10 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Wednesday, 27 April, 1988

FIRST SESSION OF THE FORTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT The House met at 10.30 a.m., pursuant to the proclamation of His Excellency the Governor. The Clerk read the proclamation. The Clerk announced that he had received a list, certified by His Excellency the Governor, of the names of the members to serve in this Parliament, together with the writs on which they had been returned; with His Excellency's certification that the writs had been returned prior to the day by which they were by law returnable.

OPENING OF SESSION The Usher of the Black Rod, being admitted, delivered a message from the Commissioners requesting the immediate attendance of this honourable House in the Legislative Council Chamber to hear the Commission for the opening of Parliament read. The House went, and members having returned,

OATH OR AFFIRMATION OF ALLEGIANCE The Clerk informed the House that His Excellency the Governor had issued a Commission authorizing the Hon. Nicholas Frank Greiner, the Hon. Wallace Telford John Murray and the Hon. Peter Edward James Collins to administer the oath or affirmation of allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen required by law to be taken or made by members of the Assembly. The Clerk read the Commission.

MEMBERS SWORN All members, with the exception of Mr Hatton, took and subscribed the oath or affirmation, and signed the roll.

ELECTION OF SPEAmR Mr CATERSON (The Hills) [l 1.201: I move: That Kevin Richard Rozzoli do take the chair of this House as Speaker. It is almost 12 years since a member of the Liberal Party has occupied the office of Speaker of this Legislative Assembly in this mother of Parliaments in Australia. I regard it as a privilege-more than that, a singular honour-to propose the honourable member for Hawkesbury to the high and important office as Speaker of this House in this Parliament of New South Wales. Kevin Richard Rozzoli has been known to me personally for very many years and, like others in the Parliament and in the Liberal political Party to which we belong, I look back with a great deal of pleasure to the by-election campaign in early 1973 which brought Kevin Rozzoli to this House as the 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 1 1 member for Hawkesbury on 17th February of that year. Most of us will find it difficult to forget that day because of the torrential rain that fell and the soaking we all received throughout the hours of voting. He succeeded, as member for Hawkesbury, Bernard Sydney Llewellyn Deane, who held the seat for more than 22 years, from 17th June, 1950, until he resigned on 24th October, 1972. Since his election in February 1973, now more than 15 years ago, Kevin Rozzoli has contested six general elections, and I am very happy to be able to say in that time he has built up a record majority for that electorate. He has been a very active member of the Opposition over the past 12 years, holding at various times the shadow portfolios of local government; planning and environment; sport, recreation and tourism; business and consumer affairs; industrial relations; and industrial development and decentralisation. He was Chairman of the Liberal party's State Policy Committee from 1984 to 1988 and also was Deputy Leader of the Opposition. During his Parliamentary career Kevin Rozzoli has been a member of the Archives Authority of New South Wales and a trustee of the Australian Museum. He was a member of the Select Committee upon Parks and Mobile Homes and Caravans. It can be readily seen that he has acquired a wide knowledge of the State's functions and has contributed very positively to debates in this House over the past 15 years. Kevin Rozzoli has lived all his life in his electorate of Hawkesbury. He completed all his schooling at Richmond. He was school captain and dux of Richmond High School in 1955. On leaving school he entered the family business and trained under his father as an apprentice watchmaker. He was the top apprentice for watchmaking in New South Wales in 1960. Like many other members of this House, he served in local government. He was elected to the Windsor municipal council in 1968 and served for six years. Kevin Rozzoli has a wide variety of interests ranging from directorship of the Richmond Players to a competitor in equestrian events. His compassion for others is evidenced by his interest in the Haymarket Foundation as its director and chairman. This is an organization, based in Sydney, which provides medical care for the city's homeless people. He is well-suited to the high office of Speaker of this House as he has a wide knowledge of the procedures and forms of Parliament. This has been strengthened by his admission as a barrister- at-law to the New South Wales Bar on 5th July, 1985. You may expect that he will be helpful, compassionate, fair and just, but firm. This House has the reputation of being a bear pit. Though not in any way attempting to detract from the effort of the previous Speaker, Mr Kelly, to see decorum return to this Chamber, I am confident that under the Speakership of Kevin Rozzoli, honourable members of this House will get the opportunity to speak on behalf of their constituents and to debate the legislation before the House in an orderly and civilized way. I believe that he will prove himself to be a worthy custodian of the rights and privileges of all members. I commend the nomination of Kevin Richard Rozzoli as Speaker and urge all honourable members to support this nomination. Mr KERR (Cronulla) [l 1.291: It is with a great deal of pleasure that I second the nomination of my friend and colleague, the honourable member for Hawkesbury, Mr Kevin Rozzoli, for the position of Speaker of the Legislative Assembly. In seconding the nomination, I wish to speak of the nature of the office of Speaker, the qualities we require of a Speaker and finally, Kevin Rozzoli's fitness for that high office. 12 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 The office of Speaker is an ancient and honourable one. It dates at least from 1377 when Sir Thomas Hungerford became the first in a continuing line of identifiable Speakers. A Speaker is, or should be, one of the trustees of the State's freedoms. On his interpretation of parliamentary procedure rests the protection of the rights of members. It has been described as the linchpin of the whole chariot. In protecting the rights of members the Speaker is protecting the political freedom of the people of this State as a whole. It is a position which has been obtained at no little cost. At least nine Speakers are known to have met violent deaths, four in the War of the Roses. It is true that the former Speaker is no longer with us, but honourable members may be assured, by glancing at the public gallery, that he still lives. The reign of Charles I saw the climax of the struggle between Crown and commons, and the acceptance that the Speaker's first duty is to the House. This was immortalized in Speaker Lenthall's words: I have nelther eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place but as the House is pleased to direct me, whose servant I am here. The office of Speaker is the highest in Parliament and Mr Speaker is the custodian of the ancient rights and privileges of all members on both sides of the House. The institution of Parliament, which we all serve, is greater than political parties. The qualities we look for in a Speaker are integrity, competence and fairness. In many ways Kevin's life embodies these qualities. As the honourable member for The Hills mentioned, Kevin was both dux and captain of Richmond High School. He went on to distinguish himself in the trades. On leaving school he trained under his father as a watchmaker and won the bronze medallion as the top apprentice in watchmaking in New South Wales for 1960. That was obviously a great moment for Kevin, but his hour had not yet come. On 17th February, 1973, Kevin Rozzoli was elected to this House in the circumstances that were graphically described by the honourable member for The Hills. Since then he has built up a record majority in his electorate. A few months after his election to this House Kevin stated in a speech that since entering Parliament he had become conscious of the traditions which make up part of the fabric of the Parliament of New South Wales. During his time here Kevin has enjoyed a reputation with honourable members on both sides of the House for his undoubted integrity and competence. Ultimately he became Deputy Leader of the Opposition between 1981 and 1983, after serving as shadow minister in four different portfolios. Despite that heavy workload, Kevin made time to study law and was called to the Bar. As one who studied law when working, though at a much younger age, I can appreciate the workload and the degree of dedication and commitment that was required. I am sure that this learning will further equip Kevin for his role as Speaker. In his speech that I referred to earlier, in August 1973, Kevin stated: . . . never before has man looked so actively and so consciously at his environment. Now Kevin, by his rulings, will help determine the environment of this House. It is because of Kevin's integrity and fairness that the House can be confident that the rights of each member, and therefore the people they represent, will be preserved and in my view enhanced. In the light of this I consider it both an honour and a privilege to second the nomination of Kevin Richard Rozzoli for the high and distinguished ofice of Speaker. Mr ROZZOLI (Hawkesbury) [11.35]: I accept the nomination and submit myself to the will of the House. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 13 Question-That Kevin Richard Rozzoli do take the chair of this House as Speaker-put. Motion agreed to. Kevin Richard Rozzoli was then taken out of his place by Mr Caterson and Mr Kerr and conducted to the chair. Mr Speaker, standing on the upper step, said: It is with a sense of great honour and humility that I accept the position as Speaker for the Forty-ninth Parliament. I wish to thank my colleague the honourable member for The Hills for his nomination. My association with the member for The Hills is not only the longest in this House but also the longest among my Liberal Party colleagues. I thank him for his kind and generous words and trust I can fulfil the faith and confidence he expressed. I thank also the honourable member for Cronulla for seconding my nomination and for his very kind words. I thank all members of the House for the unanimous endorsement of my nomination. I believe that the unanimity achieved in the first vote to be taken by this Parliament bodes well for the future harmony and good conduct of the House, though I would be extremely disappointed if in the future the Opposition were not to vigorously contest many ballots. I come to the position of Speaker with a deep and profound respect for the parliamentary institution and for the duties and obligations of the Speakership, although I am not certain that in the last few years all members of Parliament have had the respect for Parliament and the Chair which both deserve. I have a feeling that there are many people in Australia who take democracy very much for granted. We are a country which has largely been blessed with peace within its boundaries. Civil strife, as it is experienced in many countries, is unknown. We are fortunate in having a democratic system second to none and leading the world in a number of respects. Familiarity born of a long sense of security does however, at times, create a certain element of indifference and a diminution of significance. In other countries riot and death can stalk the ballot-box. Fear is common amongst voters and ballot rigging common place. In this country we have a system which is the envy of many and must seem Utopia itself to those who wage a never ending battle for the same rights in their own country. Even the most precious of our rights is often taken for granted-that is, the right to vote, which brings with it the proper process of Parliament itself. Parliament is a sovereign institution. It has a will and a life of its own and is answerable only to itself and to the ultimate will of the people. Parliament must not be seen merely as a rubber stamp endorsing the will of the Government of the day. Certainly the Government's will must carry the legislative program, but Parliament is much more. It is a people's forum and we, its members, are the people's spokesmen and spokeswomen. We have a duty to give voice to the concerns of our electors and Parliament must give an opportunity for that voice to be heard. This opportunity is afforded by the standing orders of Parliament and the conventions of free speech originating in the mother of Commonwealth parliaments. From the House of Commons, the very bastion of the Westminster system, has evolved a system which has given the world its strongest democracies. As your Speaker I dedicate myself to the service of each and every member of this Parliament; to each member the right to speak; to the will of the House; and to the undoubted rights, privileges and obligations of each 14 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 member. I promise to conduct myself with impartiality in all matters, whether within the Chamber itself or within the compass of the administrative duties of the Speaker. These duties have grown considerably in recent years as the Parliament moves to keep pace with other institutions which make up the fabric of our society. As I told new members at the excellent orientation seminar conducted by the Clerks and departmental heads of the Parliament, I will respect and nurture the reputation of this Assembly as one of the toughest debating forums in the English speaking world. However I point out to all members, as I pointed out to our new colleagues, that this reputation for toughness stems from the standing orders and procedures of this Parliament, which are designed to raise the quality of debate rather than diminish it. Toughness is not to be equated with roughness, and I warn all honourable members that I will be less than tolerant of behaviour which diminishes the stature and dignity of this Parliament in the eyes of the community. Just as we have a right to be proud of the State we represent, the State has a right to be proud of us. I said earlier that in recent years the duties of the Speaker have grown considerably. New departments have emerged within the administrative structure of the Parliament and the operation of all its aspects has become more complex. A prime example of this is the growing needs of those who comprise the fourth estate; and in catering for their needs, it is the Parliament's intention to explore avenues which will give greater facility for the reporting of proceedings of Parliament. This, the Forty-ninth Parliament, brings with it the biggest influx of new members since the first Parliament convened in 1856. There are 38 new members in an expanded house of 109. There are seven Independents and I am particularly pleased to note seven women are to grace our Parliament, drawn as they are from the ranks of all parties and from amongst the Independent members. I exhort all honourable members to deal kindly with the Chair, for kindness begets kindness. I have endeavoured to acquaint myself as fully as possible with all aspects of the conduct of the House, though I am sure that from time to time I will make mistakes, as indeed you, as members, will also. I am equally sure that an appropriate blend of tolerance and respect for each other will ensure that the business of this House is despatched, both in efficiency and effectiveness, in a manner that will meet with the approval of all members. In the 15 years during which I have been a member of this Parliament I have been fortunate to have served under three Speakers: Speaker Ellis, Speaker Cameron and Speaker Kelly. From each I have learned something and to each of them I am grateful. Where memory dims, their contribution lives on in their rulings, which show a remarkable consistency over so many years. I should like to pay a special tribute to my immediate predecessor, Speaker Kelly, who on 18th April achieved the distinction of being the longest continuous serving Speaker in the history of this Parliament. Speaker Kelly served this Parliament well through a period of some turbulence. He faced the challenge of presiding over Parliaments in which the Government and Opposition were either close in numbers or widely separated. He served this Parliament in the period of transition from the former buildings to the new and faced the daunting task of combating the inevitable teething problems of such a radical change. These duties he carried out with dignity and a strong consciousness of the obligations and duties of the Speaker. During the past few weeks I have come to know more of the real Speaker Kelly than in the previous 15 years. He has been forthright and frank in the advice and assistance he has 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 15 given me. I wish to place on record my special thanks to him for his co- operation, and wish him a long and happy retirement. In conclusion, I should again like to thank honourable members for their confidence in electing me Speaker. I should like to thank members for their co- operation and expressions of good will. I should also like to extend thanks to the staff for their co-operation during the interregnum. Lastly, but by no means least, I should like to place on record my thanks to my personal staff-Miss Barbara Mork, who for the vast majority of my period in Parliament has been my most loyal and dedicated secretary, and Miss Lara Dunston, my electorate assistant, for her unstinting effort and support. Mr Speaker took the chair. Mr GREINER (Ku-ring-gai), Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs [11.41]: On behalf of my colleagues, I warmly congratulate you upon your election to the high ofice of Speaker. You have made it clear that you have recognized that in carrying out your duties you are the custodian of the ancient rights and privileges of all members on both sides of the House. You may be assured that your rulings in this Chamber will have the support and the co-operation of the Government parties, and now that you have been unanimously elected, I am sure support will be given also by honourable members opposite. I have no doubt that you will acquit yourself with dignity and distinction in the best traditions of the Speakership. Again I congratulate you and wish you well for the future and for the sake of parliamentary democracy in New South Wales. Mr CARR (Maroubra), Leader of the Opposition [11.42]: On behalf of my colleagues I congratulate you on your election to the office of Speaker. You bring to that office substantial qualifications. You studied law while a member of this House, thus becoming part of a tradition that goes back to the days of Prime Minister Hughes, Premier Holman and Premier McKell-like you, each a former apprentice who applied himself to the study of law while a member of this Chamber. You are the longest-serving Liberal Party member of this House-between 198 1 and 1983 serving as Deputy Leader of the Opposition; your interest in public libraries, conservation and heritage, the problems of alcoholism and drug dependence and the disabled all brand you as among the more enlightened of your colleagues. We on the Opposition side of the House note your commitment to impartiality. We hope you understand that the Speaker has a role akin to that of a judge, his role being not just a weapon for the majority but a shield to protect the rights of every member. On behalf of my colleagues I offer constructive opposition and respect for the Chair and the institution. We note with interest the Government's promise to establish a larger committee system in both Houses of Parliament, to review standing orders to improve the relevance of question time, to provide for lower House Ministers attending the Legislative Council question time, and eliminating the end-of-session log-jam of legislation. Any moves to make this Parliament function better will be firmly supported by the Opposition side of the House. This House is a great forum for the issues that affect the five and a half million people who make up New South Wales. It is a forum for ideas and policies at a time when the Australian economy is being restructured, our country faces an extremely competitive trading environment, and all our institutions are adapting and changing. That this House can be a forum for ideas and policies is in your hands after your election today and in those of every one of us who sits in Australia's oldest Parliament. 16 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 Mr WHELAN (Ashfield) [I 1.441: I join with the Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs and the Leader of the Opposition in congratulating you on your elevation to the high and exalted office of Speaker of this Parliament. I know many people must be proud of your achievements. For one who has experienced the vicissitudes of political life to have achieved the status of Speaker of this Parliament is indeed a great honour. I am sure that you, your family and the electors of Hawkesbury are proud of your achievements. You mentioned the role of the fourth estate in the Parliament. If it is your intention to do something about the media and the reporting of Parliament, I make an early plea that a bipartisan approach be taken and all members of Parliament be invited to make submissions to you, or that a small committee under your leadership be formed for the purposes of investigating that important role. Some of the longer serving members would acknowledge that over the past twenty years-I do not restrict it to the past twelve years-the rights of members of Parliament have been eroded. The honourable member for Cronulla correctly recorded the fact that you are the trustee of members' rights. The advent of media reporting direct from this Parliament raises the grave possibility that honourable members may be faced with defamation or libel suits. A committee such as the one I have suggested quite respectfully to you could look at the legal implications of that. I agree with the honourable member for Cronulla; you are the custodial trustee of members' rights in this Parliament. It is the right of every member to raise a matter of issue; also it is his privilege to do that without fear of litigation. Mr W. T. J. MURRAY (Barwon), Deputy Premier, Minister for State Development and Minister for Public Works [11.46]: On behalf of the other part of the coalition team within the Government of New South Wales, I also extend to you congratulations, recognition of your position and total support for the duties you will carry out in the position of Speaker. Over the past twelve years we have worked closely together on a number of occasions. I look forward to recognizing, through you, that in this Parliament all members will have their right of expression and will respect you and each other. I wish you well in your duties. Mr DOWD (Lane Cove), Attorney General [11.47]: I, too, share with other honourable members the expression of congratulations. I take some personal pleasure in having persuaded you, as my deputy, to study law. You did not need much help along the way, but worked impressively all the way through to admission. As Leader of the House, there will be times-as I remember as shadow leader of the House-of pressures within the Parliament. A long-standing friendship, I hope, will ease the pain through that period. I wish you luck and great pleasure in the office you hold. Mr SPEAKER: I should like to thank the Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs, the Deputy Premier, Minister for State Development and Minister for Public Works, the Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for Ashfield and the Attorney General for their congratulatory remarks. I repeat that I shall carry out my duties as the custodian of members' rights to the utmost of my ability. In particular response to the words of the honourable member for Ashfield, I should like to give an assurance at this time that any process by which the reporting of this Parliament is conducted by increased media involvement will proceed on a bipartisan approach, with caution, and only with the fullest consultation and approval of the House. I thank the honourable members once again for their good will. As I have undertaken already, I shall discharge the duties of Speaker to the best of my ability. Again, I thank the honourable members for all that they have said. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 17 PRESENTATION OF Ma SPEAKER Mr GREINER (Ku-ring-gai), Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs [11.48]: I wish to inform the House that I have ascertained that His Excellency the Governor will receive our Speaker at Government House at 4 p.m. this day.

THE MINISTRY Mr GREINER: I wish to inform the House that on 21st March, 1988, the Hon. Barrie John Unsworth, M.P., submitted to His Excellency the Governor his resignation as Premier, Minister for State Development and Minister for Ethnic Affairs and as a member of the Executive Council. an action which involved the resignation of all Ministers from their offices and as members of the Executive Council. His Excellency then commissioned me to form a new ministy. On 25th March, 1988. I was sworn in as Premier,Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs and as a member of the Executive Council. and the following persons were appointed by His Excellency as members of the Executive Council and to the offices indicated: the Hon. Wallace Telford John Murray, M.P., Deputy Premier, Minister for State Development and Minister for Public Works; the Hon. Peter Edward James Collins, B.A., LL.B., M.P., Minister for Health and Minister for Arts; the Hon. Ian Morton Armstrong, O.B.E., M.P., Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs; the Hon. John Robert Arthur Dowd, LL.B., M.P., Attorney General; the Hon. Joseph John Schipp, M.P., Minister for Housing; the Hon. Timothy John Moore, LL.B., M.P., Minister for Environment and Assistant Minister for Transport; the Hon. Garry Bruce West, M.P., Chief Secretary and Minister for Tourism; the Hon. Edward Phillip Pickering, B.Sc.(Chem.Eng.), M.Aus.I.M.M., F.A.I.E., M.L.C., Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-president of the Executive Council; the Hon. Robert Baron Rowland Smith, M.L.C., Minister for Sport, Recreation and Racing; the Hon. Virginia Anne Chadwick, B.A., DipEd., M.L.C., Minister for Family and Community Services; the Hon. Dr Terry Alan Metherell, M.P., Minister for Education and Youth Affairs; the Hon. Bruce George Baird. B.A., M.B.A., M.P., Minister for Transport; the Hon. Matthew Singleton, M.P., Minister for Administrative Services and Assistant Minister for Transport; the Hon. Gerald Beresford Ponsonby Peacocke, M.P., Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs; the Hon. Neil Edward William Pickard, B.A., M.Ed., Dip.Ed., L.Th., M.P., Minister for Mineral Resources and Minister for Energy; the Hon. John Joseph Fahey, M.P., Minister for Industrial Relations and Employment and Minister Assisting the Premier; the Hon. Ian Raymond Causley, M.P., Minister for Natural Resources; the Hon. David Aberdeen Hay, M.B.E., M.P., Minister for Local Government and Minister for Planning; the Hon. Raymond William Aston, B.D.S., D.Orth., R.C.S., M.P., Minister for Corrective Services.

The Minister for Police and Emergency Services will be represented in this House by the Attorney General. The Minister for Sport, Recreation and Racing will be represented in this House by the Chief Secretary and Minister for Tourism. The Minister for Family and Community Services will be represented in this House by the Minister for Environment and Assistant Minister for Transport. 18 ASSEMBLY 27 April, I988

LEADER OF THE HOUSE AND GOVERNMENT WHIP Mr GREINER: I desire to inform the House that the Hon. J. R. A. Dowd, M.P., will be Leader of the Government in the House, and the honourable member for Miranda, Mr. R. A. Phillips, has been appointed Government Whip.

LEADER AND DEPUTY LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION, OPPOSITION WHIP, DEPUTY OPPOSITION WHIP AND LEADER OF THE HOUSE FOR THE OPPOSITION Mr CARR: I inform the House that on 6th April I was elected Leader of the Opposition. My deputy is the honourable member for Marrickville, the Opposition Whip is the honourable member for Broken Hill, the Deputy Whlp is the honourable member for Seven Hills, and the Leader of the House for the Opposition is the 'honourable member for Blacktown.

DEPUTY GOVERNMENT WHIP Mr W. T. J. MURRAY: I wish to announce that the Deputy Whip will be Mr Don Beck, the honourable member for Munvillumbah.

ASSENT TO BILLS Royal assent to the following bills reported: Adoption of Children (Amendment) Bill Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages (Adoption) Amendment Bill Bread (Returns) Repeal Bill Consumer Claims Tribunals Bill Credit (Consumer Claims Tribunals) Amendment Bill Conveyancing (Sale of Land) Amendment Bill Auctioneers and Agents (Sale of Land) Amendment Bill Stamp Duties (Sale of Land) Amendment Bili Land Sales (Amendment) Bill Credit (Rural Contracts) Bill Crimes (Personal and Family Violence) Amendment Bill Bail (Personal and Family Violence) Amendment Bill Children (Care and Protection) (Personal and Family Violence) Amendment Bili Gaming and Betting (Amendment) Bill Industrial Arbitration (Thearrical Agents and Employers) Amendment Bill Justices (Amendment) Bill Landlord and Tenant (Rental Bonds) Amendment Bill Housing (Rental Bonds) Amendment Bill Liquor (Further Amendment) Bill Local Government (Grants Commission) Amendment Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Heritage Authorities) Amendment Bill Non-Indigenous Animals Bill Ombudsman (Further Amendment) Bill Parliamentary Electorates and Elections (Further Amendment) Bill Pesticides and Allied Chemicals (Amendment) Bill Prickly Pear Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Prickly Pear) Repeal and Amendment Bill Probation and Parole (Serious Offences) Amendment Bill Crimes (Sentencing) Amendment Bill Public Reserves Management Fund Bill Closer Settlement (Miscellaneous Repeals and Amendment) Bill Racing Taxation (Betting Tax) Amendment Bill State Pollution Control Commission (Amendment) Bill Transport Authorities (Urban Transit Authority) Amendment Bill 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 19

Clean Air (Amendment) Bill Clean Water (Amendment) Bill Environmentally Hazardous Chemicals (Amendment) Bill Noise Control (Amendment) Bill Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill (No. 2) Superannuation Administration Bill State Authorities Superannuation Bill State Authorities Non-contributory Superannuation Bill Hunter District Water Board Employees' Provident Fund (Special Provisions) Bill Superannuation (Amendment) Bill Local Government and Other Authorities (Superannuation) Amendment Bill Transport Employees Retirement Benefits (Amendment) Bill New South Wales Retirement Benefits (Amendment) Bill Public Authorities Superannuation (Amendment) Bill State Public Service Superannuation (Amendment) Bill Police Regulation (Superannuation) Amendment Bill Police Regulation (Special Benefits) Amendment Bill Police Association Employees (Superannuation) Amendment Bill Workers Compensation (Police Force) Amendment Bill Tourism Commission (Amendment) Bill Tow Truck Industry Bill Motor Vehicle Repairs (Tow Truck Industry) Amendment Bill Wilderness Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Wilderness) Amendment Bill Community Service Orders (Fine Default) Amendment Bill Children (Community Service Orders) (Fine Default) Amendment Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Fine Default) Amendment Bill Community Welfare (Amendment) Bill Children's Court (Amendment) Bill Children (Care and Protection) Amendment Bill Children (Criminal Proceedings) Amendment Bill Children (Community Service Orders) Amendment Bill Children (Detention Centres) Amendment Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Children's Court and Criminal Proceedings) Amendment Bill Conveyancing (Forestry Rights) Amendment Bill Real Property (Forestry Rights) Amendment Bill Forestry (Forestry Rights) Amendment Bill Co-operation (Indemnities and Guarantees) Amendment Bill Crimes (Criminal Destruction and Damage) Amendment Bill Crimes (Procedure) Amendment Bill Disability Services and Guardianship Bill Community Welfare (Disability Services and Guardianship) Amendment Bill Children (Care and Protection) (Disability Services and Guardianship) Amendment Bill Mental Health (Disability Services and Guardianship) Amendment Bill Protected Estates (Disability Services and Guardianship) Amendment Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Disability Services and Guardianship) Repeal and Amendment Bill Education (Ancillary Staff) Bill Government and Related Employees Appeal Tribunal (Education Ancillary Staff) Amendment Bill Ethnic Affairs Commission (Amendment) Bill Industrial Arbitration (Contracts of Carriage) Amendment Bill Jury (Amendment) Bill Justices (Paper Committals) Amendment Bill District Court (Judges) Amendment Bill Lake Illawarra Authority Bill Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill Local Courts (Civil Claims) Amendment Bill District Court (Civil Claims) Amendment Bill Local Government (Rates and Charges) Bill Local Government (Pensioners Rates) Amendment Bill 20 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Marine Pollution Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Marine Pollution) Amendment Motor Dealers (Amendment) Bill Motor Vehicle Repairs (Amendment) Bill Motor Traffic (Penalty Defaults) Amendment Bill Justices (Penalty Defaults) Amendment Bill Transport (Penalty Defaults) Amendment Bill Offences in Public Places (Juvenile Drinking) Amendment Bill Permanent Building Societies (Further Amendment) Bill Physiotherapists Registration (Amendment) Bill Health Legislation (Reasons for Decisions) Amendment Bill Optical Dispensers (Amendment) Bill Poisons (Amendment) Bill Police Regulation (Merit Appointments) Amendment Bill Police Regulation (Appeals) Amendment Bill Presbyterian Church (New South Wales) Property Trust (Amendment) Bill Private Health Establishments (Day Procedure Centres) Amendment Bill Public Finance and Audit (Further Amendment) Bill Real Property (Further Amendment) Bill River Murray Waters (Amendment) Bill Saint Vincent's Hospital (Amendment) Bill Stamp Duties (Further Amendment) Bill Land Tax (Amendment) Bill Land Tax Management (Amendment) Bill Pay-roll Tax (Amendment) Bill Suitors' Fund (Amendment) Bill Supreme Court (Appeals) Amendment Bill Criminal Appeal (Amendment) Bill Sydney Harbour Tunnel (Private Joint Venture) Amendment Bill Telecommunications (Interception) (New South Wales) Bill Transport (Amendment) Bill State Transport (Co-ordination) Amendment Bill Transport (Division of Functions) Amendment Bill Transport Authorities (Railway Safety) Amendment Bill Crimes (Railway Safety) Amendment Bill Government Railways (Railway Safety) Amendment Bill Treasury Corporation (Amendment) Bill Public Authorities (Financial Arrangements) Amendment Bill University of Technology, Sydney Bill University of Technology, Sydney (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill Victims Compensation Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Victims Compensation) Repeal and Amendment Bill

ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT Mr Speaker reported the receipt of a message from His Excellency the Governor informing the House that after relinquishing the administration of the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia, he re-assumed the administration of the Government of the State on 17th February, 1988. Mr Speaker reported a message from the Lieutenant-Governor informing the House that consequent on the Governor of New South Wales, Sir James Anthony Rowland, assuming the administration of the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia in the absence of the Governor-General overseas, on 9th February, 1988, he had assumed the administration of the Government of the State. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 21 FORESTRY ACT: REVOCATION OF DEDICATIONS Mr Speaker reported a communication from His Excellency the Governor acknowledging receipt of the resolution adopted by the Legislative Assembly on 12th November, L 987, regarding the revocation of the dedication of parts of certain State forests.

BILLS RETURNED The following bills were returned from the Legislative Council without amendment: Co-operation (Indemnities and Guarantees) Amendment Bill Community Welfare (Amendment) Bill Children's Court (Amendment) Bill Children (Care and Protection) Amendment Bill Children (Criminal Proceedings) Amendment Bill Children (Community Service Orders) Amendment Bill Children (Detention Centres) Amendment Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Children's Court and Criminal Proceedings) Amendment Bill Community Service Orders (Fine Default) Amendment Bill Children (Community Service Orders) (Fine Default) Amendment Bill Miscellaneous Acts (Fine Default) Amendment Bill Conveyancing (Forestry Rights) Amendment Bill Real Property (Forestry Rights) Amendment Bill Forestry (Forestry Rights) Amendment Bill Industrial Arbitration (Contracts of Camage) Amendment Bill Motor Dealers (Amendment) Bill Motor Vehicle Repairs (Amendment) Bill Offences in Public Places (Juvenile Drinking) Amendment Bill Permanent Building Societies (Further Amendment) Bill Poisons (Amendment) Bill Presbyterian Church (New South Wales) Property Trust (Amendment) Bill Public Finance and Audit (Further Amendment) Bill Real Property (Further Amendment) Bill Suitors' Fund (Amendment) Bill Treasury Corporation (Amendment) Bill Public Authorities (Financial Arrangements) Amendment Bill

LAW OF EVIDENCE BILL (pro forma) Bill introduced and read a first time.

MESSAGE FROM THE COMMISSIONERS Mr SPEAKER: I have to report that the House this day attended the Commissioners in the Legislative Council Chamber, where a Commission for opening Parliament was read, and the following message to the Assembly was delivered: Honourable Members of the Legislative Council and Members of the Legislative Assem bl y- We have it in command from His Excellency the Governor to acquaint you that His Excellency desires that you take into your earnest consideration such matters as may be submitted to you. Members of the Legislative Assembly- It being necessary that a Speaker of the Legislative Assembly be first chosen, it is His Excellency's pleasure that you, Members of the Legislative Assembly, repair to your Chamber, and there, after Members shall have been sworn, proceed to the election of one of your number to be your Speaker. 22 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

We are further commanded to acquaint you that His Excellency desires that such measures be taken by you as may be deemed expedient to provide for the public services of the State.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE Motion by Mr Mack agreed to: That leave of absence for the present session be granted to John Edward Hatton, member for South Coast, on account of absence from the State.

ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES Mr WOTTON (Castlereagh) [ 11.571: I move: That Robert James Webster be Chamnan of Committees of the Whole House. I deem it a pleasure and an honour that Robert Webster is a personal friend. He is a young man with a great future in this place. He was elected to the Parliament only in 1984. He was immediatly thrown into the deep end, and soon after he entered this place he became shadow minister for local government. Now he is on the threshold of being Chairman of Committees. He followed as member for Goulburn another great National Party stalwart, Ronald Alfred St Clair Brewer, the same Ronald Alfred St Clair Brewer who won the seat from the Labor Party in 1965 after the Labor Party had held it for 45 years; and he won it by 517 votes. History records that he was hit with everything but the kitchen sink following that, but he won the seat again in 1968, 1971, 1973, 1976, 1978 and again in 198 1. Mrs Crosio: Is this a history lesson? Mr WOTTON: Yes, and the honourable member will get more, too. In spite of all the scuttlebutt about Robert James Webster when he stood for the seat of Goulburn in 1984, he carried on that Brewer tradition by winning the seat by 1 500 votes; and in 1988 the annihilation continued when he won by 11 500 votes. Goulburn is now a traditional National Party seat, along with many other seats in New South Wales. So that is nothing new. The Labor Party even held the seat of Castlereagh for 44 years. The gloating of 12 years has been reduced to crocodile tears by so many of the defeated Labor candidates. When the Labor Government first took office one of its original Ministers, a real Labor stalwart, said in this Chamber one day, "Look at all those Ministers; they have never been in opposition. They will learn". They sure will. In the life of this Parliament the Chairman of Committees will have to exercise great judgment, great tolerance, tact and knowledge but, more important, he must display great dignity. Mr Speaker, as has already been mentioned, both you and the Chairman of Committees have a mandatory commitment to all members of this Parliament, to all those members of Parliament who preceded us and to all future members to bring some dignity back into this place, to this great institution. I know that Robert James Webster will play his part in doing just that. Parry and thrust may be tolerated in debate, yes; but loutish larrikinism, no. Never again should we see disgraceful action similar to that which took place when the Leader of the Opposition or one of the senior shadow ministers was speaking and the leader of the House turned to Mr Speaker and said, "Sit him down, Lawrie." On that occasion the leader of the House deserved an early shower. One does not need a college education to work out who was the main architect and perpetrator of that action. Now that he has gone, together with many of his disciples, I am sure that dignity will prevail. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 23

It is appropriate for me to speak of the background of the honourable member for Goulburn and of his suitability for this high office. He is one of the young, new breed of politicians, a man with a tremendous pioneering background. His father's family consisted of seven boys and two girls; six of those boys served their country with great distinction. Their father, and their grandfather before him, started the Webster dynasty, one unsurpassed in the pastoral industry of New South Wales. One of the two girls of his father's family also played a part in creating another dynasty; she became the mother of a famous Australian cr~cketer,now a guru of the financial world here and overseas, Bob Cowper. I think John Elliott may even work fcr him. Robert James Webster, the honourable member for Goulburn, started his schooling at Eastwood. Later, like his father and six uncles, he attended Newington College. At a ceremony at the college some years ago his six uncles, his predecessors at that college, perpetuated the memory of their mother by donating the clock tower. Although Robert James Webster started his schooling at Eastwood, his own son and daughter constitute 22 per cent of the pupils of Five Mile School at Crooked Corner, Blanket Flat, near Binda. Whilst at Newington College the honourable member for Goulburn excelled by being vice- captain of his school, a cadet under-officer, a rower in the school eights, and a member of the first XV. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I do not wish to interrupt the thrust of the honourable member's remarks, but I ask him to conduct himself with decorum so that members of the other side of the House will not feel compelled to respond so vociferously as they have been doing. Mr WOTTON: Without going through the figures again, I believe the greatest claim to fame of the honourable member for Goulburn is that last week he was a member of the winning team in the tug-of-war at the Blanket Flat bicentennial celebration. All these matters show his leadership qualities. After matriculating to the University of Sydney in 1969 to study law, his father's illness required him to leave the university to run the family property. It is an ill wind that blows no one some good. As he left university and did not become a lawyer, we have been spared from having yet another of them in this House. Robert Webster was a Rotary exchange student, served in local government and on the Carcoar Pastures Protection Board and in the last Parliament was the shadow minister for local government, a job he did with distinction. It surprised some of us that he did not reach ministership in this Government, and that may have been a small disappointment to him, but he will be here for a long time and has time on his side. Being Chairman of Committees and Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Premier will provide him with great opportunity to learn and later teach the virtues of this great institution. Each of us should feel privileged to be here. Today is unique in this Parliament. We have 38 new members in this the mother of all Australian parliaments, in our bicentenary year, joining the band of some 3 000 or 4 000 who have gone before in almost 200 years. I commend the motion to the House and ask for unanimous support in electing Robert James Webster to be Chairman of Committees of the Whole House. Mr PARK (Tamworth) [12.6]: I second the nomination of Robert James Webster, the honourable member for Goulburn, to fulfil the high office of Chairman of Committees. The origin of the office of Chairman of Committees goes back to the late sixteenth century and early seventeenth century when the first concerted development of committees took place in the House of 24 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Commons. In House of Representcsfivcs Practice, J. A. Pettifer, C.B.E., Clerk of the House of Representatives, stated: The Committee of the whole developed in part out of a growing view that no Members should be excluded. as they were, fiorn the proceedings of the earlier "select" and later larger standing committees. Proceedings in committee of the whole House developed in such a way that from 1610 the Speaker retired to leave the House free to the committee. The removal of the Speaker, who was at this period expected to look after the interests of the Monarch, secured for the House a greater freedon of debate. It then became necessary for the committee to choose a chairman to preside over its proceedings. The committee of the whole thus became recognised as an efficient method of discussing matters of detail. Robert James Webster is greatly respected at Crookwell, from whence he comes, and where he is a prominent woolgrower and family man. He is popular with the ladies and, though one or two of the honourable ladies of this House may not quite agree, his bark is worse than his bite. Since the honourable member for Goulburn was elected to this House in 1984 he has been active in debate and shown that he has acquired a sound knowledge and appreciation of the standing orders and procedures. This knowledge was enhanced by his fulfilling the role of shadow minisrer for local government and planning from May 1986 until the recent State election on 19th March. His experience as chairman of the Carcoar Pastures Protection Board from 1978 to 1982 and as deputy-president of the Crookwell Shire Council from 1983 to 1984 will stand him in good stead in his control of the House, a responsibility that I believe he is well able to meet. The honourable member is a man of considerable ability and a very rational person. This is important. It is one of the qualities for which we look in someone who is to fulfil such an important office. The honourable member is also fair and reasonable, and this will enable him to meet the vital criterion of impartiality. For these reasons I have much pleasure in seconding the nomination of the honourable member for Goulburn as Chairman of Committees. I urge all honourable members to support the nomination. Motion agreed to. Mr Webster declared elected. Mr GREINER (Ku-ring-gai), Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs [12.10]: On behalf of the Government I congratulate the honourable member for Goulburn on his election. He may not be able to speak as quickly as his predecessor but I am sure he will endeavour to follow the highest standards in what is at times a difficult but important task. I am sure he carries the good wishes of the House as he takes up the position. Mr W. T. J. MURRAY (Barwon), Deputy Premier, Minister for State Development and Minister for Public Works [12.11]: I join the Premier in extending congratulations to the honourable member for Goulburn on his election as Chairman of Committees of this Parliament. As Chairman of Committees he will ensure that during the course sf committee debate new members will have the opportunity to contribute to the operation of this Parliament. The honourable member for Goulburn will recognize those honourable members who wish to take part in the debates. He will do so fairly, in the knowledge that it is not so long ago that he was in a similar position. I congratulate the honourable member for Goul'ourn on his election as Chairman of Committees. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 25

Mr FACE (Charlestown) [12.12]: I join the Premier and the Deputy Premier in congratulating the honourable member for Goulburn on his election to the high ofice of Chairman of Committees of the Whole House. Having been the previous custodian of the office, I assure him that he will find it a rewarding and satisfying job. The role of Deputy-Speaker has become more onerous because of the heavier workload of this House. I am sure the honourable member will assist the Speaker in that task. I congratulate the honourable member and wish him well. Mr WEBSTER (Goulburn) [12.13]: I thank the House for the unanimous support given to my election as Chairman of Committees of the Whole House. I congratulate you, Mr Speaker, on your election as Speaker of the House. I thank the honourable member for Castlereagh and the honourable member for Tamworth for their comprehensive detailing of my background and sporting prowess, or lack of it. I appreciate their kind words. I should also like to acknowledge the high standards set by my former colleagues in the Country Party, the Hon. Geoff Crawford, the Hon. Leon Punch and James Hill Brown as former Chairmen of Committees. I acknowledge the congratulations of the Premier, the Deputy Premier and the honourable member for Charlestown, my immediate predecessor. I assure all members that I will uphold the standards and traditions of this House with fairness, courtesy and impartiality. I thank the House for its confidence. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I congratulate the honourable member for Goulburn on his election as Chairman of Committees. I look forward to his co- operation and support; I assure him he will be called upon from time to time.

TEMPORARY CHAIRMEN OF COMMITTEES Mr Speaker nominated the following honourable members to act as Temporary Chairmen of Committees during the present session: John David Booth, Frederick Douglas Claude Caterson, Jack Richard Face, Mewyn Leslie Hunter and Roger Corfield Anson Wotton. [Mr Speaker left the chair at 12.15 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]

DEATH OF DAVID STANLEY LEITCH, A FORMER MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Mr GREINER (Ku-ring-gai), Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs [2.15]: 1 move: That this House extends to Mrs Leitch and family the deep sympathy of members of the Legislative Assembly in the loss sustained by the death of David Stanley Leitch, M.B.. B.S. It is with a feeling of sadness that I inform the House of the recent death of Dr David Stanley Leitch, a former member for Armidale. Dr Leitch passed away at his home in Armidale at the age of 65 years. He is survived by his wife Rosemary-who will be known by many members on both sides of the House for her involvement in education and other community issues-his sons David and James, and his daughters Alison, Mariane and Felicity. Dr Leitch became a member of this House on 17th February, 1973. He had followed another extremely able member of the Country Party at that time, Davis Hughes, as a member for the electorate of Armidale. 26 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Dr Leitch had a country background, being the eldest son of a farmer at Leeton, and was a medical practitioner for many years at Armidale. It was with this background that Dr Leitch was able to speak with the force and feeling of a member close to the concerns of his electorate. He was genuinely concerned with bread and butter issues of rural New South Wales, particularly the issues of education and roads. On behalf of the Government, and personally, I extend sympathy to his widow, Rosemary, and to his children on their loss. Mr CARR (Maroubra), Leader of the Opposition [2.16]: On behalf of the Opposition I join the Premier to extend to the family of Dr David Stanley Leitch the deep sympathy of members of the Legislative Assembly in the loss sustained by his death. David Stanley Leitch was a member of this House from February 1973 until his electoral defeat in September 1978. Dr Leitch entered the New South Wales Parliament, as the member for the electoral district of Armidale, through a by-election held as a consequence of the resignation of the Hon. Davis Hughes. He successfully contested one of three crucial by-e1,ections held on 17th February, 1973, to determine the future of the Askin Liberal Party- Country Party coalition Government. David Leitch was re-elected as the member for Armidale on 17th November, 1973, and on 1st May, 1976. He held this seat until defeated at the elections of September 1978 by the Labor candidate Mr Bill McCarthy. Anzac Day 1988 marked the first anniversary of the death of Bill McCarthy. Dr Leitch will be long remembered on both sides of this House for his active service to this Parliament and to the people of New South Wales. In his maiden speech and in subsequent addresses to this House David Leitch advanced the needs and the interests of his constituents with dignity and determination. His representations within government reflected thestrong and robust agricultural, commercial, industrial and educational sectors within the Armidale electorate. Armidale was an electorate of which David Leitch was proud. It remains a part of New South Wales which, indeed, every member of this House would be honoured to represent. As the eldest son of a Leeton farmer David Leitch spent most of his life in rural surroundings. His early schooling was by correspondence, and his medical studies at the University of Sydney were interrupted for war service, where he served as a commando in the New Guinea campaigns. Dr Leitch had an extensive medical career in both Australia and the United Kingdom. He is survived by his wife Rosemary, sons David and James, daughters Alison, Mariane and Felicity, and two grandchildren, Katherine and Johanna. On behalf of my colleagues I extend deep and sincere sympathy to the Leitch family on their loss. Mr W. T. J. MURRAY (Barwon), Deputy Premier, Minister for State Development and Minister for Public Works f2.181: On behalf of members of the National Party and this Parliament I extend deep sympathy to Rosemary Leitch and her family on the passing of David Stanley Leitch. Born on 9th January, 1923, David was the son of the late J. S. Leitch-a pioneer.of the Narrabri district-and the great-greatgrandchild of John Leitch, who amved In Victoria in 1853 to work as a farm labourer for the Clyde Company at that time. The Leitch family was very well known in the Narrabri district. Dav?d's father had a park in Narrabri named after him. As a consequence of the Leitch family's association with Narrabri, that town has great respect for J. S. Leitch and other members of the Leitch family. David was educated by correspondence from All Saints College, Bathurst. He graduated in medicine from the University of Sydney before being appointed an honorary surgeon to the Armidale and New England Hospital in 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 27

1959. He intempted his medical studies to serve with the commandos in New Guinea at the battle of Shaggy Ridge. David Leitch distinguished himself within the service of the army and in the service of this State and nation. David's grandfather on his mother's side was Mr W. W. Killen, a former member for Riverina for 17 years and a foundation member of the old Country Party. It was fitting, therefore, that David Leitch stood successfully as the County Party candidate for the seat of Armidale at the by-election in 1973. He was encouraged to so stand by the former member for Armidale, the Hon. Sir Bill Davis Hughes. David Leitch held the seat of Armidale until 1978. David Leitch was a highly respected doctor and was known as a sympathetic and understanding physician and surgeon. It was typical of his thoroughness and appetite for knowledge that he sought to equip himself better for politics and to develop a greater appreciation of the way Parliament worked and laws were made by undertaking an external university course in law. In politics and in medicine David was conscientious and constantly sought to achieve high standards. I shall quote from a speech of Dr Harold Royle, a colleague and partner of David Leitch: He expressed thls philosophy in h~scaring att~tudeto h~spatients. He was sympathet~cand an understandmg doctor, always available to care for people in need, gomg beyond duty to glve support and encouragement to patlents and relatives In my opinion David Leitch was the epitome of the family doctor, though a dedicated specialist surgeon. He was also a great contributor to this Parliament and to the party room. At the time of his membership to the Country Party he was virtually the only professionally qualified member. The depth of his education and professionalism shone through in many debates. I think the following anecdote exemplifies David Leitch. A motion was moved in the party room to legalize the use of heroin by medical practitioners to relieve pain suffered by cancer patients. That motion was lost because the climate was not right to make such a move. I remember clearly David saying to all those present, "Each of you should remember this occasion because a third of you will die in agony from cancer". Ironically, two people in that room have since died from cancer-one being the late Jack Boyd, the former member for Byron, and the other being David. David Leitch's capacity was such that his concern extended to everyone in the community. He was delighted when Rosemary was elected mayor of Armidale, and I think that that event buoyed him up considerably in his last weeks. To Rosemary and to her family we express our deep sympathy. Mr PARK (Tamworth) [2.24]: 1 join the Premier, the Leader of the Opposition, and the Deputy Premier in this motion of condolence to Mrs Rosemary Leitch and her family, and in paying a tribute to the late Dr David Stanley Leitch. David Leitch was elected as member for Armidale in a by- election on 17th February, 1973-the same day that you, Mr Speaker, and the late Jack Boyd, the former member for Byron, were first elected to this House. Dr Leitch graduated with degrees in medicine and surgery from St Andrew's College at the University of Sydney, having interrupted his studies during the second world war to serve with the commandos. In February 1942 he enlisted in the Second AIF, and after initial training became an original member of the 216th Independent Coy. He was selected to attend the officers' training school but refused, preferring to remain with his mates. As the Deputy Premier said, David Leitch's company saw action against the Japanese in New Guinea at the battle of Shaggy Ridge. David was very proud of his service during World War 11. When the New South Wales Commando Association unveiled the memorial seat in Martin Place on 31st January, 1982, honouring the 11 commando and special units and their 28 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

members who paid the supreme sacrifice, David attended the ceremony, as did Pat Flaherty, the former member for Granville and Labor Party Whip. David was very proud also of his service for some years as a medical officer, with the rank of captain, in the New England University Company of the Sydney University Regiment. He volunteered to serve in Vietnam as a medical officer; though not selected to serve in that capacity, he was willing to do so. Dr Leitch's medical studies resulted in his achieving three higher degrees in surgery-Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons in England, Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons in Edinburgh, and Fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons. In the opinion of his medical colleagues and patients, David Leitch was good doctor-a sympathetic and understanding medical practitioner, always available to care for people in need, going beyond the call of duty to give support and encouragement to patients, relatives, and members of the health care team. When David Leitch spoke in this House on legislation dealing with medical issues, he was listened to with interest by members on both sides and his opinions were respected. David Leitch was born and reared on the land at Leeton, and his family moved later to Narrabri. His forebears on both sides of his family were early pioneers. His maternal grandfather, Mr W. W. Killen, was the member for Riverina for 17 years and a foundation member of the Country Party. David was an excellent scholar and a keen student of history, particularly Australian history. After his election as member for Armidale, he realized that to be an effective member of Parliament it would help to know something about the law. With his usual drive and ability, he undertook a two-year external law course at Macquarie University. In February 1975 he was appointed as a member of a select committee to inquire into the system of appointing judges to the High Court of Australia, and I know that he regarded that task as a great privilege. David Leitch was a shy man; often he found it difficult to mix with people. Perhaps that contributed to his defeat at the polls in 1978, following which he returned to general practice and worked alone until ill-health forced his retirement a few months before his death. He was a very caring person; no one could be kinder to people in distress or trouble. He visited many frail people in their homes, both as a doctor and as a member of Parliament, and he cared deeply for them. He was a man who thought little about himself, but his standards were high. He worked for others and expected everyone to do the same. David Leitch was a remarkable man. On more than one occasion when the House was sitting late at night I remember observing his reading literature and manuscripts that were written in high Greek. In 1973, during my first election campaign, he came to Tamworth without my having requested him, and door-knocked large areas of the city. When I came to this place following the general election on 17th November, 1973, David Leitch and Jack Boyd took me in hand and showed me the ropes. Dr Leitch had a dry sense of humour, often detectable only by his friends. He did not suffer fools gladly, and was not afraid to say what he thought. There were three highlights of his earlier life. The first was his childhood experiences on the land. The second was his studies through correspondence school, which were supervised by his mother. The third was his coming top in the Qualifying Certificate examination held for all sixth class students throughout the Narrabri district. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 29

David Leitch very much loved his wife and family. Last year his wife Rosemary was elected mayor of Armidale. This was a source of great pleasure for David during the final months of his terminal illness. My wife June joins me in expressing sympathy for Mrs Rosemary Leitch and the five members of her family on the sad passing of Dr David Leitch in January of this year. Mr CHAPPELL (Northern Tablelands) [2.32]: Dr David Leitch, as the member for the seat of Armidale, represented an area that was substantially the same as the seat of Northern Tablelands that I proudly represent today. Of those who have spoken and are to speak of him today, only I can refer to David as having been my member of Parliament. David Leitch was highly regarded in Armidale as a skilful and committed surgeon and physician. He was greatly respected by his professional peers, and throughout the community. Some people were surprised at David's decision to enter Parliament, particularly following the retirement of Sir Davis Hughes. David had a reserved nature and, until he was stirred, was quiet. He held strong opinions and expressed them fofthrightly. He loved an argument, and invariably had well-assembled information and clear logic to support his stand. In retrospect I see David Leitch the parliamentarian as a man out of his time. He sought and held the highest ideals of statesmanship in a place where, and at a time when, statesmanship was a devalued currency. David had a clear sense of right and wrong, did not suffer fools lightly, and had little time for those whose motivation he suspected. Yet, he had a compassion for people which was beyond the ordinary. He was happy to do the quiet, behind the scenes work, which holds no glamour and attracts no public attention. I have been impressed by the number of people who have spoken kindly to me of the work that David did for them, for the helpful advice he gave, and the kindness he showed. A number of the staff of this House, many years after his departure from it, were able to recall his kindness to them and his recognition of the service they gave to him. David Leitch was a man of the highest integrity, and the most noble motivations. I am proud to follow him in the service of the people of Northern Tablelands and the State of New South Wales. I am particularly proud to work alongside David's widow Rosemary, whom I count as a personal friend, and who is the present mayor of Armidale. David is sadly missed by Rosemary and their five children, three of whom are with her here today. I extend to them my sympathy and that of the people he served. Mr SINGLETON (Coffs Harbour), Minister for Administrative Services and Assistant Minister for Transport [2.35]: I join with the Premier, the Deputy Premier, the Leader of the Opposition, and my colleagues in this motion of sympathy to the family of Dr David Leitch. I knew David extremely well and came to know him as a very sincere person and dear friend. We occupied adjoining rooms in the old military barracks parliamentary building, where the committee and the Chairman of Committees' rooms are now located. They were very old, inadequate offices, and one became good friends with the members who occupied them. My leader referred to the use of heroin. I thought I would be the only one who would remember the occasion in the party room when David Leitch pleaded that we do something about relieving the pain suffered by terminally ill people within the community. At that time one did not talk about heroin. Consequently David was very upset when he was unable to get that proposal off the ground. His pleas completely changed my point of view about the use of that drug. During David's time in this Parliament he contributed significantly 30 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 to debate both in the party room and in the House. One of the reasons he contributed so much was that, being the kind of sincere man that he was acknowledged to be, he always had people's problems at heart. I recognized David Leitch as a very lonely man. Often at night I can remember his coming into my room and asking whether we might talk. I was always very happy to do so, particularly as David had a brilliant mind and was able to converse on almost any subject. One example of his kindness that has not been mentioned occurred when the Hon. Edna Roper had a seizure in the old parliamentary dining room. David Leitch rushed to her aid, revived her, and we were able to convey her to Sydney Hospital. His considerable concern on that occasion for a person on the other side of politics, in the other Chamber, indicated to all the kindness and sincerity that was reflected in everything that David Leitch said and did. David did not tolerate fools lightly, and I believe that was probably one of the reasons he had some problems with politics, and in his representation of the electorate of Northern Tablelands, or Armidale as it was then known. David's wife Rosemary is mayor of Armidale and is performing marvellously in that position. David was most pleased at her appointment as Mayor and had no doubt that she would perform her tasks ably and well. On behalf of my wife Nancy and myself I join with my colleagues in extending our deepest sympathy to Rosemary and her family. Mr PICKARD (Hornsby), Minister for Mineral Resources and Minister for Energy [2.39]: I support the remarks of the Premier, the Deputy Premier and my colleagues on this side of the House. I was shown great kindness by both Dr Leitch and his wife on occasions when I visited the Armidale area. I also knew Dr Leitch as a man with a logical mind, who was quiet in debate but strong in argument, and who was always friendly to people both within and beyond this House. Having once visited his electorate and been the recipient of his kindness, one could not help but be aware of his qualities, or of the marvellous support he received from his wife. I well remember that on three separate occasions when I visited his electorate in the early 1970's it was his pleasure not to take me to be feted at any council meeting but to take me immediately to look at schools for the disadvantaged, for which he and his wife had a great heart. His wife still carries on great work in the Armidale area, and many disadvantaged people in that region will remember him and his qualities and the service he gave so fondly, as do I. I extend my sympathy to the family and to his wife, and trust they will find all the comfort they desire from the people they helped and comforted in their day. Members and qjicers of the House standing in their places, Motion agreed to.

PETITIONS The Clerk announced that the following petitions had been lodged for presentation: Murrumbidgee River Fishing

The Petltion of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That extensive damage is being done to the Murrumbidgee River by allowing professional fishermen to employ apparatus prohibited to amateur fishermen for the purpose of catching fish for sale. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 3 1

Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will prohibit the fishing of inland waterways by professional fishermen, especially Victorians. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Cruickshank, received.

Education

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That there is great concern at the failure of modem education, at primary and secondary levels, to uphold the strong moral code inherent within the Judeo-Christian ethic, particularly in the areas of literature and personal development and health studies. The Government is called upon to introduce immediate legislation to enforce existing laws prohibiting the showing of R-rated videotapes in classrooms to minors; to remove all debased texts and videotapes featuring obscenity, indecency, pornography, explicit sex, gross violence, occultism and blasphemy as well as texts encouraging rebellion against authority, from all classroom curricula, and to replace them with materials reinforcing positive moral values; to thoroughly investigate, through the establishment of a joint interparty select committee, the undermining of traditional Judeo-Christian values in school curricula, and to ensure, as a result, that specific guidelines are formulated that will guarantee the positive moral content of all texts used in schools in future. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will protect our society, especially our children, from moral pollution and its harmful effects. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Jeffery, received.

Food Irradiation

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the irradiation of food by any means degrades the nutritional value of food and is potentially harmful to the health of all consumers and to the environment. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will take all possible steps to ensure the enforcement of the regulations prohibiting the irradiation of food and the sale of imported irradiated food. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Dowd, received.

Epileptics The Petition of Citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That there is concern about the Anti-Discrimination Act's classification of epileptics as being intellectually impaired. The classification presently given infers there is some sort of mental deficiency in people with epilepsy. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: 32 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

That your honourable House will take steps to classify all persons suffering an impairment in the one category of being impaired, therefore eliminating the need to be classified as either physically or intellectually impaired. And your Petitioners. as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Hatton, received.

Orange and Canobolas High Schools The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the inadequate facilities and lack of maintenance at both the Orange High School and the Canobolas High School are deplored, as evidenced by the recent major sewerage problems and faulty maintenance at Orange High School and the continuing lack of an assembly hall and inadequate maintenance at Canobolas High School. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will call on the Government of New South Wales to redirect the refurbishment proposals for the New South Wales State Office Block in Anson Street, Orange, to the abovementioned public high schools as a matter of urgency and that all consideration be given to several thousand citizens and public school students affected by substandard conditions and inadequate maintenance at these public high schools. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr West, received.

Firearms Legislation The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the gun laws of New South Wales are deficient in dealing with crimes involving firearms and inadequate in terms of provision for the legitimate gun owner. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will extend the amnesty and implementation period of the new laws until after the 1988 State election. And further, that any new gun laws attempting to deal with criminal offences will continue to provide for the licensed sports shooter by allowing the purchase of equipment without permission, and the right to legally engage in recreational hunting and competitive shooting. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petitions, lodged by Mr Jeffery and Miss Machin, received.

Gap Beach, South West Rocks

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the Arakoon Park Trust is about to deny the right of vehicle access to Gap Beach by closing the access road at the top of the hill behind the beach, thereby restricting access to the beach by the aged, infirm, crippled and children who will now have to walk down a very steep decline and return from the beachfront, a distance of about 2.4 kilometres return. For many decades these people have been enjoying the amenities of the area, which include fishing, surfing and family picnic outings using vehicles to go up and down the steep grades each way. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will allow the continuance of the right by vehicle access to this magnificent beach, and will request the Arakoon Park Trust to revoke that part of the adopted plan. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 33

Petition, lodged by Mr Jeffery, received.

Fairfield Stormwater Drains

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That action should be taken to prevent the recurrence of a tragic accident similar to the one that took the life of 12-year-old Michelle Worth on 23rd October, 1985. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will take measures to pipe and cover drains that run adjacent to homes in Fairlight Avenue, Fairfield, and in other areas; to adequately fence all open drains that are impossible to pipe and cover; and to maintain such fences in good repair. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mrs Crosio, received.

Ultimo and Pyrmont Development

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the residential and business communities of Ultimo and Pyrmont have suffered considerable detriment due to traffic and development pressure on the area, and will suffer much more environmental detriment when the Darling Harbour project opens. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will request that the Government take immediate steps to protect the residents and businesses of the peninsula. These steps should include the following. First, there should be provision for and preservation of certain parcels of land for permanent landscaped open space. These parcels include: the land between Point and Herbert Streets, Pyrmont, which is currently owned by the Maritime Services Board and leased to the Darling Harbour Authority for the storage of masonry: the land between Bulwarra Road and the railway line between Gipps and Miller Streets owned by the State Rail Authority and currently leased to the Department of Main Roads for five years as demountable offices for Glebe arterial construction: the land adjacent to the fish markets site as envisaged in the local environmental plan for the area: part of the land covered by the Pyrmont power station when the site is redeveloped: the Department of Main Roads land bounded by Fig Street, Bulwarra Road, Fig Lane and Jones Street, as fenced, open grassed space: the isolated parcel of land under the freeway near Pyrmont Bridge Road and Wattle Crescent, below Bulwarra Road, as an urban forest to mitigate pollution effects of the freeway: Wentworth Park, which is the only substantial tract of open space in the area, should not be used for bus or car parking: and a reasonable proportion of each new redevelopment site on the peninsula. Second, urgent measures should be taken to protect the declining availability of resident parking in the area. To do this, the Government and the Darling Harbour Authority must cease advertising the availability of kerhside parking in Pynnont and Ultimo on the western side ofDarling Harbour, as there is already less than current local requirements. The existing kerbside car parking spaces covered by the resident parking scheme must be increased by 20 per cent, and the hours of operation extended to 10 p.m., seven days a week. Fifty per cent of kerbside resident parking spaces must be designated as dedicated Residents Only parking areas, in which parking by non- residents is strictly prohibited. The New South Wales Police Force must deploy sufficient parking officers to regularly and diligently police the area against intruder parking. 34 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Third, the provision of adequate policing of the area against crime, induced by its proximity to the Darling Harbour complex, will require the relocation of the proposed new police unit from the casino site to the western side of Darling Harbour and the introduction of precinct policing throughout the peninsula. such policing to maintain at least four officers full-time in Ultimo and Pyrmont. Fourth, measures must be introduced to reduce the impact of non-local traffic on residential streets. This should be done by the abandonment of any proposal to build an off-ramp into John Street, Pyrmont, as part of phase two of the Glebe Island arterial; by the Fig Street cutting, which forms part of the southern road system, being fully covered and made available as open space; by the closure of Macarthur Street, Ultimo, and the pedestrianization of the Pyrmont shopping precinct, as envisaged in rhe 1980 Ultimo-Pyrmont plan: by the systematic and regular police traffic surveillance of the residential areas to deter rev-heads from using local streets; by special, very low speed limits in all residential streets; immediately after the forthcoming opening of the city-bound part of the phase one freeway, by taking effective steps to discourage through traffic from using the Miller Street, Pyrmont, and Harris Street route as a through route; by the closure of the Fig Street entrance from Hams Street, to prevent intruder traffic: as a matter of urgency, by the Traffic Authority preparing, in consultation with the Department of Main Roads, the Darling Harbour .Authority and the city council. a comprehensive traffic management plan to keep non-local traffic from local streets and to buffer residents from the impact caused by the opening of the Darling Harbour project; by residents being advised immediately of Darling Harbour Authority plans for an ingress and egress route to the complex from the western side; and by action to increase the proportion of visitors travelling to Darling Harbour by accessible public transport, so as to minimize traffic volume in the area. Fifth, there should be provision of adequate pedestrian access throughout the peninsula by the introduction of shared zones in as many local streets as possible; by the ercction of a pedestrian overpass across Wattle Street to Wentworth Park; by the immediate preparation of a pedestrian access plan for the whole area; by requiring all construction companies to preserve the integrity of existing footpaths; by the maintenance of pedestrian access to the fish markets by Pyrmont Bridge Road; by immediately upon the opening of phase one of the arterial route, the rephasing of the traRc lights at Pyrmont Bridge Road, and Miller, Union and Harris Streets; and by the restoration of pedestrian access along Harris Street east across Fig Street. Sixth. there should be improvement of local access to integrated public transport. Seventh. urgent consideration should be given to the question of compensating residents adversely affected by the construction of arterial roadworks and the Darling Harbour project. Eighth, there should be improvement of lighting in the area, especially along pedestrian routes such as Harris Street between Quarry and Allen Streets, and under the freeway at Fig Street. Ninth, there should be minimization of the adverse impact of the new Wcntworth Park night lighting system, for example, by screening. Tenth. there should be provision by the Department of Main Roads of appropriate screening against light and noise pollution on all viaducts and ramps. Areas particularly affected include Headingly units in Allen Street, and Bulwarra Road, Pyrmont. Eleventh, there should be prior notification to all residents and businesses in affected areas of all major demolitions in the peninsula, for example, Pyrmont power house, and the taking of precautions to protect them from asbestos and other pollutants in the buildings being demolished. Twelfth, there should be immediate establishment of an ongoing mechanism for continuing effective liaison and assessment on all problems affecting residents and businesses of Ultimo and Pyrmont. Thirteenth, the existing key planning objective for the peninsula, namely residential regeneration. should be adhered to and, to this end, no further consents 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 35 be granted for the erection of new hoi.els or for the conversion of existing buildings for tourist-related uses. Fourteenth, special care should be taken to avoid structural damage to buildings, and other adverse environmental effects in the area, and appropriate consultants should be retained to investigate claims of damage. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Hatton, received.

Recyclable Resources

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That for the maintenance of public health and the rehabilitation of impoverished soils, the tbllowing action is necessary: there should be treatment of all sewage effluent to tertiary standard and recycling of sewage by-products for maximum re-use in agriculture and industry. There should be cornposting of all presently wasted recyclable, biodegradable garbage and sewage-sludge, by proved and established methods, into hygienic humus for use in rehabilitation of impoverished soils and other earth repair action projects. There should be protection of the remaining native forests by propagating, planting, and maintaining appropriate trees and other vegetation wherever possible in urban and rural areas to combat the alarming build-up of atmospheric pollutants, to control soil erosion, and to enhance the environment and create employment opportunities. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will take all steps necessary to determine the best methods of achieving this. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr E. T. Page, received.

Firearms Legislation

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That gun owners and shooters are being treated as potential criminals under current legislation. In 1985, 1 173 violent road deaths were attributed lo alcohol use, but no legislative action was introduced to generally register alcohol users. All forms of violent and untimely deaths should be examined, and not only deaths attributed to firearm use singled out. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That the Government will repeal the firearm legislation of 1985, and will return to the pre-existing laws for firearm control. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr W. T. J. Murray, received.

Abortion

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That because of the tragic deaths of over 100 000 Australian unborn children each year, by unnatural means as well as unfortunate accidents, and the confusion over the legal status and rights of the unborn child as well as its God-given historic right to life: Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: 36 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

That the Parliament of New South Wales will fully support Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile's private member's bill entitled the Unborn Child Protection Bill, and will ensure its prompt adoption and implementation in New South Wales, in the interests of future generations of Australian children. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petitions, lodged by Mr Baird, Mr Harrison and Mr Hatton, received.

Non-government School Enrolments

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the decision by the State and federal governments to place ceilings on the enrolment numbers of certain non-government schools unfairly discriminates against those citizens who wish to send their children to non-government schools. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That the members of the Legislative Assembly will direct the Minister for Education to remove all ceilings on pupil enrolments at non-government schools, and will take steps to ensure that all such pupils receive government assistance towards their education. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Miss Machin, received.

Valley Industries Sheltered Workshop The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That there is support for the Valley Industries sheltered workshop in Taree and that the attack made on this workshop and its supporters by the former Minister for Youth and Community Services is deplored. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will ensure the continued operation of Valley Industries. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Miss Machin, received.

Senior High School for Mount Druitt The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the Government is requested to reconsider its decision not to proceed with the establishment of a senior high school for the Mount Dmitt area, as it is believed that the establishment of such a high school would be most beneficial to the children of this area. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Arnery, received.

Steel Mill for Rooty Hill The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That there is opposition to the siting of the proposed Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited's steel mill in the historic and residential area of Rooty Hill. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Amery, received. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 37

Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That because of the dramatrc spread of the AIDS disease in New South Wales, with more than 50 000 AIDS male carriers in Sydney, and because the AIDS cases are doubling every three months: Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That the Parliament of New South Wales will take urgent steps to prevent the spread of the AIDS disease among homosexuals; will introduce urgent measures to prevent the spread of AIDS to the heterosexual community, especially through blood transfusions; will immediately close all AIDS disease centres, such as homosexual bath houses. brothels. and so on; will commence compulsory blood testing of the homosexuals in Sydney to locate and treat the AIDS carriers: will repeal the homosexual schedule of the Anti-Discrimination Act, 1983, and will repeal Mr Wran's private member's sodomy bill, known as the Crimes (Amendment) Act, 1984; and will institute a levy on all homosexual organizations, newspapers, clubs, bars, and so on. to pay for AIDS medical research and treatment. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will protect our community from the AIDS epidemic, and will do all it can to promote the healthy heterosexual lifestyle, especially in our education system. And your Petitioners. as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Harrison, received.

Bloomfield Riverside Hospital The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That it is necessary to maintain institutionalized mental health facilities in western New South Wales. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will not close Bloomfieid Riverside Hospital, in the best interests of the community. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound. will ever pray Petitions, lodged by Mr Peacocke and Mr West, received.

Warringah Shire Sewerage The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfullj: sheweth: That the health, environment and amenity of areas of Bilgola Plateau, Taylors Point and Clareville Beach are seriously disadvantaged by lack of sewerage services. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That the New South Wales Government will take urgent steps to connect the aforementioned areas to the sewerage system. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Longley, received.

Lotteries and Lotto Agency at Wollongong The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the refusal by State Lotteries to grant an agency for Lotto and instant lotteries to Crown Central Newsagency at its new premises at Shop 26 Crown Central will cause inconvenience to members of the public who have previously dealt with the newsagency. 38 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will take urgent steps to require State Lotteries to grant Crown Central Newsagency the right to act as an agent for the sale of Lotto and instant lotteries. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, wiil ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Arkell, received. Firearms Legislation The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That there is deep concern at the impact of the amendments proposed to the Firearms and Dangerous Weapons Act, 1973, and the regulations already imposed under that Act, on the following grounds. It is believed that such proposals and regulatiens will prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and will hinder their safety. Further, they will prevent or hinder private ownership of firearms retained for lawful purposes of earning income, destroying vermin, destroying sick or maimed animals and the keeping of historic firearms; they will not address the problems of crime and violence within our community; and they will create unnecessary expansion of the bureaucracy. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will reject any amendments to the Firearms and Dangerous Weapons Act, 1973, and wiil disapprove of regulations made recently under the said Act. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Beckroge, received. Vineyard Land Use The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That there is worry about precinct 13 ai Vineyard in northwestern Sydney, bounded by Bandon Road, Windsor Road, Riverstone Parade and Victoria Street. For many years owners have been forced to pay rates on land that cannot adequately be used. The bodies influencing this unsatisfactory state of affairs are the Department of Environment and Planning and the Water Board. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will permit the use of this land for urban purposes, even if the owners have to rely on tank water, a circumstance that is already happening in other local areas. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Amery, received. Shoalhaven District Memorial Hospital

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the Shoajhaven community recognizes the importance of a health system that provides New South Wales with the best possible health and hospital services. The Shoalhaven community is aware of the inadequate condition of key sections of the Shoalhaven District Memorial Hospital, particularly the medical ward and the hospital's core services. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will initiate a program to rebuild the medical ward and the core services of the Shoalhaven District Memorial Hospital in order to ensure the best possible hospital service for the people of the Shoalhaven area. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.

Petition, lodged by Mr Hatton, received. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 39 Wyong Road, Tuggerah

Thc Petition of citlzcns of New South Wales respectfully shewcth: That there is deep concern about the substandard condition of Wyong Road, a main arterial road from Tuggerah to The Entrance. The appalling condition of this road cannot cope with local Central Coast traffic, let alone peak holiday traffic. One life has been lost. let us not let apathy mean that more will follow. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will legislate for immediate and urgent upgrading of Wyong Road. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray Petition, lodged by Mr Baird, received.

Firearms Legislation

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That there is strong opposition to any proposed firearms legislation that would remove firearms from being held and or used by responsible citizens within this State. We further petition that we are opposed to any confiscation of lawfully used property at any time. Present legislation, whereby firearms users can seek approval for licensing through local police stations, is strongly recommended, and it is requested that this method be allowed to continue. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will undertake to look at the main source of violence which. we believe, is caused through unacceptable video and movie productions, and will take stronger action against the criminal elements in this State and that the good citizens will not be disarmed through unfair or unjust legislation. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by r Beckroge, received.

Child Care Centre for Cobar

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That it is intended to seek funding for a multipurpose child care centre for Cobar, incorporating various children's services, but primarily for an occasional day care centre. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House recognize the urgent requirement for such a facility in Cobar, a project to which we give our full support. And your Petitioners. as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Mr Beckroge, received.

Regent Theatre

The Petition of citizens of New South Wales respectfully sheweth: That the Regent Theatre in Sydney is of permanent historical and theatrical significance to the people of New South Wales. The decision by the Government of New South Wales to revoke the permanent conservation order placed on the Regent 40 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Theatre in 1986 will allow the demolition of the Regent Theatre and the redevelopment of the site. The demolition of the Regent Theatre will mean that Sydney will not have a viable lyric theatre. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your honourable House will call upon the Government of New South Wales to prevent the proposed demolition of the Regent theatre and the redevelopment of the site by reinstating the permanent conservation order on the Regent Theatre to ensure that the theatre is permanently protected as part of Sydney's architectural heritage. and as a vtable live theatre. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Petition, lodged by Ms Moore, received.

AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORT Mr Speaker laid upon the table a copy of the Report of the Auditor- General under the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983 for Audits with Balance Dates between 1 July 1987 and 29 February 1988 and Completed Audits not included in the previous year, Volume I, 1988. Ordered to be printed.

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE Report Pursuant to section 57 (4) and (5) of the Public Finance and Audit Act, 1983, the Clerk tabled the report of the Public Accounts Committee on the purchasing practices, and the for allocation of stores and equipment resources within the technical and further education system.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

APPOINTMENT OF Dr GREGOR RAMSEY Mr CARR: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Education. On 22nd March did the Minister tell Dr Gregor Ramsey, the designate Director-General of Education, "I look forward to working with you"? On the basis of that information, did Dr Ramsey sell his house in Canberra? Did the Minister terminate Dr Ramsey's appointment three days later in a one- minute interview? If Dr Ramsey was suitable for the post on 22nd March, will the Minister tell the House why he was unsuitable on 25th March? Dr METHERELL: The appointment of Dr Gregor Ramsey by the former Government was one of the most outrageous steps taken by a government to frustrate the will of the people and to frustrate the will of an incoming government. It was an exercise in total cynicism by a Minister who knew that he would no longer be a Minister after the next elections, and was sanctioned by a government that knew it would no longer be the government after the next election. I am advised that Dr Ramsey was appointed to his unprecedented position as Associate Director-General in January, to take up his appointment in late April. In other words, he was to take up his appointment after the elections, but was appointed to the position by the backdoor before 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 41 the elections took place. Nothing could be more obvious than that this was devised by the Minister and sanctioned by the former Government to frustrate the will of the incoming Government and to prevent it making an appointment to one of the most significant public service positions in the State. Dr Ramsey was signed to a seven-year contract, starting at an annual salary of $83,000, by a cynical Minister and a cynical government that knew its term would finish. The educational community and the staff of the department were staggered by that political appointment. It was an inappropriate appointment, for the man was simply not competent to carry out the task. As I said at the time, Dr Ramsey was sent to New South Wales with the full sanction and co-operation of the Commonwealth Government. In fact, during the transition period he continued to carry out Commonwealth responsibilities. He was sent to New South Wales as a result of a deal between the Commonwealth Minister, Mr Dawkins, and the former New South Wales Minister for Education. I am surprised that the right-wing members of the former Cabinet sanctioned what was obviously a left-wing deal made between two left-wing Ministers. When I terminated Dr Ramsey's appointment I made it clear that he was welcome to return to Canberra and that the Government would do all lt could to facilitate that course of action. Quite predictably the federal Minister, Mr Dawkins, leapt to Dr Ramsey's defence and sang his praises to the medla and to the Parliament in Canberra. I said, "Well, in that case, Mr Dawkins wlll welcome him back with open arms". And that is exactly what occurred. Mr Dawkins has welcomed Dr Ramsey back with open arms; and good riddance to him. I am happy to announce that Dr Ramsey has returned to Canberra. I understand he is now the interim head of the higher education council of the National Board of Employment Education and Training, which is quite a mouthful. I am sure that pronouncing that to everyone will keep him busy. He has returned to a happy home and happy hunting ground in Canberra. We wish him well in his career. We wish only that such an inappropriate appointment had never been made.

COSTING OF ELECTION PROMISES Mr LONGLEY: My question without notice is addressed to the Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs. Is he aware of any Treasury assessment of the Unsworth Government's election promises? When was this assessment prepared and what was the forecast economic impact of the proposals on the New South Wales Budget? Mr GREINER: The long and diligent interest of the honourable member for Pittwater in the finances of the State will be rewarded at last by there being decent economic management of New South Wales. Honourable members opposite will recall that at the outset of the last election campaign, the honourable member for Rockdale said that the issues were not really law and order, health, education and other things; the issue was economic management. He proceeded to say a number of totally asinine things about the coalition's position. It is worth while for the people of New South Wales to examine the comparative economic policies of the two sides. I remind the House that for a number of years the coalition had a simple policy, a conservative policy if you like, of restraining recurrent expenditure within the inflation rate; in other words, ensuring that there was a freeze on recurrent expenditure, although there would be growth in some key areas where Labor had underfunded and under- resourced for a long time. 42 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 We had a commitment to no tax increases. We offered no tax cuts. We had a very clear-cut commitment to controlling the size of the Government debt, which was rising totally out of control, until now when something like lc in every 8c that is actually appropriated in the New South Wales Budget is used to meet the debt burden that the Australian Labor Party built up. The Labor Party did not have an economic policy for the first two weeks of the election campaign. Then nine days before the election the honourable member for Rockdale came out with this wondrous grab bag of promises. The ALP, as the House will recall, stood for the elimination of stamp duty for first home buyers, a 25 per cent reduction in weekly rail tickets for suburban commuters, the elimination of liquor tax on low alcohol beer, cash grants to parents who meet certain income requirements, and so on. I ask honourable members opposite, including the Leader of the Opposition and the honourable member for Rockdale: do they stand by those policies? Are they affordable? We all know the answer: they do not stand by them. Does the Leader of the Opposition stand by them? Let the record show that it took exactly seven minutes of the first question time of this Government for the Leader of the Opposition to repudiate the entire election policy of his predecessor. He knows and, as we will find out in a minute, the former leader of the Government knew, that that policy was totally economically irresponsible; it was not capable of being met without effecting either very substantial increases in other taxes or massive spending cuts. Mr Unsworth: That is not true. Mr GREINER: Is it not true? We will wait and see. Mr Unsworth: And Percy Allen told you it is not true. Mr GREINER: The Opposition is now going to start attacking senior public servants. The fact is that the Labor Government went into the last State election with promises that it knew full well New South Wales could not afford. There was a totally reckless and irresponsible conspiracy effectively to defraud the people of New South Wales. At least the former Premier-probably not the former Treasurer because he scarcely knew what day of the week it was-knew full well that what he was promising was totally undeliverable in the context of any sort of rational economic approach. We will wait and see. Though the Labor Party did not hesitate to publish Treasury's costings of the coalition's promises, it never revealed Treasury's costings of the Labor Party's promises. In fact, it explicitly refused to ask the Treasury for those costings. When they were offered by the Treasury, as any professional Treasury would have done, the Premier refused to accept the offer. He did not want to know, because he knew full well that if he had the guts and the honesty to come clean and publish the Treasury's costings of Labor policies as well as ours, those policies would be shown up as the monumental shambles they were. At least the people of New South Wales were able to see through them without any difficulty at all. The important thing is that it was a deliberate deceit on the part of the former Premier when he refused to have Treasury do those costings. When he knew that Treasury had done that work he said, "We do not really want to know, and we certainly are not going to say so". Of course, the Labor Party then relied on its own costings. Heaven knows whose costings they were, whether they were those of the Canberra mafia or Stephen Loosley-and if they were his, they would have been at least $10,000 out. Maybe they were the costings of John MacBean. Who knows. The Labor Party certainly did not rely on Treasury's costings. It worked on the assumption that the economy would grow by 3% per cent in 1988-89, and it applied a rule of thumb that each 1 27 April, 1988 FYSSEMBLY 43 per cent of economic growth would produce $120 million of revenue in a normal year. Mr Unsworth: So did you. Mr GREINER: Patience, patience, you have four years. Labor projected that revenue would be up by $420 million in real terms in the next financial year. It also assumed a windfall of $55 million as a result of a crack-down on tax avoiders. I asked the old Department of Finance, the present Office of State Revenue, whether it could give me some information about the $55 million of extra revenue that was projected, because we would like to have had it as well. It said it knew nothing about that extra revenue. It said, "The Government never asked us. We know absolutely nothing about it". Any windfall gains in revenue that there were, and there were some-we suggested them five years ago from that side of the House-have been eaten up in the current financial year. So the Department of Finance knew absolutely nothing about the $55 million that the honourable member for Rockdale claimed as part of his funding package. I asked the Treasury for its costings of Labor's election promises and for the preliminary budget estimates for 1988-89-a reasonable thing to do. The Treasury's estimates show that Labor's promises would have cost at least, on the most generous assumptions, $338 million in 1988-89 and a total of $1,7 10 million over the next four years. When Labor came out with its promises it claimed that the State could afford them. Since coming to ofice I have seen Treasury's preliminary budget estimates-exactly the same estimates that were available to the then Premier and the then Treasurer at the time they made the promises. Those estimates show that at best the Government faced a small deficit for 1988-89, assuming a no policy change scenario. In other words, the Labor Government knew that it was facing a deficit in 1988-89, not spare funds of $420 million as it pretended to the people of New South Wales. It must have been completely clear to the Labor Party that if it introduced the new policies major deficits, unsustainable deficits, would result unless big cost savings were achieved. Yet at no time during the election campaign did Labor indicate that the savings through program cuts were anywhere on its policy agenda. Were they? Who knows? I suspect no one knows. The truth is that unless there were going to be very significant cuts in programs there would have been a deficit of $500 million in New South Wales in 1988-89. In other words, the implementation of Labor's promises would have resulted in a $500 million deficit-a deficit that even Neville Wran could not manage when he was going broke in 1981, a totally unprecedented deficit in State accounting terms. Of course, Labor's approach conveniently ignored the full year cost of the spending and tax concession commitments it made in the 1987-88 Budget and after the Budget. These amounted to $760 million in a full year, $392 million more than provided for in last year's Budget. In other words, before Labor even delivered its policy speech it had to find an extra $392 million in the next financial year to pay for the full year effect of policy undertakings already introduced in the current financial year. Those extra commitments amount to more than 3 per cent real growth on estimated recurrent spending for this year. It would have been the continuation of the greatest profligacy of any State Government anywhere in Australia. It is no wonder that the Unsworth years are single-handedly responsible for the blowout in State spending, for Paul Keating doing his stuff and saying that the States are not being responsible. The States have not been responsible, because of what happened during the last two years of the Unsworth 44 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Government, which has been directly and single-handed!y responsible for the blowout. If by any chance the Unsworth Government had been returned, it would simply have compounded the situation. In effect, the economy would have needed to grow by more than 3 per cent in real terms next year just to fund the full year cost of Labor policies from the previous Budget. To meet the extra $338 million worth of new promises, the economy would have had to grow by double that rate-in other words, by 6 per cent. On Labor's own claim real economic growth was going to be about 3'/2 per cent, and even that is a full percentage point higher than Treasury's own estimate. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Rockdale and the honourable member for Smithfield to order. Mr GREINER: In other words, if the Commonwealth and State Treasuries are correct and Barrie Unsworth is wrong, which is likely to be the case, an implicit $120 million deficit lay simply in the difference between the growth rates they were assuming. No one else in the whole of Australia was assuming a growth rate for next year such as the Labor Government in New South Wales assumed for its election purposes. In addition, 1988-89 will be a difficult financial year because the Commonwealth Government is looking for further cutbacks in its assistance and borrowing limits, and a downturn has been experienced already in certain revenue items. Overall, the House can now see that the economic program with which the Labor Party- Mr J. J. Aquilina: On a point of order. The Premier has now been speaking for 12 minutes. This is the first question time in this new session. In view of your words earlier today, Mr Speaker, that this will be a fair Parliament with all sides given an opportunity to have their say, I ask that you uphold my point of order and rule the Premier's answer out of order. Mr Longley: On the point of order. The question clearly called for a detailed answer of great specificity. The answer requires the depth of detail and length of time the Premier has given to it. Mr J. J. Aquilina: Further to the point of order. If the Premier wishes to give a detailed answer, he should do so by way of ministerial statement. No provision is made for the giving of a detailed answer other than by way of a ministerial statement. Mr Singleton: On the point of order. The honourable member for Blacktown clearly is trifling with the House. During a number of earlier sessions in this Parliament, as a Minister of the Crown the honourable member used question time to make statements that were clearly ministerial statements, which often exceeded 15 minutes. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Ashfield to order. The honourable member for Blacktown has taken a point of order that the answer provided by the Premier is in fact a ministerial statement. There is a considerable degree of specificity in the Premier's answer to the question. I advise honourable members also that in future I shall be somewhat stricter in deciding matters of relevance. Provided an answer by a Minister is relevant to the question asked, the Chair cannot dictate the way in which a Minister will reply. I rule that the Premier is in order. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 45

Mr GREINER: Mr Speaker, I give a clear undertaking that any answers given by Ministers in my Government will always be relevant. In coming to the end of my answer I wish to say two things: first, it should be quite clear that the economic program of the Unsworth Government is totally discredited. It has been shown to have deliberately avoided the truth and as being prepared to bankrupt the State in an effort to save its political skin. It ought to be quite clear, and I say this once more, that there is a $500 million deficit-not by my reckoning or by the reckoning of the Government but by the reckoning of the Treasury-that was directly implicit in the set of promises with which the Labor Party went to the people. I make one further point for the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, whom I congratulate upon his election to that office. In February 1987 to previous Treasurer, the honourable member for Wallsend, rejected my proposal for Treasury officers to meet with the Opposition, as we then were, to cost our promises. I have since asked the Treasury to cost the coalition promises with the benefit of discussion with us, and they will be found explicitly in our Budget this year. They will be consistent also with the commitments made in our election manifesto. The other point I wish to make for the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition is that in future, contrary to the policies of the Labor Government, Treasury will be available to cost the Opposition's program. I look forward to a request in 199 1 from the then Leader of the Opposition, whomever he or she may then be, to take up that opportunity. Accordingly, during the next election we will have a professional and independent costing of both Government and Opposition promises for the people to weigh. This will put an end to pie-in- the-sky estimates and will facilitate rational public debate on the financial implications of the policies of each side. If the Labor Party fails to subject itself to this discipline, the people will know that it remains exactly the same recklessly irresponsible and financially illiterate rabble that so deservedly lost office on 19th March.

TARONGA ZOO DIRECTOR Dr REFSHAUGE: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Environment and Assistant Minister for Transport. In view of the Premier's commitment to the principle of open government, and in view of the slur against the reputation of Dr John Kelly, will the Minister now tell the House why he first sacked and later reinstated the director of the Taronga zoo?

Mr T. J. MOORE: A matter of very narrow and constitutional compass existed as a difficulty between Dr Kelly and me. After discussion with the Premier I held a lengthy and frank meeting with Dr Kelly at which we both traversed all the issues involved. That meeting was private. I do not propose to traverse the issues that Dr Kelly and I discussed. I make it perfectly clear, in fairness to Dr Kelly, that the issues involved did not relate to his professional competence to administer the zoo-a professional competence that I respect and have acknowledged publicly. After Dr Kelly and I resolved our differences in the matter that arose, Dr Kelly gave me a further professional ministerial briefing on the operation of the zoo, which continued until late in the evening. Dr Kelly and I have resolved our differences as grown-up adults, in proper fashion. Additionally, I have personally and privately apologized to Dr Kelly's wife and children for any anxiety I may have occasioned them during that period. 46 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

EARLY RELEASE OF PRISONERS Mr WEBSTER: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Corrective Services. Is the Minister aware of widespread community concern about the previous Government's policy of day release of some of the most dangerous criminals in this State? Will the Minister inform the House what the Government intends to do about the problems caused by that scheme and how this relates to present Government policy? Dr ASTON: The question is related to a major part of this Government's corrective services policy, a policy that was well endorsed at the last election and which substitutes for the previous free-for-all, masquerading as a policy, which the Labor Government put forward in relation to the day release of prisioners. For the benefit of honourable members, and to ensure there are no misconceptions about the intentions of this Government, 1 restate an announcement made by the Premier on 25th February. The Premier said that the community was understandably perplexed and bewildered by a system of day release and remissions that allows murderers to mix with the public, play tenpin bowling and find ultimate freedom within eight years despite the initial imposition of a life sentence. Today, the only part of those remarks I wish to address touches upon the matter raised by the honourable member, the day release scheme. To give honourable members an estimate of the extent of this serious problem, it is illuminating to quantify the existing scheme. In the next six months approximately 650 prisoners will qualify for day release according to the criteria set down by the former Government. Included among those prisoners are 129 who have already qualified for weekend leave, but also included are 28 murderers, 28 sex offenders and 135 people who have been convicted of drug- related crimes. Make no mistake, it is the former administration that has allowed this to happen. Having said that, let me make it perfectly clear that this Government is not about to abolish the day release scheme because to do so would fly in the face of the rehabilitation scheme available to most prisoners. To be consistent with our overall policy of being both tough and fair, we are determined to tighten the procedures which govern the scheme. The most obvlous benefit of the scheme, which we must all recognize, is its value as a transit!onal period between the confined, and often highly-charged, atmosphere of prlson and the unconfined and sometimes unexpected opportunities of the real world into which a prisoner may step, perhaps after many years of lncarceration. Associated with this benefit is the prospect that, given a real commitment by both the prisoner on day release and his or her sponsor, that prisoner may be able to arrange appointments as a prelude to getting a job, undertake training or education courses, renew relationships with family and friends, or otherwise make worthwhile use of these days outside the confines of the pnson system. From today it is this Government's intention that no prisoner guilty of crimes of violence, sex offences and drug-related crimes will be eligible to participate in the day release scheme until he or she has proved to be trustworthy and rehabilitated within the prison system. From today no prisoner will be eligible for day release under any circumstances unless he or she has achieved a C3 classification in gaol, that is, has proved to be trustworthy without the need for supervision by prison officers. The C3 classification is the lowest security rating any prisoner is able to achieve. From today the Government is determined that all prisoners will be seen to have served a significant proportion of the sentence originally imposed on them. It is the Government's intention 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 47 that any prisoner sentenced from today for any crime of violence, any sex offence, or any drug-related offence, will serve at least half the minimum effective custodial period before becoming eligible for day release. Further, the Government will immediately tighten access to day release by excludmg prisoners convicted of crimes of violence, sex offences and drug-related crimes from external recreational programs. Consequent upon the thrust of the Martin report, custodial officers will no longer be delegated to approve day leave. This delegation will be exercised by the director of classification within my department, so that we ensure a consistent approach to the identification of prisoners who prove themselves worthy of the trust placed in them. Each prisoner who is granted the privilege of day release must be sponsored by a person of reputable character who guarantees the prisoner's conduct, and the safe return of the prisoner at the end of the day. The Government will immediately tighten one of the basic requirements of the scheme so that, in addition to the present criteria sponsors will now have to be at least 25 years of age instead of the previous requirement of 18 years of age. Further, the sponsor must have a clean criminal record for at least 10 years, unlike the present position that gives an option for a convicted person to become a sponsor. To reduce the amount of drugs entering prisons, the Government will introduce a universal, compulsory strip searching program for prisoners returning from day release. These requirements will apply immediately to all day release prisoners, including those who are currently granted the privilege. Honourable members should understand that these matters relate specifically to the day release program. However, underlying this program and the changes to it is one of the key tenets in this Government's approach to correctwe services, truth in sentencing, and a commitment to review the procedures for release of prisoners. Finally, because this Government is not willing to introduce legislation that will have retrospective effect, regrettably for some years to come the citizens of this State will have to endure the results of the shambles established under the Labor regime in this policy area.

HIGHER SCHOOL CERTIFICATE Urgency Mr CARR (Maroubra), Leader of the Opposition [3.26]: I move: That it is a matter or urgent necessity that this House should forthwith consider the following motion: That this House calls on the Minister for Education to defer alterations to the 1988 Higher School Certificate to allow consultation with public and private students, teachers and school organizations. The urgency of this matter was underlined by the visit that the honourable member for Blacktown and I paid yesterday to year 11 and 12 students at Leichhardt High School, in the electorate of the honourable member for Balmain. One of the students said to us- Mr Greiner: Mr Speaker, given that this apparently is a matter or urgency, I inform the House that we propose to let the debate proceed. Motion of urgency agreed to.

Suspension of Standing Orders 48 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Mi CARR (Maroubra), Leader of the Opposition l3.281: I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would preclude consideration forthwith of the following motion: That this House calls on the Minister for Education to defer alterations to the 1988 Higher School Certificate to allow consultation with public and private students, teachers and school organizations. Yesterday one of those students at the school said to us, "It seems like they're cheating us. We started on one policy and he changed it. I feel there is no use going on now". Mr Greiner: I realize it is the honourable member's first day as Leader of the Opposition, but he must move the motion. Motion for suspension of standing orders agreed to.

Motion Mr CARR (Maroubra), Leader of the Opposition [3.28]: I move: That this House calls on the Minister for Education to defer alterations to the 1988 Higher School Certificate to allow consultation with public and private students, teachers and school organizations. One of the students we spoke with summed this up by saying to us, "We started on one set of rules and he, the Minister for Education, changed it on us". That student went on to say: "Last year none of us was advised to do two-unit English. Now all but one of us are going to be scaled down because we are doing two-unit general English. How were we to know. Had we known in the beginning of the year we would have all done the other course". A teacher said to us, "The Government has made the maturely thought out decision of these students irrelevant". Members should ponder the plight of one girl at the school who had embarked on a course of two-unit mathematics, two-unit English, two- unit economics, two-unit ancient history and three-unit Greek. There were no general subjects in her course, no other approved studies. If she had been told of the Minister's changes she said that as an alternative she would have taken biology and three-unit mathematics. It is too late now. Her hopes of becoming a teacher of Greek have been dashed by this Minister's arrogance. The Minister's abrupt changes have disposed of her ambition. Her difficulties symbolize the disruption to young lives caused by this Minister's rushed decision. One student said, "Year 12 is difficult enough as it is. He has made it harder for us". A year 11 student said, "You may as well throw four months of study away". This Minister's manic desire to force change without consultation has affected every senior student- 100 000 young Australians in government and non-government high schools. These changes affect not only senior students who are completing less than 10 board approved units. Last year there were 2 900 of these students in year 12, and this year their number has increased due to the growing popularity of OAS courses. The changes also affect students studying 10 units who are not seeking entry to a tertiary institution. Last year in year 12 there were 6 200 of these students. The changes affect all senior students in New South Wales high schools, no matter their level of study, who are concerned about the changes in the yet to be determined system of scaling and weighting of marks per subject. We wait with interest to see which faction in education takes control of the scaling. Will Latin be redeified; will technics and industrial technology again be despised? Out in the schools teachers and students are waiting to be told. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 49 On Monday I spoke with the headmistress of an independent girls high school who said: "The schools do not know what is going on. You call an inspector and he does not know". Soon after the recent elections this headmistress wrote to the Minister asking what changes for secondary education he had in mind. What did she get in the mail? She got a copy of the Liberal Party policy speech. There were no indications in its anodyne comments that explained why an entire generation of school leavers has been plunged into dislocation and distress. Every parent, school, and teacher organization in New South Wales is opposed to the injustice involved in switching the rules on students halfway through their studies. It is not the substance of the changes th&t they are talking about; it is the change in the rules halfway through the process. Following a meeting of North Coast parents and citizens associations at Alstonville last Saturday, the regional president, Mrs Beth Trevan, said to a member of my staff: Where else rn the world would they change the rules In the m~ddleof a game3 We felt, as parents, that th~sGovernment was golng backwards by th~rtyyears. One of our local schools. Kyogle H~gh,has Improved ~tsretention rate from 34 per cent. . to 93 per cent thts year If the OAS courses are downgraded by the Government, how can we keep our ch~ldrenat school? Last week, members of the Catholic Education Commission, the New South Wales as so cia ti or^ of High School Principals, the New South Wales Parents Council, and the New South Wales Independent Teachers Association, all working tcgether with the New South Wales Teachers Federation and the Parents and Citizens Federation of New South Wales for the first time expressed their concern at the Government's lack of consultation on the higher school certificate changes. Last night these organizations met again and today are finalizing a joint communique of concerns. Their statement raises basic objections to the Minister's actions. First, the changes are retrospective- retrospective action from a conservative government which is unfair, therefore, to each student who commenced his or her studies in years 10, 11, as well as 12. Second-and at this stage I quote from a newsletter of the New South Wales Independent Teachers Association, which will be distributed tomorrow: The M~nister'slntentlon to make rap~dwidespread changes In educat~onw~thout thorough consultat~on1s contrary to the Government's own elect~onplatform. The newsletter states further, and this is a view shared throughout the coalition of educators and parents: Major changes rap~dlybemg put Into place by the new Minster for Educat~onmay well turn the educat~onalclock back to the per~odwhere the senlor years of education were seen solely as tertlary preparation and where the role of prlmary educat~onwas to drill students unt~lpasswe and ~ntim~datedrote-learners. A survey of schools across New South Wales reveals the full extent of how the new higher school certificate format has disrupted schooling and disappointed students, parents, and teachers. Yesterday my staff spoke with people from Ashcroft High School, in the housing estate of Green Valley, where 11 of that school's 57 year 12 students are without the 10 units necessary for a full aggregate mark in this year's higher school certificate. The problem is worse among the school's 102 year 11 students, each of whom was counselled on his or her subject choices at the commencement of the school year. The principal of Ashcroft High School now expects this counselling will have to be repeated for each student. At Auburn Girls High School more than 20 per cent of the 140 year 11 students will no\.* need to study additional board units to obtain a complete higher school certificate. Currently most of those students are studying eight units and will have to either revise completely their curriculum or leave school 50 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 altogether. At Whalan High School, near Mount Druitt, 12 of that school's 80 students in year 11 face the same difficulties. These are the same problems, the same concerns of students who attend country high schools. The Trinity Catholic College at Lismore informed my staff that 48 per cent of senior school students have been surveyed and classified as non-academic; that is, students who have no desire to proceed to tertiary education. Consequently, the school has made available a wide range of other approved study courses and work experience activities designed specifically to meet the vocational needs of these students. This innovative program at Trinity Catholic College has not been placed in jeopardy because of the arrogance of this Minister and his lack of consultation. At Bathurst High School 10 of the 74 year 12 students are studying without the 10 units required for a complete higher school certificate aggregate. One student aged 15, having learnt of the Minister's changes, informed the school principal that she could no longer see any benefit in continuing her education and that she would be leaving school to search for employment. In each instance, at each school, the students most concerned about the Minister's changes and who are least able to cope with the new higher school certificate format are those whose sole purpose in continuing their education was to enjoy the benefits of OAS courses. They are now being punished precisely because of the OAS courses. They are now being punished precisely because they set out at the beginning of this year to acquire the skills and a higher school certificate necessary to get a job in a competitive labour market. These students-and there are thousands of them across New South Wales-are being handicapped by this Government. Under a Liberal Government, as ever, those most disadvantaged are copping not help but further handicaps. Just as the national education policy is working towards better vocational training and higher participation rates, this Government has introduced a measure certain to drive down student retention rates in New South Wales. Since March 1983 and the election of the Hawke federal Government retention rates in secondary schools throughout Australia have increased from 36 per cent to 50 per cent. Now, in New South Wales, these gains are under attack as a result of the hasty actions of this Minister. Again leaving aside the merits and demerits of the changes-they will be debated on another occasion-why was it impossible to give warnings? Why was it impossible to provide consultation? How will each student be notified of the exact details of the changes? Why have year 11 students been forced to lose more than a term's work? Why have year 12 students been stranded by changes they find cruel and haphazard? The Minister's explanation is that computers demanded it and that the Government had a mandate anyway. In other words, the Government will ride over school organizations, teachers, and students- in a manic desire to be assertive. In his election policy statement on education the Premier gave a commitment to encourage more young people to complete year 12 and "ensure that every higher school certificate student received a scaled aggregate on their higher school certificate". Through the hasty and arrogant actions of the Minister for Education these two policies have become mutually exclusive. This Government, far from encouraging higher retention rates, is deliberately forcing thousands of senior school students away from their chosen studies and out of schools. The Government is enforcing the philosophy that secondary schooling has but a single purpose: to prepare for university, and no other purpose. The Minister has no mandate to introduce these changes this year. He has no mandate- 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 5 1

Mr SPEAKER: Order! It being 3.40 p.m., business is interrupted to enable honourable members to attend upon the Governor. The House will now proceed to Government House. Honourable members are requested to arrive at the main entrance to Government House between 3.45 p.m. and 3.55 p.m. Buses for Government House will depart shortly from outside St Stephen's Church in Macquarie Street. On returning, the House will reassemble upon the ringing of one long bell. Debate will then resume on the motion before the House. [Debate interrupted.]

PRESENTATION OF Mr SPEAKER The House proceeded to Government House for the presentation of Mr Speaker and returned at 5.1 p.m.

HIGHER SCHOOL CERTIFICATE [Debate resumed.] Mr CARR: It is not the substance of the changes to the higher school certificate that the Opposition is raising in the motion before the House. There will be another opportunity to debate that matter. We are talking about the haste of the policy change that has presented the students of Leichhardt High School with a change in the rules. At the beginning of year 11 the students embarked on their studies believing that they were operating as advised by their teachers and as the system allowed. Now those rules have been tom up by the Minister acting in haste, arrogantly, and in a way that showed his determination to prove one thing above all else-that he was as assertive as his colleague who sacked the director of Taronga Park zoo; as his colleague who sacked a hospital board and senior health administrators; and as his colleague who announced the abandonment of the Government's anti-gazumping laws. It is all competition on the front bench-one Minister against another to determine who takes the prize for the most brutal, insensitive, non-consultative behaviour. I referred earlier to the Liberal Party policy at the recent election campaign which contained the commitment, "The coalition will give the people of New South Wales a voice in their government". Here was a commitment to consultation, but where was the voice of the people? Where was the access for the representatives of the Federation of Parents and Citizens' Associations of New South Wales? At a meeting with the Minister on 13th April, what were federation representatives told? Simply that his changes were "non-negotiable". or, as quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald today, these changes were "ali cemented, finished, done and irreversible". Is that arrogant? Is that assertive? Is that non-consultative? This was the attitude, non-negotiable, of the Minister for Education who, just two months earlier on 13th February when a shadow minister, promised a meeting of the council of the federation "full and frank consultation with the federation and other interest groups before any changes to education policy in New South Wales". The Teachers Federation has received complaints about the changes from teachers all over the State. The federation's latest circular makes the following point: The Government has, in other areas, indicated that they are opposed to restrospective legislation, yet are proposing this for secondary credentials. 52 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

What concerns the Opposition is this Minister's manic determination to be different from the previous Government for no reason other than the sake of difference. Education arguments and the merit of each case will count for nothing in his desire to place his personal stamp on his portfolio. The Minister should be aware that the brief period of a scaled aggregate was no more and no less than a triumph for one faction in the education community which believed, and continues to believe, that secondary education should be tertiary oriented; not just tertiary oriented, but university oriented; and not just university oriented but Sydney university oriented. The Minister has fallen victim to accepting the advice of one section of a diverse education community. This has happened because he lacks the maturity of judgment to consult all sections of the community, as he promised before the recent election campaign. We have learned rapidly that the Ministry of Education could not run a zoo. It is no surprise that managing the interests of one million students and 3 200 schools severely taxes its resources. That revelation is no help to the students I met yesterday at Leichhardt High School. Those young scholars want stability and certainty, which they had when they began their senior studies. They thought they were operating within one system with one network of rules and guidelines on which they had been advised by their teachers. That was the climate they needed to succeed as scholars. The Minister has shattered that climate; he has changed the rules without warning. In the words of one of the Leichhardt High School students, "Year 12 is hard enough anyway". The single achievement of the Minister is to make it harder, not by challenging the students but by cheating them. Dr METHERELL (Davidson), Minister for Education and Youth Affairs [5.7]: What a cheap, pathetic and irresponsible stunt by the Leader of the Opposition. He is trying to create panic among higher school certificate students and their parents by an orchestrated campaign of lies and half-truths about the effect that the Government's proposals will have upon the school certificate and the higher school certificate later this year. Opposition members are the wreckers of the school examination system and the certification processes in this State. They are the people who destroyed educational standards in New South Wales over 12 years of concerted attack upon the goal to which the system should be directed-the achievement of a high standard right across the board. The Opposition will not have a bar of the school certificate; it will not have a bar of the strong higher school certificate that the Government is in the business of restoring. The Opposition wants a certificate of secondary education, which is a completely worthless document. If the Government were not to proceed with the legislation about which I gave notice earlier today, that would be the result. When the Opposition was in office it abolished the school certificate. Mr J. J. Aquilina: On a point of order. The Leader of the Opposition's motion related to the higher school certificate, and did not in any way canvass changes to the school certificate, about which the Minister for Education gave notice today. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Although there is some substance in the point of order taken by the honourable member for Blacktown, it is quite clear that attaining the school certificate is a precursor to a student's proceeding towards achieving the higher school certificate. Therefore I intend to permit the Minister for Education to make brief reference to the school certificate. Dr METHERELL: That point of order encapsulates the gutlessness of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition said, "Let us not debate the merits and demerits of the system". 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 53 Mrs Crosio: At this stage. Dr METHERELL: He said that because the Opposition is afraid to defend what it did, by legislative amendments last year, to the certification process in this State. The school certificate, the proposed certificate of secondary education and the higher school certificate are inextricably intertwined. The Opposition knows that, and it knows that if the Government's proposals do not proceed, or if the strengthening of the higher school certificate does not proceed, at the end of this year the proposed certificate of secondary education would be in place, and that would be a totally worthless document. As the Leader of the Opposition spent so much time on the amount of change that the new Government and I as Minister have introduced into the system, let us review the changes that this mob opposite made to the higher school certificate and the school certificate during the years in which it was in government. In 1976 it introduced the first changes to the higher school certificate. Students' performances in each subject were reported as a series of grades, one to five, for each of the subjects. How long did that last? In 1977 another set of changes was made. The students' moderated estimates were used, and equal weighting with scaled examination marks used to form a composite mark on which candidates' grades were based. How long did that last? In 1978, the very next year, as my ministerial colleague reminds me, another change was made. This time the method of reporting on higher school certificates was changed, with grades being replaced by a scaled mark and a percentile band. The former Government was elected in 1976 and made its first change that year. In 1977, the next year, it made another change. In 1978, the next year again, it made yet another change. Did it stop there? In 1983 a new Minister for Education was appointed. Regrettably he has now departed his portfolio and this House. Under his ministry there was an additional onslaught on the standards of the higher school certificate. In 1983 the former Government eliminated ranking by percentile from the higher school certificate. That was the fourth major change that the former Government made to the higher school certificate, but it was the most serious change to affect its standards. Yet, the Leader of the Opposition had the gall to move a motion about disruption in schools, changes to the system, and concerns of students and their parents. What a heap of hypocritical garbage that was from the Leader of the Opposition. In 1983 the Opposition eliminated ranking by percentile from the higher school certificate. Why did it do that? It did so because that was one of the basic indicators of what the marks on a certificate meant, and because that was the basis for the next round of attacks that the Minister at that time intended to launch against the higher school certificate. Once he had removed ranking by percentile from the certificate he was able to start tampering with the actual marks on the higher school certificate. Because the rankings of each student against each mark had disappeared, no longer would anyone know what the marks meant. The next round of changes occurred in 1986. At that time the Opposition removed the aggregate from the higher school certificate. Not stopping there, in that same year the Opposition abolished the reporting of merit lists in newspapers. Mr J. H. Murray: After consultation. Dr METHERELL: What a joke. The Opposition should ask the parents of New South Wales whether they approved. [Interruption] 54 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Dr METHERELL: Did the parents of New South Wales approve of the abolition of rankings from the higher school certificate? What nonsense; of course they did not. Did the parents of New South Wales agree to the abolition of the aggregate from the higher school certificate? Of course they did not. Most of them were totally ignorant of that aspect, and those who knew of it totally disapproved. Did the parents approve of the non-publication in newspapers of the top 1 per cent of students? Of course they did not. That decision was openly criticized by parents, teachers and the students themselves. Those three fundamental changes, following on three other fundamental changes earlier in this mob's term in office represented the most serious onslaught ever made on the standards of the higher school certificate. They formed a sequential attack upon the standard of education in this State. The Leader of the Opposition was a member of the Cabinet that made those decisions, and should be ashamed to have spoken in the way he did. In deference to your ruling, Mr Speaker, and the fear of the Opposition that the Government will nail it to the wall for the changes that it made and the attacks that it makes upon standards of education, I shall not detail the two pages of changes that it made to the school certificate during the period in which it held office. The Opposition made such changes in 1976, 1977, 1978, and again in 1984. In 1987 it abolished the school certificate. In 1988 it proposed a certificate of secondary education. The list goes on and on. [Interruption] Dr METHERELL: This irresponsible interjector, the honourable member for Smithfield, was part of the Government that made those decisions and attacked educational standards in this State. So let us have no more of this hypocritical hogwash about changes being made to the system. The Opposition's changes destroyed quality in education-and that is why it is now sitting on the benches opposite. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Smithfield to order. Dr METHERELL: I turn to the Government's mandate. I have in my hand a document that details the most substantial Opposition policy on education or any other subject ever released in Australia. The coalition released that document in February 1987, and rereleased it in its present form in June 1987. That document was sent to every school in New South Wales, government and non-government, and to every parents and citizens association in New South Wales. Every interested group received a copy of it. Yet, this worm opposite- Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask the Minister for Education and Youth Affairs to withdraw that word, as I consider it to be unparliamentary language, and I ask him in future to direct his remarks to the Chair. Dr METHERELL: I certainly withdraw the word worm. It was not adequate to describe the- Mr SPEAKER: Order! I do not accept a conditional withdrawal. I shall accept a positive withdrawal. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 55

Dr METHERELL: I withdraw. This policy was so widely distributed and debated that it set the agenda for educational debate for two years, leading up to the last election. On fact sheet number 8 of the policy, the coalition's policies are set out chapter and verse. They include the changes we proposed to make, including the restoration of the school certificate, the strengthening of the higher school certificate and the introduction of a scaled aggregate. Those changes were widely debated, and the former Government attacked them for all it was worth, both in and out of Parliament. It set up various stooge educational lobby groups to attack them. Though the coalition set the agenda with this document, this Opposition now says pathetically that there was no consultation.

That was, of course, before the election. Since the election three meetings of the Board of Secondary Education have been held, at one of which I was present, and at all of which my Director-General of Education and other senior officers were present. Consultation has taken place with the Teachers Federation and with the parents and citizens federation. The Opposition is simply attempting to stall because it knows that these policies, when introduced, will be the greatest single step forward ever taken to improve educational standards in this State.

Let us examine the higher school certificate that will be issued at the end of this year. The reform package proposed by the Government will lift the stature and acceptability of the higher school certificate among students, parents and employers above the level it had before the former Government took office. The document I have in my hand is the model for the new package of documentation the Government will introduce at the end of the year for the higher school certificate. Where did the package come from-one of the most fundamental reforms in the history of education in New South Wales, which will lift standards to an all-time high? The model did not come from John Elliott, or the Employers Federation of New South Wales, or any other group the Opposition may like to deride as conservative or irresponsible or opposed to the things it sets as priorities in education. The model the Government is using and improving in New South Wales came from the South Australian Labor Government.

-The reform package, into which the Government will put the strengthened documents and the year-by-year records of achievement, will create the most effective package that students have ever had by which to present themselves to employers. Yet the Opposition wants to stand in the way of that. It wants to reintroduce the certificate of secondary education and undermine all the steps the Government will take to restore the standard and quality of certification and their acceptability in the market-place of this State. The Leader of the Opposition made a few references to principals of unnamed schools and anonymous students he had seen during his visit yesterday to Leichhardt High School. I have received from a parent a document sent by facsimile transmission. I shall not read the name of the writer, but I am happy to show the letter to the Leader of the Opposition to authenticate it if he wishes. The letter, which I received this afternoon reads: 56 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Dear Minister. Subject: HSC

I am the father of twrn boys who are sltting for HSC exams this year. I want them to be rewarded for their efforts w~than HSC that records their aggregrate result and that has some meanlng to future employers. It will help them to get a job. I don't really care too much for the 2 500 puplls who chose the soft options in the knowledge they will receive a secondary school certificate. Rather, I care about the 42,500 final year students who chose more difficult opt~onsIn spite of the previous Government's attempt to reduce educat~onal standards. You must stand firm on this issue and not be swayed by the highly vocal but numerically small group of educational trendies who refuse to recognize that there is a new government In power. I voted Liberal because educat~onin New South Wales needs tightening up. Please don't sell me out. The Government will not sell out the hundreds of thousands of other parents in the commmunity who want New South Wales' educational standards restored. So that there is no doubt about the matter, the position of employers, which I should have thought was made absolutely clear by the media over the past few weeks, was made plain by the Chamber of Commerce and the employers education consortium applauding the changes the Government will make. At long last there will be an HSC that they can believe in, that has some credibility in their eyes, and that will enhance the standing of the students who apply for a job. This afternoon I received a news release from the Employers Federation of New South Wales, which read: A leading employers' spokesman today outlined employers' needs from the education system in terms of marking the higher school certificate. The executive director of the Employers Federation, Garry Brack, said employers needed both an overall scaled mark and subject-by-subject marks for HSC candidates because the requirements of ~ndiv~dualemployers d~fferedwidely and the system needed to take account of this. That is exactly what the Government's new and strengthened higher school certificate will do. Nothing has been subtracted from the higher school certificate document, but many necessary things have been added so that the total package will give more information and, therefore, have more credibility than ever before. The Opposition wants to destroy the credibility of the higher school certificate and the whole certification process. Let them stand condemned for that. We shall remind them of it from now until the next election. When we win the next election we shall remind them of it for the four years after that, and they will remain rotting on the Opposition benches until the turn of the century because they stand opposed to the improvement of educational standards in this State. The higher school certificate has two fundamental roles, and both of them will be met by the new and strengthened form of higher school certificate that the Government will be presenting at the end of the year. Its first and most important role is as a reliable report to parents and employers of all-round achievement. Whatever its final format, that is exactly what it will do. In an attractive package-something like this format-the certificate will show the results of the school certificate and contain a detailed record of a student's achievements for years 10, 1 1 and 12. Finally, the higher school certificate package will have enhanced credibility because the aggregate will be recorded on it and it will show the ranking of the student in the subjects attempted. The package will have space for additional documentation about the student, whether it be references from his school, references from employers for part- time work or work experience. Other awards students have received for whatever it is they are skilled in and have achieved during the entirety of their school career will be included in the package. How dare the Leader of the Opposition imply that students of New South Wales do not need this package? 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 57 How dare he embark on a campaign to frustrate those students getting this essential package and the parents and employers of New South Wales who want justice? The second most important role for the higher school certificate is as a gauge for tertiary entrance. Nothing that is being proposed will do anything to enhance the credibility of the higher school certificate for tertiary entrance purposes. There are two groups of tertiary institutions in New South Wales: one group-a diminishing group-that does not at present accept the University of Sydney's scaled aggregate, and the other more important group, the universities, and largest colleges of advanced education-and from next year an even larger group of colleges of advanced education-that do accept the scaling method of the University of Sydney. Whichever of those two systems is used, the necessary information will appear on the higher school certificate. If all the universities and three of the colleges of advanced education use the University of Sydney's system this year, they will have the University of Sydney's scaled aggregate on the certificate where it belongs, where it can be seen, right up front-not the nonsense of the pick-a-box document that went out to students, who had to rummage round two or three alternative scores on a cheap and shoddy document and try to pretend it was part of their higher school certificate document. That nonsense will stop. That score will appear up front on the higher school certificate for all the students seeking entry to those institutions. For students seeking entry to other tertiary institutions the same assessment and examination marks that have always appeared-at least since the last round of changes to the higher school certificate were initiated-will still appear on the front of the certificate so that those institutions can calculate their scores for entry to those institutions. Where is the disadvantage to any student seeking entry to a tertiary institution under one set of rules or the other? All the information necessary for those two sets of judgment will be included in the new higher school certificate. Of course it is important to have that scaled aggregate up front; of course it is important to encourage students to take the difficult options. How can the Leader of the Opposition with any credibility use as an excuse for his campaign of frustration the fact that some teachers are advising students to take the soft option as a way of jacking up their scores artificially? How dare he use that as an excuse. It is a threat to the future of this State and nation to encourage students not to take courses because they are the most difficult they can attempt, but to take the easy ones because they can do better and score more by tak!ng the soft options. That is a ludicrous attempt to defend the bizarre education policies being pursued on the opposite side of the House. In an earlier speech in this place the Leader of the Opposition referred to the need for Australia to pick itself up, to look forward and to develop its standards. Yet he is attacking proposals that will do just that. He is totally contradictory. He does not have a sense of direction and on the first day of this new Parliament is selling out whatever standards he may have believed in. I have stated that all students will be better off under this system because all of them will enjoy one or both of the following: they will enjoy far supenor documentation than they have ever had about the full range of their achievements in education and, if they go on to the higher school certificate, they will get a much enhanced higher school certificate. That is to the advantage of every student, to ail their parents who have struggled hard alongside them, and to every employer who is confronted with a choice between prospective employees. The Government does not bat an eyelid at the criticisms being mounted by members opposite, nor does it blink at the fact that the Leader of the Opposition can trot out a couple of captive educational lobby groups which 58 ASSEMBLY 27 April, I988 support his proposals. Members on this side know what camp those people are in. We are not at all impressed by their arguments. We have heard it all before. We heard it ail in the election campaign, in the months before the election campaign, and we will be hearing it further. We will not be distracted by those sorts of mindless criticisms. Honourable members should remember that those lobby groups to which the Leader of the Opposition is making himself captive are the very groups that are opposed to examinations in this State. That is the official policy of the Teachers Federation. It wants to do do away with external examinations. It wants to have a totally classroom-based assessment system. How cosy that would be for the teachers and for the system. The Government will not have a bar of that, and I am shocked that the Leader of the Opposition would deliver himself up to groups espousing those policies. Those same groups were responsible for stripping of the aggregate and the stripping of any other indication of relative merit from the higher school certificate over the time I have outlined. Honourable members of this side are not at all impressed. We are proud to stand distinguished from those groups and to stand alongside the parents and students of New South Wales who want quality education in this State. That is what they are going to get. The legislative reforms the Government is embarking upon-of which the amendments to the Education and Public Instruction Act are but a part- will chart the way for education in Australia for the future. Members of the Government are no longer content for New South Wales to be dragged behind the trends of other Labor States or to be rendered captive of the educational lobby groups that the gutless mob opposite has surrendered itself to. This State is setting the way for education in Australia. In the years to come the people of Australia, as have the people of New South Wales, will turn to this Government and say thank God someone set a new direction; thank God someone cares about education; thank God we will have better discipline in schools in this State; thank God basic skills will be tested; and thank God some element of quality and substance has been restored to the certification and examination process. The Government intends to proceed. As I have said, in the past couple of days decisions have been taken, and they are irrevocable. We are determined to chart this new direction for the future of Australia and for the families of New South Wales. Mr CARR (Maroubra), Leader of the Opposition [5.35], in reply: Is the Catholic Education Commission a stooge education body? Is the New South Wales Association of High School Principals a captive education organization? Is the New South Wales Parents Council a stooge of the Opposition? The New South Wales Independent Teachers Association, the Teachers Federation and parents and citizens associations have all been joined by those bodies in condemning what they regard as a hasty decision. If the Minister for Education and Youth Affairs had done what my colleague the honourable member for Blacktown and I did yesterday and gone to a high school, sat down in a classroom with year 11 and year 12 students and asked them to say what they think of these changes, he could not have given the speech he just gave to this House. It would have been impossible to do so. These were good kids. They were neatly dressed kids, kids who took their studies seriously, who were polite in their relationships with their teachers, who were concerned about their futures and were taking their studies seriously. They said to us, "We have been cheated because at the end of year 10 we made certain decisions with the advice of our teachers and now those guidelines on which we were to operate for two years have been changed". 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 59

Leave aside the substance of the case. Leave aside the merits or demerits of the changes proposed by the Minister, they will be debated on another occasion. The House is debating today the fact that those changes have been introduced without warning, in a way that disadvantages 100 000 young Australian scholars who are trying to do their best to prepare themselves for a competitive labour market. I do not speak solely of those children who are doing other approved studies. In the group we spoke to at Leichhardt High School yesterday there were no such students. None had done the courses the Minister stigmatized as soft options. The kids we talked to were not doing other approved studies, as legitimate and useful as those are. They were concerned about the changes in the weighting. They were concerned because at the end of year 10 or at the start of year 11 they made course selections that were being drastically revised. It was the tearing up of the rules in the middle of the process to which they objected. One might call these kids naive, but they assume that those who are making decisions at the top of the education system are people who take their problems into account; that a Minister will take into consideration the effect on their lives and their careers of changing the rules after they have launched upon their package of studies. Those students do not count with this Minister. He has not spoken to them. No one in the Government will sit down and talk to them. The Minister said that I have imagined the names of high schools and quoted unnamed principals. I was quite specific. I mentioned a few high schools by name. I mentioned Bathurst. I hope the honourable member for Bathurst talks to the students at that school, including the student aged 15 who told the principal, after hearing the Minister's proposed change, that she did not feel there was any purpose in continuing at school. The Minister should talk to the people of Ballina where the regional parents and citizens associations are saying that the rise in school participation levels they had worked so hard to achieve has been shattered by the arrogance of this Minister. To give an idea of the extent of feeling I quote from the Holy Cross College, Ryde, newsletter, Publica published on 22nd April: Many groups of parents, teachers, principals, and students have expressed their concern about these moves. We support their concerns and believe that: (1) changes are being made without adequate consultation (2) changes arc being made too quickly, without considered rationale for doing so, and (3) new legislation will be retrospective,- And this is the essence of their grievance: -affecting adversely students who have already made course selections for years I1 and 12.. . The students affected have already made their selections under one set of rules. The Minister cares nothing about them. Last night on radio station 2GB the Minister was almost flippant in his dismissal of this case for consultation. He said, "Necessarily it takes a little bit of time for the detailed guidelines then to be worked out for the implementation of the broad policy decisions", and that is the stage we are at now. That is not good enough for the teachers, the schools or the students. For example, they want to be told where they stand on weighting and scaling. Individuals from independent schools, whose weighted sympathies on other education questions could well be with this Government, are complaining that they can get no answers when they ask the Minister for clarification. 60 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

Clearly, this Minister has not sat down and talked to the students, and he will not do so because the message he would receive would be the same as the Opposition has received, that there was a case for consultation. Every educational organization, State and private, is united on this issue. It has taken a political genius to bring those who represent the Catholic school system and the private school system together with the Teachers Federation, but this Minister has done it by his arrogance. Every educationist in this State will be aware of the tone of his utterances in this House today. Honourable members should reflect on the fact that we now have a Minister for Education who refers to these respected school organisations representing the Government and the private sector as stooges of this Opposition, as captive organizations.

Numerous organizations will be appalled by that description. The hot- headedness that the Minister has displayed in this debate would be of concern to any person concerned about the Minister's arrogant decision-making, which reflects his unsuitability to be ministerial head of the education system in this State. This Government should learn from the way the Labor Party handled the introduction of changes to the school certificate. Those changes were made after two years of consultation, including the setting up of a select committee of the Parliament upon the school certificate. That committee met for more than two years, spoke with the education groups and provided those who have a right to be heard in educational debates with an opportunity to consult. This Minister made no opportunity for consultation, or expression of opinion. That is not available with this Minister and with this Government. It would not matter so much if it were not for the numerous students affected-not just the 5 000 in the Minister's calculation, but the majority of those 100 000 students who will sit for the higher school certificate this year. That is another example of this Government's growing arrogance. This Parliament is right to urge this Minister to reconsider decisions made with haughtiness and rashness, which will do so much damage to the education system.

Question-That the motion be agreed to-put.

Division called for.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before I call for the division bells to be rung I inform honourable members that the House is acting under the standing orders and not the previous sessional orders. Those voting for the ayes should therefore pass to the right of the Chair and those voting for the noes should pass to the left of the Chair.

The House divided. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 6 1

Ayes, 48 Ms Allan Mr Hunter Ms Nori Mr Amery Mr Irwin Mr Paciullo Mr A. S. Aquilina Mr Keegan Mr E. T. Page Mr J. J. Aquilina Mr Knight Mr Price Mr Arkell Mr Knowles Mr Primrose Mr K. G. Booth Mr Langton Dr Refshauge Mr Brereton Mr Lovelee Mr Rogan Mr Carr Mr McManus Mr Shedden Mr Cleary Mr Mack Mr Unsworth Mrs Crosio Mr Markham Mr Walsh Mr Davoren Mr Martin Mr Welsh Mr Doyle Ms Moore Mr Whelan Mr Face Mr H. F. Moore Mr Ferguson Mr Moss Miss Fraser Mr J. H. Murray Tellers, Mr Gibson Mr Nagle Mr Beckroge Mr Harrison Mr Newman Mr Christie

Noes, 58 Mr Andrews Mr Griffiths Mr Roberts Mr Armstrong Mr Hartcher Mr Schipp Dr Aston Mr Hay Mr Schultz Mr Baird Mr Jeffery Mr Singleton Mr Berry Mr Kerr Mr Small Mr Books Mr Longley Mr Smiles Mr J. D. Booth Miss Machin Mr Smith Mr Caterson Mr Matheson Mr Souris Mr Causley Mr Merton Mr Tink Mr Chappell Dr Metherell Mr Turner Mr Cochran Mr T. J. Moore Mr Webster Mrs Cohen Mr Morris Mr West Mr Collins Mr W. T. J. Murray Mr White Mr Cruickshank Mr D. L. Page Mr Wotton Mr Dowd Mr Park Mr Yeomans Mr Downy Mr Peacocke Mr Zammit Mr Fahey Mr Petch Mr Glachan Mr Photios Tellers, Mr Graham Mr Pickard Mr Beck Mr Greiner Mr Rixon Mr Phillips Question so resolved in the negative. Motion negatived.

PRESENTATION OF Mr SPEAKER Mr SPEAKER: I have to report that the Assembly has been to Government House where I informed His Excellency the Governor that, immediately after the opening of Parliament today the Legislative Assembly, in the exercise of their undoubted right, had proceeded to the election of their Speaker, that the choice had fallen upon me, and that I had to present myself to His Excellency as their Speaker, whereupon His Excellency had been pleased to offer me his congratulations. I then, in the name and on behalf of the House, 62 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 laid claim to all their undoubted rights and privileges, particularly to freedom of speech in debate, to free access to His Excellency when occasion should require, and asked that the most favourable construction should, on all occasions, be put upon their language and proceedings; to all of which His Excellency readily assented. Once again I thank honourable members for the great honour they have conferred upon me and again affirm my intention to impartially uphold the privileges and duties of honourable members.

PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE Mr SPEAKER: Order! I direct the Clerk to report to the House on a matter of parliamentary privilege. The Clerk: Mr Max Smith, a former member of the Legislative Assembly, is a defendant in defamation proceedings arising from the allegedly unauthorized issuing of a press release at variance with a speech made by Mr Smith in this House. Defendant Smith objected to the inspection by the plaintiff of letters passing from Smith to the Speaker, and letters passing separately both from the Speaker and the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly to Smith, relating to parliamentary privilege. Defendant Smith claimed the letters, which came into existence as a result of the proceedings, were subject to parliamentary privilege. At the direction of Speaker Kelly, I sought the advice of the Crown Solicitor as to whether the letters could be the subject of a claim for parliamentary privilege, in relation to the question of discovery and inspection of documents. The Crown Advocate subsequently advised that a claim that the abovementioned letters were privileged could only be sustained where the correspondence could fairly be described as integral to the working of the Parliament. The Crown Advocate believed that it was unlikely that the courts would regard the advice given by the Speaker in the Smith case as being sufficiently necessary for discharging the functions of the Parliament to attract privilege. Furthermore, on legal precedent, he did not regard the Speaker's advising in the present case as attracting either parliamentary privilege or public interest immunity. The Crown Advocate suggested that in those cases where the Speaker, or the Clerk on his behalf-and by extension, members-wished to maintain a claim that would prevent disclosure of an advising relating to the workings of Parliament, the correspondence should be declared to be confidential. Such a declaration of confidentiality, however, would only be one aspect in the overall consideration by the courts of public interest and could be no guarantee that the protection of confidentiality would be invoked. When the matter was listed before Mr Justice Yeldham, it was indicated by the defendant that he had decided to waive his claim to parliamentary privilege. Honourable members who were members of the Forty-eighth Parliament will recall that on 31st March, 1987, the motion of the then honourable member for Camden, Mr John Fahey, now Minister for Industrial Relations and Employment and Minister Assisting the Premier "That this House reasserts its privileges of representation of constituents by members, including the right of confidentiality of communication between member and constituent, as propounded in the Report of the Select Committee on Parliamentary Privilege of the House of Commons" was put and negatived. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 63

DETERMINATION OF CONTRAVENTION OF CONSTITUTION (DISCLOSURES BY MEMBERS) REGULATION, 1983 Mr SPEAKER: On 15th February, the Clerk, at the direction of Speaker Kelly, sought the advice of the Crown Solicitor as to whether the honourable member for Wollongong had contravened the Constitution (Disclosures by Members) Regulation, 1983, by failing to include certain lands in his various returns. The Crown Solicitor advised in essence that it was impossible to establish that Mr Arkell had been guilty of any wilful contravention of the regulation, as required by section 14~(2) of the Constitution Act. Since the Constitution (Disclosures by Members) Regulation, 1983, came into effect, it has become the practice for members to lodge additional returns amplifying or clarifying original returns, if they so wish. The honourable member for Wollongong subsequently lodged such an additional return, clarifying his land holdings. Following the receipt of the advice of the Crown Solicitor, the Clerk recommended to Speaker Kelly that the matter of whether the member for Wollongong had contravened the Constitution (Disclosures by Members) Regulation, 1983, should not be pursued. Speaker Kelly accepted this recommendation, as do I. I draw the attention of all honourable members to the advice of the Crown Solicitor that under the legislation no provision is made for any form of inquiry to determine whether a contravention of the regulation has been made by a member. The Crown Solicitor has also advised that there are no powers conferred on the Clerk, as the person compiling and maintaining the Register, or myself to conduct any form of inquiry which witnesses might be compelled to attend and give evidence under oath. The Crown Solicitor has further advised that neither the Clerk nor myself is given power by the regulation to correct the register.

SESSIONAL COMMITTEE Standing Orders and Procedure Committee Mr DOWD (Lane Cove), Attorney General [6.2]: By leave, I move: That the Standing Orders and Procedure Committee be appointed to inquire into, and if considered advisable, make recommendations to the Legislative Assembly, respecting the standing orders, rules, usages, customs, practice and procedures of the Legislative Assembly. (2) That such committee consist of the Speaker, Mr John Joseph Aquilina, Mr William Harmon Beckroge, the Hon. John Robert Arthur Dowd, Mr Bruce Leslie Jeffery, the Hon. Timothy John Moore, Mr Ronald Anthony Phillips, Dr Andrew John Refshauge, Mr Robert James Webster and Mr Paul Francis Patrick Whelan. (3) That the committee have leave to sit during the sittings of the House. I thank the Opposition for its indulgence in allowing us to move to set up this committee today. We do not want many more two-minute divisions. I pay tribute to the former Speaker in his capacity as chairman of the Standing Orders and Procedure Committee. Although the votes tended to be along party lines, as one would expect, nevertheless he accorded members of the former Opposition courtesy and assistance and chaired the committee most impressively. I also want to say how grateful we were for the very good advice given to us by the clerks who advised us on that committee. I pay tribute also to my predecessor in office, in both capacities, the former member for Burrinjuck. He should be given great credit for introducing sessional orders to make the Parliament work better. We did not always agree on matters, and fuses tended to be a little short sometimes, but nevertheless, as I say, the Parliament 64 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 worked much better. There were fewer divisions. It is most important that the better working of Parliament should continue. Honourable members should realize, if they are not already conscious of the changes in the Interpretation Act, that for some extraordinary reason we accord weight to what we say in this House whereas previously what was said was given virtually no weight at all. As a result, it becomes important for as many members as possible to speak in debate. The Government wishes to continue the process that has occurred during the past few years of making the House a freer place for members to participate in and contribute to parliamentary debates. This will assist interpretation of the measures. I give credit to the former member for Burrinjuck for what he did to achieve that process. We did not agree with all the sessional orders. However they were much better than those under which I suffered when we were formerly in office, and under those during the early years of the immediate past Government. The task ahead of us is the setting up of this committee to deal with the new standing orders that will emerge from sessional orders. There has been a long enough go at the sessional orders. It may be that the Government will adopt sessional orders for this short session. We want to see what can be done to finalize the sessional orders process and to put them into the standing orders. We also want to consider matters of privilege typified by that which was raised earlier today. I laboured long and mightily in dealing with the question of communication between members and Ministers and between constituents and members. I want to continue that process to the great advantage of all backbenchers, Government and Opposition. One of the matters I will be asking the Standing Orders and Procedure Committee to consider touches the question of the interruption of question time. It is easy, when one assumes office, to see why the Opposition should forfeit its right to questions when it moves urgency during question time. However, I believe that procedure is wrong. The procedure used in Canberra is better and provides an opportunity to deal with genuine matters of public importance. It avoids the practice of trying to fit a Standing Order 49 adjournment into the time allotted, or the taking of an urgency motion. This matter has not yet been resolved by the Government, but I register my view that we should try as best we can to give to the present Opposition the opportunity that we did not enjoy while in Opposition. There will be a meaningful choice at question time. It is obvious after today's question time that there is no reason for any member on the Government side of the House to worry at all-having heard the 45 minutes called for and taken up by the Opposition. Having paid tributes to those deserving of them, I commend this motion to the House. Perhaps next week we can convene our first meeting to try to resolve some problems. Problems affecting privilege will take longer, but some of the mechanical matters could be dealt with. Motion agreed to.

CONSTITUTION (PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARIES) AMENDMENT BILL EVIDENCE (CROWN PRIVILEGE) AMENDMENT BILL EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INSTRUCTION (AMENDMENT) BILL Suspension of certain standing orders agreed to. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 65 EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INSTRUCTION (AMENDMENT) BILL Bill introduced and read a first time.

Second Reading Dr METHERELL (Davidson), Minister for Education and Youth Affairs f6.81: I move: That th~sb~ll be now read a second time. The Education and Public Instruction (Amendment) Bill is the first step in restoring credibility to a public education system which the previous Government, in an unprecedented campaign of wilful disregard for the wishes of the people, had left in a state of confusion and disarray. On 19th March the will of the people was made clear to all. This Government was elected, charged with the responsibility of bringing to education in this State a new credibihty, continuity, discipline and improved basic standards, These amendments are fundamental to the carrying out of that responsibility and are directed specifically at the restoration of standards. They will also restore to our schools the necessary powers to maintain a disciplined and effective environment for teaching and learning. The prime objects of this bill are to abolish the certificate of secondary education, to restore the school certificate and to give to the Director-General of Education and his delegates power to suspend or to expel students from State schools. No one should be surprised that one of the first parliamentary actions of the Greiner Government is an amendment of the Education and Public Instruction Act. On 25th February, 1987, I stood in this Chamber and began my contribution to the second reading debate by stating that the Education and Public Instruction Bill was the most serious attack on freedom of choice and basic standards in education since the Labor Government took office. I have announced that before the middle of this year I intend to put in train a widespread review of the Education and Public Instruction Act with particular reference to the registration of non-government schools. This will involve calling for submissions, issuing a discussion paper and full and proper consultation yith interest groups and the wider community. I intend to brine to the budget sesslon of the Parliament in 1989 a package of amendments based on the review process. In the meantime, however, there are matters which cannot wait for the review process. These are matters upon which the Government has a clear and unequivocal mandate. They are matters where the community expects us to act decisively before irreparable damage is done to the credibility of the statewide public examination and accreditation processes. These processes, linked as they inevitably are to computer technology, are also tied in to a timetable whereby it is essential that advice to schools, administrative arrangements and computer programming proceed now if we are to present students with certificates of substance and value at the conclusion of the school year. The abolition of the certificate of secondary education is consistent with our pre-election commitment to reward excellence and to issue certificates which are easily understood by the whole community and which are a true reflection of the student's results. The proposed certificate of secondary education was fundamentally flawed in three ways. First, it proposed to reward, with a board-issued certificate, students who left school as early as year 9 before even completing year 10. In this sense it was a direct incentive to drop out and an endorsement of early 66 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 leaving as an acceptabie option. The successful completion of year 10 should properly be seen as a staging post, a first step in a series of assessments and examinations leading to the reward of the higher school certificate. Any certificate which was available to those who dropped out before successfully completing year 10 would be of little value, not only to the student but to the whole significance of educational assessment and certification. The second flaw was that the proposed certificate of secondary education was to reward students who stayed on until the end of year 10 but who did not fulfil minimum requirements-again, an endorsement of failure, a clear indication to students that just being there was somehow good enough, that completing the course in the sense of finishing to the end was sufficient and that standards of performance were irrelevant. Third, the proposed certificate would have rewarded those students who dropped out midway through a year, such as year 11 and year 12. What a disincentive that would be to those students trying to keep going at a time when they needed every encouragement to see it through. Moreover, the same certificate in name would be awarded to every student who left school at any time from year 9 until the end of year 12. This would have guaranteed the certificate's poor standing in the community and, therefore, greatly disadvantaged students obtaining it, especially with employers. Clearly it was necessary to abolish the certificate of secondary education at the first possible opportunity. It was vital that such a certificate, and its underlying philosophy of "near enough is good enough", should not gain a toehold in New South Wales. The school certificate, which this amendment will restore, will not suffer from the flaws of the proposed certificate of secondary education. It is well known and widely accepted throughout the community. Indeed, most parents and employers were unaware it had been abolished. The school certificate will not be awarded to any student who drops out before the end of year 10, nor will it be awarded to those who do not fulfil the minimum requirements at the end of year 10. Those students who leave before the successful completion of year 10 will be given a school record and reference, but not the certificate. Further, in years 1 1 and 12, records of achievement will not be awarded to students unless they complete the full year. The school certificate is a genuine benchmark award, recognizing publicly the completion of an important phase in secondary education, rewarding that achievement with a credible award and signalling the beginning of the next important phase which will culminate in the achievement of the higher school certificate. The school certificate is not an encouragement to leave at the end of year 10. Rather than being an exit visa we are seeking to develop an award which will recognize the previous hard work and provide a stimulus for students to return to school to complete the full secondary program. In this context a starter package of documents is being developed, containing the school certificate and a year 10 record of achievement. These will later be consolidated as a subset of the major package of documents to be awarded at the end of year 12. In format and design the school certificate will appear as a logical foundation upon which further secondary school certification is built. By restoring the name with which the citizens of New South Wales are familiar a sense of continuity is preserved. By refining and strengthening the concept of the school certificate a sense of current and future relevance is ensured. Contrary to the assertions of some cornmentators.and interest groups, this is not a decision made in haste or without consultat~on.Our position on the school certificate was part of the Liberal Party-National Party education policy which has been public for more than two years. That policy was developed after wide consultation with the community and is strongly supported by parents and employer groups. This amendment is consistent with, and 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 67 underpins, our commitment to academic excellence and achievement; to six years of secondary education for all young people; to improving the skills of young people and consequently enhancing Australia's social and economic performance. This Government will ensure that New South Wales education certificates genuinely reward effort and achievement. Now certificates will have credibility and currency. Our certificates will encourage commitment and stimulate students to complete the course and finish the task. The second major purpose of this amendment bill is to remove from the Minister and to give the Director-General of Education the power to suspend or expel students from State schools. I am clear in my view that though the Minister should control and regulate the general matter of student discipline in State schools, he should not be dealing with issues relating to individual students. The question of the suspension or expulsion of particular students is properly a matter that should be dealt with as close as possible to the school where the problems take place and the recommendation for action is developed. It should be readily apparent that in this matter I take a contrary view to that of the former Minister for Education. It seems to me that he, in taking unto himself the power to expel in a very public fashion, practically ensured that particular cases of individual students would gain exposure in the media, often in the context of threatened industrial action. The amendment relating to the delegation of functions by the Director- General of Education should be read in conjunction with this amendment. It is proposed that the Director-General of Education should delegate the expulsion function to the rqgional director while retaining the final right of appeal from a decision by the regional director. Again, this amendment is consistent with the Government's policy on school discipline. We seek to strengthen the authority of the principal and the school by effective and prompt action to protect the rights of the great majority of students to learn and teachers to teach, free from the constant disruption and harassment of an uncontrollable minority. I commend the amendments to the House. Debate adjourned.

CONSTITUTION (PARLIAMENTARY SECmTARIES) AMENDMENT BILL Bill introduced and read a first time.

Second Reading Mr GREINER (Ku-ring-gai), Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs [6.20]: I move: That this bill be now read a second time. It is not without significance that the first bill which I have the honour to put before this House is one whose sole aim is to improve the efficiency in government administration in this State. One of the foremost aims of my Government is to ensure that public administration in this State is open, efficient, and accountable. In due course we will be introducing freedom of information legislation, restructuring the Public Service Board and establishing the independent commission against corruption. The appointment of parliamentary secretaries in the Legislative Council, as proposed in this bill, is but one measure my Government will employ to meet my aim of efficient public administration and to recognize the potential 68 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 significance of the upper House in the running of the State. I have already made it clear both publicly and privately that I expect the highest standards from the members of Cabinet. I have no doubt that heavy demands will be made upon the time of each Minister in order that we may undo the damage of the past 12 years. At present parliamentary secretaries may be appointed only from the Legislative Assembly. This bill provides for their appointment from the Legislative Council as well. As honourable members will be aware, parliamentary secretaries provide assistance to Ministers in the carrying out of functions associated with their ministerial responsibilities. They represent Ministers at public functions and receive deputations on a Minister's behalf. That has been their traditional role. I propose also that the secretaries be given additional specific responsibilities in policy development and administration, as have the secretaries associated with my administration, the administration of the Deputy Premier, and the administration of the honourable member for Goulburn. These are all-important and time-consuming tasks and it is my intention that the parliamentary secretaries I propose to appoint will work closely with me, as Premier, and with Ministers of the coalition Government. This Government recognizes the experience and expertise that members of the Legislative Council can offer to public administration. Accordingly, the bill before the House gives members of the Legislative Council the opportunity to assist Ministers of the Crown in the effective government of this State. I turn now to the amendments in the bill. Schedule 1 to the bill will make the main amendment to the Constitution Act and enable parliamentary secretaries to be appointed from either House. The bill also amends the manner in which a parliamentary secretary ceases to hold office. Parliamentary secretaries from both Houses will now hold office for the same terms. In addition to other instances listed in the Constitution Act, parliamentary secretaries will cease to hold office on polling day for a general election of members of this House. Further, they will cease to hold office if their seats become vacant for any reason other than the dissolution or expiration of the Legislative Assembly. This bill is the first initiative of my Government to ensure the smooth running of New South Wales. Members of the public have the right to receive prompt and efficient service from the Government. They expect their representations to be answered promptly. They expect to meet with Ministers to discuss their concerns. Under the two preceding Labor administrations, these expectations were often not met. Weeks passed before letters were answered and requests for meetings were simply ignored. My Government proposes to be available for the people it represents and the assistance of parliamentary secretaries will ensure that the people of this State receive the prompt service they expect and deserve. This amendment will bring New South Wales into line with States such as Western Australia, Tasmania, and Victoria where parliamentary secretaries may be appointed from either House of Parliament. The measures in this bill will certainly contribute to the efficient administration of New South Wales. I table additional explanatory material for the benefit of honourable members, and commend the bill. Debate adjourned.

EVIDENCE (CROWN PRIVILEGE) AMENDMENT BILL Bill introduced and read a first time. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 69 Second Reading Mr DOWD (Lane Cove), Attorney General [6.24]: I move: That th~sb~ll be now read a second tlme The Evidence (Crown Privilege) Amendment Bill will repeal part VI of the Evidence Act 1898. Part VI of the Evidence Act 1898 is a complex scheme providing for the giving by the Attorney General of a conclusive certificate claiming Crown privilege in relation to certain communications. It was introduced by the previous Government in 1979 to overcome what were then seen to be difficulties arising from the case of Sankey v. Whztlam and Ors. The scheme under part VI vested in the Attorney General an absolute power to certify that any communication, whether written or oral, was a confidential government communication and that disclosure would not be allowed in the public interest. Once a certificate was given by the Attorney General the court would have no power other than to accept the Attorney General's ruling. It would have no power to examine the documents or to look behind the certificate. The shadow Attorney General at that time, the late Mr John Maddison, indicated that the Opposition wholeheartedly opposed the bill. Indeed he said: One of the first ieglslat~veacts of a government of our polit~calpersuasion wtll be to repeal what we regard as some of the most obnoxious provlslons to be found In leglslat~onfor many many years.. . It prov~desthe mach~nerywhereby there can be a cover-up of all kmds of ~llegalactlvltles w~th~nthe Government and w~thlnthe government servlce. This bill is the fulfilment of the undertaking given on that occasion by John Maddison. The purpose of the introduction of part VI was to take away from the courts the power to determine whether the release of certain information was in the public interest. Part VI reposed in the Executive the determination of the question of whether the disclosure of government communications was in the public interest. The legislation was introduced by the Wran Government with great haste in 1979 with debate being severely truncated. The urgency arose because it was politically expedient at the time. Nevertheless, it was a gross interference with the independence of the courts and perhaps foreshadowed the increasing extent to which the Executive of the Labor Government was prepared to override the independence of the judiciary. Other examples of interference with the proper role of the judiciary include legislation to override the decisions of courts relating to Parramatta Park and the Sydney city council. The Conduct Division of the Judicial Commission is yet another example of the former Government's mistrust of the ability of the judiciary to act properly as a third tier of government. The introduction of the Evidence (Amendment) Act was without question unnecessary and was perceived by us in Opposition at the time to be unnecessary. But the Wran Government was not willing to allow proper consideration of the legislation. Indeed, the Wran Government's prediction of the devastating impact of the decision in Sankey v. Whitlam and Ors was clearly wrong. Part VI of the Evidence Act, which was introduced to overcome that perceived impact, has indeed never been used. The statutory scheme was always fraught with potential for abuse and the only pleasing aspect is the fact that the legislation was never used. As we expressed at the time, it is our view that questions of Crown privilege are properly considered by the courts in accordance with the long- standing principles of common law. The effect of the Evidence (Crown Privilege) Amendment Bill will be to repeal part VI of the Evidence Act thereby restoring 70 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988

the courts' discretion at common law to determine, in a particular case, whether or not information should be subject to Crown privilege. This Government believes that the principles of common law, when properly applied by the courts, will ensure that Crown privilege does apply to those government communications which, in the public interest, should not be disclosed. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned.

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT Mr DOWD (Lane Cove), Attorney General [6.30]: I move: That thls House at ~tsrlslng th~sday do adjourn untd Tuesday, 17 May, 1988, at 2.15 p.m. The Government proposes that Parliament should sit for two or three weeks- probably three weeks-from 17th May. On the last occasion there was a change of government, which does not happen often in New South Wales, only a formal sitting of Parliament took place on the first day and some time elapsed before the House resumed. The Government has taken the somewhat unprecedented step of introducing legislation on the first day of sitting. That legislation will be debated from 17th May onwards. Other measures will be announced in the intervening weeks to give as much notice as possible to members and to allow proper debate to take place when the House resumes. I assure the House that, as a new government, it has not been easy to prepare legislation for introduction at short notice. If the Government had not arranged a sitting in May, the House would not have sat from November 1987 to August or September 1988, other than for a formal sitting day. That would have been intolerable for the democratic process and the legislative program. The Government is considering some of the legislation that was before the House when the recent election was called. Some bills will appear in a similar, if not the same, form. When the House resumes on 17th May I shall, of course, inform honourable members of the proposed program for later in the year. Certain decisions need to be made but I shall give honourable members as much notice as possible. I thank the honourable member for Blacktown, and other Opposition members with whom I have dealt, for the co-operation extended to me. I have attempted to provide them with as much information as possible. Mr Speaker, you have set the tone for the future conduct of this House. I would like to think that this Parliament will be a pleasant place in which to work. I am not holding my breath, but we will try to keep up the standards. Mr J. J. AQUILINA (Blacktown) [6.32]: I support the motion and thank the Attorney General for the way in which today's proceedings have been conducted. As Opposition Leader of the House, I appreciate that warning was given that a number of motions would be moved today, up to and including the second reading speeches of Ministers. Honourable members have been given an opportunity between now and the resumption of the House on 17th May to prepare appropriate debates on those matters. That is the democratic process of this Chamber, and we trust that proceedings will always be conducted in that way. No doubt the Leader of the House realizes that that may not always be possible, but the Opposition appreciates what has occurred and looks forward to being able to conduct full debates and co-operate as much as possible and wherever possible in the proper and orderly procedures of this Chamber. Motion agreed to. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 7 1

ADJOURNMENT Collaroy Hospital Mr DOWD (Lane Cove), Attorney General [6.33]: I move: That th~sHouse do now adjourn. Mr J. D. BOOTH (Wakehurst) [6.33]: I welcome the opportunity to raise the situation facing Collaroy Hospital, which is in my electorate, with the implementation of the Richmond report. I am pleased that the Minister for Health is at the table, enabling him to inform me of the approach to be taken by the new Government on this vexed issue that has caused considerable concern to constituents in the neighbourhood of Collaroy Hospital and to parents and friends of patients. At the outset, Mr Speaker, I add my congratulations to those offered earlier today by the Premier, the Deputy Premier, and other honourable members on your appointment to the important role of Speaker. Collaroy Hospital is one of the Fifth Schedule hospitals operated by the New South Wales Department of Health. For many years it has serviced the needs of developmentally disabled young persons. It has been most successful, partly due to its location near the shoreline and just above the beach at Collaroy-one of the most beautiful sites in New South Wales for a hospital- providing it with the opportunity to offer patients a relaxed and happy atmosphere. The hospital has been successful because it is not very large, and for many years the staff have shown an enormous degree of care and concern for the patients. It was sad news to those involved with the hospital when the previous Government announced that Collaroy Hospital was one of the nine Fifth Schedule hospitals destined for closure. Those involved with the hospital feared that not all the patients were suited to the alternative of living in community cottages. Under the previous Government some community cottages were established. A number of patients from Collaroy Hospital moved into the cottages, in many cases with considerable success. I am sure I speak for the Minister for Health when I say that the coalition has never objected to cottages being established for suitable patients. The coalition's objection was with the previous Government's proposition that one either had Collaroy Hospital or community cottages, but not both. The previous Government decided to have community cottages and the hospital had to close. For the past two and a half years the people in the area, the friends and parents associated with the hospital, and I have been fighting the proposal. In the recent election campaign it was an important issue in my electorate and a successful one for the coalition as it was clear that the majority of constituents considered the coalition's policy much more attractive than that of the previous Government. There were several reasons for that. First, the previous Government offered no alternative. Second, it was clear to anyone visiting the hospital-and I think I am safe in saying that, except close to the recent election campaign, the former Minister for Health had not done so-that many patients were not suited to living in community cottages. The advocates of the scheme were keen to prove its value and show how patients were living happy, productive, and in some cases even more fulfilling lives than in the hospital. I do not dispute that, but the first patients who moved into the cottages were those most suited. Most of them were Downs syndrome patients whom history has shown succeed in the community cottage scheme. The patients remaining in Collaroy Hospital, who were causing the greatest concern with the proposed implementation of the Richmond report, were those suffering a profound degree of autism, usually coupled with a severe degree of 72 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 grand ma1 epilepsy. Such patients are not those who, to use the words of the former Minister for Health and, I am pleased to say, the former honourable member for Penrith, would go ballroom dancing on Saturday nights and do very well in community cottages. That was the most patronizing and insulting remark that one could make about the patients I have seen in the hospital time and time again. It was a completely insufferable remark to make to their parents and friends. It displayed a complete lack of understanding of the problems facing the developmentally disabled that was apparently endemic in the former Government, and which came to haunt it in the recent election campaign. Collaroy Hospital needs to be retained to provide a backstop, fall-back facility for those patients and their families who cannot live in a community cottage-and there will be a number of them. The retention of Collaroy Hospital will not result in the closure of community cottages. Nor will it result in the patients being told that they will be denied their dream of going into a cottage but, rather, will have to stay in a hospital environment. From the outset the Government has said a dichotomy of systems will provide the reasonable choice that people who suffer developmental disabilities need, and that their families need to know will be available to them. The former Government maintained that the only course of action available to it was to sell Collaroy Hospital. The reason, it maintained, was that it needed the money to establish additional community cottages. Some degree of heavy lobbying as a result of panic by my Labor opponent for the seat of Wakehurst, a former employee of the former Premier of this State, resulted in the former Minister for Health undertaking not to sell a couple of blocks of land at the bottom end of the Collaroy Hospital site, but to retain them as parkland for the use of the community. However, it became abundantly clear that the proposal to sell the four remaining blocks of land at the top end of the hospital would have to be complete anathema to the local neighbourhood. To establish the extra cottages $3 million to $4 million would have to be realized from the sale of the blocks of land. The mathematics of that is extremely do~btful.The blocks of land involved would be no more than 35 feet wide, and therefore the former Government would have to realize almost $1 million per block of land. They are excellent blocks of land, but the mind boggles at the sort of development that would have to be allowed on those blocks to achleve that sort of money from the sale of those parcels of land. As I said, for that reason the people in the neighbourhood were concerned about the previous Government's proposal. It was perfectly clear that over the years those people had become used to, and indeed enjoyed, the particular association that they had with Collaroy Hospital as ~t previously operated. This Government is not necessarily talking about re-establishing the hospital with facilities for 50 developmentally disabled patients, as there once were. I am aware that already the Minister for Health has announced an inquiry into the Fifth Schedule hospital system and the best available method of handling patients, both in mental hospitals and in institutions for the developmentally disabled. However, the Government is talking about retaining this hospital as an institution and as a site available and accessible to the ' developmentally disabled, to provide facilities to them, whether for fall-back accommodation, respite care, day care, or whatever may flow from the inquiry that the Minister has instigated. However, it is important to the people of my electorate that the hospital and the site be retained. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member has exhausted his time for speaking. 27 April, 1988 ASSEMBLY 73 Mr COLLINS (Middle Harbour), Minister for Health and Minister for Arts [6.42]: I also congratulate you, Mr Speaker, on your elevation to the important office of Speaker. You will add great dignity and direction to this most eminent office that you now occupy. The matter raised by the honourable member for Wakehurst is important to the community. During the several months leading up to the State elections it was a vexed social, community, and political issue. The honourable member rightly said that the previous government viewed changes to the treatment of the developmentally disabled and psychiatrically ill as very much an either or situation. Until September 1987 almost every person in New South Wales who had suffered either a developmental disability or psychiatric illness had been locked up-at least that was the official version and policy until that time. The policy then chan$ed, and the decision was made that all such people-or at least the overwhelming bulk of those who previously had been treated in Fifth Schedule hospitals-should live in the community. Since becoming Minister for Health I have taken a number of initiatives on behalf of the new government. First, I have scrapped all plans to sell hospitals in the Fifth Schedule system, that is to sell the nine hospitals that were earmarked for closure by the previous Government. Second, I have frozen the implementation of the Richmond scheme-that is, the mass de- institutionalization scheme-as announced in September 1987 by the Hon. Peter Anderson. Third, the Richmond implementation task force is at present under review. During the next week or so I expect to announce the formation of a reconstituted task force to examine the implementation of the deinstitutionalization scheme and sort out any bugs in the system that may have occurred. Fourth, I have terminated the real estate buying spree that had been undertaken since September last year. I inform the House that under the scheme approximately 300 properties have been acquired and 800 staff have been added out of 2 000 announced in September 1987 by the former Minister. Fifth, I have frozen the recruitment of untrained staff. It is important that the House and the community understand that the former Government embarked upon the recruitment of 2 000 untrained staff to be employed as residential care workers and residential care assistants. They undertook only three weeks' training before being sent out to run community homes. Therefore, the Government needs to examine the training of staff, and that will be looked at by the review task force. An inquiry was announced prior to and during the recent State election campaign to review all services grouped under mental health services at present in the Department of Health. That inquiry will have a 12-month time limit, and I expect to announce terms of reference within the next couple of months. Next, I inform the House that the Deveson report on the review of the Mental Health Act commissioned by the former Government is expected to be completed by the end of May and will be released as soon as possible thereafter so that before the end of the year the Government can look at improvmg the Mental Health Act to ensure that it protects more adequately the interests of both the community and the patient. Honourable members on the Government benches recognize that there is no black and white solution to services for the developmentally disabled and the psychiatrically ill. There is a need to ensure that the services and the treatment available to such patients are individually tailored to their needs. No blanket policy can be made of locking them all up or putting them all into the community. One needs to look at what is best for the individual patient and for the community and make sure the resources are available to service their 74 ASSEMBLY 27 April, 1988 needs. Finally, I am happy to give the honourable member for Wakehurst the assurance he seeks that Collaroy Hospital will not be closed, sold or disposed of. That applies to the Fifth Schedule hospitals, which I am pleased to say remained intact at the change of office. I assure the House that the Government will be most diligent and expeditious in ensuring that major improvements are made to mental health services, both for the developmentally disabled and the separate and distinct group of the psychiatrically ill. Motion agreed to. House adjourned at 6.48 p.m.