LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Friday, 1st November, 1991

______

The President took the chair at 9 a.m.

The President offered the Prayers.

PETITIONS

Abortion

Petition praying that because of recognition of the right to life of the unborn child, the House support the Procurement of Miscarriage Limitation Bill, received from the Hon. Dr Marlene Goldsmith.

Stray Dogs

Petition praying that the Premier fulfil his promise to ban the sending of stray dogs to laboratories within New South Wales, received from the Hon. R. S. L. Jones.

BUDGET ESTIMATES AND RELATED PAPERS

Financial Year 1991-92

Debate resumed from 30th October.

The Hon. I. M. MACDONALD [9.5]: As I was saying in my truncated assessment of the Budget last Wednesday night, this Government has lost its credibility as an economic manager. It lost that primarily because, after spending $1 million whooping it up at the Regent Hotel, it released the Curran report. Though that report emphasised debt and liability, this Government brings forward a budget that will dramatically increase both the debt and the liability of this State. The State debt is $9 billion.

The Hon. J. M. Samios: What is the debt of Victoria?

The Hon. I. M. MACDONALD: The Hon. J. M. Samios refers to Victoria. I am happy to deal with that instantly. New South Wales taxation revenue per head of population is now $250 in excess of the average taxation level for an individual in Victoria. Yet members of this Government claim they are economic managers. The Government claims to be concerned about the level of debt in this State. Time Page 4073 and again it uses the Victorian situation in an attempt to justify its appalling economic performance when we in New South Wales are taxed $251 per head per annum more than Victorians. That is a fact which honourable members in this Chamber could not dispute.

Before dealing with the Budget in general terms, I turn to two areas of concern. The first a funding cutback to the National Parks and Wildlife Service for the Blue Mountains National Park of $220,000. In the last financial year its funding was $405,000; this financial year it is $186,000. This is a cut of 56 per cent, at a time when there is a widespread public campaign to obtain for the Blue Mountains National Park world heritage listing. Unfortunately these substantial cuts to funding will undermine the genuine and important campaign of the people of the mountains and therefore jeopardises this park. This is an atrocious step by the Minister. The Minister for the Environment sacked Alderman Joy Anderson, a member of the national parks advisory committee. That is the act of a childish dictator. The Minister is acting in a way that would please dictators of 50 or 60 years ago. The Opposition is concerned, as I am sure the Hon. R. S. L. Jones is, about the attacks on the National Parks and Wildlife Service. Five National Parks and Wildlife Service positions in the Blue Mountains have not been filled. That national park, one of the most popular parks in this country, is being destroyed because of this Government's lack of interest in the environment and in the national parks system.

No wonder Dr Terry Metherell had to leave the Government. He was concerned that in recent years the shade of green of the Government had disappeared as the leading lights of the Gay-Bull conspiracy came to power and influenced environmental protection policy. As a consequence the Blue Mountains National Park, one of the finest examples of our heritage and one of the most used parks in this State and country, is suffering disgracefully under Tim Moore and the stranglehold of the National Party, which wants to establish a mine or chop down a tree wherever possible. We have already seen what is happening at Chaelundi State Forest and how the Government is resisting Terry Metherell's fine initiative for the establishment of the Nattai wilderness. The Government will not take the steps necessary to improve the environmental legacy of this State to provide our children and future generations with a proper national parks system.

The move to slowly strangle the Blue Mountains National Park and run down its facilities is not good economic management but a disaster. That park is very popular and is used by many people. If the Government does not spend money to improve the tracks and the stairways that lead into the various sectors of the park, environmental degradation undoubtedly will occur. The Government will be responsible for that degradation because it does not care about the environment. The few remaining green Liberals opposite and in the other Chamber are dominated by the dead hand of the National Party on environmental policy in this State. In the last three and a half years the Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith - a leading National Party dead hand - ripped up a bit of green in the western suburbs to put in the Eastern Creek track that no one wants to use, which cost $92 million of the taxpayers' money. The Page 4074 Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs nods in agreement because she is embarrassed about that black-hole that has been created out at Eastern Creek. It is interesting to see members opposite liven up because they realise how disgracefully inept, poorly managed and conceived the Eastern Creek fiasco was.

While that was happening the main priority of the Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith was to see his ruggers playing around out at Concord or at the Sydney Stadium. It was fortunate for the honourable member that in the past six months his code decided to return to the Stadium. The honourable member maintained that as his priority while the environment of this State was undermined by a Government that has lost any shade of green it might have had. The Hon. D. J. Gay, when he came into this House, said he was a bit pink and green. He was certainly green but not environmentally green. As a consequence, under the Greiner-Murray Government, appalling environmental degradation has occurred. Under the dead hand of the white shoe brigade, the National Party is crushing in the Government any pretence to environmental protection. What is happening in the Blue Mountains National Park is but another example of the Government having lost any sense of direction, if indeed members opposite ever had it.

Tim Moore unquestionably had some interest in the environment, as did the former honourable member for Lane Cove, the former Attorney General. Yesterday I received his little book about three and a half years of proud achievement. The way the book was sent to me I thought he was still Attorney General, and I am sure other honourable members were similarly surprised. Terry Metherell, that great shining light of northern suburbs environmentalism is no longer in the Liberal Party. Poor old Tim Moore, with his much reduced department and funding, alone has to cope with the dead hand of pressure being exerted upon environmental policy by people who are more interested in pouring more sewage into the ocean at Coffs Harbour than protecting the environment of this State.

[Interruption]

The Hon. I. M. MACDONALD: I note that Liberal Party members opposite groan, but they know full well that on the frontbench at the moment is the Hon. Bob Rowland Smith. What has he done about the environment? All he did was put more cars out at Eastern Creek, and that will lead to more air pollution from various races. Fortunately almost divine intervention has ensured that the western suburbs air quality will not be ruined by Bob Rowland Smith's toy; the Government cannot even get a race to proceed on the track, so there will not be a vehicle on that track. We can all thank someone up above that the track will not be used and the people of western Sydney will not suffer further increases in air pollution. I wish to deal specifically with another area of the Budget, having concluded that the cutback in funding for the Blue Mountains National Park is a great worry to the people of the Blue Mountains and should be of concern to anyone who is worried about heritage, particularly environmental heritage. In the Premier's Budget Speech on 24th September he said:

Page 4075

The Government is also proud of its achievements in helping low to medium income families to borrow for a home. HomeFund Loans are raised by FANMAC, the largest and most successful issuer of mortgage backed securities in Australia.

Under my Government over $3,000 million has been made available to some 38,000 low and middle income home purchasers throughout the State. A further $1,500 million will be available for over 18,000 home seekers in 1991-92. This compares with just over $200 million made available in the last year of the previous Government.

I intend to examine this matter fairly closely. Until 1987 some 4,000 loans had been initiated under FANMAC, which was established by the Labor Government in 1985 or 1986. Unquestionably it was a successful program. The Government's orientation has been to use this initiative to broaden into what has been described as rent-buy. Part of the Government's strategy is to induce individuals who live in public housing to leave the public housing sector and purchase their own homes. It is suggested that that will result in more public housing sector funding for low income families. At face value that is a laudable scheme. Yesterday I asked a question of the Minister for Health and Community Services which, inter alia, referred to the fact that as at April approximately 3,481 housing loans were at least two months in arrears. To meet that situation the Department of Housing had rescheduled mortgage payments by lengthening the term of the loans. In the question I raised the possibility that under this rescheduling low income earners may never be able to pay off their loans. I am concerned about this matter because, though the initiative is laudable, it has a number of problems in which honourable members opposite may be interested. Recently, the department, through HomeFund, released a brochure. It did not make so public its rent-buy information sheet. The brochure is headed "Why Wait and Rent? Rent-Buy Immediately!" The brochure details a series of benefits, in effect, of proceeding to enter the rent-buy program. Rent-buy is defined in the brochure as:

. . . a new scheme from the New South Wales Government, that helps you actually OWN the home of your choice!

RENT-BUY lets you RENT part of your dream home - and BUY the other part - with VERY LOW REPAYMENTS.

You can buy as little as 39%, or as much as 90%, and borrow up to $91,000.

It's your chance to enjoy IMMEDIATE part ownership of your own home, with a DEPOSIT from ONLY $1,250.

To be considered for RENT-BUY, you MUST be a Public Housing Tenant, a Public Housing Applicant, or an Applicant on the HomeFund Affordable Loan Request List, as of 30th April 1991.

The rent-buy scheme set out in the brochure is an attractive scheme for those in the public housing sector who have the laudable wish, which most Australians have, of owning their own homes. This attractive and glossy brochure would appeal Page 4076 immediately to tenants of Department of Housing homes in New South Wales. The brochure goes on to list the sorts of benefits one could expect to receive, such as immediate part- ownership of a house, which has many financial benefits in our community. The repayments and deposit required are low. The brochure states that the deposit may be as low as $1,250. Honourable members would know the level of deposit required these days to buy a house. A deposit of $1,250 is most attractive. The brochure states that no stamp duty is payable in the first five years, that there is one combined payment. It states that one can choose one's home and location and that the interest is fixed for a period of 10 years. After only three years one has the chance to have full ownership, and purchasers receive a $1,500 State grant. The brochure gives a number of examples of what can be arranged under the scheme. Taking the third example set out in the brochure, assuming one's weekly wage is of the order of $673, the weekly rent-buy payment for a house costing $120,000 is $181.71. That figure is marked with an asterisk to inform interested applicants that the package is available to approved applicants. In big glossy letters the brochure says, "You buy 75% you rent 25%". Then it sets out a number of reasons why one should pursue such a course.

The pamphlet is attractive and would encourage many people to consider the rent-buy scheme. Several thousand public housing tenants have already done so. The back of the brochure lists the various outlets of the rent-buy hotline. A number of co-operative societies participate in the scheme. I found it difficult to obtain the information sheet on the scheme, called the "Rent-buy Information Sheet". I wish to analyse some aspects of the scheme. As I shall demonstrate, the publication "Why Wait and Rent? Rent-buy immediately!" contravenes the Credit Act truth in lending provisions. Furthermore, I believe it contravenes the Fair Trading Act because, in essence, false and misleading advertising appears in the brochure. It is somewhat difficult to obtain precise information about the scheme. A number of co-operative building societies have pointed out that they do not wish to have anything to do with it, that it is far too complicated when one reads beyond the glossy brochure applicants receive, and that it was not the sort of scheme that they wished to promote.

Of a number of the city co-operatives - eight are mentioned on the back of this brochure - two are not offering the rent-buy scheme. None of the five co-operative societies had available a copy of the legal contract. Research indicates that these contracts may be available from lawyers, but are not available for people seeking to obtain further information on the scheme. As to the city agencies participating, it is difficult to find further information beyond the brochure. A comparison between the brochure and purchaser's guide reveals a number of statements in the publications which conflict and give rise to considerable concern. For instance, in the brochure under "Benefits" on page five under the subheading "A Choice for Tenants", it is said:

Public Housing Tenants can buy the home of their choice in the private market or, in some cases, may even be able to buy the home they currently live in.

Page 4077

The guide says that the property will be chosen by the purchaser from the private market. The brochure says on page 2:

Rent-buy benefits, Very Low Deposits, from only $1,250. . . .

I have mentioned this figure to the House. Let us do some sums. The maximum property value for Sydney is $155,000; for country areas, $145,000; the maximum borrowing amount is $91,000; and the maximum purchase equity is 90 per cent. With these upper limits, a would-be purchaser needs substantially more than $1,250. This is obvious from the sums. The figures that are relevant to Sydney would mean that, in the way this scheme is structured, well in excess of $1,250 would be needed, although a key statement at the beginning of the brochure mentions the amount of $1,250. For a person buying a house at the back of Bourke or somewhere of that nature, the figure might be as low as $1,250. However, in reality most purchasers will be looking for homes in regional towns and cities and in the metropolitan area. Right from the beginning, the figure of $1,250 is somewhat misleading. At page 4 the brochure says:

No stamp duty in the first five years, saving thousands of dollars.

On page 3 of the guide we find that the last of the five items in this section reads:

Purchasers under the scheme do not have to pay stamp duty on the mortgage given in respect of the financing of the purchase of additional share in the property during the first 5 years following settlement of the original purchase unless - . . . as a result of that purchase the purchaser will then hold 100 per cent of the property.

There is an immediate qualification of the statement that is made in the glossy brochure, which says that there is no stamp duty in the first five years. A person who holds 100 per cent will be required to pay stamp duty. The guide continues:

Warning - . . . stamp duty may be payable at that time on the total which is borrowed by the purchaser - not just the amount needed to purchase the further share.

That very clear statement in the brochure is contradicted when we read further in the guide. Page 4 of the brochure reads:

You enjoy very low repayments. You pay one combined Rental Loan payment per month.

The guide at page 9 says:

Rent is to be paid monthly in advance by deduction (from the purchaser's bank account. This is also the way in which repayments under the mortgage are to be made.) . . . This scheme is only available to public housing tenants, to applicants on the public housing waiting list, and for people on the HomeFund affordable home request list as at 30th April 1991.

Page 4078 Let me take the example of someone whose only income is a Government benefit. How many people in those circumstances have the financial resources to make a combined mortgage-rent payment a month in advance? Page 10 of the guide reads:

The purchaser agrees . . .

(e) to pay rent on the 20th day of each month. The rent payable on the 20th day of one month is in respect of the month commencing on the first day of the next month. The purchaser is not entitled to interest on any rent paid (even though it is payable in the month prior to the month it relates to).

Why has this formula been established? The brochure gives some examples of the impact of the payments on various weekly wages. For example, a weekly wage of $461 will lead to a weekly rent-buy commitment of $124.47; a weekly wage of $596 will lead to a weekly rent-buy commitment of $169.92; and a weekly wage of $673 will lead to a weekly rent-buy commitment of $181.71. These three examples equate with annual household incomes of approximately $24,000, $31,000 and $35,000. The monthly - or it may be five-weekly - payment in advance works out at about $500, $644 and $730 for those examples I have given. I ask members opposite whether those are realistic payments for the lower income groups I am discussing. How many of those eligible for participation in the scheme earn maximum incomes of between $33,000 for a single person and $36,000 for a household - the limits set out in the latest publication of HomeFund terms and conditions - I suggest there would be very few. Why has the maximum income for a single person has been increased from $27,000 to $33,000 in the past few weeks?

The inflation rate in this country is nowhere near $6,000 over $27,000, which is about a 25 per cent increase. The latest figures show that the annual increase in the consumer price index is about 3.3 per cent. In the past three months the increase has been 0.6 per cent. I find the increase in the threshold in relation to single persons difficult to comprehend, particularly as Australia is experiencing high levels of unemployment and as the social jeopardy in which people in low income groups are being placed is much higher. The essence of the Premier's speech was that the scheme would help low income earners buy a home. I ask whether the scheme is really targeted at low income earners. The explanatory notes reveal that the annual income for single persons in eligible client groups must be between $18,000 and $27,000. Households can have an annual income between $18,000 and $36,000. The brochure does not provide much more information. However, the purchaser's guide provides additional information which raises further concerns about the scheme. Page 1 of the guide reads:

The department does not own the remainder of the property - it will be owned by an investment company approved by the department.

It is expected (but it cannot be guaranteed) that the cost of renting the investor's share will be lower than the costs of borrowing if the purchaser had borrowed more money and bought the investor's share himself/herself.

Page 4079

There is no guarantee that the value of the property will increase.

The purchaser will be entitled to increase his/her share in the property, any time after 3 years from settlement of the original purchase of the property, by purchasing the whole or part of the share held by the investor in one or two steps. The first step must be not less than 30 per cent of the property.

Page 2 reads:

The scheme will only be available to purchasers who need to borrow money to finance their purchase . . .

The purchaser will need to provide, out of his/her own funds, the deposit on the purchase on the whole of the property.

Other rights and obligations are involved.

Page 3 reads:

The purchaser will have to pay the cost of the valuation (this is $200 now, but might be more in the future) - at least three times.

The purchaser will need to ask the vendor (or the vendor's solicitor) to put in a special clause which refers to this scheme.

The investor will not be a party to the agreement for sale of land.

WARNING

The purchaser will pay his/her own, the investor's and the co-op's legal costs of the purchase, those incurred in connection with the mortgage and the legal costs of explaining the equity purchase agreement/lease to the purchaser.

The purchaser must provide, out of his/her own funds, the whole of the deposit for the property . . .

If the market value of the property is less than the purchase price in the agreement for sale of land . . . the price to be paid by the investor for its share on settlement of the purchase will be only its share of the market value.

The purchaser will have to make up the difference . . . out of the purchaser's own money.

Is that a fair scheme when individuals in low income groups are seduced by the information in the brochure to enter into a rent-buy scheme and in the end have to make up the difference out of their own money? The guide continues:

All adjustments for council rates, water rates and so on . . . have to be paid by the purchaser out of his/her own money.

Page 4080 Where a purchaser has a HomeFund subsidised home loan then, if the purchaser purchases a further share, on or before completion of that purchase he/she must repay or refinance that original subsidised loan. Refinancing through the HomeFund subsidised loans is not permissible.

Finance from a source other than HomeFund is prohibited.

The purchaser will have to pay any stamp duty (if not exempt) when he/she buys a further share. Because of the costs involved in the purchasing of further shares the purchaser should consider acquiring the balance of the property in one step instead of two, if he/she can afford it.

The price payable for a further share is then set out and the guide states that the consumer price index used in the scheme is not the usual consumer price index figure. That was the subject of my question to the Minister for Health and Community Services yesterday. The scheme's adjustments to the consumer price index are not based upon my perception - nor that of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition or that of the Hon. Delcia Kite - of the increase in the consumer price index. The guide provides that the adjustment to the consumer price index:

. . . may benefit a purchaser if there is a period of high inflation and the movement in the CPI is above 14 per cent but may be a detriment if the movement in the CPI falls below 4 per cent.

The present inflation rate is 3.3 per cent. That figure is below the level at which this scheme becomes a detriment, according to the department's literature, to low income earners. The inflation rate is below that level now - not in six months' time or a year's time. The guide continues:

If the adjusted CPI goes up faster than the value of the property the price to be paid for the further share may be more than the market value.

Low income earners are confronted with a double bind and a double jeopardy under this scheme. If the consumer price index rises faster than the value of the property, under the scheme the final share will cost more than market value. In effect, the low income earner may lose both ways if the consumer price index falls below 4 per cent. As the Hon. R. T. M. Bull would know, the consumer price index is now running at below 4 per cent. If the consumer price index rises faster than the market value, the low income earner will lose as a result of having to pay more than market value for the final share in the property. Page 6 of the guide states:

The purchaser cannot sell his/her share of the property but can decide to sell the whole property to a third party any time after 3 years from settlement of the original purchase of the property.

It is reassuring to note that "If the purchaser is in hardship . . . there is provision for an early sale". Unless the scheme is modified, in my view many householders will be in hardship. This scheme needs to be reviewed. There are many further points Page 4081 I could make in relation to aspects of the scheme that are of concern. At page 7 the following caution appears:

It may be a condition of that consent that the purchaser make up the loss suffered by the investor as a consequence of the sale price being less than 98% of the market value.

Here we are talking about low income earners who are being encouraged, through this glossy, attractive pamphlet, to engage in the rent-buy scheme. The scheme uses the almost psychological desire of people in this State, and indeed in this country, to own their own homes; and it is a desire I endorse. The Government has wanted to get more low income earners out of public housing and into private accommodation that they own. But this scheme has many traps, particularly for young families and single parent families and other low income earners who may not be able to fully comprehend its consequences. In my view this scheme is being sold to those people on an absolutely misleading basis because the brochure does not mention the elements I have raised in the Chamber today, including the detriment that will be occasioned by an inflation rate of less than 4 per cent. I believe most economists now say we will have an inflation rate lower than 4 per cent for some time. Detriment will be to the purchaser if the consumer price index exceeds the market-value increases, and the purchaser will have to pay the investor the difference. At the end of the day - after these loans have been rescheduled dramatically, having in mind that more than 3,400 cases of arrears were recorded in April - individuals who purchased property in the belief that ultimately they would own their own homes are likely to find, with all these traps that have been placed within the scheme, that they do not own the homes and may be forced to sell them.

This is an issue of great concern. The Premier has said that 38,000 people have purchased homes under this program in the past three and a half years and he anticipates that up to 18,000 people will be assisted in the next financial year. People are being encouraged to use the scheme. However, the number of traps in the scheme cause great concern. I raise these matters because I believe some of the elements of the scheme must be reviewed. We live in a society with a changing economy. We live in a society where we could have entrenched unemployment for a long time. We live in a society where interest rates, the CPI and major economic indices fluctuate. In these circumstances I believe the scheme contains a number of severe weaknesses which will create manifest difficulties for low income earners. At page 7 of the document it is stated that the proceeds of a property sale are to be disbursed after 20 or 25 years or, indeed, earlier. Discharge of the mortgage ranks No. 3 in the list. There is another caution to the effect that if the department determines that the purchaser is in hardship, and if the investor consents to the sale, "it may be a condition of that consent that the purchaser make up the loss suffered by the investor as a consequence of the sale price being less than 98% of the market value". I believe I have already established that point. Page 8 of the document deals with alterations and improvements. I find the caution on that page extraordinary. It states:

Page 4082

The purchaser will not receive any credit for any increase in the value of the property because improvements have been undertaken - . . . Therefore a purchaser could be better off spending money on purchasing the investor's share of the property before doing major improvements.

In other words, a person who purchases a house is given no encouragement to improve that house. Most Australians who own their own houses wish to improve them.

The Hon. R. T. M. Bull: You are getting a bit repetitious.

The Hon. I. M. MACDONALD: The Hon. R. T. M. Bull has obviously listened only occasionally. He is a farmer and not terribly interested in the plight of low income families. I have raised a new issue relating to home improvements. I have not mentioned this issue before. Under this scheme if the home purchaser improves the place, he or she will not receive any credit for that in the final disbursement. As I say, I could go on giving details of the faults in this scheme. It is a scheme that was touted in rather dramatic terms as the Government's contribution to the housing sector and to social welfare policy in New South Wales. I contend that the scheme has many pitfalls for low income earners. I believe that in 15 to 20 years' time, as a result of rescheduling, many purchasers will be unable to pay off the homes and they will be forced to sell. They will come out of it with very little, especially when one considers that under the guidelines for monthly payments they will be forced to save dramatically and spend a considerable amount of their disposable incomes on meeting those monthly payments under the scheme. I hope that a review is conducted of the scheme. We need a home funding scheme in New South Wales. We must help people to purchase their own homes. However, we must have a scheme that does not lead to what I believe has the potential for financial and psychological disaster for low income families who, at the end of the term, will find they will have to pay considerable amounts of money for little gain.

The Hon. R. T. M. BULL [9.49]: It gives me a great deal of pleasure to talk in this House about another economically good and sound Budget presented to New South Wales by the Greiner-Murray Government. Before referring specifically to the Budget I would like to say a few words of welcome to our new members. Three of them have made their maiden speech. I congratulate the Hon. Dr Meredith Burgmann, the Hon. Jan Burnswoods and, of course, the Hon. Patricia Forsythe, who I am sure will make an outstanding contribution to this House. She has already spoken since making her maiden speech. She has a lot of confidence and common sense. I congratulate her on her contribution and look forward to many more. Some of my colleagues are yet to make their maiden speeches but I am sure they will make outstanding contributions to this Chamber - the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner, the Hon. D. F. Moppett, the Hon. L. D. W. Coleman and the Hon. J. F. Ryan. Honourable members would know that the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner has a long history of political involvement. She is performing extremely well in the Parliament. I am sure that Page 4083 by the time she makes her maiden speech honourable members will realise her political nous and the contribution she will make to the Parliament.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett is no stranger to the House and he has made a number of speeches since his return. The Hon. L. D. W. Coleman, our newest member, came here at the same time as the Hon. E. M. Obeid. The new members have to fill the large shoes that have been left by previous members. Sir Adrian Solomons was the grandfather of this Chamber not only in years as a member; he was a distinguished member who brought much experience and common sense to debate. The Hon. J. J. Doohan was a great stalwart for people who live west of the divide. His contributions will be missed. We will miss the members who retired at the last election and the couple who have retired since the election. The Hon. E. M. Obeid has taken the Hon. J. R. Hallam's place, which is no mean feat.

Contributions on the Budget from members opposite have been predictable. I wish the Hon. I. M. Macdonald would confine himself to housing matters and not speak on economic matters because he is right out of his depth with them. He knows a lot about housing and nobody in this Chamber would not support his final comment that we aspire to provide the economic conditions that will ensure that low income families and those embarking on the purchase of their own home under our very good rent-purchase scheme will be successful. The Budget has been cast in what can be described only as disastrous economic circumstances over which the Government of this State has had very little control. A comparison of the 1982 to 1988 period with the term in which we have been in government shows that the former Labor Government had an increase in contracts and conveyancing revenues of seven and a half times. In addition to that windfall, the Labor Government had a strong revenue base, which enabled it to spend willy-nilly on such hare-brained schemes as Darling Harbour and a number of other schemes whose debts this Government has taken over. In the same period, Commonwealth payments to the Labor State Government rose by 49 per cent. Unfortunately, this Government has not enjoyed such a comfortable economic period.

As a thumb sketch, the budget sector net debt as a proportion of gross State product fell from 12 per cent in June 1988 to 10 per cent in June 1991. These are indicators of the difficult current economic environment. Debt servicing costs as a proportion of budget outlays fell from 12.5 per cent in June 1988 to 10.4 per cent in June 1991. That demonstrates clearly that we are reducing debt and making sure that the budget component of debt servicing is within reasonable reach. Public sector employment has fallen by 20,000. That is all about microeconomic reform and better management of government trading enterprises and statutory authorities. Honourable members opposite have made great mileage of comparing New South Wales and Victoria. They have been at pains to quote very selectively without facing the facts. In the Age of 27th September Glenda Korporaal compared the New South Wales Budget with that of Victoria as follows:

. . . New South Wales . . . budget papers confirm the painful contrast between the financial position of Victoria and its northern neighbour.

Page 4084

Highlighted was the fact that the Kirner Government came to this year's budget with two severe handicaps, particularly when compared with New South Wales: the heritage of huge debt and debt servicing levels left by the Cain Government and the revenue problems of a much more depressed state economy.

But they also show how much the Greiner Government is reaping the benefits of microeconomic reform, having tackled the inefficiencies of the New South Wales public sector trading enterprises early in its term.

And given the severity of Victoria's financial state - particularly its cancerous debt levels - the Kirner Government should have taken a more savage scalpel to public spending to eliminate the disastrous position where the State is having to go into the red to pay its current operating costs . . . New South Wales and Victorian budgets of 1991 also show a painful difference in terms of recurrent operations. In terms of recurrent spending, Victoria is budgeting for a deficit of $429 million in the current financial year while New South Wales is budgeting for an operational surplus of $328 million. Victoria has counted some $300 million in redundancy payments as capital expenditure -

This is the sort of creative accounting we were used to under the Wran and Unsworth governments. Victoria has not woken up yet. The article continues:

- while New South Wales has included redundancy payments as part of recurrent spending. Adding back the $300 million in redundancy payments to Victoria's recurrent spending, the comparison is Victoria in the red to the tune of $729 million against New South Wales's surplus of $328 million.

Glenda Korporaal goes on to say:

But the really worrying comparison is in the deficit for the total public sector. New South Wales is expecting a deficit of $1.16 billion in 1991-92 while the Victorian deficit will be almost double that at $2.2 billion.

New South Wales had total public sector net debt of $21,552 million, 16.2 per cent of gross State product or $3,677 per person. Victoria had total public sector net debt of $30,591 million, 29.1 per cent of gross State product or $6,941 per person - about double the per person debt of New South Wales. Glenda Korporaal continued:

Federal grants to New South Wales will rise by only 0.7 per cent in real terms this year compared to the 2.5 per cent increase given to Victoria. Thus over the year Victoria saw its total revenue rise by 4.6 per cent in real terms while New South Wales's rose by 4.3 per cent . . . total current outlays have risen faster in Victoria than New South Wales ... real recurrent outlays in New South Wales will rise by 3.8 per cent this year while Victoria's (including redundancy payments) will rise by 7.7 per cent. New South Wales has been much tougher on spending growth than Victoria.

Honourable members opposite continue to ignore some of these bipartisan commentaries on the relative economic merits of New South Wales and Victoria which are given support by any comparison of current outlays per capita. In New South Wales total outlays per capita are 6.3 per cent compared to 6.9 per cent in Victoria. The budget deficit per capita - a very interesting figure - is $187 per capita Page 4085 in New South Wales and $335 per capita in Victoria. Western Australia, another State with a so-called very good Labor government, is crumbling like the ruins of Rome. Western Australia's budget deficit is $293 per capita. South Australia, which has another crumbling Labor government, has a budget deficit of $225 per capita. New South Wales is below the five-State average and is performing well.

I will refer to a number of other economic indicators which compare the performance of New South Wales with the performance of other States. New South Wales has outperformed all other States in matters such as motor vehicle registration, retail turnover, value of residential building approvals, bank deposits, and the consumer price index. When forming its budget strategy New South Wales had to face a difficult economic environment. This Government has tried to maintain confidence and has improved living standards. It has tried to provide better and more responsive services and it has tried to maintain financial flexibility to respond to future needs. In 1988-89 New South Wales had a significant decline - $518 million - in property and share-based revenue. Since 1987-88 there have been cuts in Commonwealth general revenue grants amounting to $685 million. As a result New South Wales has had to retain services in some areas; build on services in the essential areas of education, health and law and order; and provide a better and more responsive economic environment for private enterprise and business to succeed and grow. Over the past four years New South Wales has attracted business from other States and we have witnessed a growth in private enterprise involvement. Our economic policies are working, and working well.

Over the past four years one of this Government's financial achievements has been to constrain debt - a factor well highlighted by the Curran report which this Government initiated on coming into office. Total net debt to gross State product is reduced from 24.1 per cent to 14 per cent. I do not know whether Opposition members understand economics, but I would have thought that was an outstanding result. Budget sector net debt to gross State product is down from 11.9 per cent to 9.5 per cent. Debt servicing costs to total outlays are reduced from 12.9 per cent to 10.2 per cent. Government business dividends are increased from $129 million to $907 million. This Government has also improved efficiency. Departmental current payments have been broadly frozen in real terms. There has been a fall in public sector employment from 322,000 to 295,000. In 1991-92 this Government achieved annual savings of $684 million and that figure is expected to rise to $1,875 million by 1993-94. That is an outstanding improvement in efficiency.

This Government is extremely proud of its infrastructure programs. It has achieved a 22 per cent growth in budget sector capital programs; asset sales are up from $173 million to $528 million; and there has been private sector participation in the western Sydney toll road, the northwest sector urban release and Junee gaol. The Government has achieved results in capital expenditure. Proceeds from asset sales have been going not to recurrent expenditure but to retire debt - one of this Government's major strategies. The Government has achieved reforms in taxation. New South Wales was once one of the highest taxing States in Australia but it is now Page 4086 one of the lowest. There is good news in the Budget. I am fortunate to have served on the Longley committee which reviewed land tax in New South Wales. Some of the committee's recommendations have already been taken up by the Government and there have been a few new initiatives in response to that report. Land tax on boarding houses is to be abolished if boarding houses provide permanent accommodation to low income residents, particularly those on income support schemes. Revenue forgone per annum will be $3 million.

Joint owners of blocks of flats will now not be liable to land tax. They will be able to claim the threshold against land value in the same fashion as strata and company title unit owners. Revenue forgone per annum will be $1 million. The Government has responded to a number of other initiatives. A rebate of land tax will be available where an owner temporarily vacates a principal place of residence. An exemption will apply to vacant blocks of residential land. Exemptions will be provided also for workers using their own vehicles and people paying for their own accommodation when absent from home. Revenue forgone in each of these measures will be $1 million per annum. The Government should be congratulated for excluding wet hiring from the ambit of the Stamp Duties Act. As a member of the National Party I am pleased and proud that this Government has been able to look after that important sector. I could wax lyrical about the performance of this Government but I might be accused of having blinkered vision. It is interesting to observe what members of the press are saying about this Government's performance. On 25th September, 1991, Dennis Shanahan of the Australian said:

There are three distinct groups of consequences that Mr Greiner must face. The first is the legacy of previous administrations. The second takes in the profound effects of the recession on NSW and the third is a demographic shift.

Dennis Shanahan has rightly said in his article that, although the Government has had great difficulty in bringing down this Budget, it has had to face the three consequences. The editorial in the Australian of the same date states:

Performance takes precedence over theory.

Referring to Mr Greiner the editorial states:

His cost-cutting has been directed at efficiency, reduction of debt (high debt- servicing costs being the ultimate restraint on governments) and freeing funds (within general constraints) for law enforcement, health and education.

Paddy McGuinness, in the Australian, waxed extremely lyrical about the Government. He had a lot to say about the way New South Wales is leading the reconstruction of the Federal financial system. Many members of the press have congratulated this Government on its honest budget reporting and for the way in which it has presented its Budget Papers. Paddy McGuinness said:

Thus NSW is leading in the reconstruction of the federal financial system during the rest of this century, and whatever the political outcome of the 1995 election, it is unlikely that this thrust will be reversed.

Page 4087

Much depends, of course, on the strength of the temptation to politicians to revert to the old ways of political pork-barrelling and hole-in-the-corner deals. The very transparency which has been produced by the financial accounting reforms will however make this more and more difficult, especially as long as there is political capital to be made out of pointing to the sins and failings of other States . . .

But there is another side to the NSW financial reforms where the other States have not progressed as far - the adoption of accrual accounting. The basis of public accounts is, of course, in terms of cash inflows and outflows and their impact on the economy through what they take on a net basis from . . . the savings of the community. Accrual accounting, however, deals with the net asset liability position of the State and takes account of future calls on revenues implicit in existing policies.

He said further:

Not until all levels of government in Australia have effectively funded superannuation and other such commitments will budgets be on a genuinely stable basis, with the government of the day free to determine the pattern of spending and revenue raising.

A number of commentators have congratulated the Government on what could only be described as brave and truthful accounting in this year's Budget Papers. There is no doubt that what Padraic McGuinness said in the Australian is a challenge to other governments around Australia to take up the cudgels and present their figures in a more honest way so that the people of Victoria, Western Australia and South Australia will know exactly what their real position is and those other discredited State governments will be forced by this Government's initiative to paint the real picture. The editorial in the Daily Telegraph Mirror of 25th September stated:

The Budget also contains evidence that Mr Greiner has succeeded in protecting the State's economy from the harsher ravages of the recession including soaring unemployment and sudden tax increases.

The morning after the Budget was handed down John Laws said:

I am not critical. You've got to congratulate them. Considering what Nick Greiner had to work with I think he's done a very, very good job. Tough stuff.

I turn now to the important area of agriculture. Honourable members are aware of the crisis facing country areas which has seen no precedent - certainly not since the early 1930s. New South Wales is facing a widespread drought - certainly across more than 70 per cent of the State - and people involved in rural industry have the added burden of a downturn in commodity prices. The downturn in the rural economy has had a serious impact on rural towns and on businesses within those towns. A number of farmers have gone to the wall as well as a number of small businesses. This will continue until the drought that has ravaged much of the State breaks and the twin evils of local commodity prices and high costs are stabilised. The New South Wales Government has responded with a number of measures, such Page 4088 as the rural assistance scheme - which is funded by the Commonwealth to a large extent but also receives a significant contribution from the State - rural counselling and drought assistance. Honourable members would be aware that a number of farmers suffering financial difficulties tend to isolate themselves in the hope that the problem will go away. The Government has implemented measures to try to keep these families on their properties, to assist them, and to counsel them as to the best means of overcoming their difficulties.

The number of available rural counsellors for people in the rural sector has increased significantly, especially in those areas of the State where the downturn has been more predominant. The State Government has increased the allocation for rural councils by $426,000 - almost half a million dollars. This particular initiative has been well received in country areas. It will assist a number of families in country areas who are facing this rural downturn. In the past 12 months an additional $10 million has been spent in drought subsidies. An additional $5 million has been sought and will be granted as part of the department's response to the current drought. Only this week several initiatives were announced to further assist rural industries in terms of drought assistance and the rural assistance scheme. The agricultural sector has received significant increases in capital works. It is pleasing to note that the headquarters of the Department of Agriculture will open in Orange early in December. This Government is not only talking about decentralisation, it is doing something about it. The Government has set the example. There is no reason why the head office of the Department of Agriculture should remain in the heart of Sydney. It is one of those areas of government that realistically can and should operate in the country area, as have the Central Mapping Authority and other government instrumentalities. The decentralisation of the Department of Agriculture is a worthwhile initiative for which the Government should be congratulated.

I wish to conclude my remarks by saying a little about education. Since the last election it has been my pleasure to serve as parliamentary secretary to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs. The Hon. Virginia Chadwick as Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs has done an outstanding job in the past 12 months. She has tackled one of the most difficult areas of government with the minimum of fuss, without aggravating anyone, yet producing results. She has achieved more in the past 12 months than any education Minister of any government. The results speak for themselves. The way the Teachers Federation has responded to most of the Government's initiatives in the past 12 months is a clear testimony to the fact that it is getting things right in school education. Parents, teachers and others who are involved in education realise that the schools renewal program is not the bogey it was first painted. Curriculum changes in key learning areas are not so dramatic and are eminently sensible. They realise that we can survive with our present teacher-pupil ratios and that classes of different age groups can be combined and still maintain the same standard. A number of the bogeys thrown up by members of the Opposition and the Teachers Federation in the past few years have not come to fruition. School education is better than ever. The results are on the board. The school education budget is a record budget. An amount of $3.436 Page 4089 billion will be spent on primary and secondary school education this financial year. This is an increase in real terms of more than $160 million or 4.9 per cent over the past financial year, which is well above the rate of inflation.

Government school spending and recurrent spending has increased by $132 million, or 4.7 per cent, in this Budget. Members will be aware that when the coalition was elected in 1988 it promised to increase the level of spending on non-government schools to 25 per cent of the equivalent cost of educating a student in a government school. The coalition has delivered on that promise. This Budget has increased non-government school funding $26 million. The Opposition and the Teachers Federation were throwing their hands in the air about this bogey, but the coalition has a genuine concern for all students in New South Wales. The coalition is concerned about children in the Catholic school system. The Labor Party was opposed to this increase in funding. It should be ashamed that when it was in Government it did not support some of the smaller non-government schools, as this Government has. There has been an outstanding demand for the joint secondary schools TAFE courses program. The number of students participating in government school TAFE courses has risen from 3,800 in 1988 to 9,300 in 1991. That is a clear testament to the success of that new program. That initiative is important as I am sure that all members of all political parties want the school retention rate to increase. The participation rate clearly demonstrates that there is a demand for more vocational courses for years 11 and 12. Not all students are capable of doing or want to undertake traditional courses of study. In many cases these courses are accredited towards the higher school certificate. This has been an important initiative that has increased the retention rate and assisted the number of students.

For capital works in 1991-92 funding has been provided to commence the construction of 14 new and replacement primary schools and one high school. These schools are to be constructed in response to growing enrolments. The program provides also for 19 other new major projects to improve schools, at a total cost estimated at $125.5 million. Also allocated is $119.8 million for work on projects commenced in previous years, $78.7 million for minor works, and $97.4 million for school maintenance programs. The Budget provides for additions to Yanco Agricultural High School, providing for a significant break-through in 1993 when that school will become co-educational. Girls in country areas, and perhaps also city areas, who have been denied the chance to attend this fine educational institution will be able to do so. One of this Government's great educational platforms has been to provide choice. No other State of Australia has anywhere near the choice in education that New South Wales offers. One need look only at the success of our selective high schools, with 16,500 applicants for 2,700 places this year. New South Wales now has a language high school, technology high schools, and a sports high school. The Labor Government did not even think of those initiatives in its 12 years of non-action in education. Next year the Cherrybrook Technology High School will be opened. That school has been developed at a cost of $16 million. The project is interesting in that it has attracted $1 million sponsorship from the private sector. It has been well described as the high school of the future. That school is an Page 4090 example of how high schools are developing and will continue to develop in the future. I commend members to inspect it.

A new language high school will be developed at Kelso High School in Bathurst in 1992. Choice is most important, and in most areas of the State students now have a choice. They can decide whether to attend a technology high school, a comprehensive high school and so on. I am very proud to have been associated with this Government, particularly with regard to its rural education initiatives. During the past three and a half years enormous developments have taken place in rural education. The Correspondence School has been decentralised and taken to the children. Distance Education Centres have been established at 17 strategic locations throughout the State. Years 11 and 12 have been extended to a number of central schools. Access programs allow those children to complete years 11 and 12 instead of having to leave school and look for employment, perhaps in another town. In rural areas 200 schools receive isolated school grants. The living away from home allowance has been increased by more than 35 per cent since 1989. All this and much more is being done for rural education because we are concerned that students in western New South Wales and other isolated areas should have the same opportunities and access to education that students in cities and major country areas have taken for granted for so long. I reiterate my congratulations to the Premier and Treasurer, the Hon. Nick Greiner. As I have said previously, he has proved to be an outstanding Premier and Treasurer of New South Wales. In economic management, common sense and delivery of services that the people expect, he leads the way in New South Wales and the Commonwealth.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA [10.29]: I congratulate the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy upon his announcement yesterday that Vales Point power station will operate with two languages. The ethnic communities will be most pleased about that, particularly elderly ethnic people who like to visit such places but often do not understand what is said. I congratulate also the new Government members of this House, the Hon. Patricia Forsythe, the Hon. L. D. W. Coleman, the Hon. D. F. Moppett, the Hon. J. F. Ryan and the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner. On our side of the House I congratulate the Hon. Dr Meredith Burgmann, who already has participated in several debates, the Hon. Jan Burnswoods, who also has participated in debate and made an excellent first speech, and the Hon. E. M. Obeid, who has not yet spoken in debate, but who I am sure will make a significant contribution to the Chamber. I have had the privilege of participating with the Hon. J. F. Ryan and the Hon. D. F. Moppett, on the social issues committee, and I know that we can work well together in a bipartisan way. Before I speak to the Budget I draw to the attention of the Chamber an article in today's Sydney Morning Herald which stated:

A boy aged eight who contracted the AIDS virus through a blood transfusion will receive $600,000 from the Australian Red Cross Society, the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories and the Royal Children's Hospital.

The boy sued them through his parents.

Page 4091

That case was settled out of court, and the boy received $600,000. I am sorry that the Hon. J. P. Hannaford is not present in the Chamber at the moment, but I am sure the Deputy Leader of the House will bring this matter to his attention. The Deputy Leader is a member of Cabinet and will be involved in any decision-making process with regard to financial assistance from the Government for medically acquired AIDS victims. I bring to the attention of honourable members also an article that appeared in yesterday's Australian entitled "AIDS victims win $2.45m payout". The article reported that the South Australian Bannon Government had awarded nine South Australians with medically acquired AIDS $2.45 million, which when averaged out constitutes the highest amount paid to such people as an out of court settlement. Each will receive almost $300,000. I doubt that the medically acquired AIDS victims in New South Wales believe that such an amount should be paid to them; they realise how many of their group live in New South Wales as compared with those that live in other States of Australia. It is important, however, that governments provide these people with financial assistance.

Though they belong to the same party of which I am a member, I am ashamed of the behaviour of my colleagues in the Federal Government. They have not risen to the expectations of the community. The contents of an article that appeared in yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald, which compounds my feelings towards the Federal Government, reported that the Federal Government had paid $58 million to a group of Chinese students. The same incompetent people who are running the Eastern Creek debacle must be running Chinese student English courses. The Federal Government has provided $58 million of taxpayers' money to Chinese students who have lost their money to bogus organisations. Who has paid for this incompetence? We, the taxpayers, have. The Federal Government has outlaid $58 million for that purpose yet it has paid only $13 million for AIDS victims in Australia. It makes my Italian blood boil every time I think of it. The 1991-92 Budget has been publicised by the Government as a welfare budget. The right-wing think tank, the Institute of Public Affairs, referred to the Budget as being "too much like a big government Labor Budget". Terry Metherell referred to it as lacking in compassion. Business felt that payroll tax should have been cut. Farmers say that it pays too much attention to the environment. Environmentalists, on the other hand, say it has slashed environmental resources. According to the Sydney Morning Herald a major charitable organisation said, "Thanks Nick, but it is not enough". I have drawn attention to these various comments to show that this nothing budget has pleased no one.

The economic performance of the Government has been pathetic. The Auditor- General's figures claim that the net State debt at face value has increased to more than $23,000 million - a huge increase of more than $2 billion in the past year. The shadow minister for finance and Leader of the Opposition in this House, the Hon. M. R. Egan, has said that the State debt is the equivalent of almost $4,000 for every man, woman and child in New South Wales. What a sorry state of affairs for a Government that was elected as a team of competent managers. What we have is mismanagement, waste, and at its best incompetence, at all levels. New South Wales Page 4092 is the highest taxed State in Australia: we are taxed $251 a head more than is the position in Victoria. If Government supporters doubt what I say, I invite them to read the Budget Papers, as I have done in detail. This year the estimates committees that have been established have given at least to some members the opportunity to not only study the Budget Papers - which I acknowledge was possible in the past - but also to discuss expenditure and line items with the relevant Ministers. This has been a tremendous initiative, and I congratulate the lower House Independent members, who forced the Greiner Government to establish estimates committees.

The Hon. Patricia Forsythe: It is a pity that they do not attend the committees when they are held.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: I agree with what the honourable member said. Many of the Independent members did not attend, and that was disappointing. Though the concept of estimates committees requires some fine tuning, they are a good innovation. One criticism I have of them is the limit placed on members to ask questions. At the moment individual members are allowed one minute to put a question and the relevant Minister is allowed five minutes to answer the question. If the Minister is unable to answer the question, he will say, "I am sorry, I am unable to answer your question at the moment. I shall put it on notice for you". When that occurs the member's opportunity to ask a further question is lost. The five minutes the Minister would otherwise have used to answer his question cannot be used by the member to ask other questions. Frequently - and I do not say that it occurs in every instance - members of the Government ask dorothy dix questions of a Minister. The Minister then takes his full five minutes to deliver the answer. If members of the Opposition or Independent members ask a question and are told "I am unable to answer your question. I will take it on notice and get back to you", the remainder of the time is then lost. There is no opportunity to ask another question. A fairer system would be to allocate 15 minutes to Government members and 15 minutes to non-Government and Independent members. During those times members could ask as many questions as they wished. I make that suggestion off the top of my head. Estimates committees are valuable from the point of view of Ministers as well as individual members.

The Hon. R. T. M. Bull: Labor members and Independents do not turn up.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: We were there all the time. As I said, estimates committees are important for all members, whether they are members of the Opposition or of the Government. Too often bureaucrats run the affairs of the State and, therefore, Ministers. Ministers will have to do their homework more thoroughly if they are required to have some knowledge of every line item in the Budget relevant to them. The concept of estimates committees is excellent and I hope it is developed. They are an important part of our democratic system and I support them.

Page 4093 The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: Why were they not introduced during the 11 years that Labor was in government?

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: Initiatives present themselves at different times. I pay tribute to Caesar when tribute is required. The coalition introduced estimates committees only because the Independents compelled it. I am pleased that they have been established. I wonder, however, when the Independent members no longer have the power they have at the moment, whether estimates committees will be abandoned. I hope that does not happen. Democracy is more important than party politics. I wish now to address some specific matters referred to in the Budget Papers. The first matter I refer to is ethnic affairs. I was pleased to have an opportunity with my colleagues the honourable member for Riverstone, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the other place, Dr Refshauge, and the Hon. R. D. Dyer to discuss the initiatives taken by the Premier in this regard. I have also discussed these matters with the Premier and Mr Stepan Kerkyasharian, the Chairman of the Ethnic Affairs Commission. I express concern, however, about funding for people of non-English speaking backgrounds. The 1990-91 allocation of $98,000 to the Ethnic Affairs Commission's cultural grants program has been cancelled. Many of the grants are at times as small as $1,000 to community groups, none the less they are vital to the survival of small community groups who have few resources. The Premier said at an estimates committee hearing that although it may be nice that such grants are available, at a time of such economic stringency the Government could not afford them. I hope that the grants will be made available again as soon as possible. To small community groups these grants are of immense importance.

The area assistance scheme provides funding for projects in the most disadvantaged and isolated communities within five regions; the Hunter, Central Coast, Illawarra, Macarthur and western Sydney. Though the State Government has promised money for the second year of funding in 1991-92, no promise of further allocation of funds has been made to the area assistance scheme. In many cases projects funded through this scheme provide support for people of non-English speaking backgrounds. The Opposition also is concerned that the State Government has failed to match the 12 per cent Commonwealth growth funds provided for the home and community care program. That program helps aged and disabled people to remain out of institutions. The ethnic communities consist of a high proportion of ageing people. Many migrant groups came to Australia in the late 1940s or 1950s. They are now a very ageing population and are greatly in need of such assistance. I am glad the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs is in the Chamber because I wish to raise the matter of community languages. The Minister would know the importance of community languages in primary schools. There are only 90 language teachers in primary schools. That number has not increased since the coalition came to office.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: It is Federal funding which has been frozen since 1986. The honourable member should talk to her Commonwealth colleagues.

Page 4094 The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: The Minister has interjected by saying that it is Commonwealth funding. Not for the teachers. Languages other than English are State funded. This was a special allocation made by Premier Wran in 1980. The former Labor Government appointed the first 30 teachers. It has been increased annually by 20 or 10 ever since with the last 10 teachers being appointed under the Unsworth Government. If we believe in the need to teach our children languages, it is important that languages should be taught at primary school level. I beg the Minister to look at the budget and ascertain whether it is possible to introduce more community languages into primary schools.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: If the honourable member will promise that she will talk to the Commonwealth about how it has had this State's money frozen since 1986. Does the honourable member say that is not important?

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: Yes, that is important. The Minister is talking about the $45. I agree that it should be increased but that is another area of languages. That is for ethnic schools and assertion courses. These are our own State budget funds. If I can influence the Commonwealth Government, I would be delighted to make representations.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: Has the honourable member made representations? The money has been frozen since 1986.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: I have. The Italian Welfare Centre has written to me and I have made several representations to the Minister.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: And Mr Dawkins has not listened to the honourable member.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: Mr Dawkins is sometimes as hard as the State Minister. In the area of ethnic affairs I should like to bring to the attention of honourable members that next year Carnivale will be absorbed by the Festival of Sydney. This is causing concern within the ethnic community. Carnivale was initiated by the Wran Government in 1976 as a community celebration of our ethnic diversity. As with everything else, Carnivale has to evolve - it cannot be the same festival year in year out. This year's festival seems to have lost its local multicultural identity. One group of Americans and one group of Africans were invited at great expense. However, overseas artists, from the countries where most of our immigrants originated, were not invited. Out of a modest budget of $445,000 for the 1990-91 Carnivale, $161,411 was spent on the opening alone.

One component of this expenditure was $8,000 for a reception at the Waterfront Restaurant. When I questioned the estimates committee about this I was given the reply that this $8,000 was provided as a donation from the Waterfront Restaurant. If honourable members believe that, they really do believe in Santa Claus. I might be cynical but I do not believe that in a time of economic stringency Page 4095 a restaurant such as the Waterfront Restaurant would donate $8,000 for a reception. I attended that restaurant and I was appalled that the great majority of people attending were from the Ministry of Arts and friends of friends. This is unacceptable. Many representatives of ethnic groups were not invited and those who were boycotted that reception because it was an expensive folly. Carnivale is one of the few structures set up by the ethnic community. Those people should have been involved and invited but they were not. I hope that situation will not recur. What happens to the Carnivale under the Festival of Sydney will be monitored very carefully.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. Pezzutti: The honourable member should visit our Carnivale celebrations in Lismore.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: I did not attend this year but I did last year. I agree with the honourable member. That was excellent. Next year the Festival of Sydney will take over Carnivale and we have not been told what will happen to country areas such as Lismore and Coffs Harbour. We have not been told whether a budget allocation will be made for country areas. My fear is that the Festival of Sydney will swallow up Carnivale, never to be heard of again. I hope my fears are unfounded and that I can be proved wrong. I would be delighted to be proved wrong. I am concerned because the celebration of our multicultural communities is important. People living in Sydney know that we live in a multicultural society. They need only go down the street to Chinatown and other places to see the essence of this multicultural society. However, in towns like Dubbo, Bourke and the Central West this is not evident. Country areas tend to be much more homogeneous. It is important to introduce and celebrate other cultures and if money is not made available that will never take place. This is my great concern about the Festival of Sydney taking over Carnivale.

I should also like to bring to the attention of the Minister for Health and Community Services a recent report of the Commonwealth-State Council of Non-English Speaking Background Women's Issues entitled "National Non-English Speaking Background: Women's Health Strategy". This is an interesting report by Caroline Alcorso and Toni Schofield. This report documents the exploitation of immigrant women in many industries. God only knows what will happen to immigrants and immigrant women in particular with the introduction of the new industrial legislation and enterprise bargaining. Those groups, the most vulnerable in our work force, will be greatly disadvantaged with enterprise bargaining, which is certain to compound such exploitation. This report is well documented. It is a report of a joint task force by Helen L'Orange, who was first working in New South Wales with the Womens Co-ordination Unit and is now at the Office of the Status of Women, Rosa Droescher, Jane Woodruff from the Womens Co-ordination Unit and Sue Ingram from the Department of Local Government and Ethnic Affairs. These people, by this well documented report from the task force set up by the Commonwealth and State governments, provide confidence that some action will be taken. I quote from this report:

Page 4096

Non-English speaking background women in Australia suffer specific health problems and have a worse health service experience than most other Australian women. Over time, the great majority of NESB women are likely to experience a marked decline in the very good health they bring with them as immigrants and many will experience increasing rates of sickness and disability as a result of living and working in Australia. Yet good health is a crucial resource which conditions all other aspects of a person's life, as well as affecting their potential to contribute to society at large. The Commonwealth-State Council on NESB Women's Issues has made health a priority during its current term of work and, accordingly, has undertaken the development of a national strategy paper on NESB women's health.

I hope the State Government will fully support the implementation of at least some of the excellent recommendations in the report. Another area I wish to address is Technical and Further Education. Newspaper editorials on technical and further education appear day in and day out. The editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald of Tuesday, 1st October, entitled "Bureaucrats bloat TAFE", speaks of the TAFE system having been taken over by bureaucrats. Dr Brian Scott, a guru of the Liberal Government, a person that the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs loves to quote -

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: You do not agree with him?

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: I do not agree with him on many things, though I do on some.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: You do not believe in devolution?

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: I do believe in devolution. Having served four years on the Education Commission of New South Wales, and having visited schools everywhere in this State, I know that without strong central directives principals are not inclined to introduce women's policies, non-sexist policies or multicultural policies because they are already overburdened. Unless the central office, that is the Minister's office, directs principals to do so, they will not.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: I have more faith in my teachers than you do.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: I have faith in teachers, though at times not in the principals.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: You do not like principals either?

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: I do like them but at times my faith has been shaken during the years I have been working with them. The editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald states:

When Dr Brian Scott investigated the NSW TAFE system in 1989 with a view to proposing changes and reforms if they were needed, he found a bureaucracy that was Page 4097 "highly politicised", a climate of "cronyism and favouritism" and a "demoralisation of dedicated staff".

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: That is what Labor did; that is what Dr Scott found.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: These are the words of Dr Scott:

Two years later, when the recommendations of his review are supposed to have been implemented, Dr Scott is talking in the same way about the TAFE bureaucracy. The bureaucrats are "fat cats" who have plunged the system into crisis by "botching up" his reforms by not implementing them in the "manner, style, detail and spirit" that he had recommended. Is Doctor Scott right? And, if he is right, what has gone wrong and what needs to be done to put it right?

If a comparison is made between the history of the Department of School Education bureaucracy under the Scott reforms and that of the TAFE bureaucracy, it becomes apparent that Dr Scott is right. Head office for the government schools sector has been reduced from about 2,000 people to 300. There has been, of course, an increase in the number of bureaucrats in the regional areas. But the reduction in the number of bureaucrats is still about 1,000.

I ask the Minister to read it because it is most complimentary to her.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: Be fair and read it.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: I will read it if the Minister gives me a chance. The editorial continues:

A similar reduction has not taken place with TAFE. Dr Scott proposed a decentralised administrative system of 27 networks, which were to operate along the lines of a loose federation. He recommended that head office should reduce its numbers by a third. Dr Metherell, the then Education Minister, hinted at an even bigger cut. What has happened, in fact, is that head office has virtually retained its numbers and the 27 networks have been established. Another layer of bureaucrats has been created.

The point about this bureaucratic bloat is that it works against the principal theme of the Scott reforms - that TAFE must be "far more market-driven and expand its income-generating activities". Dr Scott saw TAFE as a skills-driven organisation, not a lifestyle or a life-enhancing organisation. The priority for TAFE was to meet the demands of the "clever country" imperative. . . The Premier, Mr Greiner, took TAFE away from the Education portfolio when Mrs Chadwick was made Minister and gave it to Mr Fahey, the Minister for Industrial Relations.

That was a mistake. The portfolio should be returned to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, the Hon. Virginia Chadwick. I have great faith in women. We gave Mr Fahey a chance and he botched it. In fairness, the Hon. Virginia Chadwick should be given a chance to botch it as well. TAFE is an excellent institution but it is in crisis, as is confirmed almost every day in newspaper Page 4098 headlines. Only yesterday the Sydney Morning Herald had the headline "TAFE crisis: 90,000 to be turned away". The article states:

Thousands of part-time TAFE teachers will be laid off, hundreds of courses cut and up to 90,000 students - nearly double the State Government's original estimate - may miss out on places next year, according to 1992 financial projections prepared by individual colleges.

It is tragic that the restructuring of TAFE was misguided from the start. The victims will not be the fat cat bureaucrats but the young students who are looking to TAFE for vocational training and retraining and find themselves on the unemployment heap without any assistance. Thousands of part-time teachers will be laid off and hundreds of courses cut. Ninety thousand students will be unable to attend classes. Dr Gregor Ramsay is quoted in the article as saying:

We have to look at all our priorities - . . . low priority courses may have to be cut.

One may ask which are the low priority courses. My fear is that they are the type of courses that give women and immigrants a second chance at education. I fear that the courses to be cut are those that enable people from low socioeconomic backgrounds to find some self- esteem and sense of self-value, if not a job. This possibility concerns greatly members on this side of the House and should be addressed immediately by the Government. The Government imposed fees for courses supposedly to create places for students. Now, students cannot get a place even if they pay a fee. It is a disgrace. TAFE is an excellent institution that has had its share of problems in its management under this Government. This should not be taken to reflect adversely on the institution nor on its teachers. I have nothing but admiration for the TAFE teachers, who are the most dedicated I have met. Recently I went to Bankstown College of TAFE Outreach to launch a booklet "Choices and Changes" a series of interviews with women who had returned to study. I commend a reading of this book to honourable members. It emphasises the excellent work done by TAFE, especially in the Outreach courses. I quote from the preface to that booklet compiled by Gail Rice:

This collection of interviews has been compiled to highlight the experiences and achievements of women who chose to return to study. It is hoped that the courage and determination reflected in these stories will help to encourage other women to make these ultimately rewarding, though difficult decisions.

All the women in this booklet attended varying courses run by Outreach at Bankstown College of TAFE in 1990/91. Outreach designs and runs programs which provide access to education and employment opportunities for people who experience difficulties returning to paid work or study. After teaching on a number of these programs it became apparent to me that regardless of age, language or social background, women were constantly voicing the same concerns and difficulties about returning to study. Their stories reflected a lack of support, information and confidence.

Page 4099 These are the women to whom TAFE has given self-esteem, support and skill so that they could return to work; women from Lebanon, Germany, Australia, Fiji, China -women who have had a second chance at education. That is why TAFE is such a precious institution. It does give women and people from a low socioeconomic background a second chance at education. The Budget has not helped TAFE or its students. It has not helped the battlers in our society. It has not helped youth unemployment. The only good thing one can say about it is that it will be the last Budget of the Greiner Government.

The Hon. J. KALDIS [11.2]: This is the coalition's fourth Budget. Many claim that it will be the last of Greiner's budgets. I remember Greiner's first and second budgets. They were full of cuts and increases in taxes and charges. Those who claimed that they were in the know, the so-called experts, emphasised that there was a plan. They said that Greiner was the man of the 90s; he knew what he was doing; he had programmed to take the coalition from one victory to another. It was said that he was tabling tough budgets in the beginning to be in a position to introduce a soft budget close to the election and to achieve landslides. He was sure and confident about that, and therefore took us to an early election on 25th May. The relatively soft Budget of last year did not help the Premier at all. The voters proved that they had good memories and did not forget the two previous budgets of the Greiner Government.

The Leader of the Opposition in the other place and the Leader of the Opposition in this House predicted well before the election that this year's Budget would be terrible, with a deficit of more than $1 billion. The Premier denied that and promised that not only would the Budget not have a deficit, but it would have a surplus. As recently as 29th April, as the Leader of the Opposition in this House, the Hon. M. R. Egan emphasised., the Premier assured us that nothing had changed, the Budget would be balanced this year and next year's Budget would be balanced also. When tabling this Budget the Premier said "times are difficult". He said that this Budget was appropriate for the difficult times shared by every government, business, household and person in Australia. But the recession has not been experienced only since April; it existed before. All honourable members knew a whole year in advance that Australia and all English-speaking countries of the world were in deep recession. So, Mr Greiner's claim that the recession is responsible for everything does not reconcile with reality.

This Budget destroyed the credibility of the Premier and the myth that Greiner was a brilliant economic manager. Now no one makes such claims. Following the election result and after this Budget the Premier has lost his credibility. This Budget is the end of Greinerism. The Premier grabbed the reply of the Leader of the Opposition and said "There you are, Bob Carr would have made bigger cuts". But the Leader of the Opposition had in mind reducing waste. He explained, for instance, that if Premier Greiner had not wasted more than $82 million on the Eastern Creek Raceway, that money could have been spent on completing the upgrading of Nepean Hospital. He could have re-hired 2,000 teachers for one year, Page 4100 to assist in reducing class sizes. He could have built seven new high schools, a prison, 450 pensioner units, or one third of the F4 Freeway extension. Eastern Creek is now a symbol of the bankruptcy of this State. The State has a deficit of more than $1 billion, but $82 million has been thrown away on a huge indulgence. The Premier's latest bail-out will end up costing $93 million by 1993. Mr Greiner's handling of this Budget and the economic matters of the State has inspired poets, in particular Blue Shearer, whose comment I heard recently on Australian Broadcasting Corporation radio. If I get it right, it went like this:

Geez I wish I'd gone to Harvard and learnt the basic skills, Of how to smile through thick and thin and swallow bitter pills. I wish I'd gone to Harvard, and gained a high degree And learnt words like economy and viability.

If I'd gone to Harvard, I might then understand Why we needed Eastern Creek. I'm sure that it was planned. Someone who went to Harvard would not make such a blue, Miscalculate so badly he just wouldn't do For a graduate from Harvard, there must be a master plan Devised with devilish cunning by this clever Harvard man.

The poem goes on and on. It was presented on the ABC by Blue Shearer the day after the tabling of the Budget. The Government has given a lot of emphasis to the $10 million allocated to help those who have suffered from the recession, to help the growing group of individuals who are not traditional welfare clients. These are the people who have become unemployed in the past 12 to 18 months, and will be unemployed for a significant period as a result of the recession. Many of these people in mid to later life, have never been unemployed before; many of them support families. Honourable members heard the Premier say that in recognition of the growing number of families and individuals who have been adversely affected by the worsening employment situation and difficult economic times a one-off recession support allocation of $10 million will be made available in 1991-92. I shall not mention Terry Metherell, who resigned from the Liberal Party citing in disgust the cynical $10 million recession support program. It is better that I mention the people who are directly in contact with those suffering, namely, the people of the Salvation Army, the St Vincent de Paul Society, the Sydney City Mission and the Smith Family. The assistant executive officer of the St Vincent de Paul Society, Mr Tony Lenart, said, "We visit 400,000 people every year, so our allocation works out at about $1.60 per family". The response by charities to the budget allocation was that the money was not nearly enough. Long-term measures are desperately needed. Someone should warn the people running charities that they will be fixed by John Hewson when he makes his next speech to the conference of the National Council of Social Service.

Over the past 12 months, like me, honourable members have received many representations on the land tax issue. Prior to the election last May the Premier, Mr Greiner, promised that one of his first tasks would be to attend to land tax anomalies Page 4101 in order to relieve suffering. I know of many instances where people have received huge increases of 300 per cent to 400 per cent. Land tax is a big burden, especially within the ethnic communities, because many ethnic people have invested their savings in land, brick and tile. Certain measures were announced in the Budget about boarding-houses. Where substantial accommodation is allocated to long-term boarders on income support, boarding-house proprietors will be exempt from land tax. The land tax exemption in respect of the principal place of residence will be extended to buyers of vacant blocks of land and will apply for two years after the date of purchase. Home owners forced to move into a nursing home or hospital due to illness or incapacity who return to their home during the tax year will be entitled to a land tax rebate. I do not know how many property-owners will benefit from these measures, but I do know that the problem has not been solved. I think the Premier will agree with me on this because he announced that he will release details in November about the land tax valuation system. We will have to wait until next month.

The Government is on the right track in the sphere of ethnic affairs, although it has to face with more determination the tendency to blame migrants for everything, which always happens in times of economic difficulties. Certain people grab the opportunity to attack multiculturalism and to take us back to the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s; they talk openly about assimilation and integration. But this time there are no racists in the forefront. We don't have Bruce Ruxton and Professor Blainey in the front line. It is John Howard who is writing articles in newspapers and talking about the good old times of policies of assimilation. It is John Howard who will be the soul of the government if the coalition wins the next election. John Howard mentioned the Premier as an example to support his claim that the assimilation policy has been successful and talked again about one Australia. But the Premier is a strong supporter of multiculturalism and I think he should take on John Howard. I am proud that the Australian Labor Party has been at the forefront of developing multicultural policies and programs for the benefit of all Australians.

The main challenge in ethnic affairs policy in the 1990s is to address the relationship between respective cultural differences, the promotion of social justice and economic efficiency. It is about building a community that is fair and at the same time economically sound. Labor is committed to the principle of multiculturalism and the policies that make it work. Its commitment to the success of multiculturalism is evident in its achievements in government. A Labor government introduced the anti-discrimination legislation, provided interpreter services in courts and hospitals, provided English as a second language courses and established the Ethnic Affairs Commission.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI [11.16]: I strongly support this responsible Budget brought down by the Premier. It is important for honourable members to realise that there are facts and there are lies. Honourable members have heard half-truths and substantial lies from the Opposition both in this Chamber and in another place. The Parliament is now stable. The Government has received Page 4102 confirmation in writing that the Independents will support the coalition Government. It has a mandate in this House for its policies because it achieved a substantial majority of the vote at the last election. I intend to touch upon a few aspects of the Budget. First, I turn to the budget allocation for health. I am alarmed that the Opposition has charged the Government with reducing its commitment to health care needs in New South Wales. Each and every year since the Greiner Government has been in office the budget allocation for health has been increased by more than 2 per cent until this year it is a massive $4.25 billion. The Government has used the resource allocation formula to direct health funding in a fair and equitable way. Increasing the funding has meant that there are winners and there are winners. Health funding in each and every region in the State since 1988 has increased in real terms. Members of the Opposition seem to have a fixation about the provision of health services in terms of hospital bed numbers.

The Hon. J. R. Johnson: Tell us about Eastern Creek.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: I will get to Eastern Creek. The message does not seem to get through that about 20 years ago the length of stay in a hospital for somebody having a gall bladder removed was about three weeks. When I went into practice in Lismore, it was about 10 days. When I left practice and became a full-time member of Parliament, it was four or five days. Now it is down to two days. Madame Deputy-President, you are aware of a friend of yours, aged 75 years, who went into hospital barely two days ago to have her gall bladder out and is now out of hospital and well. Improvements in technology since 1976 mean that the number of beds needed to provide the same range of services has been reduced by about one-fifth. We need to apply those new technologies in the State so that we continue to be one of the leaders in the world in terms of community faith in services. A recent survey referred to in the Sydney Morning Herald, show that Australia has the highest level of community satisfaction with health services in the world. For the public hospital system in New South Wales, we probably could claim to provide the greatest satisfaction anywhere in the world in the provision of acute health services. This State is very proud of that. The Hon. J. R. Johnson: Most of the money is being provided by the Commonwealth Government.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: For the benefit of the honourable member opposite, I remind him that we used to have a fifty-fifty cost sharing arrangement with the Fraser Government for acute health care services. The Commonwealth's share has now been whittled down to less than 38 per cent of that amount. Since this Government came to power, this State is behind in Medicare funding for our acute hospital system by about $500 million per annum, according to any decent formula. If we received a fair share, as other States do, it would be even more than that. The honourable member may want to check that information. The matter was raised by the Minister for Health Services Management and the Minister for Health and Community Services at an estimates committee. I am sure Page 4103 that the interest of the Hon. J. R. Johnson would have been very much satisfied if he had been at that estimates committee, on which I had the privilege to serve.

I was very distressed with the lack of fairness and equity of the level of funding that the Commonwealth is giving to this State. Each and every year the Federal Government runs into trouble with the funding of Medicare as there are subsidy returns to the Commonwealth of less than $3 billion. The Federal Government spends about $14.5 billion. The system is so out of hand that the Federal Government is cutting back the provision of money to the State governments, including this State Government. It has cut back this Government's fair share and not provided equal access. The Federal Government is not only cutting back on funding to this Government, but also saying to pensioners that they will pay $3.50 if they want to see their general practitioner. Mr Howe is left wing. Under the Federal Labor Government, which last year budgeted for a surplus of some $6.5 billion, at the end of the financial year there was a deficit of $7 billion - a turnaround of $13 billion. This is from the Treasurer who gave us the recession that we had to have, the recession that hurt this Government so much and attacked our ability to raise incomes so much. Even the Federal Labor Government thought the Treasurer was too expensive to keep. He was inaccurate and he had no idea how to manage in a time of world recession.

The Hon. J. R. Johnson: How much was this State Government's turnaround? What was budgeted for and what did we finish up with?

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: The budget turnaround last year was about $170 million in real terms.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: An excellent result!

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: It was an excellent result in the circumstances. It was a small percentage of the State Budget. Because of that turnaround, the Commonwealth will now punish this State. Our receipts are down in real terms by $1,500 million since 1988. If we were getting in real terms the receipts from the Commonwealth that we could confidently expect - even under the unfair arrangement whereby New South Wales and Victoria receive less than the other States on a per capita basis and even under the old formula whereby we were getting not just our fair share of Commonwealth grants but also our fair share of the Loan Council allocations - this State would be in a very rosy position. Spending on health this year will be up by 1.4 per cent in real terms. The capital budget is some $300 million, which retains the record level of last year. Even in these difficult times, we appreciate the need for the ongoing provision - and increasing provision - of health care to the people of New South Wales. This is not just the provision of access to services, but also a real commitment to making sure that those services move with the times and that we provide in a more equitable way the new technologies and services that are needed.

Page 4104 I turn to some information provided in the Budget Papers that indicates where the money is going and how we have been providing funds in a more equitable way across the State of New South Wales. The money that we have allocated to health has increased in real terms each and every year. We have also looked structurally at how we are spending that money. We are looking at each and every hospital and health care area to ensure that we are getting the very best value for the money that we are spending. Over time we have had a number of productivity gains, which have come about by each and every facility being asked to look at its own budget and redirect resources towards the provision of appropriate clinical services, which is the core business of health. In the public hospital system in particular, the core business is providing acute health care services to people in need. As we heard the Minister for Health and Community Services say just yesterday, that has been done by transferring resources. There has been a saving of some $34 million in the system by looking carefully at the provision of hotel services. That is not a one-off saving. That is a saving that is made each and every year. That $34 million is still in the Budget, but it is transferred to provide goods and services for hospitals: operating theatres, antibiotics, anticancer treatments and services to neonates. Despite the transfer of that $34 million out of the system, patients are still being fed and hospitals are still being cleaned but in a more economical way. In taking the money to where the people are, it is important to note that in each Budget that since the 1988- 89 Budget, including this Budget, there has been an increase in funding in each and every health area of the State.

In the central Sydney area, where there has been talk of strife and of the calling of a nurses' strike - and I will get to that later - there has been a 1.4 per cent real increase in funding while the number of people for which those services are provided is declining. There has been a massive - and much needed - upgrading of the St George Hospital to the tune of some $200 million, most of which will be completed in this financial year, with a record $68 million being spent in a single year to provide people in the southern Sydney area with health services. There has been a 15 per cent increase over three years in real terms. In western Sydney there has been a massive 21 per cent increase in real terms in the provision of health services. In southwestern Sydney there has been an 11 per cent increase. On the Central Coast there has been a massive 17 per cent increase. In the country areas - the cinderella areas for the Labor Party, areas where it has no representatives except for the honourable member for Broken Hill and the honourable member for Bathurst - there has been a 13 per cent increase. The North Coast received a 13 per cent increase. During the 12 years the previous Labor Government was in office the population of the North Coast area doubled or trebled, yet it received less and less. The present Government recognised that neglect and put the resource allocation formula into place. I am most gratified that the North Coast has been a major beneficiary of that whole process. In real terms funding to the North Coast area has increased by about $50 million.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: Is it really $50 million?

Page 4105 The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: Absolutely. To be precise, it is $48.1 million. In 1988-89, the budget was $146 million an increase on the amount allocated by the previous Labor Government. The 1987-88 Budget was the last budget of the doomed Labor Government led by Mr Unsworth. As a previous Minister for Health he should have known better. He was dragged from this House and taken to the other place because the Labor Party was leaderless.

The Hon. J. R. Johnson: He was not dragged.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: He was dragged screaming and kicking from his house at Tweed Heads on the lovely North Coast to live at Rockdale. He then found he was living near an airport. He did not like that so he joined the local people in their attempt to deny country residents access to this fair city by stopping the development of Sydney airport, a most important development to the economy of this State. Madam Deputy-President, you would know about an increase in funds of about 9 per cent in real terms allocated during the last three years to the New England region. The staggering figure of almost $170 million has been moved by this Government to country areas to increase the level of health services. That is the beginning of the process. During a 10-year period the North Coast will receive a fair share of the health care dollar on an adjusted resident basis. It is not merely a matter of moving more dollars to the North Coast. The level of services must be increased so that residents receive services at the higher level, more conveniently and with much less disruption. At the same time funds have been made available to increase services generally in our teaching hospitals in the Sydney area. In a time of great economic stress the Government has made that remarkable commitment to increase funding and keep New South Wales, the leading health care deliverer in Australia, at the forefront of world excellence.

Nothing could be more stark than the Government's commitment to the provision of nursing services. Madam Deputy-President, no one in this House would understand better than you the needs of the nursing service. For a long time you have taken a great interest in the nursing profession. You will be pleased to know that in 1988 this Government gave nurses a 50 per cent pay rise. For the first time they had a professional level of pay which recognised their efforts to help the people of New South Wales. The cost of the full implementation of that massive sudden-step change was approximately $82 million. The Government must continue to find that amount each and every year to ensure that the circumstances which pertained when the Government came to office are not repeated. In 1988 there were statewide nurse shortages and nurses strikes. These factors limited the ability of the previous Government to provide even the most basic of health care. The Government has turned that situation around and there is now full employment of nurses. All nursing places in our public hospital system are filled by graduates who are paid more and are probably better trained than ever. Their training has been matched to the changing technology but there has been no change in their degree of compassion and their commitment to professionalism. The Government's approach to nursing has been similar to its approach to education. It is providing for promotion and Page 4106 professional growth while nurses and teachers continue to provide services rather than merely ascend an administrative ladder to seek recognition of their professionalism and quality.

Work-based child care facilities have been provided. A chief nursing officer, who liaises regularly with the Minister and the director-general, has been appointed. I recall telephoning the Department of Health in 1987 during the lead-up to the election campaign. I asked how many nurses were employed in the Department of Health. At that stage I think about 1,700 people were employed in the head office of the Department of Health. That figure has been reduced to about 600. In that 1,700-person bureaucracy were two nurses, one of whom was there by chance doing a research project. The other was six levels down and two across from the Minister. Is it any wonder that the then Minister for Health, Peter Anderson, had no appreciation of the difficulties of nursing? He had no close liaison in his own office with a professional from whom he could obtain good advice. The Government has appointed an excellent chief nursing officer who has direct access to the Minister for Health Services Management and the Minister for Health and Community Services, as well as direct access to the director-general. Those people listen to that officer. In 1991 the Government restructured the Nurses Act and updated the framework to make the nursing profession more self-accountable. That was an important achievement, and because of that we will advance more quickly as the nurses know what they should be doing without other people telling them how to do it. Vacancies have been reduced from 11 per cent in 1988 to an all-time low in June of 1991.

We have heard that the next graduating class may not be able to find work. That does not mean that the number of nurses employed has been reduced. The number of nurses employed continues to rise each and every year. The provision of health services is basically a people-based process. However, during a recession or depression, nurses who may have moved in and out of the system, had babies, gone into small business or undertaken university degrees are staying in the system. Thus the turnover has been reduced to the lowest level ever recorded in this State. This is a time of great stability in the public hospital system. That stability has resulted from the turmoil outside the system. Accommodation has been provided for students to try to encourage them to enter the system. Scholarships have also been provided. With all of those things happening, I was alarmed and horrified when the Nurses Association called upon its members to strike. The nurses were told many straight-out lies. They were told that the number of nursing positions was being reduced and nurses were being sacked. Nothing could have been further from the truth, and Miss Staunton knew it. Her only defence against having misled the nurses was that the bureaucrats had shuffled the figures around. She knows that more nurses are employed in the public hospital system than in 1988, 1987 or 1986.

That lie resulted in nurses on the North Coast, which has been the major beneficiary of increasing numbers of nursing staff, going on strike because they thought they were being disadvantaged. Even the nurses in Lismore thought of Page 4107 going on strike. But the Health and Related Employees Association saw through the lie and members of that association did not go on strike; and the administration staff saw through it and did not go on strike. This year's Budget includes an increase in the allocation for Lismore Base Hospital of $1.24 million to commission - that means increase the staffing - the opening of three new wards in a development to be completed in May next year. This year $12 million will be spent on the redevelopment of that hospital. That is a huge input of funds. Next financial year Lismore Base Hospital will get a budget boost, in addition to funds already allocated, of $5.4 million. That money is not being allocated to paint the buildings. It is for recurrent expenditure. With the new wards and extra staff there will be a massive increase in the number of nurses at Lismore Base Hospital.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: Does that mean the nurses were misled by their union?

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: Absolutely and totally misled by Miss Staunton, who did not know that Lismore Base Hospital was being redeveloped. That lack of knowledge was apparent in an interview involving the two of us that was broadcast by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation radio station in Lismore.

The Hon. J. H. Jobling: She probably does not know where Lismore is.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: She has probably never been there. I have known Miss Staunton for a long time.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: They would probably be better off with an enterprise agreement and doing it themselves.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: If the staff think that is a good thing to do, we would be more than happy to engage in that. I have not heard of plans to do that at this stage. The bottom line is that next year $5.4 million will be added to the budget of the Lismore Base Hospital. In addition, some money that has been diverted elsewhere will come back to the hospital. During the decanting process some wards were closed and services reduced in order to undertake the rebuilding - the hospital is located on a difficult site - and money that usually went to the Lismore Base Hospital was allocated to Casino, Ballina and Kyogle hospitals. The money did not leave the area and the services did not leave the area. When Lismore Base Hospital is recommissioned some of that money will return to the hospital, plus the increased allocation of $5.4 million. There will be just the odd extra nurse, and particularly odd senior nurses.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: I hope there are no odd senior nurses.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: I mean odd in terms of numbers.

Page 4108 The Hon. J. R. Johnson: It is bad enough having an odd doctor accredited there.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: There are no odd doctors in Lismore. I am pleased to note the increases to the health budget for the North Coast. It is one of the reasons that I entered politics -

The Hon. J. R. Johnson: Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile says it is safer for the patients that the honourable member is here and not in Lismore.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: I will take that as credit due for my services here, because of the real efforts that I and all backbenchers have made with the Minister in order to find a way of providing equitable services across the State. If I am able to take some credit for the resource allocation formula, and I believe I should, then the honourable member is absolutely right. People are well served and are being provided with better health services because I have had an input; I have put my shoulder to the wheel with this Government to provide extra money for health funding, in particular in Lismore. I remind the House that I am the chairman of the Government advisory committee on health. I meet with both Ministers on a regular and consultative basis, and so do the 10 members of my committee. I could wax lyrical about the magnificent services this Government continues to provide to the North Coast. This year there have been more lies than ever told about the Budget.

The Hon. K. J. Enderbury: This is great for the Northern Star but there is not much interest down here.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: The Hon. K. J. Enderbury has no interest in the provision of health care services on the North Coast, and just said so.

[Interruption]

The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Beryl Evans): Order! The Hon. Dr B. P. V. Pezzutti has the call.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: Though the Hon. K. J. Enderbury used to live on the North Coast, he had to leave because the heat was getting to him. This year $5.4 million will be allocated for capital works at the Tweed Heads District Hospital, and there is an increased budget for recurrent works at that hospital. The honourable member would be pleased to know that Tweed Heads District Hospital is one of the gems of our system. It is a fine hospital providing fine services and is one of the most efficient hospitals in the system. I draw to the attention of honourable members a publication produced by the New South Wales Department of Health. This Government is committed to achieving outcomes in health, assessing those outcomes and providing accountability to the taxpayers. Taxpayers must wonder, with more and more money being allocated for health Page 4109 services, what they are getting for their taxes. It is fascinating to read the information provided by the department. Though I accept we have a long way to go in establishing quality information systems, this document makes interesting reading. In fact, the Public Accounts Committee produced four reports relating to the establishment of such information systems. The Government has now provided $50 million this year for the technology required to establish those systems. The Department of Health has a 10-year plan for the allocation of funds and resources.

The health budget allocation for the North Coast this year will be 5.8 per cent of the overall New South Wales health budget and will increase to 6.3 per cent in 1998-99. The health budget on the North Coast will continue to increase and in time will represent a more equitable proportion of the total health budget. On the North Coast we run a very lean machine. I talk of the North Coast experience because it is something I know about. It is interesting to note what is happening in the rest of the system. The lowest staff to patient ratio in the State occurs on the North Coast. That area has the highest number of admissions per staff member; it has the lowest admission elasticity; and it has the lowest cost per admission. When I visit hospitals on the North Coast I do not hear people screaming about how terrible it is to work in those establishments. They are always delighted to work in them - and they are beautiful people providing their services in a professional, caring manner. It was surprising for me to find that in other regions such as southwestern Sydney it costs $350 more per admission to provide services of the same level, or at a slightly lower level.

Appendix 1 of the document to which I have referred shows that of all the areas in New South Wales the North Coast provides the a high level of services in terms of case mix, but it has at the lowest cost per admission. The message there is that people from many other regions will have to start coming to the North Coast to find out how we do it. If we are to achieve a redirection of funding, there must be productivity savings in the system. There is room for improvement. For example, in southern Sydney it costs $300 more per admission than it does on the North Coast, although with a higher case load. In southwestern Sydney, using the same case mix data, it costs about $300 more per admission than it does on the North Coast. The Hon. Virginia Chadwick will be interested to note that in the Hunter it costs $600 more per admission to provide the same level of services as it does on the North Coast. The inescapable conclusion is that either the cost per admission is too cheap in Lismore or it is too expensive in the Hunter. I suspect that cost should be somewhere in the middle, at about the level it is in southwestern Sydney. Obviously it is a managerial challenge for the health industry to provide equitable services throughout the State. Efficiency and fairness require more cross-pollination of our administrators in relation to differing methods of operation.

I draw Miss Staunton's attention to the fact that the Auditor-General goes through the figures each year. This is an open Government with proper accountability and it has been seen to be doing the right thing in health. I am trying to overcome the misunderstanding in the community about this. The Minister for Page 4110 School Education and Youth Affairs would be aware that on the North Coast we do reasonably well because the Minister moved to needs based funding in community services and health. Because of the socioeconomic mix the North Coast probably gets a greater proportion of funding than any other region in the State. I thank the Minister and the Minister for Health and Community Services for their concern to ensure that that continues. One cannot pass over the $40 million in the Budget for victims of the recession. Provision is being made not just in the area of community services. The home and community care program involves the departments of transport, health, community services, housing and local government.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: Plus the Federal department of community services.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: That is right. This year $20 million for the full year will be provided. The Minister for Housing has been given money to help people with mortgage payments. Land tax exemptions will encourage more efficient use of boarding-houses. Rent and mortgage relief for people moving to a subsistence level of accommodation because of the recession, will amount to $1.8 million. The State Government is also providing emergency cash relief for the needy. This is really an area of Commonwealth responsibility. However, the Premier decided that not enough was being done. I was able to take, without fanfare or drama, cheques to community groups, as other members have. For example, I took a cheque to the Smith Family for $69,000 to help at the grass roots level where it is really needed. People at the Smith Family said, "We were not expecting that". They asked, "When can we spend it?" I said: "Here is the cheque. All we want you to do is account for the money in the same way that you account for Commonwealth cash assistance. We are simply matching the Commonwealth in this very difficult time for you".

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: Nevertheless, those people have felt rejected and neglected by the Federal Government. They have been totally let down by a stone-hearted Treasurer, who is not in the slightest bit interested in welfare -

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: Yes, the Commonwealth caused the trouble for these poor people.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: And the previous Government hated traditional charities such as the Smith Family and St Vincent de Paul.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: That is right: it tried to get rid of them. We are moving to assist existing infrastructure, which the community likes dealing with - St Vincent de Paul, Lifeline and the Smith Family.

The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: What did Frank Walker think of those traditional charities?

Page 4111 The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: I do not know. I really did not take that much notice of what the Hon. Frank Walker thought about these matters; I thought he was an ideological loon. The way in which he dealt with North Coast community services funding was outrageous. I know, and the Government knows, that the Smith Family will deal with the $69,000 in the most careful and compassionate way. Community based organisations will receive $4 million. All up, including existing support for welfare agencies, community based organisations and additional emergency cash relief, the community services budget increase will be almost $10 million. We hope that we will not have to repeat the special payment for the recession but this Government is responsive to the needs of the people. This Government is doing what it can in the important area of unemployment. Although we have become more proficient in providing services, with 9,000 fewer people working on the railways - and we are providing a higher level of service - the level of unemployment in New South Wales is the lowest in the Commonwealth. When we took over government in 1988 New South Wales had the highest level of unemployment.

The Hon. Judith Walker: Rubbish!

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: This is because we are better managers and the people see that we are better managers. We have made redundancy offers which have been accepted.

The Hon. Judith Walker: Sir, you have made redundancy an art form.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: I accept that we have made redundancy an art form because we have made redundancy payments in a fair, just, right way. Even with all of that, the level of unemployment in this State is now the lowest. The Labor Government was creating jobs in the public sector which were not real jobs. Most of them were creative basket weaving. People now are proud to work on the railway. We can see it in the staff on the stations and in the train system. The improvement in the morale of staff on the rail system on the North Coast is clear. They are more than happy to help old people and to keep their trains clean. They have pride in their work because they are doing a real job which they are responsible for. Nowhere has there been more change than in the reform of industrial relations. Our legislation will allow people to engage in meaningful negotiations to do real jobs which they will enjoy. They will benefit according to the job that they do. People will be free to engage in enterprise agreements. If they do not wish to work under that system, they will have substantial protection under the award system.

The PRESIDENT: Order! Pursuant to sessional orders, business is interrupted for the taking of questions.

Page 4112 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

______

Mr ZIGGY POHL CONVICTION INQUIRY

The Hon. M. R. EGAN: Is the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice- President of the Executive Council, representing the Attorney General, Minister for Consumer Affairs and Minister for Arts, aware that on 15th July His Excellency the Governor directed that an inquiry be held into the conviction of Ziggy Pohl? Has Mr Justice McInerney been appointed to conduct that inquiry? Why have more than three months elapsed since the Governor's direction? Has a lack of resources in the court's administration prevented compliance with the Governor's direction?

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: I am unable to provide the honourable member with the detail that he seeks. I am certainly aware of the special inquiry that has been created. I am not aware of any suggestion of a lack of resources. Certainly, I do not suggest on behalf of the Government that there is an unwillingness to investigate the matter. Recently, on television, I saw a gentleman actually confessing to the murder for which Ziggy Pohl has been convicted.

The Hon. M. R. Egan: It could well be that this man is still in gaol simply because the Government cannot make available a court room.

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: As I said, I am not in a position to address that detail. I have looked at aspects of the matter as they relate to my administration. I assure the honourable member that I am satisfied that my administration has acted quite properly in this regard. With regard to matters that come within the responsibility of the Attorney General I will need to check further.

Later,

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: Earlier today the Leader of the Opposition asked me a question about the appointment of a section 475 inquiry. I can inform the House that the Attorney-General advised the Governor that a section 475 inquiry ought to be held. The Governor then appointed a judge. The delay has been due to Judge McInerney, who was appointed, having to clear his outstanding work before beginning this inquiry. The responsible portfolio for this matter now is the Minister for Justice who is responsible for the courts. I understand that the Government has done all it can to set up and facilitate that inquiry.

TAFE ADMINISTRATION

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, representing the Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Further Education, Training and Employment. Page 4113 Is it a fact that, as claimed by the Sydney Morning Herald, 90,000 students will be turned away by technical and further education colleges in New South Wales in 1992? Is the Sydney Technical College to cut its teaching time by 70,000 hours? What are the reasons for this? What emergency action will the Government take to rectify this alarming possibility which will disillusion our youth? Will the Government urgently recruit unemployed tradesmen as emergency teachers for TAFE courses in 1992? Will the Government consider introducing the Singapore plan with two staggered teaching days in one day, for example, 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. and 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. to make maximum use of TAFE college classroom accommodation?

The PRESIDENT: Order! Before I call on the Minister to reply I ask members, when asking questions, to speak up because of noise emanating from machinery adjacent to Parliament House.

The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: I thank Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile for his very important question. Few issues facing New South Wales or other States in Australia would exceed the importance and magnitude of youth unemployment, training and educational opportunities. Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile will recall that recently I have raised this issue on several occasions in this Chamber. I regard it as a most important issue. Because of the recession and its flow-on effect on training and vocational opportunities for young people we must do everything in our power to ensure that we will not condemn a generation of young people - aged 15 to 19 - to the scrap-heap. I am unable to confirm or deny the figure of 90,000 students being turned away which I, too, read in the newspapers. However, it is true that TAFE colleges and other equivalent systems in New South Wales, like those in every other State in Australia, will face pressure in supplying their courses. Not one State is in a position at the moment to accommodate that huge, unmet need. We presume that young people leaving school this year will look for vocational courses at TAFE colleges, but not one State in Australia has the capacity to cope with placing students in vocational or apprenticeship courses.

Riding on the back of this national crisis is none other than that great centralist, the Hon. John Dawkins, Federal Minister for Education, Employment and Training. Every State in Australia has said to the Commonwealth Government that, even though TAFE is a State responsibility, the Commonwealth Government must accept some responsibility in this matter. We simply cannot accommodate the unacceptable number of young people who will turn up at TAFE colleges. What has Mr Dawkins done? He has held out a carrot. He has provided $1 billion to be spread across Australia to assist in placing students in TAFE colleges. But there is a sting in the tail - something we often find with the Hon. John Dawkins and the Federal Labor Government. There is a price to pay - the takeover of State TAFE systems by Mr Dawkins. Recently I and my friend and colleague the Hon. John Fahey were at a meeting of education Ministers. Every State Minister begged Mr Dawkins to release some of that $1 billion. He refuses to take the matter back to the Federal Cabinet until he can take over the State systems. Such is our concern for the young people of this State who face that dismal prospect next year that we Page 4114 have agreed to explore any possible option. Education Ministers are due to meet again with Mr Dawkins on 8th November.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. Pezzutti would know that I was meant to be on the North Coast on 7th and 8th November, but I, John Fahey and the Premier place such importance on this matter that we have cleared our diaries to attend this most important meeting. This matter is important not just to New South Wales but to every other State in Australia. It is important also to the 200,000 young people who will not get into TAFE courses next year. That is totally unacceptable. Earlier, honourable members opposite, by way of interjection, asked whether this matter was of such importance that it would be discussed at the Premiers Conference at the end of November. The answer to that question is an unequivocal yes. Recently each and every Premier met to identify what each regards as the priorities to be discussed at the Premiers Conference. They have considered the issues of youth unemployment, TAFE and the vocational needs of young people and have identified priorities to be discussed at the Premiers Conference. I have sent to the Prime Minister a letter signed by each and every Premier - of course, that includes Labor Premiers in other States - confirming that it is appropriate to discuss arrangements concerning Commonwealth and State TAFE systems. The Prime Minister and the Premiers of each State will not be railroaded by the Hon. John Dawkins.

HOME CARE SERVICES

The Hon. Dr MARLENE GOLDSMITH: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Health and Community Services. Will the Minister advise the House of the acceptability to the Home Care Service of people with HIV and AIDS?

The Hon. J. P. HANNAFORD: As honourable members will be aware, the Home Care Service of New South Wales provides services to ensure that the aged and people with disabilities are able to continue to live in the community and are not forced into premature, unnecessary institutionalisation. The Home Care Service is funded under the home and community care program, a joint State-Commonwealth funding agreement. Though the Home Care Service is primarily directed at the aged and young people with disabilities and their carers, assistance is also provided to families in crisis, post-acute discharge clients and those people in the community who require palliative care. People with HIV AIDS who are unable to undertake the basic tasks of daily living are eligible for home care assistance, as are those people with other disabling diseases such as cancer and multiple sclerosis. There is not, nor should there be any differentiation between the nature of the illnesses. When the local home care branch is approached to assist a person with AIDS, that branch will undertake an assessment to determine the person's priority and need. Provision of service will depend on the person's priority for support and assistance in comparison with other consumers and applicants for home care services. The hours available in Page 4115 home care services have increased this year and as I said, I do not believe there should be any discrimination in the provision of services through that facility.

LIDDELL COALMINE SALE

The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy. I refer the Minister to his answer to me on Wednesday, 30th October, relating to the sale of the Liddell State Colliery to Cumnock Coal. Did the commercial negotiations to which he referred and about which he seemed secretive include assurances that employees of Liddell will not lose such entitlements as annual leave, sick leave, severance and retrenchment pay?

The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: As I said to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition last week, the sale of the colliery is subject to commercial confidentiality between the purchaser and the Government. Matters relating to employee conditions, such as were referred to by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, are presently under negotiation.

LIDDELL COALMINE SALE

The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN: I ask a supplementary question of the Minister. Did he not confirm that the sale of the colliery to Cumnock Coal had been completed? If it has been completed why are commercial negotiations pending?

The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: Obviously the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has difficulty in understanding. The mine has been sold. I told him that last week. He asked me about the various conditions pertaining to the employees of the mine and I said they are currently under negotiation.

Later,

The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: Earlier today the Deputy Leader of the Opposition asked me a question about the sale of Liddell State Colliery to Cumnock Coal, as it pertained to the entitlements of employees. I am now able to give the House further information. Honourable members will recall that on 30th October I replied to a question that he had asked on 25th September and said:

On 25th September the Coal Industry Tribunal heard an application from the United Mineworkers Federation of Australia to vary the mining awards to provide payment of severance pay and retrenchment pay to employees, whether they continued working with Cumnock or not.

Subsequently the tribunal adjourned the matter indefinitely, after determining that the employees should resume work in accordance with their award. I have information now that Cumnock Coal offered continuity of employment to all of the existing 170 Page 4116 employees of the mine and that award and leave entitlements would be maintained, including continuity of service. Further, those entitlements and benefits include sick leave, annual leave and long service leave. I am not quite certain what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is getting at, but I should be pleased to have discussions with him later to find out. Whatever transpires over the sale of that mine will be done according to law and the awards. One would expect the mining unions to seek the best possible deal for their members, but obviously in these tough economic times the company has made a determination to pay what the union members are entitled to and no more. I understand that they have tried to continue negotiations, as I said to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in my original answer. Perhaps I can find out from him later exactly what he was driving at, but I should have thought that what I said was perfectly clear.

MOTOR VEHICLE GREENHOUSE EMISSIONS

The Hon. ELISABETH KIRKBY: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council, representing the Minister for Transport. Will the Government consider extending incentives, such as the 20c per kilometre mileage allowance paid to public servants who share their cars on the way to work, as a way to cut down greenhouse emissions and encourage energy efficiency?

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: The honourable member's question obviously requires significant analysis. The contribution of vehicle emissions to the greenhouse effect is a difficult matter to determine. I understand the principle - as I am sure do all honourable members - but the detail would be difficult to determine. I will therefore pass the question to the Minister for Transport for his department to examine.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES RESTRUCTURE

The Hon. R. D. DYER: I ask the Minister for Health and Community Services a question without notice. Following the recent restructure of the Department of Community Services and the deletion of 600 staff positions throughout the State, many of which are of an administrative character, will the Minister give an assurance to the House that sufficient staff are available for the adequate auditing and management of funds held on behalf of developmentally disabled clients?

The Hon. J. P. HANNAFORD: I would be most disturbed if there were insufficient resources available for the auditing of funds held on behalf of the disabled. As I am unaware of the matter I should be pleased to have the honourable member give me the details so that I can deal with it. I am examining legislation concerning funds held for some time on behalf of institutionalised people, to ensure proper accountability of those funds and the accumulated interest. I hope to be able Page 4117 to bring that legislation to the attention of Cabinet for approval to enable its early introduction to the Parliament so that those who have moneys held in our trust funds receive a proper accounting of the interest.

NATURAL GAS SUPPLIES

The Hon. J. M. SAMIOS: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy. As New South Wales presently has no commercial indigenous supplies of natural gas and cannot rely on the chance of new discoveries in the medium term, what steps is the Government taking to ensure the future supply of natural gas in New South Wales?

The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: As the honourable member pointed out, New South Wales has no commercial indigenous supplies of natural gas and we cannot take the chance that new discoveries or new technology will produce significant quantities for the future. The existing contract for the supply of natural gas from South Australia expires in 15 years and it is possible that demand may exceed supply before then. I wish to inform the House that the New South Wales Government is undertaking a detailed study of the future supply of natural gas in New South Wales. The study is to be undertaken jointly by the Gas Council of New South Wales and the Office of Energy. A committee will be established, with membership from both organisations and additional members having specialist knowledge. The committee will consult with all elements of the gas industry, including suppliers, distributors and consumers in addition to the broader community. The study is not intended to interfere with market forces that will ultimately shape the nature and direction of the gas industry. The Government is conscious that the majority of steps necessary to secure future supplies of gas will be efficiently undertaken by industry. However, government involvement is essential because there is not a level playing field in energy supply in Australia or free interstate trade in gas at present.

The problem of future gas supplies cannot be resolved by examining the needs of New South Wales alone. Important global and national issues could impact significantly on the demand for and the price of gas supplies for this State. Some of these issues are: the possible increasing dependence on the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries as an oil supply source and the impact of this on the price of oil; the decline in Australian indigenous oil supply, which may require active pursuit of conservation, conversion and exploration; and environmental issues such as the greenhouse effect. In addition to the study, the Government will consult with the Commonwealth and other States and Territories to ensure the achievement of an appropriate balance between increasing exports of gas and future local demands. The Government will take into account also the development of appropriate fiscal policies to encourage gas exploration and production and the promotion of free gas trade between States. The Government will take a uniform approach to the regulation of pipelines, including the adoption of some form of common carriage or access. The study is one of the many energy initiatives being Page 4118 launched by the Government, such as the recent introduction of a new energy efficiency program. The gas study will help to ensure that gas is supplied to and used in New South Wales in an effective manner. The study's terms of reference have been advertised and written submissions are invited from interested parties. I expect the study committee to submit an interim report to me in about nine months, so that I can consider the need for and the scope of any further work.

POWERHOUSE MUSEUM STAFFING

The Hon. ANN SYMONDS: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council, representing the Attorney General, Minister for Consumer Affairs and Minister for Arts. Who made the decision to remove the communications division and the marketing manager from the Powerhouse Museum? Did the trustees and the Ministry of the Arts approve the decisions to delete staff positions? How will the museum and its products and services be marketed now that the marketing section has been disbanded? Did the director, Terence Measham, say it was necessary to reduce costs and staffing this financial year, whereas the assistant director of services said that not a single cent will be saved by the redundancy proposal? What is the purpose of this assault on the structure of the Powerhouse Museum? Will the Minister intervene to save this internationally renowned museum from the destructive effect of these cuts?

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: Obviously the honourable member has the attention of someone working at the Powerhouse Museum who wishes to question in this Chamber managerial decisions taken at the Powerhouse Museum. As I said earlier this week, though members of the Opposition claim interest in the Powerhouse Museum, not one of them attended the museum a few nights ago on the occasion of a ball held to financially assist the museum. I should have thought a large contingent of Labor members would have attended, as on that night a most prestigious award was made to Neville Wran, a former Premier of this State. The museum acknowledged his efforts as Premier to establish the Powerhouse Museum. I felt sad to think that on that auspicious occasion Mr Wran was completely alone, without the support of even one member of the Labor Party. If honourable members opposite are genuinely concerned about the marketing and the future of the Powerhouse Museum, why did not they attend and contribute to the success of the ball? This Government places a great deal of reliance upon letting the managers manage. If a manager makes decisions, I am satisfied they are appropriate and sensible. I am sure that the Minister for Arts, my dear friend Mr Collins, who is a most enlightened gentleman, will note the concerns raised by the honourable member. If there is any need for intervention, which I would very much doubt, I am sure that he would be only too happy to assist.

TEACHER SPECIAL EDUCATION TRAINING

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs. Is the Minister aware that a Page 4119 number of parents and special interests groups have expressed concern that present teacher training is inadequate to prepare teachers to teach children with learning difficulties in regular schools? What action is the Government taking to address this concern?

The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: I thank the honourable member for his important question and more importantly for his deep and continuing interest in quality education for New South Wales children. The matter of appropriate and adequate teacher training in special education has been raised with me on a number of occasions by special educators, parents and interest groups. The issue of training has emerged in all my consultations with this sector of the education community. The honourable member would be aware of the in-service and professional development provided under the Government's $80 million special education plan and of scholarships for people training in special education. Further, the Government has employed 300 specialist teachers under the plan to deliver quality services to students with learning difficulties and disabilities. The House will recall the Greiner Government's early commitment to address the issue of training. In October 1988 my predecessor wrote to all universities and colleges of advanced education, as they then were, outlining the Government's support for the inclusion of a mandatory unit in special education within all pre-service teacher training courses.

In response to this letter many institutions further refined existing provisions or developed new units to better equip their graduates for the classroom. Recently I wrote to all universities re-affirming the Government's position on this issue and at the same time expressing appreciation for the significant developments that have occurred in this area since 1988. As an indication of the Government's strong commitment on this important matter, the Department of School Education will change the qualification requirements for both primary and secondary teachers to include mandatory studies in special education for courses for newly graduating teachers from universities. I have received from universities and interest groups significant expressions of enthusiasm and support for these initiatives of the Government. The Parliament can be assured that the Government treats very seriously the matter of adequate and appropriate teacher training. It is hoped that in the years to come as a result of this initiative all graduating teachers who are eligible to teach within the New South Wales public school system will have undertaken a mandatory unit in special education.

MEDICALLY ACQUIRED AIDS COMPENSATION

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Health and Community Services. Is it a fact that on 30th October the South Australia Government agreed to pay $2.45 million to the nine medically acquired AIDS victims in South Australia? Is it a fact that on 31st October a haemophiliac boy of eight years of age who had medically acquired AIDS at the age Page 4120 of one year was awarded $600,000 damages in what is the largest settlement in Australia? Will the Government fully review these two important decisions made since the date that the social issues committee report was tabled? Will it take those matters into account in making a fair and just decision for the 250 medically acquired AIDS victims in New South Wales? When will the Minister announce his decision on this urgent issue of life and death and justice for the innocent AIDS victims?

The Hon. J. P. HANNAFORD: I am aware of the decision taken by the South Australian Government and I have read the newspaper articles relating to the resolution of the Victorian court case referred to by the Hon. Elaine Nile. I have had discussions with the South Australian Minister for Health about his Government's considerations of claims lodged in South Australia, and whether the claims that were being pursued through the courts are legal. No doubt I shall be briefed further by South Australian authorities about the way in which that Government decided to proceed. The matter of the relationship between that decision and legal claims being pursued in that State will be addressed also. I shall take note of representations from the Commonwealth Government, particularly from the Federal health Minister about the approach that should be taken to these matters, particularly having regard to the establishment of the trust fund for those with medically acquired AIDS. Those matters and others that have been canvassed at a conference of health Ministers will be discussed.

I have referred to my department the report of the Standing Committee on Social Issues. I have asked for an urgent response so that I can take up the matter in Cabinet. No doubt the Cabinet Office and the Attorney General's Department will examine the report also. Its recommendations will have implications for the Attorney General's portfolio given that a number of court cases touching this matter are pending in New South Wales. All these issues will be taken into account by the Government in the decision-making process. The Government realises the importance of this issue to the community at large. The approach taken by the Government at present has been to emphasise that AIDS and HIV are general community issues and the resources of the Government are being utilised to address the issues across the community. This year resources have been increased for that purpose. Though there has been a concentration of assistance through the various health services within the inner city area, the Government is seeking to expand the availability of resources to other areas. Services within the head office of the department have been reorganised to ensure that services are available in areas of need. The Government acknowledges that there has been an attraction for people in need of assistance to come to inner city areas for care, however, it realises that AIDS will continue to spread throughout the community. There are a number of instances where AIDS has been transmitted through heterosexual practice and, therefore, the perception that AIDS is restricted to specific sections of the community should not continue. We must all understand that AIDS will be a continuing problem and that services should be available in health areas and regions to ensure that people in need will receive support and treatment in their own communities.

Page 4121 There must be an ongoing expansion of the availability of information about the nature of the disease. We cannot and should not be complacent about it. Australia has been in the forefront of efforts to reduce the spread of the disease. It has not spread as rapidly in Australia as was forecast several years ago. AIDS certainly has not reached the epidemic proportions it has in other parts of the world. Australia, particularly New South Wales, has led the way with regard to the provision of preventive programs. Some members of the community are now saying that because the disease has not spread as rapidly here as it has overseas we should not continue to provide resources to maintain the fight. That is a myopic attitude. We all must realise that if we do not continue to put maximum resources into preventive programs, if we sit back and rest on our laurels, the disease will escalate and Australia will be faced with the problems that exist in other countries. Recently I was pleased to learn that the efforts of professionals in Australia have encouraged their colleagues in other countries, especially countries visited frequently by Australians, to acknowledge the existence of the disease. In many of those countries the disease has reached epidemic proportions. Health Ministers throughout Australia have been encouraged to take pro-active measures. The efforts of our health professionals are impacting significantly on the spread of the disease throughout the world. They should be commended and encouraged.

SCHOOL-BASED CHILD CARE

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE: I ask the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs whether she is able to inform the House what progress has been made with regard to the implementation of a school-based child care program for New South Wales.

The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: Before she became a member of this Chamber the Hon. Patricia Forsythe was a teacher with family responsibilities with regard to child care. She knows full well some of the difficulties being faced by teachers, particularly female teachers within the teaching service, because of the lack of affordable quality child care. Given that State education and the teaching service of New South Wales have fine and proud histories and that 61 per cent of teachers in public schools in New South Wales are women, it is rather astonishing that the first work-based child care facility for the Department of School Education was formally opened only early this year. I attended that formal opening.

[Interruption]

The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: I should have thought that the Hon. Ann Symonds would be in favour of work-based child care. I certainly hope that is the case. I am delighted with the trial program that is up and running in areas of need throughout New South Wales and in Sydney's west and southwest. One such pilot is operating at the Nuwarra Public School at Moorebank, which I visited this week. A second pilot is being conducted at Madang Public School at Whalan, and Page 4122 I hope to visit there soon. The trial is part of a broader strategy to develop more flexible work arrangements, such as permanent part-time work, that will meet the needs of teachers and their schools. More specifically the two schools will have priority of access to children of teachers working in the host school or in difficult to staff schools in the region. The two centres will cater for up to 40 children from 0 to six years of age and will operate for 48 weeks of the year.

Though both are up and running at the moment, full utilisation of places will be achieved by the start of first term next year. Each centre meets the licensing requirements of my colleague the Minister for Health and Community Services and they were developed through refurbishment of space at both schools, with a total capital cost of $180,000. This excellent and in my view long overdue initiative will help teachers with child caring responsibilities return to teaching and pursue their career goals. From a student's point of view it allows us to retain highly qualified and experienced teachers within our system. There is a high demand at the centre, particularly for under two-year-old children. That indicates that a number of teachers are taking the opportunity to return to school at the end of maternity leave. Even though these are the first two and their success will be monitored and evaluated -

The Hon. Ann Symonds: The Minister means in addition to the existing ones?

The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: No, these are the first two work-based child care centres in the Department of School Education, which is what I said at the outset. If the evaluation is as successful as I anticipate, I hope it is simply the first two of many more work- based child care centres for teachers and children of teachers in the public school system.

TEACHER SKILLS

The Hon. JAN BURNSWOODS: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs. Did the Minister issue a press release in March 1991 headed "Schools receive cash to boost teachers' skills"? Did she issue at least one further press release last Monday headed "Local schools receive cash to boost teachers' skills"? Are 72 per cent of words in the two press releases identical? Do many of the cases of non-identical words involve a change from the words New South Wales to the word Bathurst? Does this indicate that the Minister has not had a new idea since March?

The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: I am absolutely overwhelmed and extraordinarily flattered that anyone - and in particular the Hon. Jan Burnswoods - would hang word by word on my press releases and that the honourable member saves them so that she can read them over and over again. I thank her. It is the nicest, most flattering compliment that I have had for some considerable time. Page 4123 Today I will get a nice folder with some little plastic slips and I am going to send it to the honourable member so that she can keep them all nice, fresh and clean for when she reads them in future.

MEALS ON WHEELS

The Hon. HELEN SHAM-HO: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Health and Community Services. It has been brought to my attention that not all members of the ethnic community are availing themselves of the Meals on Wheels service. Complaints are that the food served does not suit the preferences of particular ethnic groups. Will the Minister undertake to investigate this problem?

The Hon. J. P. HANNAFORD: I thank the honourable member for her question because she has shown a dedicated interest in this particular area. We are not considering Chinese pizzas or matters of that nature but we are looking at what is a major problem. The growth of the population of older people in Australia and the increasing demands this will place on health and welfare services are well documented. Within this overall pattern of ageing, the proportion of the ageing population from among non-English speaking background migrants is increasing significantly. In the light of Australian ageing trends the reorientation of food services to address the preferences of older people of non-English speaking background is becoming of increasing concern to food service planners. It is of particular concern that the Meals on Wheels service is greatly underutilised by older people of non-English speaking background. Meals on Wheels has a major role in maintaining people in their homes and should do so for all ethnic groups. In recognition of this problem the international foods for meals on wheels project has been undertaken through the New South Wales better health program. The project was carried out by the migrant health unit in the Hunter Area Health Service.

The final report has been submitted to the New South Wales Health Department and has been received by me. The study confirmed the perception that meal provision to the ethnic community is well below the expected level. By surveying meal providers regarding their attitudes, resources and methods of meal preparation, and consulting with the ethnic aged about meal and service preferences, barriers to equitable meal provisions were identified. These barriers included the frequency of meal supply and the scattered distribution of non- English speaking background populations. Other problems were of a structural and organisational nature. Cultural and attitudinal factors and a lack of knowledge were evident in the case of some service providers and their clients. A literature review was also undertaken of the various characteristics and different options for food preparation, food storage and delivery. A checklist was developed to assist food service planners in selecting food service systems to suit their particular needs. The relative acceptability at community level of the cook-serve, cook-chill, cook-freeze food service systems was tested through a series of food tastings with ageing Polish, Page 4124 Greek, Italian and Anglo-Saxon participants. All these systems were found to be capable of producing acceptable meals.

The findings of the project have resulted in a series of recommendations which it is hoped will pave the way towards appropriate and equitable food services for all members of the Australian aged community. The recommendations indicate that it is feasible, inexpensive and practical to have ethnic Meals on Wheels within existing services. I am pleased to inform the House that in a bid to facilitate discussion and implementation of these recommendations, I have written to a large number of organisations inviting them to consider the recommendations of the report and to provide their comments to me on the feasibility for implementation of the recommendations in this most important report, with any other comments they wish to make on issues raised in the report. I invite honourable members who have an interest in the matter to approach me. I am happy to make available copies of the report so that they can be distributed among interested groups to ensure that a variety of meals is available. Recently I had discussions with the Meals on Wheels service concerning its services and a desire to expand access to services in an affordable way with a variety of meal types that could be provided. I am having continuing consultation with that service and with the Home Care Service to make sure we can extend the service to meet the expanding need in this area.

IRON GATES DEVELOPMENT

The Hon. P. F. O'GRADY: I address a question without notice to the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy. Is the Minister aware that the Richmond River Shire Council has approved consent to the creating of a compensatory wetland at the proposed Iron Gates development at Evans Head, involving the construction of road access across wetland 146 with no environmental assessment? Has the Department of Planning written to the council to advise them that it considers "that this proposal is appropriate for determination by council"? Why is this so considering that the filling of wetland 146 should be determined by the department under State Environmental Planning Policy 14?

The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: As I pointed out to the House yesterday I cannot remember every letter that has been written to a council by the Department of Planning. There would be thousands, if not tens of thousands of them over a period of time. However, I shall seek details of the member's question and come back to him in due course.

COALITION RELATIONS

The Hon. J. R. JOHNSON: I direct a question without notice to the Leader of the Government in this House. Is the Minister aware of comments by the Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works and Minister for Roads contained in a letter Page 4125 widely reported in North Coast newspapers to Mr Bruce Francis, the endorsed Liberal candidate for the seat of Richmond, which stated inter alia that Liberals who oppose National Party candidates and who raise funds for them have the Deputy Premier's contempt? Did the Deputy Premier further state that the Pezzuttis of this world should not even be in the Government? Does this sort of comment from the Deputy Premier further destabilise the Government and undermine the State's triple-A credit rating?

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: The Hon. J. R. Johnson has been in this House long enough to know of the unique, warm, close and almost cuddly relationship that exists between the National Party in this State and my dear friend the Hon. Dr B. P. V. Pezzutti. Under those circumstances one would have to take those comments - if they were made, and I cannot confirm that - in that context.

The Hon. J. R. Johnson: It was on the Deputy Premier's letterhead.

The Hon. M. R. Egan: Was this a fake too?

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: No, I would not think so because it is quite in line with the warm and cuddly relationship that exists between a very warm and friendly chap, the Deputy Premier, and the Hon. Dr B. P. V. Pezzutti - two of nature's gentlemen. I think these affectionate comments should be taken in the context in which they were made.

FIREARMS LICENCES

The Hon. R. T. M. BULL: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council. Has the Minister's attention been drawn to comments made yesterday in the Supreme Court by His Honour Mr Justice Sully drawing attention to what appear to be circumstances in a case in which the shooter's licence issued for a firearm used to commit murders had actually expired. What does the Minister intend to do to remedy this situation?

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: The honourable member has asked a most important question. I am most concerned at His Honour's remarks since they draw attention to what is obviously a shortcoming in the policing of firearms laws in this State. I say with some confidence that the same problems exist in all other States of the Commonwealth. I think honourable members would give the New South Wales Police Service its due in moving very promptly recently to take an important initiative with respect to certain aspects of firearms control. Commissioner Lauer is to be commended for taking such swift action in that regard. There are other areas, however, where police certainly have some room for improvement, and one of these is in removing firearms from those homes where domestic violence has occurred. The fact that police have been doing this only rarely is a cause of great concern to Page 4126 me, not only for the sake of the victims of the violent incidents but, equally importantly, for the sake of the police who attend these incidents.

Upon investigation I have been told that it is rare for police to check whether or not a firearms licence is on issue to someone living at an address where a domestic violence incident is in progress although it is possible to do so. I thoroughly endorse the view of the bipartisan committee of this Parliament that firearms licences should be automatically withdrawn from holders at these premises, for the sake of the officers called to sort out the problems as well as the victims of violence. This is really very basic and I will be urging Mr Lauer to take prompt action on this matter as soon as possible. The safety of our officers is absolutely paramount and if it is humanly avoidable they must not be exposed to risk from firearms. On the matter of firearms being held after the relevant licence is expired, the position in relation to pistols is that when the licence expires police follow up all instances and ensure that the pistol is no longer in the possession of the person whose licence has expired. In the case of shooters' licences the position is complicated solely by the sheer numbers involved.

The facts are that between 1st July, 1986, and 30th June this year 83,239 shooters' licences were allowed to lapse in New South Wales. During the 12 months to the end of June this year 15,535 shooters' licences lapsed. For that reason, obviously, it is not a simple matter to physically examine each case to ensure that the weapons are no longer held. Under the present procedure when renewal notices for shooters' licences are sent out licensees are reminded that if they do not renew within the stated period they will be deemed to be unlicensed. However, I think the department can be a little more aggressive than that simple notice indicates. I would agree with His Honour that it appears that not enough is being done. Therefore I have taken up with the department the possibility of beefing up the warnings to shooters about the implications of non-renewal and to sending a separate letter to each person who allows his or her shooter's licence to lapse to remind them that they are committing a serious offence if they continue to possess firearms. I urge Mr Lauer to instruct police to make at least some random checks of expired licenses just as a general deterrent. It is worth reminding shooters that the penalty for possessing a firearm without a licence is $5,000 or five years in gaol.

WARRAGAMBA DAM

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: I ask the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council a question without notice. In view of recent alarmist statements, what is the current and future situation concerning the safety of Warragamba Dam?

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: I thank the honourable member for his question especially after today's media reports. Honourable members should understand that a suggestion arose out of the Water Board that as a result of a new Page 4127 understanding of the possible maximum floods that might occur in New South Wales there was the probability of a one in 10,000 year flood that was capable of destroying Warragamba Dam. In order to protect against that very unlikely eventuality, the Board has proposed the construction of an additional spillway about the existing dam and further proposes the construction of a new dam downstream of the Warragamba Dam that would flood the existing dam, at a cost estimated at over $300 million. To keep things in perspective I make the following points. First, the structural integrity of the Warragamba Dam today is far greater than the day it was built, as the dam has recently been structurally upgraded by raising the dam wall and post-tensioning the dam structure at a cost of about $29 million. At the time the submission was made to Cabinet seeking approval to construct the new spillway no adequate scientific review or audit of the meteorological determination concerning the maximum possible flood with a probability of one in 10,000 years had been undertaken. The annual report of the Dam Safety Committee, released yesterday, I understand, at page 11 under the heading "Floods and Spillway Capacity", says in that regard:

In 1991 the Bureau of Meteorology is expected to finalise its three year review of extreme rainfall estimates for large catchments in southeastern Australia based on meteorological data collected over recent decades and the latest world-wide estimation techniques. This review was co-funded by the Bureau, the Committee and major dam owning authorities in the region. This methodology will supplement the existing tropical storm methodology and the procedures of the small area and short duration thunderstorm methodology. When this last methodology is finished there will be a generalised extreme rainfall estimation methodology available for all catchments in NSW.

Engineers of the Water Board had suggested to me a number of possible reasons for the prospective structural failure of the dam under the impact of an assumed one in 10,000-year maximum possible flood. Only one of those reasons finally withstood critical review. It involved the flooding of the dam's internal gallery if water overtopped the dam during such a flood, enabling water to enter the dam's internal gallery, primarily through the dam's lift well. As an indication of the board's concern about the real possibility of a threat to the structural integrity of the dam, an internal recommendation from Water Board engineers to the board to provide a set of waterproof doors on the lift well and other minor entry points at a cost of a few thousand dollars to guard against this possibility of structural failure had been rejected by the board on the basis that in the event of such a severe storm occurring someone might forget to close those doors. That decision understandably has been reversed.

Cabinet took a decision to have the scientific validity of the one in 10,000-year maximum probable flood properly evaluated by recognised international experts. It is my understanding that an Italian expert and American experts were employed and have recently reported. I look forward to studying that report. With regard to the State Emergency Service's preparation for flood management control in the river area downstream from the Warragamba Dam, I can report the following. As a result of previous concerns about this matter I instructed the director-general Page 4128 of the State Emergency Service to fast-track the planning to deal with floods of the magnitude envisaged. The first draft of the State plan Nepean-Hawkesbury flood emergency was issued in December 1990. Following its issue the draft State plan and the eight subordinate subplans have been extensively revised. The fourth draft was issued in September 1991. The plan is expected to be finalised by December 1991.

If honourable members have further questions, I suggest they put them on notice.

MECCA SAVOY THEATRE PRESERVATION

The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: Yesterday I was asked a question by the Hon. R. S. L. Jones as to whether the art deco theatre, the Mecca Savoy theatre at Hurstville, was in imminent danger of demolition and whether I would save it. The Mecca Savoy theatre was identified as being of heritage significance in a cinema theatre study commissioned by the Heritage Council of New South Wales in 1983. Nominations were received from the public to protect the theatre under the Heritage Act. The Heritage Council considered and endorsed a report on the theatre in October 1988, which resulted in the decision by the Minister at that time to take no protective action under the Act. That was mainly because the alterations required to make the theatre economically viable to operate would involve the destruction of significant heritage components of the building. Subsequently Kogarah council was advised of that decision and was requested to make a proper record of the building prior to demolition. At present the theatre is in a run-down condition and circumstances generally have remained unchanged since 1988. The National Trust recently made a further request for protection under the Heritage Act, in view of a development application involving demolition being submitted to Kogarah council. I am awaiting advice from the Heritage Council in relation to the National Trust's request.

LOOK AT ME NOW HEADLAND OCEAN OUTFALL

The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: On 23rd October the Hon. P. F. O'Grady asked me a question about the Look At Me Now Headland ocean outfall. I am able to inform the honourable member as follows:

Treatment proposals for augmentation of the Woolgoolga sewage treatment plant (STP) and the proposed new Moonee Treatment Plant will produce effluent of a high standard which will fully satisfy the licence requirements of the SPCC. Treatment processes include full secondary treatment, and 10 days ponding for disinfection. In addition treatment to reduce phosphorous will be carried out with monitoring of the effect on the marine environment. It is clear that with this very high level of treatment coupled with a program of monitoring of the environment in the vicinity of the outfall that Council and Public Works has taken every precaution to protect the marine environment at Look At Me Now (LAMN) Headland.

Page 4129

Proposals for the formation of the Solitary Island Marine Reserve were under consideration at the time of the EIS and the Commission of Enquiry. A significant factor influencing the Commission of Enquiry in its recommendation to locate the outfall to LAMN Headland rather than Woolgoolga was the weight of submissions placed before the Commission indicating that the discharge at LAMN Headland would be the preferred site when considering the marine development.

LOOK AT ME NOW HEADLAND OCEAN OUTFALL

The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: On 23rd October the Hon. Elisabeth Kirkby asked me a question about the Look At Me Now Headland ocean outfall. I am pleased to be able to inform the House as follows:

The outfall as proposed complies with the NSW Government Coastal Policy. All relevant statutory requirements and approvals have been met and obtained for the Coffs Harbour Northern Areas Sewerage Scheme and proposed Look At Me Now Headland ocean outfall.

An Environmental Impact Statement for the Coffs Harbour Northern Areas Sewerage Scheme has been done according to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. This included consideration of the Look At Me Now Outfall. A subsequent Commission of Enquiry recommended adoption of the Look At Me Now Headland outfall site.

The term tertiary treatment is variously defined. Effluent discharged at Look At Me Now Headland will have received full secondary treatment plus tertiary processes of disinfection by 10 day ponding and chemical treatment to reduce phosphorous in the effluent. Pre-discharge surveys to establish baseline data have been completed. There will be post-construction monitoring to ensure performance of the outfall remains satisfactory.

There has been a long program of consultation with the community involving:

- Environmental Impact Study

- Public Enquiry

- Public Meetings

- Community Consultative Committee.

GARBAGE COLLECTION CHARGES

The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: On 25th September the Hon. Elisabeth Kirkby addressed a question to me about garbage collection charges. I now inform the honourable member as follows:

The rating and charging provisions relevant to local councils are contained in Part VII of the Local Government Act. Similar to other taxation statutes, the provisions are Page 4130 often complex and require certain expertise in their interpretation. Part VII does not clearly state whether councils may or may not make a garbage charge on vacant land, hence some difference of interpretation by councils may arise. It appears also that no legal authority has yet considered the question.

The Department of Local Government and Co-operatives has recently considered the matter and the better view would seem to be that councils may only impose a garbage charge where garbage is removed from the vacant land on a regular basis, which would seldom be the case. However, councils are autonomous local bodies which are best able to determine their own legal position when setting their charges.

TAFE CONSULTANTS

The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: On 25th September the Hon. Dorothy Isaksen asked me a question about TAFE expenditure. I have received an answer from my colleague which is of great interest. He has advised as follows:

1.During 1990, the TAFE Commission spent just in excess of $1.9 million on the employment of consultants. The 1990 annual Report of the TAFE Commission includes details on this expenditure.

2.The cost of an individual student place varies substantially within the wide range of study areas provided by TAFE. In general terms, the average cost of an effective full-time student per year is $5,500. Based on this average cost $1.9 million funds only 345 places.

In 1991 TAFE increased its enrolments by over 17 per cent on the previous year. This amounts to an estimated 68,000 additional enrolments. This increase includes an additional 8,000 enrolments of people out of work and brings to over 20,000 unemployed people who have been exempted from the administration charge to enable them to pursue further education and training.

3.TAFE has not wasted money in employing consultants during 1990. Consultants were employed only where skills and expertise were not available within the Commission, or where an objective and unbiased opinion or attitude was required or where existing staff were fully occupied on current workloads and the work was a matter of urgency and high priority.

As the annual report indicates the major consultancies concerned the planning and development of information systems, the improvement of quality and service delivery to students and industry, the development of human resources, undertaking feasibility studies and improving financial reporting.

These are areas which must clearly have priority to achieve the Government's aim of revitalising and re-orienting TAFE to meet the further education and training needs of the State as we move into the twenty-first century.

Page 4131 PROPANE GAS LEAK

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: On 18th October the Hon. J. Kaldis asked me a question about a propane gas leak. I advise the honourable member as follows:

The Minister for Transport has seen the report and he is well aware of the safety implications arising from the incident. He informs me that the report contains a number of recommendations aimed at ensuring the continued safety of operations at the Botany Bay bulk liquids berth and he has directed officers of his department to oversight their full and speedy implementation.

______

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS

The PRESIDENT: Order! I draw the attention of honourable members of the presence in my gallery and in the public gallery of ladies who served in the Voluntary Aid Detachment, known as VADs, during the second world war, who are celebrating today the fiftieth anniversary of the sailing of some of their number on the Queen Mary for service with the Australian Imperial Force in the Middle East.

I inform honourable members of the presence in my Gallery of four distinguished visitors to the Parliament: the Hon. Roy Degoregore, a member of the Nauru Parliament, Mr Opili Talafasi and Mrs O'Love Jacobson, members of the Legislative Assembly of Niue, and Mr Banzragchiin Odonjil, consultant to the Parliament of the Mongolian People's Republic.

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion by the Hon. E. P. Pickering agreed to:

That this House at its rising today do adjourn until Tuesday 12 November 1991 at 2.30 p.m. unless the President, or if the President be unable to act on account of illness or other cause, the Chairman of Committees shall, prior to that date, by communication addressed to each member of the House, fix an alternative date and/or hour of the meeting.

[The President left the chair at 1.9 p.m. The House resumed at 2.30 p.m.]

AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (NMRB) BILL

Second Reading

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING (Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice- President of the Executive Council) [2.30]: I move:

Page 4132

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek the leave of the House to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The purpose of this legislation is to give statutory effect to the merger in New South Wales of the National Mutual Royal Bank Limited (known as the National Mutual Royal Trading Bank) with Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ) and of part of the undertaking of National Mutual Royal Savings Bank Limited (known as the National Mutual Royal Savings Bank) with the ANZ and the other part with Australia and New Zealand Savings Bank Limited (known as the ANZ Savings Bank).

The background to the Bill is the acquisition by ANZ of the whole of the issued share capital of the National Mutual Royal Trading Bank from the Australian subsidiary of the Royal Bank of Canada, RBC Australia Holdings Limited, and the National Mutual Life Association of Australasia Limited. This acquisition took place in 1990 and the result was that the National Mutual Royal Trading Bank and the National Mutual Royal Savings Bank became wholly owned subsidiaries of ANZ.

The Treasurer of the Commonwealth of Australia has approved of the merger in accordance with the terms of section 63 of the Banking Act 1959.

In the interests of the customers of the National Mutual Royal Banks, the Reserve Bank of Australia has required that steps be taken as soon as practicable to integrate the operations of the two groups. Upon integration the National Mutual Royal Trading Bank and the National Mutual Royal Savings Bank will cease carrying on banking business and will surrender their banking authorities under the Banking Act 1959. The Reserve Bank and ANZ have agreed that these banking authorities will be surrendered on 15th November 1991. It is therefore essential to integrate at least some of the business assets and liabilities of the National Mutual Royal Trading Bank and the National Mutual Royal Savings Bank into the ANZ and the ANZ Savings Bank by that date.

The integration involves the transfer of more than 700,000 accounts and the transfer of the borrowing arrangements of more than 85,000 customers. Some 550,000 of the accounts are with New South Wales branches. The bulk of the remaining business is in Victoria, but there is also a considerable volume of business in South Australia, Queensland, Western Australia and the Australian Capital Territory.

Legislation quite similar to this Bill has already passed through the Victorian Lower House and will shortly be presented in the Parliaments of the other jurisdictions which I have mentioned.

The reason for proceeding along a legislative path is simply for administrative ease in completing the transactions. There is no doubt that the merger could be effected without legislation. However, that would involve separate transactions of each customer or other person who has contractual or other business relationships with the National Mutual Royal Trading Bank and the National Mutual Royal Savings Bank.

In the absence of legislation it would be necessary to contact each of these customers to obtain an authority to transfer accounts from one bank to the other, new mandates for the operation of a variety of types of accounts, new authorities for periodical payments and new indemnities for various purposes connected with the accounts.

Page 4133

In addition, mortgage securities held from customers and guarantors would have to be transferred from one bank to another and in some cases it would be necessary to obtain fresh security documents from the customers and their sureties.

Such procedures would be very tedious for customers who would be required to read explanatory material and return various forms to the ANZ. It is quite inconceivable that all customers would respond.

The work involved in the preparation of documents, contacting the parties and obtaining signatures and attending to stamping, and, where necessary, registration would be totally unproductive and would only occupy bank staff for many months at the expense of and with delay to new transactions.

There would also be considerable workload imposed upon the officers of the Office of State Revenue and the Land Titles Office because of the large number of securities involved.

This legislation will, therefore, avoid the considerable inconvenience which would otherwise be imposed on the public - as bank customers, businesses dealing with the banks, the staff of the banks and the Government. While minimising the extent of paperwork involved, the legislation ensures the protection of the interests of customers and other persons with whom the banks have dealings. The Bill is consistent with the Government's objectives of encouraging and assisting business activities in New South Wales and removing bureaucratic obstacles wherever possible.

The legislation before the House is similar in concept to previous merger Acts in connection with ANZ in 1970 and 1980, Westpac Banking Corporation in 1982, and National Australia Bank Limited in 1982.

There are two slight differences. Firstly, in the past such legislation has been introduced as a Private Member's Bill. Given the importance of the legislation and the short timeframe in which it is to be introduced, the Government decided to sponsor the Bill. Secondly, the previous legislation to which I have referred also included provisions relating to the contracts of employment of bank staff being transferred from one bank to another. However, private arrangements have already been put in place. All employees of the National Mutual Royal Trading Bank transferred to ANZ in April 1991. The entitlements of these employees to superannuation and other accrued rights, such as Long Service Leave and holiday leave, have been fully protected by private arrangements between ANZ and the employees. Accordingly, this Bill contains no clauses dealing with employment.

There is also one major difference between this legislation and previous Acts. On this occasion, it is not a straight Savings Bank to Savings Bank and Trading Bank to Trading Bank situation.

Because in 1987 it acquired the United Permanent Building Society, the National Mutual Royal Savings Bank offers many Trading Bank type products which are similar to those offered by the ANZ Trading Bank.

As a result, there are incompatibilities in products between the two banking groups and incompatibilities between their computer systems. That is why the legislation transfers the Trading Bank assets and liabilities of the National Mutual Royal Trading Bank to the Page 4134 ANZ Trading Bank but, National Mutual Royal Savings Bank assets and liabilities are split between ANZ Savings Bank and ANZ Trading Bank.

It is important to note that these problems are a direct result of the deregulation of the banking industry. Previously, the business conducted by Savings Banks and Trading Banks was clearly defined so that when amalgamations occurred it was a relatively straight forward matter.

The distinction between Savings and Trading Banks has progressively disappeared. In this case the problems are compounded because of the large number of National Mutual customers who originated from a Building Society.

As I indicated earlier there is an urgent need for passage of this legislation so that the banking authorities held by National Mutual Royal Bank can be returned by the 15th November 1991.

I commend the bill.

The Hon. M. R. EGAN (Leader of the Opposition) [2.32]: The Opposition congratulates the Minister on his fifty-second birthday and supports the bill.

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT [2.31]: May I join in the spirit of enlightenment and friendship that has been engendered by the Leader of the Opposition and also extend my congratulations to the Leader of the Government in this House. I am delighted to hear that the bill has the unequivocal support of the Opposition. On the surface, it is a bill simply to facilitate the merging of the operations of the National Mutual Royal Bank Limited with the operations of the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited, following the purchase by the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited of the shares held by the National Mutual Life Assurance Company and the Royal Bank of Canada. Although the bill will not be contested by the Opposition, I shall make some remarks about the detail of the bill and the predisposing circumstances in which the merger is taking place.

The bill parallels previous legislation relating to the merging of banking operations, to wit, the legislation of 1970 and 1980 dealing with the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited, the Westpac Banking Corporation in 1982 and the National Australia Bank also in 1982. Though similar to that legislation, this bill has some peculiarities because, on this occasion, following the deregulation of the banking industry, to which I wish to refer shortly, it includes the incorporation of both trading bank and savings bank operations as no distinction is made now between those two arms. Nevertheless, that has brought about some added complications, which are addressed in the bill. Honourable members should note that the merger will result eventually in one fewer of the banks that emerged on the Australian scene basically in 1985. It is a significant move in New South Wales because, of the 700,000-odd accounts that were developed by the National Mutual Royal Bank Limited in Australia, 80 per cent, or 550,000, are situated in New South Wales. Therefore, it is most important that the transfer of the New South Wales accounts is Page 4135 facilitated in a way that is both economical and efficient from the point of view of the banks and of the Reserve Bank, which is supervising the operation.

Honourable members should take particular note that the proposed legislation is designed to protect the interests of the depositors and customers of the bank and will make the merging of their accounts into the operations of the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited at minimum cost but particularly will protect their interests absolutely. It is interesting to note also - and I am surprised that members of the Opposition are not present to hear the details of the bill today - that staff entitlements have been protected. They are the subject of a private agreement between the staff and the employers, very much in the spirit of the Industrial Relations Bill, which has been before the House for the past few weeks. The Government has assured itself that staff entitlements are totally protected. Although agreeing to facilitate and make as cost-effective as possible the transfer of accounts, the State Government will receive $90 million approximately in stamp duty from the transaction.

I suggested earlier that I would address a few remarks to the predisposing circumstances in which the merger has taken place. It is fair to say that the bill is a gentle backwash of the tidal wave that has swept through the financial institutions of this country over the past four or five years - a mere zephyr on the edge of a hurricane that has come to this nation and visited itself with great ferocity in various circles - names like Pyramid, Tricontinental, Estate Mortgage, the State Bank of Victoria, which was involved in the Tricontinental smash, Occidental Insurance and Rothwells. All those names are burnt indelibly in our minds but, more particularly, they have heaped anxiety, anguish and ruin on many Australian citizens. The circumstances that brought about those collapses should be of concern to this House. In making these remarks I should emphasise that in no way is the merger between the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited and the National Mutual Royal Bank Limited connected with those collapses. The transaction comes completely within the purview of the requirements of the Reserve Bank. I make no suggestion in any of my remarks that the financial crises in other institutions have any bearing on those two fine institutions that have decided to rationalise their operations in this country. Over the past decade a great deal of debate has occurred about who first thought of deregulation. It is time that honourable members observed that it was neither Keating nor Howard. The transformation of the financial markets of the world occurred without any announcement; it was simply a reflection of technological change, with which honourable members are familiar, but, more particularly, the receding in people's memories of the experiences of the Great Depression in the late 1920s and early 1930s.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. Pezzutti: They forgot about it a bit too early.

The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT: That is true. The Federal Government became intoxicated with the word "deregulation", failing to understand completely what it was playing with. What had been modest objectives in the mind of the Page 4136 former Treasurer, John Howard, were suddenly distorted completely in the fervent yearnings and vivid imagination of the previous Treasurer, Paul Keating, who allowed the whole process to get completely out of hand. These changes in our financial market, which sadly are now referred to simply as bank deregulation, started off in Australia with the Campbell committee report in 1979. It is on that report that I base my assertion that most credit for preparing ourselves for the changes that were developing on the international market goes to John Howard. On the change of government, the new Hawke Labor Government instituted the Martin review group report, which was handed down in 1983. I do not think it broke any new ground. It simply reinforced what Campbell reported.

To set the record straight, measures were already in place prior to the change in government. Treasury notes were offered by tender in 1979. In December 1980 ceilings were placed on interest rates for deposits, which was one of the essential elements of the package of deregulation of financial institutions. A tender system for Treasury bonds was introduced in 1982, and in 1983, virtually on the change of government, we had the very significant decisions of, first, floating the exchange rate and, second, lifting the restrictions on the entry of foreign banks into the Australian market. It was not until February 1985 that the banking system was deregulated because the lifting of restrictions was only one leg of the changes; the second was the obtaining of licences by those banks. I am pleased that, to that extent, deregulation was not carried to any ridiculous extreme. In fact, the process of obtaining a banking licence was governed by prudential parameters, with which none of us would have any cavil.

The difficulty with the present Federal Government and former Treasurer becoming intoxicated with this process at a time of some economic stress, I concede, was that the former Treasurer believed that we would turn ourselves into one of the financial capitals of the world overnight simply because he had a collection of French clocks. Though the experts in the field believed that between six and eight new banks might be licensed in Australia, the reality was that 15 new bank licences were issued. The commercial analysis of the people who played some part in the decisions that were made was that those new banks may achieve over a decade or so 20 a per cent share of the Australian banking market. We have recognised that, as a result of a number of factors, they have been able to achieve only 10 per cent of that market in which double the number of new competitors now operate. It has been obvious for some time that there would be rationalisation of the numbers of banks operating.

By world standards the Australian public are recognised as being overbanked, having access to a larger number of branch operations and such other financial institutions as building societies and credit unions than any comparable western society. It was an extraordinary atmosphere in which to inject these new fast players into the market. It is also true to say that, as a result of long-standing policies - many of which go back to a former National Party leader, Sir Earl Page, who certainly made a major contribution to the banking philosophies of our country, and Page 4137 over the years we have been protected from some of the excesses of other financial markets by those philosophies - the major four banks of Australia were in very good shape to meet the competition. They were well entrenched; they had a good image generally; and they certainly have been able to fend off a great deal of the foreign competition that people thought may ensue from the issuing of these 15 new licences.

It is significant to note that we are on the eve of receiving yet another Martin report. This is not the same Martin as previously mentioned. It is a parliamentary report commissioned to look into the operations of the banking industry over recent years. A strong focus of that report is an examination of the interests of consumers and the allegations that have been made by many disgruntled consumers about the operations of the banking industry in the past heady years. Many of us will be looking with interest to see how that parliamentary committee will deal with the contentious issue of foreign currency loans. Active marketing of these loans some years ago has had unfortunate consequences for those who were persuaded to use them as a source of finance. We all have to face the fact that that was one of the costs of competition, and we ought to acknowledge at the same time that many benefits have been derived for consumers from the competition between banks in Australia. Sadly - this needs to be emphasised - the benefits from competition have been largely overwhelmed and entirely obscured by the interest rate regime which has literally been forced on the Australian market by the Federal Government. Whatever reasons are advanced, there is no doubt that interest rates in Australia have been extraordinarily high. They have caused great suffering and they have obscured entirely any of the benefits that might have resulted from bank competition.

In this Chamber and in the Federal Parliament, we need to recognise that the word "deregulation" has become simply a slogan. Unfortunately, there was precious little understanding of what was going on in the world. We are really talking about a move towards uniform international regulation; and no one would have argued against such a move. It is interesting to note that, on the one hand, most countries in the western world were moving to dismantle some of the regulatory processes which were installed after the Great Depression - in other words, to free up their markets. On the other hand, there were certainly markets which had to move the other way towards the uniform international standards that I was talking about. The Hong Kong market was conducted to the benefit of its citizens in what might be termed as a wild-west financial market. It was self-regulated entirely; there was market discipline only. Therefore, it attracted a great deal of interest from people looking for that type of market. Other markets are often cited as having benefited tremendously from having little or no regulation - the Cayman Islands come to mind.

No one would believe that there should be a continuation of that variation in regulation standards. I do not think that anyone would argue that the banking industry can be left totally without regulation. Most of us would see there being two camps: preventive and prudential in nature. Perhaps today is not the time to go into that subject in detail. It is not a question of regulation or no regulation; it is one of the optimum regulatory burden which we should impose upon the banking and Page 4138 financial industry so as to protect the depositor - who probably takes pride of place - and the consumers of credit and banking facilities. In the past there has been a cycle of regulations, followed by circumvention, followed by innovation and exploitation, followed by recognition of the inadequacy of those circumstances, followed by collapse, and ultimately coming back to regulation. This is an ongoing process. We need to recognise that we have not reached the end of that story by any means.

It is interesting to note that a group with which I am associated, the New South Wales Farmers Association, has demonstrated the great dilemma which exists in this area of public policy discussion. It was at the forefront of advocating the deregulation of banks. It employed that simple slogan to state its aims. In its submission to the current Martin committee, it was most anxious that there be full disclosure of all terms and conditions and all costs in lending operations particularly those conducted with farmers. One of the key pieces of American legislation, the Truth in Lending Act, was part of the deregulation process that President Reagan - and people such as Margaret Thatcher - wanted to clear off the statute books to facilitate the banking industry. The sad thing is that 10 years after its enactment in the United States of America, the Truth in Lending Act was found to be largely observed more in the breach than in the spirit, and 80 per cent of transactions were found not to comply with the provisions of the Act. I hope my remarks have in some way indicated the atmosphere in which this prudent move has been made by these two banks to rationalise their activities. The bill should be passed expeditiously as I understand the banking licence of the National Mutual Royal Bank is to be returned in November. The necessary legislative structures should be in place by that time. I have great pleasure in supporting the bill.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [2.51]: I wish to place on record the support of the Call to Australia group for the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (NMRB) Bill. We support the aim of the bill. The recent industrial relations legislation will free up the whole bureaucratic system. This legislation will achieve a similar objective. As the Minister has stated, if the legislation is not passed, a complicated procedure will follow. Separate transactions would have to be conducted with each customer of the bank, which I understand has more than 700,000 accounts. The bank could have been required to approach each of those account holders individually to ascertain whether each customer agreed to the account being transferred. I understand that several hundred thousand people have loans or mortgages with the bank. Detailed individual transactions could have been required with those people also. In addition, the Office of State Revenue and the Land Titles Office would have become involved in a large number of securities. The bill is commonsense legislation which will assist the commercial institutions of this State to operate effectively, efficiently and for the financial benefit of their shareholders and, therefore, the entire State. The individual transactions to which I have referred would have involved a huge amount of labour and expense. This bill will save that labour and expense and that is in the long-term public interest.

Page 4139 The Hon. R. S. L. JONES [2.53]: I should like to take this opportunity to wish the Leader of the House a happy fifty-second birthday. He has had a difficult week in the House and I hope he has a relaxing weekend with his family. On behalf of the Australian Democrats, I should also like to lend support to the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (NRMB) Bill. It is sad to lose the National Mutual Royal Bank which is to be merged with the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited. I understand that the licence of the National Mutual Royal Bank has been recalled and will be handed back to the Reserve Bank in November. Shortly the National Royal Mutual Bank signs will disappear from all round Sydney. Essentially this bill means the death of that bank. However, we hope that as a result of this bill the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited, which apparently has the least capital adequacy of the big four banks, will be strengthened. We hope also that the shareholders and those who bank with the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited will benefit also.

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING (Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice- President of the Executive Council) [2.54], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions. I commend the bill.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.

BUDGET ESTIMATES AND RELATED PAPERS

Financial Year 1991-1992

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI [2.57]: I should like to clarify something I said earlier in my contribution about the redevelopment of the Tweed Heads Hospital. The total cost of the redevelopment is $4.8 million with an allocation this year of $1.7 million. My point of clarification does not in any way detract from what I said earlier about the hospital. When I spoke earlier about the wonderful efforts of the Government in relation to the provision of community services I omitted to mention the major increase in funding for children's services. The allocations for child protection services and substitute care have been increased by $3.1 million and $4.4 million respectively. These two areas are of particular importance when the nation is in a recessionary mode, and they are two areas in relation to which the Government is strongly committed to ensuring a major increase in funding. Overall funding for children's services has been increased by approximately $26 million, which is a major boost to that part of the Minister's portfolio.

Page 4140 It is clear from the Budget that the Government is trying to maintain the confidence of the community, to improve living standards, to provide better and more responsive services, and to maintain flexibility in the financial area in order to respond to future needs. The budget strategies concentrate on constraining debt in order to reduce the budget deficit, to improve efficiency and to renew infrastructure. In renewing infrastructure the Government strategy is to reinvest proceeds from asset sales into more infrastructure and to boost the economic infrastructure of the State. Another strategy is to reform the taxation system in order to reduce the taxation burden on residents in New South Wales. It is important to note that the impost of taxes at a general level should be equitable, should be used efficiently and that the system should be simple. The Government faces a challenge in that funds available from stamp duty have declined as a result of the decline in property sales and the general movements in the property market have necessitated a major change in the taxation base. Though unemployment levels are low in New South Wales compared with other States, any unemployment reduces another part of the Government's system of raising money, that is, the very unpleasant payroll tax.

It is worth reflecting on some of the Government's achievements over the past four years. It has been able to constrain debt. As the honourable member for Pittwater pointed out in the other place, New South Wales has no overseas debt. It has paid off $4 billion worth of overseas debts in the past year, and that is something of which it should be very proud. It has improved the efficiency of departmental recurrent budgets in order to get value from every dollar spent. The savings in those areas, particularly those brought about as a result of increased efficiencies in the rail services, compound yearly so that major savings are achieved as a result of productivity improvements. For that we must thank the loyal staff of the public service and the various government instrumentalities. We must thank also the trade union movement, in particular relating to rail and transport services, for co-operation in ensuring that services were improved and became more cost effective.

The Hon. J. R. Johnson: Do I hear you praising the trade union movement?

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI: The honourable member interjects to ask if he heard me praising the trade union movement. That is typical of the approach taken by the Opposition. It tries to make a lie of every word one says. It tries to belittle any attempt to reduce the level of conflict in our society. There has been too much concentration on disagreement. We should be trying to build on the things we agree on, that is, the 90 per cent that we agree on. Improvements to infrastructure and improvements in efficiency of service have been achieved by the Government joining with the Labor Council of New South Wales and public sector and private sector unions in order to reach agreement. Over the past four years the Government has renewed infrastructure. Real growth in the capital works program is of major importance. As well, there has been taxation reform. The result of this budget strategy is that the Government has less impact on the State's total economy. The State Government now costs only 14 per cent of the total wisdom of all the Page 4141 products manufactured in New South Wales, which is a major change from the 23 per cent the Government cost the State Budget in 1987. We are better off now in New South Wales than ever before. At the same time the Government has been more open and responsive with what it does with taxes.

It is important that people realise how valuable it is to be able to live in New South Wales. This financial year, because of the management of the State, the people of New South Wales can expect to see a rise in government charges of barely 4.5 per cent, compared with 9 per cent in Melbourne, 6.2 per cent in Brisbane, 6.7 per cent in Adelaide, 8.4 per cent in Perth and 10.6 per cent in Hobart. In Australia generally the rise will be 6.9 per cent in government charges. That figure represents the Commonwealth's contribution. The Government is trying deliberately to reduce employment in the public service by trying to get some services performed outside the public service or, if they must be within the public sector, performed more effectively. This State must strive to retain its triple-A rating. The Government has gone to enormous lengths to retain that rating. One must understand that the importance of the triple-A rating is that it reduces the cost to the people of this State of borrowing money and reduces the interest rates that apply. The Commonwealth Government has only a double-A rating and the difference between that Government and the State Government is about 1 per cent in terms of the cost of borrowings. The State Government has faced the hard realities of the situation, although a soft centre has become evident in the Budget Papers with money being set aside for relief for people who are hit hard by the recession.

I turn now to education. I was pleased to receive a note from the New South Wales Parents Council which stated that there had been a major downturn in the Commonwealth's contribution to school education in the public sector and in the private sector. In 1993 the per capita grants for non-government schools, for schoolchildren in classes 1 to 7, will be frozen in real terms. The Commonwealth's capital assistance to non-government schools has declined since 1981 by 12 per cent: when expressed on a per student basis the decrease is 29 per cent, because the non-government sector has increased. The percentage of funding that the Commonwealth Government gives to the non-government sector and to the government sector for school education has declined alarmingly in the past 10 years. This is in stark contrast to the continuing rise in funding by the State Government to the education system. The cost per student in New South Wales public schools has increased from 1988-89 to 1989-90 by 15 per cent and this year will rise another 9.8 per cent in actual terms; in real terms 3.5 per cent or 4 per cent must be deducted from that figure. I hope that the major increase in funding per student in State schools will be reflected in the quality of education achieved by students in the public sector. This Government is committed to raising the percentage contribution from 23 per cent to 25 per cent for educating a child in the public sector.

The continually increasing Government burden of financing public sector education makes all the more laudable its commitment to increase the private sector education subsidy to 25 per cent of the cost of public sector education. It is not as Page 4142 if the Government is improving the amount of money allocated to the non-government sector by reducing the amount given to the government sector. In fact it is increasing the amount given to the government sector and at the same time increasing the amount given to the non- government sector. We will be better able to face the future if our students are better educated and more competent. The thrust of the Government's policies will ensure that that happens. The Government is committed to resourcing non-Government schools as well as the government school sector, particularly in matters of professional retraining and advancement. Better teachers will be encouraged into the system because of promotional opportunities, different grades and access to higher salary levels. Last year there was a major boost in the Budget for teachers' salaries.

[Quorum formed.]

The student transport scheme has received an increase in real terms this financial year of 6.8 per cent. The scheme may need to be changed if it is not to get out of hand. There is much to recommend this Budget. I have spoken on some small sections of it. My colleagues will speak on other sections. This Budget positions New South Wales perfectly to come out of its financial difficulties. I commend the Budget and condemn the Opposition for its carping about some areas. It has deliberately distorted the position of the Government.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE [3.14]: I congratulate the new members of this Chamber who have already made speeches and those who have not yet made speeches. On behalf of Call to Australia I congratulate the Leader of the Government in this House, the Hon. E. P. Pickering: we wish him a very happy fifty-second birthday. We commend the Government for a number of programs which aim at providing services and assistance to women, who governments often forget make up 50 per cent of the population. The mammography screening program aims to reduce breast cancer deaths by up to 30 per cent in the screened population. Over a five-year period the New South Wales program will target 500,000 women between the ages of 50 and 69 years. In October 1990 the first accredited screening assessment centres for the New South Wales program, with mobile and fixed screening units, were established at Rachel Forster Hospital in Sydney and Mater Misericordiae Hospital in Newcastle. The actual cost in 1990-91 was $3,220,000, a $1 million increase on the 1989-90 figure. In 1991-92 the Government will set up three new screening centres - at Westmead hospital, Royal North Shore Hospital and Lismore for the North Coast region.

Unfortunately, there has been an increase in cancer of the cervix: 350 new cases are expected to be diagnosed in New South Wales for the year 1991. It is time that teenagers and young women were taught that promiscuous sexual intercourse with multiple partners is one of the main reasons for the increased rate of cancer of the cervix. The Government forgets that the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. Unfortunately, a great deal of misguided effort, often by government anti-discrimination boards and equal opportunity tribunals et cetera, is devoted to devising Page 4143 ways and means of taking the mother's hand away from the cradle. The mother's hand no longer rocks that cradle. Under current adoption laws the mother's hand is being replaced by State child care workers, by househusbands and by homosexual males or lesbian females. Mothers need support in these days of rapid social change brought about, unfortunately, through the misguided efforts of radical feminists and international socialists. It is not simply rapid social change in a positive, wholesome direction; we are experiencing accelerated harmful social change in the wrong direction, the opposite direction to which we should be going. We are going down the moral slippery dip.

The evidence is all around us. In the area of divorce, we have broken homes, broken families - throw away disposable families. In 1989-90 more than 12,414 divorces occurred in New South Wales and 42,635 occurred in Australia. One in three marriages ends in the divorce or family dismantling law court. More than 750,000 children now have only one parent following the introduction of the Family Law Act in 1975. Boys with only a mother have no father model, no male model to guide their development. Girls with only a father have no mother model, no woman model on which to base their development. According to the Burdekin report thousands of children are living on the streets of Sydney - 8,500 in the 12 to 15 age group and 41,400 in the 18 to 24 age group. Children and teenagers often described as homeless youth in many instances are home leavers. Attracted by the bright lights of Kings Cross, often ensnared in the web of prostitution, drugs and pornography, some die after lonely lives in the gutters of Kings Cross as a result of a drug overdose. Other teenagers are confused by the conflicting advice they receive from teachers, social workers and youth workers who drive a wedge between teenagers and parents. They undermine the parents' authority and confuse the teenagers about their so-called rights. They are being told: "Your parents do not control you. They cannot make you do what they say. If you are not happy at home, you can leave home and move into a youth refuge". We have many instances of parents coming to us with that complaint.

Then we have the abused children. Unfortunately, a number of teenage girls are forced to leave their homes because they are being sexually or physically abused, or both. Our society and our governments are hypocrites. The radical, left-wing feminist movement is hypocritical; the Civil Liberties Council is hypocritical; and the permissive, trendy journalists are hypocritical. All these influential moulders of public opinion scream out, "No censorship" whenever we call for controls or restrictions or for the prohibition of rape manuals, pornographic magazines and videos and pornographic programs and films on television. We are very pleased that the New South Wales Government will be taking action. Last year I was speaking with the mayor of Nowra who said that, on a property close to his, he came across a film crew where people were taking part in pornographic films and videos.

These permissive groups - the blind leaders of the blind - are often very vocal about child abuse, incest and rape but they do nothing about the causes. They campaign against caring organisations such as the Festival of Light - I represent the Page 4144 women's arm of the Festival of Light - and the Call to Australia Citizens Movement. They ignore completely the wide range of pornographic magazines and videos which glamorise and promote incest and often depict fathers sexually abusing their daughters or brothers sexually abusing their sisters. They ignore the fact that these magazines and videos are one of the main reasons for the growing number of incest cases, sexual assaults, rape attacks, abductions, abuse and the murder of small girls. Their failed, left-wing socialistic ideology blinds them to these realities. May God's truth and Christ's life open their eyes and help them to see these realities. What strange bedfellows - left-wing socialist feminists in bed with the greedy producers and distributors of this multimillion dollar pornography industry.

Call to Australia commends the Labor Premier of Queensland, Wayne Goss, for his recent efforts to clean up pornography in Queensland - in newsagencies and so on. Thousands of women, thousands of mothers, are deeply offended by the crude, sexist and pornographic magazines in newsagencies, especially blatant, crude and sexist magazine covers flaunting the naked bodies of pouting, sensual female models. Usually these magazines are displayed outside newsagencies where children can see them. There should be no discrimination against women who are pregnant. We need a balanced approach. Modern science has shown how sensitive is the growing, unborn baby in the womb to outside influences such as alcohol. A Government booklet on alcohol entitled "How alcohol can harm the baby" details the risks involved. The booklet states:

Doctors now think that even small amounts of alcohol may cause some damage to your unborn child.

Miscarriage, mental retardation and slow growth patterns in your child can be caused by daily drinking of any amount of alcohol, regular drinking of small amounts of alcohol (around two standard drinks several times a week). The risk of damage increases the more you drink. The greatest risk to your baby is during the first 3 months of pregnancy.

Our Tobacco Advertising (Prohibition) Bill is still to be debated in this Chamber. The Government brochure describes the risks for women who smoke. It states:

Women who smoke during pregnancy have a higher risk of miscarriage and still birth, placental problems, bleeding during pregnancy, premature rupture of the membranes and preterm delivery.

We have heard a lot about the legalising of illegal drugs but, at the same time, legal drugs can cause these risks:

Aspirin taken in large amounts throughout pregnancy, can definitely cause complications like prolonged pregnancy, longer labour, bleeding and haemorrhaging before or during birth.

Heroin can cause the following problems:

Pregnancy complications (including miscarriage, premature breaking of the waters, baby in breech position).

Page 4145

Methadone causes the following problems:

General symptoms and complications similar to heroin use.

Until a woman realises she is pregnant she does not know the danger her unborn child is in. The unborn baby has rights. Unborn babies must be allowed to develop their full health and mental potential. These drugs can have an effect on the developing, unborn baby. Unborn babies in the womb can be affected by harmful external influences such as extreme heat and lead products. The Sydney Morning Herald of 6th November, 1990, states:

A major sex discrimination battle is looming as a result of attempts to end the historic ban on women working in the lead industry - one of the last bans of its kinds.

An article in the Sydney Morning Herald of 20th September, 1991, entitled "Plan rejected for women in lead industry" states:

A proposal allowing women to work in the lead industry has been rejected by a meeting of Worksafe Australia, the tripartite body which recommends national work safety standards.

Worksafe's chief executive, Dr Ted Emmett, said yesterday a task force would be set up to resolve the contentious issue by December.

Fertile women have traditionally been excluded from the lead industry because of evidence that high lead levels can damage a foetus or breast-fed babies - an exclusion which has been attacked for its treatment of all women as though they may become pregnant at any time.

The plan put to the commission argued that properly informed women should make their own decisions.

Although the commission did not formally vote on the plan, Dr Emmett said most members believed it was unacceptable.

He said the blanket ban on women reflected outdated and paternalistic attitudes, but he noted that the commission found it difficult to sign away the rights of a third party - in this case a future child.

The task force will aim to balance what Dr Emmett sees as the competing claims of occupational health and equal opportunity.

I fully support the retention of the ban on women working in the lead industry. We must protect the health of women. We must especially protect the rights of the third party - in this case a future child. I find it hard to believe that any woman would want to go into an area where she knew her unborn baby would be damaged. An article in the Sydney Morning Herald of 10th October, 1991, entitled "Lead paint blamed for Balmain's toxic kids" states:

Page 4146 Ten out of 30 children aged between one and three had contamination above theLC new threshold, the Central and Southern Sydney Public Health Unit found.

The finding comes after studies in Broken Hill, Newcastle and Port Kembla also showed alarmingly high levels of lead poisoning among children.

Lead has been linked with dementia, learning and behavioural problems in children.

Dr George Rubin, director of epidemiology with the NSW Health Department, said: "We've got a major health problem that we just can't ignore."

Passive smoking can damage the unborn child. Mothers must put their unborn babies before their careers. They should not selfishly want to do their own thing just to prove they are better than men. For a number of years Call to Australia has been very concerned about the quality of books being used in classrooms. The book Oscar and Lucinda is part of the English course for the higher school certificate. We have been criticised because we do not believe it is a suitable book. It contains blasphemy and four-letter words. There is much about male genitalia which I would not want my 17-year-old or 18-year-old daughter reading. One example of blasphemy was reference to the Father, the Son and the f...ing Virgin Mary. Christians consider that to be most offensive. The book also deals with frozen parts of male genitalia. Some people may view that as suitable reading for students but many parents in New South Wales do not consider it is suitable, even though it received the Premier's award. The book has been criticised in New Zealand and was not promoted in New Zealand. The Reverend Harry Herbert of the Uniting Church, when he was ridiculing us on the television program "Sixty Minutes", said that the moderator of the Uniting Church recommended that that book be read by all clergy when on holidays. At the end of the book clergymen are depicted hanging themselves.

Many of these books are offensive to young people. A professor who was a member of the same committee that I was a member of said the reason we no longer have books of the quality we had years ago is that authors do not write in that vein any longer. He said that they were interested only in making money and that was why they wrote about violence, sex and so on. The authors are not asked about whether their books are suitable for the classrooms. The books are chosen, and once accepted royalties are paid to the authors. Thomas Keneally said publicly that his book The Chant of Jimmy Blacksmith, was not written for the classroom. The department should examine what books are being given to our young children in the classroom. Complaints are made about the behaviour of young people, their attitude to life and to work, and the violence on the streets, yet they are given books portraying exactly that. Another issue that the Call to Australia group found to be unacceptable was that of the occult. I have given the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs books on levitation. Many parents find it offensive to see books depicting a group of young people standing around a child lying on the floor and chanting, "Tommy is sick, Tommy is sick, Tommy is sick - Tommy is dead, Tommy Page 4147 is dead", and they are then depicted with their hands raised in levitation signifying that Tommy is alive and well. That type of thing does not go down well with Christian parents in particular.

The Hon. Ann Symonds: Where do you get all this information?

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: I get this information from parents who are concerned about the textbooks their children must study. A recent TAFE book dealt with the occult. I know of a young woman who was involved with the occult for many years. She is aged 18. When she went to do a TAFE course she discovered, to her distress, that this was one of the books she had to study. The effects of the occult on her life were horrific. I turn now to sex education. The Call to Australia group is of the view that the present approach to sex education is not effective. It is neutral, so-called value free, relative rather than objective with subjective ethics. Children should be taught about what is right and what is wrong, but apparently that is no longer trendy. They should be taught how to say no to sex, not how to have so-called safe sex by using a condom. It is incorrect for people to say that by teaching children about safe sex they are protecting them. Young people are being told to "Go ahead and have sex so long as you use a condom". I ask the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs about the book Everygirl by Derek Llewellyn-Jones. I was given this book by a parent who advised me that it is available on the shelves of school libraries. The book claims to be about AIDS. I will read parts of it for the benefit or honourable members. In part it reads:

Some couples obtain great sexual pleasure from oral sex. This is when a man licks a woman's . . . area and when a women sucks a man's penis.

This is really sickening and I hope the Hon. Ann Symonds is upset -

The Hon. Ann Symonds: Upset about what? They are obviously enjoying themselves.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: I shall read the extract into the Hansard if the honourable member thinks that this is about people enjoying themselves. I hope the honourable member is sickened by it because this is the sort of that is material available in school libraries.

The Hon. Ann Symonds: How old are these children?

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: It does not matter whether they are 17 or 18. In the State school education system the Government has an obligation to give children a moral education, not an immoral education. I will read the extract again:

Some couples obtain great sexual pleasure from oral sex. This is when a man licks a woman's clitoral area and when a women sucks a man's penis . . . Some people Page 4148 believe that oral sex is dirty, but oral sex transfers no more, or no fewer, germs between the couple than does kissing.

The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Beryl Evans): Order! I remind the honourable member that this is the budget debate. I do not believe that what she is reading into Hansard is in any way relevant to the Budget. Reasonable scope is given for members to discuss matters of interest but I suggest to the honourable member that she return to the subject-matter of the debate.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: I will not proceed any longer as it is sickening.

The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Beryl Evans): Order! The honourable member's remarks should be relevant.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: It is of concern to the Call to Australia group that within the Budget there is funding for these types of books. I turn now to the subject of medically acquired AIDS. There is no question that innocent victims of AIDS are seeking compensation, as illustrated in the following article:

The South Australian Bannon Government, an ALP Government, has awarded nine South Australians with medically acquired AIDS $2.45 million which, if averaged out, is the highest amount paid so far in Australia in out-of-court settlements.

The politically bipartisan decision has been criticised by AIDS groups as being discriminatory.

The nine are believed to be haemophiliacs who acquired the HIV infection in the early to mid-1980s.

While only one of the cases had taken legal action, the Minister for Health, Dr Hopwood, told Parliament yesterday that it was clear that a right to legal action might exist in other cases.

A jury in the Victorian Supreme Court awarded an AIDS sufferer $870,000 in damages last December.

By comparison, a NSW parliamentary committee earlier this month recommended that the 224 people with medically acquired AIDS in that State should receive up to $50,000 in compensation.

The West Australian Government earlier this year paid $5.4 million to 22 people in what was then regarded as one of the world's largest per capita group settlements.

The Call to Australia group is not saying that the money will actually compensate for the loss of a wife or a mother. For example, Doug Johnson who lost his wife and child must now try to play the role of a mother. He needs a housekeeper, emotional support and so on. George Cliff lost his wife. The other day I spoke in this House about George Cliff, who is desperate in more ways than one. He must now raise a Page 4149 seven-year-old child, get her ready for school each day, clothe and feed her, and so on. He needs financial help also. Robert and Lyn Hatch lost their son when he was 16 years of age through use of a blood product. They sold their home - worth half a million dollars so that they could meet their court costs. They lost the case. Those people are down the drain financially and it cannot be proved that they are not innocent victims. They need compensation. On Friday, 1st November an article in the Daily Telegraph Mirror under the heading "AIDS boy's payout" stated:

A boy infected with the AIDS virus has been awarded $600,000 in damages. The payout for the boy, 8, is believed to be the largest settlement in Australia for negligence for a victim of medically acquired AIDS. The boy, who can be identified only as BY, will receive the money from the Australian Red Cross Society, the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories, and the Melbourne Royal Children's Hospital.

BY had sued all three bodies, claiming they had been negligent in failing to ensure the safety of the blood supply and failing to ensure the safety of the blood supply and failing to warn of the dangers of contracting the killer virus from blood products.

The Supreme Court heard that BY, a haemophiliac, contracted the HIV virus from one or more of three transfusions of a clotting agent he received at the Royal Children's Hospital when he was one year old. The jury heard that the boy was a "walking time bomb" who would die a dreadful death from the disease.

Earlier this week I referred in this House to homosexuals and lesbians adopting children. A recent newspaper article dealt with gay couples wanting the right to be parents. The Call to Australia group and most Christian people would say that those people do not have this right. If they want to be parents they should do as heterosexuals do. An adopted child living with either a homosexual or a lesbian certainly would be influenced by that lifestyle. I understand that a single homosexual has been granted custody of a child, who is now under the care of that person. I hope and pray that no other child is given into the custody of a homosexual or lesbian. On behalf of the Call to Australia group I place on record our commendation for police officers. Quite often in this Chamber police are criticised and abused. A poem written by a police officer dealt with abuse, facing violence and guns, attending accidents and literally having to pick up pieces of human remains, and how those traumas affect his life. The poem concluded, "How would you react in such a situation yourself?" On 7th October, 1991, Call to Australia held a Christian march through the streets of Sydney, for which a permit had been granted. Twenty police were assigned to that march.

The Hon. Judith Walker: On a point of order. I ask how the honourable member's comments about police attendance at a Call to Australia march is relevant to the Budget Papers?

The Hon. Elaine Nile: On the point of order. I am speaking to the police estimates in the Budget. I am seeking to commend the police for their conduct and bravery and the trauma they face.

Page 4150

The PRESIDENT: Order! No point of order is involved.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: The police should have more power. At the march to which I refer and at other marches police have said they were intimidated and watched. They are frightened. During our march my leader was dragged down in the middle of the crowd and as he tried to get to his feet his clothes were almost dragged off his body. The police were frightened to act. When they did act, there were screams of: "Police abuse. Police abuse." I assume those screams had been well and truly rehearsed.

The PRESIDENT: Order! It being 3.45 p.m., pursuant to the sessional order proceedings are now interrupted to permit the Minister, if he desires, to move the adjournment motion.

ADJOURNMENT

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING (Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice- President of the Executive Council) [3.45]: I move:

That this House do now adjourn.

POWERHOUSE MUSEUM STAFFING

The Hon. P. F. O'GRADY [3.45]: Until Thursday, 24th October, Powerhouse Museum staff were divided into three divisions. The communications division has been abolished and only the collections division and the services division remain. The position of Assistant Director (Communications) has been abolished. The staff regard this as a clear move away from the communication focus of the museum. The restructuring was done without any consultation or discussion with the staff. The fait accompli was presented on Thursday morning to all staff up to and including the Assistant Director (Communications). The position of marketing manager and the marketing department have been abolished. The recent substantial budget cuts and the decline in visitor numbers since the introduction of the charges make this move difficult to understand given the need to introduce new sources of revenue. The position of community services manager and seven other positions will be abolished in community services. The proposed restructure and reduction in staff numbers flies in the face of recent museum trends towards more access to objects and greater visitor participation in museum activities. The director stated that cuts to community services will result in reduced public programs. This will reduce the quality of visitor experience of the Powerhouse Museum. The community services division's advances in the evaluation of visitor studies have been recognised widely, and staff have been invited to speak at international conferences on communication strategies.

Page 4151 The restructure ignores the strategic plan that was developed with staff participation throughout the past 18 months. The objectives established through that process have been ignored. The work has been wasted. The restructure indicates no clear direction or objective. In answer to questions from the staff the Assistant Director (Services) said that the restructure "would not save a single cent". Therefore, the cuts will not result in operational savings, as originally supposed. The new structure will change the museum back to the old traditional museum model. It will remove the communication focus. That is contrary to major international trends with regard to museums. For the public the result will be a no-frills museum. Staff are concerned also about the results of a recent visitor survey that was conducted at considerable expense. Preliminary results support the role of the communications division. For example, the report highlights the effectiveness of public programs in generating repeat visits. The new charges have had a particular impact on repeat visits. The staff fear that the results will be ignored and not used to establish future directions for the museum. For 18 months the museum has operated on the basis of a strategic plan. One wonders how the museum will be able to fulfil objectives 3, 5, 6 and 7, which are:

3. To provide effective public programs which enhance visitor enjoyment of the museum and communicate its collection fields to the widest possible audience.

5. To promote and provide access to the museum's collection, research and scholarship by presenting information in an accessible form to target audiences.

6. To provide financial support to museum through sponsorship and commercial operations.

7. To develop a structure and mechanisms to ensure that all appropriate museum activities are market-oriented and to promote the museum's corporate image, standards and services to the widest possible community.

One position to be abolished in this shakeup will be a senior executive service position held by a public servant from outside the museum. That raises some concerns about the restructuring and of the nature of the staff at the museum. During the school holidays the attendance rate at the museum dropped by 80 per cent. No discussions have been held with the staff about the changes that have been implemented. The director has wasted of the order of $70,000 to have a wall built so that visitors to his office cannot see the public relations staff. The direction of the Powerhouse Museum is a matter of extreme concern and, in my view, the director should be dismissed.

IRON GATES DEVELOPMENT

The Hon. JAN BURNSWOODS [3.50]: I wish to draw to the attention of the House a letter received from Al Oshlack, research officer for The Lismore Greens. It is dated 22nd October and deals with the important subject of a development application for the construction of a compensatory wetland at Iron Gates Page 4152 at Evans Head. The Lismore Greens object to the consent given by Richmond Shire Council to the development application for the following reasons. The first is related roadworks through wetland 146. The letter states:

The developer is proposing to grade, fill and level a track through designated wetland 146 without any environmental impact assessment. According to the EIS this track is to handle more than 2,236 truck movements in a five week period. We contend that the EIS has considerably underestimated transport movements in relation to machinery, ancillary vehicles and related roadworks connected to the proposed excavation.

We hold that the roadworks required to accommodate the truck movements as proposed will have a significant effect on the environment. The EIS refers to the tracks into the area as of being of "poor standard" and "suitable for four wheel drive vehicles" and we contend will need significant upgrading to accommodate the vehicle tonnage proposed by the Developer.

Our concern that the proposed access to the excavation will require vehicles to cross designated wetland 146 without consent or Department of Planning concurrence is in breach of SEPP 14 has not been addressed. Instead our fears have been enhanced by conditions 1 and 3 of the Determination which proposes to redefine the boundaries of wetland 146 by locating "the genuine wet section" to allow vehicular and excavating equipment access to the proposed development. The EIS in appendix 2 clearly states that "Construction access shall be by way of existing tracks through the dry portions of wetland 146". We contend that Council does not have the authority to redefine the boundaries of SEPP 14 wetlands which is the prerogative of the State Government.

The developer in the EIS is proposing to grant consent to itself so as to allow "vehicles to traverse existing areas of salt marsh or mangrove, the route shall be first agreed with the superintendent . . . " We contend that such activity requires the consent of Council and the concurrence of the Director of the Department of Planning under SEPP 14.

The developer is proposing to revegetate the compensatory wetland by obtaining "stock for transplanting of mangroves and salt marsh grasses from within wetland 146". We hold that this will breach 7(1)a of SEPP 14 which states that "In respect of land to which this policy applies a person shall not clear land".

The second reason for dissatisfaction is archeological considerations. The letter states:

We contend that the proposal has not taken full consideration of the effects of the development on archaeological sites. Our immediate concern is that the developer is proposing to use "The spoil from the excavations . . . as fill on the adjacent Iron Gates residential development site. According to the drawing in appendix B titled "Disposal of Spoil From Wetland Construction", the developer is proposing to place the fill on the north west corner of the proposed residential development. We have also noted from Map 6 of the archaeological survey carried out by Mary Dallas, December, 1990, that this dumping is in the approximate vicinity of the site known as IG7. This site is known as the "Honey Tree" and is a three metre high tree stump, which according to Mr Sabu Dunn, Senior Aboriginal Sites Officer with NPWS attributes a series of 15 mm horizontal Page 4153 axe marks to Aborigines in the past getting honey out of trees. There has been no assessment in the EIS of the impact on the proposal to IG7 except to comment that the interpretation of the scarred tree is in doubt.

The EIS has not carried out any detailed archeological survey on the proposed site where the actual excavation and compensatory wetland construction is to take place. Instead the consultant is relying on the archeological report by Mary Dallas as being adequate to fulfil the requirements set by the Department of Planning under the EP & A Act. We strongly reject this on the grounds that the survey carried out by Mary Dallas only covered surface observation and did not make any assessment of sub surface or undisturbed sites buried by alluvium. The report actually raised that this is a possibility in the North Western portion of the Iron Gates Development zoned 6.c. but does not specify the exact area on any map or recommend further investigation.

As previously stated the EIS has not indicated the exact locations and routes for access vehicles crossing wetland 146 which have not been subject of any archeological survey.

On October 21st in a conversation with Mary Dallas she informed me that the Developers told her that the foreshore area would not be subject to any work. She also stated that she was not consulted about the EIS concerning the compensatory wetland and that her commission was specifically for the actual Iron Gates Development. In response to the question: "Do you think that there is a possibility that an archeological site may exist in the proposed area to be excavated for the compensatory wetland?" She replied: "I would have to think about it before I give you an answer".

The PRESIDENT: Order! The honourable member has exhausted her time for speaking.

POWERHOUSE MUSEUM FEES

The Hon. ANN SYMONDS [3.55]: I support the comments of my colleague the Hon. P. F. O'Grady, among others. I am extremely concerned at the downgrading of cultural institutions in this State. Peter Pockley in the Sun Herald on 27th October wrote about the reaction against the imposition of museum entrance fees as follows:

The outcry is muted, coming only from those who can afford entrance fees. That's why the politicians are getting away with it.

It is disgraceful that the Government is getting away with the destruction of our major cultural institutions by instituting the user pays system. The downgrading in particular of the Powerhouse Museum and its functions is of concern because that museum was developed by the former Labor Government to have a particular focus in design and service to the community. The museum is regarded internationally with great respect. The museum's communications division, which no longer exists, was responsible for the design and organisation of exhibitions, public programs, publications and marketing. It consisted of four departments: community services, exhibition development, marketing, and print and media production. All are now Page 4154 part of the collections division, except marketing, which has been taken on by the director. The community services department had two lots of staff cuts since June and is now facing a third. The director of the museum, Mr Terence Measham's ostensible reason for dissolving the Powerhouse Museum communications division was to reduce lines of friction within the museum. That is, now there are only two divisions - collections and services. Terence Measham has said he is prepared to see a decline in the quality of visitor information as a result of the restructure.

The reorganisation means a greatly reduced emphasis on the interpretative and educational role of the museum. This is demonstrated by the fact that the publications and community services departments are now answerable to an assistant director who is an ex- curator in decorative arts. The previous head of the communications division, the woman who is now being sacked, has a background in education and communications and, as shown in the management structure, is more qualified than either the director or the assistant directors. The community services department has been downgraded in the new structure and has suffered large staff cuts. It is hard to understand the logic of that at a time when museum admissions are down 80 per cent since the introduction of charges on 16th September.

The Hon. E. P. Pickering: I thought it was 60 per cent.

The Hon. ANN SYMONDS: That is your figure. The actual figure after a survey was conducted is 80 per cent. When people are paying to get in to the museum, what exactly will they get for their money? One of the reasons given when charges were introduced was that they would enable the museum to continue to provide a high level of visitor services. With no marketing manager or department any more, and with the museum's structure reflecting an emphasis on the collections per se and on administrative services, it is hard to interpret this concern for the public in anything but the most cynical light. The fact is, three years ago, Terence Measham wrote to the Premier expressing dissatisfaction with the divisional structure of the Powerhouse Museum. The dissolution of the communications division - and the contempt for the public that this reveals - has always been the director's aim. It has nothing to do with efficiency and certainly not with cost cutting. The administrative services manager has stated that the restructure would not save a single cent.

The restructure is the act of an insecure director out of his depth. Terence Measham should be called upon to justify his actions not only to museum staff but also to the public for whom he shows such a cavalier attitude. I want the Minister and the Government to respond to the questions that I have been asking all week in this House. The Powerhouse Museum belongs to the people and was designed to be of service with a communications function. The Government has cut out the communications function and the communications division. The Government has tampered with the museum in a most destructive way. In a short space of time we will be left with a dead museum. The contemporary nature and communications Page 4155 focus of the museum was praised internationally and, more important, was sponsored by visitors. The dismantling of the -

The PRESIDENT: Order! The honourable member has exhausted her time for speaking.

The Hon. E. P. PICKERING (Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice- President of the Executive Council) [4.0], in reply: I have noted in the past two days at question time and on the adjournment debate that a couple of members of this House have been greatly interested in the administration of the Powerhouse Museum. It is self-evident to anyone sitting on this side of the House that a nice little internal personnel brawl is going on within the group who run the Powerhouse Museum. Because of the interest shown by honourable members I shall make sure personally that the Minister for the Arts is well and truly apprised of what has been said in this place over the past two days. I hope that the Minister will have the matter sorted out well and truly before the House returns later this month.

Motion agreed to.

House adjourned at 4.1 p.m., until Tuesday, 12th November, 1991, at 2.30 p.m.

______

QUESTION UPON NOTICE

The following question upon notice and answer was circulated in Questions and Answers:

BOOTI BOOTI STATE RECREATION AREA

Mr Jones asked the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy representing the Minister for Conservation and Land Management___

Will the Minister guarantee that there will be no mining, residential development or other development which would exclude the public from the existing Booti Booti State Recreation Area?

Answer___

I am advised by the Minister for Conservation and Land Management that the answer to the Hon. Member's question is:

The future administrative arrangements for nine (9) State Recreation Areas, including Booti Booti, are currently under review. However, at this time the administrative Page 4156 responsibility for this particular State Recreation Area remains with my colleague, the Minister for the Environment.

My colleague, the Minister for Conservation and Land Management, has given a public assurance that State Recreation Areas already transferred to his portfolio and any that may subsequently be transferred will be properly managed and their status will not be allowed to be downgraded or subject to inappropriate development. Clearly, these areas are properly available for community access and enjoyment and this shall remain so.