ADJOURNMENT ...... 19901 ANZAC DAY ...... 19904 AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORT ...... 19857 AUSTRALASIAN LYMPHOLOGY ASSOCIATION AWARENESS CAMPAIGN ...... 19853 AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION OF UKRAINIAN ORGANISATIONS ...... 19856 AUSTRALIAN MEN'S AND MIXED NETBALL CHAMPIONSHIPS ...... 19855 BATTLE OF KAPYONG SIXTIETH ANNIVERSARY ...... 19849 BENEVOLENT SOCIETY 200TH ANNIVERSARY ...... 19849 BLUE MOUNTAINS SEPTIC PUMP-OUT SCHEME ...... 19896 BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE ...... 19846, 19853, 19857, 19857 CENTRAL COAST MARINERS AND WESTERN SYDNEY WANDERERS ...... 19849 COAL SEAM GAS INDUSTRY ...... 19896 COMMUNITY HOUSING PROVIDERS ...... 19892 COMPULSORY THIRD PARTY GREEN SLIP INSURANCE SCHEME...... 19894 CORROBOREE CULTURAL FESTIVAL ...... 19856 CRIMES (DOMESTIC AND PERSONAL VIOLENCE) AMENDMENT (INFORMATION SHARING) BILL 2013 ...... 19846 DARLING HARBOUR WATER QUALITY ...... 19898 DISABILITY SECTOR NURSE SALARIES...... 19903 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS ...... 19888 DROUGHT ASSISTANCE...... 19895 FIREARMS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2011 ...... 19858 FIVE DOCK SOCIAL HOUSING MAINTENANCE SERVICES ...... 19893 GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 2 ...... 19849 GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 3 ...... 19856 HEALTH FUNDING ...... 19858 HELLENIC LYCEUM EXHIBITION ...... 19851 HEPATITIS C ...... 19846 INSPECTOR OF NSW CRIME COMMISSION ...... 19889 IRREGULAR PETITION ...... 19857 JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE OFFICE OF THE VALUER GENERAL ...... 19900 LOCAL GOVERNMENT PENSIONER CONCESSIONS ...... 19899 MINING INDUSTRY ECONOMIC BENEFITS ...... 19894 NATIONAL PARK ESTATE (SOUTH-WESTERN CYPRESS RESERVATIONS) AMENDMENT BILL 2012 ...... 19858 NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE AMENDMENT (ILLEGAL FORESTRY OPERATIONS) BILL 2012 ...... 19858 NEWCASTLE COMMUNICATIONS CENTRE ...... 19895 PAKISTAN CONSULATE CONSUL-GENERAL ...... 19854 PALLIATIVE CARE ...... 19905 PEOPLE'S DAILY ONLINE ...... 19851 PUBLIC TRANSPORT ACCESSIBILITY ...... 19902 PUNJABI COUNCIL OF AUSTRALIA FESTIVAL OF VAISAKHI ...... 19850, 19853 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ...... 19888, 19890 RETIREMENT OF HER EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR OF NEW SOUTH WALES ...... 19848 RIGHTS OF THE TERMINALLY ILL BILL 2013 ...... 19868 RURAL AND REGIONAL ROAD UPGRADES ...... 19891 SCHIZOPHRENIA AWARENESS WEEK ...... 19847 SCHOOL ASSETS SALES ...... 19900 SICHUAN PROVINCE EARTHQUAKE ...... 19852 SNOWY HYDRO LIMITED ...... 19888 SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT ...... 19858 STATUTORY AND OTHER OFFICES REMUNERATION AMENDMENT (JUDICIAL AND OTHER OFFICE HOLDERS) BILL 2013 ...... 19846 TRIBUTE TO ERNIE BRIDGE ...... 19848 TRIBUTE TO FATHER SUPERIOR ANTOINE TARABAY, OLM ...... 19847 TRIBUTE TO MR JIM CAREY ...... 19901 TRIBUTE TO MR PETER (BOUTROS) INDARI ...... 19851 TRINITY GRAMMAR SCHOOL 100TH ANNIVERSARY ...... 19847 UNLAWFUL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISM ...... 19873

UNPROCLAIMED LEGISLATION ...... 19900 WARRIEWOOD WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ...... 19899 WHITE BAY CRUISE TERMINAL ...... 19897 WORKERS COMPENSATION SCHEME ...... 19889, 19890, 19900 19846

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Thursday 2 May 2013

______

The President (The Hon. Donald Thomas Harwin) took the chair at 9.30 a.m.

The President read the Prayers.

STATUTORY AND OTHER OFFICES REMUNERATION AMENDMENT (JUDICIAL AND OTHER OFFICE HOLDERS) BILL 2013

CRIMES (DOMESTIC AND PERSONAL VIOLENCE) AMENDMENT (INFORMATION SHARING) BILL 2013

Bills received from the Legislative Assembly.

Leave granted for procedural matters to be dealt with on one motion without formality.

Motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay agreed to:

That these bills be read a first time and printed, standing orders be suspended on contingent notice for remaining stages and the second readings of the bills be set down as orders of the day for a later hour.

Bills read a first time and ordered to be printed.

Second readings set down as orders of the day for a later hour.

Pursuant to sessional orders Formal Business Notices of Motions proceeded with.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Formal Business Notices of Motions

Private Members' Business item Nos 1089, 1091, 1092, 1093, 1110 and 1167 outside the Order of Precedence objected to as being taken as formal business.

HEPATITIS C

Motion by the Hon. agreed to:

1. That this House notes that a new report by the Boston Consulting Group on the Economic Impact of Hepatitis C shows that "For every one dollar spent on treating hepatitis C in Australia, four more dollars are currently spent on the consequences of not treating, or curing people with hepatitis C".

2. That this House:

(a) welcomes the decision of the Federal Government to fund boceprevir and telaprevir on the PhBS as, from public health perspectives and from a health budget point of view, this makes sense, as the use of these new therapies for hepatitis C will help prevent around 2,400 cases of liver cancer and over 2,200 premature deaths and avert the need for over 800 liver transplants amongst the people in Australia currently living with hepatitis C, and

(b) notes that chronic hepatitis C is a major cost to the public health system, affecting over 220,000 Australians, and approximately 11,000 new cases of chronic viral hepatitis C are diagnosed annually, with more and more people dying from severe liver disease and liver cancer each year.

3. That this House calls on the Federal and State governments to take action as needed to avert a national health crisis, as Hepatitis C has already overtaken HIV/AIDS as Australia's number one viral cause of death.

2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19847

SCHIZOPHRENIA AWARENESS WEEK

Motion by the Hon. AMANDA FAZIO agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) Schizophrenia Awareness Week will be held from 13 to 19 May 2013 with the theme of "STOP for Schizophrenia: give it up for mental health", and

(b) STOP is the annual online fundraising campaign for the Schizophrenia Research Institute that allows people to choose what they want to give up during Schizophrenia Awareness Week or for the whole month of May to raise money for schizophrenia research.

2. That this House recognises that:

(a) the Schizophrenia Research Institute is the only national medical research institute solely dedicated to discovering ways to prevent and cure schizophrenia,

(b) schizophrenia is a brain disorder that will affect one in 100 young people in Australia, and schizophrenia robs them of a normal future, an education, career and future relationships and is a major contributor to youth suicide,

(c) the Schizophrenia Research Institute was established in 1996 as Australia's first virtual medical research institute, and conducts and supports schizophrenia research in hospitals, universities and research institutes across the country and internationally, and

(d) the institute has over 60 employees and more than 140 scientific affiliates; drives a proactive research agenda; has invested over $26 million; and has had numerous successes to date.

3. That this House congratulates the Schizophrenia Research Institute on its efforts in promoting and undertaking schizophrenia research.

TRIBUTE TO FATHER SUPERIOR ANTOINE TARABAY, OLM

Motion by the Hon. agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) His Holiness Pope Francis recently announced the appointment of Father Antoine Tarabay as the fourth Maronite Bishop of Australia,

(b) Father Tarabay, born in Northern Lebanon, was until now the Father Superior of the Lebanese Maronite Order in Australia, Rector of St Charbel's Monastery and College, and Parish Priest of St Charbel's Parish, and

(c) Father Tarabay will be Australia's second youngest Bishop.

2. That this House acknowledge the contributions, commitment and service of Father Tarabay's predecessor, Bishop Ad Abi Karam.

3. That this House congratulate Father Tarabay and the more than 30,000 Australian Maronites on his elevation.

TRINITY GRAMMAR SCHOOL 100TH ANNIVERSARY

Motion by the Hon. MARIE FICARRA agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) Trinity Grammar School was founded in 1913 by the Reverend G. A. Chambers,

(b) Reverend Chambers' vision was for a church school that would provide witness in the populous area of south-west suburbs of Sydney where there was no Anglican Church boys' school,

(c) Trinity Grammar School was thus established as a parish school for boys, by a committee of parishioners of Holy Trinity Dulwich Hill,

(d) this committee was chaired by Reverend Chambers, whom it appointed as Warden of the School,

(e) the school was opened on 13 February 1913 by the Archbishop of Sydney, the Right Reverend J. C. Wright, and

19848 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

(f) during the 100th anniversary, a number of students have achieved sporting excellence in becoming champions or winners of various titles:

(i) the CAS swimming team won the Thyne Shield for the tenth consecutive year and included Blake Artemi, Christopher Artemi, Luke Asnicar, Ryan Atherton, Dylan Betham, Maniah Betham, Jack Brereton, Blake Byrne, Koray Cancurt, William Catterson, Cedric Chan, George Corias, Harry Dai, Alex Douglas, James Douglas, Nicholas Dungan, Tomas Elliott, Adam Emanuelli, Martin Floro, Austin Fong, Jacob Gadiel, Lee Garox, Mackenzie Gavin, Brayden Gossling, Ethan Hansford, Jimmy Harris, Declan Heim, Jonah Hobbs, Lelland Hui, Nicholas Hui, Riley Innes, Andrew Jamieson-Grigg, Patrick Jiang, Cameron Jones, Patrick Jiang, Andrew Kim, Jason Kim, Justin Kim, Anthony Klepac, Gary Koshnitsky, Patrick Kwok, Derek Leung, Edward Marks, Paddy Martin, Keân Mccaw, Ben Mcdermott, Hugo Miller, Mitchell Needham, Sho Nishimoto, Andrew Noh, Cameron Paterson, Dillan Pienaar, Paul Raptis, William Raptis, Tom Salmon, Joshua Simat, Thomas Stirk, Keegan Street, James Traiforos, Kaden Tsoi, Joel Walker, Dominic Weller, Patrick Yap, Jasen Yu, Yan Yu, coaches Matthew Brown, Colman Wong, David Roberts, Master in Charge James Martin, and managers Janet Wonders, Keith Dobbs and James Leckie,

(ii) the 1st V basketball team was premiers and won the AV Smith Shield for the fifth consecutive year and included Lucas Angelakos, Liam Brown, Joel Di Chiara, Tom Dickinson, Nicholas Feng, James Finney, Dominic Gilbert, Peter Gullotta, Jed Maher, Max Peters, Callum Price, Dane Ristovski, Jaden Weldon, Coaches: Ben Morrissey and Chris Barnes,

(iii) the CAS diving team won the Steven Barnett Shield and included: Nathaniel Bradford, Cooper Chambers, Nicholas Dungan, Nicholas Jeffree, William Jeffree Matthew Lang, Benjamin On, Thomas York and Coach: Martin Lang,

(iv) the 1st VI volleyball team was undefeated premiers and included Evan Bao, Simeon Athos, James Combes, Michael Diamantis, Callum Fogarty, Cameron Griffith, Darren Hojel, Nikolas Kukic, Arun Lertsumitkul, Liam Obeid, Jared Phillis, Matthew Skelly, Jonathan Webster and Coach: Andrew Simos.

2. That this House:

(a) congratulates Trinity Grammar School on its 100th anniversary and commends all students for their efforts both academic and sporting achievements, and

(b) congratulates Trinity Grammar School's Headmaster, Mr G. M. Cujes, Deputy Master and Director of Curriculum, Mrs S. Floro, and Sports Master, Mr J. Allen, on their continued commitment to excellence in education and Trinity Grammar School.

TRIBUTE TO ERNIE BRIDGE

Motion by the Hon. LINDA VOLTZ agreed to:

1. That this House notes with sadness the passing of Ernie Bridge, the first Aboriginal member of the Western Australian Parliament and the first Aboriginal to be a Cabinet member in any Australian Parliament whilst serving as Western Australia's Minister for Water Resources, the North West and Aboriginal Affairs.

2. That this House notes that Ernie:

(a) had previously served as the Minister for Water Resources and Minister for Small Business,

(b) recorded seven country and western albums,

(c) performed at the Grand Ole Opry, and

(d) left a handprint in Tamworth.

3. That this House extends its condolences to Ernie Bridge's family and friends, in particular his children Beverley, Kimberley, Noel and Cheryl.

RETIREMENT OF HER EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Motion by the Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) the Governor of New South Wales, Professor Marie Bashir, will retire in September 2014,

(b) her retirement will mark 13 years of remarkable service as Governor of New South Wales, and

(c) Governor Bashir has served the people of New South Wales with the highest integrity, dignity and diplomacy.

2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19849

2. That this House acknowledge the immense contributions Governor Bashir has made particularly across arts and culture, mental and indigenous health and education.

3. That this House congratulate Governor Bashir on her inspirational leadership in her commitment to various causes; and on continuously representing the people of New South Wales with warmth, generosity and humility.

4. That this House wish Governor Bashir the very best for the rest of her term and for her future endeavours.

GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 2

Visits of Inspection

Motion by the Hon. Marie Ficarra agreed to:

That, for the purpose of its current inquiry into drug and alcohol treatment, General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 have power, with the approval of the President, to make visits of inspection elsewhere in Australia.

CENTRAL COAST MARINERS AND WESTERN SYDNEY WANDERERS

Motion by the Hon. AMANDA FAZIO agreed to:

1. That this House congratulates the Central Coast Mariners on their well-deserved 2-0 victory in the A-League Football Grand Final held on Sunday 21 April 2013.

2. That this House congratulates the newest team in the A-League, the Western Sydney Wanderers, on a stunning debut season which saw them reach the Grand Final after a record-breaking run of 13 undefeated games.

BENEVOLENT SOCIETY 200TH ANNIVERSARY

Motion by the Hon. AMANDA FAZIO agreed to:

1. That this House notes that, on 8 May 2013, the Benevolent Society, the oldest charity in Australia, will celebrate its 200th Anniversary.

2. That this House congratulates the Benevolent Society on its many significant achievements over the last 200 years which include:

(a) the provision from 1879 of free legal aid to women to assist in obtaining maintenance,

(b) the agitation for old age pensions which were ultimately introduced in 1901, a world first,

(c) the inclusion of women on the board of directors from 1902, the year women received the vote,

(d) the Royal Hospital for Women at Paddington which opened in 1905,

(e) the development of the diagnostic ultrasound procedure at the Royal Hospital for Women from 1962, and

(f) establishing a social advocacy unit so that not only would the society comfort the afflicted it would also afflict the comfortable.

3. That this House commends the Benevolent Society for its contribution to the social good in New South Wales and wishes the society continued success.

BATTLE OF KAPYONG SIXTIETH ANNIVERSARY

Motion by the Hon. AMANDA FAZIO agreed to:

1. This House notes that:

(a) on Saturday 20 April 2013, a service was held at 2.00 p.m. at the 113th AGH Memorial Chapel at Concord Hospital to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of the ceasefire and the battle of Kapyong. The Battle of Kapyong took place on 23-24 April 1951 and came to be the most significant and important battle for Australian troops in Korea. Thirty-two Australians were killed and 53 were wounded fighting to stop the Chinese advance which prevented Seoul from falling into enemy hands,

(b) from 1950-53, 17,000 Australians in the Army, Navy and Air Force fought as part of the United Nations multinational force, defending South Korea from the Communist force of North Korea. Australia's allies in this operation were the United States, Belgium, Britain, Canada, Colombia, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, and Turkey. India, the Scandinavian countries and Italy provided medical units,

19850 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

(c) the Australian Army was primarily represented in Korea by the 3rd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (3 RAR), which arrived in Pusan on 27 September 1950. The 1st Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (1 RAR) and the 2nd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (2 RAR) also joined the war later, each on a one-year tour of duty. The Australians were part of a larger Commonwealth force, eventually redesignated the 28th Commonwealth Brigade. In July 1951, this Brigade joined the 25th Canadian and the 29th British Brigades to become the 1st Commonwealth Division,

(d) the Royal Australian Navy had nine ships operating during the Korean War: the aircraft carrier Sydney, the battle-class destroyers Bataan, Warramunga, Anzac and Tobruk, and the river-class frigates Murchison, Shoalhaven, Condamine and Culgoa. The Royal Australian Air Force deployed 77 Squadron,

(e) after the war ended, Australians remained in Korea for four years as military observers. Since then, Australia has maintained a presence, discharged by the Australian Military Attaché,

(f) Australia's involvement in the Korean War won much praise from other nations. Awards and decorations given to Australians during the war totalled 615, while awards given to Australians by other countries numbered 173. The loss of life during this conflict made it one of the bloodiest wars of the 20th century. Nearly four million Koreans and Chinese were killed with more than half the dead being Korean civilians. Australian casualties numbered over 1,500, including 339 dead,

(g) the service was held by the Korea War Veterans Association of New South Wales with the support of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the NSW Corrective Services Band, Sydney Cheil Church Choir, the Food Services Department and staff of Concord Hospital and the Concord Hospital Pastoral Care Department,

(h) present at the Commemoration were:

(i) Mr Brian Davies, LVO, representing the Governor of New South Wales Her Excellency Professor Marie Bashir, AC, CVO,

(ii) Mr John Murphy, MP, representing the Prime Minister,

(iii) Hon. , MP, Minister for Citizenship and Communities representing the Premier,

(iv) Mr , MP, shadow Minister for Citizenship and Communities, representing the Leader of the Opposition,

(v) Mr , MP, member for Drummoyne,

(vi) the Hon. Amanda Fazio, MLC,

(vii) Mr Mick Kohlhoff, President of the Korean War Veterans Association,

(viii) Mr Tom Stewart Chaplain to the Korea War Veterans Association, and

(i) also in attendance were many veterans of the Korean War and their families including Lt V. B. Fazio, RAN, (retired) and Mrs Fazio.

2. That this House acknowledges the contribution made by all service personnel who participated in the Korean War and peace keeping operations and commends the Korea War Veterans Association NSW for organising this important commemorative function.

PUNJABI COUNCIL OF AUSTRALIA FESTIVAL OF VAISAKHI

Motion by the Hon. AMANDA FAZIO agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) the Punjabi Council of Australia held its Vaisakhi Celebration, a festival of harvest, at the New South Wales Parliament on Tuesday 26 March 2013,

(b) this was the seventh year that the Punjabi Council of Australia has held its Vaisakhi Celebration at the New South Wales Parliament. Vaisakhi also coincides with the Baptism of the Sikh faith by the Tenth Master, Guru Gobind Singh, in 1699 at Anandpur Sahib in Punjab India, and

(c) a special guest at the celebration was Mr Fauja Singh, the oldest marathon runner in the world who turned 102 on 1 April 2013.

2. That this House congratulates Dr Moninder Singh and the Punjabi Council of Australia for the success of its Vaisakhi Celebration.

2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19851

TRIBUTE TO MR PETER (BOUTROS) INDARI

Motion by the Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) Mr Peter (Boutros) Indari passed away on 26 May 2012,

(b) Mr Indari was a pioneer of the Arabic press and ethnic community media in Australia,

(c) throughout his career, Mr Indari founded, co-founded and edited a number of leading Arabic newspapers in Australia, including El-Telegraph, An-Nahar and Aesharq,

(d) Mr Indari was a well-respected political writer and was renowned for his series of articles titled "Lest We Forget", which were published over a period of 20 years and collected in a book under the same title, published by An-Nahar newspaper in Sydney during 2001,

(e) Mr Indari grew up in the village of Metrit, Lebanon, arriving in Australia at the age of 16, and

(f) Peter (Boutros) Indari is survived by his wife Lamia, and his three children Ziad, Imad, and Hanan.

2. That this House notes the contribution of Mr Indari to the Arabic community media in New South Wales, and notes that a memorial in his name will be held on 2 May 2013.

PEOPLE'S DAILY ONLINE AUSTRALIA

Motion by the Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) on the evening of 22 March 2013, People's Daily Online Australia Pty Ltd was officially launched in Sydney, Australia,

(b) People's Daily Online Australia is an international media organisation with a global multi-language medium adding to the wide tapestry of ethnic media in Australia,

(c) since the establishment of official China and Australia diplomatic relations in 1972, significant social, economic and political achievements have been made between the two countries, and

(d) People's Daily Online Australia will provide a platform for information exchange, thereby improving the friendship and communication between both countries and its people.

2. That this House notes the contribution of all Australian Chinese journalists and congratulates all those involved in the launch of the People's Daily Online Australia.

HELLENIC LYCEUM EXHIBITION

Motion by the Hon. DAVID CLARKE agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) on 7 and 8 March 2013, the Hellenic Lyceum held in the Fountain Court of the New South Wales Parliament an exhibition of part of its extensive collection of Hellenic costumes and jewellery, as well as a collection of paintings by 15 Hellenic-Australian artists, followed by a Symposium at Sydney University on the role of Greek women in Australian society, and

(b) those who attended as guests at the official opening included:

(i) the Hon. Konstantinos Tsiaras, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Greece,

(ii) the Very Reverend Father Steve Scoutas, representing His Eminence, Archbishop Styllianos,

(iii) the Greek Ambassador, His Excellency Mr Charalambos Dafaranos,

(iv) the Greek Consul-General, Mr Vaseleiou Tolios and Mrs Tolios,

(v) the Hon. Tony Burke MP, Federal Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities,

(vi) Senator Arthur Sinodinos, AO, representing the Leader of the Federal Opposition, the Hon. Tony Abbott, MP,

19852 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

(vii) the Hon. David Clarke, MLC, Parliamentary Secretary for Justice in New South Wales, representing the Premier of New South Wales, the Hon. Barry O'Farrell, MP, and the Hon. Victor Dominello, MP, Minister for Citizenship and Communities,

(viii) Mr John Robertson, MP, New South Wales State Opposition Leader,

(ix) the Hon. , MLC, shadow Minister for Local Government, Housing and the Status of Women, and Parliamentary Host,

(x) the Hon. Nicholas Kotsiras, MP, Victorian Minister for Multicultural Affairs and Citizenship,

(xi) Mr Harry Danalis, President of the Greek Orthodox Community of New South Wales,

(xii) Mrs Marina Efthimiou, past President of the Hellenic Lyceum,

(xiii) Councillor Angela Vithoulkas of City of Sydney Council,

(xiv) Councillor Angela Marcellos of ,

(xv) Councillor Ester Pashalidis of Canterbury Council,

(xvi) Councillor Stephanie Koikolis of Strathfield Council.

2. That this House notes that:

(a) the Hellenic Lyceum was founded in 1951 by Australian women of Hellenic heritage to promote Hellenic values and culture, and specifically the contribution of Hellenic Australians to the life of Australia,

(b) since its foundation, the Hellenic Lyceum has established an illustrious record of achievement and charitable work, and

(c) the Hellenic Lyceum is currently engaged in working to establish a permanent Hellenic museum in Sydney to showcase the contribution that Hellenism has made to the world and particularly to Australia.

3. That this House:

(a) congratulates the Hellenic Lyceum, its President Mrs Kathy Liogas-Stojanovic, Events Co-ordinator Mrs Theodora Zoukas and General Committee for a successful exhibition and Symposium held at New South Wales Parliament and Sydney University, and

(b) commends the Hellenic Lyceum for its 62 years of service to Hellenism and the life of our State and nation.

SICHUAN PROVINCE EARTHQUAKE

Motion by the Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) at 8.00 a.m. on 2 April 2013, Lushan, Sichuan China was hit by a magnitude 7.0 earthquake,

(b) this earthquake caused the deaths of a few hundred people, with many still missing, and over 13000 injured,

(c) more than two million people have been affected, with severe damage to residential properties and infrastructure including roads, bridges, electricity, communications, hydro-station and reservoirs, causing enormous economic losses and severe environmental damage, and

(d) in May 2008, the same province of Sichuan was also hit by a significant 8.0 earthquake with over 70,000 dead and with thousands others missing.

2. That this House express sympathy to all those that have suffered, particularly the families who lost their homes and loved ones.

3. That this House acknowledge the prompt emergency response, the work of rescuers, and many civilians who put their lives on the line to help those affected.

4. That this House commends the efforts of Australian institutions such as the University of Technology, Sydney for their support and donations assisting in disaster relief and reconstruction work.

5. That this House also commend Sing Tao, TVBA and the Australian Chinese Community Association, as well as the Australian Chinese community for actively supporting fundraising initiatives to assist people in need.

2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19853

AUSTRALASIAN LYMPHOLOGY ASSOCIATION AWARENESS CAMPAIGN

Motion by the Hon. MARIE FICARRA agreed to:

1. That this House notes that on Monday 25 March 2013, the Parliament of New South Wales hosted an Iced Tea Party as part of the Australasian Lymphology Association's [ALA] Awareness Campaign Launch of a DVD and online video aimed at raising awareness of, and supporting those with, lymphoedema.

2. That this House acknowledges that:

(a) lymphoedema is a condition that can affect individuals of all ages,

(b) there are two main types of lymphoedema that can be contracted:

(i) primary lymphoedema, which is the swelling of tissue where excess lymph has built up as a result of faulty lymph nodes or vessels, and is not thought to be caused by another medical condition and may be present from birth,

(ii) secondary lymphoedema is often the result of damage caused to lymph vessels and nodes following the surgical treatment of other conditions, including cancer,

(c) some of the physical complications that may arise from the condition include:

(i) fibrosis,

(ii) debilitating skin infections and ulcers,

(iii) in extreme cases, the amputation of extremities or limbs,

(d) those suffering from lymphoedema will experience the physical impairments brought about by the condition worsening over time,

(e) approximately 400,000 Australians are currently suffering from lymphoedema,

(f) there is currently no cure for those suffering with lymphoedema, and

(g) the launch of the DVD and online video and awareness campaign, along with other internet-based resources supplied by the Australasian Lymphology Association, will offer relevant information and support for individuals, medical practitioners and healthcare professionals in identifying treating and managing lymphoedema.

3. That this House:

(a) commends the outstanding work of the Australasian Lymphology Association President Dr Helen Mackie and Chair of the association Dr Debbie Geyer for their tireless work in raising awareness of lymphoedema in Australasia and striving to provide support services and networks for those suffering from this condition, and

(b) notes the hardship and endurance of those individuals suffering from this condition.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Formal Business Notices of Motions

Private Members' Business item No. 1255 outside the Order of Precedence objected to as being taken as formal business.

PUNJABI COUNCIL OF AUSTRALIA FESTIVAL OF VAISAKHI

Motion by the Hon. DAVID CLARKE agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) on 26 March 2013, the Punjabi Council of Australia held a reception at the Parliament of New South Wales to celebrate the Festival of Vaisakhi, one of the most important celebrations in the calendar of the Sikh community, and

(b) those who attended as guests included:

(i) Mr Fauja Singh, who at the age of 102 is the world's oldest marathon runner,

(ii) noted historian Len Kenna,

(iii) Mr Deep Dhillon, prominent Indian film actor,

19854 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

(iv) Mr Gurwinder Sandhu, prominent cricket player,

(v) the Hon. Marie Ficarra, MLC, New South Wales Parliamentary Secretary to the Premier of New South Wales, the Hon. Barry O'Farrell, MP,

(vi) the Hon. David Clarke, MLC, New South Wales Parliamentary Secretary for Justice,

(vii) the Hon. Melina Pavey, New South Wales Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Health,

(viii) Mr John Robertson, Leader of the New South Wales State Opposition,

(ix) the Hon. Nathan Rees, MP, shadow Minister for Police and Emergency Services, and the Arts,

(x) Mr , MP,

(xi) Mr Bryan Doyle, MP,

(xii) Mrs Tanya Mihailuk MP, shadow Minister for Fair Trading, Healthy Lifestyles, Volunteering and Youth,

(xiii) Mr Guy Zangari, MP, shadow Minister for Communities and Citizenship,

(xiv) the Hon. Barbara Perry, MP, shadow Minister for Ageing, Disability Services, Mental Health, and Heritage,

(xv) the Hon. Amanda Fazio, MLC, State Opposition Whip in the Legislative Council,

(xvi) the Hon. , MLC,

(xvii) Mr Charles Casuscelli, MP,

(xviii) Mr David Elliott, MP,

(xix) Dr , MP,

(xx) Mr Bruce Notley-Smith, MP,

(xxi) Mrs , MP,

(xxii) Senator Matt Thistlethwaite, and

(xxiii) Mr Stanley D'Cruz, President of the Mangalorean Catholic Association of Sydney.

2. That this House commends the Punjabi Council of Australia and its co-ordinator, Dr Moninder Singh, and committee for their good work on behalf of Australians of Sikh religious heritage, and Australians of Punjabi heritage.

PAKISTAN CONSULATE CONSUL-GENERAL

The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE [9.45 a.m.]: I seek the leave of the House to amend Private Members' Business item No. 1257 outside the Order of Precedence for today of which I have given notice by omitting "Mr Balakh Kher Khosa" in paragraph 3 and inserting instead "Sardar Bala Sher Khosa", and omitting paragraph 4 and inserting instead "That this House welcome both Mr Uqaila and Mr Khosa and wish them the best during their posting in Sydney."

Leave granted.

Motion by the Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) the new Consul-General of the Pakistan Consulate, Mr Abdul Aziz Uqaili, recently arrived in Sydney,

(b) Mr Uqaili was the Secretary of the Sindh Government Culture Department and is a distinguished Pakistani civil servant with vast foreign experience,

(c) Mr Uqaili replaces Mr Azam Mohammed who was the Consul-General for over six years, and

(d) Mr Azam Mohammad has been promoted to Additional Secretary and has returned to Pakistan.

2. That this House congratulates Mr Azam on his promotion and thanks him for his valuable contributions during his term as Consul General in Sydney.

2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19855

3. That this House notes that:

(a) Mr Sardar Bala Sher Khosa was recently posted to Sydney as the first ever Community Welfare Attache at the Pakistan Consulate, and

(b) Mr Khosa was previously the Counsellor Welfare at the Pakistan High Commission in the United Kingdom.

4. That this House welcome both Mr Uqaila and Mr Khosa and wish them the best during their posting in Sydney.

AUSTRALIAN MEN'S AND MIXED NETBALL CHAMPIONSHIPS

Motion by the Hon. MARIE FICARRA agreed to:

1. That this House notes that between 31 March and 6 April 2013, teams from across Australia, as well as the Australian Defence Force and invitational teams from Brunei and Malaysia, competed at the twenty-ninth Australian Men's and Mixed Netball [AMMNA] Championships.

2. That this House notes:

(a) the outstanding success of New South Wales teams, players and officials:

(i) NSW Open Reserves Team—Championship Winners—Coach—Kelli Douglas, Manager—Adam Longmore, Andrew Rayner—Captain, Brent Ferguson—Vice Captain, George Hirst, Reg Maynard, Bim Wilkinson, Tim Wotherspoon, Richard Bracken, Andrew Kennedy, Hayden (Paki) Jensen, James Morrison and Tom Portelli,

(ii) NSW Open Mixed Team—Runners Up—Coach—Darren Kelly, Manager—Michelle Alatini, Catherine Kennedy—Co-Captain, Levita Kalepo—Co-Captain, Brad Halton, Anthony Tucker, Chris Goris, Anthony Scoon, Eliza Long, Nadja Kundrus-Little, Kailahh Elliott, Lauren Gardiner, Dianna Haggerty and Alex Mecham,

(iii) NSW 17 & U Team—Runners Up—Coach—Sue Barnett, Manager—Gary Toft, Joshua Byron Co-Captain, Josiah Toft Co-Captain, Jack Edwards, Taylor Fraser, Ty Simpson, Joshua O'Riordan, Jackson Strahan, Ethan Toft and Thomas Turner, and

(b) those New South Wales players and officials selected to represent Australia:

(i) Australian Sonix Open Team to South Africa: Roger Quayle, Valance Horne, Mike Zylstra, Aidan Kelly and Stephen Philpot,

(ii) Australian Sonix Open Mixed Team to South Africa: Bradley Halton, Lauren Gardiner, Catherine Kennedy and Nadja Kundrus-Little,

(iii) Australia A—Open Reserves Team to South Africa: Coach—Mark Kerr, George Hirst, Adam Zemski, Andrew Raynor and Matt Porter,

(iv) Australia A—Open Mixed Team to South Africa: Richard Bracken, Levi Kalepo, Alex Mecham and Kaihlah Elliott,

(v) Australian Sonix 23&U Team to South Africa: Sean Gray, Tory Allan and Tip Raharaha,

(vi) Australian 17&U Sonix Team to Malaysia: Manager—Sue Barnett, Josiah Toft and Josh Byron,

(vii) Umpires selected for South Africa: Joel Owen, Chris Hall, Stewart Ting, Elle Bonasia, Kylie Brown, Kylie Pearce and Maureen Stephenson, OAM (Director of Umpiring),

(viii) Umpires selected for 17&U Development Tour to Malaysia—Cheryl Van Dreumel, Amy Winchcombe and Lisa Harm.

3. That this House:

(a) commends and congratulates all players, coaches and managers that won or were runners up at the Championships and those players and officials selected to represent Australia,

(b) congratulates Victoria on their winning the Open, Mixed, 23&U, 19&U and 17&U championship and Queensland on being runner up in the Open Championship,

(c) acknowledges those that officiated at the Championships: Mrs Maureen Stephenson, OAM, Director of Umpiring, and Mrs Juleen Maxfield, Assistant Director of Umpiring, Joel Owen, Kylie Brown, Kylie Pearce, Sean Steele, Amy Winchcombe, Stewart Ting, Chris Hall, Brian Cooper, Glen Colman, James Morrison, Lisa Harm, Deborah Tapper, Ian Thomas, Zac Dawes, Elle Bonasia, Tracey Luck, Sue Holden, Carolyn Sweet, Chris Jack, Travis Eccles, Sally Martin, Allison Davidson, Cheryl Van Dreumel, Mark Cockerell, Peta Ingall, Michelle McCallum, Monique Emmett, Nicole Landells, Sue Drummond, Vanessa O'Shea, Christine Starvaggi, Gabe Leveleky, Ester Hermes-Young, Elliot Dawson, Ailish McCormack, Natalie Tomkins, Anna Edmonds, Rhys Carter-Coleman, Mariah Martin, Ebony Novak, Ashley Mynott, Ruth Smith, Aimy Skym, Abby Wong, Selwyn Crick, Judi Sutton, Kahlia McHugh, Renee Hulls, Megan Wolfe, Kerry Watts, Geoff Taylor, Naomi Linossier and GemmaTombolato,

19856 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

(d) commends and congratulates the Board of AMMNA—Mr Grant Crocker, President, Ms Tahli Shields, Vice President, Mr James McCallum, Domestic and International Director, Mrs Maureen Stephenson OAM, Director of Umpiring, Miss Kelli Douglas, Hon Secretary and Mr James Morrison, Public Officer and State Presidents: Mr Darren Kelly (NSW) and Ms Carolyn Sweet (Qld) and Tournament Organising Committee Members: Tahli Lake, Lauren Wilson, Jenni Dewhurst and Ika Shields, and

(e) congratulates Mr Grant Crocker and Mrs Cheryl Van Dreumel on being awarded Life Membership of AMMNA in recognition of their outstanding service to netball.

GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 3

Reference

Motion by the Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones agreed to:

That General Purpose Standing Committee No 3 inquire into and report on the value and impacts of tourism on local communities, and in particular:

(a) the value of tourism to New South Wales communities and the return on investment of government grants and funds,

(b) the value of tourism to regional, rural and coastal communities,

(c) the impacts of tourism on local government areas, including:

(i) infrastructure services provision and asset management,

(ii) social impacts,

(iii) unregulated tourism,

(iv) employment opportunities,

(d) the marketing and regulation of tourism,

(e) the utilisation of special rate variations to support local tourism initiatives, and

(f) any other related matter.

CORROBOREE CULTURAL FESTIVAL

Motion by the Hon. MARIE FICARRA agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) on Monday 15 April 2013, Her Excellency Professor Marie Bashir, Governor of New South Wales, the Hon. George Souris, MP, Minister for Tourism, Major Events, Hospitality, Racing and the Arts, and the Hon. Victor Dominello, MP, Minister for Citizenship, Communities, and Aboriginal Affairs announced that Sydney will host the largest national Indigenous arts and cultural festival in Australia's history,

(b) the festival, "Corroboree", will be held for 11 days, commencing 14 November and ending 24 November 2013,

(c) "Corroboree" will bring approximately $21 million to the State's economy over three years and is expected to bring over 55,000 visitors to New South Wales,

(d) a working group of mainly Indigenous staff has been formed to construct and execute "Corroboree", and

(e) the working group is led by Professor Michael McDaniel, who is "Corroboree's" Creative Director, Director of Jumbunna Indigenous House of Learning at University of Technology Sydney and Hetti Perkins, Artist-in-Residence at Bangarra Dance Theatre.

2. That this House acknowledges Her Excellency Professor Marie Bashir, the Hon. George Souris, MP, the Hon. Victor Dominello, MP, and Professor Michael McDaniel and the Working Group on the "Corroboree" initiative.

AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION OF UKRAINIAN ORGANISATIONS

Motion by the Hon. MARIE FICARRA agreed to:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) the Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations [AFUO], the national umbrella body for the Ukrainian Australian community, strongly supports the principles of multiculturalism as enshrined in policy and legislation and had issued a Statement on Multiculturalism,

2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19857

(b) the Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations believes that Australia's successful model of diversity is an example to the world of many faiths, cultures and languages contributing to Australia's national strength, and

(c) in February 2013, the Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations ratified the following Statement on Multiculturalism:

That the Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations contributes to Australia's successful diversity and upholds the principles of multiculturalism by:

(i) acknowledging and respecting Australia's unique history, social and cultural norms, the rule of law, democratic conventions, and pluralistic make-up,

(ii) respecting our shared values as Australian citizens at the same time that we preserve our Ukrainian heritage in an Australian context,

(iii) sharing Ukrainian religious, cultural traditions and language with our fellow Australians regardless of their race, religion, language, cultural background or political preference,

(iv) demonstrating strong respect for the cultural traditions that other ethnic communities contribute to the diversity of Australia,

(v) extending the hand of Australian mateship to other culturally, linguistically and religiously diverse communities,

(vi) ensuring that Ukrainian community engagement with both government and non-government institutions that promote multiculturalism, such as commissions, ethnic communities' councils,

(vii) contributing to the further development of policy and legislation that is relevant to multiculturalism, and

(viii) providing guidance when requested to emerging culturally, linguistically and religiously diverse communities as they take part in the migration, settlement and community development experience.

2. That this House acknowledges the Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations' Statement on Multiculturalism and commends the Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations for its efforts in promoting multiculturalism, diversity and tolerance in Australian society.

IRREGULAR PETITION

Leave granted for the suspension of standing orders to allow the Hon. to present an irregular petition.

Tamworth Fire Station

Petition requesting that Tamworth fire station be fully staffed and operate for 24 hours a day, seven days a week, received from the Hon. Walt Secord.

AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORT

The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, of a performance audit report of the Auditor-General entitled "Management of the Club Grants Scheme Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services, Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing, Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority", dated May 2013, received out of session and authorised to be printed this day.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Withdrawal of Business

Private Members' Business item No. 1144 in the Order of Precedence withdrawn by the Hon. .

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Postponement of Business

Business of the House Notice of Motion No. 1 postponed on motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay. 19858 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay agreed to:

That this House at its rising today do adjourn until Tuesday 7 May 2013 at 2.30 p.m.

FIREARMS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2011

Second Reading

Debate called on, and adjourned on motion by Reverend the Hon. and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

NATIONAL PARK ESTATE (SOUTH-WESTERN CYPRESS RESERVATIONS) AMENDMENT BILL 2012

Second Reading

Debate called on, and adjourned on motion by the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE AMENDMENT (ILLEGAL FORESTRY OPERATIONS) BILL 2012

Second Reading

Debate called on, and adjourned on motion by the Hon. and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

HEALTH FUNDING

Debate resumed from 27 March 2013.

The Hon. MARIE FICARRA (Parliamentary Secretary) [10.05 a.m.]: To begin—and I will say this very slowly so members of the Opposition hear it clearly—

The Hon. Walt Secord: I was going to leave but I will stay and interject.

The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: Stay. There is no $3 billion cut to the New South Wales health system. The total 2012-13 NSW Health budget is $18.3 billion. That is an increase of $940 million or, to put it simply, 5.4 per cent more than the Health budget was in the previous year. This real growth in the Health budget will enable 50,000 more patients to be treated in emergency departments and an additional 30,000 patients to be admitted to public hospitals, including an extra 2,000 elective surgery procedures. All local health districts received an average of 4 per cent growth in their funding in 2012-13 to allow them to treat more patients.

The $3 billion referred to in this disingenuous motion by the Opposition reflects two things that were announced in the June 2012 State budget: a $775 million labour expense saving and $2.2 billion in efficiency savings required over the next four years. Efficiency savings have been required of all agencies since 2005-06. I ask members to cast their minds back to that time and remember which party was in government then. The efficiency savings were intended to operate up until 2008-09 and had to be returned to Treasury. The $2.2 billion in efficiency savings will be retained by Health to reinvest in front-line services over the next four years.

The 's commitment to the people before the March 2011 election was to provide more front-line services—more doctors, more nurses and more healthcare workers but fewer unnecessary bureaucrats. We realise that the system cannot operate without bureaucrats—they are very important—but front-line staff are even more important during times of great need. Health's share of the cross-government labour expense savings in the 2012-13 budget is $89 million. This has been distributed proportionally across all NSW Health entities. Chief executives have the flexibility to develop and implement their own local workforce strategies appropriate for the services that they are delivering in their local health districts, such as relying less on contractors and locums, better rostering of staff and reducing the burden of overtime. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19859

To make it very clear to the Opposition, I will go through the local health districts and I will start with the Ambulance Service, where there has been an increase in funding of $15.1 million or 2.3 per cent. For the Central Coast Area Health District the figure is $31.9 million, growth of 5.3 per cent. Far West Local Health District had an increase in the budget of $5.7 million, or 6.8 per cent growth. Hunter New England Local Health District had an increase of $55.8 million, or 3.2 per cent growth. Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District— and I know that this is of great interest to the Hon. Paul Green—had an increase of $30.5 million, or 4.5 per cent growth, in its budget. Justice Health had an increase of $3 million, or 1.7 per cent growth. Murrumbidgee Local Health District had an increase of $12.4 million, or 2.9 per cent growth. Mid North Coast Local Health District had an increase of $18.6 million, or 4.2 per cent growth. Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District had an increase of $28.5 million, or a 5.2 per cent growth in budget. Northern Sydney Local Health District had an increase of $33.7 per cent, or 2.9 per cent growth. Northern NSW Local Health District had $27.7 million, or 4.7 per cent growth.

Sydney Children's Hospital Network, which is a local health district dedicated to the care of children's health, had $16.7 million, or 2.9 per cent growth. South Eastern Sydney Local Health District had an increase of $46 million—reflecting a growth in population and a growth in patient numbers—or a 3.4 per cent growth in budget. Southern NSW Local Health District had an increase of $17.9 million, or 6.3 per cent growth. St Vincent's Health Network had an increase of $11.5 million, or 3.9 per cent. South Western Sydney—another area of major population growth in this State—had an increase of $76.9 million, or a 6.2 per cent growth in budget. Sydney Local Health District had an increase of $40.2 million, or 3.1 per cent growth. Western NSW Local Health District had an increase of $27.4 million, or 3.9 per cent growth. Lastly, Western Sydney Local Health District—another area of major patient growth—had an increase of $55.4 million, or 4.2 per cent growth. An additional 4,000 nurses will be working in our State hospitals since the election of this Government in March 2011—an outstanding achievement—

The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: That's not right.

The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: I will tell you why it is right. I am putting it on the record and I will give you a copy of the statistics. The Minister for Health was able to say that for the first time ever we have 47,500 nurses working in the New South Wales health system. As we know, nurses are at the very heart of our hospitals. More nurses mean better experiences for patients and their families. The Government is getting on with the job of supporting front-line staff and ensuring that patients are provided with quality care when they need it most. The New South Wales Liberals and Nationals made a pre-election commitment to recruit an additional 2,475 nurses for our State's hospitals in our first term, and in just two years we have well surpassed that goal, with 4,000 new nurses. More nurses are working in hospitals across the State's local health districts, with 137 in Sydney—

The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: What about St George Hospital?

The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: I will give you the breakdown in health districts. You asked for it and you will get it: 137 in Sydney, 128 in Western Sydney, 185 in South Western Sydney, 340 in Northern Sydney, 402 in South Eastern Sydney and 468 on the Central Coast. There are more figures, which I will break down. More nurses are also working across other areas of the health system, including the Justice and Forensic Mental Health Network and the Sydney Children's Hospital Network. We are extremely disappointed that the Opposition—the puppets of the Health Services Union, which has done its union membership no good in its history of operation—is scaremongering about the Health budget. But its scaremongering will not work. This budget has increased this year by 5.4 per cent.

Mr Scot MacDonald: Point of order: The House is getting some very important information and I cannot hear it.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! I uphold the point of order. There is a lot of noise in the Chamber. I ask all members to refrain from yelling or having conversations.

The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: It is a record Health budget of $17.3 billion, and we thank the Minister for Health for her sterling management of this portfolio, along with better use of existing health resources through efficiency savings. We do not shy away from efficiency savings; every portfolio in our Government is subject to efficiency savings that are acceptable and practical. All healthcare workers within the system—those in charge of their budgets, those in charge of departments, those responsible for the delivery of vital health services— understand that the budget has to be sustainable, and we can do that only through good economic management. 19860 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

These efficiency savings will be used to provide care for an anticipated 50,000 extra emergency patients, 30,000 extra overnight hospital patients and 2,000 extra elective surgical procedures. Over four years $2.2 billion in efficiency savings will be made in health but will be reinvested in front-line services. So the Opposition should not go around scaremongering and telling lies—just as Labor does at the Federal level, telling mistruths and scaremongering in the electorates—because the electorates now are very discerning and they see what is produced by their local members and what is in their local papers. They will see that the statistics are there, the budget figures are there. You cannot fudge budget figures. This $2.2 billion in efficiency savings will stay within the New South Wales health system and it will not be cut from any front-line services.

The Hon. SOPHIE COTSIS [10.17 a.m.]: First, I congratulate the Hon. Peter Primrose on bringing on this very important motion highlighting the O'Farrell Government's cuts of $3 billion to the Health budget for New South Wales. In the past year we have seen many cuts, particularly for communities in rural and regional New South Wales. In particular, I raise the issue of NSW Health's Non-Government Organisation Grant Program, which provides funding to eligible organisations for the provision of specified health services and projects in New South Wales. This program accounts for more than two-thirds, or 69 per cent, of all NSW Health funding allocated to the non-government organisation sector, which includes women's health centres around the State.

In 2012-13 funding through the Non-Government Organisation Grant Program was around $149 million, with a further $67 million provided on a needs basis. However, last year the O'Farrell Government announced in its budget that it would reap $1.2 billion from efficiency savings and it would be targeting ineffective, inefficient and non-priority programs to better deliver services and achieve value for money. This coincided with non-government organisations, which received funding through the non-government organisation health program, not being advised about their funding for the coming year. Non-government organisations with triannual funding arrangements due to expire at the end of last month did not receive new grant applications.

Inquiries to the Ministry of Health were met with silence. It would not confirm whether there would be a new grant cycle but said that letters of advice would soon be sent. Many organisations began receiving monthly rollover funding with no guarantee of how long those arrangements would continue. With the help of organisations such as the Council of Social Service of New South Wales the non-government organisations were eventually given 12 months of rollover funding. At the same time the Ministry of Health decided that it would appoint a task force to review the Non-government Organisation Health Program, with the aim of improving grants administration and introducing opportunities for new partnerships with non-government organisations and other community providers. As we know, that has taken some time. A few minutes ago I was given some updated information that the Government-appointed task force has made 43 recommendations for a supposedly new approach to partnering with non-government organisations. I recommend that all members read that information and ensure that no funding has been cut and that non-government organisations have certainty and security.

The review was undertaken by the Grants Management Improvement Task Force. Although the Government has remained silent on the issue, I understand that it has been dismissive of the work of non-government organisations. These organisations fill the gaps in our community, especially in women's health and in rural and regional communities. Organisations such as women's health centres are still in the dark about their funding. The rollover funding expires on 30 June but the Government has not advised them of the state of their future funding. The last round of triennial funding was made up of 503 grants, which went to 391 non-government organisations across the State. The Hunter New England Area Health Service received approximately $5.5 million, which funded 45 grants to 41 non-government organisations. The South Eastern and Illawarra Health Service received just over $16 million, which funded 78 grants run by 64 non-government organisations.

As we know, non-government organisations run tight ships and they must plan for the future. They have staffing, rent and other costs associated with running the services they provide to communities and they need long-term security and certainty. The Non-government Organisation Health Program funds a wide range of health and related services. They include direct health services, health promotion, community development, social research, and advocacy. It spans a number of program areas including Aboriginal health, mental health, drug and alcohol, AIDS and infectious diseases, oral health, women's health, youth health, and chronic illness. It also provides service information to women from non-English speaking backgrounds.

The concern is that the Government has not been able to advise non-government organisations about the future status of their funding. It is hoped that the current information that has been given to me will provide 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19861

them with some certainty. These non-government organisations are a critical part of the health system. As I mentioned, they reach out to disadvantaged people who are most at risk of poor health and who might not access mainstream services or would default to the acute hospital system. Non-government health organisations support integrated ongoing care for people in the community and provide continuity of care between hospital services and primary care.

I wholeheartedly support the motion of the Hon. Peter Primrose and I thank him for bringing it to our attention. Over the past 18 months the Government has not provided many of these non-government organisations with any security. I call on the Government to give these organisations certainty and security. Non-government organisations provide fantastic and important services to many people on the fringes of our community. It is important to ensure that those people are provided with the same equitable health service that the rest of us enjoy.

The Hon. NIALL BLAIR [10.24 a.m.]: I oppose the motion moved by the Hon. Peter Primrose. I will place on record some facts that illustrate the commitment that the O'Farrell-Stoner Government has made to health since coming into office in 2011. In particular, I will highlight some of the regional areas where increased spending has been prioritised. Regional areas were grossly neglected by the previous Government, but we need only look at the 2012-13 budget to see this Government's commitment to residents in regional areas. Local health districts in regional areas received increased funding at an average rate of 4.6 per cent: comprising a 6.8 per cent increase in the budget for the Far West, a 3.2 per cent increase for the Hunter New England, a 2.9 per cent increase for Murrumbidgee, a 4.2 per cent increase for the mid North Coast, a 5.2 per cent increase for Nepean Blue Mountains, a 4.7 per cent increase for northern New South Wales, a 6.3 increase for southern New South Wales, and a 3.9 per cent increase for western New South Wales.

The O'Farrell-Stoner Government is proud to deliver an average 4.6 per cent increase in local health district funding to our people in regional areas. The money is being targeted particularly at increasing the front-line and face-to-face services that the people of regional New South Wales have been screaming out for too long. Those services are now being delivered by this Government. An extra 4,000 nurses are working across the State and about 2,000 of them are in rural and regional hospitals. Since the Liberal-Nationals Government was elected 178 extra nurses have been employed in the Illawarra Shoalhaven, 616 in the Hunter New England, 397 in northern New South Wales, 234 on the mid North Coast, 145 in southern New South Wales, and 222 in western New South Wales. The Government is committed to providing front-line services. Those numbers speak for themselves.

Front-line services are not the only thing essential to people in regional areas. We have also increased the Isolated Patient Transport and Accommodation Assistance Scheme, which is vital. We have provided an additional $28 million to the scheme over four years. Also, the deadline for patients to submit claims has been extended from six months to 12 months. A broader definition of "authorised representative", which is a person who can sign the application form on behalf of the referring practitioner or specialist, has been introduced. The requirement for patients who have private health insurance to prove that they cannot claim travel and/or accommodation benefits from their fund has been abolished. A shortened and less complicated application form has also been introduced. These things are making it easier for people living in the regions to access the vital medical services they require.

The Government has not only committed more money in the budget for the delivery of services but also made a commitment to fix the medical and health infrastructure across regional New South Wales, which was severely neglected by the previous Government. We have made commitments to projects including an estimated $170 million to Bega Hospital, $79.8 million to Dubbo Base Hospital, $80 million towards Kempsey Hospital, $80 million to Lismore Hospital, $110 million for Port Macquarie Base Hospital, $220 million for Tamworth Base Hospital, and $282 million for Wagga Wagga Hospital. They are the estimated total costs of projects to which the Government has committed funding. The Government has stated it will work towards completion of those projects.

The Hon. : How much Federal money is in that?

The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: There is Federal money in some of the projects, but the New South Wales Government has demonstrated its commitment to completion of the projects. The Government is getting behind the projects and working with local health boards to ensure that people in regional areas are not neglected.

The Hon. Mick Veitch: What about Hay? 19862 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: What about projects that include the Lockhart multipurpose service [MPS], the Gulgong multipurpose service, the Hillston multipurpose service and the Peak Hill multipurpose service— projects that the former Government failed to deliver, particularly when it had the ear of the Federal Government? The former Government could have built those infrastructure projects but did not. The former Government severely neglected the people in regional communities. Those communities recognised that and voted accordingly at the 2011 State election. They then put their faith in this Government because this Government is committed to delivering projects such as the Dubbo hospital and projects in Parkes, Tamworth and Wagga Wagga. That is what people will see from this Government—projects being delivered. The former Government had its opportunity but failed to deliver for people in regional communities, yet now Labor members have moved a motion in this House to condemn the current Government.

Significant funding has been allocated to the provision of palliative care. The Government has committed an additional $35 million over four years to increase access to palliative care on top of the $86 million provided annually for specialist palliative care in New South Wales. The Government also is committed to the pain management plan. The Government has committed an additional $26 million over the next four years to support the development of new pain management services, particularly in regional areas. Other allocations to improve health services in regional areas include a commitment of $2.1 million a year towards new dedicated medical nursing and allied health positions to meet service and training requirements of tier 3 tertiary care services and an additional $1.7 million a year to establish new tier 2 pain management services at Tamworth, Orange, Port Macquarie, Port Kembla and Lismore. An additional $620,000 a year will enhance existing services at the John Hunter, Royal Prince Alfred, Prince of Wales, Royal North Shore hospitals as well as the children's hospital at Westmead to enable them to become support centres to new regional services. An additional $200,000 a year has been allocated to enhance regional paediatric health services at the John Hunter Hospital.

It is quite clear that the O'Farrell-Stoner Government is committed to the provision of improved health services, particularly for people in regional areas of this State—something that was lacking in the term of the former Government. The former Government had every opportunity to do that, particularly as it had the ear of the Federal Labor Government; they could have formed a partnership to deliver improved services. The former Government demonstrated severe neglect. Flying in the face of the black-and-white evidence of significant health services funding in regional areas, Labor members have sought to condemn the O'Farrell-Stoner Government. The funding that has been allocated to the provision of front-line services by the Government to benefit people in regional areas who had been severely neglected for far too long cannot be understated. The current Government is putting its money where its mouth is. I am proud to be part of a government that concentrates funding where it should be—front-line services—to the benefit of people of rural and regional New South Wales.

The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE [10.33 a.m.]: I support the motion moved by the Hon. Peter Primrose, which states:

1. This House notes:

(a) the impacts of the O'Farrell-Stoner Government's cuts of $3 billion to the Health budget for New South Wales, and

(b) that these cuts are resulting in staff shortages and are putting the quality of patient care and the lives of patients at risk.

2. That this House calls on the Government to reverse the cuts to the Health budget.

I congratulate the Hon. Peter Primrose on moving this motion. The impacts of the O'Farrell-Stoner Government's $3 billion cuts to the Health budget are being felt across the State from Bulahdelah to Blacktown, from Wagga Wagga to Westmead, from the Nepean to Newcastle and from Griffith Base Hospital to St George Hospital. The cuts comprise $2.2 billion in efficiency savings and the remainder will come from capped labour expenditure. Numerous reports and stories highlight the failings and inadequacies in the current system. For example, expectant mothers have been turned away from Blacktown and Nepean hospitals and have been forced to give birth alone, cancer patients have been turned away from hospitals such as Westmead, vital hospital services have been cut in the Hunter region, air-conditioning has broken down, there is a shortage of beds and proper administrative services in hospitals, and waiting times for emergency and elective surgery have increased. The hospital horror stories emerging from metropolitan areas is scary, but of greater concern is the impact of the cuts on people in regional areas, who already have limited access to proper health care. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19863

According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, across Australia it has been recognised that people who live in rural and remote areas generally have worse health conditions than those who live in metropolitan areas. The institute reports that many factors contribute to this differential, including geographic isolation, socio-economic disadvantage, a shortage of healthcare providers, greater exposure to injury risks, and Aboriginal healthcare needs. The people of New South Wales are suffering at the hands of a Premier and a health Minister who have been slashing vital services and facilities across the State. The people of New South Wales have been told to tighten their belts and "to live within their means". The cuts to the Health budget must be reversed. Three billion dollars is a significant amount. Budget cuts to crucial health areas will decimate services and have a lingering impact on the wellbeing of people in future years, particularly in country areas and in places such as my duty electorate of Griffith in the Murrumbidgee region. On 27 October 2012 I stated the impact that State Government cuts would have on my duty electorate of Griffith:

According to the Area News, Griffith's already overburdened health system is set to be stretched even further after the O'Farrell Government announced overtime payments to health workers and contract staff would be on the chopping block to achieve an $89 million cut in the State hospital budget. Griffith Base Hospital relies heavily on locums to make up for staffing shortfalls in the State. There are fears the city will be among the worst affected.

When my office tried to contact Griffith Base Hospital to confirm the cuts, we were told to speak to the ministerial liaison officer who would provide a statement. This may show how the Government not only is cutting jobs and services but also is creating a sense of fear and controlling what people can and cannot say about the devastating effects of the cuts on staff and the services they provide. The issues raised with me relating to home care in Griffith indicate that jobs and workers' shift hours are part of the cuts. When I contacted Griffith Homecare, I was provided with this statement, "There is a finite amount of funding to provide a finite amount of services." Of course that is so, but that clearly shows that the O'Farrell Government has done a great job of silencing workers who are fearful of the Minister for Health, Jillian Skinner, and are probably trying to save their skin.

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: Who wrote this rubbish?

The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE: I wrote it. During my most recent visit to Griffith I was told about people waiting in hospitals for four hours and elderly patients being turned away from Homecare. The people of Griffith are suffering, and I fear that more suffering is yet to come. They know that and that is why they have taken matters into their own hands by building their own private hospital. The Area News reported that the design process for a new private hospital will commence soon. This will be made possible by $13 million that was promised by the Federal Labor Government in May last year and supported by the then regional development Minister, Simon Crean. The remainder of the funding for the hospital will be sourced from private contributions from businesses as well as contributions from local councils.

I thank the Federal Labor Government for stepping into the breach and assisting the people of Griffith. The State member who represents Griffith, the Hon. Adrian Piccoli, and the Minister for Health, the Hon. Jillian Skinner, were approached with a request for funding, which was rejected. Griffith's local member of Parliament was nowhere to be seen on this issue. He failed to stand up for the people of Griffith, in particular the young and elderly people of Griffith who need better health care, and he failed miserably to properly represent the people of Griffith who voted for him at the 2011 State election.

I support the motion moved by the Hon. Peter Primrose and I call on the House to note that these cuts have resulted in staff shortages. I have been told that many people in and around the Griffith area are leaving their jobs because of insufficient hours and pay or they have been sacked. In addition, almost every day we hear stories that demonstrate how the cuts are putting the quality of patient care and the lives of patients at risk. The Government's plans for the New South Wales health care system will have an adverse impact on all six dimensions of a quality health service: safety, effectiveness, appropriateness, consumer participation, access and efficiency. The Government's statement that the cuts will not affect front-line services is just spin; it is not true. Every bit counts, particularly when it comes to treating our sick and taking care of our elderly. The tiresome tags of "labour expense caps" or "efficiency savings", which include cutting overtime and hiring locum doctors, do not justify the massive cuts to the Health budget. People are being denied timely access to adequate health care. As Federal Minister Tanya Plibersek said in September last year:

I will be ringing the New South Wales health Minister and asking her to explain how she can take $3 billion from the health budget and still provide the services that the residents of New South Wales need.

19864 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

The idea that $3 billion can be taken out of the Health budget and not affect front-line services is extremely far-fetched. In addition, as the New South Wales Opposition leader John Robertson said, it will impact on hospital waiting times and services such as cleaning and physiotherapy and other medical jobs are likely to be axed. He went on to say:

Our hospitals will be dirty. It means people will wait longer for surgery and we will continue to see bed block occur and ambulances queued up outside our hospitals because funding isn't keeping up with demand.

These budget cuts and the further efficiency savings proposed by the Government will leave the New South Wales health care system in worse shape. As the Hon. John Robertson and my colleague Dr Andrew McDonald said, internal government documents reveal that front-line hospital workers will lose their jobs under the O'Farrell Government's $3 billion cuts to the Health budget. In September 2012 the shadow Minister for Health, Dr Andrew McDonald, said that budget allocations reveal that hospitals in the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District alone face a $29 million cut to their staffing budgets. He went on to say:

These are the documents the O'Farrell Government didn't want people to see, because they show front-line hospital workers will lose their jobs under Barry O'Farrell's cuts to the health budget.

He said further:

Cutting $29 million is the equivalent of sacking more than 460 nurses or 120 doctors—cuts of this magnitude will compromise patient care.

He added:

As a practising paediatrician with 39 years' experience working in the New South Wales health system I know these funding cuts will cause absolute chaos in our hospitals.

He continued:

With enormous cuts like this, you cannot guarantee safe care for anyone in the New South Wales health system.

According to the Government's 2012-13 budget allocations, the annual funding cut for Sutherland Hospital is $979,000 this year and $3,916,000 over four years. St George Hospital's funding cut this year will be $2,206,000, and over four years St George hospital will cop a cut of $8,824,000. The $3 billion health cut will have significant impacts. I concur with the comments of the Hon. Peter Primrose and members on this side and call on the House to support the motion to reverse the cuts to the Health budget.

The Hon. [10.44 a.m.]: The motion before the House is based on either a misunderstanding or a distortion of fact. The $3 billion referred to in the motion reflects two components. The first is a matter that has long been debated in this House, that is, the $775 million labour expense saving over four years. The second and major component is the $2.2 billion in efficiency savings required over four years. The efficiency savings, totalling $2.2 billion, have been required of all agencies since 2005-06. Until 2008-09 those efficiency savings were being returned to Treasury. In essence, the efficiency savings relate to a formula created by the former Labor Government which it used to pad out its budget in other areas. The $2.2 billion in efficiency savings over four years is money that is redirected within the Health budget to front-line services. In other words, to talk about a $3 billion cut is either a profound misunderstanding of basic accounting or simply a distortion designed to gain publicity for what is left of the rump of the Australia Labor Party in New South Wales.

The obligation placed upon the New South Wales Liberals and Nationals when we came to office was to operate all budgets efficiently and improve front-line services. That is in contrast to the 16 years of Labor, when it developed enormous back offices and destroyed front-line services in New South Wales. How do we know it destroyed front-line services in New South Wales? The people of New South Wales made it clear when they went to the ballot box that the mob opposite were failures in managing the budgets of New South Wales, including the Health budget. The efficiency savings of $2.2 billion that are being redirected will result in, for example, 50,000 additional emergency department placements this year, 30,000 more overnight hospital stays, and 2,000 more elective surgery procedures.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! I remind Opposition members that interjections are disorderly at all times. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19865

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: They will mean the employment of even more nurses on top of the 2,900 extra nurses that have been employed since the New South Wales Liberals and Nationals were elected. They will mean the employment of additional doctors and a record number of interns, as well as additional allied health workers and those who support them in providing patient care.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! The Hon. Helen Westwood will come to order.

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: When I break the funding down into areas, we are able to see more clearly the Government's achievements. For example, the Health budget for 2012-13 has provided $5.4 million for the South Western Sydney Local Health District for approximately 85 more nurses, and $3.3 million for the Hunter New England Local Health District for approximately 51 more nurses, including an additional $528,000 for Calvary Mater Newcastle for an additional eight nurses.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: What about the nurses you took out of Bulahdelah?

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: The Health budget has provided $3.1 million for the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District to employ approximately 49 more nurses.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: Yes, it's true.

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: Just repeat the same thing. They've got nothing else to say.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: Do you reckon you've got more nurses then, Marie?

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! Members will not interject across the Chamber.

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: It includes an additional $560,000 for Calvary Health Care at Kogarah to employ approximately nine additional nurses.

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: Hear, hear!

The Hon. Helen Westwood: The hostel is 15 midwives short.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! Members on both sides of the Chamber will cease interjecting.

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: It has included $2.3 million for the Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District for the employment of an additional 36 nurses and $2.1 million for the Northern Sydney Local Health District for an additional 33 nurses.

The Hon. Helen Westwood: At Muswellbrook Emergency Department it is 74 minutes wait time for triage 2.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: What about the loss of Gloucester maternity services?

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! Opposition members will not interject.

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: It includes $2.1 million for the Sydney Local Health District to employ approximately 33 more nurses and $1.7 million for the Western Sydney Local Health District for approximately 21 more nurses. In addition, there is $1.1 million for the Central Coast Local Health District for approximately 17 more nurses and $821,000 for the Northern NSW Local Health District for approximately 13 more nurses.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: What about western Sydney?

The Hon. Helen Westwood: Brian Naylor says they have 10 per cent fewer public hospital beds and fewer than half the number of private hospital beds and mental health beds, and 25 per cent fewer GPs. That's western Sydney, thanks to your cuts. 19866 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: It includes $550,000 for the Mid North Coast Local Health District for an additional nine nurses.

The Hon. : Is this science fiction or mystery?

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: It includes $534,000 for the Western NSW Local Health District to employ approximately eight more nurses and $205,000 for the Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District to employ approximately three more nurses.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: You almost said Gloucester then. You wouldn't raise that one.

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: The problem with Opposition members is that they just do not like good news. They just do not want to hear about improvements in services achieved under the New South Wales Liberal-Nationals Government. Instead, they just wish to engage in a constant cackle because of their inability to accept that proper management is being achieved in the Health budget in New South Wales.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: You've got 26 seconds to go.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! I call the Hon. Lynda Voltz to order for the first time.

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: I will yield the floor at this time to give someone else the opportunity to make a contribution.

The Hon. HELEN WESTWOOD [10.52 a.m.]: I support the motion of the Hon. Peter Primrose. These $2.2 billion cuts are to be— [Time expired.]

Pursuant to standing orders debate interrupted to permit the mover of the motion to speak in reply.

The Hon. PETER PRIMROSE [10.52 a.m.], in reply: I thank the members who participated in this debate for their contributions. A number of other members had wished to participate, particularly the Hon. Helen Westwood, who was unable to give her detailed contribution to the debate because of time restrictions imposed by the standing orders. The motion asks that:

1. The House note:

(a) the impacts of the O'Farrell-Stoner Government's cuts of $3 billion to the Health budget for New South Wales, and

(b) that these cuts are resulting in staff shortages and are putting the quality of patient care and the lives of patients at risk.

2. That this House calls on the Government to reverse the cuts to the Health budget.

While Government members have sought to obfuscate the issue, the source of the statistic of a $3 billion cut to health expenditure is the New South Wales Minister for Health. I return to her original comment. The Treasurer delivered the New South Wales budget on 12 June last year. On 14 September, after having a considerable period to read through the document, hopefully the Minister was confident enough to confirm the $3 billion cut to the Sydney Morning Herald. The Sydney Morning Herald reported:

… Mrs Skinner confirmed this morning that $3 billion would be cut from NSW Health over the next four years.

This includes $775 million from the imposition of a "labour expense cap" announced for every government department in this year's budget.

On the same day, ABC radio news reported:

The New South Wales Health Minister has directed the State's health department to make more than $3 billion in savings.

… Ms Skinner says the measures will stretch the health budget further.

There it is. I thank the Minister for Health for her honesty. Of course, a month later statements from her media people started appearing denying that the Minister's earlier statements were correct. However, I refer members 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19867

to Budget Paper No. 2, chapter 4, page 4-7. The total number of people on the surgical waiting list for New South Wales is now 66,450—up from 65,705 in December 2011. New South Wales has the longest median waiting time in Australia. Over the past few weeks the effects of the $3 billion cut to the Health budget have continued to escalate. Throughout New South Wales reports continue about the effects of these cuts. For example, on 12 April the Daily Telegraph reported:

Beds will close and staff will be "redeployed" from the Prince of Wales Hospital at Randwick, management confirmed yesterday.

The Hon. Mick Veitch brought to my attention a newspaper he reads regularly, the Tumut and Adelong Times and Batlow District News. On Tuesday 30 April on page 1 under the headline "White Elephant—Dialysis machines sit unused while patients travel to Wagga for treatment" the paper reported:

Three renal dialysis machines that have been ready for use at Tumut Hospital for five months are yet to treat a single kidney-disease patient.

It's not for a lack of need—there are three Tumut people with kidney failure that make the trip to Wagga three days a week to spend five hours receiving treatment at the machines just like those at Tumut.

But because the NSW health service refuses to train or pay staff to operate the machines here, they sit untouched, gathering dust.

Again, I thank my colleague and quote from the Riverine Grazier. Under the headline "What's happening to our hospital?" on 26 September the paper reported:

No VMO rights for local doctors. People dying on the way to Griffith because they were not allowed treatment in Hay and (ER) emergency room patients not allowed to stay longer than four hours.

Councillor Jasen Crighton stated:

If it's a cost-cutting measure, then tell the public.

… It stinks of a facility slowly being downgraded.

Only three days ago it was confirmed also that the Western NSW Local Health Network started announcing that possibly up to 300 positions would go to bring its spending into line with the budget following the labour savings cap. Bathurst is required to save $3 million. To achieve this, five surgical beds will be closed with the loss of 4.8 full-time equivalent nursing positions. I commend the motion to the House. [Time expired.]

Question—That the motion be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Ayes, 17

Ms Barham Dr Kaye Mr Veitch Mr Buckingham Mr Moselmane Ms Westwood Ms Cotsis Mr Primrose Mr Whan Mr Donnelly Mr Secord Tellers, Ms Faehrmann Ms Sharpe Ms Fazio Mr Foley Mr Shoebridge Ms Voltz

Noes, 19

Mr Ajaka Mr Gay Mrs Mitchell Mr Blair Mr Green Reverend Nile Mr Borsak Mr Khan Mrs Pavey Mr Clarke Mr Lynn Ms Cusack Mr MacDonald Tellers, Ms Ficarra Mrs Maclaren-Jones Mr Colless Miss Gardiner Mr Mason-Cox Dr Phelps

Pairs

Mr Roozendaal Mr Gallacher Mr Searle Mr Pearce

Question resolved in the negative.

Motion negatived. 19868 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

RIGHTS OF THE TERMINALLY ILL BILL 2013

Bill introduced, and read a first time and ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. .

Second Reading

The Hon. CATE FAEHRMANN [11.06 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

As I formally introduce the Rights of the Terminally Ill Bill 2013 I have at the forefront of my mind human suffering—the suffering that we in this place have the power to prevent and I would strongly argue that we have a responsibility to prevent. I speak of suffering like that experienced by Angelique Flowers, who was diagnosed with aggressive and advanced colon cancer just before her thirty-first birthday. Angelique, who was an articulate softly spoken writer, learned that despite all the achievements of modern medical science and the love, support and care of her family she faced an agonising and grossly undignified death. Angelique soon discovered that the type of cancer ravaging her body meant that the pain and suffering towards the end of her life would not be alleviated in any adequate way by palliative care.

Angelique's colon cancer was cruel and aggressive. When Angelique became aware of just how she would die she realised how desperately she wanted to avoid dying that way—but she did die that way. Angelique's brother Damian was with her when she died just months after her diagnosis. He helplessly held a bowl under her chin as Angelique, still in excruciating pain despite massive doses of morphine and other drugs, died vomiting and choking on her own faeces. It is a death that many of us in this place would seek to avoid if we were able to foresee it. Surely if we could choose to die with a little more dignity we would do so. Angelique knew she could not escape death itself and that it would come soon; she simply sought to go a little sooner before she was gripped with the grotesque and unimaginable pain and suffering that is an inevitable result of the dying stages of such an aggressive colon cancer.

In her effort to die with a little bit of dignity Angelique began searching for the lethal drug Nembutal. During this time she was forced to withdraw from friends, family and medical staff which only added to her stress and suffering. Angelique recorded a number of videos of herself in the last few months of her life and in one of them she stated:

At a time when I want to spend what good days and precious moments I have left having meaningful time with the people I love I have had to cut myself off writing questions and notes, making inquiries, doing research.

At times she contemplated violent ways to end her life, such as jumping off a building. "If euthanasia was legal", Angelique said, "I could have ended my days as I chose, finding peace before leaving this world, not panic and more pain." None of us here today can help ease Angelique Flowers pain but we can hear her story and let it give us the courage to make the right decision and support the bill knowing that it will help prevent awful suffering like this, or some of it, in the future. This bill is for people like Angelique who are staring death in the face, who are staring down the barrel of an excruciatingly painful and horrific death that could last many weeks or months. Members can hear Angelique's story and they can decide that they are going to have the courage to do the right thing for others like her who are still alive today.

One of Angelique's dying wishes was to see law reform in this area so others do not have to suffer like she did if they do not want to. One of her dying wishes was law reform so that others could choose to die with dignity, a dignity that she was denied—others like Loredana Alessio-Mulhall. I met Loredana two years ago. She has multiple sclerosis, which she has had for 37 years. She is 63. Multiple sclerosis results in the progressive loss of motor and sensory function in a haphazard way over many years, resulting in virtually total loss of movement. People are initially wheelchair-bound, then later bed-bound. They become incontinent, then if their speech and sight are impaired, they lose the ability to communicate. Meanwhile the intellect may remain unimpaired but the person is a prisoner in a body which cannot move or function in any real way.

Loredana still has sensation in her body; she just cannot move. She has told me how she can lie awake for hours at night, her fingers painfully clawing her skin. There is no-one there for Loredana at night so she must wait for the first carer's shift the next morning before her fingers can be pulled away. Loredana continues to tell me she is a positive person and under ordinary circumstances of course she would not want to die but she is very afraid of what is ahead. The multiple sclerosis is now eating away at the nerve endings to her eyes and attacking 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19869

her voice box. This understandably terrifies her and she knows that her final weeks, months or even years will be spent completely cut off from the world, unable to communicate if she is in pain, unable to speak to her family, unable to do anything at all, at the mercy of everyone and everything. So Loredana was searching for lethal medication in the years before she was totally incapacitated. Her predicament is heartbreaking:

"I don't want to die" says Loredana "but when life gets too difficult, I should not have to beg for mercy, from the people around me, like I am now, to be allowed to die in peace and with dignity."

Loredana is begging all members today to please support this bill. Loredana wants to die with dignity but she needs assistance to do it. Under our laws as they stand, Angelique was denied and Loredana will be denied a very important choice—the choice to die a peaceful and dignified death, the choice to go a little early, when death from a terminal illness is inevitable and the suffering is unbearable. That is the choice that the Rights of the Terminally Ill Bill would allow, nothing more, nothing less. The bill is the culmination of two years work, countless hours of research, the tireless work of passionate volunteers and advocates, far-reaching consultation and the best elements of longstanding schemes overseas. I am very proud of it and of the compassionate advocates who have worked so closely with me to get us to this point. It is a bill for voluntary assisted dying for the terminally ill.

It will provide that a person who has a terminal illness, with decision-making capacity and who is experiencing unacceptable pain, suffering or distress can choose to request assistance from a medical practitioner to end his or her life. Subject to extremely stringent safeguards, this assistance would take the form of the provision of a lethal substance that the patient would administer to himself or herself or, in the case of severe physical disability, be assisted to take.

The legislative framework established by the bill will provide protection for persons providing such assistance and set up safeguards to prevent abuse of the right recognised by the bill. To be eligible to receive such assistance the patient would have to meet a number of criteria as laid out in clause 7. The patient would need to be at least 18 years old; be a resident of New South Wales; be suffering from a terminal illness, that is, one which will result in death and which is causing severe pain, suffering or distress to an extent unacceptable to the patient; have been fully informed of the diagnosis and prognosis of the disease and all other options, including palliative care; and have decision-making capacity and be making the decision freely, voluntarily and after due consideration.

There must be no medical measure acceptable to the patient that can reasonably be undertaken in the hope of effecting a cure. In addition, any medical treatment reasonably available to the patient must be confined to the relief of pain, suffering and distress, or any one or more of them, with the object of allowing the patient to die a comfortable death. The assessment to determine whether these conditions have been met is extremely rigorous. Clause 7 requires that the patient would have to be examined by two independent medical practitioners who would both certify that the patient met the eligibility criteria. In addition, clause 7 requires that an independent psychiatrist, and if necessary an independent social worker, examines the patient to certify that he or she is fully informed of all medical options, able to make an informed decision and is not under any duress from any quarter to make the request for assisted dying.

Clause 6 requires that none of the health professionals involved or their close associates can stand to receive any financial benefit from the patient's death. Clause 6 imposes severe criminal penalties for coercion of the patient by the medical practitioners or of the medical practitioners by another party. Clause 10 imposes severe criminal penalties for the improper certification of eligibility criteria by the medical practitioners or other involved party. Importantly, clause 9 makes it clear that the patients could change their minds at any stage of the process. The passing of this legislation would not result in any health professionals being forced to participate in assisting people to die. No health care provider—whether it be a doctor, nurse, palliative care centre or hospital—is under any duty to participate in the provision of assistance to a patient under the legislation.

Therefore, the bill recognises that some practitioners have conscientious objections to the concept of assisted dying. Their right to hold such a position will be respected. According to the Australian Medical Association Code of Ethics, when a personal moral judgement or religious belief alone prevents a doctor from providing assistance, patients should be informed that they may seek assistance elsewhere. However, this is not a requirement of the bill.

I will now address how the process would work, from initial request for assistance from the patient, through to the final provision of assistance and the accountability steps afterwards. The process begins when a patient who is suffering from a terminal illness and is experiencing pain or suffering to an extent unacceptable to 19870 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

the patient requests the assistance of a medical practitioner to end the patient's life. This doctor is known as the primary medical practitioner. The primary medical practitioner then assesses the patient according to all the strict eligibility requirements as laid out in clause 7 of the bill.

If the primary medical practitioner does not have experience in palliative care, the information about palliative care options must be provided directly by someone with experience or expertise in the area. A second independent doctor must examine the patient and verify the first doctor's assessment. Then an independent psychiatrist—and, if the primary medical practitioner considers it necessary, a qualified social worker—would have to examine the patient to verify that the patient has decision-making capacity and is not under coercion from any quarter.

For patients to be determined to have decision-making capacity they must understand the facts relevant to their illness and condition, understand the medical treatment and other options available, have capacity to assess the consequences of the patient's decisions, understand the impact of those consequences and be able to communicate decisions. If the patient and any of these medical practitioners do not speak the same language then a qualified interpreter is used at all stages of the process. If patients are not able to communicate verbally but they can communicate in other ways, that is also considered. Following these assessments, if and when all of the eligibility conditions have been met, and only when they have all been met, a written request for assisted dying is signed by the patient and by all the aforementioned medical practitioners and the interpreter, if applicable.

However, an initial cooling-off period of 72 hours would first need to elapse between the original oral request and the signing of the written request. In the event that a patient is unable to sign the request because of physical incapacity, it may be signed on his or her behalf by another person over 18 years of age. This person forfeits any financial or other benefit he or she would obtain directly or indirectly as a result of the death of the patient. This must occur in the presence of both medical practitioners and the interpreter, if applicable.

Following the signing of the written request, a subsequent additional cooling-off period of at least 24 hours must elapse before the primary medical practitioner, after being assured again that the patient wishes to proceed, provides assistance by prescribing or preparing a substance for the patient to administer to himself or herself. The doctor must remain with the patient until the point of death. In the event that both the primary and secondary medical practitioners agree that the patient is physically incapable of self-administration and all other conditions have been met, the primary medical practitioner may administer the drug.

Following the administration of the substance and the death of the patient, the primary medical practitioner reports the patient's death to the registrar, citing both the terminal illness and the assisted death. He or she also forwards a copy of the death certificate and relevant medical records to the Voluntary Assisted Deaths Review Panel, which would be established by part 4. This monitoring mechanism would be a specialised body that would oversee the operation of the assisted dying regime. It would be appointed by the Minister and assisted by staff from the department. It would comprise a representative of the Minister and a representative of the NSW Medical Board. Additional members of the panel would include specialists in end-of-life care, a legal expert and an ethicist.

Every assisted death would be reported to the panel and it would review the circumstances of each one to ensure that the procedures laid down under the legislation had been followed. If the panel was concerned that a possible breach of the provisions of the legislation had occurred it would refer the matter to the appropriate authorities. The panel would also have the function of monitoring the ongoing operation of the Act and of fostering research and keeping records about its operation. The panel has the discretion to make a report to Parliament at any time.

The Rights of the Terminally Ill Bill will do exactly what I have just outlined and nothing more. However, I have no doubt that members in this place will be told otherwise. Over the coming weeks we will all hear from opponents of voluntary assisted dying a barrage of claims about this bill and about existing legislation overseas. These claims often include inaccuracies, misinterpretations and misrepresentations of academic research—piecemeal cherry-picking that presents a distorted and inaccurate picture and claims based on poor-quality data or unreasonable assumptions. These misleading claims are often the basis of the "I support the concept of assisted dying but not this bill" argument.

I am aware of dozens of these misleading claims, but time does not permit me to go through all of them now. I will use my reply to address any such claims if they come up in debate. However, I will inform members 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19871

of the types of tactics used to discredit voluntary assisted dying schemes in operation overseas. Recently members received an email from Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile regarding this issue. I do not question that Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile believed the material he distributed was academically sound and truthful but, unfortunately, it was not. The material circulated was an article by Peter Saunders headed, "Stunning 4,620 per cent increase in Belgian euthanasia cases in ten years since legislation." The article originally appeared in the web publication LifeSiteNews, which is published by the Life Issues Institute, an international organisation based in the United States of America. That organisation is dedicated to right to life issues and campaigns against abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage and similar issues.

Saunders cites statistics about euthanasia and assisted dying in Belgium and The Netherlands. These statistics come from the 2010-11 annual report of the Belgian voluntary euthanasia regulatory agency to the Belgian Parliament. The regulatory body is called the Federal Control and Evaluation Committee. As Saunders says, the number of euthanasia deaths in Belgium has increased from 24 in 2002 to 918 in 2011. However, he has miscalculated the percentage increase. The increase in the 10 years is 918 minus 24, which is 894. So the percentage increase is 3,725 per cent, not 4,620 per cent. In addition, Belgian euthanasia laws were not passed by Parliament until late September 2002, which means the 24 deaths that year were in the last three months. That is why the figure is relatively low.

The following year the number was 235, so arguably that should be the base line number. That is more like a four-fold increase from 2003 to 2011. Of course, this percentage increase still seems large. But presenting the figures in this way is misleading. It stands to reason that in the first few years after the introduction of the legislation the number of euthanasia deaths would be low because the system took some time to be understood by both the medical profession and the public. Once it was more established annual deaths under the scheme began to increase by about 100 a year to the present level of 918. But that figure comprises only 1 per cent of total annual deaths in Belgium, according to Saunders' own source. Another way of expressing the increase in Belgium is to say that between 2002 and 2011 the percentage of deaths from euthanasia increased from 0.026 per cent of total deaths to 1 per cent of total deaths. It is hardly opening the floodgates.

Saunders' other unsupported assertion is that the Federal Control and Evaluation Committee is now considering "extending the right to citizens who suffer from degenerative mental illnesses like Alzheimer's and also to children". It is true that Belgium and The Netherlands operate a more extensive regime of voluntary euthanasia than operates in, say, Oregon in the United States of America or that has been or is contemplated in any jurisdiction in Australia. Differences include the following: In Belgium a person who is in a permanent vegetative state or in an irreversible coma can access euthanasia via an advanced care directive. No such provision is allowed or is being contemplated in this bill.

In both Belgium and The Netherlands, unlike Oregon, the law permits voluntary euthanasia; that is, the lethal substance is administered by the doctor under strictly controlled conditions. Under my bill, the role of physicians would be to assist patients to administer the dose to themselves—the assistance being by way of prescribing and preparing the substance and remaining with the patient during the process. This bill does not permit euthanasia. The only exception would be if the patient was certified by two doctors as being physically unable to administer it himself or herself because of some physical disability.

In my bill there is no possibility of the assisted dying regime being used for children. To qualify, a person must be over 18 years of age. In my bill there is no possibility of people with Alzheimer's disease being able to access voluntary assisted dying. To make a valid request for assisted dying a person must have decision-making capacity, as I explained previously, as well as a terminal illness where the only treatment available is confined to pain management. The claims of an automatic slide towards including new categories of eligible persons—such as people with dementia, handicapped people or children—are unfounded. The Rights of the Terminally Ill Bill proposes a highly controlled and regulated system that would be impossible to circumvent. No changes to the regime could be made without parliamentary approval and further legislation. Such changes cannot occur by stealth.

We know how strongly people feel about this issue on both sides of the debate, but feelings and convictions alone are not good bases for important decisions on law reform. I say to those with strong views against assisted dying laws based on their religious beliefs: You do not have to access this law if you find yourself in a similar situation to that of Angelique or Loredana. No, you do not. I say to the church leaders who oppose this and actively campaign against it: You can urge your parishioners to not go down this path, but please do not stand in the way of those who are seeking the right to die with dignity. Please have the humanity and the decency to step out of the way. 19872 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

It is time for us all as legislators to listen to the people's call on this issue. The people of New South Wales want change, they are demanding change and that call for change will not diminish in numbers or in its urgency. In fact, over the years, public support for voluntary assisted dying for the terminally ill has grown. Now polls consistently show levels of support at between 75 and 85 per cent. The most recent Newspoll in 2011 showed 83 per cent support across New South Wales. The question asked in the poll was, "If a hopelessly ill patient experiencing unbelievable suffering with absolutely no chance of recovering asks for a lethal dose, should a doctor be allowed to give a lethal dose or not?" That is exactly what my bill does—nothing more, nothing less. In Sydney 80.5 per cent said yes, while elsewhere in New South Wales that figure was 88.4 per cent. There was little variance in the response among different income or education levels or between people with children or with no children.

Those figures have been confirmed during my series of forums, "Dying with Dignity: Your Right to Choose", that I have brought to centres around New South Wales to explain this bill. In partnership with Dying with Dignity NSW, I have held events in , Newcastle, Coffs Harbour, Ballina, Katoomba, Orange, Wagga Wagga, Dee Why and Parramatta, with more planned for Balmain, Paddington, Tweed and Mosman. At every forum it has become painfully clear just how far behind public opinion we are. Support for voluntary assisted dying crosses the political divide; in fact, in most of the forums I have conducted at town halls and rooms in clubs—often brimming to capacity—it is hard to spot a Greens voter among the attendees.

Clearly the arguments against law reform are not convincing the public. One of the reasons why the myths do not carry the same weight they used to is the successful operation of schemes overseas, such as in Oregon, the United States, with its Death with Dignity Act. Oregon provides a successful, compassionate legal framework for a practice that is already happening in Australia behind closed doors and underground.

Several cases were outlined in the booklet I distributed earlier this year. I will speak about one. Triathlon competitor, heli-skier and passionate human being Wayne McCarthy was diagnosed with the brain disease progressive supranuclear palsy, with a prognosis anywhere between three to eight years of progressively not being able to walk, talk, write, eat or see properly. The disease results in a death by choking. After many attempts he managed to obtain lethal medication by stealth. His widow, Ronda, tells the heartbreaking story of their planned goodbye and of Wayne taking the medication alone in a hotel room while she attended church. Ronda said:

If it had been legal for Wayne to seek assistance from a doctor, he would not have had to do it so early and we would have had him a little longer. Our family and friends would have been able to say goodbye. And it turns out goodbyes are important. I would have been able to be with him in his final moments. It would have been hard, but not as terrible as having to leave him to do it on his own.

This is why having legislation for voluntary assisted dying for the terminally ill is a safer and fairer option. It is far better to regulate what is already happening than to allow it to continue unchecked. And it is going unchecked. Essentially, this bill puts a framework around what is happening anyway. It allows patients and their families and their doctors to talk more openly about end-of-life choices when suffering gets too great. One of the choices available to people who are reaching the end of their lives is to withhold food and water. In other words, the patient slowly starves and dehydrates to death. This can take weeks. Why is this okay, but active, compassionate assistance at the request of the patient is not? Why not?

In all of the jurisdictions where assisted dying schemes are in place palliative care is extremely well-resourced and is respected and valued. In fact, palliative care improves in jurisdictions where voluntary assisted dying is legal. Crucially, it puts the decision about the end of life back into the hands of the patient. Ultimately, this bill is about giving the ultimate choice to dying people, who surely deserve whatever control they can exercise over their suffering when they are nearing the end of their lives. If we in this place today or in the coming weeks do not give people this choice, who will? Are we satisfied to hear that doctors are doing this anyway; that patients are committing suicide anyway; that people are begging their loved ones to kill them anyway? Can members accept that as our law currently stands those who can afford it are spending tens of thousands of dollars travelling to Switzerland to achieve a dignified death? And some of those who cannot afford it are killing themselves anyway.

If this law were passed many terminally ill people would have immense peace of mind. Some would live longer, because they would then not have to resort to finding their own way out of their suffering. The system around end-of-life choices is failing people and it is our job to fix it. The vast majority of people of New South Wales are crying out for a legal framework to be put in place that will enable terminally ill people— people who are dying anyway, people who are facing an unimaginable, excruciatingly painful death—the right 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19873

to request assistance to die that little bit sooner, with their family around them and at a time of their choosing, instead of dying in ways that we all find too horrible to think about or to talk about. Surely we can grant the people of New South Wales that.

I know some members in this place will decide that it is too much for them to legislate this; that they support the idea in general and they feel sorry for people who are telling them their story, but it is too much for them to do this. I know that when some of the people who helped elect members hear that it was too much for those members they will scream in frustration. They will literally scream in frustration, because it is our job. It is why we are here. We are here to make the difficult decisions, to make a difference to people's lives, to improve our society, to advance society, to keep up with the expectations that the people of this great State bestow upon us. This bill is about alleviating suffering. The best palliative care cannot alleviate the suffering of some terminally ill patients. I will read from some of the emails we have all received. One extract reads:

The palliative care team that visited our home for months and looked after her for the last 7 weeks in Canterbury Hospital were very kind and supportive, but they had no answers and were shocked by her intolerance of the medication. Together we just waited and watched her gradually disintegrate to death.

Another email reads:

She said she was ready to die before she even left the hospital and wondered why she woke up each day to more pain, nausea and extreme discomfort in spite of palliative medications.

I have a folder of many more such emails. I appeal to all members to make their decision on how they will vote on this important and long-overdue piece of legislation based on sound evidence, well-reasoned arguments and the wishes of the community. Please think about the suffering that people from all parts of the State, from all walks of life, are asking us to help alleviate. I truly hope that in this debate compassion and courage are the victors over fear and self-interest.

I will take a moment to thank the campaigners, advocates for reform and those touched by terminal illness who have dedicated so much to this bill. At Dying with Dignity NSW, I give special thanks to Richard Mills, who is in the gallery today, Sarah Edelman, Jill Weekes, who is also in the gallery, Gabrielle Brown and all the volunteers, staff and board. I have had the pleasure of working with those inspiring people and also Gideon Cordover, Ronda McCarthy, Shayne Higson, James McKay, Loredana Alessio-Mulhall and many others who have shared their deeply personal and moving stories in support of law reform. To all those who have telephoned, emailed and written to me with their stories I say a huge thank you.

I also thank medical professionals and academics Dr Robert Marr, Dr David Leaf, Dr Chris Ryan, Professor Colleen Cartwright and many others. Special thanks must go to our researchers Liz Jacka and Carolyn Williams. Without the significant hours they have invested in this bill and the supporting material I think we simply could not have brought this bill to the Parliament. There are so many others, and I wish I could name them all. Thanks to Margaret Otlowski, Marshall Perron, Nicholas Cowdery, Philip Nietzsche, Ian Wood and John Dowd. I also thank Jamie Parker, and for agreeing to carry this bill forward into the lower House should this bill win the support of the majority of members.

Finally, back to Angelique: before she died Angelique gifted her sister, Michelle, 35 handwritten letters for her thirty-fifth birthday. In those letters she did not mention death or dying but the power of words. She wrote:

Let words be as feathers. I shall gather unto myself these paper wings, and soar to you. Such wings were not made to fly too close to the sun, but nearer the moon.

I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Lynda Voltz and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

UNLAWFUL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISM

Mr SCOT MacDONALD [11.37 a.m.]: I move:

1. That this House notes that:

(a) the New South Wales public expects its political representatives to reject illegal activities and participate in debate in a lawful manner, and

(b) elected Greens representatives have publicly stated their support for illegal blockades and the hoax perpetrated by an environmental activist against Whitehaven Coal and the ANZ Bank on Monday 7 January 2013.

2. That this House condemns the The Greens for supporting unlawful activities in New South Wales.

19874 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

On 7 January this year an anti-coal activist sent out a fake press release on ANZ letterhead claiming that the bank was withdrawing funding for the Maules Creek mine between Gunnedah and Narrabri. That precipitated a sale of Whitehaven shares on the Australian Stock Exchange. Estimates of the losses by investors are around $314 million. Many of these were mum and dad savers and workers who rely on the results of their superannuation fund.

Former Greens leader has compared the Whitehaven hoaxer to Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King and even Jesus Christ. The current leader of the Federal Greens, Senator , said the action "was part of a long and proud history of civil disobedience." New South Wales Greens Senator congratulated the activist. The Greens New South Wales member of the Legislative Council was supportive of the hoax, tweeting, "100 per cent wrong, nothing could be more Oz", in reply to the chair of Whitehaven, Mark Vaile, stating that the hoax was un-Australian. On 9 January The Greens member of the Legislative Council Cate Faehrmann tweeted:

Yes, I support the activists and landholders who have been trying to draw attention to the Maules Creek destruction.

The Greens member of the Legislative Council Jeremy Buckingham has criticised the police for ensuring compliance with the law at mine or coal seam gas blockades. I am not sure whether Mr supported the hoax. My guess is that he thought Maules Creek was a cheeky red wine. The Greens deserve the condemnation of this House and the New South Wales community for placing themselves above the laws of the land. Members are elected to this Parliament and the Federal Parliament to uphold the laws and the institutions that serve our society.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. ): Order! Members will have an opportunity to contribute to the debate. Mr Scot MacDonald will be heard in silence.

Mr SCOT MacDONALD: New South Wales and the rest of Australia are fortunate to have a politically inclusive system. We have multiple layers of jurisdictions; voting is compulsory; turnout is high; political cycles are short; Ministers and members of Parliament are accessible; there is a robust media, notwithstanding the Gillard Government's attempts to muzzle the press and the internet; there are 24-hour news channels; the community is engaged at many levels; there is a plethora of non-government organisations and think tanks; and lawful protest is common and even facilitated. Social media have brought an unprecedented immediacy and accessibility to public debate.

In New South Wales we know the date of free and fair elections that are held every four years. Very few citizens are prohibited from standing for Parliament. It is not onerous to form a political party and run candidates. Hundreds of people have put themselves forward for office. Policies are offered by the major parties and governments are accountable. It is not a flawless system but it is the envy of many. Each year, approximately 200,000 people vote with their feet by moving to Australia to enjoy the fruits of our democratic system. But for The Greens that is not enough. In their own judgement they are smarter and better than the rest of us. They are the Parliament, the judiciary and the police. The laws do not apply to them.

This is the ultimate fatal and gross conceit. This House must reject that in the strongest possible terms. Social harmony and broad support for the law are fragile. When a party that is trying to portray itself as a serious political player signals that adherence to the law is optional it undermines the norms that give security and opportunity to us all. Essentially The Greens are saying that they are the arbiters of lawfulness. They decide what should be observed and what we can opt out of. All sorts of justifications are trotted out. Usually some sort of environmental Armageddon is promised if the illegal activity is not tolerated and successful. The Whitehaven hoaxer explained his actions in this way:

Our primary concern is the impact of this mine on the environment at the end of the day. A lot of people were taken in by it, but when you compare the cost of that to the health of our forests and farmlands, it justifies it.

Resource exploration and development in Australia is now among the extensive, comprehensive and most costly in the developed world because of our environmental regulations. In New South Wales the Liberal-Nationals Government ensured that the consent authority is now independent and, depending on the scale of the development, either the Joint Regional Planning Panel or the Planning Assessment Commission makes the decision. Those bodies are required to call for extensive review of environmental factors or environmental impact statements, ask for submissions and hold public forums. They weigh the evidence and make a decision independent of government. Rejections are explained and approvals usually have multiple conditions. Now the Australian Government can be drawn into the application process through the Federal Environmental Protection 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19875

and Biodiversity Conservation Act, and the Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development may be giving advice to State and Federal governments. In all those considerations the triple bottom line's economic, social and environmental aspirations have to be weighed.

Ecologically sustainable development and the precautionary principle are uppermost in the minds of the assessors. Notwithstanding the complexity, the process is exhaustive, transparent, fair and accessible. But The Greens have decided they know better. They have more expertise and wiser judgement than the army of departmental experts, scientists and independent panels. Their higher level of grey matter entitles them to ride roughshod over process and endorse unlawful activism against an approved development. Why do we have a process? Why do we spend potentially millions of dollars on studies and an environmental impact statement? Why would we engage the community? Why do we wait for years?

According to the logic of The Greens, all a proponent needs to do is pick up the phone to The Greens and say, "Hi Jeremy, have you got a minute? How do feel about my latest mine proposal? Is The Greens party room"—all six of them—"likely to give it the go-ahead? How is the karma today? Is Cate focused on her Senate campaign this week, or has she had a chance to give the project a once-over? How many 'Likes' or 'in-favour-ofs' has the idea got on Twitter and Facebook?" Of course, it is complete nonsense. But it is dangerous nonsense. It is undermining our institutions that have taken hundreds of years to develop—at great cost. It is elitism at its worst.

I have highlighted political inclusiveness. It is important also to discuss briefly economic inclusiveness. Clearly the actions of the hoaxer and site blockaders infringe on property rights. Share trading is reliant on honesty and transparency. Without confidence, investors will strike. Our society will be poorer without risk-taking and funds. Vexatious interference in markets will lead to disinvestment and a weaker community. Developers have to feel they are being treated fairly.

In Australia there are considerable costs to proceeding with a resource application. Arbitrary and non-accountable review of application decisions, which is essentially what a blockade is, ultimately will erode confidence. Who would bother with all the costs and risks associated with development if a property right can be expropriated by activists and extremists without warning? Sounds communist? Let us call it what it is: this behaviour is rooted in . We must not forget that every one of the coal seam gas blockades, which the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham is so enthusiastic about, is hindering access that has been given by landholders who have given permission for companies to enter their land. They have a contract, which is a property right that The Greens are encouraging third parties to ignore.

Successful societies are politically and economically inclusive. Those that are exclusive are characterised by inequality, powerlessness, poorer health outcomes, greater inequality, degraded environments, uneven opportunities, lower standards of living, absence of innovation, and misery. The elitism and arrogance of The Greens are pushing our State and country down that path. Fortunately, there are some within their ranks that are wiser. New Senator Peter Whish-Wilson had the maturity to admit he would not have taken the same action as the Whitehaven hoaxer or the New South Wales Greens supporter. The Greens in this Parliament need to consider the views of the wiser heads within their movement.

The Greens in this Parliament stand condemned for their support for unlawful and illegal activity. Unless they reject those strategies the community needs to deregister them in their minds as a credible political party. The Greens are behaving as a protest movement and their political support is reflecting that. Their vote is declining throughout the country. In the recent Western Australian State election The Greens recorded a 4 per cent drop in the primary vote and a subsequent loss of seats. That trend will continue as long as they behave as an irresponsible fringe movement. I urge the House to support the motion.

The Hon. DAVID CLARKE (Parliamentary Secretary) [11.47 a.m.]: I support the motion moved by Mr Scot MacDonald and congratulate him on bringing it before the House. The facts surrounding this whole shameful scandal are very clear and straightforward. A person, who is described by his pals as an environmental activist, sent through the media a fake media release that was purported to have been authorised and issued by the ANZ Australia bank. The fake media release stated that a request by Whitehaven Coal Limited for $1.2 billion as finance for a coalmining project had been refused by the bank. That false media release stated:

The decision to withdraw our loan facility has been made after a careful analysis of reputational risks and analysis of the returns on this mine in the current climate of high volatility in the coal export market.

As a result of the hoax and that criminally fraudulent document the shares of Whitehaven Coal Limited initially fell by 8.8 per cent, or some $314 million, before finally making a recovery after the hoax had been exposed, but 19876 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

still resulting in the value of the company being reduced by several hundred thousand dollars at least. How this affects many small shareholders in Whitehaven Coal has not yet been finally determined. What is clear is that the media release was a fake and a lie, was issued by a liar and set out to inflict damage against shareholders in Whitehaven—and it constitutes a criminal act.

What did some of The Greens parliamentary representatives throughout Australia do? They congratulated the perpetrator. They justified his actions. They rejoiced and gloated in the cleverness of his actions, in the slick way that his fraudulent actions played out in the media. They gushed forward with their wholehearted support for this fraudulent and criminal action. They gave their moral backing to this immoral action. This fine motion by Mr Scot MacDonald states that the public expects its representatives to reject illegal activities. Who could do anything other than support such a view, and I support that view as well.

This motion condemns those elected Greens representatives who have publicly stated their support for illegal blockades and for the hoax ANZ bank media release. I join in condemning those Greens representatives who support such actions as well. I remember a while back a former Greens member of Parliament justified the illegal actions of activists who scaled the heights of the Sydney Opera House and splashed ugly, political graffiti across that world-famous, iconic and graceful building, thereby putting at risk the lives of workers whose unenviable job it was to scale the Opera House and remove the graffiti.

The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Unlike you, who splashed the blood of Iraqis all over Baghdad in an illegal war, a disgraceful war that killed hundreds of thousands of people, and you condemn us for some paint. What about the blood of the people of Iraq?

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Sarah Mitchell): Order! I call the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham to order for the first time. I remind him that he will have an opportunity to participate in the debate. He will leave his comments until then.

The Hon. DAVID CLARKE: Something is getting under his skin. This shows that the justification by some Greens representatives is not just happening now; it has been around for years. They are serial performers. They cannot help themselves. It is for reasons such as this that The Greens are on the nose with a growing number of their own supporters. That is why The Greens are now in terminal decline. That is why in elections throughout Australia—election after election—The Greens vote has been collapsing. That is why in the coming Federal elections The Greens will pay a devastating electoral price, and I can hardly wait for that day.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM [11.52 a.m.]: I oppose this ridiculous motion. It is interesting that the member for Santos, the hired gun of the coal seam gas industry, has introduced this motion.

Mr Scot MacDonald: Is that the best you can do?

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: No. I thank Mr Scot MacDonald for bringing it forward because it gives me an opportunity to educate him and some of the less informed members of the Government about the history of social movements in this country and around the world. It gives me an opportunity to show how this community has come to enjoy the freedoms they have today, to put the ongoing protests against this Government's agenda into context and explain some history that Scot MacDonald clearly misses with his motion. Put simply, Scot MacDonald has no understanding of history or social movements. He fails to recognise the role protests and civil disobedience have played throughout history to uphold, promote and gain legal recognition of fundamental human rights and to promote social change. Quite simply, he cannot see the woods for the trees and fails to see where we stand at a critical time in human history, where we can no longer continue with business as usual.

Every day people taking action throughout the State recognise the critical nature of our times. They have not buried their heads in the sand and pretended we can continue with business as usual. These people recognise that the current attempt by fossil fuel companies to suck up the world's last fossil fuel reserves on Australia's last viable farmland is an attempt to profit from an industry responsible for causing catastrophic climate change. These corporations are motivated by speculative profiteering, whereas the people who rally against it are motivated by the protection of their life-support systems—the land, the water and atmosphere that are so essential to our survival and our economy. To put speculative investment ahead of the very life-support systems that we rely upon for our health, quality of life and survival shows a Government completely out of touch with the overwhelming scientific data that says we must protect our farmland, our water and our communities. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19877

On the right to protest, firstly, by bringing this motion to the House Scot MacDonald shows his ignorance of the law that protects people's right to protest. Australia is still a democracy. We have a right to publicly assemble and protest based on the implied right of political participation found in the common law and the Australian Constitution. This is not about to be overturned on the whim of Scot MacDonald. The courts have recognised for more than a century there is a freedom to protest. Any limits on those freedoms have to be made really clear in any legislation. Despite the posturing of certain politicians or coal seam gas lobbyists—or both— people are allowed to protest against the mining takeover of their land and water and are protected by law in doing so. That is why we have a democracy and not a dictatorship. These are not the days when one is taken away in the dead of night for speaking out against the Government or a corporation; nor should we allow such things. We would be a worse society for it.

Scot MacDonald shows that he has no understanding of how we come to enjoy the freedoms we have today. He would have us living in the dark ages. If Scot MacDonald were in charge we would have no recognition of the first people of Australia—Indigenous Australians who were custodians of this land long before Europeans arrived. The struggle for Indigenous recognition, as with all great social movements that came before and after it, can be summed up by the judgement of Justice Lionel Murphy in the case of Neal v The Queen when he proclaimed:

Mr Neal is entitled to be an agitator.

Mr Percy Neal, Chairman of the Yarrabah Council, was convicted by a magistrate in Cairns of assault and unlawful entry and was sentenced to two months imprisonment with hard labour. He appealed to the High Court of Australia, and Mr Justice Murphy stated:

That Mr Neal was an "agitator" or a stirrer in the magistrate's view obviously contributed to the severe penalty. If he is an agitator, he is in good company. Many of the great religious and political figures of history have been agitators, and human progress owes much to the efforts of these and the many who are unknown.

Mr Neal was one of countless Aboriginal leaders who, of necessity, became agitators in an attempt to achieve equality, recognition and social justice for his people, the likes of which should be commended and not, as Scot MacDonald would have it, condemned. If we look at other social movements, if Scot MacDonald had his way—

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: The Hon. Scot MacDonald.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: If the Hon. Scot MacDonald, the member for Santos, had his way, India would still be a colony of England and Gandhi's mass galvanisation of his people to kick out India's colonial rulers would not have been given the recognition it rightly deserves. In relation to suffragettes, if Scot MacDonald had his way—

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Gandhi supported non-violent protest.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: We condemn violent protests. There is no doubt we support non-violent protests but this was clearly a non-violent protest and Scot MacDonald's motion condemns all protests. He calls them unlawful. If Scot MacDonald had his way—

The Hon. Niall Blair: Point of order: The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham keeps referring to the member by his name without using his correct title. I ask you to please direct him to refer to him by his correct title.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Sarah Mitchell): Order! I uphold the point of order. Members will refer to other members by their correct titles.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: If Mr Scot MacDonald had his way women would still be second-class citizens and not have the vote. He would be condemning the suffragettes as lawbreakers for chaining themselves to railings and burning mail to protest their exclusion from public society. While those just like Scot MacDonald railed against the idea of giving women equal recognition at the time, the fight for the right to vote and stand in elections was often a long, desperate and violent one. For example, in the United Kingdom many suffragettes were imprisoned and went on self-enforced hunger strikes which resulted in force feeding and sometimes ended in death. Others set fire to buildings and heckled politicians, a bit like the greeting the Hon. got when he went to Lismore to sell the Government's coal seam gas dream. If Scot MacDonald had his way, Rosa Parks would still be treated as a second-class citizen and would have to give up her seat on the bus to a white passenger. 19878 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

Mr Scot MacDonald: Point of order: I take offence to that. The member is implying that I favour racial discrimination. I find that offensive.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Sarah Mitchell): Order! The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham will speak to the motion before the House and be careful not to cast aspersions on other members. Other forms of the House are available to him should he wish to speak about the member.

Mr Scot MacDonald: I am asking for a withdrawal of the remark.

The Hon. Amanda Fazio: To the point of order: Mr Scot MacDonald in his point of order did not ask for withdrawal of the comment. He simply denied the comment, which is not a point of order. It is a bit late now for him to seek withdrawal. He also is bordering on canvassing your ruling, Madam Deputy-President.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Sarah Mitchell): Order! Mr Scot MacDonald can take a new point of order asking the member to withdraw. In his original point of order he said that he had taken offence.

Mr Scot MacDonald: Point of order: It might be unimportant to you, Jeremy, but you just accused me—

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Sarah Mitchell): Order! Mr Scot MacDonald should speak to the point of order.

Mr Scot MacDonald: I ask the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham to withdraw.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Sarah Mitchell): Order! Mr Scot MacDonald has taken offence to the comments and has asked the member to withdraw.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: To the point of order: What were the specific comments to which he has taken offence that I am being asked to withdraw?

Mr Scot MacDonald: The words I heard were that I would still support Rosa Park being discriminated against.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Segregation.

Mr Scot MacDonald: Segregation.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Sarah Mitchell): Order! Mr Scot MacDonald has taken offence and to assist the House the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham should withdraw the comment.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: I withdraw. Perhaps Scot MacDonald—

The Hon. Niall Blair: Point of order: My point of order is the same as the one I took a minute ago, which was upheld. The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham should refer to Mr Scot MacDonald by his correct title.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Sarah Mitchell): Order! I uphold the point of order.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: Rosa Parks' acts of defiance in the Montgomery bus boycott became important symbols of the modern civil rights movement. She became an international icon of resistance to racial segregation. She organised and collaborated with civil rights leaders, including Martin Luther King Jr. To Scot MacDonald, these people are merely law-breakers. To those who understand history and the interface between civil disobedience and effecting progressive social change, we would still be living in the dark ages but for people such as Rosa Parks. By moving this motion Scot MacDonald ignores the context of our current place and time in human history. He ignores the fact that humanity has reached the limits of our biosphere. He ignores the fact that further development of fossil fuels across our landscape will enable this dead-end industry to wreck the last of our farmland, pollute the last of the world's 1 per cent drinkable water and drive catastrophic climate change. Bill McKibbon stated:

So far, we've raised the average temperature of the planet just under 0.8 degrees Celsius, and that has caused far more damage than most scientists expected. The scary thing though, is the understanding that we have five times as much oil and coal and gas on the books as climate scientists think is safe to burn.

2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19879

This explains why big fossil fuel companies have fought so hard to spread misinformation, manufacture doubt and create denial about climate change. However, Jonathan Moylan and others were galvanised into action after realising that governments have failed to take action on climate change. These climate activists realise that to avert a catastrophe they must take non-violent action against the fossil fuel companies that seek to put profit before the planet. While the actions of members of groups such as Rising Tide, Greenpeace or Lock the Gate may potentially infringe laws, they are motivated to protect the life-support systems on which we all depend. These so-called law-breakers in 50 years time will be viewed as visionaries and leaders, whereas fossil fuel executives and the governments that support them will be treated as pariahs and criminals. Fundamentally, the Hon. Scot MacDonald ignores the context of the times in which we live. He thinks business can carry on as usual and pretend that by shooting the messenger we can rid ourselves of the problem.

The Hon. : What we need is one world socialist government. That's what we want, all dictated from The Greens party.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: I acknowledge the interjection of the Hon. Robert Borsak. He said "the dickheads of The Greens party". I take offence at that comment and I ask him to withdraw it.

The Hon. Robert Borsak: I didn't say that.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: I will bat on. The retort to Scot MacDonald's assumption could not be put better than by Bob Brown, who wrote on this very issue some months ago, under the apt title "It's coalminers, not Moylan, who are costing us the Earth". He opens with the testimony of James Hansen, head of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies in New York.

The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox: You are a space cadet.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: The member would not even know who James Hansen is. James Hansen said:

CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of long-term consequences of continued business as usual. In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.

The import of Hansen's comments cannot be brushed aside. The real criminals are not those opposing fossil fuel expansion but the companies and governments who back their forced entry onto people's land. Today on the Alan Jones radio program Tony Abbott said he supported the rights of farmers to say no to gas and miners.

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: Hear, hear! That's right.

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: I note the interjection of the Hon. Marie Ficarra supporting that call. The Hon. Tony Abbott now takes the position of The Greens and Lock the Gate of civil disobedience. Those opposite have been dragged kicking and screaming to this position because of civil disobedience and people standing up in their community and organising around their kitchen tables to fight fossil fuel industries. We are not responsible for that. The people make that determination. They are talking amongst themselves and we stand with them and support them. They are an organic grassroots movement standing up to you and to the influence of fossil fuel companies. They will continue to do so, just as they fought racism, for suffragettes to have the right to vote and for the right to determine what happens in their community. They will not take tintookies like you, mate, coming into their community forcing a poisonous industry on them, their children and their water supplies.

The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK [12.06 p.m.]: That is what I like, a bit of passion. I hope I can get the same passion into my speech.

The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: I doubt it, mate. You're bloodless.

The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK: I can understand why the member says I am bloodless because I shot them. The Shooters and Fishers Party wholeheartedly supports the thrust of this motion and congratulates the Hon. Scot MacDonald on moving it. It is important that we expose the lies being told by so-called activists, who take it upon themselves to try to pull down all that is decent and honest in our working lives and institutions. These same people live off the fat of the land or the efforts of family while at the same time loathing the very society that provides support and succour. They do little, if anything, to produce anything of worth other than adolescent point-scoring and seeking to destroy jobs, families, communities, traditions and cultures. The Greens, 19880 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

the great supporters and boosters of the rent-seeking classes, are the first to vilify and slander without the slightest shred of evidence or conscience. They then are outraged when called for what they are: hypocrites and bigots. Let us examine the definition of "bigot".

The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: Point of order: I take offence at being called a bigot.

The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK: I said The Greens are hypocrites and bigots.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! There is no point of order. The Hon. Robert Borsak will continue.

The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK: Let us examine the definition of "bigot". One text defines it as "a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, especially on religion, politics or race." It is fitting to note that the word "bigot" has one possible source from a fifteenth century French word meaning "an excessively devoted or hypocritical person". Perhaps from the twentieth century onwards it should be modified to include "a green, who is excessively devoted to his or her world view to the exclusion of all others". It is a fact also that most environmental activist groups and many pop-up community action groups who advocate civil disobedience are simply nothing more than stalking horses for The Greens. The New South Wales National Parks Association and Mr Pepe Clarke come quickly to mind.

In rewriting history about what he did to the ANZ Bank and Whitehaven Coal, Mr Jonathan Moylan says that he exposed ANZ's investment in the coal industry. If that bludger Mr Moylan is such a great and good man, why did he not also expose the great and good work the ANZ does in ethical investments and in its support of businesses and jobs in Australia? Why is he interested in destroying the ANZ's investment portfolio and the share value of millions of Australian workers superannuation? Their investments are not just in coal businesses but in an institution that helps form part of the financial backbone of the Australian economy, the ANZ Bank. If that is his intention, the man is deluded and childish and has an adolescent grasp on what it takes to create and maintain a standard of living that he takes for granted in Australia.

The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox: Are you talking about Jeremy?

The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK: Yes. Mr Moylan's half-baked attempt at protest and subversion supports the destruction of jobs and, indeed, our economy. But that is okay because it is in the name of protest— just ask Senator Milne. Since when has it become a crime to invest in the coal industry? Coal is not an illegal product but Mr Moylan decided to take action, apparently in the interests of everyone who does not like the mining industry. I can inform Mr Moylan that the majority of Australians like the mining industry and they like the taxes that are paid because they fund our hospitals, the police force and schools and pay for our teachers which the State Government employs to educate our children.

I wonder when Mr Moylan last paid taxes, employed staff, made mortgage payments or, indeed, did anything that created wealth and was of net benefit to his fellow citizens and community. I refer to the bleating of that great and good leader of The Greens in Canberra. Senator Milne strongly supported Mr Moylan and praised his undermining actions. It is not hard to understand why Senator Milne, a Tasmanian Green and now Leader of The Greens, would praise Mr Moylan's actions as she looks proudly on the handiwork of The Greens and the damage wreaked upon the once great State of . The Greens have destroyed the Tasmanian timber industry, which was once the largest employer in the State, and wrecked farming and tourism. The Tasmanian economy is that of a failed State. It relies for its existence on Federal dole payments, Federal grants and Federal handouts.

Senator Milne is a key conspirator in the long-running plan to undermine the Australian economy and destroy our capitalist system of wealth creation, capital accumulation and job creation. As a nation we are well on track for economic penury because of The Greens sabotage of the Australian economy through its various activities and carbon dioxide tax. So Ms Milne's support for Mr Moylan as an economic saboteur is clearly understood. Mr Moylan is also upset that in his lifetime he has seen the world's largest coal export port, located in his hometown of Newcastle, expand rapidly. Indeed, it has doubled its output in 15 years. What is the crime in that? Many economic benefits have flowed from the coal industry. It is called progress but the likes of Mr Moylan do not seem to understand that. He is not interested in a prosperous Hunter Valley or the hundreds of thousands of jobs of decent, honest and hardworking people. He revelled in the publicity and notoriety he received for his stunt and spoke about the risk of his going to jail. I hope that if the crimes are proved that the law is fully applied to him and he does end up in jail. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19881

Unfortunately, The Greens and their fellow travellers do not confine themselves to the coal industry when involving themselves in what could be and has been regarded as illegal activities. For example, they champion the so-called conservationist group Sea Shepherd and defend its members as supposed ecowarriors. These people are pirates and terrorists of the high seas. Last month a United States court decided exactly that— that they are pirates. A United States judge stated that their aggressive and high-profile attacks on Japan's whaling fleet endangered lives and he ordered them to stop attacking the fleet. Last year a court issued an injunction banning Sea Shepherd from going within 500 metres of Japan's ships. What did they do? They ignored the order. The most recent ruling clears the way for Japan to launch extensive legal action against Sea Shepherd, and so they should. In his ruling, Judge Kozinski stated:

When you ram ships, hurl glass containers of acid, drag metal reinforced ropes in the water to damage propellers and rudders, launch smoke bombs and flares with hooks, and point high powered lasers at other ships, you are, without a doubt, a pirate.

We live under a system of law and order. The Greens have benefited from such a system, yet they persist in breaking the law when it suits their cause. I again point to Tasmania as an example. Some time ago in this place I spoke about the Labor Party's attempts to deal with The Greens in order to keep peace in the forests. The deal resulted in thousands of timber workers being thrown onto the scrap heap. Under the deal, forestry activities were curtailed and in return The Greens were to stop illegal activities such as tree spiking and preventing timber workers going about their lawful work. The same unlawful activities are carried out in New South Wales in our northern and southern forests. The aim of all these illegal activities is not to save trees but to destroy regional and rural industries, jobs and—their long-held hope—the economy of New South Wales. They want to rebuild New South Wales in the image of Tasmania.

The Greens want to completely strike down the Murray-Darling Basin Plan and withdraw water from irrigators and farmers as if they are somehow to blame for the problems of the Murray and Darling rivers. The Greens go out to the bush and pretend to befriend the farmers. Far from being their friends, they are responsible for the native vegetation Act and for closing the river red gum forests to the local timber industry and now they want to dictate to farmers what they can and cannot do on their own land. The Greens are the epitome of the false prophet. They agree to law and order when it suits them but have no hesitation in breaking the law or encouraging their fellow travellers to do so when they think they will get free publicity from the taxpayer-funded media. The media uncritically repeats the bigoted catcalls and adolescent screeching of The Greens that the sky will fall in if we do not heed their prediction of doom for us all. I commend the motion to the House and urge all Government and Opposition members to speak out against The Greens' support for and encouragement of illegitimate civil disobedience and well-structured unlawful activities by people of the ilk of Mr Moylan.

The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS [12.16 p.m.]: We have to remember one thing when dealing with The Greens: they hate humanity. I can understand the broad leftism of the Labor Party and its willingness to work within a Fabian tradition but the radicalism that is espoused by The Greens surely draws on the Spartacist theory which so many of them brought with them into the greens movement in New South Wales. They obey the court decisions that are made in their favour and they protest the court decisions that are made against them. They approve of the laws of Parliament that support their agenda and oppose the laws of Parliament, through direct action, that do not support their agenda. They hate humanity and they hate human laws unless they serve their particular agenda.

Some of my conclusions, I expect, will be offensive to people who consider themselves part of the greens movement, amusing to those who loathe the greens movement and, hopefully, enlightening to those who are not sure where they stand. I will try hard not to exaggerate for effect but the suicidal, mankind-hating, technology-loathing, apocalyptic vision of the world I am about to present is not something I have invented so as to present the greens movement in the worst possible light. Rather, the greens movement chooses to represent itself through such books as Time's Up!, written in 2009 by Keith Farnish, in which the author describes with unhealthy relish the coming apocalypse brought on by humanity's selfishness and greed, nay, by humanity's very existence. Luckily, Keith has a solution to the problem. This is his solution: The only way to prevent global ecological collapse and thus ensure the survival of humanity is to rid the world of industrial civilisation. Of course, he does not say this directly. He uses the normal greens method of devolving into opaque euphemism and talks about "unloading." Mr Farnish states:

Unloading essentially means the removal of an existing burden: for instance, removing grazing domesticated animals, razing cities to the ground, blowing up dams and switching off the greenhouse gas emissions machine. The process of ecological unloading is an accumulation of many of the things I have already explained in this chapter, along with an (almost certainly necessary) element of sabotage.

19882 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

I repeat: an almost certainly necessary element of sabotage. I find this disconcerting. The idea of blowing up dams has me a little worried. You can call me old-fashioned but I remain strangely attached to industrial civilisation, given that it has provided me with work, transport, entertainment, clean water, healthy children, a nice home, pleasant holidays and many other things besides.

I would be loath to chuck in the towel simply because some hippies say that the only way our planet is to survive will be to abolish human civilisation as we know it. Unfortunately, many in the greens movement would agree and say, "Yes, exactly. That's what we need to do." Many greens share Farnish's views on industrial civilisation and agree with the activist measures that Farnish recommends to destroy it. They are consistent with green behaviour elsewhere, such as, extravagant claims that coal-fired power stations are "death factories" that should be closed and the Greenpeace activists who were found guilty of criminally damaging power stations such as Kingsnorth power station in south-east England.

The reason that most people do not understand how diabolical The Greens are is that it would never occur to them that, like religious zealots, The Greens believe they have a monopoly on revealed truth. I appreciate that this statement is guaranteed to raise the hackles of more fair-minded people. They ask, "How can you possibly make the sweeping accusation of The Greens as religious zealots?" I can imagine their saying, "They are people who care about nature, and what is wrong with that?" Of course, there is a big difference between nature, which we all love and appreciate, and Nature which they deify.

For the serious greens, the enjoyment we derive from nature is not just trivial but essentially wrong-headed because it is grounded in selfishness—I enjoy nature—and anthropocentricism, which basically sees us as subservient to Mother Gaia. This is best exemplified by people such as BBC's green reporter Chris Packham, who when asked by Radio Times which animal he would not mind seeing extinct replied, "Human beings. No question. That's the only one." I detect a similar puritanical intensity amongst most Greens.

Mr David Shoebridge: Point of order: The motion is not about Mother Gaia, despite the attempt by the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps to draw it into the debate. The member is clearly straying from the relevance of the motion. He should be constrained to the terms of the motion.

The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: To the point of order: I am being directly relevant to the motion. The issue is why The Greens would undertake antisocial and illegal activities. The answer is that they adopt a religious creed and view of their environmentalism which transcends the need for them to follow human laws.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! I do not uphold the point of order. The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps is laying the foundation of his speech.

The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: This attitude is surprisingly common amongst hard-core greenies. It is what I call the "we must save the city to destroy it" mentality, or Nature trumps nature. If one wants to invoke Lenin, which I am sure some members of The Greens have done more than once in their lives, one may well say that you cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs. If I make it sound scary, that is probably because it is scary. The more closely we examine the core tenets of their faith, the more we realise there is nothing cuddly, fluffy or bunny hugging about the greens religion. In fact, it could not unreasonably be described as a pagan death cult, rooted in hatred of the human species, hell-bent on destroying almost everything man has achieved, and slavishly, weirdly, insanely devoted to a heartless goddess who offers nothing in return, save cold indifference.

Mr David Shoebridge: Point of order: The motion is not about the member's pagan death cult; it is about Maules Creek mine. The fact that the member may have researched and partaken in pagan death cults is not relevant to the motion.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! There is no point of order.

The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: This may sound a little extreme but we often hear people before an election say, "I am going to vote for one of the major parties in the lower House but I will give my vote to The Greens in the upper House." They think it is not like voting for the Citizens Electoral Council or the Monster Raving Loony Party, however much we may know it is exactly in that same paradigm. It seems to them like a caring, innocuous middle ground. Let us have a closer look at the watermelons—green on the outside and red on the inside—deep red in New South Wales—and what they really believe. A good place to start is Rachel Carson's 1962 bestseller Silent Spring. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19883

Carson's book shook an entire generation's faith in the very notion of scientific progress. Carson had scientific proof. Technology, she said, was going to kill us all. Paul Ehrlich is another one who is similarly feted by the greens movement. After all, he did as much fine work towards the cause of environmental catastrophism as did Carson, and all his predictions of doom were spectacularly wrong. Ehrlich is best known for The Population Bomb, the 1968 bestseller that terrified hippies, parents and children, and the dealers too, with claims such as this:

The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve … in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death date.

In the world envisaged by Ehrlich in 1980 the average age of death in the United States was 42, thanks to toxic pesticides. There would be disastrous climate change, although, cannily, Ehrlich hedged his bets as to which direction it would take. "With a few degrees of cooling a new ice age might be upon us," he argued in The Population Bomb, but "with a few degrees of heating, the polar ice caps would melt, perhaps raising ocean levels 250 feet." Which is it? Will it be colder or warmer, fish or no fish, birdsong or no birdsong? It did not matter just so long as the gates were wide open for the continuing flood of envirohysteria—trademark pending. The guiding philosophy behind this can be ascertained from others such as James Lovelock, who spells it out in his book The Revenge of Gaia. In an interview about his book he crows:

It would be hubris to think humans as they are now are God's chosen race.

Because we are not, we are doomed, he tells us. We are all doomed, and it is no more than we deserve for being such a filthy blight on Mother Gaia's otherwise perfectly balanced ecosystem. The Ecologist was with him all the way. Founded in 1970 by Lovelock's good friend, deep ecologist Teddy Goldsmith, the magazine made it clear from its first editorial exactly how it viewed man's role in the great scheme of things. Goldsmith argued we are just a "parasite" or a "disease which is still spreading exponentially". We have "long since ceased to play any useful ecological role". We are, in fact, "waste".

I should like to bludgeon members over the head with just a few more examples of how bizarre, destructive, misanthropic and unashamedly extremist the green mindset really is, and what better place to do so than by visiting the paradigm of green virtue in excelsis, Nazi Germany. The Nazis pushed the cause of environmentalism with a commitment that makes even the modern eurocrats or Californian econuts look like rank amateurs.

Dr John Kaye: Point of order: I listened to the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps' speech in my office and now in the Chamber and I have been struggling to find any relevance in the Government Whip's comments. I even struggle to find any relevance in his reference to James Lovelock. Not only is there a lack of relevance in his speech but also I take deep offence, given my family history, at being likened to a Nazi. I ask that the member, first, withdraw that remark and, secondly, desist in likening me or my party to the Nazis.

The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: To the point of order: I specifically said that the Nazis pushed the cause of environmentalism with a commitment that makes even the modern eurocrats or Californian econuts look like rank amateurs. The Dr John Kaye is neither a eurocrat nor a Californian econut, as far as I know.

Dr John Kaye: To the point of order: Mr Deputy-President—

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! I will rule on the point of order. The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham was given some latitude during his contribution.

Mr David Shoebridge: Not to call people Nazis. That is what the Chamber has descended to—that man calling other members Nazis.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! I remind the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham that he is already on one call to order. The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps will confine his remarks to the ambit of the motion. The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps explained very clearly that his statement was not directed at Dr John Kaye. The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps may continue his speech, but I encourage him to come back to the twenty-first century and to refer to the events of Monday 7 January 2013.

The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: The policies of the Nazis were more than a mere aberration of environmental history at large. 19884 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

Dr John Kaye: Point of order: I accept your previous ruling that the statement was not directed at me or at my party. Therefore, the statement of the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps is completely irrelevant and out of order.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! I have already ruled on the point of order.

The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: In the post-World War II years the environmental movement was a bit more circumspect about its desires and its intentions, but its instincts remained little changed. Harrison Brown's book The Challenge of Man's Future in 1954 had a clear Eugenicist agenda: he talked about sterilising and discouraging the mating of feeble-minded people and a whole range of other Eugenicist objectives as part of a grand environmental scheme. With luck, by this stage I have helped the House form a pretty clear view of what the watermelons stand for. By this I do not mean the nice, fluffy associations greens have developed over the years—nurturing, caring, cherishing, preserving, cleansing and so on. I mean, rather, the core beliefs on which the green religion is based, as expressed in the writings of its most influential philosophers. These core beliefs, although often dressed up as concern for nature and the future of mankind, are deeply rooted in the most bitter misanthropy and direst pessimism. Are these really the kinds of people we want to control our children's future?

The Hon. STEVE WHAN [12.31 p.m.]: The Government Whip must have far too much time on his hands.

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: He has just got a high intellect.

The Hon. STEVE WHAN: That or he is an incredible speed reader. The Labor Party believes in the right to protest. I am sure that there would not be a member of the Labor Party in this place who has not protested in the course of their lives or in the course of their political involvement. We believe that protests should be legal. However, we recognise that over the course of history there have been occasions where protests that were not legal have been justified—for example, the protests in the streets against the Bjelke-Petersen laws in Queensland, the civil rights movement in the United States of America and the protests that saw India gain its independence. There have been many occasions when protests have occurred that have been technically illegal but have been justified by draconian laws at the time or by the oppression of particular points of view or particular people.

In New South Wales people have the right to protest legally and the opportunity to raise their points of view to participate in the process of the consideration of projects and ensure that they are heard. As a former forests Minister and as a former resources Minister, at all times in those positions I said, particularly about protests in relation to forests—often to the industry—that people had a right to protest if they did not agree with operations in their areas but that they should do it legally and not in a way that caused harm to themselves or to others. On that basis, I join in the condemnation of the action that was taken by Jonathan Moylan in issuing a fake press release suggesting that the ANZ Bank had withdrawn finance for Whitehaven Coal, because regardless of whether one agrees with Whitehaven's project in Maules Creek—and there are legitimate arguments on both sides—his actions affected ordinary people; people who were investing in that company and the stock market.

One can take what I regard is an appalling view that all people who invest in coal are guilty of some offence if one happens not to agree with coalmining—and I do not share that view. In Australia these days, particularly as a result of the reforms introduced by Paul Keating, millions of ordinary Australians are investors in projects around Australia through their superannuation, and those projects include mines and coalmines and they are legal investments. Legally operating mines contribute to Australia's wellbeing and to our exports. Whether one philosophically agrees that coalmining is right or wrong, one has to acknowledge that people's wellbeing could have been affected by that fraudulent press release.

I join in condemning Jonathan Moylan's action against Whitehaven Coal. I consider it appalling that members of Parliament backed that action—that supposed leaders in our society from The Greens movement came out and suggested that that action was okay, that it was reasonable to do that. Protesters against coalmines, coal seam gas or any development have every right to protest legally, but I have concerns about people's justification when they say that because they happen to agree with one cause that it is okay to illegally protest against it but not to illegally protest against some other cause. Would The Greens feel the same about endorsing a protest by a farmer who was upset about land clearing?

One protest about land clearing laws involved a farmer in the Monaro area who sat up a pole for a very long time—many months I believe. That was a legal protest because it did not harm anybody else. I think it was 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19885

an ill-directed protest, but it was a protest that he was legitimately able to make. My only reservation is that he took the protest to the point where his own health was being affected. Would The Greens or the people who endorsed the fraudulent action against Whitehaven Coal endorse the actions of a farmer who said, "I disagree with land clearing laws, therefore as a protest I am going to clear this area of bushland"? No, they would not— neither would the Labor Party and, I hope, neither would the Government. Do people who disagree with speed limits have the right to speed?

The Hon. Duncan Gay: No.

The Hon. STEVE WHAN: The Minister for Roads and Ports says no.

The Hon. : Traffic lights?

The Hon. STEVE WHAN: Do people have the right to ignore traffic lights if they think that they are a blow against freedom in society? No, they do not. I think the point is made, and it is a very serious point. We cannot just judge a protest on the basis of our own view of whether the protest is right or wrong; we have to judge it by other criteria. As I said before, I think most people in the Labor Party would agree that there are some circumstances, such as the sheer draconian nature of a law or where something tramples on the civil liberties of people, which can justify an illegal protest, but I do not think this is one of those cases.

We should not engage in activities that cause harm to others—whether that is financial harm such as we saw in the case of the fraudulent press release about the ANZ Bank or harm to people who happen to be operating machinery that might be going into a particular area. Unfortunately, it is sometimes forgotten that just because someone works for a company it does not make them guilty of an offence. We endorse the right to protest. We recognise that in the debate about coalmines and, indeed, all fossil fuels in New South Wales there are two sides to the argument.

I happen to believe, as do most people who support our transition to a lower carbon environment, that we will need to continue to have fossil fuels in our society for quite some time to come, and that means we will continue to need to mine coal and we will continue to need gas until our dependence declines in those areas and we move to a lower carbon environment. But that will happen over decades, not tomorrow, because that would cause massive problems for people in New South Wales—affordability issues, uncertainty and, indeed, job losses for huge areas of manufacturing across New South Wales. I happen to believe—incidentally, as do Ross Garnaut and Professor Tim Flannery— that we should phase down our dependence on fossil fuels over time. That means we will need to continue to mine coal and have a robust process for assessing legitimate issues that arise from coalmining. Those issues include direct environmental impacts, threatened species conservation, cumulative community impacts, coaldust impacts and so on. They are important and legitimate issues.

However, I also acknowledge that the people who believe we should no longer use fossil fuels have a right to express their view. They have a right to raise those issues in society and to argue their case. I recognise that the people who are protesting against the Maules Creek development also want their issues concerning threatened species and environmental destruction adequately dealt with. My colleague the Hon. Luke Foley, the shadow Minister for the Environment, has met with a number of those people and has heard their concerns. They are right to continue to raise their concerns, but they should do so legally and in the ways that our democracy allows.

Energy in New South Wales is a complex issue, but we must recognise that the community we serve needs long-term provision of affordable energy. Numerous international studies have shown that access to electricity is one of the key things to bring people out of poverty. Massive numbers of people have been lifted out of poverty in China over the past decade primarily because of their access to electricity. That energy has largely come from coal-fired sources but China is now a world leader in developing alternative energy. China has trialled a carbon tax in a couple of provinces and also has the most wind farms of any country. Some of those farms stretch for hundreds of kilometres. China has recognised the problems caused by coal pollution, but it also must be recognised that electricity has lifted many people out of poverty. For example, connecting rural New South Wales to the electrical grid provided a huge boost to agricultural and rural communities.

We have a responsibility to balance the need to move to a lower carbon environment with the need to provide the electricity that helps people to sustain their standard of living and is essential to numerous industries in various sectors, such as the more than 8,000 manufacturing businesses in western Sydney. That means we 19886 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

must continue to carefully consider projects such as coalmines. I will not go further in this contribution except to say that the Labor Party recognises there are some extreme circumstances in which protests may not be legal but are justified. We do not believe that is the case in this instance.

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE [12.42 p.m.]: I oppose this motion and will speak up for the right to protest and the proud history of activism that is, in the end, what forces change. It is not this Parliament, this Chamber or, as a general rule, parliamentarians that bring about change. It is activism, grassroots movements and people pushing and challenging the law, that ultimately delivers change in society. I note the comments of Aidan Ricketts. He is a lecturer at the School of Law and Justice at Southern Cross University in Lismore and has been one of the key thinkers behind much of the Lock the Gate protests. At the introduction of The Activists' Handbook, published last year, he had this to say:

Activism, social change advocacy and the practice of democracy are inextricably linked. It is the work of activists and social movements which pushes society along, prompts it to deal with its own failings and inequalities and helps to manifest a vision of a better world.

When we think about the proud history of changing grossly unfair laws we realise that on each occasion it was ordinary people that gathered together to challenge those laws. That makes us realise why it is so vital to oppose this motion and to stand up for the courage of someone such as Jonathan Moylan, who recognised that a greater good could be achieved by his kind of activism. Let us cast our minds briefly to history. What would have happened if people had not been willing to challenge the United Kingdom laws that allowed slavery and that encouraged and led to gross profiteering by slave traders using English ships? If those laws had not been challenged in the nineteenth century by brave activists who put their bodies on the line to oppose the slave trade we would not have stopped slavery.

Let us move to the beginning of the twentieth century when women ran campaign after campaign to win the right to vote. Suffragettes broke the law and held protests which at the time were condemned by conservative politicians, just as Jonathan Moylan is being condemned by conservative politicians here today. Those women bravely challenged the laws that prohibited them from voting. They were willing to flout the law and stand up for a higher ideal, and the Peter Phelps, the Scot MacDonalds, and the Fred Niles of the time condemned those women when they stood up. Whether it was in South Australia, England or New South Wales, women were condemned in the same way as conservative politicians are now condemning Jonathan Moylan.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Point of order: I object to the remark relating my name to the suffragettes. I strongly supported the suffragette campaign. They were part of the Women's Christian Temperance Organisation, and I have spoken on that issue in this House. I ask the member to withdraw the reference to my name in his statement, which has no bearing on truth.

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: To the point of order: I think the honourable member misunderstood my submission. I was not saying that at the time he opposed the suffragette movement; I know his age.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile has asked the member to withdraw the association of his name. I think, given the spirit that the member has just mentioned, that it might be wise to withdraw the—

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: I will not withdraw the statement that conservative politicians of the ilk of the people that I have mentioned would in the temper of the times also have opposed the suffragette movement. It is a simple fact.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Point of order: The member is a coward who will not withdraw the reference to my name.

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: Don't call me a coward.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Well, withdraw my name from your reference.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! Members will resume their seats. In this Chamber we have a spirit of working together. A member has been offended and a direct association has been noted. Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile has asked the member to withdraw his comment. I ask Mr David Shoebridge to withdraw it. I give him an opportunity to do that and to continue with his speech. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19887

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: I do not withdraw the comment that I made. I repeat: I do not withdraw the comment that I made. For the benefit of the House, I accept what Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile says: That his position on woman's suffrage is that he would not vote against it. To the extent that I suggested otherwise, I withdraw that comment.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Thank you very much.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! Thank you, Mr Shoebridge. You may continue.

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: It is not just women's suffrage though; civil rights activists in the United States spoke out against policies of segregation and separation.

Mr Scot MacDonald: Point of order: My point of order is the relevance of Mr David Shoebridge's speech to the motion, which he and his colleagues do not understand. The motion does not suggest that people cannot protest or should not protest.

Dr John Kaye: This is not a point of order. This is a waste of time.

Mr Scot MacDonald: The motion is about The Greens supporting illegal activity.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Paul Green): Order! There is no point of order. Mr David Shoebridge is building a foundation, as did the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps in his speech.

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: When Rosa Parks took her courageous action and sat in a part of the bus that under a local ordinance was prohibited to her because of her colour she was breaking the law. She was breaking an unfair and unjust law. She was breaking a law that should not have been on the statute book. By doing so she was taking action that the likes of Mr Scot MacDonald would condemn—breaking a law. The argument underpinning this motion is that the only way to challenge an unjust law is by making an approach to the vested interests who support the unjust law. That is an ideology that I and most people who are interested in positive social change comprehensively reject.

In the late 1960s to early 1970s a number of Aboriginal elders and activists occupied Wave Hill Station in the Northern Territory. According to the laws that existed at that time, that was trespass. In the eyes of Mr Scot MacDonald it was an illegal occupation. The Aborigines said that the laws that denied Aboriginal land rights and treated this continent as terra nullius—to allow the land to be divided regardless of the rights of Aborigines—were unjust. The Aborigines said they would sit there and occupy the land and, if necessary, trespass and face criminal sanction until they got their land rights—and thank goodness they did. If they had not taken that step to defy the law, demand their land rights and demand justice we would not have land rights laws. Effectively, the motion seeks to attack the merit and actions of Jonathan Moylan. It is appropriate to read onto the record what he said, which may explain why he took those steps and why this Parliament and most parliaments will be ineffectual in addressing the effects of climate change and the power of the coal industry. He stated:

We are living in a dream world if we think that politicians and the business world are going to sort out the problem of coal expansion on their own. History shows us that when power relations are unevenly matched, change always comes from below. Every right we have has come from ordinary people doing extraordinary things and the time to act is rapidly running out.

I commend the words of Jonathan Moylan and all brave activists who are willing to put themselves on the line to challenge unfair laws when their actions are taken on behalf of a necessary greater good. We all have the right not only to protest but also to break a law when we believe that the law is unjust. I am grateful for the thinking of Aidan Ricketts, who states:

Even within an overall respect for the rule of law, a participatory view of democracy insists that protesters have the right to (conscientiously) break the law to make a political statement. This does not necessarily mean that they do not expect any legal consequences to follow; it may simply mean that they assert a right to conscientiously break a law but are prepared to suffer the prescribed consequences. The environmental movement worldwide and particularly in Australia has been a leading proponent of this approach. Greenpeace is an international organization that has prominently practised this approach at a global level.

That is a right. No matter how many laws are prescribed to prevent environmental activism, to privilege the coal industry and degrade the environment, to privilege coal and the coal seam gas industry and ignore the long-term sustainable industries such as the wine, thoroughbred and agricultural industries upon which our future depends, the right to break an unjust law is the key right. It is a right that many activists prize greatly. 19888 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

On 11 April this year I held an activist training day in this Parliament at which Aidan Ricketts spoke about how Lock the Gate works. We also heard from other brave activists from the animal rights movement, such as Lynda Stoner and . They spoke about how, on occasions, it may be necessary to trespass into one of those appalling sheds where caged chickens effectively are tortured day in, day out to obtain the footage that bears witness to a great abuse of those animals' basic rights; and, if necessary, to flout the law on trespass to bear witness to that, and so that people can see the truth of what happens in industrial farming.

We also heard from Laurie Levy about his work for the Coalition Against Duck Shooting. Following what happened in Victoria, in the middle of last year the Shooters and Fishers Party caused this Parliament to pass laws that effectively make it a crime to protest against duck shooting. It is a crime to harass or interfere in any way with people who are shooting waterfowl in Victoria. He told us that animal rights activists in the Coalition Against Duck Shooting flouted the law. He added that they would not be constrained by a grossly unfair law that prevents them from saving the lives of native waterfowl that had been shot for fun. They will save as many birds as possible. They will not respect an example of gross ideological law-making that makes it a crime for them to place themselves between the birds and duck shooters. I condemn the motion but in doing so I acknowledge the bravery of Jonathan Moylan in taking courageous action. I also commend my colleagues in the Federal Parliament and in this Parliament who have supported that action.

The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO [12.57 p.m.]: In participating in debate on the motion moved by Mr Scot MacDonald I express serious concerns with the implications of paragraph 1 (a) because it constitutes an infringement on the rights of parliamentarians to support people who peacefully make illegal protests. New South Wales has a long history of supporting illegal but peaceful protests. We have had campaigns during which women would chain themselves inside the public bar of a hotel when it was not legal for them to drink in a public bar. I support equality for women and I therefore supported their campaigns. I supported the right of people to march in moratorium protests against the Vietnam war, even though a lot of the marches did not have the requisite legal permits. We only need to hark back to the long campaign against apartheid in South Africa of the Hon. Meredith Burgmann, some of which involved illegal protests, such as invading sporting grounds, marches, and other forms of protest.

As parliamentarians we should not be locked into the blanket terms of paragraph 1 (a). I am not prepared to reject illegal activities that involve peaceful protest. However, when it comes to supporting forgery, politicians of any persuasion should not support that. That is basically what happened with Whitehaven Coal Limited and the ANZ Australia bank. While Mr Scot MacDonald describes it as a hoax, I would say it is a clear-cut case of forgery. We should condemn that. It was not a hoax but a criminal act. Parliamentarians should speak strongly against it.

[The President left the chair at 1.00 p.m. The House resumed at 2.30 p.m.]

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted at 2.30 p.m. for questions.

Item of business set down as an order of the day for a future day.

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS

The PRESIDENT: I welcome into the President's gallery the Hon. Julie Soso-Akeke, MP, Governor of the Eastern Highland Province in Papua New Guinea. I welcome in the public gallery also Judge Slaikatc of the Court of Appeal, Thailand, accompanied by 46 officials from across Thailand who are studying at the University of New South Wales Law School for two weeks. You also are very welcome. I hope you all have enjoyed your visit to Parliament House today.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ______

SNOWY HYDRO LIMITED

The Hon. LUKE FOLEY: My question is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. In light of the recent leaks that the Government intends to appoint Paul Broad to Snowy Hydro and intends to sell even more Government assets, will the Government rule out the privatisation of Snowy Hydro?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Once again the Leader of the Opposition shows his ignorance of very fundamental facts. The Leader of the Opposition apparently does not know that Snowy Hydro is jointly owned by the Federal Government, the New South Wales Government and the Victorian Government. He does not understand that any appointment of a director would be a matter for all three shareholders. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19889

INSPECTOR OF NSW CRIME COMMISSION

The Hon. : My question is directed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Will the Minister inform the House of recent changes to the oversight of the NSW Crime Commission?

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I thank the honourable member for her important and timely question. I am sure the House will recall that significant changes were made in 2012 to the management arrangements of the NSW Crime Commission. I am very pleased to be able to advise the House about the appointment of the Hon. Graham Barr, QC as the first Inspector of the Crime Commission. The Inspector is an independent statutory officer whose role is to hold the Crime Commission accountable in the way it carries out its function. The inspector oversights the Crime Commission by auditing its operations and by assessing the effectiveness and appropriateness of procedures relating to the legality or propriety of its activities. The inspector can deal with complaints about the conduct of the Crime Commission or its officers which concern abuses of power, impropriety, misconduct and maladministration.

The functions of the inspector may be exercised in a number of ways. These include on the inspector's own initiative; at the Minister's request; in response to a complaint made to the inspector; or in response to a reference by the parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on the Office of the Ombudsman and the Police Integrity Commission. In order to carry out his functions the inspector may hold inquiries, and has the powers, authorities, protections and immunities conferred on a commissioner under the Royal Commissions Act. Judge Barr is an extremely experienced and distinguished member of the legal profession. Judge Barr has practiced as a barrister, a Crown prosecutor and is an acting Supreme Court judge. Judge Barr has also led the review of forensic procedures and forensic evidence in New South Wales. So we are obviously delighted that he has accepted a five-year appointment as inspector of the Crime Commission.

The inspector is held accountable through a reporting requirement to the Committee on the Office of the Ombudsman and the Police Integrity Commission, chaired by my parliamentary colleague the Hon. Catherine Cusack. The committee is authorised to examine each annual and other report of the Inspector and to report to both Houses of Parliament on any matter concerning the inspector. The appointment of Judge Barr as the inspector is a significant part of ensuring that the NSW Crime Commission will continue to be Australia's most successful agency of its kind. I congratulate Judge Barr on his appointment and thank him for accepting this very important role.

WORKERS COMPENSATION SCHEME

The Hon. : My question is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. What is the impact of Monday's Court of Appeal judgement in Goudappel on his Government's harsh and unfair workers compensation laws?

The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Point of order: That question clearly contains argument. The bits that contain argument should be ruled out of order.

The Hon. Amanda Fazio: To the point of order: The question did not contain argument, because I am sure the part the Hon. Dr Peter Phelps is objecting to is part of the judgement in the case that has been cited. So the question is not argumentative; it is factual.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I will allow the question.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I am aware of the case and I have some preliminary advice on it. We have some preliminary advice from the scheme actuary which indicates there is no impact on the future operations of the scheme. This is basically a transitional matter that relates to the interpretation of some existing potential claims. That is the preliminary advice. Obviously, WorkCover is seeking more detailed advice on the outcome of the case. I can say that yesterday, May Day, was a great day for the workers of New South Wales because businesses in New South Wales found themselves in a much more competitive situation because we were able to announce yesterday that employers will benefit from an average reduction in WorkCover premiums of 7½ per cent, saving more than $200 million a year in the New South Wales economy.

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: Hear, hear! More jobs. 19890 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: More jobs—another $200 million to push towards more jobs. The Government's WorkCover reforms are reducing the cost of doing business in New South Wales and are delivering a stronger economy and creating more jobs. Honourable members will recall that as of June last year, as a result of reforms, employers—and that means jobs and the economy—avoided an average premium hike of about 28 per cent, which would have been required from 1 July last year to cover the over $4 billion and growing deficit in the scheme left to us by this mob on the other side of the House. That 28 per cent average increase in premiums would have cost over 12,000 jobs. They are not interested in jobs; they are not interested in a strong economy. They were interested in having a deficit in the scheme that was going to drive up premiums by an average of 28 per cent.

Our changes have made the system fairer and have provided more generous payments for severely injured workers as well as providing incentives for businesses to improve workplace safety. That is one of the things I am most proud of in this reform process. Listen to them over there. These are the people who, when we talked about the thousand or so people who had their miserable weekly benefits of $432 increased by 70 per cent, said they did not care about those people. They said they did not care about them. The Hon. Penny Sharpe said she did not care about those people.

The Hon. Steve Whan: Point of order: My point of order is relevance. The Minister was asked a specific question about a court case. He is now roving into accusations about this side of the House and reflecting on this side of the House. I ask you to draw him back to the leave of the question.

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Minister has been generally relevant in his answer and should ensure that he remains so.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Let me finish by commenting on how interested those opposite are in WorkCover. John Robertson was a director of WorkCover for the year to 30 June 2007, during which time 11 board meetings were held. How many did John Robertson attend, even though he was being paid?

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Ten?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Nought out of 11. And that is what those opposite get.

WORKERS COMPENSATION SCHEME

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: My question is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. In light of the decision in Goudappel v ADCO Constructions Pty Ltd that allows a very limited class of injured workers to retain some existing benefits, will the Minister undertake not to wind back by legislative amendment this very small gain for injured workers?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: The member is almost accurate as to the case referred to in his question.

The Hon. Penny Sharpe: Stop debating the question.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I like debating the question, particularly when it is a question from David Shoebridge.

The Hon. Penny Sharpe: You are not allowed to debate the question.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Because I then get some idiot from your side to take a point of order and I can sit down and have a rest.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: Point of order: The Minister obviously cannot debate the question. My other point is that he should not call the person who takes a point of order an idiot. I ask him to withdraw. I take offence.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I did not hear him use that word.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: I heard him. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19891

The PRESIDENT: Order! It is contrary to the standing orders for a Minister to debate a question, but it is not contrary to the standing orders for a Minister to canvass the subject matter of the question. I believe the Minister's answer was more tending towards the latter. The Minister has the call.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Thank you. I am pleased to be able to talk about our WorkCover reforms because the Government's changes have produced a fairer system and provided more generous payouts to severely injured workers as well as incentives for businesses to improve workplace safety. They are the key things about a workplace safety scheme. As I indicated earlier, the Government's actions to fix WorkCover will mean that no employer will receive a base increase in 2013 and businesses will save on average 7.5 per cent on premiums. Those opposite hate hearing that. Our reforms mean better care for injured workers, lower premiums and the protection of jobs. Employers across 364 industries have improved safety performance in the workplace.

Mr David Shoebridge: Point of order: The question very specifically asked about a retrospective amendment to take away the benefits of the Goudappel decision. The Minister has strayed well beyond that.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I remind the Minister that his answer must be generally relevant.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Mr David Shoebridge is worried because his legal practice has gone down the drain and what he is looking for now—

The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Minister of Finance and Services to order for the first time. Does the Minister have anything further to add?

The Hon. Greg Pearce: Not at this time, thank you.

RURAL AND REGIONAL ROAD UPGRADES

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: My question is addressed to the Minister for Roads and Ports. Could the Minister update the House on upgrades to country roads in New South Wales?

The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: What about the bridges? Are you going for the hard questions again?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I thank the member for his question. I acknowledge also the interjection about bridges. They are very important. Yesterday when I was giving a comprehensive answer on western Sydney roads those opposite asked me about country roads because they do not like good news and try to pretend that we have not done anything when they know the fact is completely different. Today I am going to talk about country roads. I am delighted to tell the House that just this morning I and the Federal Minister, Albo the sometimes good—on this occasion he was—announced $50 million in joint funding for major road and freight improvements in country New South Wales, with $40 million to be allocated to replace the Kapooka rail bridge on the Olympic Highway near Wagga.

The Hon. Penny Sharpe: You have announced this about 20 times.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: They hate good news. They asked about bridges and we just gave 40 million good reasons why we are getting on with the job. Not content with that, Albo and I announced a further $10 million to build additional overtaking lanes on the Newell Highway. The real country members in this Parliament, which include my honourable friend Trevor Khan and at least one from the other side, know the importance of that announcement. That is just another example of the New South Wales Government building for the future. A new Kapooka bridge will remove the only remaining higher mass limit deficient bridge on the Olympic Highway, which is a major transport and freight route. Walt Secord laughs. He laughed his way all through government when he worked in the Government.

The Hon. Walt Secord: Point of order: The Minister is misleading the House—

The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. 19892 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

The Hon. Walt Secord: —and picking phantom interjections.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Walt Secord to order for the first time.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Well may he laugh, because he is the biggest joke in this Parliament. The Kapooka rail bridge—built many moons ago and characterised by a dangerous dogleg approach from both sides—has more than 150,000 truck movements each year. Last year I stood beside the bridge with the Chair of the New South Wales Freight Advisory Council, Ron Finemore, to announce the $145 million Bridges for the Bush funding program. I heard "shame" from The Greens and the Labor Party. For an Australian citizen with an Order of Australia who has worked to contribute—

The Hon. Penny Sharpe: Point of order: The Minister continues to try to gratuitously verbal the Opposition. It would help if he actually heard what was said. Alleging that the Opposition and The Greens said "shame" is completely incorrect.

The PRESIDENT: Order! The member knows that is not a point of order. The Minister has the call.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Not only will this money build a new rail overpass bridge; it will open up an extra 315 kilometres of road use for higher mass limit vehicles. [Time expired.]

The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: I ask a supplementary question: Can the Minister elucidate his answer on country roads in New South Wales?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: With one exception the Labor Party does not want to hear about the country.

The Hon. Greg Donnelly: Point of order: I do.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I am sorry; there were two exceptions. Approximately 4,200 heavy vehicle trips will be removed from the highway each year because of the efficiency gains brought about by trucks being operated at more productive weights. A detailed design and a review of environmental factors is already underway, with the new bridge expected to be ready by 2015. The good news does not end there. The Government is also building new overtaking lanes on the Newell Highway.

The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: How many?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Three.

The Hon. Jan Barham: Where?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I will tell you in a minute. The Newell Highway is the major road freight link between Sydney and Brisbane, running through the spine of country New South Wales. There will be four new overtaking lanes—we have put another one in—one north of Moree, one north of Parkes and two north of Jerilderie. These new lanes are in addition to the six overtaking lanes built or being built on the Newell Highway between Marsden and Forbes, Coonabarabran and Narrabri, two west of Wyalong and one north of Coonabarabran, which were part of a separate $10 million New South Wales Government election commitment. Each one of those roads contributes to the saving of lives on the Newell Highway and will reduce the frustration experienced by drivers on this highway, which goes through the spine of regional New South Wales. The speed limit was lifted from 100 kilometres per hour to 110 kilometres per hour.

The Hon. Jeremy Buckingham: That will make it safer!

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: The Greens, with a degree of irony, said that that will make it safer. It did. [Time expired.]

COMMUNITY HOUSING PROVIDERS

The Hon. JAN BARHAM: My question without notice is to the Minister for Finance and Services. Can the Minister inform the House if the report on the Government's review of the transfer of public housing 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19893

properties to community housing providers will be made available and what information will be made available about progress towards increasing social housing stock and the conditions that are being placed on recent and future transfers of property to those community housing providers?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I thank the member for that question and her interest in this matter. As members would be aware, I recently announced that ownership of over 1,300 public housing properties will be transferred from the New South Wales Government to community housing providers. That decision resulted from a review I commissioned of the framework that surrounds the program. The review examined the contractual and regulatory arrangements that were put in place by the Labor Government, it made recommendations to strengthen requirements for community housing providers to house applicants on the social housing register and it recommended improving reporting procedures and contracts with providers.

I am pleased to say that the community housing providers were eager to work with this Government and put in place the governance and reporting framework that we requested to help protect and properly utilise this substantial investment of public assets. The 15 community housing providers that were to receive public housing assets were required to submit business cases demonstrating their ability to leverage further social housing properties on the basis of the ones to be transferred. I have announced that nine of the 15 community housing providers have been advised that their business cases have been approved. It is a matter of looking at the business cases. This will enable the transfer of 1,302 additional properties to those housing providers, who have between them received 3,099 properties.

The nine approved community housing providers are Ecclesia Housing, Bridge, Argyle, On Track, St George, North Coast, Affordable Community Housing, Homes Plus and Housing Plus. Discussions are progressing with the remaining six providers regarding the transfer of a further 1,616 properties. The transfer of these properties to the community housing sector will position them to deliver approximately 1,200 new affordable social housing properties over 10 years. That is the leverage. It means that more people who are in need in New South Wales will be safely and securely housed and, with the changes that I have required, more people will be coming off the New South Wales housing waiting list.

The New South Wales Government acknowledges the increasingly important role played by the community housing sector in providing low-cost affordable housing. This Government is committed to building constructive partnerships with community housing providers to meet a growing need in our community. The community housing sector is growing rapidly and now accounts for more than 26,000 properties or 17 per cent of the social housing stock in New South Wales. It has the flexibility and local knowledge that allows it to effectively respond to the needs of its clients.

I note that Gary Moore, Chief Executive of Homelessness New South Wales, has congratulated the Government on its decision to vest these additional properties. Mr Moore notes that the entire industry is watching to ensure that these community housing organisations utilise the transferred properties to deliver additional housing for the disadvantaged. I take this opportunity to congratulate the nine successful community housing providers and note that the transfer of these properties is a substantial vote of confidence in their capacity to deliver additional housing for those most in need.

FIVE DOCK SOCIAL HOUSING MAINTENANCE SERVICES

The Hon. SOPHIE COTSIS: My question is to the Minister for Finance and Services. Will the Minister inform the House when officers of the Land and Housing Corporation will respond to urgent requests from residents in its properties in Five Dock, particularly Coadys Place, who have made numerous pleas for assistance to remove graffiti, repair gutters and brickwork and remove cockroach infestations?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Those particular representations have not been raised with me but I think the best thing to do is to suggest that the Hon. Sophie Cotsis and I form a working bee and go out there and clean it up.

The Hon. SOPHIE COTSIS: I ask a supplementary question: Will the Minister please elucidate his answer to my question? It is a serious question because none of your people are responding to those requests.

The PRESIDENT: Does the Minister wish to elucidate any aspect of his answer? The Minister declines. 19894 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

COMPULSORY THIRD PARTY GREEN SLIP INSURANCE SCHEME

The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: My question is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. Can the Minister please inform the House of the recent consultation and feedback received on the proposed reforms to the compulsory third party insurance scheme?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I thank the Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox for that important question. As members will be aware, the Premier recently announced potential reforms to the compulsory third party [CTP] insurance scheme. The compulsory third party insurance scheme needs to be more affordable for motorists and fairer for accident victims. The scheme needs to change because the current arrangements have become increasingly unaffordable for vehicle owners and delays in claim settlements are not serving the interests of people who are injured in accidents. The scheme and the need for change were outlined in a policy document which was released for consultation for a period of more than six weeks in February this year.

The policy document shows that New South Wales green slips are the least affordable of those in any jurisdiction in Australia. The Ernst and Young report found that New South Wales green slip premiums are the least affordable of those in any of the States or Territories. The report also found that on average from 2000 to 2010 the compulsory third party scheme has had an efficiency of only 50 per cent. That means that only 50¢ of each dollar of compulsory third party premium paid by vehicle owners ends up in claims payments received by injured claimants. For smaller claims involving people who are less severely injured the efficiency is even worse. Ernst and Young found that for all claims for less than $50,000 only 36 per cent of the compulsory third party premium is returned to claimants.

More alarmingly, for legally represented claims of less than $50,000 only 28 per cent, or 28¢ of each premium dollar, is returned to the claimants due to the higher proportional costs of legal services. The possible changes include moving to a no-fault scheme that will be more efficient and will reduce legal and investigation costs and insurer expenses. The lifetime care and support scheme will remain unchanged. It seems the Government's proposed reforms are not raising concerns for many in the community.

Fewer than 200 comments were provided by individual citizens on the Have Your Say website in response to our policy document and a significant number of those just want us to get on with making green slips more affordable. This favourable response comes as no surprise, given that if the reforms go ahead they are expected to lead to green slip premium reductions. Some 20 submissions were also received from organisations, including a variety of stakeholders. The views in the submissions are diverse and canvass issues in some detail. Several are supportive of the proposed reforms but there was opposition to the changes from the legal profession and The Greens. They seem to want a scheme with more lawyers and more disputes, which would lead to an even less efficient scheme.

The Government is carefully considering the feedback received. The State's peak legal bodies have raised concerns about the proposed reforms and instead propose various smaller amendments to the existing scheme. It is noted that many of the suggestions from the legal profession are aimed at being consistent with the Government's policy document of promoting scheme efficiency and removing unnecessary costs and disputes. These suggestions are being closely evaluated. Interestingly, at page 11 the submission states:

There has been legitimate public criticism of the charging practices of one now defunct law firm.

That is only one. It is anticipated that if the scheme changes proceed the average passenger vehicle premium will reduce when compared to the expected 2013 premium for the current scheme.

MINING INDUSTRY ECONOMIC BENEFITS

The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Resources and Energy. Is the Minister aware of a recent report commissioned by the Nature Conservation Council which claimed that mining companies routinely exaggerate the economic and social benefits of projects while downplaying the impact on health and the environment? What has been the industry reaction to these claims and is it a fact that if the green groups get their way and shut down mining it will directly and indirectly impact over 120 jobs in New South Wales?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I thank the honourable member for his question. I am not aware of that particular inquiry. I am shocked to hear that the Nature Conservation Council would make such allegations 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19895

against mining companies. Who could believe that the Nature Conservation Council would think that anyone would exaggerate anything? There are some in the mining industry who would believe that the Nature Conservation Council may have indulged in a little bit of exaggeration over the years. In fact, there are former employees of that organisation in our illustrious House who are missing during question time. Had they been present in the Chamber they would have been able to defend themselves. They may well be preparing for a little bit of exaggeration. I am not aware of the report but I will refer it to my colleague the great Minister for Resources and Energy, the Hon. Chris Hartcher, for a response.

DROUGHT ASSISTANCE

The Hon. MICK VEITCH: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports, representing the Minister for Primary Industries. This week the Queensland Government declared several areas to be in drought. In Queensland, affected farmers receive fodder and stock transport subsidies. Farmers in western New South Wales are now starting to handfeed due to drying conditions. Is it appropriate that under the New South Wales Government's new policy these farmers will no longer be able to receive the 50 per cent transport subsidies for fodder or to send stock for agistment and that, as the Government has abolished drought declarations, the broader community will not know when rural communities need help?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I thank the honourable member for his question. He and I know that large areas of the State are now affected by drought. Thankfully, at the moment both his area and mine are okay. His is on the edge; mine is reasonably good. Last week I was in the Northern Rivers region, where they are recovering from floods, and other areas of the State are now in drought. The honourable member is right to raise concerns on behalf of these farmers, and I share those concerns. However, he should realise that different States provide different types of assistance. It is not as simple as comparing one State with another. This is an important question and I will refer it to my colleague the Minister for Primary Industries.

The Hon. Steve Whan: Do you think they should have the fodder subsidies or not, Duncan?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Thank God the Hon. Katrina Hodgkinson is the Minister for Primary Industries because that bloke over there on the losers lounge was an absolute disaster. First, they had Macca. They thought, "It can't get any worse", and it did.

The Hon. Steve Whan: Point of order: My point of order is relevance. The Minister, rather than ranting about the other side of the House, should answer the question about whether New South Wales farmers should or should not get fodder transport subsidies, which they did receive under the previous Government.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: To the point of order: I answered the question. I must apologise because I have breached the rules by responding to the interjection. He got what he deserved because he was asking for it.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I do not need to take the matter any further. I call the Hon. Steve Whan to order for the first time.

NEWCASTLE COMMUNICATIONS CENTRE

The Hon. MARIE FICARRA: My question is addressed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Will the Minister inform the House about the recent opening of the Newcastle Communications Centre?

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: On Friday 19 April 2013 I was absolutely delighted to attend the official opening of the newly upgraded $3.46 million Newcastle Communications Centre at Cooks Hill. As part of its commitment to ensuring its communications system meets the needs of the community at a time of crisis, last year Fire and Rescue NSW introduced a new state-of-the-art aided dispatch system. Fire and Rescue NSW also expanded and upgraded the Newcastle Communications Centre to increase its capacity to house equipment and staff.

The system has allowed Fire and Rescue to move away from a silo approach of four separate, partitioned communication centres to a single virtual operating environment where the Sydney and Newcastle centres can share the load of 000 emergency calls. The communications centre is located in the historic original Cooks Hill fire station, and although it was built in 1912 the interior fit-out is very twenty-first century. I was 19896 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

delighted to be joined by my colleague the member for Newcastle, Tim Owen; the Lord Mayor of Newcastle, Jeff McCloy; Fire and Rescue NSW Commissioner Greg Mullins; NSW Police Force, Ambulance Service of NSW, NSW State Emergency Service and NSW Rural Fire Service personnel; and other distinguished guests.

The new centre boasts an operator room fitted out with 12 high-tech, purpose-built consoles, a training room and a major incident coordination centre. The communications centre houses the new state-of-the-art computer-aided dispatch system, or ESCAD, which further enhances Fire and Rescue's effectiveness and helps to reduce the time it takes to answer emergency calls and dispatch fire crews from both Fire and Rescue and the NSW Rural Fire Service. It is a secure facility and has an uninterrupted power supply.

This cutting-edge technology has enabled better coordinated, enhanced operations, with incident-specific hazard and risk information available to operators at the time of dispatch, as well as enabling responses using Fire and Rescue's automatic vehicle location system. About 50 operators work around the clock using 12 state-of-the-art consoles. Since the new system went live last June the highly-trained operators at Newcastle have answered more than 45,000 emergency calls and nearly 145,000 non-emergency calls. The total number of calls answered by operators at the two centres is nearly 700,000. The new communications centre also houses information technology and communications equipment storage.

Staff facilities include a new kitchen, meal room and recreation facilities, locker rooms, toilet facilities and showers. With a dedicated team of professional operators, all of whom are firefighters, and cutting-edge technology, the Newcastle Communications Centre has contributed to better coordinated and enhanced emergency response operations, ultimately leading to greater public safety across the State. It is a significant investment in public safety. It will help protect residents and businesses across New South Wales for many years to come and also protect firefighters themselves.

COAL SEAM GAS INDUSTRY

The Hon. JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: My question is directed to the Hon. Duncan Gay, representing the Minister for Resources and Energy. In light of the Government's recent approval of Santos' construction of plastic-lined lakes to store huge volumes of coal seam gas produced wastewater in the Pilliga, will the Minister explain how this approval sits with the Government's July 2011 ban on all evaporation ponds?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I have to be very careful with the questions that the Hon. Jeremy Buckingham asks because when I carefully analyse the details of his questions I generally find that they are inaccurate. I will take his question on face value and refer it to my colleague for a detailed answer.

BLUE MOUNTAINS SEPTIC PUMP-OUT SCHEME

The Hon. HELEN WESTWOOD: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. Will the New South Wales Government reconsider its decision to scrap the Blue Mountains Septic Pump-out Scheme, which will mean an increase in payments for 72 households from $600 a year to $4,900 a year?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: There she goes again, trying to mislead the Parliament. The New South Wales Government has not made any such decision.

The Hon. Penny Sharpe: Point of order: I take a point of order on two issues relating to the standing orders. The first is that the Minister is debating the question. The second is that the Minister is making imputations about a member of this House by saying she is misleading the House. The Hon. Helen Westwood has simply asked a question on behalf of her constituents in the Blue Mountains and she is entitled to do so. If the Minister wishes to suggest that she is misleading the House he should do so by way of substantive motion.

The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: If the Hon. Helen Westwood had listened to me yesterday when I was congratulating Sydney Water on its 125th anniversary she would have known that water and sewerage supply is a matter for Sydney Water. The member is asking me about an operational matter. The appropriate course for her to take in relation to an operational matter is to put the question on notice. I know that she will have ample opportunity to put questions on notice because we are going to allow the Opposition to lodge nine a day. This is 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19897

the first one to go on notice. If the question had been asked by the Hon. Walt Secord I would have had to give an answer anyway, because we know that he is too lazy to put questions on notice. But the Hon. Helen Westwood is not lazy and she probably does not know—

The Hon. Amanda Fazio: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The Minister was asked a question about the scrapping of the Blue Mountains Septic Pump-out Scheme. He is now raving on about questions on notice rather than giving an answer to a question without notice. I will not cast aspersions on why the Minister is not able to answer the question asked of him but I suggest he be directed back to the question.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I uphold the point of order.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I am a really generous person. So when a good member such as the Hon. Helen Westwood asks me a question and does not realise that it is an operational matter I am prepared to provide an answer. Rather than the Hon. Helen Westwood doing her own work, I will do it for her. I can inform the member that Sydney Water has been providing a septic tank pump-out service in the Blue Mountains since 1988. During 16 of those years the Labor Party was in power. The cost of the pump-out service is subsidised by the State government. Most of the former septic pump-out customers are now connected to Sydney Water's sewerage system. In fact, more than 14,000 customers in the Blue Mountains received sewerage connections as part of the New South Wales Government's Priority Sewerage Program. I am advised on this very important operational matter that there are 72 remaining properties that are outside sewered areas.

The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: Helen told you that.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I am trying to be very helpful to the member but I have run out of time. [Time expired.]

WHITE BAY CRUISE TERMINAL

The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads and Ports. Will the Minister update the House on the new $57 million White Bay Cruise Terminal?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Mr Matthew Mason-Cox, who is Parliamentary Secretary to another Minister, is a very good Parliamentary Secretary, but the Hon. John Ajaka is the best Parliamentary Secretary I have ever had. For the past eight years Sydney Harbour has been voted the best cruise port by readers of the prestigious Cruise Passenger magazine—and why not? Sydney Harbour is truly one of the world's greatest harbours, with its Opera House, Sydney Harbour Bridge and proximity to the city's many attractions.

The Government recognises the importance of the cruise industry in Sydney and is investing in new cruise ship infrastructure accordingly. On 19 April I officially opened the new $57 million White Bay Cruise Terminal, which will provide a state-of-the-art modern terminal, mainly for the domestic cruise ship market. It replaces the temporary cruise facility at Darling Harbour, which is making way for the major Barangaroo development, and it confirms Sydney Harbour as the nation's premier destination for the cruise sector. In fact, Sydney continues to be the only port in Australia with two dedicated world-class cruise passenger facilities.

As we all know, waterfront land on Sydney Harbour is at a premium. White Bay's deepwater berths and its prominent location in the harbour make it an ideal location for the city's new dedicated passenger cruise terminal. The wharves at White Bay also have a long maritime history and have shipped everything from timber, paper, coal, sugar, wheat and cement to cars and containers. While inspecting the facility I was impressed with the design, which makes use of the existing maritime structure combined with a modern floating roof canopy. Its vast open-plan arrivals and departures hall is designed to cater for 2,400 passengers at a time.

The terminal also includes two aerobridge-style gangways, short-term parking for 200 cars, coach and truck parking areas and extensive upgrades to local roads and intersections to ensure the best possible traffic flows. It is a considerable improvement on the previous temporary terminals at Darling Harbour. The Government understands the importance of consulting with the local community and welcomed community involvement in the decision-making process for this development. After listening to the community and working with council, plans were amended to minimise the loss of on-street parking. Additional amendments were made to provide public access to the site on non-ship days—a first for the site in 45 years. 19898 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

Combined with investment in the Overseas Passenger Terminal, the New South Wales Government is spending $87 million on infrastructure to support the passenger cruise industry in Sydney Harbour. This significant infrastructure spend will support the cruise industry in Sydney Harbour and will ensure that the harbour remains a working port—two industries that will benefit the New South Wales economy and support New South Wales jobs. I suggest to honourable members who have not already seen it that the site is well worth visiting. It is one of the better projects delivered by government. In fact, it was started under the previous Government, and I have to say that it was a good project. If members opposite had started more projects like it they would have been opening the facility instead of me.

DARLING HARBOUR WATER QUALITY

The Hon. WALT SECORD: My question is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. What steps is the Government taking to improve water quality in Darling Harbour, which has been described by the environmental body Boomerang Alliance as one of the most polluted areas in Sydney?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Sydney Water is uncompromising in its commitment to provide safe, clean and healthy water and wastewater services to all of its customers. It is a heavily regulated business—and rightly so—in order to protect the quality of our city's water and wastewater services. Sydney Water has an operating licence which enables it to lawfully provide these services within its area of operations. Sydney Water's performance under the licence is assessed by a yearly operational audit that is managed by Sydney Water's licence regulator, the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal. The results of those audits are then provided to me as Sydney Water's portfolio Minister.

I am pleased to inform the House that for as long as I have been its portfolio Minister, Sydney Water has received either full or high compliance for every aspect of its licence. If, however, Opposition members are suggesting that there is a problem with the licence requirements, I remind them that the operating licence was set under the Labor Government in 2010.

The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Who was the Minister?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Phillip Costa was the Minister for Water. Water quality testing and monitoring takes place at every stage of the supply system. All water supplies are treated to comply with the requirements of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines. Samples are taken in the catchments, after water is treated, in distribution pipes and from customers' taps. Every month samples are taken from around 650 household taps across Sydney. Testing covers up to 70 different parameters. There is something in the Opposition members' water today, isn't there?

The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Sophie Cotsis to order for the first time.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: The parameters include physical, microbiological and chemical characteristics, as well as pesticides and cryptosporidium and giardia. This water quality monitoring program is agreed to by NSW Health. Sydney Water also manages a large and complex network of approximately 21,000 kilometres of water mains. Laid end to end they would run almost the distance from Sydney to Los Angeles and halfway back again. Since 2002 Sydney Water has reduced the level of breaks and leaks by more than 50 per cent. Sydney Water's level of leakage has reduced from around 11 per cent in 2002-03 under the Labor Government to 7.3 per cent under the current Government.

The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: There were a lot of leaks under Labor.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: There were a lot of leaks under Labor. Sydney Water's level of leaks is amongst the lowest in the world. Under the world rating system for leak management, Sydney Water has the highest grade of A1. Under the previous Government the number of water main breaks for the 2009-10 financial year was 5,950. The most current results for the 2011-12 financial year under the Coalition Government is 4,841. That is a 19 per cent improvement in just two years of this Government.

Sydney Water has 26 environmental licences granted by the New South Wales Environment Protection Authority for wastewater treatment plants, water filtration plants and an advanced water treatment plant. If Opposition members are suggesting that these licences are not appropriate I suggest they look at who issued those licences. Yes, they were issued by the Labor Government with Bob Debus as Minister for the Environment. The operational requirements for Sydney Water were set by members opposite. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19899

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PENSIONER CONCESSIONS

The Hon. PAUL GREEN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services, representing the Minister for Local Government. Given recent media reports suggesting the scrapping of the $250 pensioner concessions which help pensioners cope when paying their council rates and managing their limited finances, will the Minister reaffirm the current situation and commitment to pensioners of New South Wales that the $250 concession will not be abolished?

The Hon. Sophie Cotsis: Good question.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Yes, it is a good question. I will refer it to the relevant Minister for an answer.

WARRIEWOOD WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

The Hon. SARAH MITCHELL: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. Will the Minister update the House on the recent upgrade of Warriewood Wastewater Treatment Plant?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I am pleased with the $32 million upgrade of Sydney Water's Warriewood Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is now complete.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Walt Secord to order for the second time.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: This upgrade is part of Sydney Water's commitment to reduce the frequency of wet weather overflows from the wastewater treatment system and improve the reliability of the plant to manage the expected local population increase over the coming decades. These works ensure the plant continues to meet environmental requirements and means that this pristine piece of coastline will now be further protected. I see that the Hon. Walt Secord is joining with me in congratulating Sydney Water on its commitment to this project.

The Hon. Walt Secord: Point of order: The Minister is misrepresenting me, and the upgrade did not work.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I would have thought that a member on two calls to order would have been a little bit more cautious. The member is warned. The Minister has the call.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: The completion of the upgrade of the wastewater treatment plant is great news for the people of the northern beaches because the upgrade was vital to meet the long-term population growth expected in that area. It is a positive outcome for local residents, who had long campaigned for improvements to water quality resulting from the upgrade of the treatment plant. The Government is determined to ensure wastewater services protect public health and the environment. This upgrade has addressed longstanding concerns about the outfalls near Warriewood Beach.

The Hon. Walt Secord: It didn't work.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: What was that, Walt?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: He said it worked well. Residents and the many thousands of beachgoers that visit the area can continue to enjoy those magnificent beaches every year. Fishing is one of the most desirable things to do in Warriewood. Warriewood Wastewater Treatment Plant serves an area of 25 square kilometres taking in Palm Beach, Terrey Hills, Duffys Forest and North Narrabeen, and this upgrade goes a long way to meeting the needs of these communities and the environment. It currently serves a population of about 63,000 people and treats an average dry weather flow of more than 16 megalitres—about the amount that spews out of the Hon. Luke Foley's mouth each day.

The Hon. Greg Donnelly: Point of order: The Minister is a disgrace.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Greg Donnelly to order for the first time.

The Hon. Greg Donnelly: I ask that the Minister withdraw his insult.

The Hon. Luke Foley: I took it as a compliment.

The Hon. Greg Donnelly: Then I will sit down. 19900 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: The local population is expected to grow by around 11,000 people, or 17 per cent, over the next two decades and the Government is committed to ensuring Sydney Water services are available to meet this growth. The upgrade included adding two new clarifier tanks to lift the capacity of the treatment plant. These tanks are 26 metres in diameter—about the same size as the Hon. Steve Whan's mouth— and more than five metres deep. They will raise the capacity of the treatment plant, which will reduce pressure on the wastewater systems feeding into the plant.

SCHOOL ASSETS SALES

The Hon. LYNDA VOLTZ: My question is directed to the Minister for Finance and Services. Given that the Government commissioned a report into the space required by high school students that recommends the reconfiguration and rationalisation of underutilised assets across high schools, will he inform the House whether his land asset sales will include school sports ovals or open space of current New South Wales schools?

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: That question should be directed to the Minister for Education.

The Hon. LYNDA VOLTZ: I ask a supplementary question. Could the Minister elucidate his reference to another Minister during his answer when the question was about a report by his department?

The Hon. Duncan Gay: If you understand that question, you are pretty good.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I agree. If anyone could understand that supplementary question, they are pretty good.

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted to permit a motion to adjourn the House if desired.

The House continued to sit.

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: The time for questions has expired. If members have further questions, they should place them on notice.

WORKERS COMPENSATION SCHEME

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: Earlier in response to a question asked by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, I informed the House that the WorkCover board had 11 meetings and that Mr John Robertson had attended zero meetings of the board. I may have left members with the impression that Mr Robertson was entitled to attend all 11 meetings whereas he was entitled to attend only 10. The roll shows Mr Robertson attended zero out of 10 meetings of the WorkCover board.

Questions without notice concluded.

Pursuant to sessional orders Government business proceeded with.

UNPROCLAIMED LEGISLATION

The Hon. Greg Pearce tabled a list detailing all legislation unproclaimed 90 calendar days after assent as at 1 May 2013.

JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE OFFICE OF THE VALUER GENERAL

Report: Report on the Inquiry into the Land Valuation System and Eighth General Meeting with the Valuer General

Mr Scot MacDonald tabled report No. 2/55 entitled, "Report on the Inquiry into the Land Valuation System and Eighth General Meeting with the Valuer General", dated May 2013.

Ordered to be printed on motion by Mr Scot MacDonald.

Mr SCOT MacDONALD [3.32 p.m.]: I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Scot MacDonald and set down as an order of the day for a future day. 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19901

ADJOURNMENT

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER (Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Minister for the Hunter, and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [3.34 p.m.]: I move:

That this House do now adjourn.

TRIBUTE TO MR JIM CAREY

The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK [3.34 p.m.]: My friend Jim Carey passed away in Tamworth last week. Jim was just 60 years old, but he led a full and extraordinary life. His legacy includes a successful and distinguished term as President of the Young Liberals, during which he repaired the movement's fractured relationship with the party and manoeuvred Australia's largest youth organisation into a position of greater influence and respect during the turbulent Fraser years. Jim served as vice-president of the Federal Young Liberals and co-authored two books, including a wonderful biography of the then young Andrew Peacock, which I reread over the weekend. Jim's towering intellectual prowess, his dedication to the principles and traditions of Westminster democracy, and his idealism—that politics can be a means to achieving great things, to make Australia a fairer, better place—shine through every single page of that remarkable book.

Jim's dad was one of thousands of World War II veterans who came home very damaged by their experiences. He served in the Air Force and was shot down three times. Jim rarely discussed it, but life for the young Carey family was very difficult. The family's finances were squandered and they moved from their farm at Moree to modest lodgings in Dolphin Street, Coogee. Jim thrived with a Marcellin education, a degree from the University of New South Wales and membership of the Randwick Young Liberals—the beginning of a lifetime of dedicated and distinguished service to his second family, the New South Wales Liberal Party.

It was thanks to Jim's brilliance that the Liberal candidate for the marginal Federal electorate of Phillip, Jack Birney, was elected in 1972 and then held that seat throughout the Fraser years. Jim not only had a great intellect but was a master political tactician. These boundless gifts were firmly guided by the highest personal ethics and standards I have ever encountered in politics. Jim's health was always frail. He suffered a breakdown in the mid-1980s and returned with his family to Tamworth. He courageously fought back. It was a long journey and a lesser person would not have made it. I acknowledge the former general manager of the Parry Shire Council and later the Tamworth City Council, Glenn Inglis, who met Jim during this nadir and who placed his faith in Jim by giving him a job. In characteristic style, Jim threw himself into research and pitched for new funds and programs to present first the Parry council and then the Tamworth council as a leader in presentations to industry and government. In Glenn's words, it was Jim who gave his council that leading extra edge.

Soon after that I became close friends with Jim. Actually he picked me, and I joined a select club of female politicians in whom Jim invested and whom he mentored. They include Jane Prentice, the Federal member for Ryan, Senator , who will soon be an Abbott government Minister, the former New South Wales and Federal Liberal president Chris McDiven, and the late great Virginia Chadwick. He believed in us, defended us, and he could find no fault in us. He considered us to be his sisters and would often sign his emails "Bro". Two years ago Jim was devastated by the passing of his elderly mother. Then a change of management occurred at the Tamworth City Council and Jim lost his job. He was offered counselling and refused. Given Jim's circumstances, his loyalty and performance, this treatment was not nearly good enough. I did not hear that from Jim. He never complained. He just withdrew.

Last Tuesday I visited Tamworth for a Liberal Party meeting. My plan was to visit Jim on my way to the motel and try to talk him into moving out of his house. I was not looking forward to the conversation, and at the last second drove past the turn-off to his street. At the Tamworth Liberal meeting I was shocked to discover Jim's name had dropped completely off the membership list. I left, intending to drive straight to his home—he was a notorious night owl—but in the car my courage failed me a second time. The next morning I tried to visit. I became concerned and sought police assistance. They went into his house while I waited pensively for Jim to storm out in a fury and rip me to shreds for causing such a drama. That is not what happened. The crestfallen young officers re-emerged and said Jim had passed away. This morning I was shattered to learn Jim's date of death has been determined as 24 April. I missed him by a matter of hours. 19902 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

I do not want to reflect on my own struggle with depression except to say I was not, as many people may suppose, battling disappointment or anger. I found myself to be quite simply engulfed by shame. My tribulations were nothing compared to what Jim faced, but I recognise that overwhelming shame can physically as well as mentally destroy a person. It was once said, "The difference between guilt and shame is: we feel guilty for what we do; we feel shame for what we are." Shame is not rational. It cannot be talked out. It is a blackness one cannot climb out of. It is a cruel emotional virus that systematically destroys every means of escape and causes people to alienate their own support base. They become impossible to help. I do not know precisely what happened to my friend, but I do know we all need to be a little kinder to one another. We need to reopen that shrivelled space in politics and life called compassion and respect the dignity and hopes of the ordinary worker in the humblest workplace. We can all do more. We can all do better. My belated tribute to Jim is to try.

PUBLIC TRANSPORT ACCESSIBILITY

The Hon. PENNY SHARPE [3.39 p.m.]: Recently I hosted a forum about how we can make public transport more accessible for people with a disability and people with limited mobility. The forum was the brainchild of transport activist Alex Dennis. I met Alex via Twitter. His Twitter handle is @miracleboi. The idea behind the forum was to examine the New South Wales Government's Disability Action Plan 2012-2017 and to provide an opportunity for public transport users, particularly people with disabilities, to talk about their experiences with public transport in Sydney and New South Wales more broadly. When one looks at the glossy Disability Action Plan one sees that there are many good commitments, but plenty of things are not in the plan.

What happens when there is a breakdown and people in wheelchairs are left on trains? What happens when there is a major failure on our train network and station staff make inaudible announcements and nothing is displayed on station screens? What is the experience for someone with an intellectual disability navigating our complex interchanges? What action is the Government taking to improve wheelchair accessible taxis and make it financially viable for people to catch a taxi? What happens when a scheduled accessible bus service is replaced by a non-accessible bus due to breakdown or the accessible service fails to stop for passengers? In particular, I hoped this forum would draw attention to action that our public transport authorities could take straight away to improving the experience of people with disabilities and mobility limitations on our trains, buses, ferries and taxis. Some of this is not about money; some of it is about culture.

Across the day the Transport for All forum heard from five speakers. The Council of Social Service of New South Wales [NCOSS] Director, Alison Peters, explained that the council sees transport as an enabler, allowing access to services and improving social inclusion. Greg Killeen, of Spinal Cord Injuries Australia, spoke about the campaign to increase the Taxi Transport Subsidy Scheme. Alex Dennis talked about the issues he faces in his daily commute from Blacktown on public transport in a wheelchair with station ramps that are poorly designed. What happens if something goes wrong? Someone needs to ask him about the lifts at Blacktown station. He can tell you a lot. Laurie Grosvenor spoke about the challenges of having a double disability—vision impairment and needing a wheelchair—and how this can be very restrictive. Anthony Mulholland, representing the New South Wales Council for Intellectual Disability, spoke about safety, changes and information provision for people with an intellectual disability. Often when the community thinks about transport needs for people with a disability those with an intellectual disability are forgotten.

About 40 people came along to the forum and spoke about the issues that they face on a daily basis. They also put forward many good suggestions for improvement. Forum participants recounted instances including incorrect information being given to people with an intellectual disability about how to make a complaint; people with multiple disabilities feeling that they are not taken seriously by service providers—feeling like service providers are thinking, "How does someone in a wheelchair who is vision impaired get around anyway?"; a person with a vision impairment being told on the phone, "You don't sound blind"; staff not recognising that someone with an intellectual disability has a disability, not being helpful or treating them like they are being a nuisance; a person with a vision impairment being asked by staff to move because other commuters did not want to eat because the person had a guide dog on the train; and a person with autism who could not read transport maps being told by station staff to "go back to school". 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19903

While negative experiences were common, participants also noted that the presence of staff can be reassuring for people with disabilities and older people, especially when there are disruptions to travel plans. Serious concerns were voiced about the impact cuts to station staffing and security staff will have on people with disabilities and older people. Many people with disabilities feel more vulnerable because of their disability. For example, Anthony noted that he prefers not to travel in the evenings because he feels that his disability can make him a target for bullying and harassment. Another common thread from participants was a belief that people with disabilities were lumped into a homogenous group by transport agencies.

One participant spoke about not being able to use the emergency buttons on the new Waratah trains because they were placed at a height she could not reach as she does not have the use of her arms. She had provided this advice to Transport for NSW when the Waratah trains were being commissioned—and, yes, I accept that was on Labor's watch. When this issue was raised again with Transport for NSW after the Waratahs were built she was told that other people with a disability could use them so therefore it was not a problem. Not being able to reach the emergency buttons puts this person in a vulnerable position. Participants raised the need to place disability planning at the centre of transport planning—and of all government agencies—rather than as a peripheral issue. Other participants argued for making accessibility a responsibility of executives in transport departments. They argued that accountability needed to be part of the contracts of senior management.

Public transport is a public good with many private benefits. But public transport that does not think about all its users is doomed to exclude many from this essential service. Across New South Wales, one in five people has a disability. Excluding 20 per cent of our population from public transport is not reasonable. The forum report is currently being put together and that will be finalised soon. I look forward to formally giving it to the Minister for Transport and I hope she takes the suggestions from the forum seriously. I look forward to reporting back to the House on the Government's response.

DISABILITY SECTOR NURSE SALARIES

Dr JOHN KAYE [3.44 p.m.]: Across New South Wales nurses perform difficult, skilled, challenging and demanding tasks. Whether they are nurses or midwives, whether they work in emergency care, acute care or in the community, they are all valued members of the community and their skills are essential to us. They all deserve quality pay and quality working conditions—none more so than registered nurses who choose to work in the disability sector under Ageing, Disability and Home Care. These nurses, despite the difficult work they do, are earning up to 12 per cent less than their counterparts in public hospitals. On average, disability nurses are earning 6.8 per cent less than the rest of their profession. Despite there being no difference in the training, no difference in the skills level and no difference in the complexity of the work they do, Ageing, Disability and Home Care nurses are paid up to $4,594 less per year for their work.

As a result of this appalling pay disparity, the sector is now facing a staff shortage. As nurses leave, young nurses do not choose to go into this sector—not because they do not have a commitment to working with people with disabilities but because they cannot afford to live off the lower pay levels. The disability sector has a large number of nurses who are approaching or are over the age of 55 and we can expect whatever staff shortages are crippling the sector at the moment will get worse as time goes on. The disability nursing sector now suffers from an overall shortfall of 21 per cent of the total number of nurses required to adequately cater for the needs of the community of people with disabilities. At some centres the staffing shortage is even more acute.

Last year I had the pleasure of visiting the Stockton Residential Care Centre in Newcastle, which is suffering, with an enormous 40 per cent of positions for clinical nurses remaining unfilled. That has consequences not just for the nurses themselves but also for the patients, who do not receive the quality of qualified, skilled nursing care they desperately need. Fortunately, and thanks to advances in medical science and to quality nursing in particular, people are living longer and are developing more complex medical needs. Disability centres and services in general are now relying increasingly on itinerant workers, including people holding working holiday visas, to fill the staffing gaps. This is false economy. The practice requires the payment of agency fees, contracting fees and casual rates over and above the total costs associated with recruiting more permanent employees. In the long run the Department of Family and Community Services is spending more money.

It is not just the financial costs. The temporary nature of these workers means that much of the service they deliver can be disjointed and inconsistent. Even the best temporary workers will not have the ongoing understanding of individual patients. This was made clear to me when I visited the Stockton Residential Care Centre, where discussion of individual patients showed a long-term concern and commitment to their needs and 19904 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

to satisfying their needs. The 2007-2008 National Health Survey showed that 46 per cent of people aged between 15 and 64 with severe or profound disabilities reported poor or fair health, compared with 5 per cent of those without disabilities, showing there is a desperate need for more nurses.

On top of the pay disparity, the O'Farrell Government has announced a raft of changes to the award for Ageing, Disability and Home Care nurses which includes the abolition of annual leave loading and cuts to penalty rates and annual leave entitlements, making this professional choice even less desirable. The Public Service Association and the New South Wales Nurses and Midwives Association have taken direct statewide action to highlight this issue, to try to force the O'Farrell Government to come to its senses and recognise that it should be paying disability nurses the same rate it pays all other nurses.

Of course, the O'Farrell Government argues that it is hamstrung by its own 2.5 per cent per annum maximum pay increase, another reason that legislation is having devastating consequences, by locking in inequality, by locking in unfair pay rates for nurses, who do difficult work. The shortage of nurses and the collapse of nursing morale in this area are not only to the disadvantage of patients; they are putting nurses themselves at risk. We urge the O'Farrell Government to listen to the Nurses and Midwives Association and to nurses, to rectify this anomaly, and to provide a decent and appropriate rate of pay for disability nurses that matches the rest of the profession.

ANZAC DAY

The Hon. NIALL BLAIR [3.49 p.m.]: Like many other members, on 25 April I attended an Anzac commemoration ceremony in my local community. I attended a small march and service held in the village of Exeter, along with my wife and son on a beautiful autumn morning. The service began with a march around the village oval led by three replica light horsemen, followed by the students of the Exeter public school, returned service men and women, and members of the community from Exeter and its surrounding area. This year was the first that school students led the march behind the light horsemen. It was a fantastic initiative appreciated and respected by the ageing returned service men and women.

It was heartening also to see so many young families participate in the march to the village war memorial for the service, which included a wreath-laying ceremony. I was happy to see my local member, the Hon. Pru Goward, member for Goulburn, attend the ceremony and lay a wreath before leaving to attend another service in Taralga. The Exeter service was moving and respectful, followed by a cup of tea and, of course, Anzac biscuits in the village hall. Obviously, the day was a great opportunity to remember those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice so that today we enjoy our freedom.

Until last night I was unaware of the contribution to this effort nearly 100 years ago of Irish-born Australians. On 1 May the Parliamentary Friends of Ireland were honoured to host a lecture on the Irish Anzacs in the Parliamentary Theatrette organised by the Irish Consulate. The event was well attended by many dignitaries, including the New South Wales Irish Consul General, Caitroina Ingoldsby; Major General Michael Slater from the Australian Army; Professor Rohnan McDonald from the Centre of International Irish Studies, University of New South Wales; many representatives from returned service organisations; members of the Parliamentary Friends of Ireland; and distinguished members of the Australian-Irish community.

The lecture was delivered by Dr Jeff Kildea, adjunct professor from the Centre of International Irish Studies, University of New South Wales. He painted a picture of the Irish contribution to the First World War and challenged a number of theories that the Irish opposed the Great War. One thing he highlighted was that 6,600 Irish-born Anzacs signed up and fought in the First World War, many of whom lost their lives at Gallipoli and at battles such as Lone Pine. About 1.5 per cent of the Australian Imperial Forces were born in Ireland, and 970 paid the ultimate sacrifice. Irish-born Anzacs were joined on the Great War front-line by regiments of 200,000 Irish soldiers, of which over 35,000 died.

One most interesting fact was that despite sectarian problems in Ireland at the time the Irish Anzacs and soldiers directly from Ireland fought side by side. Dr Kildea pointed out also that Country Antrim, from which my parents come, had the highest number of immigrants from any other Irish county who signed up to the Anzac cause in Australia. This was because in 1880 most immigration was from the Ulster area. This is why I remember as a child seeing many war memorials throughout Northern Ireland and why a high number particularly of protestant immigrants from Ulster to Australia were lost in the Great War.

Dr Kildea talked also about a number of interesting Irish-born Australians who fought with the Anzacs, in particular Victoria Cross recipient Sergeant Martin O'Meara from Western Australia. Sergeant O'Meara 2 May 2013 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 19905

joined the Sixteenth Battalion, which fought in France, and was awarded the Victoria Cross for bravery. He was seen regularly removing injured soldiers from no-man's-land, and taking ammunition and supplies across the lines. He was wounded twice in the line of battle before returning to the front-line each time.

I raise this information tonight as a first generation Australian who is very proud of the effort and sacrifice our Anzacs made for us. I am equally proud of my Northern Irish heritage. I was previously unaware that these two worlds collided so significantly. I thank Dr Kildea for his outstanding work and interesting lecture last night. I thank also the Irish Consulate for working with the Parliamentary Friends of Ireland to allow the event to be hosted in this Parliament. It is an important part of our history and one we must acknowledge. Lest we forget.

PALLIATIVE CARE NEW SOUTH WALES

The Hon. PAUL GREEN [3.54 p.m.]: Tonight I speak about Palliative Care NSW. Good palliative care does not take shortcuts with people's lives or leave them suffering excruciating pain. That is bad or poor palliative care. Good palliative care providers insist on appropriate pain relief without the intention to hasten someone's death. On the other hand, they certainly do not try to extend a person's suffering. Good palliative care does not try to shorten or extend life; it tries to keep one's remaining lifetime as comfortable as possible. I refer to the document entitled, "Palliative Care NSW Policy Statement: providing informed input to the development of palliative care policy in NSW". Healthcare reform at national and State levels has resulted in considerable changes to the New South Wales health care system. The main concern of Palliative Care NSW is that these reforms will result in improved and more equitable access to palliative care for people in New South Wales.

Palliative Care NSW is the peak body for palliative care in New South Wales and represents the interests of health care professionals, people with a life-limiting illness, and their carers and families. Its vision is that every person in New South Wales who is diagnosed with a condition that will result in their death in the foreseeable future has access to quality palliative and end-of-life care that addresses their physical, psychosocial and spiritual needs. The Christian strongly endorses this vision. Everyone approaching the end of their life, along with their family and carers, require some level of support and access to a range of health and other services. The range and depth of services required obviously depends on the nature and length of the illness.

Palliative Care NSW acknowledges that not all people approaching the end of their lives require specialist palliative care, but everyone in New South Wales deserves quality health care that allows them to live as well as they can until their death. The problem is that at the moment every person in New South Wales does not have access to quality care as they approach and reach the end of life. Palliative Care NSW explains that the quality of care largely depends on where one lives and/or the nature of one's illness. People who have non-cancer related life-limiting illnesses such as dementia, renal failure, heart failure, end-stage respiratory disease and many others also experience inequity of access. This is because palliative care services have historically been linked to cancer funding models and services.

While this has changed over recent decades, the historical cancer-based funding model has not been reviewed and amended to meet the increased—and increasing—demands of non-cancer causes of death. Poor service delivery models for palliative care reflect the challenges facing the general health care system. As I mentioned, these challenges are currently the subject of reform at national and State levels. Palliative Care NSW indicates that equitable access to palliative care does not result from the challenge of servicing regional or remote communities. It results from skewed funding models, inadequate resourcing across health areas, and fragmented and inconsistent approaches to service delivery.

The Christian Democratic Party also notes that Palliative Care NSW has welcomed the announcement by the New South Wales Minister for Health, and Minister for Medical Research, the Hon. Jillian Skinner, in August 2011 that the New South Wales Ministry of Health would undertake an exercise to map current palliative care services against population needs. She announced also that the ministry would investigate population planning tools to assist in future planning, and examine workforce capability, including the training of and resources available to support volunteers. The report by Palliative Care NSW makes 33 recommendations.

I have worked in palliative care for many years. One of the most rewarding things that loved ones can do for a person facing the end of their life is stroke their hair, do their hair, hold their hand, speak to them, read scriptures, sing to them or say poetry. There are a lot of ways to minister to someone who is at the end of their life. One does not think they are responding but internally they are responding and it is those times when we think they cannot hear that they are hearing us shout loving communication. 19906 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 May 2013

PUBLIC HOUSING RENTS

The Hon. GREG DONNELLY [3.59 p.m.]: Last Friday as part of my visit to the Coffs Coast I had the opportunity to meet and discuss with a number of seniors and disability pensioners an issue that they and many others are furious about. To be frank, they are disgusted with this action by the O'Farrell-Stoner Government. The callous action that has been taken will haunt every Liberal Party and Nationals member in this Parliament between now and the next State election, in March 2015. I predict that this unjustified and unwelcome act, probably thought up by some pointy-head in the office of the Treasurer or the Minister for Finance, has sown the seeds that will lead to the demise of some Nationals and Liberal Party members in this and the other place. The anger being expressed on this issue is white hot. Those impacted will not forgive or forget. Liberal and Nationals members are going to pay for this.

The issue I refer to is the greedy grab by the Government that makes the old-school eye-gouging that we once saw at footie games look like cosmetic surgery. On 20 March this year pensions paid by the Commonwealth Government were increased. Beneficiaries of the increase included pensioners, war widows, veterans and the disabled. Along with the increase was the payment of the clean energy supplement. To be clear, this payment was separately listed as a line item for those eligible for a Commonwealth pension and was paid consciously and deliberately to offset, to the extent that it was necessary, any increases in water and electricity charges associated with the introduction of the carbon tax. The correspondence that people received with respect to the pension payments clearly explains this. For a single pensioner the amount came to $13.50 per fortnight and for a pensioner couple the amount was $20.40 per fortnight. So far, so good. Then we have gouging Goward ably assisted by the Treasurer and the Finance Minister—

The Hon. Dr Peter Phelps: Point of order: The member would be fully aware that he has to refer to Ministers in the other Chamber by their correct titles.

The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Jennifer Gardiner): Order! I remind the member that he must refer to other members by their correct titles.

Hon. GREG DONNELLY: —sticking their hands into the purses and wallets of the least well off in our community and ripping out the cuts for themselves. How have they engineered this manoeuvre? Quite easily. What this miserable mob have done, notwithstanding the lack of a right to do so, is take 25 per cent of the value of the clean energy supplement and count it as part of a person or couple's assessable income for the purpose of calculating pensioner public housing rents. The impact is that on 15 April public housing rents for affected people were increased unjustifiably and jacked-up higher than otherwise would be the case but for the sleazy arithmetic done by the Government. The impact of an $88 per annum hit on a single pensioner and a $133 per annum hit on pensioner couples is harsh, unjust and unfair.

As all those who attended the morning tea attested—and everybody else they have spoken to—they believe this is a low act by the O'Farrell-Stoner Government. The clean energy supplement payment is not there for this miserable mob to raid and plunder. Those who attended told me that they and others in a similar position were gob-smacked that the State Government has done this. They consider it theft—plain and simple. Everybody who attended this morning tea stated it was their view that the State Government should immediately reverse its decision and pay back the money it has stolen from them. Everyone who came along resolved that they were prepared not to let this matter rest.

I was told that if I convened another morning tea a bigger venue would be required. One of the wags present said that if I booked the BCU International Stadium for the meeting I would easily get more attendees than the country-city rugby league football clash. I was expressly asked to do whatever I could to press this issue as hard as possible. To the attendees' dismay, their State and Federal Nationals members, Andrew Fraser and Luke Hartsuyker, have shown no interest in this matter whatsoever. The attitude of those out-of-touch members is that people should be grateful for any increase as far as the clean energy supplement goes and they should suck it up. Mr Fraser and Mr Hartsuyker, I have news for you: Your disregard and disrespect will not be forgotten. You have treated the Coffs Coast pensioners, war widows, veterans and those with a disability poorly and you will pay for it. In conclusion, I thank all those who attended the morning tea. I look forward to staying in touch with them and working on this important issue to a successful resolution.

Question—That this House do now adjourn—put and resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

The House adjourned at 4.04 p.m. until Tuesday 7 May 2013 at 2.30 p.m.