21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1503
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
Thursday, 21 March, 1991
Mr Speaker (The Hon. Kevin Richard Rozzoli) took the chair at 10.30 a.m. Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.
BILLS RETURNED The following bills were returned from the Legislative Council without amendment: Constitution (Legislative Council) Amendment Bill Constitution (Referendum) Bill
PETITIONS
Chullora High-temperature Incinerators Petition praying that the House reject the proposal to construct two high-temperature incinerators at 75 Anzac Street, Chullora, received from Mr Shedden.
Albion Park Rail Pedestrian Crossing Petition praying that a pedestrian crossing be established on Tongarra Road, Albion Park Rail, in the vicinity of the Albion Park Rail Public School, received from Mr Rumble.
Albion Park Rescue Helicopter Service Petition praying that the House ensure that the rescue and emergency helicopter service stationed at Albion Park and serving the communities of the South Coast be retained at its present level of service, received from Mr Rumble.
Rockdale-Banksia Traffic Petition praying that the House reject the proposals of the Roads and Traffic Authority for Rockdale and Banksia, received from Mr Unsworth.
Pacific Highway Roadworks Petition praying that the House request the Minister for Roads to honour the promise to complete work on the Swansea S-bends by 1991, received from Mr Welsh.
Rockdale Police Station Petition praying that full police services be maintained at Rockdale police station, received from Mr Unsworth. 1504 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1993
Royal Agricultural Society Showground Petition praying that the House will prevent the sale by the Government of foreshore and public parklands, including the Royal Agricultural Society Showground, the E. S. Marks Athletic Field and part of Moore Park, and that residents be included on their administrative bodies, received from Ms Moore.
Woolloomooloo Finger Wharf Petition praying that public money not be wasted demolishing the structurally sound finger wharf and establishing a walkway on the western side of Woolloomooloo Bay but instead that basic renovations be carried out on the wharf and an integrated multimedia arts centre be established, received from Ms Moore.
Mater Dei Catholic High School Bus Service Petition praying that because the bus service from the North Head, Noraville and Toukley areas to the Mater Dei Catholic High School is grossly inadequate and inappropriate, the House and the Minister for Transport will intervene, received from Mr H. F. Moore.
Toukley Ambulance Station Petition praying that the Minister for Health ensure that paramedics are retained at the Toukley ambulance station, received from Mr H. F. Moore.
Offences Against Children Petition praying that an investigation be made concerning claims that child sex offenders are being acquitted, and sentences of convicted child sex offenders be reviewed to see whether they should be substantially increased, received from Mr Rumble.
Adult Leisure Learning Centres Petition praying that annual grants to adult leisure learning centres be maintained at least at 1990 levels, received from Mr Unsworth.
Police Rescue Units Petitions praying that the House call upon the Premier and the Government to refrain from disbanding police rescue units in New South Wales, received from Mr Hunter and Mr Mills.
Bulli District Hospital Petition praying that proposals for the redevelopment of the Bulli District Hospital be commenced immediately and that full district hospital services be provided as a matter of priority, received from Mr Rumble. 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1505
Swimming Pools Petition praying that because the Swimming Pools Act has failed to achieve its objectives, the House amend the Act by revoking the requirements in respect of fencing swimming pools and deleting section 13 of the Act, received from Miss Fraser.
Casinos Petition praying that the Government will take no steps that will legalise casinos and further expand gambling and organised crime in New South Wales, and that the Government will close existing illegal casinos, received from Mr White.
Blacktown Bus Services Petition praying that consideration be given to redressing the grievances arising out of the rerouting of the bus lines and the increasein fares by theLeslies Bus Company at Blacktown, received from Mr J. J. Aquilina.
Mount Ousley Road Safety Petition praying that the House take urgent steps to provide additional safety infrastructure on the Mount Ousley Road to allow out of control vehicles to vacate the main thoroughfare before they collide with other traffic or invade private houses, causing serious injury or death, received from Mr Markham.
ROYAL COMMISSION INTO PRODUCTIVITY IN THE BUILDING INDUSTRY OF NEW SOUTH WALES
Report Mr GREINER: I desire to lay upon the table the first interim report of the Royal Commission into Productivity in the Building Industry of New South Wales. I indicate briefly that the report suggests the appointment of an additional commissioner and the appointment of a task force to carry out prosecutions after the completion of the commission. The Government is happy with the progress of the commission and accepts the recommendations.
MINISTRY Mr GREINER: I wish to inform the House that the Minister for Health and Minister for Arts is away today. I will be answering questions on his behalf.
JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE UPON THE PROCESS AND FUNDING OF THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM First Report Mr Booth, as Chairman, brought up the First Report from the Joint Select Committee upon the Process and Funding of the Electoral System. Ordered to be printed. 1506 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Mr BOOTH (Wakehurst) [10.35], by leave: The report which I have tabled today is the first report of the Joint Select Committee upon the Process and Funding of the Electoral System. It addresses questions related to the operation of public funding of elections as it currently works. The report details 13recom.mendations to improve the current system, including the introduction of a universal threshold of 4 per cent of the first preference votes cast at an election of the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council in order to qualify for public funding. This proposal is the same as applies in the Federal system and would bring public funding into line with the new system of qualification for return of deposits to candidates which was included in amendments to electoral legislation passed by this Parliament late last year. Our second report will address all the issues related to disclosure of donations, election spending and various other matters-including numerous proposals about different types of limitations in election spending-which have been tried overseas and are currently the subject of much discussion and dispute here. It was in order to commence this review that recently some members of the committee completed a study tour to the United States of America and Canada. I point out, as there was some criticism of this tour, that our committee not only has completed a most exhaustive study of numerous options used in North America but also has the best and most extensive collection of information, reports and studies available in this country. Indeed, we are now being approached for assistance by such groups as Parliament House in Canberra and the Australian Electoral Commission. Public hearings in relation to the subject-matter of this second report will commence on Monday, 8th April.
REGULATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
Eleventh Report
Mr Cruickshank, as Chairman, brought up the Eleventh Report from the Regulation Review Committee.
Ordered to be printed.
Mr J. H. Murray: Mr Speaker, as a member of the Select Committee on the Process and Funding of the Electoral System I want to-
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Leave has not been granted for any statement other than the statement of the honourable member for Wakehurst. It is not within the standing orders or the procedures of the Parliament for the honourable member to speak on the matter. I have consulted the Clerk, who has confirmed this.
Mr J. H. Murray: On a point of order-
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have ruled on the matter. I have sought the advice of the Clerk. The Clerk has advised me that the honourable member is not able to speak on the matter at this time. The honourable member will not canvass my ruling on the matter. 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1507
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
STATE BANK FINANCIAL STANDING Mr CARR: Will the Premier, Treasurer andMinister for EthnicAffairs inform the House of the current financial position of the State Bank, following its regular briefings to him? Is the level of bad debts the same as that described in the bank's last annual report? Will he request the Auditor-Generalto immediately bring forward his report on the bank's financial position and examine any change since the bank's 1989-1990accounts? Mr GREINER: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question which, as usual, is eminently predictable, and in this case responsible. I thank him for the responsible way in which he framed the question. The State Bank of New South Wales is performing considerablybetter not only than State banks in other States-which would be damning with faint praiseindeed-but isperforming very comparably with all the banks with which it competes-in other words the nationally operating banks. In terms of the precise level of non-performing loans, the State Bank issued a statement a month or more ago which put the level at of the order of $800 million. I would be happy to have the bank reaffirm that today. I think the underlying point of the question of the Leader of the Opposition concerns a report in the news services today that Nippon Investors Service Inc., which is one of the Japanese bond rating agencies, has downgraded the rating of the State Bank of New South Wales. It is important that all members of this House, regardless of their views of the future of the bank, support the State Bank and its importance to the State. The reason for the decision has nothing to do with the StateBank of New South Wales and everything to do with the Government of Australia. I should like to read to the House from a letter sent by the managing director of Nippon Investor Service Inc., dated 14th March, in which he advised of the change in grading from AA+ to AA, and stated: The major reason for such a downgrading is that our implicit sovereign rating for the Commonwealth of Australia has been lowered from AA+ to AA, taking into consideration such factors as (a) serious economic downturn characterized with high unemployment rate and increasing number of corporate failures, and (b) worsening external position as a result of persistent current account deficits. As you already recognize, our basic principle is that no bond can carrya rating ranking higher than the implicit sovereign rate rating applicable to the country of the bond issuer. In other words, in simple terms, because Australia has been downgradedthey take the view, as a matter of principle, that no bond issued by any bank or institution in the country-Australia, in this case--can be a higherrating thanthat of the Commonwealth. Therefore, the bank has been downgraded. As the Leader of the Opposition suggests in his question, it is true that for perfectly obviousreasons, given the state of banking in Australia, I have regular meetingsand briefings with members of the board, both the chairman of the audit committee and of the other committee, as well as with the managing director, the secretary and the chairman of the bank. For the half year to the end of March, the bank expects to record a very reasonable profit. That profit will be announced in due course, perhapsabout the end of May. [Interruption] 1508 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Mr GREINER: Do I know what day it is? Yes, I do. I know all the dates. The position is straightforward. The bank's profit results from last year obviouslywere well down on those of the previous year, as were the results of every other bank in Australia. It is important to note that the State Bank of New South Wales is dramaticallydifferent from the State banks in other States because it has not indulged in the lending binge in which the other banks were involved. We do not have a Beneficial Finance or a Tricontinental. Mr J. H. Murray: You can thank the Labor Party for that. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Icall the honourable memberfor Drummoyne to order. Mr GREINER: The honourable member for Drummoyne cannothelp himself. He said that we can thank the Labor Party that we do not have a Beneficial Finance or a Tricontinental. He ought to ask the people of Victoria what they thank the Labor Party for. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call honourable member for Drummoyne to order for the second time and remind him of the exhortation I gave to the Chamber about members endeavouring to debate matters. Mr GREINER: I will not go onabout the Labor Party in the other States because the story is known well enough to everyone. It is more than the normal asinine objection that comes from the honourable member for Drummoyne to say that we can thank the Labor Party for anything associatedwith good management anywhere in Australia. That is simply a contradiction in terms and the hollourable member for Drummoyne knows it. My last point concerns the growth rates of the various banks. I shall quotesomething that was said by Mr Turner, the secretary of the State Bank, this morning on ABC national radio. Mr Turner said:
I think one of the most telling statistics you can have is through the latter part of the 80s boom when the four nationally operating banks were growing at 18 per cent per annum. The State Bank of South Australia grew at 37 per cent per annum and the State Bank of Victoria grew at 29 per cent per annum. Here in New South Wales the State Bank grew at 16 per cent per annum.
In other words the growth rate of the State Bank of New South Wales was the lowest of all the major banks in Australia, whether State banks or other. That underlines the conservatism of the approach that had been taken by the State Bank's management. The point the honourable member for Drummoyne was trying to make was that the management of the State Bank of New South Wales has been conservative over a period longer than that of the term of office of this Government. If that is what the honourable member wants me to concede, I am perfectly happy to do that. The State Bank has had the same management, so I can hardly suggest it has had a change of heart. I have never criticised it, even when I was Opposition leader. I never criticised the management of the State Bank during the couple of years up to 1985, either. I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. The State Bank of New South Wales is in a perfectly sound financial position. There is absolutely no basis for any doubt about its financial credibility. It will record a reasonable profit, comparableto the profits of the other major nationally operating banks for the half year to the end of March. 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY
WORKPIACETOBACCO SMOKING Mr BERRY: My question without notice is to the Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Further Education, Training and Employment. Is the Minister aware of public concerns about smoking in the workplace? [Intemption] Mr SPEAKER:Order! Honourable members will hear the question in silence. Mr BERRY: What action has the Minister taken to ensure a balanced community debate on this sensitive issue? Mr FAHEY: There is concern about this issue. It is not new; it is an issue that the Government has addressed in the past. It is important to consider rational reform of this issue through sensible debate. Honourable members would know that a voluntary code has been adopted by many government agencies and a number of large companies whereby in certain workplaces smoking is banned. It is timely to review that voluntary code. I draw the attention of honourable members to the fact that the Government and I consider that debate on this issue ought to be confined to the effects of passive smoking. It is important that I outline to the House and to the public some of the wide ramifications of this issue. They cover such matters as the impact of passive smoking on the health and productivity of people working in places such as aluminium factories and in confined spaces. If smoking is banned in the workplace, will it result in workers wandering hourly out of buildings into the street throughout the day to smoke? The definition of workplace is extraordinarily wide. It covers the boundary rider sitting on a horse or a motor bike west of Bourke and the rigger working on the Harbour Bridge. Is it appropriate to ban smoking in those particular workplaces? The legal implications must be considered and whether it is appropriate for the Government to let the courts determine the matter. More particularly, it is important to acknowledge that there are massive financial implications in any action that might be taken by any government. Is it necessary for workplaces to be reorganised, to be constructed differently merely to cover the fact that smoking may or may not take place? That cost cannot be underestimated, nor can the ramifications of redesigning buildings. The concerns about smoking in the workplace go further than the issue of health. Those concerns ought to be addressed rationally and include the widest possible consultation. Submissions and points of view from such organisations as the Australian Hotels Association and publicans ought to be included. A distinction should be made between public places and workplaces, and whether a restaurant is a public place. The effects of passive smoking on spectators attending a football match at the Sydney Football Stadium on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon must also be considered. I simply say that the concern will be addressed rationally, responsibly, quietly and in the fullness of time. I have asked the appropriate authority, in this instance the Workcover Authority responsible for workplace health and safety in this State, to release a wide-ranging discussion paper and to ask all members of the public, employers, unions and other interested parties to give the Government their views so that the full weight of all views can be taken into account in a responsible manner. In reference to the story in the DaiZy Telegraph Mirror of which the Leader of the Opposition has 1510 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991 reminded me, that newspaper got one thing right: Cabinet authorised the release of a discussion paper. It was the only recommendation that Cabinet was asked to consider-a wide-ranging discussion paper to allow a full consultative process. That will occur and the Government will not ignore the issue. It will look at it sensibly, responsibly and rationally. All of the implications will be taken into account before any action is taken. The action that is taken will be responsible, as are all actions taken by this Government.
HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR GLADESVILLE WITNESS SUBORNATIONCOMPLAINT Mr WHELAN: My question without notice is directed to the Attorney General. Has a Sydney magistrate formally complained that the honourable member for Gladesville attempted to influence a witness in a recent drug case involving the sale of drugs? Did the magistrate recommend to him that the evidence revealed that the honourable member should be prosecuted for attempting to pervert the course of justice? Why has he chosen to suppress any further action until after the next State election? Mr DOWD: A matter was referred to me by a Sydney magistrate concerning the honourable member for Gladesville. Immediately it came to my hand I referred the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions and asked that the matter be dealt with expeditiously as it involved a person in public office. He, in turn, has referred the matter to the police for investigation. There has been no delay on my part or on the part of any Minister in relation to the matter, and such an imputation cannot be justified. Mr Whelan: When did you refer it? Mr DOWD: To answer the second part of the honourable member's question, I referred the matter on either the day I received it or the following day. [Intemption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Ashfield to order. He has asked the question and he will listen to the answer in silence. Mr DOWD: To the best of my recollection it was sent immediately. I do not take instructions from anyone and the honourable member should not lightly say he does not believe me on the matter.
WESTERN SYDNEY LAND DEVELOPMENT Mrs COIIEN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Housing. Is the Minister aware of the reported call by the honourable member for Wentworthville for a moratorium on land development in Sydney's west? In view of the Government's stated policy of providing more housing for low and middle income earners, what action is proposed in relation to the suggested moratorium? Mr SCHIPP: I appreciate receiving this question from the ever alert human dynamo from the west in the form of the honourable member for Minchinbury. I should like to thank also the honourable member for Penrith, who is equally as energetic and dedicated to his area, for having raised this matter with me. I appreciate the high billing 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1511 given to the question. I have a suspicionthat it is in recognition of another great moment in the calendar of events in New South Wales. I thank those honourable members opposite who were kind enough to send me cards and letters and telephone me for my birthday. Honourable members can imagine the excitement I felt yesterday when I answered a call on my private telephone line to hear, "Hello Joe, it's Sandra here". I thought, "Sandra has remembered my birthday but she is a day early". She did not mention birthdays; but she concluded the call with the well-known catch-cry,"Good on you, Joe". The matter of a moratorium on housing growth in the west has been raised. We have had the lightweight honourable member for Camden running around, making statements. When questioned by people in the west, he said, "Look, I am only being political". [Intemption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! The House will come to order and the Minister for Housing will answer the question. [Intemption] Mr SCHIPP: I go to the west and I hear everywhere that comment, "Good on you, Joe", acknowledging that people are being housed. The honourable member for Camden was honest enough to admit he was merely causing political trouble. However, I was concerned to hear the honourable member for Minchinbury being quoted assaying that she also endorsed the moratorium. When I got hold of this document purporting to be the Labor Party policy on planning and environmental matters forthe west, one can imagine that the first matter I wished to read related to the moratorium. I note that it says here, "Bob Carr cares". Bob Carr cared so little that he did not even attend the launch of this document. He went missing. I can understand fully the embarrassment of the Leader of the Opposition in disowning this document because he was one of the architects of the growth of the west, without any studies being conducted. The first item in the document is a short resume of the location of suburbs in the west, intended for use by honourable members opposite because they disowned the west; they lost their way in the west. I am sure the honourable member for Wentworthville intended to say, "AGregory'sStreetDirectolyis included withthis document",which honourable members opposite would need to find their way to the west. Mr J. H. Murray: On a point of order. I submit that the Minister's comments are not in answer to the question asked and should be ruled to be a policy statement. Mr SPEAKER: Order! No point of order is involved. Mr SCIIIPP: If the honourable member had heard the Premier's comments on housing addressed to the great numbers of people present at the breakfast held by the Minister for Transport, he would have learned all the good news about housing. The item in the document dealing with the moratorium is right up front on page two. It states: "In the short term it is simplyimpractical to restrain the growth ofwestern Sydney. The immense pressures on Sydney's housing marketwill not permit this approach". That is total honesty and a fact of life. Neither the honourable member for Wentworthville, the honourable member for Camden, the honourable member for Campbelltown nor anyone else can say that they can stop the growth. The damage that would cause to economic growth and the homelessness it would create in this city really makes a farce 1512 ASSEMBLY 21March, 1991 of what the honourable member for Wentworthville said publicly. She could not have meant it, as this document makes clear. The only other matter mentioned is the imposition of a moratorium while some type of an authority is established for the Nepean and Hawkesbury river areas. [Intermption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member forLondonderry to order. Mr SCHIPP: The honourable member for Wentworthville knows that the Minister for Environment already has in place, to start on 1st July, the total catchment management plan involving all parties and all stake-holdersin thewest. She knows that document is a hoax, a lie and an ignorance of the processes in train. The document can be taken apart chapter and verse. I cannot describe it as rubbish because it is more or less a counterfeit of what the Government is doing in many areas. It is a resume of what actually happens in this State and is a hoax on the people of the west that there will be great changes made to the way that local environmental plans and regional environmental plans are administered. It is a total encapsulation of what happens now. Therefore it is dishonest and misleading. We are told that urban consolidation is one solution. We all know that, but where were you people when the legislation we tried to introduce to give some hope to urban consolidation was blocked in the upper House? You are not fair dinkum, and you know it. The honourable member for North Shore ought to ask questions because she deliberately stated that she would impose urban consolidation upon the North Shore. That is the only area she named. What about the inner ring suburbs? What about naming some of those suburbs and telling the people of the inner west what she would do there? Would she stand over the top of local government? What would she do? All she has done is to raise questions and leave them up in the air, with no solutions. This document is a total hoax with regard to what you people would do. It is not worth the paper it is written on. [Intemption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member forWaverley to order. Mr SCHIPP: It tells gross, misleading lies. The document states that the two main council areas, Blacktown and Baulkham Hills, had not been communicated with about the northwest sector. What is the local environmental plan process about? Why did it continue for a frustrating 18 months? [Intermption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wentworthville to order. Mr SCHIPP: At the time the document was produced, the Blacktown LEP had been through all council procedures, returned to the Department of Planning and processed. In 10 days it will be approved. Baulkham Hills councilis within a few days of returning its document to the Department of Planning for processing. I hope that the Minister for LocalGovernment and Minister for Planningwillreceive this document 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY and treat it for what it is, a hoax on the people of the west. You have no intention of imposing a moratorium. You have stated it cannot work. Only three areas in the Sydney bowl can be developed. [Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Minister for Environment to order.
Mr SCHIPP: We have taken the responsible decision to slow down the pace and to do the studies. We called for the CSIRO report. [Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wentworthville to order for the second time.
Mr SCHIPP: When your leader was Minister, he declared housing areas,with no studies. [Interruption]
Mr SCHIPP: You are very good at interjecting in a very narky and smart way but when it comes to good fun and banter you are so thinskinned.
Mr SPFXKER: Order! Matters should not be debated at question time by way of interjection. I askthe Minister to return to his answer. I ask the honourable member for Wentworthville to desist from interjecting.
Mr SCHIPP: In conclusion- [Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wentworthville to order for the third time.
Mr SCE-IIPP:We know the people in this Parliament who can give it but cannot take it. One sits right there.
Mr SPFAKER: Order! I direct the Minister to answer the question and not continue to debate interjections.
Mr SCHIPP: I was coming to the point that we have a member who has hoaxed the people.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I respect the tradition that has been followed in this Parliament for many years that a Minister, when answering a question, has the right to answer an interjection. However, I am concerned with the growing practice of interchange between a Minister and an interjector which goes beyond answering an interjection. I ask the honourable member for Wentworthville not to interject further. She has had three calls to order and she knows the consequences of further interjection. I ask the Minister to co-operateby desisting from further reflecting on any member of the Chamber and by completing his answer. 1514 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Mr SCHIPP: I was concluding by referring to the moratorium that is said to be Australian Labor Party policy. It is not practical, it is not part of the ALP policy, and it is a deliberate hoax on the people of the west. I deplore people who make such a statement, knowing that it will never be fulfilled.
CITYRAIL SPORTS FIXTURE SERVICES Mr WHITE: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier, and Minister Assisting the Treasurer. What is CityRail doing to encourage sporting fans to use trains to get to and from major sporting fixtures, particularly at weekends? Mr BAIRD: I thank the honourable member for Earlwood for his question and for his obvious interest in the promotion of the State Rail system. As every member knows, State Rail is getting it right, right, right. After years of neglect by the group opposite we are reforming the State Rail system. We are spending a total of $2.6 billion to transform our rail services into a world-class system that is the model to be followed by every rail system round Australia. As a result of the transformation I am sure that all honourable members who have a railway station in their elcctorate have been complimented on a significant improvement in standards since this Government was elected. There has been major improvement. We have spent $112 million on the upgrading program. At the end of January, 198 stations, including Lakemba station in the electorate of the honourable member, have been improved. The number will rise to 237 for the class of 1984 by the end of this financial year. The range of work includes painting and the provision of upgraded lighting, signs and seats. The public acknowledges what we are doing. As part of the upgrade we are looking at innovative ways of attracting passengers to rail services. Since this Government was elected, the level of rail passengers has increase by 12.5 per cent, and during that time the taxpayers of New South Wales have been saved more than $170 million. One scheme we are looking at is attracting patrons to use public transport to travel to sporting fixtures. Mr Moss: Like the Nightride service. Mr BAIRD: The Nightride service is a good illustration ofwhat this Government has done. You lot opposed it-every one of you. The honourable member for Canterbury led the charge and held meetings attended by about five people. The result is that since Nightride buses were introduced, after midnight patronage has tripled. The people of New South Wales are grateful for this safe service. Last year two million people attended rugby league games in New South Wales, and 1.6 million of them travelled to grounds that were near railway stations. If CityRail can win some of those sports fans, off-peak rail patronage would be boosted. For that reason, in the new rugby league season CityRail is promoting rail services for fans attending weekend fixtures. As part of the plan CityRail is negotiating with the New South Wales Rugby Football League on a variety of joint promotions. They will include the use of reciprocal promotional space at individual teams' home grounds and on CityRail stations, and the use by CityRail of league team emblems. At the suggestion of the Premier the painting of nominated stations in league team colours is also under way to promote those stations as individual teams' home stations. Following discussions with officials of the Western Suburbs Rugby Football 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1515
League Club, work has been completed at Leumeah railway station, which will be designated as the Magpies' home ground station, to be opened tomorrow in time for the Magpies' first home game of the season. The Leumeah project will be jointly funded by the football club and CityRail. Recent improvements at the station will be preserved, and new work will include glass panel stencils of noted players, the use of club emblems on station headboards and the provision of signs indicating the connection with the team. The scheme has attracted wide interest among rugby league officials and fans. The Illawarra Steelers have inquired about a similar promotion. I am sure that South Coast members would be highly supportive of that. [Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is far too much interjection. The Minister should be heard in silence. Mr BAIRD: CityRail is having discussions with the Penrith Panthers' officials about upgrading Penrith station. This is all part of a $105 million upgrading program that is about attracting passengers back to the rail system, revitalising public transport, and showing the taxpayers that this Government knows how to effectively manage the New South Wales public transport system. [Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Londonderry to order for the second time.
HONOURABLEMEMBER FORGLADESVILLE WITNESS SUBORNATIONCOMPLAINT
Mr WHELAN: I address a question without notice to the Attorney General with regard to the answer he gave to a question asked by me earlier this day. Will the Attorney give a full account to the House of the circumstances of the matter that I raised, and will he table all papers relating to it?
Mr DOWD: I am reluctant to take the point of order-and I do not do so-that the question is a supplementary question. As Isaid earlier, the matter has been referred to the Director of PublicProsecutions. I have not received a report from him. Ministers do not table material about matters being investigated by the Director of Public Prosecutions. When he reports to me on the matter I shall advise the House.
JAPANESE ORGANISED CRIMELN AUSTRALIA
Ms READ: I direct a question without notice to the Attorney General, representing the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Has his attention been drawn to a June 1987 report of the New South Wales Police Bureau of Criminal Intelligence entitled "Information Compiled to Determine the Probability of Japanese Organised Crime Incursion Into Australia"? Is he aware that that report states that Kumagai Gumi should become the subject of a major inquiry in its own right? Has such an inquiry ever taken place? 1516 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Mr DOWD: I take it that the "hewreferred to in the question is the Minister. My answer is: I do not know; the Minister has not told me. I shall make inquiries and advise the honourable member and the House in due course.
ABORIGINALLAND COUNCIL ELECTIONS Mr JEFFERY: I address a question without notice to the Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs. What action has the Government so far taken to honour its promise to give New South Wales Aborigines a direct say in the election of councillors to the Aboriginal Land Council? Mr GREINER: The question of the honourable member reflects the deep interest he has for the well-being of Aboriginal communities in Kempsey and- [Intemption] Mr GREINER: The young people in the gallery from St Josephs, Lochinvar, and Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, Kensington, must wonder at the reaction of the Opposition to a serious question about Aboriginal land rights and Aboriginal elections. The clowns on the front bench of the Opposition-those who purport to be the alternative government-immediately sought to make a joke of the question and trivialise an issue that one could not conceivably suggest was the subject of any fun. My mind boggles when I think of the honourable member for Waverley- [Intemption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Canterbury to order. Mr GREINER: The honourable member should go back to his bankrupt council. I welcome the opportunity to inform the House of the steps taken by the Government to implement the provisions of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Amendment) Bill and of some other recent initiatives in Aboriginal affairs. I say at the outset that, unlike the honourable member for Waverley, I should like to thank the honourable member for Keira. It is fair to say that the change in the progress of Aboriginal affairs in New South Wales has been on a bipartisan basis, and the shadow minister is to be commended for his role in that process. I commend also the honourable member for Strathfield who, as my parliamentary secretary, has done a great deal of work in this regard. In the spirit of ecumenicism, I commend also the Federal Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, with whom I do not agree on a whole range of philosophical issues. It is fair to say that a healthy bipartisan spirit has developed in Aboriginal affairs, and that has been of benefit to Aborigines and the State. Some of the suspicion that characterised the early consultations about the future of Aboriginal land rights in New South Wales has been allayed. There is now a sound working relationship between the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council and the Government. The same can be said of relationships within the Aboriginal community where a healing process is in progress. Some of the factionalism of the past is disappearing. It is in this spirit of consultation and co-operation that the Government is embarking on the next step-the implementation of the provisions of the bill that was passed in the latter part of last year. In this regard, although steady progress is being made, some delays have been experienced in finalising regulations. This has resulted in a delay in the holding of elections in which Aboriginal people will elect directly their 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1517 representatives to the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council. This is one of the major thrusts of the amendments introduced. One of the reasons for the delay is that, as was agreed, draft regulations were circulated to local Aboriginal land councils for comment and those comments are now receiving consideration. It is anticipated that the regulations will be gazetted at the end of this month and that elections conducted by the State Electoral Commission-not the elections about which the honourable member for Port Stephens keeps asking-will be held 75 days later, as provided for in the regulations. As a transitional measure, last October I extended the term of sitting councillors until elections could take place to ensure continuity and that the day-to-day functioning of land councils will not be affected. Last week I met with David Clark, the chairman of the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council, and with members of that council. I am pleased to report on a most constructive exchange ofviews on a number of important issues. The first issue about which views were exchanged was the Olympic Games bid. With regard to matters of that nature there has been a degree of resistance by the Aboriginal community to participate. One of the most significant outcomes of the meeting I referred to was the wholehearted support by the council for Sydney's bid for the Olympic Games. The council has assured me not only of its active support but also of its willingness to forcefully and enthusiastically participate in the lobbying process for the Olympic Games bid. Given the reality of the Olympic Games bid process, the active support of the Aboriginal people of New South Wales will be a significant advantage. Honourable members will be aware also of volume 3 of the Auditor-General's Report for 1989, which stated that 40 per cent of local land councils had failed to reach an acceptable level of accountability. Without doubt, prior to the amendments of last year concerns about lack of accountability were a major issue with respect to the operations of the Land Rights Act. The following steps have been taken, and I commend the council for these initiatives: an internal audit control office has been created; and the use of a uniform accounting system by all Aboriginal land councils has been made compulsory, which effectively will be controlled and policed on a monthly basis by the staff of the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council. An urgent task that councillors have set themselves, and a task which has engaged a great deal of their attention, is that of helping the many local Aboriginal land councils that were virtually non-functional to be up and running by the end of June this year. The amendments left intact the underlying structure of the three-tier Aboriginal land council system, but reallocated power between the three tiers with more decision-making and self-management at the local level devolving to local Aboriginal land councils. That initiative owes a lot to the input of land councils such as those in the electorate of the honourable member for Port Macquarie, where local Aborigines have said that they are willing to take a meaningful and responsible role so long as they have some real power in the structure. That power was not available to them under the previous arrangements. The revitalisation of local councils that is taking place at present is an essential part of the preparation of local land councils for the crucial role they will play in the economic and social advancement of their communities. I shall now refer to two other related matters of Aboriginal policy and programs. For some time the Commonwealth and State governments have been conscious of the need for greater co-ordination of their efforts to make programs more effective and ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1993 efficient. The Premiers' Conference of last October and a meeting of the Australian Aboriginal Affairs Council subsequent to that time addressed this issue. One outcome has been the establishment of a working party of senior officials representing Federal and State governments to review the delivery of programs and services to Aborigines and to try to reduce the amount of duplication and overlap that exists. That committee will meet for the first time in Sydney this month. Finally, I wish to draw attention to some criticism made a month or so ago by the Assembly of the World Council of Churches. At its meeting in Canberra the council chose to criticise conditions in remote Aboriginal communities. I am sure honourable members would concede-as would any person in government throughout Australia-that there is some validity in such criticism. On the other hand, however, it is fair to say that the Assembly of the World Council of Churches failed to give recognition to the real progress that has been achieved in recent times by governments of all persuasions. For example in the isolated region of Toomelah, as a matter of priority, Federal and State governments have addressed community needs and concerns by way of the provision of housing and health facilities and other infrastructure developments. Similarly, the Government stepped inwith an action plan to address the asbestos-related health concernsof the Aboriginal community in Baryulgil. On Friday, 22nd March, the honourable member for Strathfield and the Federal Minister for AboriginalAffairs will assist the Baryulgil community to assess the progress being made to address these health-relatedissues.
A major program that will address the priority needs of remote Aboriginal communities, which is getting off the ground this year, is the tripartite community infrastructure program, involving the Commonwealth and New South Wales governments, as well as the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council. This program is aimed at meeting the infrastructure needs of 46 Aboriginal communities, including that of Wilcannia which was the subject of one of the two reports by the World Council of Churches delegates. A little more than 7,000 Aboriginal people in these communities, some of which are former reserves, will benefit from this program, which will include the construction of access and internal roads, water and sewerage systems, garbage disposal provisions, electric power supply, recreation areas and housing. My Government has indicated that it will commit $2.25 million each year over the next four years to this program, and I expect matching funding from the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council to be forthcoming, as well as an allocation of $4.5 million from the Federal body, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. I thank the House for its indulgence in respect of and its attention to that run-down. As I said at the outset, I welcome the spirit of bipartisanship withwhich Aboriginal affairs is being approached. The road ahead is long. No one pretends that the problems have been overcome, but at least as a community we are heading in the right direction.
PREMIER'S NEW YORK VISIT
Mr LOVELEE: My question is addressed to the Premier, Treasurer andMinister for Ethnic Affairs. Was the Premier accompanied on his recent visit to New York by an officer of the Department of State Development, Miss Susie Jones, and an adviser to the Minister for State Development, Mr Geoff Deakin? Did Miss Jones stay in New 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1519
York for two weeks in a five-star hotel at a cost of $7,000? Did Mr Deakin fly out of Australia on a Friday, attend the New York lunch and immediately depart for a skiing holiday? Did these trips cost the Department of State Development about $110,000?
Mr GREINER: I am not aware of the detail of the question, but certainly Miss Jones was in New York. This practice of attacking public servants is not doing members of the Opposition any good. Whether the Leader of the Opposition wants to attack the Secretary to the Treasury or the Director-General of the Premier's Department, or whether the honourable member for Bass Hill wants to attack a middle level officer in the Department of State Development, it will do them precisely no good electorally or in any other way. To my knowledge it is true that Miss Jones was sent ahead of that mission. It was a mission for which the private sector paid to the tune of approximately $500,000 or $600,000. It was a mission which on any estimation was an outstanding success. Indeed, it was regarded as the best thing that anyone from Australia has done in New York in living memory. In showing my deep knowledge of this matter, it is fair to say that she did stay at the Pierre, which is where the conferencewas held. I suppose Opposition members would prefer that she stayed in Greenwich Village. I have no idea how much it costs to stay overnight at the Pierre; I assume it is not cheap. It is also the only place where she should stay, given that is where the conference was held, that is where the meetings were held and that is where I stayed. The people of New South Wales paid for my accommodation, and so they should have. I am not familiar with the details of the matter, beyond what I have said off the top of my head to the honourable member. I make absolutely no bones about the fact that the involvement of Department of State Development in that conferencewas highly successful. We now have in place a follow-up program which is gearedto following up the 500 or so people who came to the main event, the 200 who came to the luncheon, and the 250 who came to the State dinner, which was the only part of the trip that the State Government paid for. It cost the State Government about $100,000. What we are doing in terms ofstate development, in having the private sector take the initiative, lead these missions and pay the overwhelming majority of the money, is not only much more cost effectivethan what the Labor Party did, it is also the only way to get any real results. The question, which is the last question the honourable member will ever ask in this House, does him-
[Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr GREINER: The honourable member might ask one tomorrow. Who knows the date? He might ask one next time the House sits. I hope the honourable member will ask another question. It may not be the last question he will ask because the House will resume in a couple of weeks and, if the Leader of the Opposition has got no one better to give questions to than the honourable member for Bass Hill, the honourable member will be able to ask questions when the House resumes. I make no apologiesin respect of the trip to New York. It was very effective. I think the question is absurd. 1520 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Suspension of Standing Orders
Mr DOWD (Lane Cove), Attorney General [11.25]: I move: That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would preclude such interruptions of the order of the day for the resumption of the debate on the Address in Reply to permit consideration of business of the House notice of motion No. 1 and government business notice of motion No. 1.
Mr WI-IELAN (Ashfield) [11.26]: Government and Opposition members have been reading with great interest the discussion paper delivered by the Attorney General. I note that the Attorney General will be making some comments in the House today about this matter, and he has asked that I adjourn the debate. The paper has aroused a great deal of interest among Opposition members. It is hoped that when the Parliament resumes after the Easter break we will have a full and flowing debate on the matter, not fettered in any respect, because naturally we do not agree with all of the matters raised in the paper. For a decade the Parliament has been afraid to make a decision on some very important matters of privilege. This discussion paper provides an opportunity for the Parliament to involve itself in a long-term direction to finally resolve once and for all the matter of the privileges of members of Parliament. Though the Opposition will be adjourning the debate on the paper, I hope the Government will regard my comments as a quite sincere attempt to resolve the problems of privilege that relate to the Parliament and that are in evidence. But having looked right through the paper, Irealise that there is a great deal more to be said. I also ask the Attorney General to contact those members who are concerned about this matter, some of whom are still in the Parliament, for the purpose of preparing comments. The former Minister for School Education was a former chairman of the privileges commit.tee and is still active in political life. Members of the Government, when in opposition, were very active in the formulation of policy. The preparation of this document has cost the State's taxpayers a great deal of money. I can see no reason why they should not be supplied with a copy of the Attorney General's paper in order that they may also be represented, if only by way of written submission, in this Chamber.
Mr DOWD (Lane Cove), Attorney General [11.28], in reply: I thank the honourable member for Ashfield for raising this matter in the way that he has. It is the Government's intention that this paper be treated as a discussion paper which is intended to be, and obviously is, supplementary to the report of 1982. Obviously people both inside and outside the Parliament will have a great deal of interest in the matter. Indeed, I have tried to circulate it to the Bar Association and other interested groups outside the Parliament in order that they can have an input. It is my intention and the Government's intention that a full and free debate be allowed on the matter. We are, of course, only about six weeks from the end of this session, including the two reserve weeks that have been set aside. It may not be possible to complete the debate in that time. But certainly this paper is intended as a discussion provoker. It is intended that other matters will be brought forward as members see fit. The other report has been in existence for quite some time-since 1982. We are now trying to bring it into the Parliamentary arena. Whether the debate on this matter is completed in this session or in the budget session, we will allow as much time for that debate as is appropriate because 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1521 these are matters of great consequence to every member. I assure the House that the intention of the Government and my own intention accord with the stated views of the honourable member for Ashfield. Motion agreed to.
PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE DISCUSSIONPAPER
Mr DOWD (Lane Cove), Attorney General [11.30]: I move: That this House take note of the discussion paper entitled'!Parliamentaty Privilege in New South Wales" tabled on Tuesday, 19 March, 1991.
I speak today on a matter of great significanceto all members. As honourable members would be aware, on Tuesday, 19th March, I tabled in this House a discussion paper prepared by my department entitled "Parliamentary Privilegein New South Wales". The paper is intended to provide a basis for discussion concerning the procedures, privileges and powers of the New South Wales Parliament. As members may be aware, New South Wales stands alone among Australian jurisdictions as the only Legislature that has not sought to define its privileges and powers in specific legislation. New South Wales has been also the only Australian Parliament which has not legislated to provide powers to deal with contempt. The discussion paper which has been prepared by my department at my request examines in detail the recommendations of the joint select committee established by resolution of this Parliament in November 1982to review and report on whether any changes are desirable in respect of: (a) the law and practice of parliamentary privilege as they affect the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly, the members and committees of either or both Houses and other persons;
(b) the powers and procedures by which cases of alleged breaches of parliamentary privilege may be raised, investigated and determined.
The report, which was tabled on 26th September, 1985, contains 28 recommendations covering a wide range of issues relating to privilege and the powers of the Parliament. A full list of the recommendations is set out in my department's discussion paper. While not all recommendations containedin the report require specific enactment to come into effect, several proposals may be suitable for enactment in parliamentary privileges legislation for New South Wales. The joint select committee foresaw the need for a parliamentary papers and procedures Act to deal with the privileges and powers of this Parliament. Today I wish to examine some of the committee's recommendations examined in the discussion paper which are of particular significance to all members. I shall concentrate upon those recommendations of the committee which foresaw the need for legislative action, which should form the basis for ensuing debate in this House.
I should also note at this juncture that written submissions as to the matters raised in the paper are welcomed by all members, and should be addressed to the secretary of my department by 15th April. The threshold question in any consideration of a possible parliamentary papers and proceduresAct is, of course, whether any such legislation is necessary to define the privileges and powers of Parliament. As I have mentioned, the privileges of the New South Wales Parliament are uncertain. The New South Wales Parliament is the only one in Australia which has not legislated to provide 1522 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991 powers to deal with contempt. At the time of the committee's inquiry, the then Solicitor General-now Justice Mary Gaudron-advised that in the absence of any specific legislation, the New South Wales Parliament has only the following privileges: I. such powers and privilegesas are impliedby reason of necessity;
2. such privileges as were imported by the adoption of the Bill of Rights by the Imperial Acts Application Act 1969;
3. such privilege as is conferred by the Defamation Act, 1974;and
4. such privilege as is conferredby other legislationsuch as the ParliamentaryEvidence Act 1901 and the Public Works Act 1912. Apart from the limited privilege conferred by legislation, the scope of Parliament's powers is unclear. At the time of her advice the former Solicitor General maintained that the power available to Parliament by reason of necessity is "what is reasonable under present-day conditions and modern habits of thought to preserve the existence and proper exercise of the functions of [Parliament] as it now exists". In the absence of any specific provision, the generality of this principle would appear to require that the courts will be the final arbiters of what powers and privileges vest in the New South Wales Parliament as of necessity. Furthermore, recent decisions of the courts have also cast doubt upon the extent of the privilege available to Parliament under article 9 of the Bill of Rights. Article 9 of the Bill of Rights declares that "proceedings in Parliament ought not be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament". In a number of recent cases, New South Wales courts have cast some doubt upon the scope of the application of the Bill of Rights in this State. In order to overcome the manifest uncertainties which currently exist as to the privileges and powers of Parliament, the joint select committee recommended that Parliament legislate to confirm the privileges and powers of the Parliament today and what they have been since the establishment of responsible government in this State. The committee further recommended that the Constitution be amended to place beyond doubt that the powers, privileges and immunities of the Houses of the New South Wales Parliament are those of the House of Commons as at 1856. This recommendation reflected the committee's intention to bring New South Wales into line with the majority of other State Parliaments which have enacted parliamentary privilege legislation. In Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia the Parliaments adopted, by specific enactment, the powers exercised by the House of Commons as part of the establishment of representative government in the mid-nineteenth century. While the historical significance of the date 1856 is acknowledged, it may be argued that the adoption of the powers of the House of Commons as at a date last century does introduce uncertainty and ambiguities as to the extent of privileges claimed. It may be preferable to choose a more recent date than 1856 as the privileges of the then House of Commons are not easily discernible and have in some respects been amended or partially repealed by consequential legislative action. A further question which needs to be considered is whether it is appropriate in 1991 to adopt by specific enactment the extensive powers and privileges of the House of Commons of nearly 150 years ago, many of which evolved by virtue of long usage and prescription relating to that Parliament's ancient judicial function and many of which have since been abrogated or amended by the House of Commons or by the British 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1523
Parliament in the intervening period. It is acknowledged that the State Parliament has a constitutional foundation in the Parliament at Westminster and that other States have incorporated reference to the privileges of the House of Commons in their Constitutions. However, while it may be claimed that adoption of these historical privileges would bring New South Wales into conformity with other Australian States and the Commonwealth, it can be observed that the various States' assertion of powers and privileges is in no way uniform, with States having made specific provisions as circumstances necessitated. Honourable members will need to give careful consideration to the difficulties and uncertainties which would arise as a result of adopting principles based on the law and custom of an ancient and unique legislature. A statutory enactment asserting the authority of ancient and ambiguous privileges may not be as beneficial in terms of providing real protection as reference to specific rights and privileges.
The committee's report also recommended that extensive legislative codification of privileges would not be necessary. This is consistent with the approach that has been taken in other Australian jurisdictions. There is no doubt that any attempt to provide exhaustively for the privileges of the New South Wales Parliament would be likely to reduce the flexibility of Parliament to accommodate its needs as they arise. The joint select committee also recommended the enactment of specific legislation to physically define the precincts of the Parliament and to vest their control in the Presiding Officers. There is no statutory definition of the New South Wales parliamentary precincts, and in the absence of specific legislation there is little agreement evident in decisions of the courts as to the exact scope of the term precincts, though the balance of opinion would appear to support a meaning of "in the parliamentary buildings". As honourable members would be aware, the main function of a statutory definition of precincts is in relation to provisions defining the scope and extent of Parliament's authority over its precincts. Under the common law the Speaker-and similarly the Deputy-Speaker-has power to maintain and preserve order in the House and its precincts. In this Parliament he does that with skill, discernment and fearlessness. The power is also reflected in the standing orders.
In their consideration of legislation that would provide Presiding Officers with absolute authority over access to parliamentary precincts, honourable members should not discount the potential of such authority to place Parliament outside the established rule of law in New South Wales. To deny the inherent authority of the State law enforcement agencies to have access to parliamentary precincts in accordance with their statutory authority would be to grant Presiding Officers powers that potentially greatly exceed those required to maintain the order and decorum necessary for the Parliament to fulfil its functions. The discussion paper on parliamentary privilege in New South Wales raises a number of important issues relating to the scope of protection available to statements by members within the precincts of Parliament in a number of different circumstances. The joint select committee recommended in 1985 that absolute privilege should attach to quotation &om galley proofs of Parliamentary Debates where that quotation was made before the production of the final pamphlet form. The committee also recommended that absolute privilege should attach to the bona fide use of photocopies of these galley proofs. 1524 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
As honourable members would be aware, the Defamation Act 1974 provides that Hansard reports are subject to absolute protection. However, the Crown Solicitor has advised that although there are arguments, based upon section 17 of the Defamation Act 1974 and article 9 of the Bill of Rights, that the various forms of Hansard would be absolutely protected, there are some doubts as to whether these arguments would always be successful. The scope of absolute privilege under the Defamation Act is very narrow, and it would appear that the Act would not afford a defence of absolute privilege to copies of galley pulls made by Hansard officers and distributed to members. There is no doubt that a defence of qualified privilege is at present available under the Act in these circumstances, and this may be considered to be adequate. There may be arguments for not wishing to encourage wide distribution of galley proofs, which could be subject to major and substantive textual correction.
The committee recommended also that absolute privilege should attach to extraction by the Government Printer of members' speeches for reproduction in limited pamphlet form for members, provided that a certificate be enclosed with such reproductions stating the date of the debate from which the extract is taken, the name of the bill and the nature of the debate during which the speech was made and the statement that it has been published under the authority of the New South Wales Parliament. At present it is unlikely that absolute privilege attaches to extracts from a debate, although such extracts do attract qualified privilege under section 25 of the Defamation Act provided that they form "a fair extract or fair abstract from, or fair summary of, any such document or records". A number of arguments exist in favour of amending the Defamation Act to extend absolute privilege to members, the Government Printing Service and the Editor of Debates in respect of reprints of excerpted speeches.
As the speeches sought to be reproduced are texts already printed in Hansard and as the relevant proceedings of Parliament would have received full media coverage by the time the Government Printer has prepared the extract, the application ofabsolute privilege would be appropriate in those circumstances. Furthermore, the distribution of excerpted material would be limited to the number of copies printed and the ability of the member printing the material to distribute them. However, it will be important for honourable members to consider that the application of absolute privilege in these circumstances would enable excerpts involving only one speaker's contribution to be distributed. These kinds of excerpts may not form a fair extract of proceedings in circumstances where defamatory allegations are made and relevant responses are not included in the excerpts.
Another important recommendation of the joint select committee dealt with the production of Hansard or other formal records of the Parliament in court as proof of what is contained in them. The procedure which is usually followed, based on standing orders derived from the practice of the House of Commons, requires that parties seeking to produce Hansard or other official records in court proceedings present a petition to the relevant House seeking leave. The New South Wales Supreme Court held, however, in Mundey v. Askin, reported in Volume 2 of the 1982 New South Wales Law Reports at page 369, that the fact of what was said in Parliament may be proved in court by the tender of a Hansard report and that production without a certificate does not involve a 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1525 breach of parliamentary privilege. It may also be queried whether litigants should be burdened with the requirement of approaching the Clerk of the appropriateHouse for the provision of a certified copy of Hansard. Production of Hansard also raises the larger question as to the scope of protection offered by article 9 of the Bill of Rights. Though there is little doubt that article 9 of the Bill of Rights, to which I have referred previously, was adopted as law in New South Wales, there is judicial controversyas to the scope of its application to the use in civil or criminal proceedingsof statements made in Parliament by members and duly recorded in Hansard. Although it has long been accepted that reliance may be placed uponHansard in thejudicial interpretationof legislation, it wouldbe appropriate for considerationto be given to how best to avoid interferencewith this reliance while upholding the principle set out in article 9 of the Bill of Rights that the proceedings of Parliament shouldnot be questioned in any court or place outside Parliament. The Commonwealth Government has incorporatedthis principle in legislation, and it may be that a similar provision would be appropriate in this State. The joint committee recommended also the application of absolute privilege to tape recorded material held by the Editor of Debates and recorded under the authority of the Parliament, and to broadcasts of the words used in each of the Chambers within the precincts of the Parliamentby methods authorisedby the Presiding Officers. At present there would appear to be some doubt as to whether absolute privilege attaches to authorised tape recordings of witnesses' evidenceat parliamentary committeehearings. Although the Crown Solicitor has advised that it is likely that such recordings already attract absolute immunity,express legislationto this effect would be required to put the matter beyond doubt. Similarly, it would appear that specific provision would need to be made to confirm that the authorised use of tape recorded excerpts of debates broadcast within the precincts of Parliament is protected by absolute privilege. In 1985 the joint select committee recommended that the various provisionsof the Defamation Act 1974 relating to parliamentary proceedings together with the Parliamentary Papers(Supplementary Provisions)Act 1975 and its various amending Acts should be repealed and their provisions, as amplified or modified by the recommendations of the committee, be incorporated in a parliamentary papers and proceedingsAct. Thecommittee felt that therewould be benefit in gathering thevarious existing provisions relating to parliamentary papers, and any new legislationwhich may eventuate fromthe committee's inquiry, into one Act, which would form an easy source of reference for members. Although that point is accepted, this benefit mustbe weighed against the utility of retaining all statutory provisions dealing with defamation within the oneAct. In terms of access to current legislation,it may be also argued that a greater number of people would resort to and rely on the Defamation Act 1974 than to any proposed parliamentary privilege Act, and the needs of members could potentiallybe served by preparation of a pamphlet or handbook containing alllegislative provisions relevant to their activities as parliamentarians. Consideration may be given to legislating to extend absolute protection to the Presiding Officers and thosewho prepareor publish parliamentary documents, evidence or reports under the authorisation of the Presiding Officers, with consequential amendments that may also be necessary to extend the protection offered by the Defamation Act in this regard. The final major issue relating to privilege that the 1526 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991 committee considered involves the application of absolute privilege to communications between a member and a Minister and vice versa. The committee also recommended that all other distributional circulation of such correspondence be covered only by qualified privilege. At present neither the Defamation Act nor the Bill of Rights provide immunity against liability for defamatory remarks that may be contained in representations from a member of Parliament to a Minister on behalf of constituents. There have been a number of occasions in recent years when a member of the New South Wales Parliament has been threatened with legal action on the grounds of remarks contained in such a letter. The committee's view was that absolute privilege should attach to correspondence between members of Parliament and a Minister of the Crown relating to the responsibilities of the member as a member of Parliament and to the Minister's reply. In their consideration of the need for any legislative amendment to this effect, honourable members should also recognise that it may be undesirable to extend absolute immunity to a member who may maliciously and deliberately make a defamatory attack on another person. Such an amendment would extend the protections or privileges accorded to members in new directions. The joint select committee report devoted a considerable amount orspace to the establishment of privileges committees in each House and to the procedures of parliamentary committees. These aspects of the report are examined in detail in the discussion paper which has been prepared by my department. Although the majority of the joint select committee's recommendations in this regard did not anticipate the need for specific legislative provision, its report did not recommend that witnesses before committees of the New South Wales Parliament be provided with protection from self-incrimination relating to indictable offences, by means of an amendment to section ll(1) of the Parliamentary Evidence Act 1901. Section 11 of the Act provides a penalty of imprisonment for refusal to answer any lawful question during examination before a parliamentary committee. Although Crown law officers have advised that a witness before a parliamentary committee does not have to answer a potentially incriminating question, as witnesses called under the Parliamentary Evidence Act cannot becompelled to answer a self-incriminating question, it may be preferable for section 11 of the Act to be amended to put this issue beyond doubt. The joint select committee also recommended that the Parliamentary Evidence Act be amended to provide that witnesses who fail to answer a summons to give evidence before a parliamentary committee should be subject to the same penalty as witnesses who refuse to answer a lawful question during an examination before a parliamentary committee. As I have mentioned, section 11 of the Act provides for a penalty of imprisonment for refusing to answer a lawful question before a committee. The penalty is determined by order of the relevant House. By comparison, sections 7 and 8 of the Parliamentary Evidence Act impose no specific penalty on witnesses who fail to answer a summons and attend to give evidence. These sections provide that the President or the Speaker, as the case may be, may take the matter to a judge of the Supreme Court, who may then issue a warrant for the apprehension of the person named in such certificate, for the purpose of bringing him before the Legislative Council, Legislative Assembly, or a committee to give evidence. The committee believed that the appropriate method for dealing with witnesses who are summonsed but fail to attend, a failure which amounts to contempt of Parliament, should be left for Parliament's determination. There has been much debate in recent years about whether a parliamentary committee is an 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1527 appropriate body, as opposed to the Supreme Court, for determining punishment of recalcitrant witnesses or issuing warrants. In these circumstances it is arguable whether therewould beany benefit in replacing the certain and specific penalty currentlyimposed under the Act with an indefinite penalty to be imposed at the discretion of the committee. One of the more contentious of the joint select committee's recommendations deals with the power of Parliament to punish for contempt. The committee recommended that a power to fine for contempt be invested by statute to be used as an alternative to the power to imprison in appropriate cases. As I have mentioned previously, the New South Wales Parliament has no express statutory power to punish for contempt.
Power to punish for contempt of Parliament is justifiable on the grounds that Parliament must be able to function satisfactorily, without obstruction. The only sanctions currently claimed by the New South Wales Parliament are censure motions or reprimands by resolution of the House or prosecution if an offence against the House amounts to an offence at law. Although it is arguable that this Parliament has a common law power to fine based on a finding that to do so is necessary to its existence or to the proper exercise of its functions, it would appear to be necessary for express legislation to be enacted if a power to fine was to be confirmed. The committee was also of theview that any contempt powers should be retained by Parliament, rather than referred to the courts. This accords with the committee's view that reference of the power to determine contempt to the courts would have undesirable consequences for the separation of powers between the Legislature and the judiciary. However this view is open to debate, and it can be argued with equal force that judicial review ofwhat are potentially arbitrary powers is not incompatible with the doctrine of separation of powers. It could be argued that transfer of the Parliament's penal jurisdiction to the courts would ensure that a person whose conduct is under scrutiny received equitable treatment from a body with the proper ability to make a thorough and disinterested assessment of the facts. In view of these arguments, it would be essential to establish safeguards against arbitrary or inequitable use of the contempt power before any legislation is enacted granting Parliament the power to fine.
Such measures may include the codification of what action constitutes contempt-as in the Queensland, Tasmanian, Western Australian and Northern Territory privileges legislation-and adjudication procedures set out in suitable standing orders which accord with the principles of natural justice. Though it would be desirable to clarify the availability and extent of Parliament's powers to imprison or fine for contempt, any proposal to introduce legislation providing Parliament with an ultimate, unreviewable penal jurisdiction must be very carefully considered. It must be queried to what extent a modem legislature should be empowered to act as judge and jury in its own cause. The final recommendation of the committee which may give rise to legislative action concerned the retention of Parliament's right to expel a member as the ultimate sanction of a House to protect itself. The Supreme Court of New South Wales has held that there is power in the Legislative Council to expel a member, provided that special circumstances exist and the expulsion is by way of self-protection and not punishment. The special circumstances postulated by the court related to fitness or worthiness to sit in the Parliament. ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
The Parliamentary Electorates and Elections Act also makes specific provision for expulsion of members who are bankrupt, insolvent or "attainted of treason or convicted of felony or any infamous crime", and the standing orders of this House also provide for suspension of a member from the service of the House if a criminal trial is pending on charges founded on the member's misconduct. Though this power is clearly related to the need to observe the sub judice rule, the terms of the standing order anticipate consideration by the House of a substantive motion against such a member in relation to his or her alleged misconduct. It would appear that express legislation would be required if it is considered that it would not be appropriate for this Parliament to retain its apparent power to expel members. A further issue to be considered in relation to this recommendation is whether it is desirable, in principle, for a House to be able to reverse the decision of the constituents who elected the members as their representatives. The power to expel a member has the potential to change the composition of a House and while the power is retained, there will always be the potential for its proper functional use to be subverted to politicaladvantage. Apart from those recommendations of the committee which I have outlined, there are a number of other recommendations which would not require implementation through legislation.
Although I do not propose to deal with these other matters in any detail, I do note that a number of these other recommendations have already been implemented by administrative action by officers of the Parliament. Recommendations 6, 7 and 10 of the committee's report, dealing with press gallery protocol, complaints by members against media representatives and the cost of distribution of galley proofs respectively, have all been dealt with in this way. Recommendations 19 to 21 of the report deal with the establishment of standing committees of privilege. As honourable members would be aware, the Legislative Council established a parliamentary privileges committee on 20th October, 1989. Other issues raised in the report and discussion paper such as the establishment of a Legislative Assembly privileges committee and the establishment of the select committee to examine the desirability of televising parliamentary proceedings, involve matters which will need further consideration and may be appropriately raised in the course of ensuing debate. The discussion paper on parliamentary privilege in New South Wales raises questions of great importance for the Parliament of New South Wales. It is appropriate that the issues arising from the joint select committee report which are examined in the paper, particularly those which raise the need for specific parliamentary privileges legislation, should receive the prompt attention ofall members.
I have mentioned previously that New South Wales is the only Australian jurisdiction which does not have any specific legislation in force relating to the powers and privileges of this Parliament. In view of the significance of the proposals canvassed in the discussion paper, I consider that these matters should be the subject of parliamentary debate before work commences on the formulation of any specific legislation which may be required. An opportunity will shortly be found for parliamentary debate on issues dealt with in the discussion paper. Mr Speaker, I want to place on record my appreciation of you and your officers, particularly Miss Rhonda Miller, who assisted me in another capacity when in my department, of the President and his officers and, indeed, of the Solicitor General and the many people who have commented on the discussion paper that has been in the course of preparation. I can inform the honourable member for Ashfield that it is not intended merely to have one 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY continuous debate but that the matter be debated substantively on perhaps several occasions to deal with the matters canvassed in the discussion paper and any other issues that may arise. Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Beckroge.
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT Mr DOWD (Lane Cove), Attorney General [12.0]: I move: That, unless otherwise ordered, thisHouse at its rising this day do adjournuntil Tuesday, 9th April, 1991 at 2.15 p.m. Mr BECKROGE (Broken Hill) [12.0]: I speak on behalf of the shadow leader of the House who has an important engagement. In this special adjournment debate the Opposition may have its last opportunity to say farewell to some members of this House. The Opposition wants to make sure that its congratulations go on record, in case the Government does anything spurious in the meantime. I congratulate those members who have served the Parliament over the years. On the Opposition benches that includes a number of members who of their own volition will be not coming back to this place: the honourable member for Maitland, the honourable member for Rockdale, the honourable member for Seven Hills, the honourable member for Lake Macquarie and the honourable member for Wyong. Those honourable members have been close friends of mine though I cannot say that all of them are members of the group I have. They are not all trogs. I congratulate them on their service and wish them well. If members are given another opportunity to speak about this matter, much more will be said. The Opposition also congratulates members on the other side of the House who will not be returning as members, the honourable member for Castlereagh and the honourable member for Tamworth and perhaps the Minister for Minerals and Energy. The Opposition hopes that those members enjoy their retirement and that they will visit this place on many occasions. Motion agreed to.
INDUSTRIALARBITRATION (UNFAIR DISMISSAL)AMENDMENT BILL Bill introduced and read a first time.
Second Reading Mr FAHEY (Southern Highlands), Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Further Education, Training and Employment [12.2]: I move: That thisbill be now reada second time. Given that less than one third of private sector employees in Australia now belong to a trade union and that this proportion would be considerably less in some industry sectors it must be questionable whether unions should be the sole avenue through which individuals can gain access to industrial tribunals. This bill before the House provides for access by an individual in respect of a dismissal or threatened dismissal which the individual claims is harsh, unreasonable or unjust. Further, it provides the right for an industrial union of employees, on behalf of the individual, to make an application for a claim in respect of the dismissal or threatened dismissal. It is the Government's belief 1530 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991 that individuals have a right to access to industrial tribunals. Currently, in most instances, access by individuals is effectively precluded by the Industrial Arbitration Act's registration scheme for representative organisationsof employers and employees, and by the special preference which these organisations are given in instituting proceedings before industrialtribunals. ProfessorNiland in volume 1 of the green paper "Transforming Industrial Relations In New South Wales" said:
One of the guiding principles for the Green Paper has been the importance of trade unions having a secure base to exist and operate under the aegis of the Industrial Relations Act 1989. What is not intended is that this be achieved at the cost of more fundamental civil rights, which are entailed in providing any individual in society with the option to seek assistance and justice from institutions established by society for that purpose. That is, there are betterways of securing tmde unionism than providing such bodies with virtual monopoly access to the Industrial Relations Commission.
Members of this House may remember the decision of the Industrial Commission in Court Session in 1984in the case ofhlonkv.Dow ComingAustralia Ply. Limited reported at volume 2 of the 1984 New South Wales Law Reports at page 485. In this case the appellant had been unable to induce his union to file an application, for reinstatement, on his behalf. The appellant applied to the commission for an order under section 30 of the Act that he be reinstated in employment with his former employer without loss of pay and privileges and with continuity of his service preserved. In accordance with the established line of authority, the commission in court session held that the provisions of section 74 of the Industrial Arbitration Act 1940 effectively deny to an individual employee the right to invoke the jurisdiction of a conciliation committee to make an award under section 20, or the jurisdiction of the commission, under section 30 of the Act, to exercise the jurisdiction of the committee for that purpose. The commission in court session said: Basic to the scheme of industrial arbitration set up by the Act is the conception that, in the case of employees, proceedings for an award must be instituted by an industrial union of employees, that is, a trade union registered under the Act as an industrial union, and which, as a consequence of its registration, is subject to the supervisory control of the Commission. The Act does not make any provision for an approach by individual employees to a conciliation committee; employees must come to the committee through their appropriate industrial union.
Further, the commission in court session also held that by force of section 20A of the Act, a reinstatement matter is an "industrial matter" irrespective of the absence of any immediate collective element or industrial disputation. However, such an application could only be commenced by an industrial union of employees. Of importance in this decision is the fact that the commission in court session also held that the commission had jurisdiction, either on its own initiative or on application made to it, to make an award under section 31(b) of the Act, independently of section 30. The power of the commission to make an award or to vary an award under section 31@)was held to be a special provision with a special history, which suggested that its purpose was not to provide a general basis for exercising award-making powers ofa committee. In fact section 31(b) conferred a special supervisory jurisdiction upon the commission. Consequently, it was held that it remained open to the appellant to demonstrate that his case should be entertained under section 31(b) of the Act on the basis that he might not otherwise be enabled to have his claim or grievance considered. The Labor Party, the then Government of the day, reacted swiftly to this development and in the first months of 1985 introduced the Industrial Arbitration (Amendment) Act 1985, No. 7, 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1531 which, amongst other things, overturned the decision of the commissionin wurtsession in Monk's case. The then Minister for Industrial Relations,the Hon. P. D. Hills stated in his second reading speechbefore this House: Finally, the proposed amendments contained in Schedule 4 will confine to employers and industrial unions the right to apply to the Industrial Commission to exercise its award-making powers. The Government considers basic to the scheme of conciliation and arbitration set up by the Industrial Arbitration Act is the concept that in the case of employees, proceedings for an award should be instituted by an industrial union of employees, rather than an individual employee. I am sure all honourable members will support these improvements to the Industrial Arbitration Act.
This Government does not look at a principle such as this as an improvement to the Industrial ArbitrationAct. In fact, this Government looks at such a scheme as a denial of freedom to an individual to seek justice from an industrial tribunal. Given the need for an arbitral remedy to supplement the perceived deficienciesof the common law, the Government is seeking to provide a just system of individual accessin respect of unfair dismissal. Victoria has, since 1st July, 1988,been referred to by some as the undisputed unfair dismissal capital of Australia. The reality behind this phraseis that: from 14th December, 1983, to 30th June, 1988, there were 5,740 applications alleging unfair dismissal; from 14th December, 1983, to 30th June, 1989, there were 8,702 such applications. Thus in the year to 30th June, 1989, there were 2,962 fresh applications, this singleyear generating 51per cent of all applications made inthe previous 4.5 years.
The Government does not intend New South Wales to repeat the Victorian experience. Consequently,the bill as drafted provides the benefit of its provisions only to employees whose conditionsof employment are fixed by an award or an industrial or enterprise agreement. Trainees and apprentices are excluded. The bill provides mechanisms whereby a conciliation commissionermay dismiss an application if the commissioner considersthe application frivolous or vexatious or for such other reason as to the commissioner appears sufficient. Further, a commissioner may order costs if the commissioner considers the application frivolous or vexatious or where the commissioner considers aparty has unreasonably failed to agree to a settlement of the claim. It is my belief that these provisions provide for equitable and balanced accessby an individual who alleges an unfair dismissal whilst also providing a sensible controlled approach to individual access.
The bill provides for an application concerning an unfair dismissal to be dealt with by a conciliation commissionersitting alone exercising conciliation and arbitration powers. A right of appeal is provided from the decision of a commissioner to a single member of the commission. The jurisdiction depends on the applicant satisfying the conciliation commissionerthat the dismissal was harsh, unreasonable or unjust. This test is the same as that provided for under South Australian and Victorian legislation and the standard Federalaward clause contains similarphraseology. Thereis much case law on the meaning of this phrase and the bill provides matters which may be considered by a commissioner in determining a claim. Remedies provided by the bill are those of reinstatement andre-employment andin both these cases an order may be made for lost wages. Provision is also made for a commissioner to compensate a person where it is considered impracticableto make an order for reinstatement or re-employment. This may be the case where there is no available position or where mutual trust and confidence cannot be restored or a satisfactory employment relationship cannot be 1532 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991 re-established. The amount of compensation to be awarded cannot exceed six months remuneration of the applicant at the average rate received over the period of six months immediatelybefore being dismissed. The bill, as drafted, provides maximum flexibility in respect of the treatment of wider disputes under section 25 of the Act and the determination of a claim of unfair dismissal as part of that wider dispute. If a conciliationcommissioner dealing withan unfair dismissal claim becomesaware that the claim arises out of, or is likely to give rise to, a question, dispute or difficulty in respect of a wider issue, upon direction by the president of the commission the commissioner may deal with the wider issue by calling a compulsory conference under section 25 of the Act. Likewise, if a commissioner has commenced a compulsoryconference under section 25, the commissioner may also deal with the dismissal or threatened dismissal as if it were the subject of a claim under the proposed division relating to unfair dismissal.
I have referred several times in this second reading speechto the fact that these cases of individual access will be heard in both conciliation and arbitration modes by a conciliation commissioner. The provisions of the bill now before the House have been purposely drafted to provide for these matters to be dealt with by conciliation commissioners so as not to clog up the Industrial Commission, the superior court of record. I am mindful that section 30 of the Industrial ArbitrationAct allows members of the Industrial Commission of New South Wales to assume the role of conciliation commissioners. Though the Government has made no attempt to amend section30 of the Act, I make it quite clear that it is not the intention of the legislationthat these cases should be heard by deputy presidents, be theyjudicial or non-judicial members, of the Industrial Commission. It is not the Government's intention that members of the Industrial Commission should invoke the option available under section 30 in instances of individual access casesof unfair dismissal. However, section 30 has been left intact so as to retain the status quo in relation to other matters which come before the commission. It is the Government's view that individuals, be they represented or not, should be heard in the confines of conciliation commissioners'hearing rooms.
Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Price.
HONOURABLEMEMBER FOR GLADESVILLE WITNESS SUBORNATIONCOMPLAINT
Personal Explanation
Mr Petch: I wish to make a personal explanation.
Leave granted. Today in this House the honourable memberfor Ashfield sought to damage my reputation by alleging that I was guilty of a criminal matter. I categorically deny any criminal behaviour on my part. As the Housewill appreciate,I am not at liberty to speak on this matter at this time. However, my personal record will withstand any scrutiny and I trust I will be afforded the presumption of innocence that would be afforded any citizen of New South Wales. 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1533
GOVERNOR'S SPEECH: ADDRESS IN REPLY Ninth Day's Debate Debate resumed from 19th March. Mr J. H. MURRAY (Drummoyne) [12.15]: No doubt all honourable members would agree that the job of a member of this Parliament is difficult and onerous. We have within this Parliament a unique number of individuals-the majority ofwhom were elected as party people-who represent the whole of our society. The number of those sorts of politicians who remain in this Parliament is dwindling. We have only to look at photographs of past parliaments displayed in the corridors of this building to establish how many members sitting in the House today were here two parliaments ago. This is probably the last opportunity I will have to say something about those honourable members who have indicated that it is not their intention to return to this House. Allan Walsh, who has served with me on the Public Accounts Committee for a number of years, is someone I regard as a good mate. As a consequence of working with Allan, travelling with him and conducting in-camera hearings I have benefited from his wisdom. I wish him the very best in his retirement. I know that Roger Wotton is also bowing out. Roger has graced the floor of this House for a number ofyears. I always delight in coming into the Chamber and listening to Roger contribute in Address-in-Reply and budget debates. He is one of the old style orators. We do not have those orators now. We tend to perform not to the House but to members of the media and television. Roger and his wife have always taken seriously the civic side of their duties. I can vouch for their hospitality on the homefront and I know that a number of Opposition members have benefited from Roger's thoughtfulness when they have travelled through his electorate. Harry Moore is one of those unique, old style members of Parliament. It is unfortunate that those sorts of people are not now being elected to this Parliament. That is a difficulty this Parliament faces, because it really should mirror all of society's aims and aspirations. I knew Harry before he came from local government to this Parliament. His grass roots attitude and his feeling for the community will be missed. To Harry I say: You have done your job well and I hope you and Cass enjoy your retirement. Barrie Unsworth has leadership qualities. Very few members in this House would have been able to do what Barrie did at the last elections. He knew that when he came back to this House, he was in for it and would cop it, but he took it on the chin. Only those people close to Barrie fully appreciate his qualities. The chairman of the Labor caucus, Merv Hunter, is also bowing out, but another Hunter will be replacing him. When I first visited this Parliament with my predecessor, Michael Maher, I met Merv Hunter. He said to me: "John, I will give you a bit of advice. You will never get a vote in this Parliament. The onlyvotes you will get are out in the electorate". Never a truer word was spoken. People like Merv Hunter have had an influence on the Labor caucus. Merv's attributes and his contributions will also be missed. Bob Christie, the member for Seven Hills, our Deputy Whip, is also bowing out. It is a difficult job being Whip or Deputy Whip. There is always some problem such as members not attending for duty. In all the time I have had dealings with Bob Christie I have never seen him not get the respect and commendation of members of the Labor Party. He has not brow beaten members and members respect his attitude to parliamentary work. According to the whispers around the corridors, the Minister for 1534 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Minerals and Energy, Neil Pickard, may journey to London to take up a quasi-diplomatic position. Neil would do a fine job in such a position and uphold the dignity of the office. I wish Neil all the best in his endeavours on his retirement and in the job which it seems he may land. Another member who will be retiring is the member for Tamworth, Noel Park. Condolence motions will never be the same in this Parliament without Noel Park. Noel has never exhibited any malice in his parliamentary position. I have had the pleasure of knowing Noel and his wife over the years and I wish them the very best in Noel's retirement. My remarks in the Address-in-Reply debate are not all pats on the back. I now turn to an area in which I believe the Government is particularly remiss. I am pleased to see the Minister for Corrective Services, and Assistant Minister for Roads at the table. He shares my view on the subject. The Governor said in his Speech that the New South Wales economy is relatively stable, which can be attributed to prudent management. One wonders whether the land tax fiasco within the State should be included in that statement. Small business in New South Wales is being crushed by land tax and punishing levels of payroll tax, which have increased markedly since last October. The effect might not have been so serious had the State been able to pull off a number of deals over the past 18months to underpin our infrastructure. In 1958 we lost to Victoria the battle to host the 1996 Olympic Games. In 1989 the $3.9 billion frigate contract was surrendered. The smart end of engineering technology required for the project has gone to South Australia and we have missed out. The concomitant flow ons from the project went to Victoria. In 1990 we lost the massive high tech investment opportunities presented by the multifunction polis project. That also went to South Australia. It was lost for the same reason that we lost the frigate contract and the Olympic Games: the New South Wales submissions were hopeless. They were not up to standard. Consequently, the Government is now in a bind in that it cannot provide relief from land tax to people who are being hurt. As I indicated, there are problems in the Government in relation to this. The Minister for Corrective Services, and Assistant Minister for Roads has publicly embarrassed the Premier by stating that he believes tax on residential investment property should be abolished. I wonder whether the Minister is in the Government or in the Opposition.
Mr Yabsley: I am representing my electorate.
Mr J. H. MURRAY: He is representing his electorate but he is at odds with the Government and the Premier on the matter. At least he has come clean and stated that the land tax system is imposing a crippling burden on many taxpayers, especially small property owners in his electorate. That is also occurring in the electorate of Drummoyne. The Minister said yesterday that he had received hundreds of complaints about the increase in land tax. I am in the same position. I have been involved in deputations and have received representations from many constituents who are hurting because of the crippling land tax. At least the Minister knows where to get a vote. He has admitted that the tax increases might pose a potential problem for him in Vaucluse. I can whisper in the Minister's ear-I am only a metre or two away-that it is not a matter of "might"but a certainty that the land tax issue will bite deeply into the voting patterns of people in the existing seat of Vaucluse or the proposed seat of Vaucluse. 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY
Mr Phillips: What are you going to promise them?
Mr J. H. MURRAY: I am telling the Minister that he is on the right tack The Real Estate Institute of New South Wales is giving the Greiner Government a bit of curry in relation to land tax. Last year the Greiner Government gave a commitment to resolve the problem of the totally inappropriate land tax system. Despite a comprehensive review, it has failed to do so. Land tax increases in a depressed market are totally unjustifiable. The Real Estate Institute has said that the Government will be told this by property investors on polling day. The Cabinet did not pick up all the recommendations of the review, and the Ministerwas part of that Cabinet decision. The recommendations were changed to put a greater burden on the small property investor, to look after the big end of town. The Minister, who was part of that Cabinet decision to change the recommendations of the review committee, is now finding that the chickens are coming home to roost. The small property-owner is being hurt rather than the big end of town. Contrary to the belief that land tax has increased by only 17 per cent, all members of Parliament have been inundated with examples of people whose land tax has been increased by from 20 per cent to 200 per cent. In some cases, because of the special circumstances of the downturn in the property market, people have had to borrow money to live after paying land tax. The equalisation factor was of concern to most people but despite the clear recommendation of the review committee, the Longley committee, that the factor be abolished the Government has not done so. Consequently, land tax is now biting the average small investor in this State. I believe that the Premier should announce a moratorium on penalty interest for late payers of land tax. The honourable member for Miranda asked what should be done. There is a very simple solution. The land tax hotline that the Labor Party has set up has received numerous complaints from property-owners who have been unable to pay their land tax by the 28th February deadline. Many landlords have been forced to raise rents and this has passed on the tax to those people who are less able to afford it, those people in the rental property market. Many people do not even have the money to pay the fines that are accruing because of late payments. According to the Valuer-General, the average value of a property in Drummoyne has declined by 15 per cent in the past two years. But land tax has increased by 17 per cent. No wonder the people are bleeding and crying. The Minister understands the difficulty. He knows that these people will vote according to their hip pocket nerve and against any government responsible for such a system. I give as an example a recent representation to my office from a constituent, the owner of a property in Drummoyne who had been left the property by her late husband. The constituent and her husband had had another property in Hunters Hill. Because the industry in which her husband was involved did not offer superannuation the property at Hunters Hill and the income from it had been his superannuation. In 1990 the income from that propertywas $83,000, but land tax was $66,000 and the widow also had to pay maintenance bills, council rates and water rates, totalling $17,000. Hence she had practically nothing to live on for the rest of the year but because the property was highly valued she received no pensioner concessions. That example is echoed many times over throughout most of the areas of the inner city where land tax is payable. This is the most expensive Government in the history of New South Wales and the land tax fiasco says that this is so. 1536 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Another matter raised by His Excellency was that of law and justice. His Excellency said that the Government maintains its ongoing commitment to the proper administration of justice in this State and the protection of its citizens. His Excellency then referred to the Police Service and what it did last year. I will tell you what happened in Haberfield. After considerable pressure from the honourable member for Drummoyne and the residents of Haberfield, with the concurrence of Ashfield council, we opened a shopfront police station. We had all the fanfare. The police came along, the Deputy Commissioner and the Minister, a band was there and all the residents when the shopfront station was opened. One little hiccup was caused when the State member was not asked to speak on that occasion but he changed that and did have something to say. This year, however, the shopfront station does not work. There are no police there. There are no beat police around there. It still has its Eaglefone; the police emblem is still there but there are no police on daily duty there. It was just another publicity stunt to alleviate some of the fears of the residents of Haberfield. It is all right to open a shopfront cop shop as it was called-have the Council give it to you for a dollar a year-but it is of no value to anybody if that police station is not manned. A spate of robberies, handbag snatching and those sort of occurrences in Haberfield could have been alleviated if that police station had been adequately staffed.
I also note that His Excellency indicated there is now a period of consolidation after two major rounds of reform in education. I will tell you about the consolidation in Drummoyne. Drummoyne Boys High School has been closed. Drummoyne Boys High School was one of the most historic high schools in this State, one of the oldest, with great tradition. It was a comprehensive high school. Many great scholars went through that school and they have contributed considerably to the benefit of this State. What has happened now? Drummoyne Boys High School is still closed-nothing has happened. There was a two-year period when this Government indicated it was going to close it. When the school was closed there was a fiasco. No buses had been provided to transport the children to adjoining schools. Students in Drummoyne cannot now go to the adjoining school because Concord High has not got the facilities to take the overflow. Here we have a multi-million dollar high school just sitting there. We are in the third month and the high school is sitting there not being utilised even though there was supposedly a two-year plan to have that school in operation. I understand there is a proposal that it will become an open high school similar to the Correspondence School but what I am saying is there has been no work carried out.
Drummoyne high school is sitting there like a white elephant and you will get vandalism and we have the difficulty of properties being burnt down, as has already happened in other high schools around this State. Drummoyne high school has been sitting there like a white elephant for two years whilst the employees of the head office of the Department of School Education are in luxurious offices up in the big end of town paying something like $1.5 million a year for rental property. So in terms of education we need more than a State which says we are entering a period of consolidation. We want this Government to pick the ball up in education, this Government which is supposed to be an economic manager, to show that they can manage and in terms of school reform that has been a complete disaster. I turn now to a matter which is a little 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1537 bit out of my area in terms of my electorate but as a member of the Public Accounts Committee we recently undertook a very intensive studyof the Forestry Commission. I note on page 11 of the Governor's Speech that His Excellency said:
In its continuing plantation programsthe Forestry Commissionwill plant some3,200 hectares of new pinus radiata plantations, afurther 1,400 hectares of replanting following final harvest and 80 hectaresof eucalypt plantation.
I am saying that is too little too late. We have here this major debate about resources, about old growth forests. Other States are leaving us for dead. We have this philosophy because the National Partyare in there running the Forestry Commission and having an input intoit-the North Coast input is quite significant-and theywill not recognise that there are alternativesto the use of old growth forests. Thealternative is the planting of eucalypt plantations using Tasmanian blue gum, which will grow at a phenomenal rate and can be harvested in something like10 years. Here we have 80 hectares being produced-it is a sham. As long as the Forestry Commissionand this Government allows that policy to be maintained to basically use old growth forests rather than a forward looking policy of developing eucalypt plantations, inyears to come we will be in all sorts of trouble. I am guessing now, but I think most honourable memberswill agree with me that the green movement will close down many more of the old growth forests and they will not becomeavailable and the peopleworking in the timber industry will be the losers in respect of that.
We have a little par here about the bid for the Olympic Games. Let us hope it is better than theprevious bid. I say it is reasonable for the Government to make that bid and I acknowledge it is a bipartisan bid which has the support of the Opposition but one thing I would warn the Government aboutis the ability and the need to look at the infrastructure;that is, the roads and the access to any of those projects that are going to be used in the Olympic Games. At the moment we have Concord Oval and when you get somethinglike20,OOO people going there it is a disaster in terms of parking and traffic leaving the place. If you are going to use Concord Oval and Hen and Chicken Bay for the rowing and Homebush Bay for the major facilities-they are all within an area of about two kilometres-you willnot be able to run your events adequately. You will not have spectators arriving on time, nor contestants arrivingthere unless that matter is addressed. It is important that the Governmentbe made aware of that. My information is that the costing has not taken into account the upgrading of the infrastructure that is required to deliver the spectators and the competitors to and from those particular facilities. I appeal to theGovernment to make sure they look at that because as the local member for DrummoyneI can tell you the matter of Concord Oval, in terms of traffic, is nothing but chaoticwhenever there is a decent matchbeing played.
I am a little apprehensive about that part of His Excellency's Speech where it is stated that an integral part of that process will be the review of funding the festivals to make better use ofavailableresources, with three majoractivities, the Festival ofsydney, Carnivale and the Biennale of Sydney all coming under one umbrella. My concern is that Carnivale,which is what I am interested in because the electorate of Drummoyne has always been involved in it on a two-yearly basis, will lose its identity once it comes under that umbrella. More importantly, if it is to be organised in a similar fashion to the Festival of Sydney, it will be subject to private sector donations. Because of the ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991 diversity of the groups participating in Carnivale-not so much the national rivalry but the general rivalry-private sector funding involvement will cause all manner of difficulties. It was interesting to listen today to the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier, and Minister Assisting the Treasurer lauding the virtues of the State Rail Authority, but the Minister has little ammunition for a positive bus program. The 449 and the 492 bus services to Drummoyne and Five Dock have been eliminated. The 461 and the 460 bus services no longer service Concord. The 502 and 504 bus services to Chiswick and Ingham Avenue, Five Dock have been reduced. The 503 and 505 services from Chiswick to Drummoyne have been cut out and the Canada Bay service has been reduced. Those services have been affected in the past two and a half years. That is the sorry record of this Government's bus service program. The electorate of Drummoyne has no train stations. Residents of that area must rely on a reduced bus service. They are furious with the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier, and Minister Assisting the Treasurer because all they hear on television and radio broadcasts is the Minister telling them what a wonderful job he has done, that he is a can do man and that his programs are successful. One thing the Minister can do is to knock about the inner west network of bus services. I am not responsible for the seats of Balmain and Strathfield but the same sorry saga is echoed throughout those electorates. Pensioners are now isolated in their homes, unable to undertake their banking business or to visit their doctors because of the reduced bus services. Another matter I wish to mention is the Government's attitude to the third runway. In the past 12 months the electorate of Drummoyne has held three major public meetings with between 200 and 500 people attending each meeting. My office has been inundated with representations concerning the impact of the third runway on residents of Chiswick, Abbotsford, Drummoyne, Haberfield and Rodd Point. The Premier's response has been to pass those representations to the Minister for State Development, who has in turn passed them to his secretary. That is the level of concern that this Government has about the impact of the third runway on the Drummoyne electorate. The Government is not worried about the possibility of fatalities due to increased air traffic. There has been a 60 per cent increase in outgoing aircraft flying over the Drummoyne electorate. It is not worried about the noise factor that will evolve from the third runway proposal. The Government is only concerned that it will not have to spend money on the infrastructure for an airport at Badgery's Creek. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member has exhausted his time for speaking. [Mr Speaker leji ihe chair at 12.45p.m. The House resumed at 2.15p.m.l Mr WI-IITE (Earlwood) [2.15]: I join with my colleagues in supporting the motion for adoption of the Address in Reply to the Speech of His Excellency Rear Admiral Peter Sinclair, A.O., and congratulate His Ejtcellency on his inaugural Speech to the Parliament. The motion was ably moved by the honourable member for The Hills and seconded by the honourable member for Coffs Harbour. As this is probably the last contribution to an Address in Reply that a member for Earlwood will make in this House, I wish to reflect on that aspect. I have regarded it an extreme privilege to serve in this House and to have the opportunity to represent 33,000 constituents. I make this 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY responsewith a little nostalgia. Ishould like to refer also to the previous two incumbents of the seat of Earlwood. The seat was formed in 1950 and was held by Sir Eric Willis with distinction for 28 years, being a Premier. Ken Gabb, who also held ministerial portfolios, represented the electorate for 10years, followed by myself for the past three years. Sir Eric was elected on 17th June, 1950, so this year the electorate of Earlwood will have been in existence for 41 years. I have read some of Sir Eric's old speeches, and some things never change. Early in the 1950s Sir Eric complained about the lack of police in Earlwood. In those days three police serviced 22,000 people. I shall expand on that later. When I was elected, 18 police served 33,000 people and, of course, today we have 46 police. When I became the honourable member for Earlwood my aim was to be a grass roots parliamentarian, available to all members of my constituency, without favour, and with a strong concentration on youth, education and caring for the aged. Of course I strongly support multicultural diversity within my electorate. Not many members on the Government side of the House have that multicultural diversity. As stated by the Governor, the key policy objectives of this Government over the past three years remain important objectives for the future. They are to reduce debt, to have a leaner and more productive public sector, a balanced budget and a reordering of spending priorities to emphasise basic services such as health, education, law and order. By any political or economic assessment those are strong endorsements for the Government's record. I wish to refer to a couple of points in the editorial of the Sydney Morning Herald of 20th March. It states that one of the difficulties with running a well-managed State is that the popularity of the Government is certain to come under pressure by having to say no to vested interest groups. That is one of the strengths of our Premier. We have a government for the majority, not the minority. The Premier should also be congratulated because in all of the pressures of last year-and we knew we were taking the right path-as the article says, the Premier stuck to his guns, maintained his commitment and that has borne fruit. By keeping his nerve he has entrenched reforms that are now obvious and are being taken up by governments all round Australia. It is a pity for this country that they were not taken up earlier by the Federal Government. The editorial concludes that New South Wales Incorporated has served this State well. I wish to take a few moments to reflect on the ageing population in my electorate and, in particular, some of the organisations that serve it. I refer first to the Canterbury-Earlwood Caring Association and the president of that association, Miss May Harris. That association is a prime example of a neighbourhood centre that does magnificent work for my area. Fifty per cent of my constituents are more than 55 years of age. The local senior citizens group is headed by Nell Finlinson, a magnificent lady in her eighties, who does wonderful work in organising elderly people to get them away from their homes and out and about. The elderly in my electorate have problems with bus services. The previous speaker spoke about a similar problem but why did he not do something about it? My electorate lost the 490 bus service as a result of the combination of two routes. That had an impact on the senior citizens in my area. However, thanks to the Minister for Transport-a can do Minister-a special 411 bus service has been introduced to run the length and breadth of my electorate, as well as to the Roselands shopping centre. That has been a boon to the old people. It is a non-peak hour service that is used extensively each day. 1540 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Mr Graham: A real achievement! Mr WHITE: It was a real achievement. It took a while, but we were rewarded in the end. That service provides the elderly the opportunity to get out of their homes and go shopping. With the help and the entrepreneurial skills of Trevor Reeves, the manager of the local bus depot, during the two weeks prior to Christmas that service ran also during the peak periods, between 8.00 a.m. and 8.00 p.m., and proved most beneficial. One of the real successes in my electorate is the 400 Metro line that runs through my electorate from Burwood to the eastern suburbs. It connects with the 411 bus service and allows the elderly and others to travel to the airport, to Eastgardens and elsewhere. In the past we have had difficulties with education, but I believe the former Minister for Education will be recorded in history for his great achievements. I thank him and I thank the present Minister for School Education for their support of my electorate and for the reforms they have introduced. The two high schools in my electorate were built during the 1950s and, to the shame of the previous Government, have never received any cyclic maintenance. Within two weeks of our election in 1988 I asked the Minister for Education at that time to visit the bigger of the two high schools, Kingsgrove North High School, which has 1,360 students, of which about 70 per cent are of Greek decent. It is affectionately known as Greek Grammar. That school required between $500,000 and $600,000 for cyclic maintenance. The work has been completed and the school is now a credit. My predecessor tried for 10 years to have ceiling fans installed in that school's assembly hall so that examinations and prize presentations could be conducted in the hall. I have been successful in achieving that. The cost was only $30,000, and the improvement was very well received. The other high school in my electorate, Kingsgrove High School, was built during the same period and has had no cyclic maintenance work carried out; work is now due to commence at a cost of about $500,000--expenditure made necessary by years of neglect. Belmore South Public School, on Canterbury Road, is an old, dilapidated school. I have convinced the Minister to sell the front portion of the land and to build a new primary school. Those plans are well under way. Beverly Hills Public School is in the adjoining electorate of my colleague the honourable member for Hurstville. We have been successful in our representations for pedestrian overhead bridges across the main thoroughfares of Georges River Road and Stoney Creek Road. They are due for completion in about May. Mr Graham: What about Clemton Park school? Mr WHITE: Clemton Park has received some cyclic maintenance. As a former pupil of that school I understand the honourable member's concern. I pay a vote of thanks to the teachers and other staff of the schools in my electorate. In understandably difficult times they have done a magnificent job. I have excellent rapport with all the schools in my electorate; I have never been banned from attending any of them, and am always welcome. That augurs well for education in the future. The reforms that have been put in place are accepted by the parents, the teachers and the community. I pay tribute also to the service clubs in my electorate, including the Bardwell Park RSL, the Kingsgrove RSL, and their associated bowling clubs, the Earlwood Ex-Servicemen's Club, and to people such as Frank Mulhall, Andy Hyde, Barry Stevenson, Jim Bell and 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY
Bill Tyrrell, who on behalf of their clubs make a considerable commitment of time and money to the youth and the elderly in the area. Their work is unsurpassed, and I place on record the assistance they have given me as the local member. I acknowledge also the work of the Minister for Tourism. When clubs had a problem with turnover tax he, when he was Chiefsecretary, stood aloof from the bureaucrats, sanity prevailed, and the tax was not introduced. That decision was very well received by my local clubs which are of a medium size and would have suffered if they had had to allocate funds to pay that tax, rather than apply them to assisting schools and the elderly in the community.
The electorates of Hurstville, Georges River, Miranda and Earlwood are serviced by the Southern Area Health Board. To fund ongoing major developments at St George Hospital, $193 million will be allocated. The hospital will become a first-class teaching hospital. Such facilities as a 500-vehicle car park and a helipad are being provided. A clinical services block will be completed by August. A new ward tower will be built and renovations will be carried out to the old ward block by 1994. The construction of a clinical services block involves the provision of a new pathology unit; eight operating theatres; a cardiac pacemaker unit; a cardiac surgical intensive care unit; coronary care facilities; and nuclear medicine and associated support services. I draw attention to the little sister in the southern area health service region-Canterbury Hospital, which yesterday the honourable member for Canterbury had the hide to criticise. During its 12 years in government the Labor Party did nothing for Canterbury Hospital. This Friday, at Canterbury, on behalf of the Minister for Health, I shall open new geriatric assessment unit extensions, which have been provided at a cost of $350,000, a new intensive care coronary care unit which cost $335,000; and renovated theatre blocks which cost $326,000. Other parts of the hospital are being refurbished. Maternity services at Canterbury will be maintained. The Sherman report recommended the closure of the maternity section, but as a result of representations by me, Major Sharpe and the Southern Area Health Board, the unit will be re-established and refurbished. I pay tribute to the members of the board and their chairperson, Lorna Stone, for their professional and valued contribution to health services in the region.
I now address the issue of law and order. Earlier I referred to the attempts of Sir Eric Willis to increase the number of police in his electorate from three to four. As a result of the excellent efforts of the Minister for Police and Emergency Services an additional 1,600 police are on duty in New South Wales. The two district inspectors in my electorate, Inspector Standaloft from Earlwood and Inspector McClosky from Kingsgrove, are what community-based policing is all about. On many occasions I have accompanied them on patrol and I have witnessed at first hand the expertise of these men and the first-class officers they have at their disposal. When I was elected the member for Earlwood, 18 police were stationed in the district. The former member never went near the police station. Any communication he had with police was by way of ministerial notice. Theonlyway to have matters solved is to meet with the inspectors, who find out what is happening and speak with the people concerned. Matters are resolved at the local level. I am sure the Minister has no complaints about that approach. It was obvious that 18 officers were insufficient to man the station on a 24-hour basis; it required at least 24 officers. I am pleased to report that the officer complement is now 48, including the members of the detective squad. Beat policing is up and running and has proved to be successful. The local inspectors are innovative in their approach. 1542 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Earlwood was the first station in the metropolitan area to have bicycle patrols for covert and beat purposes. The incidence of breaking and entering and stealing from motor vehicles has fallen by about 50 per cent since 1988. Offences of motor vehicle stealing have also decreased. In 1988 the arrest rate was of the order of 130 a year. In 1990 the rate was 265, and for the first three months of this year there have been more than 100 arrests. Obviously the police are doing their job. Public response to policing is important. Consultative committees and programs such as Neighbourhood Watch have been set up. Once a month about 120 people attend committee meetings. The co-operation that exists between police and the community is second to none. I am sure it is no different in other electorates throughout the State. A large proportion of the population of the electorate is of Greek origin. I communicate with my Greek constituents through Greek radio to make them more aware of programs similar to Neighbourhood Watch, to which they contribute significantly. Mr Kerr: I have been informed that the honourable member is learning the Greek language. Mr WHITE: I speak a few words of the Greek language. I wish now to say a few words about the multicultural diversity of my electorate. I am pleased to have the support of the many Christian Lebanese, Chinese, Italian and Greek people in the Earlwood electorate. People of Greek origin make up almost 40 per cent of the population of the electorate. A good percentage of the remainder are elderly Anglo Saxons. It has been my honour and privilege to serve this interesting electorate. I have also been privileged to be a member of this House and I hope that I will continue to have that privilege. The Earlwood electorate has been cut into four segments by the stroke of the commissioner's pen, but that will not prevent Philip White from representing the people of New South Wales, whether that be in this Chamber or in another place. To a degree the constituents of abolished electorates have been disfranchised. I express my sympathy to those honourable members who will not be here after the election because their electorates have been abolished. They were unlucky but to other members I say it is a case of but for grace of God go I. The commissioner's pen could have struck any electorate. There are always winners and losers. I am sure that the members who lost out on this occasion will be winners in the future. With apologies to Hansard I should like to say, in closing, a few words in Greek as a mark of respect to my Greek friends and constituents. The English translation is that I, the honourable member for Earlwood, thank my friends and constituents in the electorate. To them I say: Osvouleftis tou Earlwood tha ithela na efharistisso olous tous elliness. Filous mou. Mr WELSH (Swansea) 12.401: Like all my colleagues, I wish to thank His Excellency the Governor for the content of his first Speech and to congratulate him on his delivery. I congratulate him also on some of the initiatives that he mentioned. I wish to address three areas in relation to which the Speech caused me apprehension and reaction: the continued neglect of Swansea in particular but in general the whole of the Hunter region; so-called microeconomic reform; and increasing bureaucratic control of this State. The Governor's Speech was long and very detailed, but, I am sure through no fault of the Governor, it failed to mention Swansea, Newcastle or the Hunter region, except for one brief mention of the Hunter Water Board. That is on a par with last year's Speech in which the Hunter was mentioned only once in passing, in relation to new 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY
coalmines proposed for the Hunter. That proposal did not involve my electorate so I do not know whether it proceeded. I do know that in my electorate the Governmentis trying to flog off the Elcom mineand is threatening to put more of my constituents out of work. I suppose that is just more economic reform and it will somehowbe justified; but I hasten to add not to me, never to me. I could put on an outraged performance and jump up and down about it, as some of my colleagues are wont to do, but we have seen how ineffective isthat sort of shamindignation. The Leader of the Oppositionpromises to reverse this decision,but I am sure that he also realises it will be a fait accompli long before he ever gains office,if indeed he ever does gain office. I digress, so I return to the failure to mention the Hunter region in the Governor's Speech.That is understandable, I suppose. The Government, the Federal Government, andpreceding governments, both Liberal and Labor,State or Federal,have failed to realise that thereis an area north of the Hawkesbury River called the Hunter Valley and that Swansea is part of that Hunter Valley, unfortunately. Isay unfortunately becauseif they cannot find the Hunter Valley, how will they ever findSwansea?
Mr Hartcher: With a road map.
Mr WELSH: That is probably what they would need. My colleague the Independent member for Wollongong has had to go to extreme lengths to have governments realise that Wollongong exists. He has been successful in havingthat city recognised. Perhaps we will have to go to extreme lengths to have Swansea and the Hunter Valley recognised. Funny little maps may have to be drawn on how to get there. I will have more to say about this matter later. Having heard the Governor's Speech and having listened intently to it, I came to the conclusion I could have grabbed my Address-in-Reply speechfrom last year and repeated it in this Chamber today. We are all one year older but no closer to the goals we had hoped to achieve. This Government is oneyear older but seeminglyno smarter. In that speech I applaudedthe Government's intention to introduce legislation to focus efforts on combating drug trafficking and drug-related crimeand to recover assets from people involved in serious drugcrime, and I questioned why we should stop short and penalise only serious crimein this way. All drug-relatedcrime is serious to me. The peoplewho pray on the gullibilityand inquisitive minds of our youth to take advantage of them and to destroy their lives purely for financial gain are committing the most serious crimes of all. Where is that legislation? Has it, too, been put on the too-hard-to-do back burner like so many of the other legislative reforms that I will mention later inthis speech?
Last year I applauded the bipartisan approach to major national, international and global environmentalproblems, withparticular reference to the greenhouseeffect. In respect of that matter also it seems now to be a case of out of sight out of mind. After a few dry spells we forget about the major flooding that occurred in our suburbs as a result of the one-in-100-year eventswhich were then occurring every two years. Should we wait for the incidence of such events to increasefurther before we start to take these possible threats more seriously? Lastyear I mentioned that I believed the bureaucracy had gone mad and that that was the cause of some of the hare-brained theories put forward. At that time I warned that it was time for the Government to grasp the reins firmlyand call whoa. But it seems that my plea has not been heeded and the bureaucracy has taken control of many of the Ministers. This yearthe bureaucracyis completelyout 1544 ASSEMBLY 21March, 1991 of control. For instance,look at microeconomic reform.I have been asking everyone what that means,but I havebeen getting differentanswers. It seems to mean anything and everythingthat onewants itto mean. Mr Schipp: Ask mewhat it means. Mr WELSH: Whatdoes it mean? Mr Schipp: Seeme later. Mr WELSH: Depending on who uses the term, it could be used to mean anything. It is a buzz word for a panaceato cure allfinancial ills. At themoment, if that term is slippedinto a speechthe speaker soundsas if he knowswhat heis talkingabout. To me, microeconomic reform hascome to mean that the Governmentis able to improveits fiscalperformance by passing on thecost of some of its responsibilities to local governmentand volunteergroups. That is not microeconomicreform but rather microeconomic double-dealing.Reforms of this calibre wouldenable the Government to contain its costs to the maximumextent by passing thosecosts on to someoneelse, and then requiringthat someoneelse to pass themon again. Is that how microeconomic reform works? I turn next to law and justice. Newcastleis the sixth largest city in Australia andtherefore larger than someof the Statecapitals, being the secondlargest city by populationin this State, second only to Sydney itself. With all the inherent problemsof a city that size, Newcastlehas no communityjustice centre. Thatis a shame. In fact it is appalling. Again,that situationmust be due to the north of the Hawkesbuty wildernesssyndrome. The growth areas of my electoratehave a scant policepresence. Police are mostly availableonly on demand. The population in the area is rapidly increasing,mostly without-of-work families, because industryand commercehave not kept pacewith the populationgrowth. I speakof Gwandalan,Summerland Point, Lake Munmorahand the ManneringPark area,where I have been trying unsuccessfullyto have a permanentpolice station built or police presenceincreased. Crime andhooliganism are rampant andincreasing in these areas, and police resourcesand manpowerare stretchedto their limits. But I supposethe peoplein this area are lucky. Swansea does have a police station. Despite anassurance by the departmentlast September that that police station would be upgraded to 24-hour manning, becauseof cuts in authorised strengths,half the time itis shut. Perhaps that is microeconomicreform. In the interests of saving a few dollarswe could supply a cardboard cutoutpolice stationand put a photographof a policemanon the wall with the caption, "This is the man responsible for crime in this area". That should keep everyonehappy. Add to that the cutbacksin police presenceat the police youthclubs, as a result of cutting backon the most important evening shift from 4p.m. to 9 p.m. whereby a policeofficer will be present on only two nights of the week with the expectation that these shifts will be filled by volunteers ina city hard-hit by unemployment,and onehas a cauldronfor the creationof futureproblems. Suchaction might be regarded as microeconomicsnow, but it will cost macrodollarsto reverse the resultsfurther down the track. In this scenario,the presence of the men in blue in the police youth clubs in growth areas is, at the onetime, the greatestdeterrent to young peoplestraying off the rails, withresultant increasing crime statistics,and thegreatest opportunityfor young peopleto build lastingrelationships with and respect for the police to carry withthem 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY into adult life. In the police youth clubs further microeconomicreform is forcing already overburdened volunteers to carry more of the State's responsibilities and save a few pennies by that shift in responsibility. The Government has also failed to allow police officers to do duty at Camp Mackay, again leaving this to the few volunteers left in the organisation. Is the Government aware of the problems associated with recruiting and keeping volunteers in the current economic climate? The ladies who would once volunteer to help worthy causes are now housebound because of the costs involved in doing volunteer work. It might be all right for some of the more affluent matrons to lead the volunteers, but the ordinary people who form the backbone of voluntary organisations can no longer afford to do voluntary work. Mr Schipp: Tell Paul Keating. Mr WELSH: Someone has to pay for it. The Government has passed it off as microeconomic reform. Mr Hartcher: Why does Lake Macquarie council not pay for it? Mr WELSH: That is one way of having microeconomic reform, by passing such costs on to the council. Fuel costs are a burden on family budgets; and those who are unemployed and who might like to volunteer are prevented from doing so because of the constraints placed on their eligibility to receive unemployment benefits if they do. The world is turning upside down. Those who want to help are prevented from doing so by ridiculous constraints invented by some bureaucrat with little else to do than to justify his more than adequate salary package. I have listened to the arguments about salaries or packages. Given the choice, I would take the box. But the little battlers have not been offered packages or State assistance. They are offered microeconomic reform. The Governor in his Speech said, "Upgrading the health system continues to be the Government's top budget priority. . . and the increased provision of health facilities in areas of high population growth". I have received letters from volunteers who seek support to conduct public appeals for funds to purchase equipment that is needed urgently in the coronary care ward of Belmont hospital. I suppose that if we got rid of a few cardiovascular sufferers,that would be microeconomic reform because we would no longer need to provide health support funds for them. Stress testing equipment is required to supplement the management of cardiac patients at Belmont hospital. A submission has been made to the area health service as an enhancement project and, although favourably viewed, it is unlikely to be funded in the near future. The provision of this equipment would enhance significantly the quality of care available to patients in the ]Eastlakes region. Transport is another neglected facility in the Swansea electorate. The previous director of the northern region worked hard to iron out some of these transport concerns, but I suppose it will be a return to square one now that the capable and lateral-thinking Len Regan has been rewarded with dismissal. Now that the rest of the troops know what happens when one does not play the bureaucratic game, they will probably toe the line and all initiatives will be placed on the backburner. The suburb of Pelican will have to wait for a new formula for calculating urban requirements before a bus service is provided. The attitude of government departments seems to be that if an answer cannot be provided, a formula will be developed to show the service is not needed. I do not say we know all the answers but we know enough to get on with the job. With 1546 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991 regard to the Swansea channel, the Public Works Department found that some of its initiatives worked but the bureaucrats want to stall by carrying out more studies. Let them perform some more microeconomic reform and get on with the job. We had the study in 1976; now let us get on with the job. Some microeconomic reform could be practised in the field of transport by having the buses from Gwandalan and Summerland Point leave a few minutes earlier than they do so they connect with trains at Wyong, instead of arriving five minutes after the train leaves. Microeconomic reformis working out the timetables to provide co-ordination. Mr Schipp: Is there any good news? Mr 'WELSH: No. We never get good news in the Hunter. All the Government is concerned with is the Hawkesbury and lower regions. A document now available about environmentaltrusts shows clearly the south of the Hawkesbury thinking of this Government and other governments. The document states in part: TheTrust's aimis to initiate a range of projects to reduceenvironmental degradation andto rehabilitatedamaged sites and waterways.. .Fundingwill be available for: restoration or rehabilitation projects withinthe Sydney,Illawarra and BlueMountains regions. Mr Schipp: Do they pay any levies up there? Mr WELS1T: We just gave you $10 million from the Hunter Water Board surplus, and you can bet that it will not be returned. Mr Schipp: Do your constituents pay a levy? Mr WELSH: They do. They have levies forrehabilitation and for the sewerage, yet the Government has not built a park in Lake Macquarie since I know not when. Mr Hartcher: Parks are the responsibility of councils. Mr'WELSH: Who is payingfor the SydneyHarbour National Park? What about the Hunter; what about Lake Macquarie? The bureaucrats are hardest at work in the area of local government. Statebureaucrats andlocal government bureaucratshave had their heads together working out deals to change the Local Government Act, even before most members have seen the draft, though the bureaucrats have. Without having seen the draft Icannot comment, but Ibelievefrom what I have heard that the underlying intent is to take local government away from the people and base it under bureaucratic control in Sydney. That is something we should all abhor and fight with our last breath. We are talking about the demise of democracy at the grass roots level. I am sure more will be said about this when members are aware of what has been hatched by the bureaucrats. Is this empire building and centralised control more important than getting on with working out a more equitablerating system? Should not the bureaucrats have as their primary objective the finalisation of the new rating system? After all, local government is to be asked to adopt microeconomic reform, but to leave the financial rules until after the controls are put in place. Imagine the stonewall that ratepayers will face when bureaucrats get control before the rates system is improved. In my electorate cuts have been made to community serviceprograms, with the removal of the family and community services office from Belmont, relocating it at Charlestown, which is well outside the electorate. Despite assurances from the staff involved that the same services would be available, the people perceive a loss of the 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY reassurance provided by having their own facility and the convenience of not having to travel far to get assistance. It is another example of microeconomic reform at the expense of those suffering most. These people who are affected are the human face of the cost-cutting exercises conducted by the bureaucrats. Successive governments seem to have considered the Hunter as a backwater. The new Federal Senator, Dr John Tierney, hit the nail on the head and stopped short of blasting this State Government. He said: The Hanter Valley is the richest valley in Australia. It produces one-third of the nation's coal, one-third of its aluminium, 27 per cent of its crude steel and 24 per cent of its electricity. Miss Fraser: What about port? Mr WELSH: I have not mentioned wine. Compared with Tasmania, the Hunter has a greater population than the whole island. The regional capital, Newcastle, has twice the population of Hobart and the gross domestic product of the Hunter is more than that of the whole State of Tasmania. The Premier realised this when he put in place theHunter parliamentary task force. That bipartisan group had the opportunity to unite and demand for the Hunter a fair share of the State's budget but, instead, it did the usual thing that Oppositions do-procrastinated and obstructed. Following the initial successes of the task force, the Opposition boycotted it because it looked like it was working. The Opposition was frightened that the Government was getting too much credit. It is time to stop the point-scoring and for the Hunter's politicians to examine their priorities. It is time to put the Hunter first and the party second, to start working together for the Hunter. I am not talking about secession; I am asking for a better deal for the Hunter, otherwise that sleeping giant might wake up and stir itself into political action which would capture the attention of that area, get a positive reaction in this State and no doubt shake the socks off the Federal Government which has taken that region for granted for so long. The Government has been blatant in its neglect of Swansea. The project that most gives the big lie to microeconomics is the Swansea S-bends deviation. Where is the economic sanity of starting a project, bringing it so close to completion, carrying out stabilisation works and then walking away from it and having to return to repair erosion damage, not to mention the resultant environmental damage and the trauma caused to the people living in fear of king tide flooding that could othenvise have been averted if the completion of ancillary drainage had gone ahead on time? I realise that flood-created problems exist elsewhere in the State, but accelerated work on the Swansea section of road would have been more economically responsible. The deterioration of the road base will present maintenance problems in the future. Not only does Swansea have the only man-made continuously operating roadblock-the idiot-inspired duplicate low level bridge-but it also has the only single lane each-way section of road between Newcastle and Sydney. That should be to the eternal shame of the Government. Swansea people pay their way. They are used to waiting. They will wait another year for the S-bends to be fixed. They wait for medical services, housing, justice and for a government that will be responsive to their needs. That is a particular problem everywhere in the State, but successive governments have seen fit to take the notorious part of the PacificHighway that passes through Swansea-the major national road-and turn it into a roadblock for the people of this State. The Hunter region wishes to have 1548 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1993 economic stability and progress; it wishes to have jobs that will bring the children who were born in Swansea back to live in Swansea. Successive governments have cut Swansea off from that. Whywould any industry be willing to establish itself in the Newcastle area and face roadblocks to reach Sydney, the most used exit port? Successive governments have shown gross stupidity by not alleviating the problem. I thought this Government would carry out its promise to fix it. It intended to replace the S-bends by the end of 1990. I have since made that 1991, as I thought perhaps the Government meant 1991, but I have now made it 1992. When will the Swansea roadworks be completed? When will the people of the region feel that they are part of this State? Whenwill the Government of this State stop cutting Swansea off from the rest of the State? I ask only for a fair deal for the Hunter. I believe that my parliamentary colleagues from the Hunter region will speak in the same vein when they contribute to the debate. The Hunter region has been neglected by successive governments, but this Government has been no different. The people of Swansea thought it would be different. The coalition parties may get a reaction from the people of the Hunter; they may take the matter into their own hands.
Mr Schipp: You have never had a better go in your life.
Mr WELSH: We have never had a go from the Government at all. I hope that the Address that will be sent to the Governor in reply to his Speech will mention that there is a place north of the Hawkesbury River that is responsible for creating much of the wealth of this State-
Mr IIartcher: Called Gosford.
Mr WELSI-T: Called Gosford-the retirement village of the future. No wonder the Government has geriatric support in Gosford. That is where all the geriatrics are. I represent people who want to work. They want to provide wealth for the country and the State, yet the honourable member talks about geriatric centres. I thank honourable members for their patience.
Mr SOURIS (Upper Hunter) [3.5]: I am delighted to join the long list of my colleagues who have congratulated His Excellency the Governor of New South Wales upon his Speech on the opening of Parliament. I am particularly pleased that the Governor has confirmed strongly the Government's program, a program that has allowed this State to shoot to excellence in comparison with the other States through debt reduction, budget control, the better management principle, a more efficient public sector, and emphasis on basicservices such as health, law and order, educationand roads, and in the general concept and program of microeconomic reform. Also I wish to congratulate the Governor and thank him sincerely for his wonderful vice-regal visit to the Upper Hunter last year. The Governor and Mrs Sinclair proved to be popular, energetic and hard working. I list the organisations and functions they attended during their three-day visit: the Scone Air League, Col Pays Flying Museum, the Scone Grammar School official opening, the Scone High School and area schools assembly, the Scone hospital, the Scone Nursing Home, Segenhoe and Agnew horse studs, the Murrurundi publicand area schools assembly, the Willow Treecommunity, the Quirindi community, and the Walhallow Aboriginal community school. 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1549
I must pause in my recitation to highlight the great sight the Governor madeat Walhallow school--completely surrounded by Aboriginal children,most of whom had their hands on him or part of his tunic at some stage-trying desperately to blow the didgeridoo, all fortunatelycaptured on film. The Governor and his wife attended also the Gunnedah ecumenical community,the Gunnedah flour mill, the rural museum, the historical museum,the Gunnedahhospital, and on the final day the official opening of Gunnedah's Alkira Hostel. Throughout the visit the Governor was ably served and represented by the scouts and guides of the electorate. It is always a privilege to have a Governor make a vice-regal visit to one's electorate,but it is an even greater privilege to have two vice-regal visits. Earlier last year the Upper Hunter was privileged to have a scheduled vice-regal visit by the former Governor,Sir David Martin,who, during the time of thevisit, fell fatally ill. Thevisit was conducted by Lady Martin. It is to her credit that she would undertake a three-day tour of the electorate at that critical time. The people of Coonabarabran have not forgotten, and probably will never forget, the wonderful visit Lady Martin undertook on behalf of her husband during that period.
I congratulatemy colleagues and friends the honourablemember for Tamworth, Mr Noel Park, and the honourable member for Castlereagh, Mr Roger Wotton. I have known both those distinguished parliamentarians allmy life. Mr Roger Wotton has been my local member for most of my life. It is a great privilege to be in this Housewith such distinguished gentlemen. I place on this record thanks for the great help they have given me, not only in the pre-election campaign but subsequently to show a new hand the ropes and to pass on the benefit of their wisdom and experience gainedover many years. In the context of the Governor's Speech, Iwish to outline the Government's program as it affects the Upper Hunter. Iwas interestedto hear the honourable member for Swansea refer to the Hunter area as the forgotten area. I can say without hesitation that the Hunter has not been the forgotten area of this Government. The change of government andthe change in the political landscapehave been a breath of fresh air for the Hunter Valley. The Hunter region-particularly the Upper Hunter-has benefited noticeably in ways it never dreamt of under the 12yearsof Labor administration andthe predominanceof Labor parliamentary membershipin the Hunter, I doubt whether the Hunter will ever forget the great benefits it has achieved, and I doubt whether Labor will ever return to the sort of dominance it had in the 12 years of its administration.
I would like to comment on the success of the 3 x 3 roadworks funding program. In my electorate road funding has doubled in the last three years compared with the previous three years. In the last three years $45 million worth of road expenditure has been committed to, and spent in,the Upper Hunter. I am still pressing, and I will do so on a continuingbasis, for the rerouting of the New EnglandHighway over the Liverpool Range. Probably the most dangerous segment of the entire New England Highway is where it crosses the Great Divide at the Liverpool Range between Murrurundi and Willow Tree. I will continue to strive for the completion of the primary sealing of the Coonabarabran to Quirindi road,the Binnaway to Coonabarabran road and the Scone to Merriwa road. They are high-volume roads which are not yet completely sealedand which people in other areas perhaps take for granted. I will continue also to press for the upgrading of the Muswellbrookto Merriwa road which has gained importance over the last decade or so as the most significant east-west transport route between Dubbo and the port of Newcastle. It is sealed but is in great need of upgrading. 1550 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
After the electoral boundary proposals are confirmed, it is my intention to press strongly for roadworks in the new area of Mudgee and Rylstone that will be included in the electorate. I would also like to point out that the Government has not neglected the rural bridge program throughout the Upper Hunter. In fact the Deputy Premier will visit my electorate onMonday to openbridges at Giants Creek, Martindale and Wybong Creek. A fourth bridge at Timor is nearing completion but is not quite ready for opening. In addition, I will continue to press for the reconstruction of the bridge over the Mooki River on the road between Tamworth and Gunnedah, a project which has been finalised in terms of priority and approved but which has yet to actually commence. That project will require some follow-up when construction commences. In the second year of the Greiner Government's term of office, a new motor registry was opened at Gunnedah. It serves a large area extending north to Narrabri, west to Coonabarabran and south to the Quirindi district. It is a large district and the motor registry in Gunnedah is a welcome addition. At the same time or perhaps a little later motor registry agencies were opened at shire councils in Quirindi and Merriwa. In conjunction with the local councils, I have been pressing for those motor registry agencies for some time and I am pleased that only recently both of those facilities,which now carry out the full range of motor registry services, were opened. I will continue to press for the opening of a motor registry agency at Coolah shire council. It will serve an area of 100 kilometres in any direction which contains mostly partially unsealed roads. A motor registry agency is critical to the community of Coolah. I am confident that objective will be achieved. One of the Government's greatest achievements has been the recently announced Explorer train program. Last Friday the Minister signed the official contract for the construction of the first four trains under the Explorer program. Two trains will travel through the Hunter Valley and my electorate, splitting at Werris Creek to Moree and Armidale. Coincidently a train will depart both of those centres and rejoin the Explorer at Werris Creek and travel south through the Hunter to Sydney. That service will be welcome indeed. It was a program which I, together with the members representing the two adjoining electorates-the honourable member for Northern Tablelands, Ray Chappell, and the honourable member for Tamworth, Noel Park-pursued very vigorously indeed after train services had been adjusted in favour of an XPT service which turned around at Tamworth and provided a same-day return service to Sydney but excluded the last extension to Armidale and out through Gunnedah, Narrabri and Moree. That service had to be adjusted or the XPT would not have been able to return to Sydney in a reasonable time. It now returns to Sydney at about 7.30 p.m. That is reasonably acceptable although the service is fed by buses. That service will cease during 1992 when two Explorer trains are introduced on to that line. At the same time two Explorer trains will be introduced to the Canberra line, one at each end coincidently, providing three return journeys or six paths. That will also be very welcome. At the same time the Minister announced the future extension of the Explorer program to the unelectrified portion of the South Coast line. On a prior occasion the Minister foreshadowed an urbanised version of the Explorer train to replace the nine two-car diesel fleet in the Hunter and the diesel commuter fleet in the Illawarra. I point out that that is a $45 million allocation in the Budget to the Evplorer train program 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1551 alone. The allocation involves a $38 million contract for the trains as well as spares, and repair and maintenance facilities. When these Explorer trains arrivewe should be taking delivery also of two XPTs, one constructedin Victoria and one constructed in New South Wales, for interstate routes. In addition, the XPT which will be released from the present Tamworth run will be available for an additional daily XPT service from Grafton to Sydney. In summary, we will see four new Explorer trains, two XPTs, the reallocation of an existing XPT and future programs for additional Explorer trains on the South Coast as well as the urbanised version. That total program may take another four or five years. When it has been achieved, I will continue to push for the upgrading of country services and the introduction of new services to the country. In particular I am mindful of the lobbying and good work that has been done by the honourable member for Murrumbidgee, Adrian Cruickshank, in respect of the Junee-Griffith line and the honourable member for Northern Tablelands, Ray Chappell, in respect of an extension of the Explorer train service from Armidale to Glen Innes. I will be pressing for the extension of the service to take in Mudgee, assuming that Mudgee becomes part of the new electorate. That does not conclude what I have to say about train services in the Hunter. Last year I was proud to have been involved, together with three shire councils-Singleton, Muswellbrook and Scone-and the Upper Hunter Labor Council in the extension of CityRail services to Scone. Those services had never been previously available. Scone and Aberdeen now enjoy a daily morning southbound service and a daily afternoon northbound service. That is an extension of CityRail services. I would not permit anyone to talk about cuts in rail services in the Hunter or Upper Hunter areas. The program I have just outlined involves considerable upgrading and increasing of rail services. The reopening of Scone railway station on 14th April will give me great pleasure. The railway station has been leased at a peppercorn rent to Mrs Barbie Palmer, who will conduct a gallery, kiosk and catering facilities there. Those improvements will revitalise the station. I have still not completed what I have to say about rail services. I would like to compliment the Minister and the executive structure of the State Rail Authority for the great gains achieved with FreightRail. The Upper Hunter electorate is dominant in coal production and produces about 60 per cent of the State's output. Most of the wheat produced in New South Wales passes through the Hunter to utilise the port of Newcastle. The State Rail Authority freight system is enjoying increased tonnages. It is now carrying approximately 55 million tonnes of freight, 30 million tonnes of which is coal, throughout New South Wales. The 100-kilometre rail line through the Hunter to Newcastle carries about 60 per cent of the entire New South Wales freight tonnage. The 30 million tonnes to which I referred is approaching the capacity of about 40 million tonnes of the present coal loaders at Port Waratah and Kooragang. It will not be long before the construction of an additional coal loader should be contemplated. Already in my electorate alone about 20 million tonnes of coal tonnage is being developed, in particular at the Maules Creek mine near Gunnedah, the Dartbrook mine near Scone and the Bengalla mine near Muswellbrookwhich are coming on-stream quickly. In addition, just south of the Upper Hunter electorate the Camberwell project and other developments in the electorate of Cessnock are making rapid progress. A minimum of 20 million tonnes of coal will come on-stream in the next few years. That will put considerable pressure on the port of 1552 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Newcastle coal handling facilities and will necessitate the construction of an extra coal loader. Further, it will bring into full focus the justifiability and economic justification for the electrification of the rail line between Newcastle and Muswellbrook, a project that has been the subject of many feasibility studies. I know of four such studies having been carried out in the past four years, one by the former Government. Those studies continue the evaluation process and firm up the project and will assist in determining whether it is economicallyviable to electrify the line. That program will cost about $400 million and construction undoubtedly will be carried out by private enterprise, perhaps on a lease-back arrangement. My point in pursuing the electrification of that northern rail line is the logicality of such an undertaking. New South Wales will be using an increasing amount of the electricity which is available in great abundance in the Hunter Valley, which will lead to reductions in oil imports and lessen this State's dependence on oil. That will be an environmental plus in terms of using the cleanly produced electricity in the Hunter region, utilising the abundant coal supplies and diminishing our dependence on, and use bf, diesel fuel. Approximately 39 million litres of diesel fuel are used annually for the cartage of coal on that 100-kilometre stretch of railway line between Muswellbrook and Newcastle. Having alluded to electricity I should say that the Upper Hunter electorate produces about 40 per cent of the State's electricity supply; 4,700 megawatts are produced at the Liddell and Bayswater power stations. Most of the employees of the power stations live within my electorate. I extend my congratulations to the management and all employees of the Electricity Commission, in particular those associated with those two power stations. They do a wonderful job in producing electricity. The availability rate of plant at times has exceeded 90 per cent, a feat never thought of in former years. Last year Elcom was the best government business. That was no surprise to me, knowing the work that is done and the quality of the staff from the Upper Hunter region involved in power generation. They are engaged, particularly at the Bayswater power station, and will be, once the upgrading has occurred, at Liddell power station, in the installation of electrostatic fabric filters for the complete removal of all particle emissions from the stacks at the power stations. Once that happens Liddell power station and Bayswater power station will be world leaders in state-of-the-art environmental technology. I record my congratulations to the Electricity Commission employees involved and look fonvard to a strong future of electricity supply and production from the Hunter Valley. I know that the next base load power station is likely to be in one of three locations: either Oaklands, the mid-Hunter or at Gunnedah, the last two of which are in my electorate. If either of those sites is chosen, I look forward to working again with the Electricity Commission in the vital infrastructure requirements of the State and the construction of the next base load power station. Last year my electorate was blessed with a project that had been strongly encouraged by the Government and was launched in Gunnedah. The construction of a 50-megawatt mini power station will take about three or four years. I know that sounds small in comparison with the base load power stations which usually have a capacity of about 2,500 megawatts. A 50-megawatt power station at Gunnedah associated with the Gunnedah colliery will use new technology of a coal-water mixture or a fluidised bed technology which will introduce a new era in environmental technology for power 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY generation. Not only is the method more clean and efficient than any other system in the world, but it will solve another environmental problem-the disposal of coal tailings with which Gunnedah colliery has a problem, as do other collieries throughout the State. Approximately 15 million tonnes of coal tailings annually are produced in New South Wales. Those tailings provide a ready source of energy if the technology can be expanded-that is the CWM or fluidised bed technology. It is not yet known whether that technology is capable of being expanded into base load power stations, but that process will be pioneered. New South Wales will be the only place outside Japan using that technology. It is of great credit to the New South Wales Electricity Commission to have been chosen, if that is the right word, to participate in this new project. I know of two other coalmines where 50-megawatt mini power stations would be appropriate, and they are at the Ulan coalmine which produces six million tonnes, and the Warkworth coalmine in the Hunter Valley which produces four million tonnes. Both of those coalmines havesurplus coal tailings in abundance and aproblem disposing of them. Those mini power stations will be welcomed by the county councils in those regions. The Ulan County Council and the Shortland County Council are active in promoting the concept of alternative power stations using coal tailings or waste products involving recycling. While the Minister for Housing is at the table I should compliment him and his department for thework that has beencompleted inmy electorate in housing production. All areas have benefited greatly from the program of construction of new houses undertaken and the various housing loan packages and incentive packages that have led to more young people than ever before becoming first home buyers. I congratulate theMinister on the amount of housing construction that has taken place, and in particular in a special area, the Walhallow Aboriginal community. Every year the Minister seems to be able to find funding for one or two more houses in that community. That wonderful program has been continuing for some time. I am proud of the standard of housing and the way the entire community has looked after the housing in that settlement. I frequently take people there to show it off. One can drive down any of the streets and see well kept lawns and be welcomed in any house at random. I am so proud of that region 1 made a deliberate point of ensuring that it was on the Governor's itinerary during the vice-regal visit to which 1 referred. I know from the Governor's subsequent comments that he was quite surprised to see an oasis of goodwill in that community. That is in no small part due to the efforts of the Minister for Housing and his department and the way in which the portfolio has been administered.
Mr Schipp: Is that my birthday present from the honourable member?
Mr SOURIS: I am expecting to receive a continuing upgrading of that program as a result of those comments. In this last year the St Heliers correctional centre has been established. That minimum security prison accommodates 150 inmates and has 30 staff. The centre has been operated in an excellent fashion. I compliment Superintendent Ken Middlebrook, his deputy, Alan Chisholm, and the other officers from the Department of Corrective Services at that establishment, and also commend the inmates who have made the establishment work. In the initial stages the inmates had considerable involvement in constructing and refurbishing the facilities which were old when St Heliers was an institution for wards of the State. Much work has been done. Wherever one goes in the St Heliers area there is an air of pride. Last Friday the 1554 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Minister, Mr Yabsley, opened the first private enterprise industry in any New South Wales prison. That was a small fabrication shed in which agricultural wire gates of MI Steel are fabricated. It is interesting to note that inmates who have been selected to work in that prison-it is sought after-were able to be at the official opening. They sat in the audience and participated in the entire ceremony. They were dressed in uniforms bearing the emblem of the company for which they were working and, during the inspection of that facility, which was conducted by the inmates, they exhibited considerable pride in their work. It is hoped that in the future a dairy farm will be established at St Heliers. After all, it is a 1,600 hectare property. We expect to see a further extension of the carpentry workshopthat is presently being used for Department of School Education work. St Heliers is on the short list with two other cities-Cowra and Dubbo-for the establishment of a 500-cell medium securitygaol. That project is well and truly on the drawing board but the site is yet to be selected. Muswellbrook is a possible site, though the site has not yet been determined. No feasibility study has been done, no environmental impact statement or social impact study has been conducted and no budgetary allocation is available. The Public Works Department and the Deputy Premier,Minister for Public Works,and Minister for Roads have confirmed that that project has been temporarily deferred. Within two years we will be more definite about that project, about the selected site and about its ultimate construction.
I congratulate all principals, staff,parents and citizens associations and students in my electorate for the way in which education has been upgraded and for the way in which community spirit has been improved and increased. Everyone, at least in my electorate, is striving for excellence and a better education product. Higher school certificate results prove this and I have certainly gained the impression, when I have been inspecting various schools, that this is what is occurring. Almost every area in the Upper Hunter electorate has benefited one way or another from maintenance or construction. I will list just a few. In Gunnedah there has been increased maintenance, and approval has been given for the immediate construction of an administrative building. In Muswellbrook a science block, a library and a new canteen have been constructed, which have involved millionsof dollars. At present we are undertaking a major maintenance and refurbishment program at Scone primary school. Recently we received approval for the purchase of Stones paddock adjoiningScone high school. This will be used to extend the agricultural science faculty at Scone High School. New buildings for agricultural studieshave been built at Quirindi High School. A new library has been built at Merriwa. A shelter awning needs to be attached to that library and I will continue to pursue that matter. That library was the first building to be opened by the present Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, the Hon. Virginia Chadwick, M.L.C.
New buildings have been constructed at Gunnedah technical and further education college and the whole college has had air-conditioning installed. A new TAFE college has been built at Quirindi. We expect to receive approval very soon for the construction of a new TAFE college at Scone in conjunction with the equine centre. New buildings have been constructed at Coonabarabran TAFE. The Minister for Family and Community Services announced only a few weeks ago that 10 extra places would be funded at Muswellbrook pre-school. I record my strong appreciation for the 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1555
Government's strong support for health services in all areas in the Upper Hunter region. I will mention a few projects in that area. The Cameron wing at Coonabarabran was saved, maintained and re-opened by this Government. The Coolah-Dunedoo hospital board merger, which was strongly promoted by the previous Government, was canned and cancelled. Muswellbrook and Scone hospitals are presently witnessing refurbishments. Hospital committees have been established in large area health boards-such as those in the Upper Hunter-at Murrurundi, Scone, Merriwa and Muswellbrook This project has received much co-operation and has closely involved the local community. Base hospitals at Dubbo and Tamworth have had increased services and a wonderful new hospital has been opened-
Madam DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member has exhausted his time for speaking.
Mr HUNTER (Lake Macquarie) [3.35]: I am grateful for this opportunity to speak in the Address-in-Reply debate. Members havea right to speak on all aspects of government, including past performance and future expectations. I congratulate His Excellency, Rear Admiral Peter Ross Sinclair, A.O., on his first Speech to the joint sitting of the upper and lower Houses of the New South Wales Parliament. In the 22 years in which I have been a member of Parliament I have never seen fewer proposals referred to in the Governor's Speech adhered to. This was the case in 1989-1990and, no doubt, it will be the case in 1991. I address these years as the dark ages of Greinerism. Let me make absolutely clear that these are dark times-times which willrequirespecial qualities from everyone; from the unions, the community, academia, various organisations and politicians. Theywill require from each of us continual vigilance and analysis. We will need also to rebut most of the malicious policies beingadopted by this most conservative Government. There should be no doubt about this Government's true agenda; not the agenda it put to the people of New South Wales in March 1988. That agenda has been exposed as being deceitful. At last count this Government has broken 190 promises.
Gradually this Government's hidden agendais coming to light. The Government has imposed savage cuts to basic services which everyone in this State not only expects but rightly demands. The Government has made cuts to education, legal services,public transport, farmer services and communitywelfare. We have still not seen the full extent of its agenda. Who would have thought that bus fares would increaseby more than 100 per cent; that rail fares would increase by over 50 per cent; that hospital bed charges would increase to the extent that they have; that an average family's electricity bill would go up to the extent that it has; and that pensioners' travel concessions would be ripped from under them? So much for Mr Greiner's promise that no charge would increase above the consumer price index. These savage slugs to the budgets of average families and pensioners are a typical response from a conservative government. This Government protects the rich and imposes the burden of financial management on those in the community who are least able to bear it-pensioners, schoolchildren, the poor and the average family. Not only these groups have suffered; the economy has also suffered. Businesses have hadtheir future growth prospects thwarted becauseof higher costs for government services, such as power and transport, which are so necessary for their basic operations. That can mean only two things: higher charges for their products, which we as consumers have to pay, and future job expansion will now not occur. ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Devastation of the public education system has resulted from cuts of millions of dollars. In the first four years of Greiner government at least $350 million has been ripped from public schoolingin this State, and 2,400 teachers jobs have been lost. Class sizes have increased. Teachers, parents and students of schools in my area ask me: "Mr Hunter, can you not talk to the Government? Can you not do something about the problems?" In some cases three classes are crammed in together and students are not getting a fair go. The full hidden agenda of Greinerism is unfolding-cutting services, increasing charges, running down the public infrastructure: in short, running down the public sector in this State. The result is that those in the community who can afford private alternatives do so. Those who can afford user-pays in the public sector do so. Those who cannot afford to pay go without. We are already seeing this-a two-tiered society. Those who can afford user-pays serviceswill suffer twice. If they can afford to pay, all they will receiveat best is second-rateservices. If they cannot afford to send their children to other than a public school-and up to three years ago we could be proud of our public schools-their children are sentenced to sitting in overcrowded classrooms with fewer teachers, learning fewer subjects and receiving poorer quality education. Thevicious cycle continues. There are not just the financial aspects of the hidden agenda of Greiner, the agenda which is so destroying that public sector and the New South Wales community, there are other parts of the agenda. We saw this in the last days of the marathon parliamentary sittingin June 1958. Remember Greiner's promise to improve the standing and integrity of the Parliament and not to rush legislation through at the end of a session? Members on the Government side rememberonly too well. In the final week of sitting we sat late into the night and on one occasion until 5 o'clock the following morning. What happened last November? The House sat longer than it had for more than 100 years, on one occasion for more than 30 hours straight. Can anybody in this House say that people function properly after 30 hours of sitting in this Chamber? In thatvery week we dealt with momentous pieces of legislation such as the Essential Services Bill, the Public Sector Management Bill, the Summary Offences Bill and the Independent Commission Against Corruption Bill. We had less than 24 hours to study some bills. Honourable members should not underestimate the implications of that legislation. Union rights and civil liberties have been overridden. The provisions in the bills would lead one to think that they were from South Africa or Poland. They are not; they are from New South Wales. That package of legislation was integral to the Government achieving its hidden agenda. It is no coincidence that the State Government now has powers to straitjacket any community group or union which dissents from its actions. In many cases the issues involve not a simple fight by workers for their terms and conditions of employment that they have won in the past, but a fight to retain their employment. We see how the armoury of legislation can be used to squash any potential dissent from public sector employees in protecting not just their rights, not just their jobs, but the standard and quality of the services they help to provide. It will be the strength and unity of all those affected-including the people in the gallery, including the people we represent; not necessarily people Governmentmembers represent-which will ultimately be so great that voters will reverse the decision of March 1988and return to this State a government that is both economically efficientand socially just, a government that will return New South Wales from the age of darkness to the age of light and hope, a New South Wales Labor Government. 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1557
I turn now to specific areas of the Governor's Speech. I do not recall whether the Minister for Housing visited the Lake Macquarie council chambers back in 1989 on the invitation of the mayor. Cabinet members were as arrogant as ever and did not give me as the local elected member the opportunity to present arguments in relation to my electorate. A few Ministers who attended the supposed Cabinet meeting had the courtesy to listen to my representations. One of the matters I put forward as requiring attention was overcoming the backlog in compensation cases with an increase in court sittings. I have been waiting since 1989 but the extra sittings have not taken place. I approached the Attorney General-I have been approaching him continually-to provide funding to build a court house at Carey Street, Toronto. Under the Labor Government that was a certainty but the present Attorney General keeps telling me that other projects have higher priority and at this time funds unfortunatelyarenot available. At that same meeting I asked whether the Government would give favourable consideration to a constructive submission for the provision of crisis medium and long-term accommodation in the Lake Macquarie area. I remind honourable members that the Lake Macquarie municipal or city area is part of four State electorates. We are still waiting for that accommodation.
The Australian Labor Party recognises that youth are our future but this Government, which claims that it is interested in youth, has done nothing about the problem. At the supposed Cabinet meeting I requested the provision of initial funds for home care services in the Lake Macquarie electorate. Like many seaside areas, Lake Macquarie has a large number of retired people. The Government actually closed down the services and grouped them into one centre. I am very disappointed that funds for home care services were reduced. I am sorry for the people who administer the services from the centre. Without funds they cannot provide the services required in the area. At the supposed Cabinet meeting the mayor and I, and a number of other people, asked the Premier and the Minister for Public Works at that time-he has been demoted since-to provide funds to acquire an area of land in the Swansea electorate on Lake Macquarie known as Green Point. The Minister said that no funds would be made available. Since then a meagre amount of $I million has been offered to acquire the land. Part of the offer is that a certain amount of the land should never be developed but allowed to be open space for our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. It should not be built on right to the foreshore.
I had hoped that the Minister for Housing would have remained in the Chamber to hear what I have to say. The Minister came to my electorate and carried out an inspection with me. We inspected land on the foreshores of Lake Macquarie, between Bolton Point and Marmong Point, which many years ago should have been dedicated as open space and handed over to the Lake Macquarie city council. To date no decision has been made about that land. That naturally timbered land, which is inhabited by many native birds, should be preserved for future generations. The honourable member for Liverpool was a former Minister for Health and he would do a magnificent job if he regained that portfolio when Labor is re-elected. I asked the supposed Cabinet meeting whether the Government would make known its full intentions in relation to Morisset hospital, including the foreshore land and undeveloped land within the hospital surrounds. The Minister for Health and Minister for Arts has assured me a number of 1558 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991 times that there are continuing investigations in regard to the hospital and has said that the Government will do the right thing. To date no report has been handed down on at least two inquiries that have been held During the Address-in-Reply debate several members spoke about the great service their electorates are receiving from the Government. These must be isolated instances because I cannot get answers about matters affecting my electorate, let alone get services. A former employee of the Wangi power station attended that meeting. The Wangi power station has been closed for some years. The building, which has been unused for so long, is now worth millions of dollars. I asked whether the Government would consider leasing sections of the power station to light industry or for commercial development. I suggested that Asian countries were crying out for small power plants. Wangi power station has 30-megawatt and 60-megawatt units and they would be ideal for use by those Asian countries. Nothing has been done. I believe the Government attempted to get rid of the asbestos that was surrounding the plant, but that is as far as things have gone. This Government's policy is to sell off its assets, but it is selling off the profitable assets. The power station is lying idle and not bringing in a penny in revenue. To the contrary, it is costing the Government money but nothing is being done. I ask the Government to reconsider my proposal. I am sure that when the Labor Party is returned to office at the next State elections it will do something about the power station to encourage industry to utilise the building and therefore provide employment opportunities in the area.
The public is not gullible enough to believe that the Federal Government has caused all the strife and hardship that New South Wales is experiencing. As Isaid earlier in my contribution, the Greiner Government will not be forgiven for the aggressive manner it adopted when it commenced its term of office. It set about slugging everyone in the community. I am pleased that the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier, and Minister Assisting the Treasurer is present in the Chamber because the next item I propose to deal with is the drastic reduction in employees of the State Rail Authority. What have those reductions gained? They have caused misery for many families whose main breadwinners lost their jobs. The Minister should hang his head in shame. The workers he has made redundant can hardly afford to buy the essentials for living, let alone entertainment. I assure the Minister his actions will not be forgotten in the Hunter region. I was surprised when I heard one member say that the Hunter had benefited. He must have been referring to the upper Hunter, because the lower Hunter certainly has not benefited. All the Government has succeeded in doing is to reduce services. The Minister has closed down the only local railway service in my electorate-the Fassifern to Toronto service. He replaced that service with buses but did nothing to improve the road. There is not even a footpath leading from the Fassifern railway station.
Mr Baird: What did your Government do about it?
Mr HUNTER: The Minister has a hide in interjecting because people are forced to walk in the dark from the station to their homes in the Blackall, Fassifern and Toronto areas. They do not have the benefit of street lighting. Those people are saying, "Shame on the Minister". They will not forget his actions. In the next election the vote for Labor can only increase. In the Hunter the Government will get the biggest shock it has ever 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1559 had because of the way it has treated the electors. I cannot lay all the blame on the Minister for Transport for the poor state of our roads. The Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works, and Minister for Roads must accept some of the blame. As a member of Parliament I have always been fair dinkum, as I am on this occasion. I have told successive transport and roads Ministers that it is a waste of time merely resurfacing roads with tar or bitumen. It is about time that governments learnt to build roads of quality. Poor quality roads require continual maintenance. They are forever being patched, with patches on patches. Poor roads fall into disrepair more frequently, and it is the motorists who suffer. Bad roads cause accidents and damage to vehicles. It is about time that Ministers responsible for our roads visit other countries to see how roads should be built. In many other countries roads are built to withstand huge volumes of traffic and they last ten times longer than our roads. Lake Macquarie council, which comprises many Independent aldermen, is partly to blame because they do not have the gumption to stand up to the Minister or the Government and say "Look, you have allocated us so many millions of dollars. Let us build a decent road one kilometre long rather than a poor road two kilometres long which will fall to pieces in five minutes. We want the roads to last". That is the way to save money. If this Government were true in its wish to re-establish the city of Newcastle, it would do something about housing. I give free advice to the Government that it must attract more people to Newcastle. The adjoining electorate of Lake Macquarie has 165,000 people. Newcastle has now under 140,000 people. The Government expects Newcastle to survive following the earthquake but has pushed more people out of the area, whether or not they are pensioners. The Minister for Housing mentioned on radio a scheme for shifting aged persons from Sydney to the North Coast. To move elderly people away from a place where they have resided all their lives up to the coast where they do not know a soul is one of the worst things one could do-it is inhuman. That should not occur. For years I have talked about the promise of a court house at Toronto, a public hospital that does not exist on the western side of Lake Macquarie and the community health service that has deteriorated from 26 people to 12 people. It is a disgrace to the present Government. The question of youth is one of my old hobbyhorses. Recently the Morisset hospital closed ward 21. Very few people have been to Morisset hospital which, in the old days, was a mental institution. Ward 21 was for the criminally insane. Those people have been transferred out of that ward. I hope that this Government-whether through the Minister for Corrective Services, and Assistant Minister for Roads or the Minister for Health and Minister for Arts-has done the right thing. Some of those clients, as they call them, have gone to Long Bay while others remain in less secure wards at Morisset hospital. I hope they do not escape and cause trouble because some of those people should never be at large but secure in the confines of a proper area, such as Long Bay. I shall touch briefly on one of the promises that the Greiner Government broke very quickly. The former Treasurer of New South Wales, Ken Booth, gave me his full support in seeking to have my electorate connected to the sewerage system. The former members for Cessnockand Swansea, and also other northern colleagues offeredsupport. The Hunter fringe area sewerage scheme was introduced. The water board was to charge a little extra and the council was to charge a little extra, the Greiner campaign said there 1560 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1993 would not be extra charges imposedon the people of theHunter. It only took 12months. Now we are paying all those extra fees that we have all become accustomed to paying under this Government. I am receiving a call to finish up. The honourable member for Swansea castigated Labor members for not attending the Hunter task force team run by the Government. The reason we did not attend those meetings, after being as loyal and helpful as possible, was that the decisions were made before we went there. Honourable members opposite were silly enough, under the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, to announce them before the meeting. We were told we would not have any input, so what was the use of attending? I wish to make it quite clear-and my northern colleagues will support me in this-that those decisions were the wrong decisions and that is why we were not allowed to have any input. On the odd occasion I have been known to bewrong, but I do not think this will be the last opportunity I shall have to speak in this Parliainent. Therefore, I shall leave my tributes to my associates until the election is held. I give this warning to the Premier: if he goes to the people now, he will be defeated.
Madam DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member's time for speaking has expired. Mr KERR (Cronulla) 14.51: 1 congratulate His Excellency the Governor on his Speech, which sets the tone for this Government and what this Government is all about-leadership, management and teamwork. [Intemption] Madam DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The member for Smithfield will cease interjecting and the member for Cronulla will continue with his contribution. Mr KERR: The honourable member for Smithfieldhas the opportunity to find out, having been in this House only a short time, what the Government is all about-health, law and order, and education. I wish to speak about those matters. I speak first about law and order because the quality of a nation dependsupon the quality of its laws. The quality of those laws will depend upon thoselaws being respected by the vast majority of people. When we came to government what did we find'? We faced a situation where the very institutions of government had been subverted. The former chief stipendiary magistrate-I notice lately in the news once again-had been gaoled; the former Minister for Corrective Services had been gaoled, so the Legislature, Executive and judiciary were represented in the dock. Judges were being convicted. The Executive was represented. A former deputy commissionerof police had been taken up on bribery charges and allowed to retire with the rank of sergeant. There was a full representation of the Executive, the judiciary and the Legislature. What a great achievement in just more than a decade. Mr Baird: Unbelievable. Mr KERR: Unbelievable, as the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier, and Minister Assisting the Treasurer states. Having faced that problem, this Government came to power with a commitment that is mentioned in His Excellency's Speech. The Independent Commission Against Corruption was set up and as His Excellency stated, codes of conduct were introduced.The Government has emphasised the high premium it has placed on the integrity of public officials. I have the honour of 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1561 being the chairman of the parliamentary committee. That committee hasdone sterling work. Five or six reports have been published by that committee on the Independent Comnlission Against Corruption. The furthest that committee has been is Redfern. That says a great deal, and that was at its own expense. Thework of that committee has certainly been in the best spirit of this Government,very economical. I wish to pay tribute to all the members of that committee forthe work they have done and the quality of the reports produced. The key indicators of this Government are leadership and management. We came into power with a $46 billion debt at last count. We set up an independentcommission to carry out an audit into that. Thatwas thestate of play. Now, instead of piling debt upon debt, this State has been turned around. Why would one ever want to go back? It is perhaps relevant for me to refer to my predecessor, the Hon. M. R. Egan, since transferred to the other place and now chairman of the Opposition's Wastewatch committee. One would have thought he would have a lot to look at in caucus, but he seems instead to be talking about someof the things that the Government is doing. In this world, if you want to judge you have to be prepared to be judged. Let us look at his management record. He was president of the Cronulla Labor and Workingmen's Club. I am sure that the Minister for Transport, an old Cronulla boy, would remember that club. It was beautifully located and no doubt its members, who put their hard-earned savings into the club, believed in the Chifley and Curtin version of the Labor Party. Despite the location of the club it went into receivership,and in April 1988 it was sold for $3.9 million. Lessthan 12months later, inMarch 1989, it was sold for $7.2 million. That is hardly a great example ofan asset sale. The club's unsecured creditors, those Labor Party supporters, received only 70c in the dollar. That was disgraceful. Opposition is all about criticising the Government when it mismanages or is guilty of waste. The Cronulla workersclub exemplifiedthe former Government's track record, and that club was a microcosm of New South Wales at the time the present Government was elected-it was gutted and bankrupt. One could almost say that Victoria, Tasmania,South Australia and Western Australiaare the Cronulla workers club, writ large. That is the sort of management style that these people opposite have in mind for New South Wales. Let us consider the environment, a subject that the Leader of the Oppositionwouldlike to talkabout. On thatsubject hc has beenstranded by his Federal colleagues. The Federal Governmentwon the election in early 1990 and has been greener than green. But suddenly it has not so much as taken a U-turn,but has almost jack-knifed, on its policy. Mr White: A reverse J curve. Mr KERR: Exactly. The environment shouldnot be a plaything of politicians. The environment debate is far too complex and far too important to be allowed to degenerate into a superficial attempt to lock up second or third preference votes in a particular election. The pressing environmental concerns that affect the lifestyle and sense of security and well-being of the citizens of New South Wales should be above party politics. Because of the teamwork of the various members representing electorates inthe Sutherland shirea large number of environmentalconcerns are being addressed. Mr Baird: The A-team. ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
Mr KERR: As the Minister says, the A-team. We have tackled problems with the beaches, sewerage and catchment areas, and we have made real achievements. Members on the other side of the House should remember that when you look at what has happened in Eastern Europe you realise that a cleaner, healthier environment cannot be achieved financially or technologicallywithout a thriving economic base. That is what this Government is about. It is all very well for the Leader of the Opposition to say on behalf of his shadow cabinet that members are against what the Federal Government is doing and that they embrace the politics of conviction, that they can do no other than take a stance. When the coalition was in Opposition and the present Leader of the Opposition was Minister for Planning and Environment, he cut the staff of the State Pollution Control Commission, and he cut its budget by 10 per cent. He certainly took a stand on the environment. When Kurnell was turned into a site for toxic and noxious industries, the local residents could not ascertain where he stood. The only Labor person who can talk about conviction in politics is Rex Jackson. When Labor was in government the coastal council-which has been revived by this Government-was dismantled. We know what is happening with the Opposition leadership. It is up for grabs and deals are being done between the right and the left. The member for Liverpool-the former member for Penrith-might not have a chance, because, of the deals being done. In future we might see on that side the lovely Nagle party emerge. The honourable member for Auburn is a highly talented member, but I give him the same advice that the honourable member for Liverpool received when he challenged the Won. Barrie Unsworth-and I think that the honourable member for Liverpool would be gracious enough now to admit that he would not have made as good a Premier as the Hon. Barrie Unsworth. As Neville Kenneth Wran said in relation to the honourable member for Liverpool "It was a bit adventurous". I offer that advice to the honourable member for Auburn. There is a man who could be described as waiting in the wilderness, depending upon your view of Turramurra, who, like Wilson and Churchill, is ready to serve. He is a man who has a degree of toughness. One might not like what he stands for, but at least he stands for something. The problem with the Leader of the Opposition is that he cannot quite make up his mind what he is-a cabaret artist or some type ofwind-sighing evangelist. That is the problem with this Opposition. We are a government of achievement. I could easily talk about a whole series of multimillion dollar achievements in my electorate, such as a traffic and parking study for Cronulla, Kurnell sewerage, Bundeena sewerage, the Waterfall bridge for which tenders have been called, and the rock pool at Cronulla. Some aspects of Sutherland shire council are of concern to the local residents. No one would deny that that council has many hard-working officers who spend a great deal of their time endeavouring to make the council work. But what, for example, has happened about the rock pool at Cronulla? On 3rd April last year in a speech in this House I said that the members in the Sutherland shire had raised funds to repair the rock pool. Despite the council having received hundreds of millions of dollars in rate revenue from residents since the pool was damaged, the council does not have the money to repair that pool. Though the members collected $130,000, work has not commenced. When will it commence? A tourism plan for Sutherland shire has been prepared. When will it be put on public exhibition? A traffic plan for Cronulla has been prepared. When will it be exhibited? The council cannot impose its environmental agenda upon the residents of 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1563 the Sutherland shire unless it communicates with the residents. Delays have occurred. This Government allocated $500,000 for the dredging of Port Hacking. What has happened? When will the dredging be completed? How has the moneybeen spent? The Sutherland shire council must address those questions. There is so much I could say about what is happening in the Sutherland shire and about what this Government is doing, but I realise that time is precious, and members are keen to get away.
Mr Shedden: We want to get away from you. Mr KERR: The honourable member for Bankstown is part of an abomination-denouncing and horror-expressing formation team that populates the Opposition benches. He has to come up with a policy, an alternative. Government is not about slogans or rhetoric. This Government is about achievement; we are a can do Government. The Opposition must formulate an alternative. That is what the coalition did when it was in opposition and that is why eventually we were elected to government. You cannot govern merely for the present day and pile debt upon debt. That happened for 12 years, but now New South Wales has a government that is governing for all its people. It is no longer sufficient to govern only for one section of the community, whether it be the trade union movement or any other small section of the community, This Government accepts no sectional boundaries, or ethnic or racial divisions. We govern for the men and women who produce our food, patrol our streets, man our factories, teach our children, keep our homes, and heal us when we are sick. We govern for the professionals, the industrialists, the shopkeepers, the clerks, the taxi drivers and the truck drivers. The Speech of His Excellency is a blueprint, a vision, for New South Wales that the Government will realise. It is a challenge the Government has grasped because that is the kind of government we are. Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Anderson.
PRINTING COMMITTEE Third Report Mr Small, as Chairman, brought up the Third Report from the Printing Committee.
House adjourned at 4.21 p.m.
QUESTIONSUPON NOTICE The following questions upon notice and answers were circulated in Questionsand Answers:
RAILWAY STATION CLOSURES Mr Amery asked the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier, and Minister Assisting the Treasurer- 1564 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
(1) How many railway stations have been closed throughout New South Wales since March 1988? (2) What are the names of these stations and in which electorates are they located? (3) How many staff were employed at these stations prior to their closure? Answer- (1) to (3) Since March 1988,State Rail passenger trainservices have been replaced with coach services beyond Tamworth, Dubbo and QueanbeyadCanberra affecting the electorates of Banvon, Broken Hill, Armidale and Monaro. I announced in May 1990 that, with the introduction of new generation Explorer trains in 1992, passenger services will be restored to Armidale and Moree and upgraded between Sydney and QueanbeyanJCanberra. In July 1989 I announced that State Rail's Staff would be reduced to 18,500 through a voluntary redundancy programme. Only 29 per cent of these reductions will occur in country areas.
CARINGBAH-SANS SOUCI SCHOOL STUDENT TRANSPORT Mr Langton asked the Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works, and Minister for Roads- (1) Is there no suitable bus transport between Sans Souci peninsula and Caringbah for students of Caringbah High School and Caringbah North School? (2) Can he advise if the Roads and Traffic Authority are able to provide this service? (3) If not, why not? Answer- (1) to (3) The honourable member should address this question to the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer.
RnTERSTONE-RICHMONDRAILWAY SERVICES Mr Amery asked the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier, and Minister Assisting the Treasurer- (1) Is he aware that rail commuters on the Richmond line have been continually inconvenienced by breakdowns of the 600 Class diesels servicing this line? (2) How much money was spent, in the year ended 30 June 1990, to maintain these units? (3) How much money has been spent repairing these units during: (a) July 1990? (b) August 1990? (c) September 1990? 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1565
(4) How much money is being paid to private bus companies, per month, to maintain a service whilst the diesel trains are out of service undergoing repairs? (5) Will he bring unused diesel trains from the Newcastle and Wollongong areas into service on the Richmond line to back up and support the trains now being used on this line? Answer- (1) Yes. (2) $241,652. (3) July $9,263 August $12,389 September $24,636
TOTAL $46,288 (4) The average cost per month this financial year to the end of September is $15,748. (5) Diesels from Newcastleand Wollongong have replaced older rolling stock on the Richmond line from 4 November 1990.
PUBLIC BUS ROUTE 469 Ms Nori asked the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier, and Minister Assisting the Treasurer- (1) Are the temporary bus stops for the new 469 bus route being parked out because of inadequate sign posting? (2) Has this resulted in buses havingto double park to enable passengers to board and alight? (3) Will he investigate this problem as a matter of urgency? (4) When will permanent bus stops for this bus route be completed? Answer- (1) The temporary bus stop signs were replaced recently by permanent signs following approval by Leichhardt Council. (2) Not applicable. (3) Nor applicable. (4) See (1) above.
FAIRY MEADOW RAILWAY STATION OVERBRIDGE Mr Markham asked the Minister for Transport, Minister Assisting the Premier, and Minister Assisting the Treasurer- (1) Will ramp access be provided from the Elliotts Road overbridge to the western platform of Fairy Meadow RailwayStation? 1566 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
(2) If so, when will the work commence? (3) If not, what access will be provided to the western platform for the elderly, people with limited mobility and parents with young families? Answer- (1) CityRail's 1990/92 station upgrading programme does not include plans to construct a ramp at this location. (2) The 1991192 programme has not: yet been finalised. (3) Access to the western platform is provided by way of a pedestrian level crossing leading to a ramp to the Sydney end of the Fairy Meadow platforms. The pedestrian level crossing is in good condition, protected by lights, bell, a boom and barriers.
JERVIS BAY MARINE RESERVE Mr Gibson asked the Minister for Local Government and Minister for Planning- When will a decision be made concerning the marine park proposal for Jervis Bay? Answer- The marine park proposal is one of a number of land use issues which have major implications for the Jervis Bay area. Accordingly,I have arranged for a regional planning exercise to be undertaken jointly by the Department of Planning and Shoalhaven City Council to advise on appropriate strategies, policies and plans for Jervis Bay and environs. A discussion paper and draft policy guidelines will be placed on public exhibition in mid 1991. Following the exhibition, detailed consideration will be given to the submissions received. The Governmentwill then be in a position to make an informed decision about the marine park proposal.
LEICHHARDT TRAFFICSTUDY Ms Nori asked the Minister for Local Government and Minister for Planning- What, if anything, has been considered from the findings in stages 1 and 2 of the traffic report compiled by Stapleton and Hallam in association with Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales, Department of Planning, for Leichhardt Municipal Council? Answer- The traffic study to which Ms Nori refers was commissioned and administered by Leichhardt Municipal Council. The Department of Planning contributed $10,000 toward the study but the Council remained responsible. The findings are a matter for the Council to consider in finalising draft Local Environmental Plans on the Balmain Peninsula and in the preparation of its report under section 68 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. 21 March, 1991 ASSEMBLY 1567
BALMAIN PENINSULA DEVELOPMENT Ms Nori asked the Minister for Local Government and Minister for Planning- (1) Is he aware, that in the claim of urban consolidation, Balmain Peninsula has already passed the figure required, thus, making a greater need for open space consideration? (2) In the matter of rezoning, has consideration been given to the effect that the White Bay-Pyrmont proposal will have on the traffic aspect of rezoning and should it be taken into account before rezoning? (3) Why is the Government opposed to and refusing to allow an independent commission and a public hearindinquiry into an overall plan for the Balmain Peninsula? (4) Does the administrator have a vested interest in the State-owned land now being developed and in future State sites? (5) (a) Was the second stage compiled before the traffic figures were available from the Roads and Traffic Authority? (b) Was the Leichhardt Council town planner's report released before the second stage of this report was completed? (6) Why did the first stage report that these developments should not be considered for completion before the completion of the City East Link and alteration to the Glebe Island Bridge? (7) As the proposals for White Bay and Pyrmont have now been released, should there be a further evaluation? Answer- (1) There is no specific urban consolidation figure for Leichhardt Municipality or the Balmain Peninsula. The 1986 open space provision rate review shows that in the context of Leichhardt Municipality, Balmain Peninsula is relatively well provided for open space. Balmain has a rate of approximately 2.1 ha per thousand of population compared to approximately 1.7 ha per thousand for the municipality overall. Asubstantial portion of Balmain's open space has been purchased by the Department of Planning and consists of high quality foreshore parkland. (2) The City West Urban Strategy has taken the proposed rezonings into account in examining the regional traffic impacts of potential development in the vicinity of the strategy lands. (3) The Government is not opposed to and in fact has encouraged Leichhardt Council to prepare an overall or comprehensive plan for Leichhardt Municipality. The Council resolved to prepare a comprehensive plan in 1986 but to date has failed to progress this overall review to the point where it can be made available for public exhibition. The Government has not refused an Inquiry in respect of a comprehensive draft local environmental plan for the Balmain Peninsula. (4) No. 1568 ASSEMBLY 21 March, 1991
(5)(a) It is assumed Ms Nori here refers to the Balmain traffic study. That study was commissioned and administered by Leichhardt Council and details associated with the study would best be sought from the Council. (b) The report entitled "Report on the Proposed Rezoning of the Arnpol Unilever, Balmain Power Station, Monsanto and Caltex Sites"released in August 1990was released before the completion of Stage I1 of the traffic study. However the town planner's report to the Council dated December 1990 and the Council's report under section 68 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, which accompanied the final draft of the Local Environmental Plans relating to those sites was completed after the completion of Stage I1 of the traffic study. (6) This question would be more appropriately directed to the Council and/or its consultants who completed the report. (7) The City West Regional Strategy considered the developments proposed in the draft Local Environmental Plans.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT REZONING POLICY Ms Nori asked the Minister for Local Government and Minister for Planning- (1) How can rezoning be approved for a specific purpose before a full analysis of sites, after clean up is made, to determine their possible use? (2) Does this then have legal implications? (3) If the developer should take legal action, who is liable?
(1) It is assumed that Ms Nori is referring to the issue of site contamination. Under the provisions of the Environmentally Hazardous Chemicals Act 1985, the State Pollution Control Commission (SPCC) is the authority responsible to ensure that any and all site contamination is identified, that adequate rehabilitation techniques are developed and that sites are rehabilitated to a level compatible with the intended use. (2) Yes, any development of the sites must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Environmentally Hazardous Chemicals (EHC) Act 1985 and relevant local environmental plans. Failure to do so would open any developers to prosecution under penalty provisions in the EHC Act and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. (3) Without a clearer idea of the type of legal action envisaged, it is not possible to provide information on liability.