Questions without Notice-17 November, 1976 2987

piegislxkihe ~uuncil

Wednesday, 17 November, 1976

Questions without Notice-Appropriation Bill (second reading)-Soccer Football Pools (Amendment) Bill (first reading)-Pay-roll Tax (Amendment) Bill (first reading) -Totalizator (Amendment) Bill (first reading)-Totalizator (Off-course Betting) Amendment Bill (first reading)-Miscellaneous Acts (Taxation Repeal) Bill (lkst reading)-Racing Taxation (Betting Tax) Amendment Bill (first reading)- Bookmakers (Taxation) Amendment Bill (first reading)---Centenary Celebration (Amendment) Bill (second reading)-Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments (Amendment) Bill (second reading)-Long Service Leave (Amendment) Bill (second reading)- Ambulance Services Bill (second reading) - Health Commission (Amendment) Bill (second reading)-Bush Fires (Amend- ment) Bill (second reading)-Gaming and Betting (Amendment) Bill (first reading).

The President took the chair at 4.28 pm.

The Prayer was read.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

FREIGHT RATE INCREASES The Hon. J. W. KENNEDY: I wish to ask the Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment a question without notice. Is the Minister aware that country and decentralized industries, particularly those in the engineering field, are having great difficulty in remaining viable owing to freight rates on steel? Does the Minister realize that the recent 7 per cent increase in freight rates means an increase of 14 per cent to those industries which have to cover both inwards and outwards freight? Will the Minister confer with the appropriate Minister in another place with the object of exempting or relieving decentralized industry from the recent increase? The Hon. D. P. LANDA: I am familiar with the fact that certain country and decentralized industries are having difficulties. Notwithstanding the attempts by the federal Government to turn on the industrial lights and the community's lights, those industries are not alone at this particular time in this problem. It has been brought to my attention that they may be having difficulty in remaining viable as a result of the 7 per cent increase in freight rates on steel and other co~mmdties.All I can do is undertake to the honourable member and to the House that I shall obtain further information on the matter from the Minister for Transport and Minister for High- ways. The Government is conscious of the need to encourage decentralized industries. 2988 COUNCIL--Questions without Notice-Appropriation Bill

However, it does not intend to exempt industries that may be suffering difficulties as a result of the stringent economic problems which emanated from the federal Govern- ment's actions a long time before freights were increased. I undertake to obtain a more detailed answer from the Minister for Transport and Minister for Highways and I shall inform the House further in due course.

SYDNEY CHURCH OF ENGLAND GIRLS GRAMMAR SCHOOL The Hon. D. P. LANDA: On 11th November, the Hon. F. M. MacDiarmid addressed a question to me concerning the financial difficulties of the Sydney Church of England Girls Grammar School at Darlinghurst. I undertook to obtain further infornation. I have had discussions with the Minister for Education. As is known by all honourable members, the school is encountering problems. It is understood by the Minister for Education that at some time last year the school's difficulties were discussed by some of the organizations attached to it. It is understood further that the Church of England works on the basis that each school it administers should be a viable unit in its own right and that funds are not transferred from one Church of England school to another. In time of linancial stress such as SCEGGS is at present suffering, it is clearly a decision for the council of SCEGGS and the achdiocese. There is no prospect whatever of the Government's becoming involved directly in providing for the school assistance of the type that the Hon. F. M. MacDiarmid suggested was given to the Cronulla Sutherland Leagues Club. That suggestion was incorrect; no money was made available by the Government to that club. Honourable members may be assured that the excellent schools within the State system administered by the Department of Education will welcome any girls who need to transfer to them.

APPROPRIATION BILL Second Reading Debate resumed (from 16th November, vide page 2901) on motion by the Hon. D. P. Landa: That this bill be now read a second time. The Hon. 0.M. FALKINER [4.35]: I join with other honourable members in congratulating the new members of the Chamber upon their contributions to this debate. I look forward to their future speeches. I have been a member of this House for a little more than thirty years and I hope to be a member for a considerable time to come. Tonight I intend to refer to the industry that made Australia what it is today, from its inception to the present time, to its problems, their causes and the effects they are having on the burning question of unemployment. In 1970 when the wool industry was at one of its lowest ebbs I forecast an unemployment figure of 300 000. Although I hope that figure will not be reached, I do not think I will be far out. Unfortunately the indications are that, unless some miracle happens in the meantime, that figure will be reached in the new year when school-leavers join the work force. Some years prior to 1797 a Colonel Gordon of South Africa had obtained some Spanish merinos from Holland. When he died his widow offered for sale thirty-seven sheep. In 1797 when Captain Waterhouse called at the Cape of Good Hope on his way to Australia he was Appropriation Bill-17 November, 1976 2989 unable to finance the purchase of the whole flock, but he bought twenty-six sheep. A Lieutenant Kent, who was on one of the other ships in the fleet, bought the balance. They were the only good sheep that came to New South Wales in its early days. On arriving in Australia, Captain Waterhouse dispersed the sheep among six colonists. Mr Macarthur purchased six rams and some ewes. If I may go forward a little, when Macarthur got into some trouble he returned to England. He took with him a sample of 250 lb of wool from the progeny of the Waterhouse sheep. At the colonial exhibition in London he was awarded two gold medals for promoting an ind~tstryin a colony that was in dire financial trouble. As a result of his lobbying while in London, he was able to persuade the British Government to allow him to bid at auction for some rams of the flock of King George 111. Mr Macarthur was fortunate in buying four rams, which arrived in Australia in 1805. The Hon. W. J. Geraghty: What breed were the rams? The Hon. 0.M. FALKINER: Spanish merinos. I suggest that the honourable member should read His Majesty's Spanish Flock, which is in the Parliamentary Library. The history of that flock is that they were smuggled out of Spain by the British Ambassador to Portugal. Apparently more than bootlegging took place in those days. With the advent of the Napoleonic wars the monopoly of Spain was broken up and a number of merino sheep from that country went to France, some to Saxony and others to the Hapsburgs in Austria. In 1826 Mrs Forlonge decided to emigrate to New South Wales. Her husband, John Forlonge, was a lazy man. Unfortunately, there was a lot of illness in the family. Sir Thomas Brisbane, who had just returned to Scotland from his post as Governor of New South Wales, persuaded the Forlonges that the best place for the health of their children was New South Wales. John Forlonge, his wife Eliza, and their sons William and Andrew went to Germany. This intrepid woman decided to get the best sheep available in Germany. She had a bag of gold and decided to set out in search of sheep, although it was said that she would be robbed. She was not. In twelve months she walked 1 500 miles through Saxony and Silesia. That was a remarkable achievement for a woman of any age. She gathered her sheep and marked them by placing a leather collar with a seal on it around their necks. On her way back when driving the sheep she was thrown into gaol, but by good fortune a German count came along and got her and her sons out of trouble. Otherwise she and her sons, as well as the sheep, would have been lost. She left one boy at school, and sent another to a woolsorting house. She was the first person with a sound knowledge of sheep to come to this country. Her knowledge of sheep was so good, as I shall point out later, that she surprised experts at the famous French stud at Rambouillet, the flock at which was the branch of the Spanish merinos in France. There is a conflict in the story then. Her family account says that in 1828 the flock was sent out to Hobart. They were supposed to go to the mainland, but the Governor of Tasmania-I think it was Governor Arthur-was a persuasive man, and persuaded young William Forlonge to settle in Tasmania. There was a lot of con- troversy over the amount of land that they should get, as William was under 21 and his brother Andrew about 10, and they wanted a land grant for each. The sheep were thought of so highly that Governor Arthur eventually gave him a grant which became known as the property Kenilworth. They settled there, and their sheep were so superior that he had no trouble selling the progeny. Unknown to William Forlonge, his uncle, Arthur Templeton, who had financed this project, died. Janet Templeton is the other woman of extraordinary courage who made a mark in the Australian wool industry. She decided that she had nothing to lose by going to Australia. She sold up everything she had. She got her sister-in-law, Eliza Forlonge, 2990 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill to return to Germany to do the same trip again and acquire some sheep. This time Eliza went first to France to look at the Rambouillets to see whether they were as good Ias the Saxony sheep. She astounded the Frenchmen with her knowledge and handling of sheep. They thought it extraordinary and somewhat erratic that a woman should go there and talk about sheep as knowledgeably as the shepherds who had spent all their lives amongst sheep. As she had a broad Scottish accent, the French would have had difficulty in understanding her, and perhaps she had difficulty in understand- ing them. She gathered the second flock together. About the year 1830 Janet Templeton chartered a ship called the Czar to take to Australia not only the sheep but also her brother and sister-in-law, Eliza Forlonge and her nine children. It was a remarkable achievement for a woman with nine little children to take such a trip on a very small brig with a mob of sheep. When they arrived in Launceston, the Forlonges-that is Eliza and her husband John- left her. Mrs Templeton came on to Sydney. As she arrived in Launceston in January, 1831, she would have arrived in Sydney about March. She was given a grant of land near Goulburn on the Mulwaree Plains. She built a house and called it Kelburn. She later decided it was time to leave Kelburn and went to Parramatta where she built Roseneath cottage. I think Roseneath cottage, and also Kelburn, are entitled to an A classification. She sent her boys to the King's School; they must have been some of the very first pupils there. Later, when they were older, they went to Kelburn near Goulburn. She had married off a couple of daughters by that time. One daughter married William Forlonge, and they went back to Tasmania. In 1838 Janet Templeton and her two elder sons, one of whom was Andrew, set off from Parramatta and walked their sheep and carried their belongings to the Murray and crossed that river. An account was written by her granddaughter. She crossed the Murray in an Aborigine's canoe. They went to Euroa in Victoria and settled at the Seven Creeks property. That is a wet area which is not particularly suited to merino sheep. She gave up the Seven Creeks property in 1843 and went on the track again with Andrew and the sheep. They crossed the River Murray somewhere near Echuca. They then crossed the Edwards River and eventually took up a property known as Wanganella. This is a fairly dramatic story. In the meantime her nephew William sold everything he had, left Tasmania and went across to Victoria. He had a certain amount of financial trouble. Unfortunately for Janet Templeton, she had given him power-of-attorney, and when she got to Wanganella she found that he had done the wrong thing by her and she was broke. She had to sell Wanganella. Eventually Wan- ganella was sold to a man named Brodribb who in turn sold it to the Peppin brothers. They then laid the foundation of the Australian wool industry. They were the first people who come to Aust~aliawith a knowledge of sheep breeding. The next to bring in a lot of sheep was the Van Dieman's Land Company, which was formed in England. There was a lot of speculation about it. In the early 1800's wool reached an unprecedented price of 190 pence a lb sterling. Honourable members can imagine the effect of that in those days. There was no trouble raising money in England for pastoral companies, and the Van Dieman's Land Company was formed. That company brought some thousands of sheep to Tas- mania, and its arrival becomes important when I get to the year 1860. At about that time a family cal~ledHenty, who had been successful farmers in England, decided to migrate. They arrived with their sheep in a vessel called Cardine. They were talked into going to Perth where they found conditions were not good for sheep. They went across to Tasmania, but as all the suitable land there had been taken up, they decided in good colonial fashion to break the law. They loaded all their sheep into boats and The Hon. 0.M. Falkinerl. Appropriation Bill-17 November, 1976 2991 went to Portland, where they were found by the explorer Mitchell in 1836. They were not supposed to be there; nobody was supposed to be there. They had been there for some time, and had established a good line of sheep. I come next to the men who are responsible for the pre-eminence of Australian wool, or I should say what was the pre-eminence of Australian wool, for it is unfor- tunately not what it was. George and Frederick Peppin were born in England. They were farmers. They acquired some of King George III's flock, which was a good one, and brought the sheep to Australia in a vessel called Tranmere. They went to Mans- field, but after fluctuating fortunes there, sold out. Scab was a tremendous problem in those days. I doubt whether many persons in this country have seen scab on sheep. I saw it in South America, and I assure honourable members it is a frightening disease. It was the cause of a lot of trouble in the early days in this country and resulted in tremendous losses. The Peppins moved from Mansfieid and went north to the Riverina. They took up a place called Morago, but had problems there, and sold it. They then acquired from Brodribb the property known as Wanganella. They did not do well there, and put it up for auction in 1861. They did not get a bid. By that time the wool (market had collapsed. However, by 1864 they had improved their sheep greatly. Wanganella is on the edge of one of the biggest saltbush areas in New South Wales, and indeed in the Commonwealth. It is on the southern edge of what is known as Old Man Plain, which extends through Hay and beyond. Mrs Templeton took up Wanganella because there was a good waterhole there and water was important. The Peppins knew that they had to make a go of it, and with their knowledge of sheep- breeding set to work and established what became the foundation of 95 per cent of the Australian merino wool industry. When one of the Peppins died in 1878, the others decided to sell. In 1853 my grandfather had landed in Victoria with the large sum of twenty sovereigns. He went to the gold diggings with his bride, aged about 16, and established a small store. He was quite a character, and became a good storekeeper. He bought gold. He was held up by bushrangers on three occasions. On one occasion he foiled a bushranger by putting a bung out of a vinegar barrel to the man's back. When the bushranger was shown what he had been held up with, he was abusive. My grandfather bought Boonoke on 6th November, 1878. By 1880 he had improved the sheep so much that he was scooping the pool at the local shows. There was strong rivalry between him and his next door neighbour, Mr Parker. The old boy was disqualified for housing sheep that were supposed to be unhoused. There was a counterclaim, and they ended up in the Supreme Court here in Sydney. The old boy had to pay all the costs. The Hon. D. P. Landa: It is not a case of like grandfather like grandson? The Hon. 0. M. FALKINER: I have not experienced that sort of thing yet. Anyway, he had a theory, and I think it was a wonderful one. He would not sell a female sheep. Once he g& too many female sheep to stock Boonoke, he bought another property. It must have been easy to1 borrow money in those days, judging from the properties that he bought. My grandfather was one of the first men to go into closer settlement in New South Wales. The Hon. W. L. Lange: He owned the lot. The Hon. 0. M. FALKINER: He owned a fair share of the Riverina. In 1882 he bought Moonbria which consisted of 47 226 acres of freehold land, and 13 000 acres of leasehold land. He paid £200,000 for it. In 1883 he bought Mungi Bundi, which consisted of 28 000 acres of freehold. There were 52 580 sheep on it and 900 bullocks. The price was £150,560. Also in 1883 be bought out his two partners. They 2992 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill

owned only one-sixteenth each of the original property. In 1889 he bought Tuppal station, for which he was supposed to have paid the biggest price ever paid for a property, £850,000. It consisted of 127 000 acres freehold and 50 000 acres leasehold. It was carrying 124 00sheep and 400 cattle and horses. The Hon. L. P. Connellan: That was before stamp duty. The Hon. 0. M. FALKINER: I was going to say that there was no stamp duty in those days, but I notice that on the purchase of Boonoke for £60,000 he paid £300 stamp duty. The Closer Settlement Board purchased 99 000 acres of Tuppal over a period. The first subdivision was done by the family. This is most interesting, for the person whose company now owns our family properties, Fred James of Cleck- heaton, went on to Tuppal as a young man. He used to come out to Tuppal as a mail boy. Poor old Fred did not live long enough to see things turn out as he had hoped. My grandfather then bought Moira station in 1889 for another £240,000, He bought Perricoota in 1900. It consisted of 72 000 acres freehold. Later he bought Wanganella estate. F. S. Falkiner and Sons bought Puckawidgee, which was 65 000 acres freehold and 29 000 acres leasehold, with 31 320 sheep, 268 cattle, and 56 horses, and Widgiewa, which consisted of 90 000 acres. At one stage my grandfather held about 700 000 acres in the Riverina. Then along came death duties and land tax. When there are five sons in a family, the sons often fight among themselves when the father passes on. In 1951 there was a donny- brook among the boys and after it the eldest son bought Haddon Rig. In 1958 the family purchased the original Wanganella homestead property. I am dealing with this shortly because I do not want to sound as tthough I am doing a lot of skiting-I assure honourable members that I am not. I am just giving a little of the background. At one stage we had 60 000 stud merino ewes. When I went to manage Boonoke in 1934 I had 42 000 ewes. From that time my family controlled the whole of the original Peppin flock. Taking the sheep at Haddon Rig into account my family has sold more than 1 million rams-enough to sire the entire sheep population d Australia. Those facts demonstrate that from 1880 my grandfather made the greatest contribution to the wool industry that has ever been made in this country. Unfortunately, those days are history. My family is now out of the wool industry. Only one member of lthe family- my second cousin, young G. B. S. Falkiner-is still in the industry. I propose to relate a few facts to give honourable members an idea of the quality of the sheep bred by the old boy. My grandfather gave Mr Mack of Murga a ram when he left the district to go to Dubbo. With this flock ram Mr Mack won the champion prize against all the northern studs. That was a tremendous tribute to the sheepbreeding ability of the old fellow-and although it may sound disrespeatful, I shall refer to him in those terms. In the original Peppin flock some American Rambouillet sheep were introduced. These sheep were quite different from the European breed, and I think they contributed much to the increase in sheep frame sizes. The Spanish sheep were very small, the Camden sheep being about 30 or 40 1b live weight. I shall now say a little 'about some of the knottty things that have happened in this country since 1929 when an embargo was placed on the export of merino sheep. That embargo, which was ridiculous, has now rebounded on Australia in a manner that no one could have foreseen. For the benefit of the Hon. Delcia Kite, I should like to state that in 1888-1 understand that her ancestors were involved in the shearers' strike at that time-the Booneke homestead was burnt down. During the fire the shearers came up to the homestead and helped to save the furniture. I hope that honourable members are not too bored with these facts because there is quite an Appropriation Bill-17 November, 1976 2993 interesting story attached to that incident. At that time the late Senator Rae was the union organizer. Though it was never proved that he set fire to the house, the tracks of his horse were seen close to the homestead the morning after the fire. Some years after this incident my father met Senator Rae on a train when they were both travelling to Melbourne. When my father was introduced to him, he said, "Well, senator, have you been lburning down any homesteads lately?" I have never heard a report of the senator's reply. The export of sheep became a vital issue in the stud ran1 industry. Also, closer settlement has helped to kill the Australian wool clip. There are 65 000 woolgrowers producing fifty bales or less in Australia at present. There are now 91 000 wool- growers in Australia. Small wool producers cannot afford to spend a lot of money. In the old days when some holdings had big flocks of sheep, small owners would get together and buy cast ewes from the bigger holdings which had established really good sheep lines. I spoke on this subject years ago, so I do not propose to bore honourable members again now. I accompanied 139 rams to Russia. We had great difficulty in getting those rams out of New South Wales. It cost the Russians more to charter the aircraft than the bill for the rams. In 1928 we experienc* a drought. One of the first jobs I had after leaving school was to take some Russians in inspect a flock of young ewes which we had on agistment near the Murray River. The Russians bought 500 of these sheep, which they took back to that country. Some sheep were eaten as soon as they arrived in Russia because there was a famine in that country at the time. The Russians bought 2 000 of these sheep at two guineas a head. We could not get anything for these sheep here; they were not worth anything; in fact you wuld not give them away. They were the worst sheep we owned and we had to get them off the property to make room for other sheep. The Russians paid us about ninety guineas a head for rams we normally sold to the locals for about ten guineas a head. It was quite an event in 1971 when we arrived in Moscow with these rams and were greeted by Government officials. We were delayed so long getting to Russia that my visa was due to expire on the Monday following the Saturday on which we arrived. When I left the aircraft I was greeted by a big Russian. An officer from the Australian Embassy then said to me, "You have got to leave the country on Monday. We cannot get your visa extended." Then this big Russian fellow said, "We will fix it." The Australian Embassy official said, "I hope he can fix it otherwise you will end up in the cooler." The big Russian then said to me, "You will see the Minister at 11.30 a.m. on Monday." At 11.20 a.m. on Monday I was taken to the Ministry of Agriculture and seated in a room that was almost as big as this Chamber. I was told to sit down at a big T-shaped table. A girl was seated at one end of the table. The Minister sat on her left and there was a bald-headed man alongside him. I sat opposite the Minister. The interrogation began through an interpreter. The Minister asked me, "When are you leaving?' I said, "Sir, 1 have to leave at midnight." He said, "Could you stay longer?" I replied, "Yes, sir, but I will not have a visa after midnight." He stated: "That will be attended to. You will be my guest, on one condition." I thought, what do I do? Will I have to join the KGB? Then I asked, "Sir, what is it?" Seated along- side me was a Russian-a hard case who was the purchasing officer for all livestock. The Hon. D. P. Landa: After the deal you made he would not have that job next time you saw him. The Hon. 0.M. FALKINER: As a matter of fact, he did not get into trouble. This was in 1929. The poor old Minister responsible for the later deal lost his head. 188 2994 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill

The Hon. W. C. Peters: Did he have a big red beard? The Hon. 0. M. FALKINER: No. He did not have a hair on his head. I asked the Minister, "What are your conditions?" He replied, "You will not drink more than one bottle of Vodka a day while you are my guest." Having had a try at drinking Vodka, I was sure I would not have trouble meeting that condition. That concluded the interview and I extended my stay for another 12 or 14 days. At the conclusion of the interview the man seated next to me said, "You will return here at four o'clock this afternoon and you will address the heads of the Department of Agriculture." I replied, "But I am not a scientist; I am just a farmer." He rejoined, "Nevertheless, you will address them." In we went at 4 o'clock and I explained to the gentlemen present how we breed sheep. Members will come to appreciate, when I tell them later of the differences in farming between here and there, that there is no way the Russians can ever become a competitor to this country in the production of wool. It was arranged that I inspect a stud farm. This was in 1971, and there was a drought in Russia, unhappily for the poor Russian Minister. The foUowing year he was replaced. If you fail over there, you fail only once. As the Hon. J. J. Maloney once said in this Chamber about the pm- cedure in Russia-you get only one chance: if you make a mistake you never get another chance. The Russians were very good to me and I cannot speak highly enough of them. They took me down to their sheepgrowing area at Stavropol, a city of about 250 000 people, about 1 200. miles south-east of Moscow, near the Caspian Sea. We had a hell of a trip down there through ice and snow. Our aircraft was delayed at one place and when we took off again we could watch the ice forming on the wings. We were flying at about tree-top height and we wondered how long it would be before we crashed. I reckoned that the pilot wanted to live so we should be all right. When we got there I was asked how I wanted to return. I said I would go back by train. That was a mistake. I was taken to see some co~llectivefarms; I found them most interesting. An economic unit for sheep and wool production in Russia is 30 000 to 40 000 sheep- quite an incredible number. Each of these communities has its theatre. Probably there are 1 500 people on a collective farm. They have one man to forty sheep and they have to house and feed the sheep for six months of the year. Each sheep eats on an average two kilos of food a day. Imagine the quantity of feed that has to be grown and handled. They were receiving 5 roubles a kilo for wool, and at that time the rouble was valued at about $1. The Germans had been all over the area I visited. Not a tree had been left standing. We were travelling by car through a blinding snowstorm-the worst snow- storm they had had for 20 years. When the driver attempted to accelerate, the petrol in the carburettor in our Jeep nearly froze. There was nothing to see; there was nothing in sight, not even a telephone wire. Nevertheless, they took me to places where I saw some of the finest sheep I have ever seen in any country. Whether they would stand our conditions is another matter. I saw a ram in half fleece weighing 350 pounds -the size of a calf. Also, I saw a poll ram which I would have been delighted to be able to bring back here. Had that been possible there might have been a complete revolution here in the growing of merinos. Just imagine it, he was over 300 pounds with no wool on. He had grown a fleece in the vicinity of 50 Ib but it was yielding only about 40 per cent clean wool. Even so, that is a lot of clean wool. The Russians want our sheep because they have a much higher yield in wool with a much longer staple. They have as many sheep in Russia today as we have. I Appropriation Bill-17 November, 1976 2995 think the present number would be, plus or minus, one million or two million. With a population of about 250 milllion people they are very short of meat. There is not very much meat to be seen there. One afternoon I was asked to address a meeting attended by 250 scientists. This was to be done through an interpreter-and she had lost her voice. She was whispering and I tend to whisper a bit too, but it all went well. After it was over, the man with me-he had a big job; he was the boss of Russian sheep production, a man called Vasiliv and a nicer man you could not wish to meet-said that he thought I had done a reasonable job and suggested that we go to another room and have a drink of vodka. You cannot drink Russian beer. It is the only country where I have never been able to drink beer. Suddenly there was a flurry and in came a big fellow complete with a big moustache, and a couple of fellows following him. He announced, through the interpreter, "Your lecture was satisfactory". I was told he was the commissar. It is a good job it was satisfactory. I wonder what would have happened if it had not been. That is the story of Russia. The Hon. Sir Edward Warren: They did not give you a couple of sheilas? The Hon. 0. M. FALKINER: No, but they gave me a gold watch with a hammer and sickle inscribed on the back of it. In 1860 there were 6.1 million sheep in New South Wales and 5.7 million sheep in Victoria. Sheep in New South Wales cut half as much wool as sheep in Victoria. There is a si

The Hon. D. P. Landa: Is that on a colleotive farm?

The Hon. 0. M. FALKINER: Yes.

The Hon. D. P. Landa: A worker on a colleotive farm would not have to pay for his food and acco~mmodation.

The Hon. 0. M. FALKINER: That is correot, bat it is not (too good. I should not recommend it to honourable members. I refer the House now to the mandays required to produce 100 Ib of various rural commodities. It takes 6.5 man-days in Russia to produce 100 1b of sheep meat. I was staggered to learn that 26 man-days are required to produce l00 lb of wool. Climatic conditions can do incredible things. Honourable members may be interested to learn also that the days worked on collective farms varies from a minimum of 212 in extremely cold areas to 281 days. Apparently they do not have the benefit of many holidays. The volume containing the figures to which I am referring has some most interesting information in it. The crux of the whole thing is that over a period labour productivity rose faster as a rule than total production.

In 1967 gross agricultural output increased by 100 per cent above the 1950 level, which one must appreciate was shortly after the war years. The average annual growth of labour productivity between 1951 and 1965 was 6 per cent and when con- ditions in Russia were becoming more stable, between 1966 and 1968, the figure was 6.4 per cent. The key point is that the growth in labour productivity provides the econo- mic basis for the increasing remuneration to workers and improvement in living stand- ards. It is a subject about which we should all think seriously. I refer the House to a booklet published sometime ago by Dr Brian Short, a CSIRO scientist whom I know. The wheel has completely turned. He has been employed by the World Bank to reorgan- ize the sheep industry in Spain. Although an Australian has gone back to Spain after all these years, unfortunately he cannot take any rams with him. I wish to sound one other sour note. Last night the Hon. W. C. Peters was having a shot at the war service of members on the Opposition side of the House. I should like to draw the honourable member's attention to something that was done in this Chamber by his party when it was in government. I was one of only two members of the Falkiner family not in the services. My brother was a member of one of the services for the whole of the war. He was lucky enough to draw in a ballot a soldier service block. At the time he did not own any land but he had a small holding of shares-less than 10 per cent-in the family company. The secretary of lands saw fit under the provisions of section 9 of the War Service Land Settlement and Closer Settlement (Amendment) Ad of 1948 to take away from him the property that he had won in the ballot. That was as low a thing that any government could do to anyone. From the outset the family company had given 100 rams a year to soldier settlers. The taking away of my brother's property was the treatment and the thanks received by the family for trying to help returned servicemen. Any employee of the family company who was on active service had the difference between his army pay and his wages credited to his bank account; and his job was guaranteed when he returned. If an employee was unfortunate enough to pay the supreme sacrifice the money was paid to his nearest relative. The family organi- zation, which unfortunately is no longer in existence, provided a free cottage, meat, bread, milk and, when power was generated, free electricity, to every married man on its properties-and there were many men in the employ of the company. It is unfair to my that something was not done for ex-servicemen and employees. By the time I sold out the staff had decreased in number from eighty to about forty. Of these, thirty were entitled to long-service leave which between them amounted to about 600 years. One employee had been with us for 42 years and I was the next longest on the payroll with Appropriation Bill-17 November, 1976 2997 a period of 41 years service. Some were third generation employees. Their grandfathers and fathers had worked for us. I thank honourable members for being so patient with me in my attempts to explain some of the intricacies of the wool industry and to clear up some of the inaccurate statements that have been made about it. The Hon. W. 3. HOLT (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) L5.301: First, I congratulate the members on both sides who made their maiden speeches. The high quality of their speeches augurs well for the standard of future debates in this Chamber and supports the method of preselection and election of members to this Chamber. The Hon. 0. M. Falkiner gave the House an interesting history of the wool industry. While the House is in the right frame of mind for listening to reminis- cences of that type, it might be opportune for me to reminisce also. A few days ago the Minister tabled a document vesting control of Captain Cook's Landing Place Trust property at Kurnell in the Director of the National Parks and Wildlife Service. This trust, of which I have had the honour to be president since 1968, was set up at the turn of the century by Sir Joseph Carruthers to keep in perpetuity for the people of this State and nation the birthplace of Australia. Since its inception the trust has been presided over by great men such as Sir John See, Mr Justice Sir John Ferguson, The Hon. R. J. Heffron, a former Premier of this State who still attends the trust's ceremonies each year, and others with dis- tinguished records in historical and other fields. The abolition of the trust has caused me and other trustees a great deal of sadness. I appreciate that one of the objects of the National Parks and Wildlife Act, which was introduced by the Hon. T. L. Lewis in 1967, is the abolition of trusts and the vesting of trust properties in the director. This has occurred progressively. I pay tribute to the people who have given voluntary service over seventy-six years to that trust. In particular, I thank Mr Don Davidson, who has been managing trustee at Kurnell since 1962, for his wonderful service to the State. By virtue of the provisions of the Act, the trustees become members of the advisory committee, and I assure the Government that I intend to serve Kurnell and Captain Cook's landing place in that capacity for as long as I remain on the committee.

I shall now refer to a few matters that have been raised in the debate. The Hon. P. McMahon said: I agree with the Hon. F. J. Darling that the sole reason for inflation is rising wages. The Hon. L. D. Serisier: That is obviously a misquotation.

The Hon. W. J. HOLT: I have taken it directly from Hansard. If that is what he said, I agree with him. I do not know whether one can agree with him that it is the sole reason, but it is pleasing to hear a Labor member speak in that vein. The Hon. D. P. Landa: I think he said it was not. The Hon. W. J. HOLT: I have quoted his statement from Hansard: I agree with the Hon. F. J. Darling that the sole reason for inflation is rising wages. If that was the approach he adopted-although the Minister says it is not, it appears that way in Hansard-it is interesting to hear that type of remark when one recalls the statements that were made by Labor leaders in the federal Parliament after their 2998 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill election in 1972. The Hon. Clyde Cameron then spoke about making the public service the pacesetters in wage conditions. The Hon. E. G. Whitlam cast inflation aside initially and said it was purely an international import. I turn to a statement by the Hon. Edna S. Roper who referred to the capacity of the Government to provide tax relief. I shall quote again, and I hope Hansard is correct on this occasion. She said: This in turn is directly affected by the most unsatisfactory situation we inherited from the outgoing Government. Let us examine that statement in a little more detail. To put it more into context, it should be remembered that Sir Eric Willis's Government had already started to imple- ment a programme of tax reductions in the short period that he was Premier. Thus, on 31st March last, at a cost to the State of some $70 million annually, it had termin- ated the burdensome petrol tax. At 30th June, in true bookkeeping terms, there was a budget surplus of $21,050,000. That would have been one of the best balanced budgets for many years. The new Government, which had already publicly said that the cupboard was bare when it took over, hid this result by transferring back to the General Loan Account the $21 million which had previously been intended for expen- diture in the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Despite these financial acrobatics, the budget was near enough to being balanced when the Treasury announced a deficit of only $950,000 for the year. On that evidence alone, could it be said that the incoming Government inherited a most unsatisfactory situation from the outgoing Government? Indeed, no mention was made at that time of what the Treasurer now describes as the fortuitous build-up of funds in the hospital account. It turns out, when one looks into it, that the fortuitous build-up of funds so described was an amount of $38 million-which the Treasurer subsequently described as being of special significance in framing this year's Budget. Those f~~ndshad been built up by the previous State Government and the present Commonwealth Government, and the Treasurer had $38 million in hospital funds to assist him in framing his Budget. Can that again be said to be a most unsatisfactory situation? Futhermore, in the current financial year repayments will amount to $20 million above last year's figure, and interest of $9 million more than last year will be available. One, surely, can barely agree with the remark of the Hon. Edna S. Roper that this was a most unsatisfactory situation that the Government inherited. The Hon. Edna S. Roper said also that all honourable members would applaud the Government's initiative in providing for abolition of death duty on property passing to surviving spouses. I consider this to be a most important matter. Despite the Government's trumpeting on the issue, the relevant legislation was not introduced until yesterday, as I understand it, when I think it was read a first time in another place. We all know that most estates take at least six months to finalize. Assuming that the new legislation will not be enacted until about Chrisbmas at the earliest, it will not cost the Government one cent in lost revenue this year. I invite the Government to look at the legislation that is to be enacted in Queesland from 1st January next year, in respect of which it has been announced that all death duties will be abolished. On the information available to me, colossal sums of money are starting to flow into Queensland. It includes the money of older persons who wish to retire; of older persons who perhaps have some money to invest; of older persons who have money that they could well invest. Such persons in New South Wales are beginning to take their money and invest it in Queensland because they are reaching the end of their days and are concerned about death duties. In fact, one wonders whether Queensland might not sink under this great flood of money pouring The Hon. W. J. Holt] Appropriation Bill-1 7 November, 1976 2999 into that State, which will increase as time goes on. I invite the Government to consider seriously whether New South Wales should not equate its position with that of Queensland and abolish death duties in toto. I turn now to a remark lmade by the Hon. J. R. Hallam. He referred to the Hon. Sir John Fuller's criticism of the Government's failure to introduce payroll tax concessions for decentralized industry. The most the Hon. J. R. Hallam could say about it was that it is a complex matter in respect of which priorities have to be determined, and that the Government's promise had been given and would be carried out. The question I ask is, when? The only thing I agree with in what the Hon. J. R. Hallam said is that payroll tax is probably the most regressive of taxes. Indeed, at this stage when New South Wales has its worst unemployment since the 1930's, surely payroll tax concessions provide an avenue for serious consideration by the Government if it is genuine in its attempt to reduce unemployment. Looking at appendix 8 to the Financial Statement, one sees how much better off New South Wales will be under Prime Minister Fraser's income-tax sharing formula. The Budget reveals that there will be a 7 per cent increase in proposed expenditure from the State's Consolidated Revenue Fund, On the other hand, there will be an increase of 21 per cent in Common- wealth finanoial assistance grants to the States. Last year financial assistance grants totalled $946.7 million, and this year they will rise by $199 million to $1,145.5 million. What a joy it must have been for Mr Wran to go to the Treasury benches when he realized he had a Prime Minister in Canberra who believed in true federalism. With inflation running at approximately 12 to 13 per cent, and Commonwealth Government contributions to the States increasing by 21 per cent, one can see how much, in real terms, this State has benefited from Mr Fraser's policies. Let me turn again to payroll tax against the background that I have given of the financial situation of the States through grants. Honourable members will rwall that the L3beral Party had as its policy on payroll tax at the last election the increasing of the exemption level to $62,400, as indeed Queensland has done. The exemption level increase proposed in the Budget is from $41,600 to $48,000, a mere 15 per cent, or little more than the increase in wages by virtue of inflation over the year. Total collections of payroll tax should amount to approximately $597.7 million this year, which is a net increase of $87.77 million. With that increase the Government is giving concessions amounting to only $5 million despite all the trumpeting that it would lift the base level upon which payroll tax would be paid. On the one hand the Government is taking approximately $79 million extra from payroll-tax and is ,giving back $5 million to those who pay it. That means that the Government is not serious about payroll tax reductions as a real way of assisting with the fight against unem- ployment The Treasurer, in his budget speech, said that special action was being taken to encourage the development of the New South Wales film industry. He said that an intsrim film commission had been established with a charter to make recommendations to the Government by the end of 1976 on the setting-up of a permanent organization as the Statds official vehicle of assistance in this field. Last weekend my attention was directed to the film industry as a result of a domestic situation. My son, who was having his tenth birthday party, invited me to accompany him and a few of his friends to the pictures. The first thing I did was to peruse the newspapers to see what was being shown. The result of this perusal showed that a total of twenty-seven films were being shown in this city. However, only two theatres had programmes that were rated wholly for genera1 exhibition. Other cinemas may have had a programme consisting of one general exhibition film and an NRC movie or an R-rated film. The Hon. D. P. Landa: You could have taken them to see "Caddie". 3000 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill

The Hon. W. J. HOLT: That film has an M-rating. I shall have something to say about "Caddie" in a moment. Of the sixty suburban theatres advertising their pro- grammes in the newspaper, only eight were showing G-rated films. "Fiddler on the Roof" was showing in five of those eight theatres. Only one of the remaining three cinemas was showing a fully G-rated programme.

The Hon. D. P. Landa: What film was showing at that theatre?

The Hon. W. J. HOLT: I do not remember now.

The Hon. Edna S. Roper: You did not go there?

The Hon. W. J. HOLT: No, we went to see "It Shouldn't Happen to a Vetw-- and it was dreadful. Of the fifteen drive-in theatres advertising their programmes in the newspaper, not one had a G-rated or an NRC film. Drive-in theatres have by far the cheapest admission charges, which are such that the average family can take children there to celebrate a birthday. Drive-in theatres charge $2.50 for adults and 50c for children. However, I discovered to my horror and my financial discomfiture that city theatres charge $3.50 for adults and $1.75 for children. This newspaper had a total of 105 theatre advertisements-and no doubt there are others that do not advertise their programmes. Of those 105 theatres, only four were showing fully G-rated programmes.

The Minister smiles when I give these figures. When I inquired at the Australian Bureau of Statistics I was informed that at 30th June, 1975, there were 930423 persons under the age of 12 years to whom the NRC-rating would apply. In case the Minister does not know, an NRC-rating means that a Mm is not recommended for children. The bureau informed me also that there were 193 010 persons under the age of 15 years, to whom the M-rating would apply, and 1 447 912 people under the age of 18 years, to whom the R-rating would apply. These figures show the extraordinarily low percentage of films available for display to this large proportion of the citizens of New South Wales. I welcome the move to set up the film commission. The Premier announced that a Mrs Long would write the script for the movie called "The Pictureshow Man". The Government has offered $120,000 towards the production of this film. The newspaper report announcing Mrs Long's appointment stated that she had written the script for "Caddie", which has-and I do not suggest it is not a good movie-an M-rating. That rating would restrict its viewing by more than 1 million people in this State. I hope that the film to be produced by Mrs Long will be as happy as the Premier said it wodd be. I hope that at long last we shall produce a G-rated film here. If that result is achieved, the Premier will have my congratulations. In view of the lack of balance in the films now available to the public I should like the Minister's assurance that the money the State makes available for the production of films will be put into G-rated movies.

The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [5.58], in reply: Before making a few concluding remarks on this most important debate, I should first like to congratulate those honourable members who have chosen this appropriate but somewhat demanding subject for their maiden speeches. I am sure it is pleasing to all honourable members to see that so much of the relevant and interesting material and ideas presented during the debate on the Appropriation Bill has emanated from those honourable members who have made their maiden speeches. This bodes well for future deliberations and con- tributions to the debates in this Chamber. I congratulate those honourable members on both sides of the House. The annual budget debate is perhaps the most important and revealing period in Parliament; it is the time when the Government must put its Appropriation Bill-17 November, 1976 3001 policies on the line, and indeed I suppose-to be vulgar about it-put its money where its mouth is. In real terms the Government must say what it intends to do and how it intends to fulfil its responsibilities. Unf~~lfilIedpromises cannot be hidden and decisions are made apparent. Attempts to hide them only spell electoral discredit, and ultimately the penalty that is only too well known in this Chamber. In framing its first Budget, the Wran Government is determined to fight unemployment-and it has made that abundantly clear. The Government is determined to co-operate with employers and employees and with the Australian Government to promote economic recovery, reduce the tax burden, remove tax anomalies and restore sound, responsible management to the State's finances. I am game enough to say that few State budgets have been presented in times of greater economic difficulties. I believe that this first Labor Budget in more than a decade has been hailed generally as a responsible, productive and humane piece of legislation. The Budget reflects the Government's real concern in improving the economic situation and in rectifying the mismanagement of successive former Liberal-Country party governments in this State. The general approval of the Budget has been reflected not only in the media and by the general public and profes- sional commentators but also-I am pleased to say-by many Opposition members in this Chamber-and indeed in the other place. It is unfortunate that those members who were willing to manage a few plaudits could only resist the temptation to tempt us with faint praise for the briefest of moments; and of course the Hon. Sir John Fuller was in that group. With the greatest of respect to !theLeader of the Opposition, I thought his remarks typified ithe administra- tion of the previous Government-a cavalier disregard for the facts and realities of State finances and, most of all, ltheir applicakion to the right kind of priorities for the good of the people d New South Wales. I must admit that those qualities have been recognized for what they are by the eleatorate-a certain recklessness coupled with a mean disregard far the welfare of all but a chosen few of the people of ithis State. Naturally it was only that chosen few who voted for the previous Government at the last general elections. Perhaps members of the Opposition find the realities of the blunders of the previous administration so diacult to contemplate and its damning disregard for the welfare of the people of New South Wales so unpalatable that 'they have been forced to invent or convolute the figures set out in the estimatm and in the Treasurer's budget speech. I shall deal more fully with !the remarks of Oppmition members. They certainly appeared to be afraid to look at the fimt Wran Budget with more than one eye open, despite the several weeks that they had to study it. The few coherent comments made relevant to the subjeot were ithe words d praise that apparently the @pition speakers felt obliged to make in order to qualify their otherwise somewhat diverse, irrelevant and misinfo~medcomment. The Hon. Sir John Fuller queried how the Government could achieve such a responsible budget in the light of its criticisms that it had inherited an overdraft of $63 million. The Hon. W. J. Holt touched on that weighty subject before he shifted to the lofty heights of category G films. To assist the Hon. Sir John Fuller and the Hon. W. J. Holt get the fa& straight I refer them to the Treasurer's speech in which he pointed out that the Government did inherit an. overdraft of $63 million. That overdraft was on the State's Consolidded Revenue Fund and unless we had prepared a balanced budget for this year the State wdd have ended up even further in the Willis wilder- ness. The Leader of the Opposition did not ,mention ithat the previous Government had borrowed $324 million by way d special loans from the Commonwealth but paid nothing back. The Hon. W. J. Holt: They were not due to be paid back for five years. 3002 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill

The Hon. D. P. LANDA: That is the kind of loan that the Hon. W. J. Holt thinks of-ones that do not have to be repaid. Apparently he knm of a new breed of loan, but no one is lending at those rates. These loans are costing the Budget $1.8 million a year in interest and we have to repay them in full. The Hon. Sir John Fuller also failed to mention that this was after using over $60 million of scarce capiltal funds to reduce the budget deficits of Liberal-Country party governments. No wonder this Government was shocked et the state of the books when it came into office. Its members felt that a government which had sabotaged so many projects and pro- grammes must have been able to save something. Unfortunately we were quite wrong. The Hon. Sir John Fuller: We did not have the Rt Hon. Malcolm Fraser to help us. The Hon. D. P. LANDA: We will deal with how he is helping us. We can do with less of that kind of assistance and more advice. The Wran Government has restored sound and responsible management to $he State's finances, and this is reflected in the aotion taken this year to avoid new and increased taxes in the Budget, to exercise a firm control over expenditures, and to achieve what we have put forward, a balanced budget, while providing the maximum assistance possible to reduce unemployment and assist the less privileged seotions of our community. The Hon. Sir John Fuller con- gratulated his federal colleagues on the fact that the Sltate will receive $199 million more this year by way of tax reimbursement compared with last year's grant. He suggested that this $199 million was over and above whet was originally expected and was a credit to the Fraser Government's new federalism. It is a fact that the State will receive $199 million more 'by way of tax grants this year. However, the interpreta- tion that the Hon. Sir John Fuller has placed on this allocation is completely erroneous and it is indicative of the previous Government's bookkeeping skills. The Hon. Sir John Fuller: Is the honourable member talking about the Oppo- sition? The Hon. D. P. LANDA: The previous Government. The relevant comparison that the honourable Sir John Fuller should have made in all fairness, if he were attempting to he fair, was between this year's payments under the new tax-sharing arrangements and those which would have been made under the old formula. This gives quite a different picture as the increase, compared with the previous formula, is only $89 million for all six States-less than 3 per cent. This assumes, moreover, that this year's estimate for personal income tax collections included in the Commonwealth Budget will in fact be achieved. As the Treasurer has pointed out, a drop of less than 1 per cent in these collections would reduce the payments to the States by $34 million. As taxes, unemployment and interest rates rise under the Fraser Government, this drop in revenue is about the only thing that is likely to occur. When the payments under the new tax-sheg arrangements are taken in con- junction with the cutbacks this year in specific purpose payments and the highly in- adequate 5 per cent increase allowed by the Commonwealth in the Loan Council works allocation for the States, the Fraser Government's new federalism can scarcely be hailed as a breakthrough for the States. Opposition members served this State ill by painting the small rise-less than a quarter of the inflation rate in some cases-and the drop in capital works as a better deal for New South Wales. Those members serve New South Welshmen badly when they paint that sort of picture. As members of a State's House 1 ask them to consider their position and their erroneous reflections on the economic juggling of the federal Government. The Hon. Sir John Fuller commented on the fact that the Government will receive increased revenues from various State taxes notwithstanding the proposals announced in the Budget to provide much-needed tax relief in a number of areas. He Appropriation Bill-17 November, 1976 3003 seemed to begrudge the fact that the Government by careful planning has been able to provide this relief, although he did acknowledge that the legislation to exempt from death duty all property passing to a surviving spouse would have the support of all members of the community. It is interesting to reflect also on that economic sleight- of-hand in which the Leader of the Opposition indulged when he said, in respect of the benefits to be received by the betting community, that the Government has budgeted for increased revenue from racing. The honourable member totally ignored, as he did with all the other examples he gave, any concept of growth as a consequence of inflation. The Hon. Sir John Fulller: Not other than by inflation. The Hon. D. P. LANDA: That, of course, means ithat the Fraser Government's policies for cutting inflation must be failing. One would have thought that that Govern- ment has the prime responsibility of overcoming inflation. Needless to say, as the Commonwealth Government fails in its endeavours, one hears cries from dthe Opposition benches that the State Government should cure inflation. That view would be con- sistent with the erroneous line taken during the debate. So far as the other areas of tax relief are concerned, I assure the Leader of the Opposition !that the beneficiaries are most appreciative of what the Government is doing. The increase in tax revenues in the current year is due mainly to normal growth and to the fact that in accordance with the budget announcements the various concessions will apply only for part of the year. The Leader of the Opposition had a lot to say about the 7 per cent increase in rail freight rates. He suggested that these rates had been deliberately increased to counter-balance the 20 per cent reduction in public transport fares. He carefully avoided any reference to the huge and mounting deficit or to the rundown public transport system that we inherited from the Liberal-Country party Government. It is not correct to say that the increase in freight rates was to offset the reduction in fares. The increase was partly to offset rising costs. In fact the actual level of 7 per cent decided upon compared more than favourably with increases in recent months by road hauliers. The Government gave very careful consideration to the likely effect of freight increases before they were authorized. As the estimates show, they are not expected to have an adverse effect on the volume of freight hauled. The Leader of the Opposition referred also to the recent increase in motor vehicle taxation, which he acknowledged does not form part of the Budget. All the proceeds of the increase will be used to maintain employment on road works. The only alternative to the increase would have been substantial retrenchments. Again this was an area where the former Government was not prepared to face up to the needs of the situation and to take positive action. He mentioned also the 12 per cent increase in third-party insurance premiums which have been announced to take effect from 1st January next. The Premier's pre-election promise was that there would be no increase in third-party insurance premiums this year. We have honoured this promise. Because of the substantial losses being incurred by the Government Insurance Office it is clearly not possible to peg premiums indefinitely. We have ensured that the increase in premiums is kept down to the rate of inflation. The 12 per cent increase compared more than favourably with the increases of up to 50 per cent recommended by the Premiums Advisory Committee. When the Leader of the Opposition was referring to the reduction by 40 per cent in water charges in the Murrumbidgee and Coleambally irrigation areas to give effect to the Government's pre-election promise to reduce these charges, he said that he regarded the Government's action in reinstating the charges to their former level within a couple of months as double dealing and dishonest. The reduction in water 3004 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill

charges in these areas will apply to payments due in the current financial year in respect of water used in 1975-76. To enable farmers to plan their water usage during the current year-which in general they will not pay for until 1977-78-it has been necessary to indicate the charges which will be payable in respect of that water. AS the Hon. Sir John Fuller has indicated, the charges have been restored to the previous level. The Government did not promise that the charges would be reduced by 40 per cent for all time. It will be seen that farmers in these areas will have the benefit of the lower charges for a full period of twelve months.

Brief reference was made to the need for payroll tax rebates for country indus- tries as an aid to decentralization. It is amazing how so many honourable members opposite have found time to ponder issues such as this now that they are freed from the burdens of Government. While its enthusiasm for such a concession is fully appreciated, it is remarkable that when in Government the Liberal-Country party coalition did absolutely nothing in this direction. As I intimated when introducing the Budget into the House, the Government expects to announce next month the details of a new scheme for the provision of rebates of payroll tax for approved decen- tralized industries. This is a lot more than was announced during the 11 years that the Opposition was in Government. A number of honourable members referred to the impact which payroil tax is having on industry generally and to the need for tax relief in this area, including small businesses. As honourable members are aware, the budget provides for a 15 per cent increase in the exemption level for payroll tax with effect from 1st January next. Although the Government recognizes the problems which industries face in the current economic recession, there are real limits to the assistance which the State can provide, bearing in mind particularly its budgetary situation. This is an area where the federal Government could well assist the States to provide further relief. Unemployment, which is a matter of vital concern to the Government, is also now attracting some attention from the more aware Opposition members. If they had exhibited this concern a couple of years earlier, the Wran Government may not have inherited the highest unemployment rate of any State in Australia. When dealing with this problem, the Leader of the Opposition suggested that there is nothing in the Budget to suggest that the Government is trying to come to grips with this problem, particularly in country areas. No mention was made by honourable members opposite of enwurag- ing the Commonwealth Government to take initiatives to wme to grips with the problem of unemployment, which is a national problem that does not respect State borders. As honourable members know, the role of the State Government in economic management is severely limited and the State's capacity to relieve unemployment is unfortunately dependent to a great extent on the policies of the federal Government. The Treasurer pointed out in his budget speech that the federal Government has exclusive control over and responsibility for the major economic instruments and decisions such as bank lending, monetary policy, tariffs and the exchange rate. The federal Government also dominates Government spending both through its own activities and through its financial allocations to the States. Despite these constraints the State has taken a number of initiatives to help reduce unemployment and aid economic recovery. The Government has allocated $20 million above normal allocations for special building maintenance programmes throughout the State. It has arranged for deferred payment contracts totalling $15 million to augment our usual capital works programme. Finally, it has assisted our statutory authorities, wherever posible, to use internal reserve funds to augment their normal works programmes. These are all initiatives that the previous administration could have taken but it saw fit not to take. Beyond the Budget measures the Government is also doing everything in its power to create The Hon. D. P. Landal Appropriation Bil-17 November, 1976 3005

employment opportunities, despite the callous and ineffective policies of the Fraser Government. The Hon. Sir John Fuller spent some time toward the end of his speech drawing attention to the fact that no provision has been made in the Budget for a financial grant to the Keep Australia Beautiful Council of New South Wales. If he had carefully studied the budget papers, he would have observed that there has been no grants of financial assistance to any environment organization in New South Wales this year. I remind the Leader of the Opposition that the Keep Australia Beautiful Council is only one of a number of organizations concerned with environmental matters operating in this State and, without intending any criticism in this regard, it is by no means the most senior, biggest, most active or self reliant of these many goups. It is however, distinct from the other organizations in three major respects. First, it is essentially an anti-littering organization rather than an organization concerned with all aspects of environmental protection. Seoond, the Keep Australia Beautiful Council receives significant financial assistance from the federal Government. Third, it receives financial sponsorship from some of the fmns and industries involved in the manufacture and use of non-returnable packaging, albeit totally inadequate if the companies were serious about the litter problem. The Leader of the Opposition is correct in stating that the previous Government made a grant of $5,000 to the Keep Australia Beautiful Council in its inaugural year. He did not point out that this was the only financial assistance which his Government made (to any environmental organization. He also forgot to mention that he is currently president or patron of the Keep Australia Beautiful Council and I am sure that, considering 'both this role and his previous ministerial responsibidities, Sir John was not unaware of this somewhat singular treat- ment. The Hon. Sir John Fuller: I am merely president. The Hon. D. P. LANDA: The honourable member understands what I am getting at. The Treasurer has advised me that, although no specific provision has been made in the Budget, he would be happy to consider any special approach I may make for financial assistance towards the administratian costs of environment centres operating in New South Wales, taking into account the extent to which such organizations are receiving Commonwealth Assistance. I am currently involved in preparing such a case. I certainly support the remarks of the Hon. Sir John Fuller when he says that the people who are involved in the work of the Keep Australia Beautiful Council are dedicated to its principles. I pay special tribute to the driving force in the council in New South Wales-the chairperson, Lady Persia Galleghan, who is a truly remark- able woman. I support the objects of the council in seeking to foster and encourage the appreciation of clean and well-kept cities and countryside, and I was honoured to accept the organization's offer of vice-patronage. However, I believe-and I have told Lady Galleghan this-that the council should be making greater efforts to seek further financial assistance and support from its affiliates-those industrial and commercial enterprises involved in the manufacture and use of packaging. These companies must recognize their significant contribution to the litter problems of this State and must be willing to play a more significant contributory role in financing the Keep Australia Beautiful Council and other anti-litter aativities. The Hon. Sir John Fuller is as aware as I am that many large firms make no contribution to the Keep Australia Beautiful Council, and that others make only a token and shameful contri~butionto it. Further financial assistance from the State Government would mean that 'these firms would continue to shirk their respnsi- bilities. At this time of extreme financial stringency-when many worthwhile projects 3006 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill and donations to worthy organizations have had to be sacrificed-the Government cannot justify a further financial grant in this itnancial year to the Keep Australia Beautiful Council. If the Government is able to provide financial assistance of this sort, I should accord a higher priority to the provision of financial assistance to other environment organizations that do not have access to Commonwealth finance or alterna- tive sources of funds, though they have demonstrated a determination to survive and continue their good work. But over all, one can disregard the aberrations in the Hon. Sir John Fuller's speech and forgive the few indulgent lapses when, in what were for him a few beautiful moments, he was transported back to those halycon Willis weeks when reasoned argument based on all the facts was considered irrelevant to the basic political process. One realizes what a difficult task he had in commenting on the Budget.

The Leader of the Opposition seemed almost a little bitter when he briefly mentioned what has been done so far by the Wran Government and what is intended to be done to preserve the State's fast-disappearing heritage. He noted from the news- papers, presumably, that we have prevented the demolition of some coal mine buildings and an old tin shed. He forgot to mention Jamison House, one of the hest historic commercial buildings in the city, which has been preserved rather than destroyed. Also, he forgot to mention Horningsea House, a fine Georgian mansion, and several other buildings that we have protected individually without getting newspaper coverage. Further, he forgot to mention that the coal mine was Richmond Colliery, which is classified by the National Trust and has played a most important part in the history of the northern coalfields. I can only assume that the tin shed referred to by the honourable member must be the one situated close to the kitchen door on his property. I assure him that the Government has not acted to proted any other tin shed.

It is all very well for the Hon. Sir John Fuller to talk of the money the Treasury might have allocated to his portfolio within the previous Government if it were still in office and had decided to include it in the Budget. That would seem to be a most dubious proposition as in more than a decade of Liberal-Country party Government in New South Wales, a period in which the State's heritage continued to diminish, successive budgets did not include lc for the preservation or protection or purchase of historic buildings and sites. Any money spent came from the normal allocation to the State Planning Authority and later to the Planning and Environment Commission. The fact that the Leader of the Opposition applied for an allocation means little. There is many a slip between the cup and the lip when it comes to applying and obtaining.

The Hon. Sir John Fuller: Nothing has been obtained from your Government this year.

The Hon. D. P. LANDA: As honourable members know, this Government is preparing legislation to protect the State's heritage. It will be before this Parliament shortly. When the Heritage Bill is passed and the Heritage Council makes its recom- mendations to the Government, its financial needs will be catered for appropriately. The Leader of the Upposition knows this, and it is a little late for him to be asking where the funds will come from. His Government !had 11 years to do this, but abstained from acting. In his introductory passages, the Hon Sir John Fuller revealed true position when, even if a little begrudgingly, he complimented the Government for the action it had taken, applauded the aims of the Budget and could find nothing basically wrong with it. These were the sentiments that set the tone for the Opposition's debate and I congratulate him and his supporters upon their fairmindedness in recognizing the merits of this Budget. Appropriation Bill-17 November, 1976 3007

His colleagues may not have been prepared to1 be quite so forthright, but the content of their speeches-short, long and occasionalIy relevant-revealed that they could find nothing really wrong with the Government's intentions. I should indeed be worried if they had gone so far as to say it was the sort of budget they would have introduced as that would be rather faint praise, but in their own naturally conservative way they have shown a recognition of the Government's aim that bodes well for fruitful deliberations in this Council in future. Some of the points raised by the Opposition, however, require correction or clarification.

[The President left the chair at 6.28 pm*. The House resumed at 8 p.rn.1 The Hon. D. P. LANDA: Rather fortuitously, I was #ableto divide my speech into the complimentary and pejorative parts, the complimentary parts to aid the appetite of honourable members opposite, and the pejorative part now coming to assist with their digestive processes. I do not propose to deal with all of the speeches made by members of the Opposition, for many of them were repetitive. Honourable members whose speeches I do not mention can nevertheless embrace all of the critical comments I offer and some of the praise. I was pleased to note that the Hon. W. R. Scott chose to make a contribution in his usual forthright way-by interjecting. He asked what had happened to the Government's undertaking to build ferries at the Newcastle State Dockyard, and why the subsidy had been dropped. I believe he realizes that the Government's proposal to have two new ferries built at the State Dockyard for the Public Transport Commission is closely bound up with the negotiations with the Commonw~althGovernment regard- ing the whole future of the dockyard and of the shipbuilding industry in Australia. The future of the Commonwealth Government's shipbuilding subsidy is equally un- certain. The Prime Minister recently wrote to the Premier ofFering to have two bulk carriers for the Australian National Line built at the State Dockyard subject to certain conditions. The offer is at present being studied but it clearly has important policy and finacial implications for the State, which will need to be carefully evaluated. Its most unsatisfactory feature is that it seeks to shift responsibility in this area from the Commonwealth, where it should rest, to the State. The Hon. W. L. Lange favoured us with his more skilful review of the Budget in one of the fairer assessments of what the Government was attempting to do. For that I thank him. Those of us who sit in this House have come to respect the honourable gentleman's independence in this regard. The next matter that concerned me was raised by the Hon. W. J. Sandwith in his maiden speech, in which he displayed to the House the great depth of knowledge and sincedty he has about the building society movement in this State, his regard for which is shared by many honourable members on both sides of the House. I recall that not long ago during a difficult time for building societies in New South Wales I sought by way of a question to obtain a reassertion of the Government's confidence in building societies, and I received an answer to that effect by the Leader of the Government in this House, the Hon. Sir John Fuller. It is gratifying to know that we now have among us a person with a detailed experience of this vital financial arm of the homebuilding industry. I congratulate the Hon. W. J. Sandwith on his maiden speech and on the scholarship that was evident in what he said. However, I thought that he was unable to resist the protective umbrella provided by the occasion to visit upon the Government criticism for some of the initiatives it is taking in respect of home loans and attempting to house young persons in their first home. I can only put that down to the same kind of zeal as infected my maiden speech when I was heard to make the odd critical remark about the government of the time. 3008 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill

The Hon. W. J. Sandwith referred to the Government's election promise to guarantee 100 per cent home loans. That is, the Government has promised to guarantee the lender the difference between the highest amount he can lend and the purchase price. The Hon. W. J. Sandwith claims that the details of the proposal are yet to come to light and that when they do, the proposal will do little to help those who are seeking to obtain a house. I assure him that the Government's proposal to guarantee 100 per cent home loans is still being investigated. As has been made clear on a number of occasions, the Government's policy undertakings were intended to be implemented over a three- year term, and I am sure it is quite obvious that all undertakings cannot be honoured overnight, or even in the htyear. This promise made by the Premier, limited as it is to a certain sector of the home-seeking market, will nevertheless cure a deposit-gap problem that exists for those people. The promise has been reaffirmed, as I understand it. Although not the most burning issue in the homebuilding industry, the Govern- ment's proposal has been welcomed. In fairness we ought to wait until the plan is introduced. I am sure that, when it is, the Government and the Hon. W. J. Sandwith and his colleagues will watch its operation with great interest.

The honourable gentleman observed also that new houses are not being built in the numbers required to satisfy the demand, and that the existing stock of houses is being bought up at a rate that is forcing prices to rise again. He considered that high land prices were due largely to unrealistic council requirements in certain areas. The Government agrees that land prices are far too high and, in its view, reflect the failure of the previous Government to do anything constructive to bring them down. This Government has already moved to establish its land commission and has included a provision of $10 million in the Budget as initial working capital for the commission. We are most concerned at the depressed state of the homebuilding industry. In large measure, this can be attributed directly to the economic policies of the present federal Government. I am sure that in his franker moments the Hon. W. J. Sandwith would not disagree with me.

The position has been aggravated by the federal Government's decision to peg the welfare housing allocation at the same level for the third year in succession, representing a substantial decrease in real terms. The State has pressed strongly for the release of additional funds for expenditure through the Housing Commission and the co-operative building society movement, but so far without success. The Hon. W. J. Sandwith soon ran out of simply erroneous statements and entered the more familiar realm among Opposition membem-the fatuous.

The honourable member bdieves the allocation to the unemployment scheme of $20 million for maintenance works to be mere juggling of figures. I can only reiterate that provision has been made throughout the Budget for normal increases in departmental appropriations for the maintenance of public buildings. The allocation of $20 million is a special sum over and above khese amounts, directly aimed at providing additional employment opportunities in the building industry. I refer the honourable member back to the budget papers should he require further substantiation. The alloca- tion is one of a number of measures which have been taken within the Budget and Loan Estimates in an effm to provide some relief at a time of record unemployment.

The honourable member also suggests that in view of the critically depressed homebuilding industry, a further fare cut of 50 per cent in commuter train fares should be made during peak hours to and from areas distant from the city to encourage young people to build in these areas. Travel costs would be only one of a number of faotors influencing young pple to build in areas more distant from the city. The Govern- ment has already cut fares by 20 per cent, and we have received criticism both in this The Hon. D. P. Landa] Appropriation Bill-17 November, 1976 3003

Chamber and in the other place for doing that. There are dbvious limits, from a budgetary point of view, on just how far the Government can go in providing concessions. The suggestion that such a fare reduction should operate only in peak hours would fly directly in the face of all transportation expertise, especially in 'this State. The demands that are being placed on the existing rolling stock and signalliig equip- ment during peak hours are such that any additional patronage would be aIrnost impossible to handle at #thesignificant level that would be involved in a further cut of 50 per cent. The gradual return of patronage to the pablic transport system has to be achieved together with a carefully staged re-stocking of the rolling stock and an upgrading of ithe signalling equipment and track, and ithat is what is being done by the Minister in the other place. The orders that the Government has placed for that equipment will be caning through over the next three years and longer. The Government is also assisting through such projwts as the Macarthur growth centre and strategic planning to encourage parallel growth of uriban development and the greatest possible employment, utility and recreational opportunities. It is interesting to note that in a.ll his remarks in this House in the past few days, the Leader of the Opposi~tionhas not made one remark about the savage, ruthless cuts made to growth centres in this State, in particular to the Macarthur growth centre, that being the centre in respecit of which the Minister had the personal administration in the former Ministry. The cuts made by the honourable member's federal counteparts are of such a level that the State will be unable to meet and honour legal commitments entered into by the growth centre, on the basis of an honouring of ithe growtth centres agreement between the State and federal governments. These legal oommitments have ww been placed in a state of total limbo and will have to be met od of other State revenue because of the total failure 04 the honourable member's federal counterparts. I suppose these cuts are now history to the honourable member whose efforts during this d&te have been directed towards point scoring and an exercise in dubious arithmetic. Neither the aims of proper planning, the welfare of young people nor a solution to tthe employment situation will be met by shipping people miles and deseach day to work. The necessity for hours of travel to places of employment h already far too pevalent and is symptomatic of the in- complete and piecemeal approacb to uhan development by the previous Govwament, The Hon. W. G. Keighley suggested, rather against the limpid mainstream of the Opposition's argument, that the Budget can only increase mts and will add to inflation. The honourrdble member obviously has not, like several of his colleagues, studied the Treasurer's budgat speech or even the remarks of his own leader in this House, who said: In framing the 1976 Budget the New Soulth Wales Government has recognized that the principal problem facing Australia is inflation. . . . The Treasurer, in his budget speech, estimated that the total budget expenditure would increase by only 7 per cent. Inflation is running solmewhere between 10 per cent and 12 per cent a year. One would hope that in the foreseeable future that will be reduced to about 9 per cent or 10 per cent. It is hard to see how the honourable member can deduce that from his kind of arithmetic because it defies any kind of logic but, needless to say, not imagination, of which the honourable member is not in short supply. The Budget imposes no new taxes or increases in existing taxes. On the contrary, it provides tax relief in a number of areas. Strict control is being exercised over staffing numbers and the increase in expenditure generally. Finally, the Estimates 189 3010 COUNCIL-Appropriation Bill provide for a balanced Budget without using scarce capital funds. The Hon. N. M. Orr clambered into the bowed back of the Opposition's favourite hobbyhorse, a nag one hopes they soon put out to grass although, if I know some Opposition members, it will probably go to the knackery. The honourable member believes the Government is not concerned about the rural section, particularly the dairy industry. I thought it may have been time to defrock that sacred cow, in the light of recent debate. He contended that the 7 per cent increase in freight charges had been imposed to offset the 20 per cent fare reduction. which, he said, mainly benefited metropolikan people. He said that this burden was being carried by the nual seotor.

The Government has shown that it is concerned about all sections of the community, including the rural sector. Primary producers receive a wide range of assistance, both directly and indirectly, from the various State departments and auth- orities-agriculture, soil conservation, water resources, rural reconstruction and so on. It is interesting that one of the earliest statistics I noticed concerned the Planning and Environment Commission, which supervises and assists development in the State to the tune of many lnillions of dollars, with a staff of 580 people. The Depart- meat of Agriculture has more than 5 000 employees. If that were averaged out on the basis of each farm, together with soil conservation, water resources and other allied departments that are geared directly to the rural sector and compared to those sections that are geared to semi- The Hon. W. L. Lange: Does the Minister not think that country areas are entitled to assistance? That is where much of the State's income is derived.

The Hon. D. P. LANDA: In these days of depressed rural economy, that is a dubious prospect. I do not deny those people their right to have a share in the State's bounty and its resources. Needless to say, they deserve it, otherwise governments of various complexions over the years would have done something about it. I am saying that it is a curious comparison. I do not regard myself as sufficiently informed on rural matters to offer criticism in thii regard, but I assure honourable members that given time I shall direct my attentions to this matter. In the case of the dairy industry in particular, the Government has been con- cerned to take positive steps to improve the position of producers outside the basic &milk quota area. The increase in freight charges were introduced, not to offset the 20 per cent reduction in fares but to offset rising costs. The Hon. N. M. Orr could not resist making his contribution to the ever-popular volume of fatuous fables being compiled by the Opposition in relation to car-ownership charges.

The honourable member suggests reducing charges on car ownership, thereby making it less costly to leave cars in garages. He said this would attraot people to public transport. He believes high charges on cars force people to use them more and a reduction in the costs of car ownership would attract people to use public transport. Of all the new theories in transportation that is the best I have heard, in so far as it is universally not accepted by any experts whose opinions I have had the opportunity to read. There seems to be some conflict between the views expressed by the Hon. W. J. Sandwith, who wants to reduce public transport fares by 50 per cent, and the Hon. N. M. Orr who wants to reduce charges on cars to attract people to public transport. In their different ways both proposals are equally preposterous. But that does not matter: it has served to heighten the rather curious standpoint being taken by the Opposition on this issue. I find it hard to believe that the honourable member is serious in suggesting that making it cheaper to operate a car will attract people back Appropriation Bill-1 7 November, 1976 301 1 to public transport. But perhaps he is right. The Willis Government certainly could not find a way to solve either the public transport fiasco or the air pollution and congestion problems caused by increasing vehicular traffic. The Hon. H. J. A. Sullivan is of a rare breed indeed, of whom we do not see enough in this House-those still prepared to defend publicly Mr Fraser's disastrous new federalism policy. Even Mr Fraser's own parliamentary party and advisers appear to have given up trying. Apparently the habitat of this place suits the survival of this rare breed. Unfortunately, such support will bring no returns or favours as most of us recognize the so called new federalism for what it is. It is inevitable that, despite the new tax-sharing arrangements, the New South Wales share of Commonwealth payments is low both in relation to its population and in relation to income tax paid from this State to the Commonwealth. As the Treasurer pointed out in his budget speech, New South Wales receives back through the tax sharing arrangements only 27c for every dollar of personal income tax paid to the Commonwealth Government by New South Wales taxpayers. The new federalism will result in an improvement of less than 3 per cent over what we would have received under the old formula. On present estimates, the States will receive $89 million more than they would have under the previous formula. This depends on income tax receipts reaching the level expected. A drop of less than 1 per cent in personal tax collections would result in a fall of $33.6 million in payments to the States. When one couples that with inflation running at 10 per cent to 12 per cent, as mentioned by the Hon. Sir John Fuller, this State has lost out to the tune of 8 per cent to 9 per cent in actual money terms from the new federalism, not to mention cuts in capital grants. I must pass some remarks on the comments by the Hon. P. S. M. Philips in his sustained defence of the stock exchange, upon which even the hardiest of stock- brokers would have been somewhat more reticent, given the low ebb of the stock exchange, when the previous government was charged with the duty of doing some- thing about the numbers of swindles and departures from this country by people who have used the stock market as a means to defraud people. I noticed raised eyebrows in the House when the Hon. P. S. M. Philips referred to statements by the Premier in the other place and other politicians that people are getting out of life assurance and that it was not a good return. Quite frankly, I am dying to hear the defence of the return from life assurance policies from any Opposition members who know any- thing about financial matters. The Hon. Sir John Fuller: Do you have a pecuniary interest? The Hon. D. P. LANDA: No. I assure the Leader of the Opposition that I long ago gave up any life assurance policies I had, recognizing them as the very bad investment they are, and also having a strong belief in my own longevity. The Hon. Sir John Fuller: Was it because personally you were not worth insuring? The Hon. D. P. LANDA: I notice it did not stop the life assurance companies taking the premiums, and offering approximately 3 per cent on my money. The Hon. S. L. M. Eskell: You make money when you drop dead. The Hon. D. P. LANDA: That is an option I leave to those honourable members who may want to take out life assurance policies. I am not quite clear what the Hon. P. S. M. Philips had in mind when he mentioned the $6 stamp duty per nominee transfer-indeed, neither are the advisers who have been good enough to give me advice in the matter. I, too, am concerned of course that commercial transactions are not impeded by stamping procedures at the stamp duties office and the associated costs of handling the documents. At the same time I find it difficult to accept that the situation gives rise to business leaving the State. The registering of securities on other registers does not, as a general rule, mean that the property itself has actually been taken out of the State except in a pure legal sense. Concerning the honourable member's statement about stamp duty and the options market, the application of the provisions of the Stamp Duty Act to transsactions in this market has been the subject of a report by the Commissioner of Stamp Duties to the Treasury. The Government is studying this report. The House was then favoured with the remarks of the Hon. C. J. Cahill dealing succinctly with the topic of local government. In his few remarks he demonstrated clearly that the Government's motives for amalgamation to achieve economies in local government will be well-based in certain areas. Indeed, the examples given by the Hon. C. J. Cahill, which honourable members were grateful to receive in such detaiI to illuminate the debate, were proof positive that the Government needs to act, and indeed people and ratepayers require it to act to achieve economies in local government. The Opposition then provided one of the rare moments in this House when all members are able to enjoy a speech by a man who is acknowledged as an inter- national expert in his field. The Hon. 0. M. Falkiner provided us with one of his superlative resumes of the industry in which he and his family played such a stalwart part in the founding of this country. Indeed, it is a nostalgic note of some despondency to see that that history has somewhat come to an end as far as the Falkiner family is concerned, but needless to say others will follow who, though perhaps they will not engage in the same daring as the Hon. 0.M. Falkiner's predecessors engaged in, or build that vast fortune and estate, nevertheless will carry this industry to great heights in the future. The Hon. W. J. Holt then gave us the benefit of his remarks on the Budget. I could not quite determine whether he agreed or disagreed with what was said by the Hon. Sir John Fuller. He had no praise for us. Not only that, but his arithmetic even defied the imagination of the Hon. Sir John Fuller in his remarks by plucking out a level of fullness of the State's Treasury, suggesting th~ewere $65 million in the coffers. I do not think the Hon. Sir John Fuller went to that extent. I think he mentioned $39 million. Needless to say, the figure rose to that lofty height on the Hon. W. J. Holt's journey to the film about a vet, which seemed to be the real gravamen of the honourable member's comments. I can sympathize with him: it is difficult to go to the movies these days. This came to mind when I was reading the budget papers, and when I was experiencing difficulty in selecting a really good movie to go to with my child. But I am presuming, and I suppose I am cynical enough to assume, that all of those R-rated movies are there because people want to see them. If I may paraphrase what the great Dr H. V. Evatt said, I can only presume that all those picture threatre proprietors are not putting on R certificate movies for their health. I do not know who is watching them, but someone is watching them. The Hon. W. J. Hdt: I hope the Government watches them. The Hon. D. P. LANDA: The honourable member will see, if he has been reading the story about "The Pictureshow Man", that it is being financed partly by the State Government, and that is a iilm of infinite wholesomeness. It may not cater for the tastes of the 10 or 12-year-olds, but they can be easily satisfied by the night-time viewing available on television. The movies will perhaps remain the bastion of the rights of adults to see and hear what they wish. Appropriation Bill-Pay-roll Tax Bill-17 November, 1976 3013

I am aware that the budget debate has been a most demanding period for all honourable members but I believe we would a11 agree that it has been most worthwhile and productive. It has given all honourable members an opportunity to place the management policies of the Government in perspective, to resolve any questions raised by the budget papers and to contribute to the ensuing practical application of the budget papers as a guide to the management of this State for the welfare of all its people. I wish to pay tribute to the expertise of and the support that was given to the Budget by all Government supporters, each of whom dealt effectively with the matters raised by the honourable member who spoke previously. They adequately resolved any doubts that might have remained in the mind of any reasonable man on the GOV- ernment's intentions in its Budget. I believe it is a budget that eminently suits the trying economic conditions of which we are by no means yet free. It is a record of the New South Wales Govern- ment's commitment to contributing to the resolution of these problems. If the Fraser Government's strategy fails, as unfortunately it appears to be doing, no one will be able to accuse the New South Wales Government of the obstructionist tactics so familiar to our predecessors or of selling out its responsibilities to the people of New South Wales. The New South Wales 1976-77 Labor Budget is, in fact, a crucial and constructive step toward putting this State in better shape. I commend it and the programmes it makes possible to the House. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time.

Committee and Adoption of Report Bill reported from Committee without amendment, and report adopted, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

Third Reading Bill read a third time, and returned to the Legislative Assembly without amendment, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

SOCCER FOOTBALL POOLS (AMENDMENT) BILL First Reading Bill received from Legislative Assembly and, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa, read a first time and ordered to be printed.

PAY-ROLL TAX (AMENDMENT) BILL First Reading Bill received from Legislative Assembly and, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa, read a first time and ordered to be printed.

Suspension of Standing Orders Suspension of certain standing orders agreed to on motion by the Hon. D. P. Landa. 3014 COUNCIL-Totalizator Bill-Bookmakers Bill

TOTALIZATOR (AMENDMENT) BILL First Reading Bill received from the Legislative Assembly and, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa, read a first time and ordered to be printed.

Suspension of Standing Orders Suspension of certain standing orders agreed to on motion by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

TOTALIZATOR (OFF-COURSE BETTING) AMENDMENT BILL Fht Reading Bill received from the Legislative Assembly and, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa, read a first time and ordered tto be printed.

Suspension of Standing Orders Suspension of certain standing orders agreed to on motion by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

MISCELLANEOUS ACTS (TAXATION) REPEAL BILL First Reading Bill received from the Legislative Assembly and, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa, read a first time and ordered to be printed.

Suspension d Standing Orders Suspension of certain standing orders agreed to on motion by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

RACING TAXATION (BETTING TAX) AMENDMENT BILL First Reading Bill received from the Legislative Assembly and, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa, read a first time and ordered to be printed.

Suspension of Standing Orders Suspension of certain standing orders agreed to on motion by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

BOOKMAKERS (TAXATION) AMENDMENT BILL First Reading Bill received from the Legislative Assembly and, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa, read a first time and ordered to be printed. Bookmakers Bill-Centenary Celebration Bill-17 November, 1976 3015

Suspension of Standing Orders Suspension of certain standing orders agreed to on motion by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

CENTENARY CELEBRATION (AMENDMENT) BILL

SedReading The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [8.451: I move: That this 'bill be now read a second time. The dbject of (this bill is to vest in the Public Transport Commission the title of part of the land now occupied by Waverley bus depot, *ch has been vested by the Centenary Celebration Act of 1887 in the Chief Minister, now the Premier. The original Act of 1887 provided that a portion of not less than 640 acres, just on 259 hectares, was to be set aside for Centennial Park and the remainder of the land covered by the Act was to be used for roads, railways, tramways or certain other purposes. In the upshot, 302 hectares became Centennial Park and the l+ hectares undw con- sideration in this bill form part of the portion set aside far other uses. The particular area of land concerned has been used in connection with public transport since 1901. Its location is important to present and foreseeable government bus-operating requirements. It is also a site which could be the subject of future schemes, such as air space development and the like. With interest in this type of development growing today, it is mmt desirarble that title to the whole depot site be vested in the commission in order $0 facilitate leasing arrangements and any other action that might arise as ,the result of consideration of any scheme that might be put forward. The comrnission itself has no firm proposals, nor have any schemes been suggested to it up to this stage. Any proposition that might be entertained by the Public Transport Commission will pay regard to the views of ithe Planning and Environ- meat Commission and be subject to development application approval by the local council. The bill follows the pattern of similar legislation which has been enaded from time to time since 1904 for the purpose of transferring the title of various parcels of land from the chief Minister to some other authority. The mod recent action in this direction took place in 1966. The measure is a straightforward one. Clause 1 is self- explanatory. Clause 2 provides that the bill shall be interpreted in conjunction with the Centenary Park Sale Aot, 1904, and the Centenary Park Sale (Conveyancing) Act, 1905, which affeots disposal of lands under the original legislation. No explanation is needed for clause 3. Clause 4 provides for revocation and annulment of any trusts, encumlbrances or dedications affecting the land. There is no contentious issue in this bill, which I commend to the House. The Hon. W. G. KEIGHLEY [8.48]: In my cricketing days as a batsman I always feared the googly. I was told that the ideal method for the bowler was to bowl it once at the beginning of the batsman's innings and thereafter not bowl it to him again. After that, the batsman would wait for the infernal thing to arrive again but it never did. In the context of this bill, the googly comes as an awful anticlimax. Let me relieve the feelings of the Government by saying the the Opposition does not intend to reject the bill. I say that on two grounds. We recognize that the Government proposes to make de jure a situation that has been de facto for 70 years. Had we been in Government and contemplated the legislation, our reaction would have been the same. 3016 COUNCIL--Centenary Celebration Bill-Building Long Service Bill

The Opposition raises the question of what Jack Mundey and his followers will think of this bill. What of the cries of despoliation of the environment that one would normally expect from them? I note that for 70 years the situation has been as the Minister described. In the event of buses becoming obsolete, or the containerage-the hangerage-of buses becoming obsolete, would the handing over of land in this way be necessary, or would it be better to reserve the land for the enjoyment of citizens and thereby satisfy the ecologists? We of the Opposition ask first whether this measure is really necessary. On a slightly more philosophical note, if the Government intends to ask Parliament to pass over land to a Government department, is it worth conjuring up the position of controller of public lands, which I understand is a position in existence in Queensland? The incumbent of such a position would control all lands belonging to the Government. This would avoid the internecine warfare that occurs when one govern- ment department intends to trespass on land belonging to another. The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [8.50], in reply: I thank the Hon. W. G. Keighley for his support for the bill. I apologize to him for the fact that it has had more openings than a theatrical production that never actually got on stage. As the honour- able gentleman says, the simple fact is that the bill recognizes the realities. The land in question has been used for the purposes of a bus depot for 70 years. It certainly Iooks like being a bus depot for the next 70 years. However, I assure the Hon. W. G. Keighley that if I am still Minister for Planning and Environment when bus hangerage -I do not quite follow the semantics of that word-ceases to become a planning requirement, I shall agree to resume the land back to Centennial Park, and thus please the Jack Mundeys of that generation. On the final point raised by the Hon. W. G. Keighley I say only that, faced with the prospect of having to deal with fourteen or more bills, I shall be delighted to have a philosophical discussion with him at some time during the Christmas adjournment. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time.

Committee and Adoption of Report Bill reported from Committee without amendment, and report adopted, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LONG SERVICE PAYMENTS (AMENDMENT) BILL

Second Reading The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [8.55]: I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The operations of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act, 1974, which came into practical operation on 1st February, 1975, have been closely examined by the Builders Licensing Board and by worker and employer organizations. As a result of those examinations, various suggestions for amendment of the Act have Building Long Service Bill-17 November, 1976 3017 been made with a view to improving the administrative efficiency of the scheme and its application to both workers and employers in the building and construction industry. A large number of the suggestions have been incorporated in the amendments contained in the bill. For the benefit of honourable members I shall now deal with the provisions of the measure in some detail. Clauses 1 to 4 inclusive are the usual preliminary clauses and deal with, respectively, the short title, commencement dates, interpreta- tions, and division of the proposed Act. Clause 5 is the enabling clause for the amend- ments to the principal Act contained in schedules l to 5 inclusive, and I shall be dealing with them in detail later in my speech. Clause 6 will validate the payment of long-service charges to the Builders Licensing Board for work that was performed by certain persons. Due to the absence of an award rate for most foremen and subforemen, work could not have been actually performed during the ordinary hours as defined in section 4 subsection (1) of the principal Act. Accordingly, as parts of section 14 of the principal Act stand, there was no legal liability requiring an employer to pay long-service charges in respect of such work, although many employers, in fact, did make such payments. The amend- ments contained in items 1 (a) and 1 (c) of schedule 3, will create a liability for payment of long-service charges in respect of such work as from the second appointed day. The provisions of clause 6 are designed to regularize the situation regarding payments made prior to that day. Clauses 7 to 10 inclusive of part I1 relate specifically to supervisory workers. Many supervisory workers are technically excluded from the scheme owing to the definition of building and construction work contained in the principal Act, which states that only those foremen, subforemen or leading hands who performed work for which a rate of pay was fixed by an award were included within the provisions of the Act. In fact, few such supervisory workers are to be found in the building and construction industry. Items 2 (a) and 2 (c) of schedule 1, will remove the reference to a rate of pay fixed by an award and include within the provisions of the scheme those foremen, subforemen and leading hands who perform work in the industry under contracts of employment. Clauses 7 to 10 in part I1 are therefore designed to regularize the position of those supervisory workers. I turn now to clause 11. Although the principal Act came into practical operation on 1st February, 1975, the percentage by which long-service charges to be paid under section 14 were to be calculated was not prescribed until regulation 298 of 1975 become operative. That regulation did not take effect until 1st September, 1975. Accordingly, there was a period of 7 months during which there was no liability on an employer to pay long-service charges in respect of his workers, although in fact most employers made such payments owing to extensive publicity prior to the regulation becoming operative. Some employers, however, may not have made such payments. Clause 11, therefore, will impose a liability on employers to lodge returns, and pay long-service charges, in respect of all workers who performed building and construction work for them during the 7 months to which I have just referred. Such returns are to be lodged, and long-service charges are to be paid, within 3 months of the second appointed day. Failure to comply with this provision would leave an employer open to prosecution. Clause 12 is designed to remove an inequitable double liability imposed on employers under the Act. As the principal Act stands, if an employer provided benefits under the Land Service Leave Act, 1955, to a worker who had, at the time the benefits were provided, an entitlement to a long-service payment under the principal Act, that employer could apply to the board for payment to himself of the long-service benefit. 3018 COUNCIL-Building Long Service Bill

The intent of this provision was to provide some recompense to the employer for the long-service charges he had been required to pay to the board in respect of that worker. In other words, the employer was not to pay long-service benefits twice. At present an employer cannot obtain a long-service payment from the board under the principal Act unless the worker concerned is actually entitled to a benefit under the principal Act at the time the Long Service Leave Act benefits are provided. This has meant that, practically, many employers have been compelled to provide 1955 Act benefits to workers as well as to contribute long-service charges for those workers under the principal Act. In addition, those employers required to provide 1955 Act benefits have been prevented from recovering from the board any payment under section 19 (4) of the principal Act. Employers have just cause for concern at this double liability, as the Builders Licensing Board has already recorded some 300 cases involving a potential payout of some $100,000. In order to remedy this situation, clause 12 provides that if benefits under the 1955 Act have been provided by an employer to a worker before the second appointed day, that employer may apply to the board for payment to him d an amount ascertainable under the provisions of the amendments contained in, sched'ule 4, item 6. The amount so determined cannot exceed the amount actually paid by the employer under the provisions of the 1955 Act. For the benefit of honourable members I shall now detail the main provisions contained in the schedules. I do not propose to deal with every item in the schedules, as that would be an exhausting and an exhaustive task. However, I shall deal with those that are of major significance. Many persons in the industry, due to the type of work they perform, have been unable to qualify for registration under the scheme, although they are working alongside people who are eligible to register as workers under it. As a result of discussions with both union and employer bodies, item (2) of schedule 1 contains an 'amendment to the Act which will extend the scheme to cover lofty crane drivers, constructions labourers and electricians. In addition, this item extends the scheme to include clerks of works and construction supervisors employed under contracts of employment. The Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works, Minister for Ports and Minister for Housing, at the request of the Opposition in another place, has given an undertaking in respect of the inclusion in the schedule of new categories of workers as defined in item (2) of schedule 1. For the benefit and information of honourable members I shall restate and clarify that undertaking on behalf of the Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works, Minister for Ports and Minister for Housing. The administrative measures necessary to include in the scheme those workers described in item (2) of sohedule 1 are such that they could not be ready for proclamation any earlier than 1st January, 1977. Accordingly, the Government undertakes that those provisions of item (2) of schedule 1, which include workers in the scheme for the first time and certain other provisions dependent upon the existence of regulations, will not be proclaimed before 1st January, 1977. All other provisions of the amendment bill will be proclaimed as soon as possible after its successful passage through this Chamber. Perhaps I should mention here, on behalf of the Deputy Premier, Minister for Ports, Minister for Public Works and Minister for Housing, that the membership of the building and construction industry committee, established under section 20 of the principal Act, is to be ~eviewed. This committee was recently reappointed for a term of twelve months. Prior to the expiry of that term in August, 1977, the Government will consider introducing further amendments to give effect to a wider representation of union and employer interests. Considerable difficulty has been experienced in determining what contract in any given situation might constitute "a contract substantially for labour only" as defined in the principal Act. The Hon. D. P. Landrr] Building Long Service Bill-1 7 November, 1976 3019

The amendments contained in items (7), (8) and (9) delete references to contracts "for labour only or substantially for labour only". These amendments will facilitate the administration of the Act and will make it easier to identify contracts which have the effect of creating employer-worker relationships. In addition, the amendments wiIl stop the practice of employers evading their responsibility by arranging contracts for supply of materials and labour, where normal practice in the past has been to enter into contracts for labour only or substantially for labour only. Item (2) of schedule 2 contains ,a number of significant amendments. Item (2) (a) is designed to remedy a situation now existing, whereby if a worker performs work for each of four employers on any one working day, he is entitled to be credited in the register with four days' service in the industry. The amendment in this item provides that a worker will be credited in the register with only one day's service regardless of whether he performs work for one only or for more than one employer on that day. Item (2) (e) provides that there shall be no credit in the register in respect of the first ten days a registered worker is absent on account of illness or other injury, properly certified by a medical practitioner. Those ten days have already been taken into account in determining the maximum number of 220 days' service in the building and construction industry allowed to be credited in any one year. A limit of 110 days, equivalent to the accident pay provisions now incorporated in most awards, has been placed on the number of days during which a registered worker may obtain credit whilst absent because of medically certified illness or other injury. While the principal Act requires that the Builders Licensing Board shall serve, on each registered worker, a notice specifying the number of days service credited to that worker during each year to 30th June, there has been no provision made for a worker to dispute the accuracy of such notice. Item (3) of schedule 2 rectifies that situation by allowing a registered worker to lodge an objection against the accuracy of such a notice, to be lodged with the board within six months after service of the notice. The amendments contained in item (4) of schedule 2 of the bill relate to the making of determinations as to what constitutes building and construction work under the Act. The amendments contained in schedule 3 will serve to clarify a problematical area in the operations of the scheme, particularly in respect of members of working partnerships and butty gangs. By the insertion of subsection (9) into section 14 of the principal Act, a prime liability for the lodgement of returns and payment of long-service charges is placed on the person who engaged the subcontractor who performed the work. This new subsection also allows a subcontractor to undertake that liability in respect of workers engaged by him, or in respect of himself when he performs building and construction work. The amendments contained in item (1) of schedule 3 also provide that it will be a defence to a prosecution for an offence, arising under subsections (3) or (6) of seation 14 of the principal Act, if an employer proves that he has used all diligence in mempting to dbtain the particulars required in respect of a subcontractor and his workers, and informs the bard of the name of the subconiractor concerned and the step taken in attempting to obtain the particulars. Allowance is also made in this item for interest at a prescribed rate to be levied in respect of long-service charges which are not paid by the due date. Further amendments contained in item (1) of schedule 3 will mean that mem- bers of working partnerships and butty gangs will be able to undertake to lodge their own returns, and pay long-service charges in respeut of themselves, through their principal worker. They will then be credited in the register with service in the industry as a consequence of the lodgement of the returns. Itan (2) of schedule 3 provides 3020 COUNCIL-Building Long Service Bill that where a subcontraotor has not given an undertaking, in a form approved by the board, to lodge returns and make long-service payments in respect of workers engaged by him, or in resped d himself when doing building and construction work, he shall be required to give to the employer who engages hi,on demand, particulars in respect of himself and his workers to enable that employer to comply with sedon 14 of the principal Act. A penalty d $1,000 is provided for a breach of this provision. The employer must then lodge the necessary return with the Builders Licensing Board and pav the relevant long-service charges, and here again a penalty is provided for non-compliance. Item (1) of schedule 4 contains amendments to the provisions for the calculation of the ordinary pay of a registered worker which will be applicable in all foreseeable circumstances. These calculations will be based on information already provided in employers' returns. The amendments wntained in item (3) will simplify the method of calculating the long-service payment to be paid to a worker as well as simplifying the calculation of additional benefits to be paid to foundation workers. Several instances d hardship have been noted in the administration of the scheme, in respect of the personal representative of deceased registered workers, due to an anomalous situation contained in the provisions d the principal A&. The amend- ments contained in item (3) will allow !the personal representative of a deceased re&ered worker to apply for a long-service payment where the deceased worker has a service credit of at least fifty-five days. Under the principal Ad at present, the deceased worker must have completed five or more years' service as a worker, other than as an apprentice, immediately before his death. Similarly, a minimum qualifying period of fifty-five days' service as a worker is set, in respect of claims made by OT on behalf of foundation workers who have attained ithe prescribed age and either intend to perma- nently cease work in the building and construction industry or who have died. The amendments in item (3) of schedule 4 also create an offence, and provide a penalty, for the making of any false or misleading statement in respect of an applica- tion for a long-service payment. These amendments also grant to the board the power to prescribe, by regulation, a lesser age than 65 for retirement in respect of workers who are, for example, m burnt out pensions under the Repatriation Act and also in respeot of female registered workers. Item (3) proposes also to amend the principal A& by providing that the additional benefit payable to a foundation worker shall be paid once only, at (the time the first long-service payment is made. The principal Act at present does not allow the Builders Licensing Board to remove from the register the name of any registered worker who has left the industry. I'tem (4) d schedule 4 empowers the board to remove from the register the name of any registered worker who has not been credited in the registex with any service for a period of four consecutive years. It is considered that such a period will cover those situations where, for whatever reason, a worker decides to work in a different industry for a time but wishes to return to the building and construction industry in the future. A worker whose name is removed from the register under these provisiom will not be prevented from being registered as a worker at some future t'm lme. The background to the amendments contained in item (6) of schedule 4 is quite complex, as it covers a most complex area in the administration of the scheme. I trust that honowable members will bear with me as I treat [this matter in considerable detail in the interests of clarifying the reasons for these amendments. Under the provisions of the principal Act an employer must pay to the board long-service charges in respect of all his workers who perform building and construction work irrespective of whether they are or are not registered as workers under the p.rincipal Act. Registration is an essential feature of the scheme and has been widely publicised by the board. The Hon. D. P. Lmula] Building Long Service Bill-17 November, 1976 3021

Workers who are not registered as workers under the principal Aot may receive long-service benefib only if they qualify under the provisions of the 1955 Act. While employers and the board actively encourage workers to register under the principal Act, the faot is &at some choose not to do so. If any such worker should qualify and take long-service benefits under the 1955 Act, the employer incurs a double payment in respect of that worker's service with him since 1st February, 1975, that is, he has paid long-service charges in respewt of the unregistered worker since that date and he has also provided Ita the worker long-service leave pay under the provisions of the 1955 Ad. As the worker is not registered, the employer cannd make a claim for payment under the provisions of clause 12 d this bill if ithat longservice leave payment was made before the second appointed day. At present, there is no provision in the principal Aot to enable an employer fo make a claim in respeot of any payment made at any later the. A similar situation arises when a registered worker is promoted to a position within the industry which causes him to be no longer a worker for the purposes of the principal Ad. In such a case the ernployer will have paid longservice charges in respect of the worker during the perid that the worker was a worker for the purposes of the principal Act. If the employee remaim in the service of that employer he will, upon accruing sufficient service, be elidble to receive benefits under the provisions of the Long Service Leave Aot, 1955. At present, ithese is no provision in the principal Act whereby the employer can claim a payment from the board in respect of the long- service charges paid during the period the worker-employee was in fact a registered worker for the purposes of the principal Act. In that circumstance too the employer is in effect paying twice in respect of the long-service benefits provided to the worker- employee. Workers who are registered workers under the principal Act may elect to take long-service benefits by way of payment under the provisions of that Act or may, where the qualify for such benefits, elect to take long-service benefits under the provisions of the Long Service Leave Act, 1955. The principal Act provides that where a registered worker elects to take the 1955 Act benefits his employer may apply to the board for payment to him of the long-service payment to which the worker was enfiitled at that time. However, if the worker is not entitled to a long-service payment under the principal Act the employer cannot claim. Again, this is a situation where the employer in fact pays twice in respect of the Iong-service benefits provided to the worker. Under the provisions of sections 19~,19~, 19c and 19~,which are to be inserted into the principal Act by item (6) of schedule 4, employers will have a means of protecting themselves and will be able to apply to the board for a long-service payment in the circumstances I have mentioned, thus removing the inequitable double liability to which they were previously subject. Consequent to these amendments it will be neces- sary to make a minor amendment to the Long Service Leave Act, 1955, to correct and clarify further this camplex situation and I have already presented a bill to effect that amendment. I shall now deal with the amendments contained in schedule 5 of the bill. Section 24 of the prinoipal Act requires that an employer shall keep prescribed books and records containing such particulars as may be prescribed relating to workers, but provides no penalty for failure to keep such books and records. The amendment con- tained in this clause remedies that omission. The amendment in item (2) is designed to make the board's administrative task easier by allowing for the service, upon employers, of notices or other documents under the Act by either delivery or post. The arnend- ments contained in item (3) will allow the Builders Licensing Board to make an assess- ment, from such information as is available to it, of long-service charges that in its opinion are due to it by an employer. The amendment provides that notice of any 3022 COUNCIL-Building Long Service Bill assessment shall be served on the employer, and sets out certain other matters in relation to proceedings for the recovery of long-service charges as a debt payable to the board. It will be a requirement, by virtue of the amendments contained in item (4), that prescribed books and records shall be kept in a form that enables them to be readily assessible and readily conver$ible into written or printed form in the English language. This amendment will facilitate the work of the inspectors responsible for ensuring campliance with the provisions of the Act and the regulations under the Act. The last major amendment with which I propose to deal in any detail is contained in item (5) of schedule 5. Under the provisions of section 56, subsection (1) of the Justices Act, No. 27 of 1902, a prosecution for an offence against the provisions of the Act must be commenced within six months of the comunission of the offence. In many instances this requirement proves to be a bar to the institution of prosecution proceedings, as the commission of an offence does not always become apparent until more than six months have elapsed since such cdssioa. To avoid this difficulty, the amendment provides that prosecution for an offence under the provisions of the principal Act may be commenced within one year after the board first becomes aware of the commission of the offence. Thus, once an offence has been detectd, the board will have a period of one year from that date in which to investigate the matter and institute proceedings. The remaining amendments which I have not dealt with at length are of a minor, ancillary or consequential character and are principally designed to improve the efficiency and the administration of the scheme. The Government believes that these proposed amendments are necessary, worth while and incontestable improvefmnts and additions to what is, without doubt, one of the most significant pioneering pieces of legislation enacted by this Parliament, and I trust that they will receive the support of all members. I commend the bill to the House. The Hon. F. J. DARLING [9.15]: We are well aware that the principal Act and this bill seek to preserve the system of long-service leave payments rather than payment for long-service leave actually taken. To that extent we are concerned with the principles inherent in both the principal Act and the bill itself. We are concerned also to make sure that the proposals, which have apparently been discussed by the employer and union representatives on the board concerned, having agreed that there are deficiencies in the principal Act which require amendment, should now be considered. We agree that at this stage it is desirable and necessary that this comprehensive amend- ment, indeed comprising as many clauses and drafts as there were in the Act itself, should now be considered. However, looking at several aspects we were pleased to receive the assertion by the Minister, just shortly given, to the effect that the effective operative date would not be until 1977. This removes one of the major concerns that those employers who are about to be brought under the provisions of this Act for the first time would have had us protest severely. However, in respect of a provision contained on page 9, line 12, relating to the rate of pay to which a worker is entitled, it comes down to the rate of contribution which shall be made by the employer to the fund. I ask the Minister for clarification of that point at a later stage, in that the payments definitely exclude overtime payments and other extraneous items, there being no room for doubts as to ordinary hours. It is a question of drafting and of asking for clarification and assurance in that respect. It is a matter of concern because the rates of pay in the building trade vary considerably. In the fullness of time that could become a major item. Building Long Service Bill-17 November, 1976 3023

At page 14 there is another matter of wncern to us. The provision on lii17 and 18 refers to benefits provided when the person was a registered worker. I am not sure whether I heard the Minister correctly but I heard him say that it was not intended that a double obligation should be imposed upon any employer subject to the provisions of this Act. In that case it is necessary to emphasize that this clause needs re-examination to ensure that if the employer is obliged under the provisions of the 1955 Act, being the Long Service Leave Act itself, to make a payment, any payments he might have made in respect of that same worker should then be credited in accordance with that provision, consistent with the Minister's comments. Whereas quite to the contrary, as I read the provision on page 14, it would seem that such an employer is not to receive indemnity because of the use of the words "registered employee". I therefore ask that the Minister give some consideration to1 this matter, and at the Committee stage we might re-examine the bill. The Hon. D. P. Landa: An employee could get the two lots of benefits under the 1955 Act only if he were a registered worker. The Hon. F. J. DARLING: The employer is not looking for a benefit but a refund. It is not intended that he should be oapable of getting the double benefit. We sought clarification on page 47 of lines 11 and 12, section 19~(1) (b) (i), but I think the Minister has indicated that under this provision it is to be provided that subsequent to the second date, being the date of proclamation of this bill, refunds would be available to the employer upon application. I think it needs clarification in the sense that there is doubt as to the use of the term employee when the Act itself defines worker, registered worker and so on. We also seek clarification as to whether or not those benefits, upon application being made, might be refunded. The Hon. D. P. Landa: There is no confusion between employee and worker. I do not know what the honourable member is talking about. The Hon. F. J. DARLING: Maybe not, but it comes back to the provision I was talking about on page 14. If "registered" were no longer inappropriate, it would be the same thing, as we said. The Hon. L. A. Solomons: Remembering that worker is defined in the principal Act. The Hon. D. P. Landa: There is only an employee under the 1955 Act. The Hon. F. J. DARLING: Apart from that, which perhaps can be looked at later, I have no other comments. The Hon. Sir ASHER JOEL [9.20]: I speak in no spirit of carping criticism of the measure but to seek, as the Hon. F. J. Darling sought, enlightenment from the Minister who has undoubted experience in industrial law and legal knowledge. I speak as an employer indirectly as I am a director of a major building company in Sydney. My interest in the bill is related not only to employers but also on this occasion directly to employees. I consider that the proposed amendments to part I11 of the principal Act by an addition to section 12 render a major injustice to casual and itinerant workers whom the bill seeks to assist. I do not consider for one moment that in their promotion of the bill it was the intention of employers or of the Government, if I read the measure correctly, to do that which will result from the adoption of the bill as it now stands. I ask the Minister to bear with my inadequacies compared with the Minister's skill and technological approach which sometimes places the layman in an invidious position. I ask the Minister to go through the principal Act with me so that I may receive the benefit of his advice and, I trust, an explanation which is required if the worker is to receive the just dues that were intended originally. 3024 COUNCIL-Building Long Service Bill

By section 12 of the principal Act the board is required to send out in the case of notices served as soon as practicable after the thirtieth day of June next following the appointed day, a notice to registered workers advising them of the credits which were paid in the past twelve months on their behalf to the board. I ask the Minister whether that is correct. The Hon. D. P. Landa: That is right. The Hon. Sir ASHER JOEL: We are in agreement at last. Section 26 of the principal Act states that a notice or other document may be served by the board or the committee under the Act in the manner specified. One manner is by delivering the notice personally to the person to whom it is addressed. Where it is addressed to a registered worker, it may be served by delivering it to any place shown in the register as the registered worker's place of abode or business and by leaving it there with some person for that registered worker. It may also be served by posting it by certified mail in an envelope duly stamped and addressed to the registered worker to whom it is addressed at any address shown in the register as the registered worker's place of abode or business. The Act provides that notice so served shall be deemed to have been served upon its being so delivered or, in the case of a notice or document served as referred to in paragraph (b) (ii), shall be prima facie deemed to have been served when it would be delivered in the ordinary course of post. I wish to know how the board seeks out the employee to advise him of the credits. The casual or itinerant worker moving from job to job does not normally leave behind a forwarding address. The Hon. H. J. A. Sullivan: It may be Mrs Murphy's boarding house. The Hon. Sir ASHER JOEL: The casual and itinerant worker does not normally leave behind an address, even if there were only one Mrs Murphy's boarding house, which would enable the board to trace him. Lest the Minister thinks that this is peculiar I direct his attention to sections 14 and 24 which set out what an employer is required to do by way of advising the board as to the affairs of the workers con- cerned. I now wish to refer to what the proposed amendment to section 12 does, as I see it. It seeks to insert the following words at the end of section 12: Any person on whom notice is served under subsection (1) may, within six months after the service of the notice, lodges with the Board an objection against the accuracy of the notice in relation to the number of days specified in the notice as being the number of days service with which that person was credited in the register in respect of the year ended the thirtieth day of June next preceding the date on which the notice was served. I refer the Minister to section 26 of the principal Act and ask him to observe the meaning of the word served. I seek to learn what the addition means. As I read it as a layman-perhaps with some slight benefit of legal advice-any objection or any appeal by the registered worker is confined to the current notice. He cannot appeal against the board's assessment of total credits for ten or fifteen years previously. If he has not received his notice but he has been deemed by the board to have received his notice because a registered letter was sent, he has no redress whatever. In other words he is restricted to the period of twelve months which are specified in the addi- tion to clause 12. The Hon. D. P. Landa: He has only six months in which to challenge. The Hon. Sir ASHER JOEL: Yes, and he can challenge only in respect of twelve months. He may never receive his notice but because the board said that he was deemed to have received it all his prior rights for the period prior to the twelve months have been dissipated. Because an itinerant or casual worker did not receive his Building Long Service Bill-17 November, 1976 3025 notice personally as a result of his moving away and there was no way of finding him, he can lose anything up to fifty days. Surely the Government that boasts truthfully that it represents the work force in the community is in a serious plight over this matter. I do not think this was the Government's intention. I am seeking to put an onus upon the licensing board and not upon the worker.

Many workers in the building industry operate on a casual basis; they are here today and there tomorrow, maybe in another State. They hear of a big contract in Queensland where a new development or construction is taking place and they move to that project. Then they hear of another development in Tasmania, and go there. The next minute, so to speak, they go to Hamersley. When they return to Sydney, twelve months or two years later, somebody will hand them a notice that came in the post while they were away. Under this provision a worker will be stifled, restricted and unable to obtain his just dues.

I believe that my argument, which I have put forward in the cold light of reason, deserves to be analysed by the draftsman, the employer and specifically the Government. As I said before, all members on this side of the House are in total agreement with the philosophy of this measure. We are as anxious as anyone that each and every member of the work force, whether he be a hod carrier, bricklayer's labourer or casual labourer, get his just due. We are not seeking to deprive any person of his rights. We on this side suggest to the Government that a review of this measure will prove that the point I have taken needs to be clarified.

The Hon. Sir JOHN FULLER (Leader of the Opposition) [9.32]: The Opposi- tion has made it plain that it supports the principle behind the bill. The two speakers from the Opposition have made it plain that although the bill was apparently passed in another place without great debate, it has been sent to this glace for concurrence in a state that shows first, that it has not been well drafted, and second, that it has not been drafted in a way that will implement the obvious intentions of the Govern- ment and also the Opposition. The points made by the Hon. F. J. Darling with regard to the definition of registered worker and worker in one place, and employee in another, leaves a great deal of doubt in my mind as to who is covered. Also, I am left with a great deal of uncertainty as to the rights of employers under the provisions of the previous Act and the bill before the House and with doubt as to whether there will be dual contributions and what right of refund will operate in particular circumstances.

On top of that, the Hon. Sir Asher Joel, with his knowledge of the building industry as a director of one of the leading construction firms in Australia, has defended the rights of the employees. These rights have obviously not been properly handled by this new Government of New South Wales, which purports to have the interests of the workers at heart. The Hon. Sir Asher Joel has shown that the bill has not been drafted in a way that will protect the rights of employees.

The Opposition wishes to be co-operative in this situation. In the light of the various faults that have been exposed tonight, it would be a good idea if the debate were adjourned and the Government took the bill away for revision. It could bring back the bill at an appropriate time, having looked at the points raised tonight, and then assure the House that the interests of registered workers and employees have been adequately safeguarded and drafting errors in the bill corrected to the satisfaction of both sides. Without wishing to take any political advantage, I suggest to the Leader of the Government in this House that the best thing he can do is to accept the Opposition's offer-take the bill away, have it washed clean and redrafted, and then we shall be happy to look at it again. 190 3026 COUNCIL-Building Long Service Bill

The Hon. L. D. SERISIER [9.35] : Again, the Opposition is indulging in humbug. The Hon. F. J. Darling, with his great experience in industrial matters and great knowledge of industrial law, having looked at section 12 has said that the reference to employees relates to the Long Service Leave Act of 1955. The term registered worker relates not to that Act at all, but to the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act. They are two different Acts altogether. If the honourable member took a little time to look at the law and know it, instead of humbugging the House, he would do a lot better. He has humbugged the House by not facing the reality of the two statutes that we are dealing with. There is no question that registered worker is the term used in the appropriate sense in regard to the amendments presently under review.

It was of great interest to hear the Hon. Sir Asher Joel say that something should be done about the amendment to the 1970 law that was introduced by the former Government. He says, in effect, how unfair it was that the former Government created a basis for serving notices on registered workers. Are we going to disagree that it was unfair? What does he want us to do? Does he want employers to be responsible for chasing registered workers all round Australia, wherever they go? He has put that up to the Government. I am sure the Labor Government would be only too happy to go along with a reasonable proposal along those lines, but we know what the Opposition would do if we were to put forward an amendment along those lines. I know what the Hon. F. J. Darling would be doing. He would say that these things have to be looked at from the point of view of the employer. The Opposition is again humbugging. It has again missed the boat. It was not concerned with these things when the coalition parties were in office. Now it is trying to identify itself with a proper and just cause that has long been overdue.

The Hon. L. A. SOLOMONS [9.38]: If ever I have heard an extample of hum- bug in this House, it was evident in the speech that has just been made. The Opposition has an admission that there is unfairness under the Act, but when we draw it to the attention of the Government we are accused of humbug. That is a surprising approach from a learned member. However, I shall not take that any further. I suggest to the Minister that there could be little doubt that the Hon. Sir Asher Joel's objectipn to the proposed amendment to section 12 is soundly based. The scheme of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act was to provide protection for itinerant workers. There is no disagreement on that. I suggest that even if the rights of the worker are notionally extinguished by the operation oef the amendment, where the worker is able to satisfy the board by statutory declaration or othenvise that he has not in fact received notice, his rights ought to be retained. It does not seem to be a difficult problem for the draftsman to rectify.

The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [9.40], in reply: I thank honourable members for their support for the bill. I thought the lawyers were going to be taught a lesson in the law tonight by the laymen, and I am not sure that they did not get one. Let me put at rest the main objection to the legislation. The Builders Licensing Board has registered more than 50 000 workers who are partaking in the scheme. The Hon. Sir Asher Joel is correct in saying that a significant proportion of them are itinerant workers. However, the board is advising the Minister on the application of the legislation. I accept that advice, particularly in view of the board's long experience over the whole industry and not of a rather selected area, such as Sir Asher Joel would have dealt with, involving one company. The board's advice is that workers who are registered under the scheme are informed regularly, and publicity is given to the fact, that those who are eligible to partake in the scheme must keep the board informed d changes of address. Building Long Service Bill-17 November, 1976 3027

That general onus applies right throughout the community to persons who partake in any scheme of benefits. I agree with the Hon. Sir Asher Joel that there are isolated examples of employees who do not notify their change of address for persmal reasons- The Hon. L. A. Solomons: Because of accident.

The Hon. D. P. LANDA: Because of acuident, and so on. The honourable gentleman asks that a special provision be made on the basis of such isolated and rare events, none of which has come to the notice of the board, according to the advice given to me, and none of which is representative of any coonplaint. The Hon. L. A, Solomons: The board has not been functioning for long. The Hon. D. P. LANDA: That is so. No practical problem exists. The work force in the building industry, though itinerent, is fairly cohesive. This was one sub- mission accepted by the court in awarding the benefit. The court held that, notwith- standing the tremendous number of changes from job to job, the employees in the industry represented a continuing labour force for the building industry as a whole and, notwithstanding the constant breaks in employment that deprived them of benefits under the 1955 Act, they were entitled to a long-service scheme. The Hon. Sir Asher Joel: But the legislation restricts this to the previous twelve months. Could not something be done about that? The Hon. D. P. LANDA: I tend to agree that the longer it could be left, the better it would be. A wide area of challenge could be opened up involving detailed litigation, and I can only assume that that was the reason for restricting the existing long-service provisions to eighteen months. The Hon. L. A. Solomons: An effective eighteen months. The Hon. D. P. LANDA: That is so. Again I defer to the experience of the board. I believe the House would be ill-advised, given the history of the matter, to look at every isolated circumstance that might apply. Honourable members can be assured that should any worker be prejudiced, the Government will be quick to act to cure that injustice, and I am sure the building industry unions will be quick to get their opinions across to the Government. After all, the Minister responsible for these matters is a former official of the very union that was the genesis of this type d Iegisla- tion in New South Wales. The concern of the Hon. Sir Asher Joel for the working man, not as rare as people would say it is, and certainly not as rare as that of some of his colleagues, is refreshing when it does come. The Leader of the Opposition also expressed concern about this problem. The Government does not see any difficulty. One has not arisen yet. There has been no complaint. The debate tonight represents a purely legalistic view of what might occur. The Government's attitude is that we shall look at the matter in the interim, and confer with the building industry unions and with employer organizations. If we can get agreement on it with the various unions and engage in the process that has been engaged in so far, I am sure we shall bring forward a short amendment to cure the situation. The first the Government heard of the matter was when it was raised in this House. We do not see it as a reason to hold up this beneficial legislation, which has the support in principle of both sides of the House, and to delay the benefits it will confer. Already an administraive problem has arisen in respect of the undertaking that the Government has given to have the legislation in operation on 1st January, 1977. 3028 COUNCIL-Building Long Service Bill

Further delays will exacerbate that problem for the board and employers. We therefore ask the co-operation of the House in that respect, and I am sure that the industry and the unions would do so as well. The matters raised by the Hon. F. J. Darling rest on a legalistic view of the Act. I am surprised that his view was not voiced anywhere else, certainly not by the employer organizations more directly concerned with the building industry than the one in which he is involved. However, the honourable gentleman was answered adequately by the Hon. L. D. Serisier, and I do not propose to comment further on what he said except to assure him that no double payment will be required of employees under this scheme. If that does not prove to be the case, the Government will legislate urgently to cure it. We will not be making provision for double payments under the scheme. The Hon. L. A. Solomons: And the Government will make that legislation retrospective? The Hon. D. P. LANDA: The Government will make that legislation retrospec- tive to ensure that no employer suEers a disability in that regard. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time.

Schedule 2 The Hon. Sir ASHER JOEL [9.50]: I thank the Minister for the consideration he has given to the remarks that have been made about the amendments to part I11 of the principal Ad which are dealt with in this schedule. The co-operation which the Minister has sought from the Opposition is willingly given. We welcome the oontribu- tion he made to the debate, as distinct from another contribution from the other side of ethe House, which was irrelevank to the subject matter under discussion. We on this side of the House see in the Minister's remarks an application of his knowledge of the proposed amendment and a clearing up of the doubt that existed among Opposition members. The assurance he has given is indicative of the value of the Legisldive Council as a House of review. The Hon. L. A. SOLOMONS [9.52]: I agree with the remarks of the Hon. Sir Asher Joel. I compliment the Minister upon the sensible attitude he has taken in this matter. However, I indicate to him my concern about the proposed amendment to section 12. Having regard to (the large number of workers who have registered themselves with the board, they could well be a real cause for concern. I am having regard to their numbers and to the relatively shout time that the Act, which is being amended, has been in operation. Also, I am having regard to (the number of serious accidents in industry, particularly in the building industry. &me of these accidents require hospitalization for periods, in my experience in the case of spinal injury, of up to eighteen months. I hope $that the Minister will have a close look at what would necessitate only a minor amendment to this provision to remove any cause for concern by allowing a worker, even though he carries the onus, to be in a position where, if for any genuine cause or reason the board's notice is not brought to his attention, his rights will be preserved. The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [9.53]: I thank honourable members for their remarks. I must say with some gratitude that my colleague (the Hon. L. D. Serisier saved me the trouble of answering the query raised about employees covered by the Long Service Long Service Bill-Leave Bill-17 November, 1976 3029

Leave Act of 1955. To that extent the House has been well served. The aspect of service of notice has been well covered. The Government will be watching it in co-operation with the board, employers and unions, and any o-rganizations involved in the operation of the Act.

Schedule agreed to.

Adoption of Report Bill reported from Co'mmittee without amendment, and report adopted, on moltions by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

LONG SERVICE LEAVE (AMENDMENT) BILL

Second Reading The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [9.55]: I move: That 'this bill be now read a second time.

The provisions of this bill are relatively simple and are consequential upon amendments to the Building aad Consitruction Industry Long Service Payments Act of 1974. The amendments contained in this bill are designed to remove an anomaly which is in- equitable to employers under the existing provisions of the Long Service Leave Aot, 1955, and the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act, 1974.

Clause 1 sets out the shout title of the bill and, as is the usual practice, clause 2 provides the relevant commencement dates for the proposed amendments. Clause 3, by the insertion of a new subeeation into the Long Service Payments Actj 1955, removes from employers a double liability for payment of long-service charges under both the 1955 Act and the 1974 Act. Also, it will remove the technical possibility of an employee obtaining benefits under both Acts. I commend the bill to the House.

The Hon. F. J. DARLING l9.561: We regard this bill as purely complementary to the measure that preceded it. We accept the assurance given by the Minister in relation to double payments and the like. We regard them as important. In all other respects we support the bill.

The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [9.57], in reply: I thank the Hon. F. J. Darling for his support of the bill. As to the question of double payments, I trust that he will tell his member organizations of the need to register. Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Committee and Adoption of Report Bill reported from Committee without amendment, and report adopted, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa. 3030 COUNCIL-Ambulance Services Bill

AMBULANCE SERVICES BILL Second Reading The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [9.58]: I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The principal object of this bill is to effect the transfer of executive responsibility with respect to the control of ambulance services from the New South Wales Ambulance Board to the Health Commission of New South Wales. The importance to the com- munity of an efficient ambulance service has been recognized for a long time. At the turn of the century the annual report of the Civil Ambulance and Transport Brigade of New South Wales contained the following observations: In this great metropolis, where accidents are of such frequent occur- rence, the advantages of properly conducted, active ambulance stations are as apparent as they are manifold. Every adult person's common sense should reveal the fact to them that any mode of conveyance other than of an ambulance for a wounded, injured, or sick person is highly dangerous and calculated to increase the seriousness of the ailment. Understand, locality and distance are of no moment; as speedily as possible the ambulance and men will be at the place indicated. The patient will be handled with all possible delicacy, and the mode of transit will satisfy the most fastidious. This, like all the work, is done free of charge, but persons in well-to-do circumstances are asked to contribute to the brigade's maintenance. During the past six years the brigade has attended over 8 000 cases of accident and transport. The report disclosed also that 2 116 cases had been attended to in the current year and that an aggregate mileage of 9 249 miles had been travelled. The brigade was staffed by two permanent officers and approximately forty honorary stretcher bearers. Today the ambulance service is staffed by over 1 600 persons and is assisted by approximately 500 honorary ambulance officers. In the year ended 30th June, 1976, the ambulance service transported more than 700 000 persons and the 776 ambulances needed to provide that transport travelled collectively nearly 16 000 000 kilometres. Although ambulance services are no longer provided free of charge, an ambulance contribution scheme is now available to all citizens. Currently over 1 000 000 people in New South Wales are contributors to the scheme and they enjoy full financial cover in terms of ambulance transport. Although annual contribution rates have recently been increased with respect to single persons and family units, the charges are still very reasonable. Present annual rates for ambulance transport coverage are $12.00 for single persons and $20.00 for family units. In the case of pensioners no increase has been made to the rate of contribution and the annual rate for coverage is $3.75. The bill, by vesting the Health Commission of New South Wales with the responsibility for the provision, conduct, operation and maintenance of ambulance services, is designed to enable ambulance services to be integrated with other health services. This integration was evisaged at the time the Health Commission was constituted and is seen as an important step in the nationali- zation of health services in this State. Ambulance Services Bill-17 November, 1976 3031

Honourable members will have noted that the bill does not seek to amend the Ambulance Service Act, 1972; it proposes to replace that Act by a new Act. This is being done to avoid necessary complex amending legislation and because some of the provisions at present contained in the Ambulance Service Act, 1972, such as matkm relating to the recovery of charges and the commencement of proceedings in respect of damage or injury, will, on the transfer of executive responsibility in respect of ambulance services, be rendered unnecessary by virtue of existing provisions contained in the Health Commission Act, 1972. In other respects, however, many of the provisions that are now contained in the Ambulance Service Act, 1972, will be re-enacted in the new proposed legislation. I shall comment on the clauses of the bill. Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive relate to preliminary matters. Clause 4 is an interpretation provision which defines, inter alia, ambulance benefits, ambulance services and contributor. These definitions are, to all intents and purposes, indentical to those contained in the Ambulance Service Act, 1972.

Clause 5 denotes the powers of the Health Commission with respect to ambu- lance services. In particular it empowers the commission to continue to provide, construct, operate and maintain such ambulance services as were provided, conducted, operated and maintained by the New South Wales Ambulance Board. Clause 6 is similar in content to section 12 of the Ambulance Service Act, 1972, and makes provision for the appointment of honorary ambulance officers. The important com- munity service rendered by these officers is widely acknowledged and the continued participation of honorary ambulance officers within the ambulance services organization will have the unqualified support of the Health Commission.

Provisions for establishing, conducting and operating contribution schemes are re-enacted in clause 7 of the bill. Clauses 8 and 9 respectively re-enact provisions relating to the appointment of life members d a contribution scheme and the deduction of contributions from employees' wages.

Finance provisions are detailed in part IV of the bill. Clause 10 provides for the establishement in the Treasury of an ambulance services fund and requires that money provided by Parliament with respect to ambulance services and other money received for those purposes, be paid into the fund. Clause 11 authorizes the Health Commission to establish speciial projects, accounts, restricts the use to which money paid into a special project account may be applied and requires that money collected for use in a specified area shall be used in that area only. Exceptions to the limitations prescribed in clause 11 (2) are detailed in clauses 11 (3) and 11 (4). Clause 11 (3) empowers the commission to invest money in a special project account in any manner authorized by the Trustee Act, 1925, for the investment of trust funds or in any prescribed manner. Clause 11 (4) further empowers the commission, with the consent of the Minister, to arrange for money which has been paid into a special project account for use in a special area to be used for some other purpose. However, that other purpose must be such that the public in the special area will derive a substantial benefit. Clause 12 enables-a scale of fees in respect of ambulance services to be fixed by the Minister and to be given effect to by notice published in the Government Gazette. Previous fees were fixed by regulation. The new approach should be more practicable and less time consuming.

The Ambulance Service Act, 1972, contained provisions prohibiting the unautho- rized provision of ambulance transport and unauthorized collections. Clauses 12 and 14 of this bill re-enact those provisions. Clause 15 provides that a person who is guilty of an offence against the proposed legislation shall be liable to a penalty not 3032 COUNCIL-Ambulance Services Bill exceeding $500. Clause 16 contains the usual regulation-making powers and permits regulations to be made so as to apply differently according to such factors as are specified in the regulation. Clause 17 amends the Ambulance Service Act, 1972, and specifies, in effect, that the New South Wales Ambulance Board has, since its inception in 1973, had power to accept gifts and to agree to the condition of any gift.

Clauses 18 and 19 effect repeals and amendments of enactments made neces- sary as a consequence of the proposed new legislation. Clause 20 is an important provision which effects the saving and transitional provisions contained in schedule 3. I propose to elaborate on some of the items in that schedule. The rights, interests and liabilities of the New South Wales Ambulance Board that are to be transferred to the Health Commission on the commencement of the provisions of this bill are specified in item (2). Items (3) to (6) inclusive are self-explanatory and do not call for comment. I have already adverted to the important role played by honorary ambulance officers. Item (7) provides for the continuation of the appointment of honorary ambulance officers appointed under the Ambulance Service Act, 1972.

Item (8) deals with financial matters. In particular provision is made for the transference to the ambulance services fund of moneys held by the New South Wales Ambulance Board. Provision is made also to ensure that money collected for a special purpose shall be used for that purpose. However, if it becomes apparent that money raised for a particular purpose could be used to the better advantage of the public in the district in which it was raised, the commission may, with the consent of the Min- ister, use the money for that more beneficial purpose.

The current contribution scheme will continue under the new legislation. Item (9) specifies that such scheme shall be deemed to have been established under the proposed Ambulance Services Act, 1976. Items (10) and (11) ensure respectively that life memberships and contributors' rights under the contribution schme shall subsist under the new legislation.

Items (12) to (16) inclusive are concerned with the preservation of the rights of transferred servants, the continuation of existing superannuation rights of certain officers, the right of election by certain officers to become contributors to the State Superannuation Fund and the making of special provisions with respect to the secre- tary of the board. Care has been exercised to ensure that the changeover of executive responsibility does not affect adversely any servant or officer of the New South Wales Ambulance Board. Indeed, in the case of officers of the board, an anomaly has been removed inasmuch as a previously denied right of access to the State Superannuation Fund no longer applies. Item (17) ensures the preservation of any right of appeal to the Crown Employees Appeal Board. I commend the bill to the House.

The Hon. D. D. FREEMAN [10.5]: I have nothing but praise for this bill. It will certainly receive the support of the Opposition. Its history goes back to when it was first foreshadowed in 1972, when the Hon. A. H. Jago was Minister for Health, followed up in 1975 by a report on integrated services of the commission, when the Hon. R. 0.Healey was Minister for Health. It basically shifts responsibility for the ambulance services of the State from the New South Wales Ambulance Board to the Health Commission, with the Government playing a much more involved role in the supply of ambulance services.

When one considers the anomalies that have continued for years, one wonders why it has taken so long to reach this stage. We are all aware of the previous methods of financing of ambulance services by contributions, with ambulance officers themselves Ambulance Services Bill-17 November, 1976 3033 being involved in fund raising. It was denigrating people trained for emergency services in the health field as ambulance officers to have them stand on street corners, spinning chocolate wheels.

The Hon. W. J. Geraghty: Is the honourable member aware that down through the years the Ambulance Board declined to co-operate in the matter of absorption?

The Hon. D. D. FREEMAN: Many organizations become so steeped in tradi- tion of their own structure that it takes some time to prize them into a new era. We are all agreed that this is quite overdue. It is interesting to see that provision has been made for continuity of honorary ambulance officers, who give fine service; they are not being phased out in the changeover. Acceptance by the Government of financial res- ponsibility for this service is far more realistic when one realizes it is part of the total health service. We have to think clearly of the real purpose of an ambulance service. I suppose there are two broad divisions. One is the crisis or emergency situa- tion, the other is the much more relaxed and less urgent service when people are transported to hospitals or from one hospital to another for tests, x-rays, geriatric care or something of that nature, and there is an entirely different stress on the ambulance service.

Government involvement in ambulance service finances raises the question of consideration of the physical facilities of ambulances, including the type of vehicle. There seems to be room for a variety of such facilities in crisis situations-perhaps a single-stretcher, high-speed vehicle which is safe. I do not think that can be said of the present type of ambulance. I should not like to be a passenger in one of those vehicles at high speed-their balance is poor, as they were not built for that type of use.

There is need for a large ambulance vehicle capable of carrying four patients. One can extend this concept into the modern idea of a helicopter ambulance that is used in Germany and the United States of America. With Australia's increasing density of traffic this typ of service must come. The median strip on our roadways is one item that has made a big difference to the urgent transportation of patients. This strip has done away with the flexibility of traffic movements, particularly the facility of ambulance or police vehicles travelling in emergencies on the wrong side of the road. This may appear of only little significance but it has made a big difference to high- speed travel by police and ambulance vehicles. Helicopters can travel from one place to another at high speed and land in awkward places. If a helicopter for specific use as an ambulance were located at a hospital such as Westmead or Manly it would speed up enormously the transportation of injured or sick persons and thus save a great nu-mber of lives.

Much has been written about first-aid, particularly as it applies to sufferers of coronary attacks. The present excessive time in transporting these patients through dense traffic to intensive care treatment could be reduced by modern methods. Every effort must be made to find modern means of moving quickly persons needing medical attention. Independent and autonomous small groups of ambulances have been merged into nine major regions of New South Wales and this is a big step forward. The Central District Ambulance has to be maintained in the form that the name suggests- for the total metropolitan area. There are many advantages in the new arrangement. Because I was a little late in arriving in the Chamber I may have missed the Minister repeating some of the statistics that the Minister for Health gave in another place regarding the number of people who available themselves of ambulance services last year. It is a most impressive record, particularly when one appreciates that they operated in 3034 COUNCIL-Ambulance Services Bill

the exigencies and with the difficulties that they have experienced in the past. With the implementation of the provisions of the bill one looks forward to a speedier service, and greater ability of the people involved. I heartily commend the bill. The Hon. JAMES CAHILL [10.15]: I should like to congratulate the new members in the Chamber on their maiden speeches. I trust sincerely that their stay in this Chamber will be successful and happy. I agree with the Hon. D. D. Freeman that the bill will result in a big improvement to the ambulance services of New South Wales. I speak with some knowledge of the service as I was a member of the Armidale ambulance committee for a number of years. In 1952 I became a member of the Ambulance Service Board of which I remained a member until the early 1970's when the number of members on the board was reduced. I had a lot of experience of the working of that board. I am sure that all honourable members would agree that the ambulance service in New South Wales is equal to or better than any similar service in the Commonwealth or perhaps in the world. The history of the ambulance service is that prior to 1952 the service had a committee of eighty-three representatives appointed by local committees. Although not many representatives attended meetings, the number was unwieldy and much tifme was wasted of people who travelled long distances to attend. In 1952 a former Minister for Health, the Hon. W. F. Sheahan, introduced a bill to establish a board of twenty- one members. They represented six zones in New South Wales. The present chairman, Mr Morrie Kille, and I represented &henorthern zone. The commitkee members were elected by committees of the ambulance stations in the various areas. The first chair- man was Mr Jack Stephens and his former position of secretary was occupied by Mr Bill Kelly, who still holds that office. Mr Jack Stephens was most active in the develop- ment of the ambulance service. Innovations were introduced such as a higher training school for the State's ambulance officers under the direction of the late Allan Bailey. Ambulance personnel were brought together for schools of three weeks' duration at which they gained knowledge from leading specialists and experienced ambulance personnel in the metropolitan area. The cost of this school was borne by the ambulance board. Since that time a period of induction has been introduced for new recruits and an advanced life support course commenced. In 1973 the board was reduced to ten members who were nominated by the Hon. A. H. Jago who was Minister for Health at the time. Following the resignation of Mr Jack Stepheas, Mr Morrie Kille has had the respmsibiiity d controlling the affairs of the board. Many reforms have been introduced to the ambulance service. At one time the metropolitan area consisted of eight districts. Notwithstanding opposi- tion from the districts, they are now integrated to form the Central District Ambulance. Previously each d the eig'ht districts had its own lradio frequency and boundaries. For example, one ambulance service may look after one side of Macquarie Street and another ambulance service attend to the other side. This circumstance arose in many instances. In 1963 ambulance services were amalgamated in the Riverina distrid and in the Hunter district. The amalgamations have proved most successful as facilities available at the headquarters at Wagga Wagga and at Newcastle permit vehicles to be suwlied at a given time, to be maintained and their personnel changed. In the past small ambulance stations such as that at Hills~tonin the Riverina depended on one officer with one honorary bearer. Although ithere was opposition from many country areas, particularly Tamworth and Orange, the aerial ambulance service was introduced. I recall that Tamworth was most vocal in its opposition to the method of introduction of the aerial ambulance. That city maintained that an aerial ambulance should be stationed there. Orange made similar representattions. Anyone with a knowledge of even elementary business principles would realize it would be impossible to keep a pilot on Ambulance Services Bill-17 November, 1976 3035 standby at those locations. By the aerial ambulance operating from Sydney a pilot service from East-Wmt Airlines is available {to take out an ambulance aircraft at any time. The Hon. D. D. Freeman mentioned helicopter services. I hope to see the day when they will be provided. The aerial ambulance has proved effective in urgent cases. The helicopter service would be able to get into some areas where the aerial ambulance cannot go. On some highways, particularly the Pacific Highway, traffic is so congested that is it difficult for an ambulance to proceed at a fast speed. The Hon. D. D. Freeman referred to median strips. Ambulance drivers complain about them. Before they were installed on streets and highways, ambulances could quickly divert to the incorrect side of the road. In the period to which I have referred the colour of ambulances has been changed. Honourable members will recall the yellow ambulances. That was the common colour of ambulances in earlier days. Tests were carried out by the Ambulance Board in conjunction with experts from the University of Sydney, and it was found that by changing the colour to white the temperature inside an ambulance could be reduced by up to 10 degrees in certain areas of the State. That is why ambulances are now white. hi Dierent types of vehicle used to be a big problem. Honourable members will recall that Holdens, Falcons, Chryslers, Dodges and Plymouths were used as ambulances. Almost every station had a different type of ve cle. I am pleased that the F-100 has been adopted as the main vehicle for ambulance use in the State. Some stations use four-wheel drive vehicles, particularly on the North Coast where heavy rains flood creeks and prevent ordinary vehicles from transferring patients to hospitals. The State-wide subscription to the ambulance fund of $12 for a single person, $20 for a family unit and $3.75 for pensioners, which has now been adopted, will be of tremendous assistance to the service. There was a time when every ambulance committee and station throughout the State had a different subscription. This caused difficulties. Stations on the North Coast, which received a lot of income from raffles every year, were able to reduce subscriptions considerably, but stations in the far northwest, which received only small amounts from rafFies and housie games, had to increase their subscriptions, making it difficult for subscribers. I have mentioned that subscriptions under the new scheme amount to $15 million. This sound a lot of money, but the Government subsidy for ambulance services this year is $3,150,000, an increase of only 0.5 per cent on the allocation of $3 million last year. Another change has taken place. The service now operates in fifteen districts which are known as health regions. This number will be reduced to twelve in Decem- ber. During the year ended 30th June, 1976, more than 700 000 persons were trans- ported by ambulance in New South Wales. Of these journeys, 120 000 involved casualty patients, 148 000 were for the conveyance of medical and surgical patients, more than 387 000 provided transport for the purposes of treatment, and 53 000 were journeys for convalescent purposes. The staff needed to provide these services were 642 ambulance officers and 493 honorary ambulance officers. I congratulate honorary ambulance bearers and officers. 'Stations throughout New South Wales have had the services of an honorary officer who has taken ,over when things were busy or to cover sporting activities and the like. Following that, some of them became registered ambulance personnel and took the position of station officer. Now, all ambulance personnel will be integrated within the Health Commission. This is an excellent move. Many applications have been made to the federal Government for a taxation deduction of subscriptions paid by ambulance subscribers. Members of the ambulance 3036 COUNCIL-Ambulance Services Bill board executive have made several visits to Canberra in an attempt to gain this concession, but so far they have not been successful. However, it may be granted in future. One problem that I can see is the raising of additional funds. The committees will disappear, and local auxiliary committees will be set up for fund raising. Many people take an interest in ambulance services. I hope that auxiliary committees will be forthcoming and will raise the money needed to keep this great service going. I hope the alterations to the Act will further improve the ambulance services, of which the citizens of New South Wales are proud. The Hon. N. M. ORR [10.28]: I wish to bring to the notice of the Minister a matter that has been brought to my attention strongly in the past few days. A circular has been sent to sporting bodies, agricultural societies, trotting clubs and the like setting out the fees for use of an ambulance. Quite a few bodies in the central west have brought this matter to my attention. It costs $28 to have an ambulance on the ground and $14 an hour for the attendant. At a country gymkhana it costs $126 for an ambulance for seven hours from 10 am. to 5 p.m. For the Parkes Show Society, which runs a country show of three days and two nights over an average period of thirty-three hours, the cost of an ambulance is $546. The effect of these charges on sporting bodies and charitable gymkhanas is obvious. Trotting is the main feature at gymkhanas, and trotting drivers will not participate unless an ambulance is at the ground. The bill could have the effect of putting out of business many small trotting meetings and gymkhanas run for charitable purposes, for it will be impossible for them to make a profit. Perhaps the Government will give consideration to affording such organizations some relief. The Hon. H. J. McPHERSON [10.31] At present Medibank Private and, I understand, some private health insurance schemes provide cover for ambulance services. The bill will have the effect of bringing the control of ambulance services under the Health Commission of Nzw South Wales. I ask the Minister to say in his reply whether persons who are contributing to a health insurance scheme that does provide ambulance cover will be covered automatically for the service they would get for separate contributions to the ambulance service and, if that is not the case, whether such persons should maintain separate ambulance contributions. The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) r10.321, in reply: I thank honourable members for their support for the bill and the tributes they paid to ambulance officers, honorary and otherwise, throughout the State for the great service they perform in transporting the injured, the sick and the aged for the purpose of receiving medical attention. In respect of the matter raised by the Hon. N. M. Orr I am advised that fees paid by show societies for ambulance attendance at shows, gymkhanas, and the like are under review in an effort to deal with the very problem raised by the honourable gentleman, namely that the fees payable may render the operations unprofitable, and indeed in some cases may cause a loss. Unfortunately, some dBculties have been voiced by bodies like the Australian Jockey Club, which has put certain matters to the Government. The Government is loobking at them and is hopeful of making an early announcement on the subject after it has been able to contact the relevant bodies that made submissions to it. I am instructed that that will be the subject of a separate announcement. In answer to the Hon. H. J. McPherson, I am informed that Medibank Private reimburses the Ambulance Board total fees for ambulance contribution rates. Other funds pay a benefit for an ambulance service. It is still desirable for persons to retain their membership of the ambulance contribution fund. Ambulance Services Bill-Health Commission Bill-17 November, 1976 3037

The Hon. H. 3. McPherson: Would the Minister say that again? The Hon. D. P. LANDA: Medibank Private pays the full contributions, and a person does not have to belong separately to the ambulance fund. Other health insurance funds pay a benefit in respect of an ambultance service. It is still desirable for persons to retain their membership of the ambulance contribution fund. The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith: Did the Minister say that Medibank Private covers ambulance services? The Hon. D. P. LANDA: Medibank Private reimburses the Ambulance Board the total fees for contribution rates. The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith: Up to $15 a year. The Hon. D. P. LANDA: That is what I am advised. I would not suggest for one moment that I am an expert on Medibank. This is a matter, obviously, that covers the private insurance needs of honourable members, and I take into account the fact that at present no man on this continent would willingly put himself forward as an expert on medical insurance. I am now informed that the payment is up to $15 a year and that the Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith is correct. The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith: That is the first time the Minister has ever admitted that. The Hon. D. P. LANDA: It is early days yet, and perhaps there will be other occasions. With that clearing up of the private difficulties of honourable members in respect of health insurance and 'ambulance services, I commend the bill so that the House can get on with public difficulties. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time.

Committee and Adoption of Report Bill reported from Committee without amendment, and report adopted, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

HEALTH COMMISSION (AMENDMENT) BILL Second Reading The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [10.40]: I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The matters contained in this bill are rendered necessary as a consequence of the proposed repeal of the Ambulance Service Act, 1972, and the provisions of the Ambulance Services Bill, with which we just dealt. The bill contains only two clauses. Clause 1 cites the short title. Clause 2 will amend the Health Commission Act of 1972. Clause 2 (a) is an interpretation provision which reads as follows: In ithis Act, a reference to an ambulance service is a reference to the work of rendering first aid (to, and the transport of, sick and injured persons. It will be noted-that ithis definition is identical with the definition of ambulance sewices contained in clause 4 of the Ambulance Services Bill. Clause 2 (b) will amend the principal Act to provide that tbHealth Commission shall have power to acquire and 3038 COUNCIL-Health Commission Bill

shall be deemed always to have had power to acquire, any property by gift inter vivos, devise or bequest. Also, the commission will be empowered to agree to the condition of any such gift, devise or bequest. The powers of the commission will, of course, have application in respect of any gift, devise opr bequest that many be made in the context of ambulance services Clause 2 (c) will ensure, first, that the Health Commission may, with the approval of the Minister, dispose of land that has been acquired under the Health Com- mission Act of 1972, or any other Act. The amendment will have application to land acquired by the New South Wales Ambulance Board under the provisions of the Ambulance Service Act of 1972. Second, clause 2 (c) will require that the Minister shall not approve the disposal of any land acquired by gift inter vivos, devise or bequest if that disposal would be at variance with any condition to which the commission has agreed to in respect of that land. I commend the bill to the House. The Hon. D. D. FREEMAN [10.41]: I notice that the Minister's rate of delivery has speeded up, so I would not wish, in any way, to slow down the passage of the bill. The Opposition supports it. The Hon. AMELIA RYGATE [10.42]: I congratulate the new members who have made their maiden speeches in this session. Also, I express my thanks to the officers of the Parliament who have extended great kindness to me throughout the years. I value this opportunity to record my views on the bill before the House and, in particular, to speak generally on health matters. Though it may be considered that some of what I have to say is not strictly linked with the provisions of this bill, I should like to have those remarks placed on record. This bill, which precedes another that will soon be dealt with in another place, is one of the first pieces of legislation to be brought before the Parliament by the new Minister for Health. This is a sig- nificant opening gambit for a man who I am sure will be an energetic and caring Minister for Health in this State and will carry out the duties of his portfolio in accordance with the fine traditions of administrative responsibility and concern for the public that was displayed by his predecessors of the same political persuasion- the Hon. M. O'Sullivan, the Hon. W. F. Sheahan and the Hon. C. A. Kelly. The bill to come forward will contain some amendments of considerable signifi- cance to the public hospital system of this State. Honourable members will appreciate that the legislative changes to the Public Hospitals Act were contemplated by the predecessors of the Wran Government; in fact, they had been introduced into the Parliament prior to the recent elections which resulted in the change of government. I make that point simply because honourable members will appreciate that in recent times this has been a matter of concern for all political parties. They have seen the need, from one point of view or another, for changes in the public hospital system. These changes now seem more urgent than ever. The general public has been burdened with a great financial impost in the form of the Medibank levy. Also people who do not qualify for exemption from the levy are compelled to join private health insurance funds and pay costly premiums. It behoves all State governments that administer the various public hospital systems to take measures that will provide the public with the best possible standard of medical treatment, patient care and administration within hospitals. I believe that the intention of the bill to come before members is to emcompass those objectives. An important provision of the bill is that which sets out to update the legislation in regard to the appointment of directors of boards of second schedule hospitals, that is, the public hospitals of New South Wales. That bill will specify the duration of a director's term of office. A term of appointment will be for a maximum period of five years, with the right to seek reappointment. Health Commission Bill--17 November, 1976 3039

I have sought from the Minister for Health an assurance-and I might add *hat it was readily and sincerely given-that this provision will not set in motion some mechanism for the Government to sack members of hospital boards. The 'Government's principal aim is to streamline the system for membership of hospital boards. When the legislation becomes law existing board members will retain their office for five years. In view of this fact I am sure honourable members will see no hardship in this provision. As well, members of hospital boards will have every right to exercise an option to seek reappointment. The Minister for Health has said on innumerable occasions that periodically members of boards of statutory authorities come up for reappointment; indeed members in the other place are required to face the people every three years-and sometimes more frequently. It seems only reasonable that the appointment of members of hospital boards should be regularized within the framework of the new legislation. I should like to take this opportunity of setting into the parliamentary record my very warm appreciation of the work done by hospital boards throughout the New South Wales public hospital system. Honourable members will appreciate that the many hospital boards throughout the State's public hospital system contain people from all walks of life. These men and women have shown themselves diligent in their various occupations, whether they be a housewife, an engineer, a tradesman, a financial administrator, and so on. Over the years these people have woven the tapestry of administration of our public hospital system. They have worked voluntarily in thcir own time and it would be remiss of me-and, I believe, of other honourable mexbers-were it not written into the record how warmly we have appreciated their work. Citizens who take on the work of assisting in the administration of a hospital enter a dedicated and demanding field of service. It is most appropriate that the work performed by these people should receive our clear recognition and our warm appreciation. I should like to pay warm tribute also to the hospital matrons and nurses who have performed dedicated work in the hospital system over many yea.. They make up the heart and pulse of patient care. We cannot express too warmly our gratitude for their work. We are all inclined to take their dedication for granted. This debate is a timely occasion to pay tribute to the matrons and nurses who have done so much to lift and maintain the high standards of patient care in our hospitals. I am pleased to note that one of the provisions of this bill will enable the granting of professional privileges to medical practitioners and dentists who wish to work in public hospitals. The bill to come before members will provide for the establishment of a credentials committee in each hospital. Small country hospitals might join into group committees in accordance with their respective geographical relationships. The creden- tials comittees will make recommendations to the hospital boards. This procedure will be a pre-requisite to a doctor practising in a particular hospital. Whether or not there is a vacancy open will be a matter for the board to determine, but a doctor must have the imprimatur of the credentials committee before he can seek the board's endorsement to practise in that particular hospital. Honourable members on both sides of the Chamber must surely applaud the fact that this bill is being introduced. As I said, it is a first stage in the setting of a range of standards to1 provide most satisfactory and foolproof protection for the general public who may be patients in our public hospitals. I refer to the Government's proposal to impose other standards on the hospital and the doctor in the delivery of health and hospital services in New South Wales. One of the changes proposed for the future is hospital accreditation. When this scheme is introduced it will impose on individual hospitals a level of surgery to accord with the capacity of the hospital. That level should not be exceeded. 3040 COUNCIL-Health Commission Bill

When hospital accreditation is finally accomplished, as it surely will be, we shall be much closer to recognizing the role of every hospital in relation to its neighbouring hospital within a particular area in a region. This is very much in line with the policy of health decentralization that is supported by our Government and by our Minister for Health through the regionalization of health services. No doubt honourable members are aware that surgery is often performed in hospitals under conditions that do not give the patient the best possible services. This is because a particular hospital may not have sufficient support services in the way of intensive care, recovery rooms and trained staff to operate those facilities. Sometimes surgery is undertaken by a doctor who is insufficiently trained to perform the operation he is attempting. Obviously the maintenance af special surgical facilities and supportive specialist staff to operate them in a small hospital is neither practical nor desirable from the point of view of cost. This limitation makes it more logical and desirable for the referring of surgery to larger surgical units in larger hospitals. Hospital accreditation, as I said, is a thing of the future. The rationalizing of other specialist and supportive hospital services, which is being advocated by the Minister for Health, will mean in the long run a more efficient, better and safer system of patient care-a system that will function under improved economic control. Graded privileges for doctors practising in hospitals set by peer review-that is, periodical review of their performance by their colleagues- is another thing for the future which will tie into the ultimate plan envisaged in this bill to set up credential committees. That overall plan will provide the maximum care and efficiency for the patient. This evening it is most significant that I should be talking about a measure that will begin a pattern of controls which the Government, and the medical profession itself, will impose to safeguard the standard d patient care by the medical profession. I am quite sure that honourable members in this Chamber, as in the other place, will also support the provision that will enable an extension of duties of the Health Commission with respect to the functioning of hospitals. The object of this provision is to put the Health Commission into a better position to assist hospitals in the maintenance of adequate standards of administration, patient care and other hospital services. I need scarcely remind honourable members that the community is faced with an immense financial burden in terms of compulsory health insurance. In return they are entitled to receive the very best that the hospital system can produce. At the same time, I point out that with the current harsh economic controls being forced upon us from Canberra, every effort should be made to ensure that the hospital system does not get out of financial control. This is a great worry to us all. At the same time, this particular provision will enable the immense expertise, which is available from the Health Commission, to be channelled into the hospital system so as to ensure that patient care is conducted along the lines of the high standards that the Health Commission has set for hospitals and exist within the finances allocated annually by the commission. On this latter aspect, I draw the attention of members to the escalation of hospital costs over the past decade. In New South Wales, for example, in the financial year 1964-65, total annual expenditure on public hospitals was $100 million or $25 per capita In 1974-75, that expenditure rose to something of the order of $533 milion, or about $111 per capita. In a decade expenditure on hospitals has become five times more costly. The figure for this financial year, if one adds the cost of State institutions, State psychiatric institutions and other institutions such as those for the care of chronically handicapped children, will exceed $850 million. The high cost of maintaining beds in our hospitals for acute cases is the reason why the emphasis should shift heavily towards community health programmes. These The Hon. Amelia Rygate] 2 Health Commission Bill-1 7 November, 1976 3041 programmes were given great stimulus by the Whitlam Labor Government. During its term of office some $44.6 million was provided for the development of community health programmes in New South Wales in the three financial years ending 30th June, 1974, 1975 and 1976. This great stimulus of funds for this primary level of health care enabled innumerable developments and improvements of the community health programme throughout the State. Coimmunity health and the public hospital system are one and indivisible in their objectives to provide health care to the community.

It is of great personal concern to me that the present federal Government has reduced its financial support of the New South Wales community health programme from an estimated outgoing commitment at May, 1976, of $41.7 million to something of the order of $29.4 million. This represents a shortfall of some $12.3 million or over 30 per cent of the estimated cost of the on-going programme. The Health Commission's officers and the regional directors of health situated throughout the State have carefully studied the on-going needs for the community health pro- gramme, which is doing valuable work in the field of drug referral, alcoholism and a vast range of primary health-care treatment. These officers, after extremely careful consideration, came up with the figure of $41.7 million as being needed to finance the carrying out of vital programmes at their current level. It is most distressing that the estimate should be cut back by $12.3 million. This retrograde step is most unfortunate, fobr community health stretches its programmes to the four corners of the State and complements the public hospital system.

The federal cut-backs will place New South Wales in a most serious position in the on-going operation of its community health programme. The cut in funds for the programme will mean an embargo on the filling of vacant positions that will occur in future in community health centres throughout the State. Indeed, the commencement of any new services, or the construction of any new health centres, will have to be deferred indefinitely. This is a great pity at a time when there are such immense stresses on the community. Health problems of many kinds are being very effectivelydealt with at the community health level. The federal cut-backs will mean also the curtailment of the domiciliary paramedical scheme under which such vital services such as physiotherapy, occupational therapy, chiropody and social work of various kinds are made available to citizens, particularly the elderly in remote areas. I men- tioned earlier the extremely high cost of providing health services in this State and I quoted the escalation of costs in the public hospital system over a period of ten years. I referred, also, to the high per capita! cost of health services. Therefore, I see great short-sightedness in the Fraser Government's policy on community health.

Honourable members will surely appreciate that the community health pro- grammes are the mainstream of preventive health. They keep people out of hospitals by arresting at a primary stage a physical or psychological situation or disability that may otherwise become acute. Before leaving the subject of community health, may I refer to the valuable work of the Department of Youth and Community Services in the provision of housekeeper emergency services. Over a period of many years this organization has valiantly striven to provide emergency housekeeper supportive services to many citizens, including the elderly and family groups that are disabled by sudden illness or a tragedy to the mother of the family. I hope that my colleagues the Minister for Health and the Minister for Youth and Community Services will give serious con- sideration to the development of a scheme whereby more women may be enlisted into the service and, for a nominal amount, help its extension. The service has battled on over a period of many years with a minimum of physical resources. It may well be that the community health programme could be the bridge by which the additional physical impetus could be achieved. 191 3042 COUNCIL-Health Commission Bill-Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill

In conolusion may I congratulate the Minister for Health on taking action to have the bill to which I have been referring brought before the Parliament. I am sure that most other honourable members will willingly support its provisions. I am sure that members will also support the Minister's moves to lower the infant mortality rate in New South Wales through improved obstetric training facilities, to provide better opportunities for nurses to achieve higher levels of nursing education and to stimulate some government and community involvement in the treatment of alcoholism and drug dependency. I commend to the Minister the plight of handicapped children. I hope that if possible he will do everything possible to stimulate, on a regional basis, facilities to accommodate and treat children and to assist in the counselling of their parents. I support any move the Minister can make to restore perhaps in some streamlined way, out-patient services for people in public hospitals. I am sure that the medical superin- tendents and the chief executive officers of our hospitals know the requirements in their particular areas and will make every effort to supply the Minister with information and suggestions that will ultimately see the restoration, in a new form, of a service vital to the public and the training of undergraduates and to post-graduates in the medical profession. I take this opportunity to thank most warmly and in the most humble and sincere terms all people who are serving in such a dedicated way in the hospital and health services of New South Wales. I support the bill before the House. The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [11.2], in reply: I am proud that the Hon. Amelia Rygate saw fit to favour the House with her maiden contribution, after so many years, on the return to government of Labor in New South Wales. I congratulate her and share her pride with her. I am reminded of those remarks in Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra: "Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale her infinite variety." I con- gratulate the honourable member on her early support of another bill not yet before the House. I thank honourable members for listening to the honourable member's speech in the customary manner of the Chamber. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time.

Committee and Adoption of Report Bill reported from Cdttee without amendment, and report adopted, on motions by $he Hon. D. P. Landa.

BUSH FIRES (AMENDMENT) BILL Second Reading The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Coluncil and Minister for Planning and Environment) [l1 .S]: I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The bill proposes to increase the penalties for offences under the Bush Fires Act and to make other amendments of that Act that are considered to be necessary. Following the devastating fires that occurred during the 1974-75 fire season members of bushfire brigades and other concerned community members made representations indicating that Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill-17 November, 1976 3043 a significant proportion of the fires were caused through indiscriminate lighting and seeking increases in penalties. The maximum penalty under the existing Act is $400 or imprisonment for twelve months, or both. After considering the matter the Government has adopted the view that increases in the monetary penalties under the Act are long overdue. The bill proposes tot increase them to more realistic figures. At the same time it is proposed to amend the Bush Fires Act to give effect to the following three principles which, in the Government's view, should apply to penalties. First, provision for imprisonment should not be contained in a general penalty section but should be specified in each section creating an offence for which imprisonment is considered to be an appropriate penalty. Second, the existing provisions authorizing imposition of both a monetary penalty and a term of irnprison- ment should be removed. Third, the provision for separate penalties for second and subsequent offences for breaches of part I1 of the Act should be removed. When the Bush Fires Act was passed in 1949 its provisions applied to only the eastern and central divisions of the State and accordingly, only councils located within those divisions were eligible to participate in the eastern and central divisions bush fire fighting fund which was established under the Act. An amendment of the Act in 1958, however, brought the western division within the definition of the eastern and central divisions thus allowing western division councils to participate in the fund. Under an amendment in the bill it is proposed to recognize this change by altering the name of the fund to the New South Wales bush fire fighting fund. Section 13 of the Act provides that a notice to remove inflammable matter from, or clear a fire break on, land must be served on the occupier of that land or, where there is no occupier, the owner. Difficulties are being experienced by some councils in proving, to the satisfaction of the courts, occupation of the land in respect of which a notice has been served. Under a similar provision in the Local Government Act, relating to the removal of noxious plants, a council can exercise a discretion )as to which party it decides should be responsible for removing the plants and it would seem reasonable to make similar provision in section 13 of the Bush Fires Act. Accordingly, the bill will amend section 13 to enable a notice under that section to be served on either the owner or the occupier of the land. At the same time, it is proposed to insert new section 14~in the Act to give an owner of land a defence in court proceedings for failing to establish firebreaks or to carry out other fire prevention works where he has no legal right to enter the land, for instance, where he has leased the land. Most honourable members will be aware that when weather conditions are favourable the Bush Fire Council and its co- ordinating committee conduct large-scale hazard reduction programmes involving Crown, private and leasehold lands. Members of bushfire brigades regularly assist with these programmes, entering private lands at the request or with the consent of the owner to carry out the necessary work. Legal advice obtained by the Bush Fire Council has raised doubts at to whether the immunity provisions normally applying to members of bushfire brigades who under- take activities authorized by the Act apply in cases where members are carrying out fire prevention operations of the nature I have referred to on private and leasehold lands. The Government's proposal, therefore, is to amend the Act to ensure that mem- bers of brigades may enter private and leasehold lands to carry out hazard reduction works at the request of the owner or lessee, or where the owner's or lessee's permission has been obtained. Under section 30 of the Bush Fires Act the Minister is required before the end of each financial year to prepare and adopt estimates of expenditure from the bush fire fighting fund, for the next financial year. In practice, it has not been possible to 3044 COUNCIL-Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill provide an estimate of expenditure from the fund with any degree of accuracy before the end of the financial year because of the procedures involved in examining estimates submitted by local councils. An appropriate amendment will permit estimates of expenditure each year to be prepared as soon as practicable after the end of the pre- ceding year as well as before the end of that year. Equipment obtained through the bush fire fighting fund for use by bushfire brigades is vested in the local council which is responsible for the establishment and operation of bushfire brigades in its area. The Bush Fire Council has expressed concern that once the fke equipment is obtained a small minority of councils show little interest in ensuring its proper care and maintenance. In addition to the wastage of funds involved, it is probable that in an emergency situation badly deteriorated equipment could not be utilized effectively. This could result in serious destruction of property and even the loss of life. An amendment will clearly place responsibility for the proper care and maintenance of bushfire equipment upon the council in which such equip- ment has been vested. The bill contains a number of amendments dealing with the constitution of the Bush Fire Council and making other amendments which are neces- sary following the machinery of government and other changes in recent years. Following the establishment of the Public Transport Commission to take over the administration of the railways, amendments are required to omit references in the Act to the Commissioner for Railways and substitute references to the Public Transport Commission of New South Wales. It is proposed to replace the provision for a represen- tative of the former Chief Secretary's Department on the Bush Fire Council with a representative of the Western Lands Commissioner. Following the transfer of the Bush Fires Branch to the State Emergency Services, section 39~(1) of the Act will be amended to provide that the representative of the Director of State Emergency Services shall be a member of the finance committee. References in section 39 (2) of the Act to the Minister for Conservation and [the Minister for Lands wiU be replaced by references to the Minister for {thetime being administering the Forestry Act, 1916, and the Minister for the time being administering the National Parks and Wildlife Act, 1974, as the Ministers authorized to nominate the commissioner appointed under the Forestry Act and the Director of National Parks and Wildlife, respectively, to the Bush Fire Council. Other amendments will give effeot to the change in the constitution and name of the Fire and Accident Underwriters' Association of New South Wales, which is now known as the Insurance Council of Austraila, and the change in name of the Associa- tion of hcaS Government Clerks of New South Wales to the Town Clerks Society of New South Wales. Section 51 of the Act confers certain special powers on the relevant pablic authority where a bushfire is burning on any land within 8 kilometres of a national forest, state forest, timber reserve, flora reserve, catchment area, national park, historic site or nature reserve. Officers of or other persons authorized by the relevant public authority are authorized to enter the land on which the fire is burning or any intervening land to extinguish or assist in extinguishing [thefire or preventing it spread- ing. Subsection (4) of the section provides that where the land of public authorities and the territory of bushfire brigades are concerned in the one firefighting operation the senior officer of the bushfire 'brigade shall be in charge. However, that subsection does not apply 3 a state of emergency has been declared under section 17 of the Act, because it is essential in such a serious situation for the emergency fire control officer appointed under (that section to take over the direction of operations. The Act was amended in 1970 to provide for the appointment of a chief co-ordinator of bushiire fighting who is empowered to take charge of firefighting operations in the co-ordination zone, which extends from the Great Dividing Range The Hon. D. P. Landa] Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill-17 November, 1976 3045 to the coast, where any bushfire has assumed or is likely to assume such proportions as to be incapable of control or suppression by the firefighting authority or authorities in the area where it is burning. The question has been raised whether the special powers of the chief co-ordinator in emergency situations override the provisions of section 51 (4) and an appropriate amendment in the bill will clarify the position. Section 42 (1) provides that various persons shall be ex oficio fire patrol officers, for exampile, members of the police force, schoolteachers, and field officers of various depments and statutory bodies, including rangers appointed under the Metropolitan Water, Sewerage, and Drainage Act. An approach has been made by the Hunter District Water Board for amendment of the Aot to enable rangers appointed under the Hunter District Water, Sewerage and Drainage Act to be appointed as ex oficio fire patrol officers. An amendment to section 42 (1) d the Act will give effect to this request.

The final amendment to which I wish ito refer will provide that the provisions of section 41 of the Interpretation Act relating to tabling, disallowance, and so on of regulations applies to regulations made under the Bush Fires Act. The bushfire organization in this State is essentially a volunteer one and I feel that I cannot let this opportunity pass without expressing appreciation of the valuable work done by the members of brigades. The dedicated citizens of the community who serve in our volunteer bushfire brigades now number about 65 000 men and women each with a keenness and enthusiasm to play his or her part in reducing the menace of bushfires and being prepared, frequently at great personal risk, to combat outbreaks of fires which unfortunately still occur from time to time.

The Government hopes that the increases in penalties being provided for in the bill will act as a deterrent to people who commit breaches of the Act, particularly those who deliberately start bushfires. There are also a number of amendments which will materially assist local councils, bushfire brigades and the Bush Fire Council in preventing and suppressing fires. Other amendments are of a machinery nature. I am confident that the bill will meet with general support. I commend it to the House.

The Hon. R. K. EVANS [l1.141: I congratulate honourable members who have made their maiden speeches recently. I am sure that those honourable members who have recently been elected to this House will have an effective stay and I wish them well. The Opposition does not oppose the billl-in fact it welcomes it. Honourable members would know that it was prepared by the former Government. The Opposition considers that it will be of considerable benefit to bushfire organizations throughout the State. Among the many things that the bill provides are substantially increased penalties, including imprisonment for the more serious offences. Such provisions are long overdue and I am sure they will greatly assist bushfire organizations' efforts to prevent fires. The attention of people will be drawn to the seriousness with which bushfires are regarded and to the heavy penalties that they may incur if they break the law.

The bill provides also power to councils to establish firebreaks and fire preven- tion works on occupied or owned land. This will overcome past difficulties where in some cases there has been an owner and in some other cases an occupier. The pro- visions of the bill will make clear the law and assist bushfire organizations to establish firebreaks and thus lessen the risk of fire in the future. Other provisions in the measure require councils to care for and maintain the equipment that is vested in them. The maintenance of firefighting equipment has always been a problem. The bill tightens up this area of responsibility and should ensure better maintenance of equip- ment. Obviously plant must always be ready. It should not be located at the bottom of 3046 COUNCIL-Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill a paddock. Equally important, it must not be worn out through being used for spraying blackberries or similar purposes. Further, hand tools should not be located in a cabbage patch or some back garden; they should be ready for fighting fires. Plant must be started and run frequently. In high bushfire danger periods mechanical plant should be checked, started and run at least once a week. Unfortunately I foreshadow prob- lems in giving councils the responsibility of looking after firefighting equipment. In the past there has been a fairly loose arrangement-that would be the most appropriate description I could use.

My experience has been that the equipment has been held by councils or by landholders, who may be bushfire captains, deputy captains or occupying other positions. Some landholders, although they are most enthusiastic about fighting bushfires, use the equipment on other jobs to a greater extent than it should be. I repeat, it should be started and tested but should not be used for any length of time. A number of councils are guilty of neglecting their responsibilities. I have seen pumps for fighting bushfires used for pumping out culverts and bridgeworks and this type of work. I am glad that the bill will provide for a tightening up on maintenance of firefighting equip- ment. Although I have suggested there may be some problems, I am sure a workable system will be evolved that will ensure that firefighting plant is maintained more adequately than it has been in the past.

Having made these few general comments on the bill, I wish to refer to some matters of which I hope the Minister will take notice so that action can be taken to improve the present position. There could be an improvement in publicizing the dangers of buhfires. Although we are all familiar with the "prevent bushfire" signs that are placed on telegraph poles and trees throughout the countryside-and these are essen- tial-this type of promotion should go further by a greater dissemination of basic bushfire knowledge. With the drift of people to the cities, fewer people live in country areas. More people should have an elementary and basic knowledge of how to fight fires and of their characteristics. I do nd detract from the efforts by voluntary bush- fire brigades in fighting bushfires. They always will be the real firefighters. However, it is essential that the volunteers who assist bushfire captains and other trained people know something about fighting bushfires.

I advocate an elementary bushfire education campaign. If is important not only to prevent bushfires but also to educate people in country areas. This applies particularly in the tablelands area from where I come. They must be given a basic bushfire knowledge. Education could start in the schools, which are the kst place to get a message across. Proper information must be imparted to new Australians. Recently a number of new Australians have come into the district in which I reside. In the past year we had a fire that was started by a new Australian. He was severely questioned by the police and it was found that he knew virtually nothing about the regulations. It was entirely his fault that the fire had got away and we spent more than a day putting it out.

I advocate education and dissemination of information to people in country areas, particularly new Australians. It might be possible to get the message across by placing it in ethnic newspapers. I have always maintained that it is easier to put out a small fire than to wait and have to tackle a big one later on. This elementary knowledge will be of help in putting out a fire before it becomes of any magnitude. Anyone who knows a little about fire fighting can put out a small fire but when the fire becomes bigger it takes major plant, a large number of men and a great effort to put it out. The Hon. R. K. Evans] Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill-17 November, 1976 3047

May I mention a few examples of the sort of basic information that should be disseminated to people in the country. The first is that when they go to a fire they should contact the bushfire captain or someone in control at a section of the fire. Many people rush to a fire and run around getting in the way and doing nothing effective. First they should contact someone in authority. Next they should know how to use a fire beater. I have seen people lush to a fire and beat a fire beater flat on the ground. That causes sparks to fly everywhere and more fire is created. If they use the implement correctly it can be most effective. The same applies to the way pumps and hoses are used. I have found that the same amount of water will put out twice as much fire if ik is used correctly along the line of the fire.

Another thing that people should know is that fires race uphill in mountainous areas and go slowly downhill. It is important to know that. Some people do not appreciate it. The fire creates its own wind, regardless of the direction in which the wind is blowing-and I have seen fires racing uphill faster than anyone can run, 20 or 30 miles an hour. That is knowledge that people should have. They should know the best places to shelter, and so on. It is important that they know these things. 1 have been at fires where the fire did not even touch the ground; it jumped from treetop to treetop. In fires of that magnitude, the situation is dangerous and people should know what they are doing.

Householders also should be circularized and given elementary knowledge of what can be done to save their houses. I have been at bushfires where houses have been endangered because the undergrowth was up to the floorboards, two or three feet high. It is a nightmare if one is trying to save a house and strikes that situation. People should be encouraged to clean up their gardens and around their houses. No doubt the new provisions in the bill will encourage them to do that. They should be encouraged also to clean out their roof gutters. Invariably in mountain areas gutters are full of leaves. Sparks get into the leaves which catch alight and the fire goes straight up underneath the roof. One can then virtually say goodbye to the house.

People should be encouraged to close their windows on days of high fire danger. Sparks can get into houses which are furnished these days with much flammable material, particularly curtains and some carpets. This type of synthetic material only needs a spark to create a real fire problem. Householders should be told to clear flammable areas around their hwses and have hoses and buckets ready. I have mentioned only a few of the basic problems of fighting fires, but there are many more. I hope that I have got across my point that there should be greater promotion of the elements of fighting bushfires. Prevention is better than cure and if the type of education that I am advocating saves but one house or one life it will have been worth while.

I support the bill. It is being brought forward at a most opportune time because recent rains have caused the build up of a great quantity of fuel in the tablelands areas and in the west. It is drying off now and when it becomes dry the coming season could be a real worry to people in the bushfire areas of the State. Before resuming my seat I should like to pay a tribute to the voluntary bushfire brigades. They do a wonderful job; they are unselfish people who are called out at all hours to fight fires. I have seen them get up from their Christmas dinners and go out to fight fires. The effort that they put into their work is almost unbelievable. I have seen people fight fires day after day, with little or no sleep-and they are doing it to save someone else's propemty. It is not possible to praise them too much for what they do. I should mention also the ladies who work behind the scene. They stay with the firefighters 24 hours a day providing sandwiches and cups of tea and running messages. I should not like them to be forgotten in this brief tribute that I have paid to the volunteer 3048 COUNCIL-Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill bushfire brigades. I am sure that the bill will improve the efficiency of the brigades and will be welcomed by them. I commend the bill. The Hon. N. M. ORR [11.28]: I also support the bill, which I believe is a good one and one to be commended. The amendments in it are mainly to update and improve (things. The increased penalties will strengthen the position of the bushfire brigade officers. I draw the attention of the Minister to a matter of growing concern to people in country areas-the financial contribution that landowners make to bushfire prevention. Finance for the volunteer bushfire brigades is raised under the Bushfires Act. Section 30 (2) reads: The Minister shall so prepare such estimate that the amount of the contribution to be paid by a council shall not exceed one forty-eighth of a cent in the dollar on the unimproved capital value of ratable land in the area of such council (not being land within a fire district constituted under the Fire Brigades Aot, 1909-1949): Section 32 (1) provides: Towards the estimate referred to in subsection one of section thiry of this Act- (a) the Colonial Treasurer shall contribute one-quarter; (b) councils the areas of which are siutated wholly or partly outside any fire district constituted under the Fire Brigades Act, 1909-1949, shall contribute one-quarter. Such contribution shall be paid out of the general funds of such councils; (c) insurance companies shall contribute one-half. The question I wish to raise is whether insurance companies contribute sufficiently, in view of the fact that they have placed a loading on all fire premiums, formerly 5 per cent of the premium and now 20 per cent. I have been in touch with the Insurance Brokers Association of Australia and inquired whether the loading for the bushfire fund added to premiums represents all or only part of the contribution made to the fund by insurance companies. I was told that it represented the whole of the amount paid. What is the position of the rural landowner or homeowner? They are rated by the shire or municipal council to raise the council's contribution to the bushfire fund, and they are also levied by the insurance companies to provide their contribution to the fund. In fact, the rural owner is finding three-quarters of the cost of the busMre fighting equipment that is used by the volunteer brigades. I understand that insurance companies originally agreed to make a contribution to the bushfire fund in recognition of the great savings on claims made on them through ithe prevention of major fires and the efficient controlling of fires by the volunteer bushfire brigades. It would appear that through the application of the levy on premiums, which represents their full contribution to the fund, the insurance companies are not making any contribution to the fund in the real sense. I ask the Miniser in what way section 32 (1) (c) should apply? I realize that it can be argued that the insurance companies could pass on the extra cost by including it in the premium for insurance cover and not showing it as a levy. If they cannot be made to contribute out of general funds, I believe this would be preferable to the present practice. The main point that emerges from this situation is that as the cost of equipment increases as a result of inflation, the amount of money available buys only half the plant that it bought a couple of years ago. Under the Act the Minister decides the Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill-17 November, 1976 3049 amount of equipment that is needed. As the cost of the equipment increases, so the levy is automatically increased by shire and municipal councils and insurance companies. Only a proportion of landowners insure. The cost is being borne by that proportion on an increasing scale. If insurance companies will not make moneys available for this purpose from general funds, extra funds should be raised by increasing shire or muni- cipal rates so that all rural landowners and homeowners make an equal contributron for fire prevention. Efficient bushfire brigades have saved the community many millions of dollars each year. As they are all manned by volunteers, the contribution from the Treasury should be greatly increased. The Act provides that the Minister has the option of increasing the proportion paid by the Treasury. I support the bill.

The Hon. L. P. CONNELLAN [l1.351: People who have had some experience of the ravages of bushfires, as I have, will support the bill whole-heartedly. Having had personal experience with bushfires, I should not wish them on anybody. As the Hon. R. K. Evans said, there is grave danger in the tableland country from which he comes. Two years ago there were terrible bushfires in the western area of New South Wales. This season is another dangerous one for bushfires. The fuel position is serious and there will be danger in the coming months. Until 1958 no real provision was made for firefighting in the Western Division. This legislation will tidy up the position from the technical and legal point of view. I commend the Government for rectifying this matter. One or two of the fires that started two years ago were man-made. They were lit. I strongly support the penalty provisions of the measure. There is no doubt that penalties have been too light in terms of today's money values. I shall have something more to say about that aspect at a later date. I have had a bitter experience with bush- fires. In the bad fires in the Western Division 10 million acres were ravaged in a few weeks. Some of those fires extended for 250 miles. The entire population of that area, some 200 or 300 people, were involved in fighting the fires. With the winds often changing during the day and at night, these fires burnt for days and weeks. There were only a few people to fight a major outbreak. It is important to acknowledge the importance of factors such as maintenance of equipment. I do not disagree with the provision that this should be the responsibility of local councils. This will tidy up the existing position. It is important that the equipment be used and serviced regularly so that it will be in good order when a fire breaks out. It is of no use having a new pump or new radio if it is not serviceable. As the Hon. R. K. Evans said, worn out equipment is of no use. It is of no use also if it is not used regularly. Most of the firefighters are keen volunteers who look ahead and work on the equipment throughout the year. During the winter and in seasons when there is no possible fire danger, most of them use the equipment to some extent, and they keep in contact with local councils to ensure that the equipment is serviced. This applies not only to pumps and motors but also to communications equipment. Without good radio communications there is no hope of combating fires in the western part of the State. Even experienced firefighters who have done good work over the years must keep their communications alive and going. They are trying to get better sets and I hope they succeed. When fire danger conditions exist, inevitably the radio reception is bad. When we had a major outbreak of fire two years ago I had the responsibility of declaring under section 17 of the Act. It is possible to appeal to the State and federal Govern- ments for outside assistance, and I go on record now by saying that the assistance we received from the Civil Defence Organization on that occasion was outstanding. This is the organization under the control of Air Vice-Marshal Townsend-a most competent man. Even that organization could not give all the assistance we needed, so 3050 COUNCIL--Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill

we then sought and received great assistance from the man in the news at the moment. I refer to Major-General Stretton, who is the head of the federal Natural Disasters Organisation. Both he and the Premier came out there and provided assistance.

The federal organization provided aeroplanes and helicopters. The helicopters were of tremendous value because they provided a means of communication and direc- tion. This saved a tremendous amount of time, and probably saved several million acres between Cobar and Balranald. We were able to get closer contact with the fires, twelve, fourteen or fifteen of which were going hell for leather at the one time. With violent wind changes it became almost impossible to transfer men and equipment from one end of a £ire to the other because a fire might be 80 or 100 miles wide or long. This happened often.

I wish to emphasize that those serious fires to which I have been referring made it obvious to me that there is great strength in the submissions that were made by the Hon. R. K. Evans, who claimed that the most important element is to educate and train people in this field. Of course, this is happening, and the volunteers are keen and are doing a tremendous job.

On occasions in border districts, such as the one where I live, there are not only local volunteers for regular firefighting but also organizations from the State across the border. The firefighters in other States are trained and organized, but serious difE- culties arise because their modus operandi is different from ours. I shall tell honour- able members about a night that I shall never forget. A strong wind was blowing from the south, and the people from across the border were at the southern end of the fire. At the other end of the fire, about 65 or 70 miles away, we had nine men who had been working day and night, without sleep, for five days. They had equipment that they had patched up to keep going.

A strong gusty wind of 20 to 30 knots was blowing behind the fire. At the bottom end were fourteen units that had come over the *er from Victoria; they were well-equipped units and they were in good order, but they were not allowed to be separated to be sent to the dangerous part of the fire. A couple of our men who were working to the north of the fire coruld have looked after the fire at the southern end. I shall never forget the work that our men on the northern end put in. They retreated to an area known as the Walls of China, where they cut off that fire. It was a remarkable piece of work. They used shire graders, which we supplied, and they travelled through the night and showed the way with lights from trucks. In the end they beat the fire.

When these emergencies arise we need all the support we can get, not only from people in the area-which we get to a remarkable degree-but also from State and federal governments. Unfortunately these emergencies will undoubtedly arise again, and the State Government should make every provision to see that all possible assist- ance is given. There was remarkably little loss of life and buildings during the major fires to which I have referred, but I think this was attributable to the hard work and the coolness of the men and women concerned.

Insurance problems arise as a result of these fires, and I ask the Minister, if he g& any suggestions or appeals from people who are trying to solve problems associated with insurance of cmlmercial plant and vehicles used to fight fires-and much of this equipment costs many hundreds of thousands of dollars-tot give these matters every passible consideration. Difficulty has arisen in sorting out the problems under workers' The Hon. L. P. Connellan] Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill-17 November, 1976 3051 compensation and the other sections under which claims have been made for compensa- tion to people who have not only put ithemselves at risk but have also risked their plant and machinery. Indeed, some of them have literally beggared themselves by going to the aid of other people. Unfortunately, fires are no respecters of property or people; they have a habit of going where people do not expect them to go. However, when volunteers are willing to work and to take their tractors and plant--.maybe worth $20,000,$50,000 and more -and that plant is destroyed or damaged severely, the Government should do every- thing possible to see that they are compensated and their machines repaired. I support the bill. The Hon. F. M. MAcDIARMID 111.471: This is an important measure, for anyone who has experienced the trauma of fighting fires will understand how devastat- ing they can be to plant, livestock, the countryside and property. In supporting the bill I should like to mention the need for some attention to be given to the limited liability of the railways. About two1 decades ago in my area the fettlers approached the local landholders, through [the bushfire captain. They wished to burn off the area alongside the railway line, in conjunction with the landholders, which is normal practice and procedure. The bushfire captain was opposed to its being done that day, so the fettlers did it themselves. The fire got away from them, and it burned out a consider- able area. Under the existing legislation the Public Transport Commission has limited liability. Perhaps this would have been an opportune time, in view of inflation and other considerations, to increase that liab'ity limit. I ask lthe Minister to give some consideration to this aspect. I wholeheartedly support the request by the Hon. R. K. Evans for better public education. He appeared to be dealing mainly with country people, but I believe that this education should extend more into the populated city areas. Last January, when I was driving from Canberra to the South Coast, I stopped at a service station at Braid- wood-a town in which the Minister would be interested because it has just been decIared an historic trust town, the first to receive this distinction. When I was at the service station a young married couple from Victoria were asking the service station attendant where they could grill some chops. This was a time of total fire ban throughout the State; the temperature was high and a strong wind was blowing. I approached the young man and said, "For goodness' sake, don't start lighting a fire today". That was pure ignorance on the part of that young gentleman. I went further down the coast and, 10 and behold, going through timbered country I found a Queensland-regbtmed car pulled up beside the road and another young man collecting wood, obviously for the purpose of starting a fire to barbeque some meat. Again I told him that it was not a good idea to light fires, particularly when there was a complete fire ban. I give these illustrations to show that people need to be educated in the dangers of fires. As other honourable members have said, bushfires are almost dways man-made. There might be the odd exception, but the cause is usually a human being. One hears of fires being started by the sun's rays being reflected from broken glass and the like, but in my experience a bushfire can nearly always be traced to a human being some- where along the line. The community needs to be educated about how these fires occur, and the damage they can do. In the United States of America aircraft are used to put out bushfires. That is a costly operation, and probably if it were not for the cost we should move into that type of firefighting here. Basically the community is ignorant 3052 COUNCIL-Bush Fires (Amendment) Bill about the dangers of fire and I should like the Minister to take up with the appro- priate authorities the possibility of undertaking an education campaign to bring the dangers to the notice of the community, particularly before the long Christmas holiday break, which we are about to have, when people go on holidays in droves. The Hon. D. P. LANDA (Vice-President of the Executive Council and Minister for Planning and Environment) [11.51], in reply: I thank honourable members for their support of the bill and join with them in their praise of those in the bushfire organizations whose tremendous courage and voluntary effort often goes unheeded. Indeed, they do not seek praise. What they do is a glorious demonstration of the sort of spirit that unfortunately is diminishing with our increasingly urbanized way of life. It behoves us to reflect on the wonderful example given and Samaritan work done by these persons in times of crisis. I shall not dwell on other miatters in detail, for in essence all of them require the consideration of the Minister, and it would merely be taking up the time of the House too much to attempt to deal satisfactorily here with the various nuances of the matters that have been raised. The Hon. R. K. Evans spoke about the need to maintain firefighting equipment. The Government has left this matter within the discretion of each council, which will decide what methods it will adopt. The Government believes that that is the best solution as the council is the responsible body. Similarly, in relation to education of the public about bushfires, a point made forcefully by the Hon. R. K. Evans, the technical officers of the Bush Fire Council of New South Wales are available to assist and advise councils on this matter, and I understand that many councils take up the offer of assistance. Lectures are given to schoolchildren by representatives of the Bush Fire Council. Pamphlets are distributed, and so on. The object is to bring about in the public a greater awareness of the problems of bushfires and fire prevention. We even have a Fire Prevention Week in October of each year. I often think that we are a bit premature with the date. It would probably be better to have it in the hottest part of the year, about December. Newspapers are always hungry for news during the so-called silly season. If one could get into the media at that time a message about the seriousness of bushfires, it would be more effeotive, for children are then at home, and people are on holidays, with time to read the newspapers. I am sure that the Minister in another place responsible for these matters will take up the suggestions that have been made to ensure a better coverage of information about bushfires and their dangers. If we can get the message across to the public, there should be fewer tragedies. In relation to the liability placed on the rural landowner, a matter referred to by the Hon. N. M. Orr, I can say only that the contribution by the insurance companies, whichever way it is raised, in the end comes from the policyholder. If the insurance companies do not get you one way, they will get you 'another, whether it be by a 10 per cent levy, a 15 per cent levy, or disguised in the premium. I have long sought ways of beating the insurance companies at that game, and I think that the Government is no better off in that regard. This is a good bill. It will serve to heighten public awareness of and responsi- bility towards bushtires, and 'at the same time will encourage dedicated people engaged in the work of fighting bushfires for the benefit of the whole State. To that end the support of honourable members in this House will be heartening to persons who, as I said at the beginning of my remarks, only infrequently receive the kind of regard to which they are entitled. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time. Bush Fires Bill-Gaming and Betting Bill-17 November, 1976 3053

Committee and Adoption of Report Bill reported from Committee without amendment, and report adopted, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa.

GAMING AND BETTING (AMENDMENT) BILL

First Reading Bill received from the Legislative Assembly and, on motions by the Hon. D. P. Landa, read a first time and ordered to be printed.

House adjourned, on motion by the Hon. D. P. Landa, at 12.2 a.m., Thursday.