money is spent appropriately.
Given that the budget will be handed down in June, it is appropriate to ask that more funding be allocated to education in this State and that it be targeted at the needs of public schoolteachers and students, and overseas students. We look forward to the June budget supporting and encouraging English as a second language teachers and overseas students. The Liberal-Nationals Coalition supports the bill.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [5.31 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports the Education Amendment Bill 2008, which contains a number of practical provisions. We have been involved in some of the debates on this issue in recent times. The bill will confirm that overseas students may be required to pay fees to attend government schools. As honourable members know, overseas students have pursued a very aggressive campaign to change that policy. I believe it is the correct policy and I understand it is necessary for the legislation to make it absolutely clear that the Government has the power to impose fees on overseas students. There may be a future legal challenge because of section 31 of the Education Act 1990, which provides that 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6959
instruction in government schools is free. Some overseas students may claim that that provision should apply to them. In response, the bill clarifies what has been the legal position, and the Christian Democratic Party supports it.
I note that the only students who are exempt from fees are New Zealanders and Norfolk Islanders. Does New Zealand have a reciprocal policy for Australian students in New Zealand? Are they exempt from fees in New Zealand? I assume they are, but I am interested in the Government's response. Another provision gives the principal the power to require the name, age and residential address of a child prior to his or her enrolment at school. Again, one would assume that principals have that power. Apparently in some cases parents have not been prepared to provide that information or have provided false information. That may be deliberate if the child is below enrolment age or lives outside the school catchment area. The bill also adds the Department of Corrective Services to the list of agencies that may be asked to provide certain information about students in relation to health and safety at schools. The Department of Corrective Services has assumed responsibility for the Kariong Juvenile Correctional Centre and as a result it has a relationship with the Department of Education and Training.
The bill also contains a number of minor amendments, which the Christian Democratic Party supports. Some are obvious, including that a child may be enrolled at a school if the child is eligible to attend and the school can accommodate the child. A school might have too many children and a child cannot be accommodated and must go to another school. That flexibility should be available to principals and they should have that power. The bill also makes it clear that the Minister can exempt a child from being enrolled at school. That normally relates to the age of a child or health conditions that prevent a child from attending school full time. Again, the principal will have the power to make those concessions.
The bill streamlines the process to establish a district council of parents and citizens associations and makes it clear that the principal has the discretion to enrol an adult at school. Enrolment may not be possible for some reason or the principal may believe that an adult is potentially disruptive. In those cases, the principal should have discretion. The Government wants to restore powers to principals in a number of areas, including the employment of teachers, which we support. The Christian Democratic Party supports the bill.
The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON [5.37 p.m.]: I support the Education Amendment Bill 2008. Last week the Premier announced new laws aimed at ensuring that parents live up to their duty to ensure that their children get an education. These laws are being introduced in recognition of the fact that education is vital to a child's future success in life. It is for this reason that it is a parent's legal duty to educate a child during that child's compulsory school years. This is a crucial time in a child's life when he or she learns many of the fundamental things that equip him or her to meet the challenges of the future and to facilitate transformation into valued and contributing members of our society.
It is in recognition of the importance of those years that the Government has announced its intention to raise the school leaving age to at least 16. The law provides that a child's education must start at no later than six years of age, although many children will be given the opportunity to start school earlier. The law also provides that once a child starts school he or she must attend each day during the hours it is open for instruction. While it is important to safeguard the right of children to an education by enacting these provisions, it is also necessary for an education system to meet a child's educational needs.
It is for this reason that section 25 of the Education Act allows the Minister for Education and Training to exempt a child from the requirement that the child is enrolled at or attend school or be registered for home schooling provided the Minister is satisfied that conditions exist that make it necessary or desirable that such a certificate should be granted. We have heard from previous speakers about this issue. Such certificates are given only when it is considered to be in the interests of the child to exempt the child from the requirement to attend school. An example of when a certificate would be given is when the weight of expert medical advice or psychological evidence indicates that the child is not yet ready for school and would be harmed by being forced to attend school at the present time.
In such circumstances the child may be exempted from attending school for a limited time—say, three months—while the child is prepared by the parents and treating specialists to commence school life. This would occur only when the education department was satisfied that there were proper grounds to issue the certificate. It is clear that there may be circumstances when a child, although ready to start school, may have difficulty in attending school for all the hours that it is open. This could occur when a child is in the process of recovering from a serious illness or from injuries sustained after a car accident. The child is understandably eager to resume 6960 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
a normal life and see friends again, and returning to school is clearly an important step on the road to rehabilitation, but the child may also become easily tired during the day and not able to complete a full day at school—at least initially. I recall the Opposition Whip being very considerate to me recently when I was in similar circumstances: I was ready to come back, but not for the whole time.
It is reasonable and appropriate for all practical steps to be taken to support the child's successful transition back to school. For this reason the bill amends section 25 of the Education Act to make it clear that the Minister is able to grant a certificate exempting a child from the requirement to attend school during the times specified or referred to in the certificate. This is clearly an amendment designed to enable schools to flexibly meet the individual needs of their students. I commend the bill to the House.
The Hon. TONY CATANZARITI [5.41 p.m.]: I support the Education Amendment Bill 2008. When a parent or carer seeks to enrol a child at school the principal must be provided with accurate information about the child's name and age and where the child lives. This information is then entered into the school's records and, in the case of the child's name, will determine what the child is called for all official purposes, including on school reports and any certificates awarded. The need for this kind of information to be accurate is obvious, and it is common practice in schools to request parents to provide documentation to confirm the accuracy of the information they provide. The documentation that can be requested for this purpose varies with the student's individual circumstances and could include one or more of a birth certificate, passport, residential lease, electricity account or statutory declaration.
Thankfully, the vast majority of parents provide to schools without complaint or concern accurate documentation that confirms the details of their child's name, age and address. A small number of parents or carers complain about the request, refuse or unreasonably delay providing documentation that supports the information they have provided to the principal at enrolment. Some even provide false or misleading information to schools. This can happen for a variety of reasons. An example is when a parent may want a fresh start for a child and seeks to enrol the child in a school under a different name to avoid a history of violent behaviour following that child to the school. However, whilst every effort should be made to avoid labelling a child, it is necessary to take every step to keep schools safe from violent behaviour. Knowing a student's proper name assists the school in identifying, assessing and managing any risk that the student may pose to the school. This is clearly in the interests of all concerned, including the student.
A parent may want to enrol a child at school under a different name because the parent has changed his or her name. For example, when a father has remarried and adopted a hyphenated name with his new wife and he wants his child to have the same name as him. This is the sort of situation that can seriously affect both the child and the parents, and should be resolved by agreement or, if that fails, by the court. However, not all parents take this approach. Sometimes a parent will make a unilateral decision to change a child's name when the child is enrolled, causing potential confusion to the child and great disappointment and offence to the other parent when the other parent finds out. All reasonable steps should be taken to avoid this.
On other occasions one parent may remove the child from the family home and as part of an attempt to disappear will seek to change the child's name when the child is next enrolled at school. From time to time the education department will receive a request from the police or courts to locate such a missing child and the department's ability to respond is heavily dependent upon the accuracy of its official records. It is for these reasons that when a child applies for enrolment at a school, principals must ask for documents that prove the child's identity. As mentioned, these documents might include a birth certificate, although alternative documents are acceptable in some circumstances when, for example, the child is a refugee and has no birth certificate to produce. When available, the birth certificate also serves as proof of the child's age. A small number of parents attempt to enrol a child who is simply too young to go to school. This can occur for a variety of reasons and can be detrimental to the child's development. It can also place an extra burden on the child's teachers and detract from the amount of time and attention they give to other students.
Proof of where the student lives is also of considerable importance. It not only allows a principal to make contact with parents about a variety of issues but also it can influence whether the student should enrol at the school at all. Every student in New South Wales has a local school in which her or she can, if eligible, enrol. This does not prevent a student from seeking to enrol in a school that is outside of the student's local area; many schools receive requests for out-of-area enrolments. When a school receives a request for an out-of-area enrolment consideration can be given to factors like the number of classrooms that the school has and the existing school population. These factors are not considered when a student seeks to enrol at his or her local school. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6961
For this reason a small number of parents claim to live at an address that places them in the local area of a particular school when they live somewhere else. This can disadvantage the school that takes an additional student and it is unfair to the families who have been honest about where they live when they seek to enrol at their non-local school and who are on that school's waiting list. The need for accurate information about a child's name, age and residential address is self-evident. The bill amends the Act to give principals a clear statutory power to request proof of the child's identity, date of birth and home address. This supports principals in their administration of schools and safeguards the vast majority of parents and carers from disadvantage caused by the unscrupulous actions of others. I commend the bill to the House.
Dr JOHN KAYE [5.49 p.m.]: On behalf of the Greens I speak on the Education Amendment Bill 2008. The bill is being debated at a time when public education is under enormous pressure from chronic underfunding from both levels of government and from an increasingly aggressive private school sector that is taking away students and resources from public education. Public education is under pressure from a changing demographic amongst teachers: the age of teachers is steadily climbing and we are facing an imminent rush of retirements and, with that, the loss of expertise from the public education system. It is being debated also at a time when, despite lack of resources, public education continues to perform the most amazing and successful feats of educating our young people.
Despite the pressures it experiences from private schools, public education continues to deliver extremely high-quality outcomes for students and for the community. It is a credit to the teacher workforce in New South Wales that it continues to operate under these conditions at such a high level. It is a credit to teachers who put their bodies and souls into the business of education. They spend their nights and weekends working well beyond that for which they are paid—marking, setting assignments, preparing lessons and making sure the school runs to its optimum. It is also a credit to teachers who put time into extracurricular activities.
We owe it to teachers, students and parents in public education to ensure that nothing in the bill will impede public schools functioning to the best of their ability. The Greens have some concerns with five key provisions in the bill. The first relates to allowing the Department of Education and Training to charge overseas tuition fees to enrol at public schools, which is current practice but there are questions of legality. The amendment seeks to remove any doubt about that.
The Hon. Robyn Parker questioned where the funds collected from foreign students went. We understand that on average 80 per cent of the funds disappear from the schools while 20 per cent remain with the school where the student is enrolled. Students with less than adequate English skills, or those who have special needs or learning difficulties, may be an additional impost on the school. Although public education welcomes all students regardless of their level of ability or disability we cannot expect schools to make sacrifices, and any additional costs of having a fee-paying student should be fully covered. The department should not remove funds and leave a school impoverished.
On the other hand, if a greater amount is recovered than it actually costs for that student, it is appropriate for those funds to be redirected, preferably towards equity programs that are struggling and require extra funds to address the impacts of socioeconomic inequity within communities. Also, in cases of hardship the director general may order a refund of the tuition fees. In cases of hardship it would be inappropriate for the school to be forced to refund the 80 per cent, and we ask the Minister in reply to address that.
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: And to address how it is calculated.
Dr JOHN KAYE: Indeed, it would be helpful if the Minister explained the arrangements for the proportion of fees paid by foreign students taken by the department and that which remains with the school. How are those proportions calculated and what happens when those fees are refunded?
The second key component relates to allowing the Department of Education and Training to collect information from the Department of Corrective Services about students. I am always squeamish about the passing around of information about young people and its possible impacts. It is always important to respect the right to privacy of young people and their opportunities to make a new beginning. However, there is a greater concern here, that is, the rights of teachers and other students, and the need to ensure that when a student arrives at a school, necessary provisions are made to address whatever issues that student may bring with him or her. To that extent the Greens support this provision. However, we ask the Minister to pay close attention to the provision and ensure that the privacy of students is not violated. 6962 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
The third main provision relates to allowing the department to consider various matters before permitting a student to enrol at a particular public school, including the student's age and sex, and, in particular, the resources, classrooms and facilities available at that school, but only schools that are not the local public school. This is a welcome provision that is an essential part of planning provisions for education. Dezoning of education created a flow of students that made life extremely difficult for education planners and placed burdens on different types of public schools. Schools received increased enrolments because they were perceived by parents to be more desirable while other schools perceived to be less desirable lost student numbers.
An adverse outcome of enrolment has been an inequitable distribution of students across schools even within local areas, in many cases with no rational evidence to suggest that one school is superior to another. In my area—and I understand it is typical—a number of primary schools are full to the gunnels but one has a smaller number of students even though it is an excellent school with excellent staff. I have met many of them and I have been very impressed by their scholarship and dedication to teaching. The principal is a very fine educator with a vision for the school. In many cases where dezoning has occurred—which is across the entire State——the fashions and perceptions go ahead of evidence and schools become popular, and by dint of becoming popular they become even more desirable. It is an unfortunate outcome and any provision that allows the department to consider matters, including resources, classrooms and facilities available at a school when considering enrolment is an attempt to redress some of the most adverse outcomes from dezoning.
The fourth key provision of the bill is to allow the Department of Education and Training to require proof of identity before enrolling a student and to enable the department to remove students if fraud is detected. The allegation is that some parents have faked addresses to enrol kids in popular public schools while others have faked identities to escape a record of previous bad behaviour. Every child, regardless of his or her background and previous malfeasance, deserves enrolment in the best public education. However, I must raise some concerns about this provision. It is appropriate that we remove fraud and that we have a system that operates in an orderly fashion.
The final key provision I mention allows parents and citizens associations to set up district councils without new legislation being required each time that occurs. I have interacted with a number of parents and citizens association district councils and they serve as an extremely useful aggregation of knowledge and lobbying effort with respect to each individual school. That aggregation is an important part of the political process particularly where levels of government do not tend to listen too closely to what happens in individual public schools. The parents and citizens association district councils are an important facility. They change as time goes by and interests and personalities change, so it is appropriate to allow parents and citizens associations to set up district councils without the need for legislation every time. We hope that this will lead to an increased number of district councils and increased activity at that level.
We do not oppose the bill; we support its provisions and will vote in favour of it. However, we see this as a lost opportunity because the bill does not seek to address the substantial challenges that face public education over the next five years. For too long we have allowed those challenges to be swept under the carpet and now we are about to pay the price. The issue of the ageing teacher workforce cannot be ignored any longer. As a society we have to invest in ensuring a high-quality stream of teachers into public education to replace those who retire. This requires much more flexible thinking than we have seen to date about how we deal with teachers who are close to retirement. It is a shame that more finance has not been put into mentoring and providing part-time opportunities for teachers who are heading towards the end of their careers.
The bill also fails to address school maintenance. We can argue about dollars until we are blue in the face, but the reality of public education is that there are too many schools where parents are withdrawing their children because the facilities are outdated and the schools are not adequately maintained, are unhygienic and, in some cases, are dangerous. It is time for a real commitment to upgrading and maintaining all public education facilities to make sure that whenever parents choose a school for their children they are not lured into choosing private education by inadequate facilities in public schools. Public education does provide high-quality outcomes and high-quality teachers. It is more than competitive with private school education. It is being let down by governments that fail to invest in public education and recognise that it is their primary objective.
The final shortcoming of this amendment to the Education Act is the failure to address the unfairness caused and the damage being done by section 21 of the Act—the 25 per cent rule. It is a failure to understand the impact of increased funding that is tied both to student numbers and the cost of educating a child in public education compared with the cost of education in a private school. Until we come to grips with that and break the nexus between the funding of private schools and the cost of educating a child in public education we will continue to see public education struggle to remain competitive in the eyes of parents. The Greens do not oppose this bill. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6963
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for the Central Coast, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Finance) [6.04 p.m.], in reply: I thank members for their contribution to the debate and their support for the amendment bill. I want to deal with a number of matters raised during the course of the debate. All the normal protections of privacy that go with relevant legislation impact on all occasions on the education system, the Education Act and administration. The Hon. Robin Parker and Dr John Kaye raised concerns about international student fees. Members are aware that this amendment bill clarifies the practice of charging fees for international students, which are set at the same amount as the costs for other students. Obviously there are extra dollars for special needs. I guarantee that none of the funds so accumulated go to Treasury; what is left over and above the cost to the school goes to fund other education programs, so that all the funds collected go back into the public education system. That concern seemed to be the theme of some members' speeches. I can warrant to the members who expressed that concern that all those funds will go back into the education system. I listened with interest to the contribution of Dr John Kaye, who commenced by referring to a crisis in public education—
Dr John Kaye: No I didn't. That is not true.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: No? He referred to a decline in public education—
Dr John Kaye: No, I did not say that either. I said, "difficult circumstances faced by the public eduction system".
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: He is right about that. There have been difficult times.
Dr John Kaye: You have verballed me.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: No, I have not verballed you. I misunderstood you. In that case I will go from being critical of your remarks—
The Hon. Robyn Parker: You weren't listening.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I was listening, but I just misunderstood a little bit.
Dr John Kaye: You weren't listening; you were talking.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: No, I was listening.
Dr John Kaye: You were talking.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I was listening. I can listen and talk at the same time. It is something I am very good at.
The Hon. Robyn Parker: You are not bad at chewing gum either.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I can chew gum as well, but I do not talk while I am chewing gum. That would be very rude. It is important to understand in the context of Dr Kaye's remarks that the evidence is that New South Wales public education is—I do not like to use terminology such as "problematic"— holding if not increasing its market share. That is particularly true of the more junior cohorts—kindergarten and stage 1—and that is a big indication of the future. Clearly these kinds of trends indicate that New South Wales public education has weathered the storm of the Howard years very effectively. I have had the privilege of holding the education portfolio for only 12 months, but my predecessors and the two Premiers who presided over the education system for the long haul of the 13-year life of the Government are the reason for that relative success. Without taking anything away—
Dr John Kaye: No, it is not; it is the teachers. It has nothing to do with you people.
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Of course there are teachers in Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Victoria. But New South Wales has the highest-paid teachers and teachers to whom we attribute the highest status. We have teachers who are supported with the best practice literacy and numeracy programs in the world that we can establish. We have teachers with the best professional development programs and teachers for whom the most advanced work is done compared with those provided by any professional 6964 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
institute around the other jurisdictions. Very importantly, we have a whole range of special programs for teachers who are working in lower socioeconomic status environments and with students in public schools with particular needs. There are a number of reasons why our teachers are the best teachers. It is not just because our teachers happen to be good; teachers in every State and probably in most places in the world are good. The important thing is that our teachers are respected, paid well, treated decently and properly and given the support they need to do their job. They are also given elaborate support through the quiet revolution of the information technology work that has been done by this Government over a very long period of time, and which will be supplemented by the support that will be offered by the Rudd Government.
The public education system in New South Wales has weathered the storm of the vengeful and spiteful Howard years very effectively. This is illustrated by the fact that people from around the world send their children to this State to be educated in government primary and high schools. Our schools are internationally recognised for their superb teachers, the excellent quality of our education programs and the pathway our schools offer to a career or to further study, including to Australian and overseas universities.
It is reasonable and fair that the parents of overseas students—who are often people with the means to afford to pay reasonable fees and are not Australian taxpayers—should make a financial contribution to the education of their children, a system that provides their children with the excellent education they receive. It is an endorsement of our great system that in a number of places around the Sydney metropolitan area, in Newcastle, Wollongong and some of the regional centres and cities a large number of overseas students are undertaking secondary education. The amendments will make the system for collecting fees from overseas students in New South Wales schools transparent and clear to all. We will continue to provide exemptions for students from Norfolk Island, New Zealand and those on appropriate exchange programs. We will also ensure that the department will respond flexibly and sympathetically to situations of individual or family hardship or special circumstances.
The bill, as Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile noted, also allows for part-time attendance. The legislation governing education needs sufficient flexibility to meet the needs of individual students, such as when expert evidence indicates that a child who is of compulsory school age is not yet ready to start school. The bill also allows for a child to be exempt from attending school for part of the school day, such as a child returning to school after a serious accident or injury—a well-made point by the Hon. Christine Robertson.
The bill amends section 34 of the Act to make clear the meaning of what is meant by the school being able to "accommodate the child". The question of whether or not a school can accommodate a child becomes relevant when the parents apply to enrol the child in a school that is not designated for the local area in which they live. The Act will now make clear that a student's age, the type of school they are seeking to enrol, the resources allocated to the school, and its existing classroom facilities will be able to be considered when a decision is made as to whether or not the child can be accommodated at the school. It just makes it clear that a child's age and the type of school they wish to attend are valid considerations when determining whether or not a child can safely and, in an educationally sound manner, be accommodated at a particular school.
It is important to note that these provisions apply only to enrolment at a school located outside the intake area for the child's home address. It is also important that schools can accurately identify children when making decisions about their enrolment. The bill amends the Education Act to empower a principal to require a person seeking to enrol a child at a school to provide proof to the satisfaction of the principal of the child's identity, date of birth and home address.
Finally the Act will be amended to provide that the Minister for Education and Training can establish a district council of parents and citizens. I am very pleased that Dr John Kaye basically reiterated all of the points I would have otherwise wished to make in that regard. I simply say that the amendment allows me to do that by publishing an order in the Education Gazette. This will remove the existing cumbersome process for establishing a new district council. The reforms set out in this bill are necessary, timely and appropriate, and I would think that all supporters of public education, and good education practice in New South Wales across the board, would support the bill, which I commend to the House.
Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted to proceed to the third reading of the bill forthwith. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6965
Third Reading
Motion by the Hon. John Della Bosca agreed to:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Bill read a third time and transmitted to the Legislative Assembly with a message seeking its concurrence in the bill.
HIGHER EDUCATION AMENDMENT BILL 2008
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 9 April 2008.
The Hon. ROBYN PARKER [6.14 p.m.]: I lead on behalf of the Coalition and in doing so indicate support for the Higher Education Amendment Bill 2008. The bill demonstrates support for the growing education industry, which attracts students from around the world. It amends the Higher Education Act 2001 in recognition of changes to the national protocols approved by the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs.
The amendments will provide for the recognition of certain universities for a provisional period; require the national protocols to be taken into account in connection with the registration of education institutions and accreditation of courses under the Act; remove the requirement for an education institution seeking registration as an overseas university or overseas higher education institution to obtain accreditation under the Act of at least one of its courses before it can be registered as such; and enable certain education institutions to be allowed to credit their own courses. I note that all other States have amended or are in the process of amending their legislation to align with the national protocols. I note also that one of the aims of the bill is to enable the creation of more universities.
The latest report on applications, offers and acceptance of undergraduate university places released by Universities Australia late last month shows a continuing demand for a university qualification. The report showed that the level of unmet demand has dropped considerably and that more than 85 per cent of eligible applicants received offers this year. The report highlighted that workforce productivity associated with university qualification is borne out by OECD data that indicates that on average Australians aged between 25 and 64 with a university qualification earn 39 per cent more than those who leave school and do not go on to tertiary studies. Dr Glenn Withers, the chief executive officer of Universities Australia, summed it up well when he said:
The high level of knowledge and skills our graduates take into the workforce will keep them competitive in what is now a global labour market.
As a mother of three, two of whom are currently at university, I know how hard students work—or at least that is what they tell me—to reach their goals of attending university and following their chosen career path. Many families make tremendous sacrifices to help their children go to university. Certainly members of Generation Y are staying at home longer while they study and attend university than any generation before them.
The number of international students in higher education institutions in this country is also growing. In debate on another bill earlier today reference was made to international students. With regard to this bill, the latest statistics from the Federal Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations indicate that higher education accounted for the largest sector of international students in Australia at 39 per cent—with the majority coming from China, India and Malaysia. New South Wales accounted for more than 66,000 students, and Victoria accounted for more than 56,000 students. The statistics also indicate that enrolments with government providers increased by 4 per cent while enrolments with non-government providers increased by 9 per cent. Consequently, the provisions in the bill that will allow the establishment of more universities will be most welcome in terms of those demands.
We are fortunate in New South Wales to have excellent universities in both metropolitan and regional locations. As I come from the Hunter, I wish to acknowledge, as do many Hunter residents, the quality of education provided by the University of Newcastle. The university, which opened more than 40 years ago in 1965, currently has more than 26,000 students and 800 staff. It is a major driver of the Hunter economy. It 6966 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
generates many jobs and is one of the biggest employers in the Newcastle region. More than 100 countries are represented in the university's student enrolments. That is a wonderful achievement for a university that started as a locally focused institution. It has become an internationally recognised university.
In 2007 the University of Newcastle was ranked in Australia's top 10 research universities and in the world's top 100 universities for engineering, technology and computer sciences. Quite an achievement. Last year it secured $9 million in research funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and $9 million from the Australian Research Council. It generated more than $55 million in research income in 2006, an increase of more than 20 per cent since 2004. It established 10 new priority research centres, focusing on its research strengths of health, science and engineering, engineering and the environment. The university formed a new partnership agreement with Shanghai's East China University of Science and Technology in the area of energy and environmental sustainability. I am sure the partnership will include studies on clean coal technology, because of the importance of the coal industry to the Hunter. The university's staff have received countless awards. A number of staff members and academics have been honoured for teaching excellence. In the past few months five academics have been recognised for their exceptional record in the advancement of student learning.
With the growth in the State's population, there is increasing demand for higher education facilities and a greater spread of universities. I have already referred to one university where demand is high. Recently the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils called for a further university to be set up in Western Sydney to meet the demands of the region's growing population, which currently stands at 1.8 million. The situation in Western Sydney was compared to that enjoyed by South Australia, which has a smaller population than that of Western Sydney but is serviced by three universities. If this legislation has the desired effect, it will have an impact on the ability of higher education in Western Sydney to accommodate the growing population, the variety of higher education courses and the quality of service delivery. The Liberal-Nationals Coalition supports the legislation, as we support higher education generally.
The Hon. KAYEE GRIFFIN [6.23 p.m.]: The Higher Education Act 2001 gives effect to the existing set of national protocols for higher education approvals, which were developed in 2000 and implemented in 2001. The bill makes changes to the Act in accordance with nationally agreed revisions to the higher education protocols that were endorsed in 2006 by all education Ministers, including the then Commonwealth Minister. The amendments proposed do not seek changes to the Higher Education Act beyond those required by the new national protocols. These were developed through a cooperative national effort, including extensive consultation with the sector and all stakeholders. Subsequently, during 2006 and 2007, a comprehensive set of national guidelines was developed to specify the necessary detail that ensures the protocols apply across all States and Territories in a nationally consistent way. Together with the Australian Qualifications Framework and the Australian Universities Quality Agency, the national protocols for higher education approval processes are a key element of the national quality assurance framework for Australian higher education. The key purpose in giving effect to the national protocols through the New South Wales Higher Education Act, and other similar legislation in all other Australian jurisdictions, is to ensure that the Australian higher education sector provides education and educational choice of the highest quality and it is regulated consistently so that the same high quality applies around the country.
The proposed amendments reinforce the significant quality framework that has been set up under the existing national protocols. They reflect the nature of the revised protocols and give them force in New South Wales. The consistent standards set out in the national protocols are expected to apply to all higher education functions of an institution, regardless of whether its higher education students are located in Australia or offshore, and the way in which it delivers higher education courses. The protocols and the related national guidelines have been developed to protect the standing of Australian higher education nationally and internationally. The protocols provide the fundamental criteria and approach in Australia for regulating entry to the sector and the operation in Australia of all approved higher education institutions, including domestic and overseas universities and a range of other local and overseas higher education institutions that are not universities. As well as setting quality standards for the higher education sector, the revised protocols allow over time for greater diversity in the higher education sector in Australia. In doing so, they reflect international developments in higher education to meet diverse and changing student, employer and community expectations.
The revised arrangements offer increased diversity, but not in terms of quality. The quality bar will remain uniformly high. They permit new types of institutions to be recognised, that is, specialist universities, university colleges and institutions that are not universities with authority to self-accredit courses, provided they meet the rigorous quality criteria. Again, only in appropriate circumstances they allow for overseas universities 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6967
to be approved to offer their own overseas courses in Australia. Currently, overseas universities are able to offer Australian-designed courses accredited under the Australian qualifications framework requirements. In accordance with the requirements of the protocols and guidelines, a range of significant criteria will have to be satisfied before an overseas university is able to operate in New South Wales. Comprehensive advice will be sought first about the standards of the university in its home country, as well as its international standing and that of the body responsible for its accreditation. Any courses it wishes to deliver in Australia must have been properly accredited in the home country. In addition, an expert panel will assess the proposed delivery arrangements in New South Wales. This assessment will include the university's arrangements for academic oversight and quality assurance in this State and its proposed facilities, staffing and student services.
A range of significant criteria also has to be satisfied when determining whether a higher education institution should be authorised to self-accredit any of its courses. It is important to emphasise that the national protocols apply to all higher education institutions operating or seeking to operate in Australia, as well as to the offshore activities of all Australian higher education institutions. In the case of international students, higher education institutions must comply not only with the national protocols but also with the requirements of the Commonwealth Education Services for Overseas Students Act and other regulations that apply specifically to international students. The nationally agreed arrangements for maintaining the quality of higher education in Australia will continue to include a comprehensive system of institutional registration or approval to operate, course accreditation, a national qualifications framework and external quality audits.
State and Territory government accreditation authorities will continue to be responsible for the registration of higher education institutions and the accreditation of higher education institutions and higher education courses by non self-accrediting institutions. The Australian Universities Quality Agency will continue to be the national body responsible for auditing all universities, other self-accrediting higher education institutions, some non self-accrediting higher education institutions and government accreditation authorities.
The proposed amendments to the Higher Education Act mean that over time the New South Wales community will have a greater range of choices and specialised offerings within the higher education sector consistent with all other State and Territories. At the same time the community can be assured that the enviable reputation of the Australian higher education sector for the intrinsic quality of its awards and the quality of its delivery will be maintained.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [6.29 p.m.]: On behalf of the Christian Democratic Party I am pleased to support the Higher Education Amendment Bill 2008. This bill will provide for the recognition of certain universities for a provisional period, will require the national protocols to be taken into account in connection with the registration of education institutions and the accreditation of courses under the Act and will remove the requirement for an education institution seeking registration as an overseas university or overseas higher education institution to attain accreditation under the Act of at least one of its courses before it can be registered as such. The bill also contains other supporting amendments.
We are pleased to support this bill because it will give further flexibility to the higher education area in our nation, particularly in New South Wales. It is a result of long consultation from 2001 to 2006 to ensure that there would be national protocols to provide the quality framework for Australian higher education. Already there have been some developments in this direction with the Bond University in Queensland some years ago, the Australian Catholic University, the University of Notre Dame, and also quite a few theological colleges— such as the Anglican Moore College and the Baptist Theological College accredited to award degrees.
I left school at 15 years of age and started work as a junior storeman in a factory but I later had the opportunity to undertake some courses at university, which I greatly appreciated. It helped me understand the value of university as part of the education framework of our State. I also had the opportunity for four years to be on the Wollongong University Council—the equivalent of the senate—and to be involved in many discussions month by month concerning the university and its future. I was very pleased that whilst I was there the university was ranked number one in Australia.
I am pleased also to have had the opportunity to undertake theological studies at the United Faculty of Theology at the University of Sydney and then later to complete some courses at the University of Sydney and the University of Armidale and to attend lectures in politics at Macquarie University, where my lecturer was Dr Meredith Burgmann, who later became the President of the Legislative Council. She was the senior lecturer in politics, so I learnt a bit more about politics by attending those lectures. 6968 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
This bill provides the necessary flexibility to maintain the high standards of Australian universities recognised around the world. We want to see those high standards continue but we also want to provide further opportunities and perhaps a greater variety of institutions for people to attend to obtain their degrees. One matter that concerns me, and I know other members are aware of this, is that there has been a series of articles about the increasing number of large grants coming into Australia from Saudi Arabia seeking to influence Australian universities. There has been some controversy about Griffith University being promised $1.3 million if it will establish an Islamic research centre. I understand similar offers have been made to other universities.
It is very important for universities to maintain their independence. They should not come under any direct or indirect influence, certainly from Saudi Arabia or from extreme Islamic fundamentalism, which may be used to attract Muslim students and perhaps to give them instruction that would not be helpful for them to be part of our society in their future lives. I raise that as a warning. I am not aware of this issue being mentioned in New South Wales universities but I believe it is an area we should keep under close watch. We do not want to have donations from foreign countries coming into the political realm so I question whether it is healthy to have donations from a foreign country seeking to influence our universities and our education system. The answer should be: No, we do not want to have that outside influence in our education system. I raise that as a warning to the Government to be alert about some of these developments in other States. We want to maintain the independence and the high quality of our universities, which have been operating for many years.
Dr JOHN KAYE [6.35 p.m.]: On behalf of the Greens I raise some concerns in respect of the Higher Education Amendment Bill 2008, which implements the revised national higher education protocols. I raise concerns in respect of three key issues. The first is the creation of specialised universities and university colleges with narrow research focuses. While in principle we have heard about increased flexibility and opportunities for students, I suspect the comments come largely from a lack of understanding of how the production and promulgation of knowledge occur in the higher education sector.
The idea that one can compartmentalise knowledge and have a university that will focus only on one particular area has been left behind by the intellectual events of the past three decades. Real progress is being made at the interface between different disciplines. Students who are educated at universities are most successful when they have the broadest possible education. They then have a broader understanding of the professional world in which they will end up and also have the capacity to learn and upskill themselves to gain greater understanding across a broad range of areas.
The frontiers of knowledge are moving rapidly and are changing in a way that cannot be predicted at the point of training a student. I was trained as an electrical engineer at the University of Melbourne. The things I was taught then and what I needed to know by the time I was 25 years into my career bear very little relationship to each other. Yet I had a very fine education because it taught students to teach themselves, to question and to think across a broad range of disciplines.
Where we have specialised universities and university colleges we will end up with students who are educated—and if ever there was a contradiction in terms this is one—in a narrow range of areas and whose abilities and knowledge will therefore date more rapidly and whose understanding of the world will be impaired by the lack of cross-fertilisation. The same statement applies to research. Most of the great advances that have been made in our understanding of the universe and humanity and of the possibilities in technological endeavours have been made because of cross-fertilisation between different fields. To create institutions that are narrow is to block off opportunities for greater development in those areas.
There is a second concern with narrow discipline-based universities and that is the opportunity for highly destructive competition to occur between those institutions where a university college or a narrowly focused university can set up a narrow range of highly profitable disciplines and not engage in teaching or researching those areas which are less profitable and less attractive. This will have adverse consequences for enrolments and cash flows, and the robustness of universities that wish to maintain broad-ranging focuses. This is not good news for Australia, which has done very well from broad-based universities that cross-fertilise in different fields, endeavours and disciplines. It is also not good financial news for our existing institutions and in the end it is not good news for the future of Australia.
It is interesting to note that TAFE Directors Australia, the industrial lobby group associated with the directors of TAFE colleges, aggressively lobbied for the creation of university colleges. In its submission about the national protocols it argued against the need for all higher education institutions to have some research focus. One must wonder what is the association's agenda in pushing that proposal. Those who are, or who have been, engaged in the business of education and higher education would recognise that that is not in the best interests of Australia socially, economically or scholastically. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6969
I refer members to the mutual recognition process set out in the revised national protocols. These appear to focus almost entirely on bureaucratic considerations and do not really include academic standards setting out expectations regarding scholarship and research. The Greens are specifically concerned that the Australian Universities Quality Agency is not responsible for quality assurance in accreditation, and that is a grave mistake.
The third and final area of concern relates to overseas universities and, in particular, the protocols that apply to them. Many potential higher education students would find them very confusing. They focus primarily on the status of the university in the home country. In many cases, they simply have their title in the home country and do not necessarily meet Australian criteria. It is also not clear that they are awarding Australian or overseas degrees. The protocols do not demand that overseas universities meet Australian criteria under Protocol D, and they allow them to call themselves universities here. That is a mistake and it should be corrected.
The Greens' concern with overseas universities is similar to our concern about university colleges and speciality universities and relates to the ability of big-name universities to cherry pick students in certain areas and to damage the intellectual and scholastic activities of broad-ranging universities. There are real threats to the future of the higher education sector in Australia with or without the legislation. The Greens' concern is that the legislation puts at risk the future of our existing universities, which are truly treasures and have delivered socially, culturally and economically. We should not do that. During the development of the revised national protocols on which the legislation is based the current Minister's predecessor, Carmel Tebbutt, was one of the loudest voices against some of the worst aspects of the national protocols. She did an excellent job and I pay tribute to her.
On behalf of the Greens I also pay tribute to the National Tertiary Education Union. I am extremely proud to be a member of that union. I have belonged to it and its predecessors since I first started work in the Australian higher education sector in 1983. The union has done an excellent job representing the best interests not only of its members but also of the entire sector. It is a common feature of public sector education unions that they go beyond concern about the best interests of their members to also protect and lobby for the entire sector, and identify and attempt to counter threats. By looking after the interests of that sector, the union delivers to the Australian people. It has raised a number of concerns about the protocols, and the Greens endorse those concerns, particularly in respect of university colleges and specialised universities, the mutual recognition process and the protocols for overseas universities.
The Hon. HENRY TSANG (Parliamentary Secretary) [6.45 p.m.], in reply: I thank members for their contributions and commend the bill to the House.
Question—That this bill now read a second time—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
In Committee
Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.
The Hon. HENRY TSANG (Parliamentary Secretary) [6.48 p.m.]: I move:
Page 4, schedule 1. Insert after line 28:
[6] Section 7 (1A)
Insert after section 7 (1):
(1A) In deciding whether to authorise an education institution to accredit any courses to be provided by the institution, the Director-General must have regard to the National Protocols.
The Government is proposing a further small amendment to division 2, section 7 of the Higher Education Act. The bill amends section 7 of the Act to allow for the awarding of self-accrediting authority over courses of study and related matters. The amendment inserts proposed new section 7 (1A) in addition to those already proposed. Its purpose is to require the Director General of the Department of Education and Training—the decision maker in respect of accreditation—to have regard to the national protocols in deciding whether to authorise an 6970 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
educational institution to self-accredit its courses. While the bill is intended to imply this, the additional amendment makes the intention explicit, and ensures complete consistency and clarity throughout the bill regarding the underlying requirement that the terms of the national protocols and associated guidelines must inform decision makers.
The Hon. ROBYN PARKER [6.49 p.m.]: The Liberal-Nationals Coalition supports the amendment.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [6.49 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports the amendment. An amendment was foreshadowed by the Greens with the same principles but the Greens' amendment would have included extracts from the protocol. I believe it is not wise to have the protocols in legislation in case they are changed, making our legislation out of step with the national protocols. This wording is far better in that if there are any changes to the national protocols this State's legislation will be consistent.
Dr JOHN KAYE [6.50 p.m.]: The Greens support the Government's amendment and recognise it is an important correction to the bill to ensure that the accreditation of courses has regard to the national protocols. Our proposed amendment was slightly stronger than that. It would have required that any education institution would not be granted authorisation under subsection (1) unless it met the standards established by Protocol C of the national protocols. Nonetheless, we are convinced that the Government amendment would have the same effect, and it has been endorsed by the National Tertiary Education Union in New South Wales, so we support the amendment. It is important that this is clarified and that education institutions are not granted authorisation unless they meet the standards established within the protocol. Although we have some criticisms of the protocols, the Greens see them in the current partially deregulated environment as being the only protection we have to maintain the quality of the provision of higher education. It is a shame they do not go far enough to protect existing universities from adverse behaviour by new institutions that seek to start up in New South Wales.
Question—That the Government amendment be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Government amendment agreed to.
Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported from Committee with an amendment.
Adoption of Report
Motion by the Hon. Henry Tsang agreed to:
That the report be adopted.
Report adopted.
Third Reading
Motion by the Hon. Henry Tsang agreed to:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Bill read a third time and transmitted to the Legislative Assembly with a message seeking its concurrence in the bill.
CLEAN COAL ADMINISTRATION BILL 2008
Bill received from the Legislative Assembly, and read a first time and ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Henry Tsang, on behalf of the Hon. Ian Macdonald.
Motion by the Hon. Henry Tsang agreed to:
That standing orders be suspended to allow the passing of the bill through all its remaining stages during the present or any one sitting of the House.
Second reading set down as an order of the day for a later hour. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6971
ADJOURNMENT
The Hon. HENRY TSANG (Parliamentary Secretary) [6.55 p.m.]: I move:
That this House do now adjourn.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES FAMILY SUPPORT INITIATIVES
The Hon. GREG DONNELLY [6.55 p.m.]: Tonight I draw the attention of the House to some excellent initiatives currently being rolled out by the Department of Community Services. An integral component of the Iemma Government's record $1.2 billion reform of the child protection system is the introduction of innovative early intervention programs such as Brighter Futures and Families New South Wales. Both programs represent a major shift in the way the Department of Community Services works with families and they are representative of this Government's new approach to helping the people of New South Wales.
The first program of its kind in Australia, Brighter Futures changes the way services are delivered to vulnerable families by identifying them early and providing sustained services and support to stop problems escalating. The program aims to keep families together and keep children out of the statutory child protection system through the provision of quality childcare, parenting skills training, and intensive casework by specialist DOCS caseworkers. Furthermore, international research shows that for every dollar invested to help families with young children $4 is saved within three years on child protection, health, education and the justice system. By the time the child reaches adulthood, $7 is saved. By the time the person is 40 years of age benefits of up to $17 per dollar invested can be achieved.
With over 2,000 participating families across New South Wales, it is not hard to find examples of the positive impact this early intervention initiative is having. Dr Christopher Ingall, a consultant paediatrician in Lismore, wrote to the Minister last year outlining the program's success in his area. He wrote:
I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Department for the introduction of the Brighter Futures Program. This has helped, in so many ways, many families whose children are under my care.
Families New South Wales is another highly successful initiative aiming to support families with children up to eight years of age through a range of innovative services to boost physical, social and emotional development. Operating since 1998, some of the achievements to date include more than 260,000 home visits to mothers with new babies, providing help and support at the very start of life; more than 45 schools as community centres, supporting parents and helping children make the transition to school; more than 60 family worker services, including Aboriginal and culturally linguistically diverse family worker services; and more than 200 supported playgroups boosting child development and giving parents new skills and more than 450 home visitors to help everyday families with everyday issues.
When Labor came into office in 1995 it inherited a child protection system from the Coalition that had a budget of just $49 million. The figures speak for themselves. Between 1988 and 1995 almost 25 per cent of DOCS offices had been closed, more than 1,000 jobs had been slashed, including 77 child protection specialists, and the police child protection mistreatment units at Flemington, Wagga Wagga and Campbelltown were closed. The Government's injection of over $1.2 billion over five full years to reform the New South Wales child protection system has seen dramatic and tangible improvements, which include a greater community awareness about children who may be at risk—last year alone, the helpline received over 286,000 reports of children at risk of harm, almost double the total number of reports received in 2002; and more caseworkers getting to more cases—currently we have 2035 caseworkers, 833 more caseworkers than we had in June 2003. In 2002 just 55 per cent of the most urgent reports were responded to within the suggested time frame. In DOCS offices that have just been upgraded that response has now improved to virtually 100 per cent.
We are intervening more to protect children. More children than ever are in our out-of-home care— around 12,700 children compared to fewer than 9,300 in June 2002. We continue to provide a greater level of support to foster carers. New South Wales foster carers are the highest paid in Australia in recognition of the role they play in caring for children who cannot live safely at home. The average routine payment is $467 per fortnight compared to $411 in Queensland and $331 in South Australia.
Addressing ongoing issues that exist in building a quality child protection system remains a huge challenge, as the New South Wales Ombudsman declared last year. No government agency, no matter how well funded, is ever going to be able to replace proper care, affection and nurturing provided by families. However, the Iemma Government will continue to invest in these vital, early intervention programs to ensure that our State's most vulnerable families get the support and services they need. 6972 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
CAMILLA NOLI'S STILL WATERS BOOK LAUNCH
The Hon. MARIE FICARRA [7.00 p.m.]: Tonight, in my role as shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Citizenship, I have pleasure in introducing to the House a talented new Australian writer, Camilla Noli, whose stunning debut novel, Still Waters, was launched at Shearer's Bookshop in Leichhardt early last month, April 2008. Camilla Noli is a second generation Australian whose grandparents migrated from Italy to far north Queensland during the first half of this century. Camilla's grandparents settled in that area as cane farmers and made a new home in Australia. They contributed to the economic prosperity of our nation and raised children and grandchildren who have continued their tradition of hard work, combined with a strong sense of family and community. Camilla's debut novel, Still Waters, is a chilling, confronting and affecting novel about motherhood. It examines what happens when a woman, who some would say should never have had children, does. Because Still Waters takes us into the heart and soul of this woman, the reader is given insights into the often conflicting emotions of motherhood.
Through its brutal and powerful honesty, Still Waters goes beyond this individual experience. It forces the reader to critically examine society's generally unquestioningly rosy view of what it means to be a mother, and thus asks questions pertinent to us as a nation. For example, to what extent do we offer support to parents, particularly those who are struggling with the role? What importance do we, as a society, really place on the role of parenthood? What if additional, affordable support could prevent devastating outcomes for children?
A report by the Institute of Health and Welfare, released in January this year, reveals that substantiated cases of child abuse have increased dramatically in the past five years, and this Parliament is holding a Special Commission of Inquiry into Child Protection Services in New South Wales. We must ask: are we as a State and as a nation doing enough to ensure that some of the most vulnerable members of our society—our children and our grandchildren—are being protected?
Still Waters has generated significant media interest. The Sun-Herald has identified it as one of the important books of 2008. The Australian has placed the work of Camilla Noli alongside international award-winning authors and works—such as Lionel Shriver, with her international phenomenon, We need to talk about Kevin. The Age describes the narrative voice of Still Waters as being "cool and seductive, leading us inevitably to places we do not want to go; and yet, once there, unable to resist reading on". The Age goes on to state:
This psychological thriller is all the more terrifying because it touches on feelings common to more of us than we care to admit.
In addition, Still Waters is a book that is already generating huge interest overseas. It is to be published in the United Kingdom in January 2009 and interest has been received from a number of major American publishers. Camilla Noli has tackled aspects of motherhood that are disturbing and thought-provoking. Still Waters will undoubtedly generate huge debate. In the interests of encouraging this debate and providing a forum for these issues, Camilla has developed an interactive website, www.camillanoli.com, that people can visit to discuss some of the issues raised in the novel. I hope that all honourable members will take time to visit the website.
Camilla Noli is an example of what happens when one of the young members of our vibrant Australian-Italian community follows up on childhood dreams and is not afraid to ask difficult questions that are relevant to us all both as people and as a nation. Camilla's ability to do this continues into her later works, one of which, I am told—Double Exposure—is to be published next year. I urge all honourable members to take time to read Still Waters and to visit Camilla Noli's website. I also take this opportunity to praise Camilla's husband, Mladen, for the constant love, support and encouragement he has always given to his wife. I realised from the moment that I met Camilla last year that she is a writer about whom we will hear much more over the coming years.
BURMA REGIME CYCLONE RESPONSE AND CONSTITUTION REFERENDUM
Dr JOHN KAYE [7.05 p.m.]: The tragedy that has befallen the people of Burma with the devastation from cyclone Nargis comes on top of, and is made much worse by, 46 years of brutal, repressive and incompetent military dictatorship. Hundreds, possibly thousands, are dead and many more are injured, without homes, food or clean water. Typically, the regime has let its people down by failing to issue early warnings of the impending disaster and by frustrating international attempts to deliver assistance. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6973
The referendum voting that is currently scheduled for Saturday 12 May seeks to entrench the power of that regime and with it the poverty, systematic human rights violations and denial of democracy. The Australian Coalition for Democracy in Burma is calling for the Burmese regime to postpone the election. Since 1990 Australia has had seven elections and changed government twice. New South Wales has had five elections and changed government once. On each occasion all sides accepted the result of the election and governments succeeded each other without violence or resistance.
The parliament elected by the Burmese people in 1990 has never been allowed to operate. Aung San Suu Kyi, the Leader of the National League for Democracy, which won an overwhelming majority, has been under house arrest and many of the elected members of Parliament are in jail or have been forced into exile. The regime is now seeking to cement itself into power with the referendum to install a new constitution. Burma Lawyers Council General Secretary, Aung Htoo, makes it clear that the processes of both the referendum and the draft constitution mock the very idea of democracy.
If prepoll voting of Burmese living overseas is any measure, those seeking to cast their vote will be subject to intimidation and, in many cases, denied the right to participate if they are suspected of supporting the "no" case. In Thailand, Japan and Singapore, tens of thousands of Burmese citizens have been excluded and others have been bullied into voting "yes". Even in Australia, prepolling is confined to the Burmese Embassy in Canberra, effectively excluding residents of other cities and States, in particular, Western Australia.
The regime in Burma is issuing temporary immigration identification cards and allowing holders to vote. This is an invitation to multiple voting. Ballot box openings are wide enough for agents of the regime to extract votes they do not like. The outcome of counting is not required to be declared at local polling stations, creating massive opportunities for rigging the result. The Chief Justice, who, apart from being a lackey of the military regime, is also head of the electoral commission, will hear complaints against the result. There is no opportunity for independent oversight of the results. It is small wonder the regime has strenuously resisted every attempt at international monitoring.
Aung Htoo's analysis of the draft referendum leaves little doubt as to why the regime is working flat out to create the appearance of majority support. It would create a democracy in name only, creating legislative, administrative and judicial outcomes that bear no resemblance to the will of the Burmese. The military would appoint one-quarter of all members of both chambers of the union parliament and through a complex and opaque system would exercise control over the choice of president. The draft constitution also creates a national defence and security council, stacked with a majority of military appointees. The council will have the ability to exercise full legislative, judicial and executive power at its discretion.
The people of Burma face a rigged election to legitimise a sham constitution that will continue to frustrate their aspirations for democracy that respects human rights. The international community must not afford this travesty of democracy the slightest shred of credibility. Australia should be loud and clear in its condemnation. We owe it to the people of Burma, who have suffered for too long. We owe it to journalist U Win Tin, who has been in jail since 1989 and has suffered repeated ill treatment, including periods of denial of food, water and essential medical care, solitary confinement, intense interrogations and confinement for a long period of time to a dog cell with a concrete floor for the crime of daring to speak out for democracy! We owe it to Min Ko Naing, who was one of the leaders of the 1988 uprising and who is now almost blind after many years of imprisonment. We owe it to U Win Tin, Min Ko Naing and millions of other Burmese who refuse to have their spirit broken, and who stand proud and resolute for the day when their people will be free from the oppression of the military regime.
ELLA SEVENS INDIGENOUS RUGBY UNION TOURNAMENT
The Hon. LYNDA VOLTZ [7.10 p.m.]: On Saturday 1 March 2008 men's and women's teams from across Australia participated in the inaugural Ella Sevens indigenous rugby union tournament held in Coffs Harbour at the BCU International Stadium. The event was organised and operated by the Lloyd McDermott Rugby Development Team and sanctioned by the New South Wales Rugby Union. The tournament is part of the Lloyd McDermott Rugby Development Team's broader work in fostering indigenous involvement in rugby. From the humble beginnings of a small camp attended by 15 rugby enthusiasts in 1991 the team now trains more than 1,500 indigenous rugby players over a wide scope of the continent, from Darwin to Melbourne.
Competitions this year will include the far North Coast under 16 regional trials in Lismore and Parramatta; the mid North Coast under 16 regional trials in Port Macquarie; the Illawarra under 16 regional 6974 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
trials in Nowra; the Northern Territory under 16 championships in Darwin; the Central West under 16 regional trials in Coonamble, Dubbo and Orange; the southern New South Wales indigenous under 16 championships in Berry; the north Queensland indigenous under 16 carnival in Mackay; the south-east Queensland indigenous under 16 carnival in Ballymore; and the northern New South Wales indigenous under 16 championships in Tamworth.
In particular, the Ella Sevens showcased the potential for Aboriginal women to participate in sport at a high level, where their unique role as a mother can be accommodated. A 2006 Senate report entitled "About Time! Women in Sport and Recreation in Australia" lists two of the major barriers to women's participation in sport as their access to child care and reduced leisure time due to family responsibilities. The Senate committee found that many sporting facilities are not designed with women's needs in mind, and even when appropriate facilities exist, female teams often have to compete with men for access. These problems are exacerbated in rural areas and in communities with significant socioeconomic disadvantage, given their existing barriers to participation in sport.
The gender disparity in sports participation is exemplified in the indigenous community, with only 36 per cent of indigenous women reported to engage in physical activity, compared to 52 per cent of indigenous men. At a time when the New South Wales and Federal governments have pledged to "close the gap" between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians, these figures do not bode well for the health of the indigenous community. I commend the players selected at the Ella Sevens in the Australian women's and men's indigenous rugby sevens teams. Due to outstanding performances at the tournament, Faryaneh Hayati, Sopjie Cubillo, Veronica Jordan, Eunice Grimes and Precilla Bell of Waterloo, Tanya Lee, Paris Robinson and Krystal Donovan of Coffs Harbour, and Shannon Daly and Lesley Scharnberg of Darwin were selected to represent Australia in the national indigenous sevens squad. These women will serve as role models for young indigenous women and men as they compete in the International Indigenous Rugby Sevens Tournament in Papua New Guinea early next year.
I thank the match officials who were coordinated through the Mid North Coast Regional Referee's Association, President Matt Butler and Australian Rugby Union referee scholar Matt Kellahan. In particular I thank Peter Meagher and Matt Punch, who coordinated the match officials and all the ground staff, and National Indigenous Television for telecasting the competition. As an aside, the tournament also included a golden oldies game against the local Coffs Harbour team. The tournament included various members of the extensive Ella family, but I noted that some of the passes were longer than the runs made. My knowledge of over thirties tournaments is not vast. I assumed that an over thirties tournament meant that the players were over 30 years of age—not that more than 30 players were on each team. All in all it was a great event that raised money for local player Alan McCabe, who was confined to a wheelchair after sustaining a serious injury in a scrum.
Tom Evans and all the team members should be congratulated on hosting this great drug and alcohol-free family event that is attracting Aboriginal teams from across Australia to Coffs Harbour. I understand there are hopes that the tournament will double in size next year given that places in the men's tournament filled very quickly. Having four women's teams register in the first year of a tournament, three from rural New South Wales, is a great result and the organisers should be congratulated. I take this opportunity also to congratulate the Waterloo men's and women's teams on taking out both championships on the day.
DAILY TELEGRAPH ARTICLE RESPONSE
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [7.15 p.m.]: I respond to an article that appeared in the Daily Telegraph on 1 May 2008. The article alleged that I had asked questions on behalf of Dubbo businessman Roger Fletcher about donations he had made to The Nationals. I say at the outset that the only crime to be committed would have been not to ask these questions. As the duty member of the Legislative Council for the Dubbo electorate, I will never apologise for standing up for businesses and constituents in my local area. My job is to vigorously advocate for, and represent, the people of New South Wales, and I will continue to do so with pride and in the same active manner.
As Roger Fletcher was quoted as saying in the Dubbo Daily Liberal on Monday this week, "If we all shut up we'll be completely forgotten on this side of the mountain." And I certainly will not shut up on the issues that affect the people in the Dubbo electorate. Minister for Water, Nathan Rees, apparently unearthed the information used in the article. It is seriously flawed in its accuracy, and only serves to demonstrate just how desperate the Labor Government is to try to deflect attention from the stench of corruption that has plagued its shabby Ministers. 6 May 2008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6975
The article claimed that I had asked two questions on behalf of a Dubbo trucking company called Fletchers Trucking, said to be owned by Roger Fletcher. Firstly, Roger Fletcher owns a livestock export company in Dubbo called Fletchers International Exports, not a trucking company called Fletchers Transport. A simple Google search will reveal Fletchers Trucking Company to be a completely unrelated trucking company based in South Australia. Secondly, I have asked only one question referring to Roger Fletcher. The question, which was asked in 2005, related to the administration of a new ovine Johne's scheme. Ovine Johne's is a livestock disease, affecting many farmers and businesses across the State. At that time I was doing my job as shadow Minister for Primary Industries. Mr Fletcher, as many people would be aware, is actively involved on an industry basis through his participation in a subcommittee of the Meat Industries Council.
Thirdly, the question was asked in November 2005, many months before a Nationals candidate was even preselected for Dubbo in May 2006. It is desperation for Rees to call this "cash for questions". Rees also wrongly claimed that in 2006 in the Parliament I asked the Minister for Roads why the Roads and Traffic Authority had prosecuted Fletchers for overloading trucks. This is completely incorrect. In 2006 I asked a question regarding growers and drivers being fined for overloading grain trucks. The Roads and Traffic Authority had searched through GrainCorp records going back to November 2005 and 18 months down the track it issued court attendance notices to many drivers and growers. I asked the question on behalf of the many drought-stricken farmers who had contacted me and other Nationals members at the time. The question had nothing to do with Roger Fletcher, the livestock exporter from Dubbo, or did it have anything to do with a company called Fletchers Trucking, a South Australian company that Nathan Rees has obviously confused with Fletchers Livestock from Dubbo.
It is worth noting that the Minister who came up with this botched information, Nathan Rees, is the same man who acted as chief of staff to Milton Orkopolous. It is not the first time that this man has not exercised due diligence in his employment. Observation and attention to detail are obviously not Mr Rees' strong points. For the record, Roger Fletcher is a decent, well-respected businessman and a very active community member. He is chairman of the Meat Industries Council and is also on the Australian Wool Innovation Board. These roles mean he is often talking to politicians. The journalist who wrote this article was kind enough to note that in my 20 years in Parliament I have maintained an unblemished record. My record continues to be blemish free. Frankly, the same cannot be said for Mr Rees.
TALLAWARRA LAND DEVELOPMENT
Ms SYLVIA HALE [7.20 p.m.]: Three weeks ago I received an email from Maureen Magee, the coordinator of Concerned Residents of East Dapto, about the proposal by TRUenergy to undertake a major residential development on the Tallawarra Land at Dapto. The background to the project is that in 2003, in a secret deal, the Carr Government sold to TXU Electricity Limited the publicly owned Tallawarra Land, which comprises some 600 hectares and nearly six kilometres of Lake Illawarra frontage, for $4 million up front. A further $11 million was to be paid later when a power station was operating on 65 hectares of the site. A condition of this bonanza for the company was that it built a gas-fired power station. In return, some of the remaining 535 hectares could be sold to provide further employment opportunities and the rest was to be retained for environment conservation.
In what has become an increasingly common scenario under this Government, TXU donated $11,000 to the New South Wales branch of the Australian Labor Party in late 2003 around the time of its secret deal with the Government. In 2005, the China Light and Power Company, known in Australia as TRUenergy, bought TXU and with it the Tallawarra site. We know from recent investigations by the Independent Commission Against Corruption that Wollongong City Council at that time was weak and corrupt. Concerned Residents of East Dapto has obtained council documents that highlight the very cosy relationship between some Wollongong council officers and representatives of TRUenergy.
The result is a plan for a huge housing estate on the Tallawarra land. There was much argy-bargy, and several lunches, between a council planner and an executive of TRUenergy over the required studies. Council adopted the local environment study in April 2007. The study, however, did not contain all the necessary studies that TRUenergy claimed had been done. The study papers before council also claimed that local residents were in favour of housing on the northern end of the site—a claim that is clearly untrue. I have been told that a TRUenergy executive rang an elderly resident at her home and told her that "You residents are getting housing on the northern Tallawarra lands whether you people like it or not".
The Stage A generator has been built but not fired up. Stage B will have two generators. TRUenergy claims that it has not yet decided whether to buy a combined cycle gas turbine or an open cycle gas turbine 6976 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 6 May 2008
generator for Stage B. The noise study undertaken, however, shows that the noise from the generators will affect housing to both the north and the west. The western area already receives more than 50 decibels from rail and traffic noise. Added to this, 24 hours a day, seven days a week will be the generator noise of 35 to 45 decibels. To the north, houses are planned for zones that will be subject to night-time noise levels of up to 55 decibels. These noise levels exceed the Environment Protection Authority's 40-decibel night noise limit. There will also be low frequency sound. The noise study spells out the standards of soundproofing for the houses. On 14 April 2008 on ABC local radio, a TRUenergy representative denied the study's existence, but Concerned Residents of East Dapto has the documents that show the houses will have to meet extensive soundproofing specifications.
Both Wollongong City Council and the State Government maintain they do not have the money to build the Fowlers Road bridge to give West Dapto flood-free access. The documents obtained by Concerned Residents of East Dapto reveal that $6 million will be necessary for floodworks on the Tallawarra land. Who will pay for this? Where is the environmental impact statement for the whole of the land? How can an environmental impact statement even be undertaken if no-one knows what kind of generator will be built? It is worrying that the air pollution study, while very inadequate, suggests that diesel will be used in addition to gas.
As part of the plan, TRUenergy plans to dump waste materials from the generators into the wetlands. We already know that the ash settling ponds and the asbestos containment areas are heavily contaminated. There is no sewerage capacity, water or electricity available to this site without major government expenditure. It will be a car-based suburb with no local school.
Wollongong City Council has been discredited in the eyes of the community. The rezoning proposal for Tallawarra will provide an important test of whether things are changing in Wollongong or whether, under the administrators, it is to be business as usual. The company may want to maximise its profit from the land it bought, but it is clearly not in the public interest for the Tallawarra land to be rezoned from environmental protection conservation to residential.
KANGAROO INDUSTRY
The Hon. TONY CATANZARITI [7.24 p.m.]: Our nation's kangaroo industry is worth more than $230 million annually, exporting to around 60 countries and providing full-time employment to around 4,000 people mainly in rural and remote regions. The industry produces meat for human consumption, strong leather that is used for the production of elite fashion and sporting goods, and pet meat. A recent Australian study funded by the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, the University of New South Wales and the kangaroo industry showed that 58 per cent of those surveyed had tried kangaroo meat at least once. The study, undertaken to draw up a blueprint to advance the industry, was the first survey of consumer attitudes since 1997.
It has long been known that the consumption of kangaroo meat has many health benefits. The meat contains elevated levels of iron, zinc and protein, and is one of the highest known sources of conjugated linoleic acid, a compound believed to reduce blood pressure. Health benefits aside, kangaroo meat has become a delicacy in game-loving countries such as France and Germany and is now also gracing the tables of Japanese diners.
[Time for debate expired.]
Question—That this House do now adjourn—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
The House adjourned at 7.25 p.m. until Wednesday 7 May at 11.00 a.m.
______