28795
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Thursday 2 December 2010
______
The Deputy-President and Chair of Committees (The Hon. Kayee Frances Griffin), in the absence of the President, took the chair at 11.00 a.m.
The Deputy-President (The Hon. Kayee Frances Griffin) read the Prayers.
DEPARTMENT OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Report
The President tabled the annual report of the Department of the Legislative Council for the year ended 30 June 2010.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. John Hatzistergos.
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY SERVICES
Report
The President tabled the annual report of the Department of Parliamentary Services for the year ended 30 June 2010.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. John Hatzistergos.
CRIMES (SENTENCING PROCEDURE) AMENDMENT BILL 2010
Third Reading
Motion by the Hon. John Hatzistergos agreed to:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Bill read a third time and transmitted to the Legislative Assembly with a message seeking its concurrence in the bill.
FLAMES WOMEN'S BASKETBALL TEAM
Motion by the Hon. Lynda Voltz agreed to:
1. That this House congratulates the Sydney University Flames Women's Basketball Team on their powerhouse win over Adelaide to ensure a New South Wales Grand Final.
2. That this House notes the lack of coverage by the media of this superlative win and in particular the lack of reporting not only on this game but any women's sport by the Sydney Morning Herald 20-page sports section.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Formal Business Notices of Motions
Private Members' Business items Nos 32, 38, 46 and 48 outside the Order of Precedence objected to as being taken as formal business.
BULAHDELAH CENTRAL SCHOOL
Motion by the Hon. Lynda Voltz agreed to:
That this House:
(a) congratulates the New South Wales Government and the Australian Federal Government for their investment in and completion of Bulahdelah Central School, and the official opening of the new facilities, and
(b) notes that these facilities have allowed Bulahdelah Central School to remain at the forefront of rural education. 28796 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Formal Business Notices of Motions
Private Members' Business item No. 58 outside the Order of Precedence objected to as being taken as formal business.
SEXUAL ASSAULT
Motion by the Hon. Lynda Voltz agreed to:
1. That this House condemns recent media coverage of an alleged assault of a young woman by a prominent rugby league player.
2. That this House notes that:
(a) sexual assault is one of the most under-reported crimes in Australia,
(b) significant progress has been made to encourage women to have the courage to come forward and make a complaint,
(c) this work has seen a significant increase in reporting of sexual assault, and
(d) media coverage of fans and supporter groups' messages of support, vigils outside police stations and allegations about the alleged victim's family, are a serious setback for the good work that has been undertaken to empower women to feel comfortable with reporting this type of serious offence.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Formal Business Notices of Motions
Private Members' Business items Nos 99 and 126 outside the Order of Precedence objected to as being taken as formal business.
LARGE HADRON COLLIDER
Motion by the Hon. Lynda Voltz agreed to:
That this House notes that:
(a) on 21 November 2009 the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) restarted the Large Hadron Collider (LHC),
(b) the LHC took nearly 20 years to construct and aims to resolve physics enigmas such as an explanation for "dark matter" and "dark energy" that account for 96 per cent of the cosmos, and whether other dimensions exist parallel to our own,
(c) the LHC is fundamental to finding the theorised component Higgs boson, which would explain how particles acquire mass, and
(d) the collisions that the LHC produces will generate masses of data that could unlock mysteries about the creation of the universe and the fundamental nature of matter.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Formal Business Notices of Motions
Private Members' Business items Nos 203 and 221 outside the Order of Precedence objected to as being taken as formal business.
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
Motion by the Hon. Helen Westwood agreed to:
1. That this House notes:
(a) the NSW Government's efforts to raise awareness about violence against women, and
(b) the Government's support for initiatives that prevent domestic violence and help victims is underpinned by a $50 million, five-year domestic and family violence action plan "Stop the Violence, End the Silence". 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28797
2. that this House congratulates the Government on:
(a) supporting 67 local domestic violence committees with $1,000 grants to run activities and events during 16 Days of Activism, and
(b) its commitment to make the first week of June "Stop Domestic Violence Week" in a further effort to raise community awareness.
HUNTER ECONOMIC ZONE
Motion by Mr David Shoebridge agreed to:
That, under Standing Order 52, there be laid upon the table of the House within 7 days of the date of the passing of this resolution the following documents created since 1 January 2009 in the possession, custody or control of the Minister for Planning or the Department of Planning:
(a) the Desktop Biobank Assessment of the Revised Hunter Employment Zone (HEZ) Masterplan, authored or submitted by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd,
(b) all drafts of the Desktop Biobank Assessment of the Revised HEZ Masterplan, authored or submitted by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd, and
(c) all documents referring to the Desktop Biobank Assessment of the Revised HEZ Masterplan, authored or submitted by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd, and
(d) any document which records or refers to the production of documents as a result of this order of the House.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Formal Business Notices of Motions
Private Members' Business items Nos 237, 238, 239, 240 and 243 objected to as being taken as formal business.
SCIENCE HOUSE
Motion by Mr David Shoebridge agreed to:
1. That this House notes that:
(a) the Royal Society of New South Wales, Australia's oldest scientific society, has put forward a proposal to re- use Science House in Gloucester Street, Sydney to re-establish the site as a centre for the promotion of science, technology and innovation in New South Wales,
(b) the proposal has support from the scientific community, including the Australian Academy of Science and the NSW Chief Scientist and Scientific Engineer,
(c) the land at 157 Gloucester Street was granted in fee simple to the Royal Society of New South Wales, the Linnaean Society of New South Wales and the Institution of Engineers in 1928,
(d) Science House is a heritage building, purpose-built in 1930 and was used as a focal point of science and other professional organisations in New South Wales until it was resumed by the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority in 1975,
(e) the building has been empty for three years and is currently managed by the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority,
(f) both the interior and exterior of Science House is in excellent condition,
(g) the Rann Labor Government in South Australia has already committed over $12 million to the refurbishment of the old Adelaide Stock Exchange in order to establish the new Science Exchange for science in that State, and
(h) the building contains venue space that would provide for cross-disciplinary events and research.
2. That this House calls on the Government to:
(a) support the proposal by the Royal Society of New South Wales,
(b) acknowledge the inherent value in the promotion of science and its potential contribution to the economy of this state, 28798 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
(c) recognise the heritage significance of the site and to secure its future as a valuable public asset,
(d) undertake the transference of Science House from the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority to the Royal Society of New South Wales, and
(e) guarantee the financial viability of the science centre including recurrent annual funding.
INTERNET FILTERING
Parliamentary Internet Use Audit Report
The PRESIDENT: On 7 September 2010, following several media articles concerning parliamentary internet usage, I made a statement to the House concerning the Parliament's internet filtering policy. On 14 September 2010 at the budget estimates hearing for the Legislature, I provided an update to General Purpose Standing Committee No. 3. I advised the committee that Ernst and Young had been engaged to review the Parliament's internet filtering system and related issues as there were questions regarding the veracity of the data that had been produced in a report concerning internet usage.
Ernst and Young has now furnished its report in relation to the matter. From its report I can advise the following. There are a number of potential limitations associated with the Internet filtering application being used by the Parliament. Of the 72 most visited websites containing supposedly adult content identified in the original report on internet usage, the website with the highest number of hits was ds.serving/sys.com, which appears to be an advertising server; 35 sites appear to be adult-related websites that have been visited; 14 sites appear to be adult-content related advertisements or pop-ups; 17 sites appear to be non-adult related; and a further five sites appear to be advertisements which do not appear to be adult content.
Some of the websites analysed appear to have been incorrectly classified by the software application as they did not contain adult content. Nine websites have been identified that contain sexually explicit images of young people whose precise age is reportedly difficult to determine. Legal advice is now being sought in relation to this aspect of the report. No further comment will be made in respect of this matter so as to not jeopardise any investigations that may ensue.
The period analysed by Ernst and Young was 7 November 2009 to 6 September 2010. It should be noted that parliamentary staff and members' staff, unless specifically authorised, are no longer able to access adult content, gambling or gaming sites. Unless they indicate otherwise, members are not subject to internet filtering. The Parliament's current internet filtering policies outline the responsibility and obligations of parliamentary staff as well as of members and their staff with regard to accessing the internet through the parliamentary computer network. The policies apply to all parliamentary staff, permanent and temporary staff of the members and to all temporary, contract and volunteer staff working within the offices of members who have access to the internet.
I assure members that Ernst and Young's findings in relation to the limitations of the current version of the software application being used for internet filtering will be addressed as a matter of priority. I am confident that the policies in place will ensure that in future internet usage through the parliamentary computer network will be in accord with those policies. I now table the report of Ernst and Young, entitled "Report on our findings in relation to the Internet Filtering System in use by the NSW Parliament", dated 1 December 2010.
Report ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. John Hatzistergos.
UNPROCLAIMED LEGISLATION
The Hon. John Robertson tabled a list detailing all legislation unproclaimed 90 calendar days after assent as at 1 December 2010.
PRIVILEGES COMMITTEE
Report
The Hon. Kayee Griffin, as Chair, tabled report No. 54, entitled "Review of Members' Code of Conduct 2010", dated December 2010, together with submissions and correspondence received.
Report ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Kayee Griffin. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28799
STANDING COMMITTEE ON STATE DEVELOPMENT
Report: Wine Grape Market and Prices
The Hon. Tony Catanzariti, as Chair, tabled report No. 35, entitled "Wine Grape Market and Prices", dated December 2010, together with transcripts of evidence, submissions, correspondence and answers to questions taken on notice.
Report ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Tony Catanzariti.
The Hon. TONY CATANZARITI [11.18 a.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
This inquiry was referred to the State Development Committee by the Minister for Primary Industries, the Hon. Steve Whan, on 5 August 2010. The terms of reference required the committee to inquire into factors affecting the supply of and demand for wine grapes, the role of the Wine Grapes Marketing Board and the potential for measures such as collective bargaining and a code of conduct to contribute to an effective market.
Wine and wine tourism are vital to the New South Wales economy. However, it is widely recognised that the wine industry is going through a very difficult period. With the value of the Australian dollar high and increasing competition from other wine-producing countries, demand for Australian wine has now stabilised. The rapid growth of the industry during the 1990s generated an increase in vineyard plantings and that has led to an oversupply in the wine grape market. As a result, wine grape prices have fallen in most areas and some growers are now receiving prices that are lower than the cost of producing grapes. In these conditions growers are being forced out of the industry.
The committee heard evidence from a range of stakeholders in the industry, such as Industry and Investment New South Wales, Wine Grape Growers Australia, the Wine Grapes Marketing Board and Murray Valley Winegrowers Incorporated. The committee also visited Griffith and heard evidence from grape growers and winemakers. The Riverina produces more than half of the State's grapes and both winemakers and grape growers in the region have been hard hit by falling prices. However, it is not all about prices. The committee heard evidence from a number of growers who were reluctant to speak publicly because they were afraid of losing their contracts. The committee also heard disturbing evidence about the conduct of some of the region's wineries in their business dealings with growers.
The key recommendation arising from the inquiry is that the New South Wales Minister for Primary Industries should pursue the introduction of a mandatory code of conduct. The wine industry already has a voluntary code of conduct, but adoption of the code by wineries has been disappointing. The committee believes that a mandatory code is the way forward in the wine grape industry, as it has been in the horticulture sector. A mandatory code may not increase grape prices, but it will help to provide some consistency and stability to the industry. In order to be effective, the code should be introduced nationally. If that is not possible, the committee has recommended that the New South Wales Government establish an independent dispute resolution body for the wine industry.
The committee has also recommended that wineries be required to publish indicative prices for grapes by 30 June each year. Grape growers and winemakers have different needs in respect of information about prices paid by individual wineries. Growers are anxious to know how much they will be paid for their grapes as early in the season as possible, but winemakers are reluctant to commit to a specific price until grapes are purchased. Growers told the committee that prices are announced too late in the season and that many wineries announce the price they will pay for grapes at the very last minute. This is a major concern for growers, who are unable to make business decisions without information about what they are likely to be paid. The committee believes that improved price signals are essential to enable growers to make informed business decisions. In the right form, a requirement to publish indicative prices could help in that regard.
The committee has made nine other recommendations that are designed to help growers. However, it feels that both wineries and growers must be part of any long-term solutions for the industry. Wineries and growers need to work together to build a better future for the industry. I take this opportunity to thank all the participants in the inquiry, including those who made written submissions and who gave their time to talk to the committee. I particularly thank those who gave evidence in camera. I also thank my fellow committee members for their work, both in this inquiry and during the life of this Parliament. I acknowledge the committee 28800 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 secretariat—comprising Rachel Simpson, Abigail Groves, Stewart Smith and Christine Nguyen—for its work in supporting the committee. I commend the report to the House.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Tony Catanzariti and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON ROAD SAFETY
Report
The Hon. Ian West, on behalf of the Chair, tabled report No. 5/54, entitled "Vulnerable Road Users: Inquiry into Motorcycle and Bicycle Safety", dated December 2010, together with transcripts of evidence.
Report ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Ian West.
The Hon. IAN WEST [11.27 a.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Ian West and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE OFFICE OF THE VALUER-GENERAL
Reports: Report on the Seventh General Meeting with the Valuer-General, and Report on the Inquiry into the Provisions of the Valuation of Land Act 1916
The Hon. Kayee Griffin tabled the following reports, on behalf of the Chair:
(1) Report No. 3/54, entitled "Report on the Seventh General Meeting with the Valuer-General", together with answers to questions on notice, transcripts of evidence and minutes of proceedings, dated December 2010.
(2) Report No. 4/54, entitled "Report on the Inquiry into the Provisions of the Valuation of Land Act 1916", together with answers to questions on notice, transcripts of evidence and minutes of proceedings, dated December 2010.
Reports ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Kayee Griffin.
The Hon. KAYEE GRIFFIN [11.27 a.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the reports.
The committee discussed several issues with the Valuer-General. The main topics discussed were section 149 certificates and the impact of industrial contamination on land values and rates for shared facilities such as pontoons and jetties and the inquiry into the provisions of the Valuation of Land Act 1916. The committee made a number of recommendations and I am sure that the Valuer-General will take them on board in his review of the Act. I thank my fellow committee members. I have served as Chair of the committee during the last session and as Deputy Chair this session. The committee has done a great deal of hard work on issues that could be regarded as dry. I thank my fellow members for that work. On behalf of myself and the Hon. Matthew Mason- Cox I thank the committee secretariat for the hard work that they have done.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Kayee Griffin and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
DAYS AND HOURS OF SITTING
The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Planning, Minister for Infrastructure, and Minister for Lands) [11.20 a.m.]: I table for the information of members suggested sitting dates for 2011. Whilst I recognise the right of the next Parliament to set its own sitting dates, these dates are provided to enable members to initiate plans for 2011. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28801
LEGISLATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
Report
The Hon. Kayee Griffin tabled, pursuant to the Legislation Review Act 1987, a report entitled "Legislation Review Digest No. 18 of 2010", dated 2 December 2010.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Kayee Griffin.
AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORT
The Clerk announced the receipt, pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, of the Financial Audits Report of the Auditor-General, Volume Nine 2010, entitled "Focusing on Transport, Planning and Industry," dated December 2010, received and authorised to be printed this day.
CONVICTION OF FREDERICK LINCOLN MCDERMOTT
Ministerial Statement
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS (Attorney General, Minister for Citizenship, Minister for Regulatory Reform, and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [11.29 a.m.]: I speak on a case that has its origins in 1947. In 1947 Frederick Lincoln McDermott was convicted of the murder of William Henry Lavers. Mr Lavers disappeared on 5 September 1936. Until that time he lived with his family in the general store and petrol station which they ran. On the morning of 5 September 1936 Mr Lavers got up about 5.45 a.m. to feed the horses. His wife rose at about 7.00 a.m. and, after seeing that her husband had not lit the fire as was his practice, she went to the front of the general store and found a petrol bowser open and the hose on the ground. Near the base of the bowser, and on the bowser, she saw blood and hair, which was subsequently found to be that of Mr Lavers.
Several people gave accounts that they heard or saw a noisy bluish-grey car in the area early that morning. One of Mr McDermott's friends had a car which vaguely fitted that description. There was evidence that tyre marks left at Mr Laver's general store were from Mr McDermott's friend's car. A sole witness subsequently identified Mr McDermott as one of the men in the bluish-grey car near the scene of the murder the afternoon before the disappearance. Two witnesses gave evidence that they had heard Mr McDermott confess to his female companion, Ms Hampton, that he had killed Mr Lavers. The statement of Ms Hampton, who was not called at the trial, included evidence that Mr McDermott had said that he had murdered Lavers for two gallons of petrol and cut his body up and put it in the sheep yard.
Mr McDermott was sentenced to death, which sentence was later commuted to life. He appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeal and the High Court and his appeals were dismissed. In 1951, due to Mr McDermott's continuing petitions and doubts about the evidence, a royal commission of inquiry was opened into the trial and conviction of Mr McDermott, which concluded in 1952. The commission found that there were serious flaws with the car evidence, which, it was acknowledged, was a major link in the Crown case. Fresh evidence adduced by Mr McDermott before the royal commission, and I quote from page 12 of the report:
… prove[d] almost conclusively that the car which drove to Mr Laver's store and left tracks measured and copied by the police could not have been Mr McDermott's friend's car.
The commission determined, according to page 14 of the report:
… that the additional evidence established a strong probability that the jury was misled by the erroneous evidence upon a matter of importance.
The commission was also not convinced as to the confession evidence, as it was probable no jury would have accepted their unsupported testimony. Upon the commission's recommendation, Mr McDermott was released two days later. Mr McDermott died 25 years later in 1977. The commission's findings were not equivalent to an acquittal. Tom Molomby, a barrister, reported in a book titled A Shearers Tale that as a result Mr McDermott lived the next 25 years with the knowledge that he continued to hold a conviction for the offence. On pages 315 and 350 Molomby records this statement by Mr McDermott a month before he died: 28802 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
People still believe I did it. They said "He got out on a Royal Commission, but that's the bloke who knocked over Lavers." The public will never forget you.
Mr Lavers' body was not found until November 2004, located south of the general store near Grenfell. An inquest was conducted by the State Coroner, whereupon he concluded on page 10 of the coronial inquiry:
… that the location of Laver's body has in effect "proved" that Mr McDermott was not responsible for his death.
According to the State Coroner, there are three main reasons why the location of Mr Laver's body finally vindicated Mr McDermott. The first is that it was located south of Mr Laver's store, and the whole Crown case against McDermott was that he was in the car which was seen and heard travelling north from the store after the incident at the petrol bowser on the morning of the disappearance. Further, Mr McDermott's evidence, and that of his friend he was with, was that they were between Condobolin and Forbes at the time of the murder, many kilometres north of Grenfell where the body was found. Secondly, the body had not been chopped up or buried in a sheep yard as was claimed to be said by Mr McDermott in his alleged confession. Thirdly, the location of the body in rugged terrain on a private farming property suggests the murder was carried out by a local, which Mr McDermott was not.
Having opined that there had been a gross miscarriage of justice, the coroner wrote to me at the time suggesting I should petition the Governor to pardon Mr McDermott. This was not possible without an application on behalf of Mr McDermott by a person closely enough connected with him to be in a relationship of agency or such other proximity as to be found to be acting in a representative capacity. Until recently no such application was received. Recently I received an application in the nature of a petition from Ms Betty Sheelah, a relative of the late Mr McDermott. Ms Sheelah has requested a pardon and the quashing of Mr McDermott's conviction to finally establish his innocence. A pardon is not an acquittal but a conveyance of mercy. The effect of a pardon is to remove from the subject of the pardon all pains, penalties and punishments whatsoever that may flow from the conviction, but not to eliminate the conviction itself. Only a court can quash a conviction.
Accordingly, in all of the circumstances, having considered this matter, I inform the House that, being the Minister responsible for the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001, and having duly considered the petitions and the provisions of section 77 (1) (b) of the Act, I have decided in the exercise of discretion to refer the petitioner's conviction for murder to the Court of Criminal Appeal to be dealt with as an appeal under the Criminal Appeal Act 1912. The whole case will now be determined by the Court of Criminal Appeal, which will need to consider whether or not the conviction should remain standing.
PETITIONS
Marine Parks, Sanctuaries and Habitat Protection Zones
Petition requesting a moratorium on the creation of all new proposed marine parks, sanctuaries and habitat protection zones and rejecting extensions to existing parks, sanctuaries and zones that further restrict fishing activities and removal of the National Parks Association report "The Torn Blue Fringe" for consideration by the Parliament, received from the Hon. Duncan Gay.
Euthanasia and Palliative Care
Petition praying that the House oppose the Greens Rights of the Terminally Ill Bill and any attempts to legalise or decriminalise the practice of euthanasia and calling on medical practitioners to uphold the principles of palliative care and the Hippocratic Oath, received from the Hon. Rick Colless.
Rights of the Terminally Ill
Petition requesting that the House respect the creation of laws that protect the rights of individuals to make choices about their own-end-of-life arrangement, reject arguments of anti-euthanasia campaigners that seek to impose their own moral judgements and support the Greens Rights of the Terminally Ill Bill 2010, received from Ms Cate Faehrmann.
Planning and Development
Petition requesting the House immediately repeal part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and establish an independent planning body to assess State infrastructure, received from Mr David Shoebridge. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28803
Byrrill Creek Dam Proposal
Petition praying that the House ensure that any dam within Byrrill Creek is prohibited in the forthcoming Tweed River Area Unregulated and Alluvial Water Sharing Plan 2010, received from the Hon. Ian Cohen.
Dying With Dignity
Petition requesting that the House enact legislation in a timely manner to create and protect the right to die with dignity, including appropriate safeguards, received from Ms Cate Faehrmann.
Barangaroo Planning Framework
Petition requesting that the Government develop a strategic and integrated planning framework for Barangaroo South, received from Mr David Shoebridge.
Coal-Fired Power Stations
Petition requesting that the House call on the Government to prohibit the building of new coal-fired power stations, develop a responsible phase-out plan for existing stations, and support job creation in renewable energy industries, received from Dr John Kaye.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Petition calling on the Government to instruct publicly owned generators to move away from coal and replace it with cleaner sources of power and to work with consumers to reduce electricity demand, received from Dr John Kaye.
IRREGULAR PETITION
Leave granted for the suspension of standing orders to allow the Hon. Tony Kelly to present an irregular petition.
Putty Hall
Petition requesting the House to resolve ongoing uncertainty for the community regarding the status of the land and property title for the Putty Hall, received from the Hon. Tony Kelly.
EMPLOYMENT OF MEMBERS' STAFF
The PRESIDENT: I wish to make a statement in relation to the employment of members' staff and to advise members that the Speaker in the other place has tabled a draft exposure bill entitled Parliamentary Members' Staff Bill 2010. The Speaker has advised that in tabling the draft exposure bill on the employment of parliamentary members' staff he wishes to give all stakeholders in this issue an opportunity for comment and consultation. It is an issue which he believes needs a legislative response. The bill would allow members of Parliament to make a decision to employ and dismiss their own staff. It would cover both Legislative Council and Legislative Assembly members and, in schedule 1, parliamentary office holders who employ staff to assist them in those roles.
The current instrument of delegation to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly and the President of the Legislative Council to employ staff of the Parliament is an Order in Council issued in 1956. Members of Parliament did not have staff allocated to them in 1956 and the delegation did not envisage the employment of members' staff. Under the present arrangements there is a misalignment of decision to employ or dismiss made by individual members and the power or authority to employ or dismiss of the Presiding Officers. The Speaker believes this bill would provide for members to have the authority to give effect to their decision.
The bill would provide for members' staff to be Crown employees, for elected officers to continue to have their conditions of employment determined by an industrial instrument, and for the Presiding Officers to be the employer for all other industrial purposes, including making determinations on matters not included in the award or contract of employment. It is the Speaker's wish in tabling the draft exposure bill that members' staff, 28804 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 unions and parliamentary management can be included in a consultation process and for the bill to be introduced in the next Parliament. I concur with the views of the Speaker that there is a need to bring the employment of members' staff into the twenty-first century.
WORKERS' COMPENSATION (DUST DISEASES) AMENDMENT BILL 2010
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 1 December 2010.
The Hon. MICHAEL VEITCH (Parliamentary Secretary) [11.47 a.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions to the debate. The proposed amendments in the bill demonstrate that the New South Wales Government will continue to support families of workers impacted by asbestos and other dust- related diseases. The increase in the lump sum death benefit payable under the Workers' Compensation (Dust Diseases) Act will be phased in. Actuarial advice indicates that this increase can be funded without the need to increase the dust diseases levy on employers. However, to minimise the initial impact of the increase on the Dust Diseases Fund, it is proposed that the lump sum will be increased in three annual increases, with the first increase occurring on commencement of the proposed Act.
Indexation of the lump sum payment amount will not occur until 1 April 2013. The proposal does not impact the weekly payments payable to workers' dependants. These payments will continue to be indexed as usual. In relation to the funding of these increases in the lump sum death benefit, the Dust Diseases Board has obtained actuarial advice that it will not be necessary to increase the dust diseases levy on insurers to meet the cost of the proposed amendments. The annual cost of compensating workers and dependants under the Dust Diseases Act in 2009-10 was $75.9 million. This cost is covered by the annual levies collected by the Dust Diseases Board from insurers. The cost of increasing the lump sum will increase annual costs by $8.8m to the Dust Diseases Board's annual compensation liability once the increase is fully implemented.
The Dust Diseases Board's actuaries have advised that the dust diseases levy will not be impacted as a result of the proposed increases as the benefits will be funded from the Dust Diseases Fund's capital base. The financial position of the Dust Diseases Fund is sound and provides sufficient investment income to fund the Dust Diseases Board's ongoing compensation payments. The impact of the annual increase in payments will reduce the fund's solvency ratio in the short term to approximately 95 per cent of the board's known claims liability valuation. This is within the accepted tolerance of 90 per cent to 100 per cent for funding of known liabilities.
The actuaries project that the board's solvency ratio will return to 100 per cent of known liabilities, based on a modest projected investment return by 2014-15. The proposal to phase in the increase to the lump sum will further reduce the impact on the Dust Diseases Fund. The proposed amendments will also allow the Dust Diseases Board to consider the age of the worker at the time of death as a factor to be taken into account when determining the amount of lump sum compensation to be paid to a dependant of a deceased worker.
The Dust Diseases Board has decided to change its policy when assessing payments to dependants, to remove consideration of a dependant's income. This complements the age proposal and will allow families to be treated more equitably. Given the age of the majority of dependant spouses receiving compensation from the board, which is over 70 years, and given that most are in receipt of the age pension, this is appropriate. Actuarial advice has estimated that this change in policy will increase the board's annual compensation liability by $3 million in 2010-11, increasing to an additional $5 million in 2019-2020. These worthwhile amendments merit the support of honourable members. I commend the bill to the House.
Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28805
In Committee
Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.
Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE [11.53 a.m.], by leave: I move Greens amendments Nos 1 to 5 in globo:
No. 1 Page 3, schedule 1 [1], lines 3-5. Omit all words on those lines.
No. 2 Page 3, schedule 1 [2], line 8. Omit "subject to paragraph (d)". Insert instead "one of the following amounts".
No. 3 Page 3, schedule 1 [3], line 19. Omit "(d) and".
No. 4 Page 3, schedule 1 [3], line 20. Omit all words on that line. Insert instead "Insert after section 8 (2B) (d):".
No. 5 Page 3, schedule 1 [3], lines 21-27. Omit all words on those lines.
I spoke to the substance of these amendments during my contribution to the second reading debate on the bill. The amendments were circulated to all members of this House some time ago. I am pleased that, as I understand it, the amendments will have the support of the Government in order to improve the bill. As I said in the second reading debate, the explanatory note to the bill describes the bill as increasing the benefits payable to the dependants of victims of dust diseases under the Workers' Compensation (Dust Diseases) Act. The sting in the tail, however, is that the amendments proposed to section 8 (2B) (d), as contained in the bill as initially circulated, sought to allow the tribunal to reduce the amount of lump sum compensation payable to claimants who were wholly dependent upon the deceased worker on the basis of the age of the deceased at the time of death.
If the bill had been allowed to pass unamended it would have led to substantial reductions in compensation to a large number of claimants, because the average age of persons who die as a result of dust diseases is 74 years. If claimants were to have their lump sum compensation reduced—and that is the only discretion that would have been available, that is, a discretion to reduce—by reason of the age of the deceased at the time of death that would have led to substantial reductions in payments to claimants in that category. I look forward to the amendments receiving members' wholehearted support. The amendments improve the bill. It would be with great pleasure that the Greens would then see the bill, together with its amendments, become law before the close of this Parliament.
The Hon. MICHAEL VEITCH (Parliamentary Secretary) [11.55 a.m.]: The Government accepts the Greens amendments. The effect of the amendments is, in essence, to accept the proposed increase to the lump sum death benefit. Otherwise the operation of the Act will be left effectively as it is currently. The distinction between wholly and partially dependent persons will be retained. We are advised that there would be negligible financial impact on the scheme. So far in 2010 the Dust Diseases Board has made awards of compensation to 173 dependents of deceased workers. Of that number, 165 were partially dependent and 8 were wholly dependent on the deceased worker.
Question—That Greens amendments Nos 1 to 5 be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Greens amendment Nos 1 to 5 agreed to.
Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.
Schedule 2 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported from Committee with amendments.
Adoption of Report
Motion by the Hon. Michael Veitch agreed to:
That the report be adopted.
Report adopted. 28806 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
Third Reading
Motion by the Hon. Michael Veitch agreed to:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Bill read a third time and returned to the Legislative Assembly with a message requesting its concurrence in the amendments.
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted at 12 noon for questions.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ______
RIGHT TO SILENCE
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I direct my question without notice to the Attorney General. What is the Minister's response to calls from the New South Wales Police Association for modifications to the right to silence?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: The Government has taken a number of steps to prevent offenders from staging ambush defences. In 2007 the Government extended the requirement to give notice of an alibi to 42 days. This means if an accused wanted to assert that he or she had an alibi for the time at which an offence was committed he or she cannot hide it from police and reveal it at trial, but must give notice of it a substantial time before the hearing. Recently the Government's trial-efficiency reforms included a comprehensive suite of powers to ensure proper disclosure of prosecution and defence issues in criminal trials. Those provisions allow for the court to refuse to admit evidence or order an adjournment where the required notice was not provided, thus neutralising ambush defences. I am not sure whether these matters have been the subject of discussion or knowledge within the NSW Police Association. But it is important to recognise that beyond the Government's reforms, the right to silence has been limited in other areas, such as in the area of investigations by the New South Wales Crimes Commission, which can compel persons under investigation to reveal information. The Government does value an accused person's right to be presumed innocent, and it believes in principles not being misused or exploited for mere tactical advantage in criminal trials.
COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMISSION VOLUNTEERING AWARDS
The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON: I address my question to the Minister for Citizenship. What is the New South Wales Government doing to recognise the efforts and achievements of people in New South Wales whose community service has enhanced the cultural and social wellbeing of migrant communities?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: This is a timely question as only this morning I had the pleasure of joining the Premier, Kristina Keneally, and the Minister for Volunteering, my colleague Peter Primrose, at the 2010 Community Relations Commission Volunteering Awards Ceremony: a ceremony that celebrates and recognises outstanding volunteer service to multicultural communities. Volunteers represent the backbone of our society. They are selfless people who readily give up their time and energy to support others. I am pleased to inform the House that the 2010 award winners are as follows.
The Community Service Award this year went to Mr Robin Margo. Robin has played a significant role over the decades in promoting interfaith and intercultural understanding and cooperation amongst our diverse religious and cultural communities, particularly in building trust and harmonious relationships between people of the Jewish and Muslim communities in our State. He has also worked tirelessly to facilitate opportunities for members of the Jewish community to contribute to a range of human rights and social justice issues. He was instrumental in establishing the board of The Sydney Alliance, which is a coalition of unions, faith and civic organisations that are dedicated to the advancement of civil society.
The winner of this year's Youth Award is just 19 years old but has already achieved more than people who are twice her age. Ms Tshiband Gracia Ngoy took out the award for her outstanding voluntary work across a number of areas, including her ongoing efforts to ease the resettlement process for refugees and to educate the broader community about the experiences of our refugees. Her achievements are even more remarkable when one considers that she arrived on our shores only five short years ago under the Australian Humanitarian 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28807
Migration Program from the Democratic Republic of Congo, via South Africa. Her enthusiasm and outstanding work ethic will continue to inspire many other people, young and old alike, to emulate her strong example.
The Volunteer of the Year Award for 2010 went to Ms Peggy Huang. Penny is a young woman whose passion for helping those in need through active service and leadership roles in various non-profit and volunteer communities over the last decade is deserving of acknowledgement. The Lifetime Achievement in Community Service Award went to Mr John Gebhardt. John has exhibited a lifelong commitment to assisting members of our multicultural communities across New South Wales, and his achievements over the years have been truly extraordinary. I am sure members will join me in commending not only the winners, but also the nominees who are deserving of praise.
The Premier took the opportunity at today's award ceremony to announce a $30,000 boost for the Community Relations Commission Volunteering Awards. The awards will be given a new name, the Multicultural Community Volunteering Awards, to better emphasise the community work of culturally diverse communities in New South Wales. An annual gala dinner and awards ceremony at New South Wales Government House will be held from 2011 onwards to acknowledge the philanthropic work of nominees and winners, and a new regional volunteer award will be created to honour a multicultural community service in regional New South Wales. The New South Wales Government believes that the differences in our cultural and spiritual background should be rightly seen as things that strengthen and enliven society. The funding boost, renaming the awards, and a new regional award, will ensure that volunteers from culturally diverse communities are given the recognition they deserve.
DUBBO COMMUNITY OFFENDER SUPPORT PROGRAM CENTRE
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I direct my question without notice to the Attorney General, and I refer him to the Mitchell House resettlement facility in Dubbo. Is he aware that more than 3,000 Dubbo residents have signed a petition in protest against a Community Offender Support Program [COSP] centre being established at Mitchell House? Given there are 17 other sites the Government could have chosen to house these offenders—from an original list of 18—will the Minister name the sites and provide reasons why none of those locations were chosen? Will the Minister match the Liberals and Nationals undertaking, as led by The National's candidate in Dubbo, Troy Grant, to freeze the project and reconsider the decision to locate the facility in a residential area near a school, a retirement village and a liquor outlet?
The Hon. Eric Roozendaal: Are you running the campaign again, Duncan?
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: No, I am not the campaign director.
The Hon. Eric Roozendaal: Oh, you got the sack!
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I have never been the campaign director in Dubbo.
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: This question would be more appropriately answered by the Minister for Corrective Services, who has responsibility for these centres. I am happy to refer the specifics of the question to him. However, I want to acknowledge the work that has been undertaken in establishing these centres across the State. Previously, offenders were released back into the community following their prison terms, and they could go and live anywhere and people would not know what their circumstances were, who they were or their backgrounds. The Community Offender Support Program aims to ensure that their integration into the community is appropriately supervised and monitored so that their chances of reintegration are increased and their chances of reoffending are reduced. I am sure those communities which have these centres would generally prefer to have them, rather than having offenders abruptly finish their jail terms and go back into the community—often back to their old associations—without the support and professional assistance of the Probation and Parole Service. Having said that, I make no comment in relation to the specific venue referred to by the Hon. Duncan Gay, as that is an issue for the Minister for Corrective Services. I am more than happy to refer the specifics of the question to the Minister for Corrective Services for an appropriate response.
HOSPITAL EMERGENCY DEPARTMENTS
Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: I direct my question without notice to the Attorney General, on behalf of the Deputy Premier, and Minister for Health. Is the Minister aware that the NSW Bureau of Health recently ranked the performances of hospital emergency departments and found Gosford Hospital 28808 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 ranked ninth out of a list of 11 major metropolitan hospitals? Is the Minister aware Wyong Hospital ranked tenth in the list of 11 major metropolitan hospitals for almost the worst emergency department performance? With a "suspected" heart attack, I waited in that emergency department for 16 hours before discharging myself and catching an ambulance taxi to Royal North Shore Hospital. Is the Minister aware that patients with potentially life-threatening conditions waited longer in September than they did in June? Will the Minister indicate the reasons for the obvious failure to improve hospital emergency departments?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I will refer the question to the Minister for Health, obtain an answer and inform Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes in due course.
STATE ECONOMY
The Hon. SOPHIE COTSIS: My question without notice is addressed to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on the latest economic data?
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: More good news for the New South Wales economy! Yesterday we had great news for the New South Wales economy: seven consecutive quarters of economic growth in New South Wales.
[Interruption]
I am deeply shocked that yet again the Opposition does not want to hear good news about the New South Wales economy. They continually talk down the economy. When I come into this House with the latest data showing how well the economy is in New South Wales, they do not want to hear about it. I am deeply concerned about that. As I advised the House yesterday, the latest State final demand data in the national accounts show that the New South Wales economy grew by 1.4 per cent in the September quarter, the highest economic growth of all the States. It is an achievement that New South Wales can be proud of—today's Newcastle Herald states, "Riding high on magnificent seven".
I will update members on further data, part of yesterday's official national accounts figures. Business investment in New South Wales increased by 5.6 per cent in the September quarter seasonally adjusted. This is higher than the national average increase of 2.1 per cent and the highest of all the States. In fact, business investment fell in Victoria by 3.8 per cent and increased in Queensland by only 0.1 per cent. The good news continues. Dwelling construction in New South Wales increased by 4 per cent, compared to a decline nationally of 1.8 per cent. Non-residential construction in New South Wales increased by 11.8 per cent—higher than the national increase of 6.1 per cent and the highest of all the States. Machinery and equipment investment in New South Wales increased by 4.3 per cent, compared to a decline nationally of 0.9 per cent and a whopping fall of 6.8 per cent in Victoria and 7.6 per cent in Queensland. Without a doubt, New South Wales is the engine room of the national economy. Our $400 billion State economy is going from strength to strength. It is growing faster than the national average.
The Hon. Catherine Cusack: You had a good weekend.
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: I did not have such a great weekend, but I will not go there. As I said earlier, we have had a stunning seven consecutive quarters of economic growth for New South Wales. I remind the House that this never happened during the period of the last Coalition Government from 1988 to 1995. I look forward to keeping the House updated on further good news on the New South Wales economy, as those green shoots continue to grow.
NUCLEAR ENERGY
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE: I ask the Leader of the Government, the Hon. John Hatzistergos, representing the Premier, a question without notice. Is it a fact that former New South Wales Treasurer the Hon. Michael Costa has written a 4,000-word essay on the future of the Australian Labor Party? Is it a fact that he urged the ALP to regain the middle ground and to reject any alliance with the radical Greens party? Is it a fact that he urged serious consideration of the future use of nuclear power? Will the New South Wales Government authorise a cost benefit analysis of the use of nuclear power, particularly to dramatically reduce carbon pollution?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: My views on the Greens are well known in this House. One of my great regrets is the loss of Ms Lee Rhiannon from this place. This place went from colour to black-and-white 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28809 television. It has never been the same since. Who could forget that great question from Lee Rhiannon? The revolutionary that she was, she asked one of my predecessors, would we follow the lead of Thailand and grant remissions to all prisoners in New South Wales to celebrate the Queen's birthday? That was one of her great contributions.
The Hon. Michael Gallacher: She is a monarchist. That's the problem.
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: She was. Who could forget that other great contribution during debate on the drug dog sniffer legislation when she moved an amendment insisting that every dog involved in drug sniffing operations wear a police vest, unless it was involved in undercover operations. These are some of the great events in the history of Lee Rhiannon. We all miss those great events. This place has never been the same since she left. It has almost encouraged me to seek preselection for the Senate so that I will be able to see the next exciting episode. I will take the question on notice and refer it to the Premier.
SOLAR BONUS SCHEME
The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK: My question without notice is directed to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer confirm that Treasury is examining options to fund the cost of the Keneally Government's Solar Bonus Scheme? How many applicants have been accepted into the Solar Bonus Scheme at the 60¢ rate? What is the estimated funding requirement to honour these applications? Given the escalation in costs is a result of mismanagement by the Energy and Treasury portfolios—
The Hon. Eric Roozendaal: Point of order: The question clearly contains argument and, therefore, is out of order.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I will allow the question.
The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK: —will the Treasurer rule out suggestions that the environment portfolio may be forced to find funds to meet the cost of the Solar Bonus Scheme? [Time expired.]
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: Given the experience of the Hon. Catherine Cusack, I would have thought she would understand that this question is relevant to the Minister for Energy. It falls outside my portfolio. I am happy to take the question on notice and refer it to the Minister for Energy.
STATE PLAN TRANSPORT TARGETS
The Hon. LUKE FOLEY: My question is addressed to the Minister for Transport. Can the Minister update the House on how New South Wales is tracking against State Plan transport targets?
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: The State Plan Annual Performance Report 2010 was released last week. The New South Wales Government's key priorities for transport and infrastructure in the State Plan are: increasing investment in infrastructure and transport services to provide greater reliability and comfort for passengers, increasing the efficiency of our road and public transport network, and better aligning infrastructure investment with community needs and priorities. The targets in the State Plan to measure success against these priorities include: increasing the share of peak hour journeys on a safe and reliable public transport system, consistently meeting public transport reliability targets, and increasing the percentage of the population living near public transport.
Sydney continues to outperform all other capital cities when it comes to the proportion of people who choose to take public transport. In Sydney more than 75 per cent of people commute by train, bus, ferry or light rail. By comparison, in Melbourne that figure drops to around 62 per cent and in Brisbane 61 per cent, and in Perth just 51 per cent of people commute by public transport. It is not only trips to and from the Sydney CBD where public transport patronage is strong. The regional cities of Parramatta, Penrith, Newcastle and Liverpool all experienced an increase in public transport use during peak hours for commuter journeys over the past year. Growth was achieved in these regions despite the slight downturn in passenger journeys overall last year as a result of the global financial crisis. Service reliability and on-time running sit at the centre of the State Plan transport targets because these factors help to attract people onto our buses, trains and ferries and ensure passengers keep coming back. 28810 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
I am pleased to report that across the different transport modes we are meeting and/or exceeding the State Plan targets in these areas. On-time running for CityRail is at a record high with 95.9 per cent of peak service trains running on time in 2009-10. That is up from 95.4 per cent in 2008-09 and 92.7 per cent in 2007-08. This is the best result for on-time running in 10 years. In addition to rail services, our bus services continue to report exceptional on-time running, with 95.9 per cent of services of Sydney Buses running on time in 2009-10. These achievements are remarkable when one considers that issues such as traffic congestion, the weather or the unlawful use of bus lanes and bus stops can affect bus on-time running.
Sydney Ferries is also performing exceptionally well. Service reliability is up at 99.9 per cent compared to 99.5 per cent; fleet availability is up at 86 per cent compared to 80.8 per cent; vessel reliability is up at 96.4 per cent compared to 95 per cent; and on-time running remained high at 98.1 per cent. This has been reflected in the feedback from customers; complaints to Sydney Ferries have halved in just two years.
We are meeting our State Plan targets because we are investing in the right infrastructure, the right people and the right technology. Investments such as the Clearways program at CityRail have helped build a system that can better respond to incidents on the network and keep passengers moving. The implementation of the Public Transport Information Priority System [PTIPS] on buses means that we can now give green-light runs to buses behind schedule, again making sure that people get to work on time. This Government is delivering results for the people of New South Wales and we will continue to put the interests of commuters first.
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: My question is directed to the Attorney General. I have noted his cowardly and repeated attacks on Ms Lee Rhiannon, a former member of this House, which he launched as soon as she left the Chamber. Does the Attorney General not agree that for a person holding the office of Attorney General his behaviour is reprehensible and cowardly? Surely he should have the courage to say these matters directly to her face—
The Hon. Greg Donnelly: Point of order—
The PRESIDENT: Order! Mr David Shoebridge will resume his seat.
[Interruption]
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call Mr David Shoebridge to order. The Government Whip was attempting to take a point of order when Mr David Shoebridge was asking his question. Mr David Shoebridge failed to take his seat after being directed to do so. The Attorney General may answer the question if he chooses to.
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I assume that Mr David Shoebridge is one of the rare fans of Lee Rhiannon, and, coincidentally, whilst she was in the House I regularly used to tell her what I thought of her and her position on various issues. I do not think anyone could accuse me of shying away from that. If Mr David Shoebridge reads Hansard he will find very eloquent statements of mine that address various issues that she has referred to. I notice that he did not defend those silly statements that I referred to earlier, such as the drug sniffer dog proposal that Lee Rhiannon put forward, and he did not defend the proposal that we should emulate Thailand. Perhaps Mr David Shoebridge could reflect on the silly questions that she used to ask during the time of the Olympics—
Mr David Shoebridge: You are the first legal officer of the State and you see fit to attack a former member. It is a disgrace.
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: Come off it will you! This happens a lot to lawyers who come into this place late in life. This place is not a soft love affair. Let us get this quite clear: Robust argument takes place, people put their positions, people argue positions and generally take it. I never saw Lee Rhiannon shy away from a debate in this place. She was quite strident and outspoken in relation to her issues. Her venomous attacks—often, quite frankly, missing the mark—on various individuals are legendary. If Mr David Shoebridge wants to talk about poor performance, why does he not say something about his colleague and the silly positions that she used to take over an extended period in this place. As I said, I followed her career with interest and I will continue to do so. Hopefully Mr David Shoebridge will not criticise me for doing so. I am entitled, like every person, to have an opinion in relation to things. I know the Greens do not; they believe in the philosophy 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28811 of the east, which is basically to shut down debate, shut down argument, yes or no. That is the sort of philosophy that Lee Rhiannon used to preach regularly, and I understand that she had a few supporters. I am interested that Mr David Shoebridge is one of them.
HALEROOZ PTY LTD
The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I direct my question to the Treasurer. I refer to the Treasurer's pecuniary interest returns in which he notes as a source of income Halerooz Pty Limited. Has the Treasurer at any time been entitled to or is he entitled to any benefit from Halerooz Pty Limited, which has arisen as a result of any under market acquisition or any other concession or discount provided to the company by any person or entity? In particular, did Halerooz Pty Limited pay full market price for the acquisition of Lot 14 at 130-150 Mons Avenue, Maroubra, and, if so, what was the market price paid?
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: All of my pecuniary interests are there on the public record to be viewed. I believe the matter the honourable member refers to was in the media some time ago and I have no further comment to make on what has been reported.
DEVELOPER LEVIES
The Hon. TONY CATANZARITI: My question is directed to the Minister for Planning, Minister for Infrastructure, and Minister for Lands. Will the Minister update the House on the progress of the section 94 reforms?
[Interruption]
The Hon. TONY KELLY: I am happy to give up my question time to the Attorney General if he would like to answer some more questions. As part of the 2010-11 budget, the Premier announced a revised approach for setting local development contributions and local council rates, and this included a $20,000 cap per residential lot or dwelling. The purpose of the cap is to increase housing supply and stimulate housing construction in New South Wales by lowering infrastructure charges. This initiative formed part of a comprehensive strategy to increase housing supply across New South Wales.
Since the 2010-11 budget announcement the New South Wales Government has held extensive discussions with councils and the development industry about the implementation of the reforms. As a result of these discussions, the Government reviewed some of the key aspects of the reforms. This review acknowledged the higher costs associated with servicing development in greenfields areas and councils' existing financial commitments in areas where planning and development are already well progressed. In summary, the revised policy settings are a cap of $30,000 per dwelling or residential lot in greenfields areas; retaining the cap of $20,000 per dwelling for development in all other areas; and areas where applications for more than 25 per cent of the expected residential lots or dwellings have already been lodged will not be subject to a cap.
Importantly, the Government also established a $50 million Priority Infrastructure Fund as a two-year arrangement to assist councils that are impacted by the cap. This allows them to continue to fund the infrastructure essential to servicing new development. Developers are also allowed to voluntarily pay a contribution above the relevant cap if they wish. To gauge the impact of these announcements, particularly the effect of the $30,000 cap, the Department of Planning began to monitor development assessment activity by those councils, particularly in the greenfields areas of Sydney. This monitoring has been conducted on a weekly basis from 17 September. The development assessment monitoring originally applied to the councils of Blacktown, Camden, Campbelltown, Liverpool, Penrith and the Hills, and later was expanded to include councils such as Tweed and Wyong.
Since mid September 1,644 subdivided lots or dwellings have been approved across greenfields councils in Sydney. This demonstrates a substantial increase in residential development consents by greenfields councils following the introduction of the $30,000 cap on local development contributions in greenfields areas. This is encouraging. Increasing the level of residential building activity will put downward pressure on house prices and will promote sustained economic growth.
Housing affordability is a critical issue and new housing construction provides significant flow-on benefits to the wider economy and the community through the multiplier effect. The Treasurer told us yesterday that this State recorded a 14 per cent increase in housing affordability last month—one of the highest rates 28812 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 recorded in Australia. These reforms are working. The recent reforms will continue to ensure that the costs of development are reasonable and that all necessary infrastructure is available to allow development to occur. The reforms have also overcome assessment blockages in councils. These new measures reflect a better balance and ensure that there is a fairer system and a fairer sharing of the costs of infrastructure between new and existing homebuyers. The reforms will also provide clarity and certainty for developers and councils alike so that they can get on with the job of building new homes.
MURRAY-DARLING BASIN PLAN
The Hon. ROBERT BROWN: I was going to ask an interesting and exciting question about cross- bench legislation that has passed through this House since 1995, but I will ask a dull and boring one instead. My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment. Does the Minister agree with the 50 scientists who yesterday urged the Federal Government to make much deeper cuts to the amount of water set aside for irrigation in the Murray-Darling Basin Plan? Does the Minister agree with their comments that the plan makes insufficient allowance for the likely impacts of climate change? What impact will the scientists' call for at least 3,000 billion litres of water to be removed from agricultural use have on the communities that rely on this water for their livelihood?
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: I will refer the question to the Minister and undertake to get an answer.
ILLAWARRA ARTS
The Hon. CHARLIE LYNN: My question is directed to the Minister for the Illawarra. In his capacity as Minister for the Illawarra is he a supporter of arts in the region? Is he aware of the renowned Merrigong Theatre Company and its good works in promoting arts in the Illawarra? Is he aware of the company's latest production entitled The Table of Knowledge? Did he take the opportunity as Minister for the Illawarra to see the play? If not, why not?
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: I believe the answers are: No, no, no, and no.
VOLUNTEERING
The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE: My question is directed to the Minister for Volunteering. What is the New South Wales Government doing to celebrate and to raise awareness of the contribution that volunteers make to our communities and, in particular, in recognition of United Nations International Volunteers Day on Sunday 5 December?
The Hon. PETER PRIMROSE: Members might be aware that 5 December was declared as International Volunteer Day by the United Nations in 1985. The Keneally Government strongly supports this annual opportunity for organisations to thank their volunteers. In New South Wales International Volunteer Day has been chosen as the day on which to present the Volunteer of the Year Awards. These awards were launched in 2007 by the Centre for Volunteering to recognise the efforts of New South Wales volunteers and to promote the importance of volunteering to the community. I am proud to be the patron of the awards. The New South Wales Government has provided financial support annually to the awards since their inception. This year the centre received $15,000 for the awards to assist with the coordination and prize allocation for the 19 regional and five statewide awards.
The awards recognise and celebrate volunteer contributions from across the State. This year's field of nominations demonstrated a remarkably high standard of personal dedication that resulted in outstanding community benefit. As a result, two additional nominees have warranted special acknowledgement in the senior and team categories, and this has served to highlight the incredible dedication that our volunteers put into the work that they so selflessly undertake. The winners will be announced in a ceremony at Parliament House tomorrow.
Similarly, as the Attorney General indicated in response to an earlier question, I attended the Community Relations Commission's Volunteering Awards, which were held just this morning here at Parliament House. Those awards are also held annually to celebrate volunteers whose service has enhanced the cultural and social wellbeing of their migrant communities, who have played a vital role in easing the broader migrant experience or who have contributed to social cohesion and community harmony. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28813
The important contribution that volunteers make to their communities is recognised not only on this one international day. The Government recognises the value of volunteering all year around. New South Wales health services host volunteer appreciation days to celebrate and recognise the valuable contribution made by volunteers to the public health system. Each of the State's emergency services offers extensive volunteer awards and recognition programs. Communities NSW jointly hosts a volunteer recognition reception with the Fundraising Institute Australia to acknowledge the valuable work of volunteers in the charitable sector. The State's major cultural institutions also organise a calendar of events for volunteers to visit other museums and galleries and to meet fellow volunteers. They also invite their volunteers to a thank you function that coincides with International Volunteers Day. The New South Wales Premier's Student Volunteering Awards program also recognises and celebrates the contribution of year 9 and 10 students to their school and community through volunteering. Students participating in the program receive certificates from the Premier. In 2010 more than 110,000 hours of student volunteering have been acknowledged and I will be attending a presentation ceremony with the Premier on 13 December.
There is also significant Government investment in making volunteering easier and broadening the volunteer base. For example, as part of the Government's 10-year plan for disability services Stronger Together, $8.5 million has been invested in strategies to attract and retain staff in the sector, including volunteers. This includes a significant investment in learning and development tools to support better governance and financial management for voluntary boards of management in non-government organisations. The Government's commitment to celebrating volunteers and their contribution to the New South Wales economy takes place not only on 5 December each year; it is ongoing.
BUSHFIRE HAZARD REDUCTION
The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK: Today feels a bit like school break-up day; members on both sides of the House are laughing and guffawing. My question without notice is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment. Is it a fact that national parks and reserves cover nearly 9 per cent of the State's land area yet they include 23 per cent of the bushfire-prone areas of New South Wales? Is the Minister confident that even with the acceleration in hazard-reduction burning the State is properly prepared for the coming fire season? Are fuel loads in national parks such that if we do face a hot summer and dry conditions major fires are likely?
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: I note that the long-term forecast for this summer is like the forecast for this week: rain, rain, rain and more rain. Nonetheless, I will refer the matter to the Minister for an appropriate response.
ELECTRONIC TICKETING SYSTEM
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Transport. In light of the Government's failure to implement the Tcard project at a cost of $100 million for absolutely no return, will he, on the last day of Parliament before the 2011 election, accept responsibility for the Keneally Labor Government's failure to implement an electronic ticketing system?
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: This Government has done more to reform transport fares than any other government in the history of this State. The introduction of MyZone has dramatically improved travel for commuters. MyZone has delivered with 93 per cent or 94 per cent of journeys cheaper or at the existing fare. The more people travel, the more they will save. MyZone is a huge success for commuters. With the introduction of MyZone commuters have taken the opportunity to utilise public transport.
The New South Wales Government has now signed a contract with the Pearl Consortium to deliver Sydney's new electronic ticketing system. The Pearl Consortium includes partners who delivered the world famous Oyster smartcard, used daily by millions of London's public transport users. Our new system will allow customers to tag on and tag off from different modes of transport—government ferries, trains and government and private buses. When customers tap on and tap off at a smartcard reader or gate, their fare is calculated. It can operate in a similar way to an eTag, because the smartcard can be linked to an account from which the price of the journey will be automatically deducted. Commuters will be able to top up their accounts online or arrange to have automatic deductions made from a linked bank account or credit card. They will also be able to load cash on the card through retail outlets. 28814 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
The New South Wales Government is delivering an electronic ticketing system that will benefit the millions of people who use our public transport system every week. The system will be rolled out across the greater Sydney public transport network, including in Newcastle and the Hunter region, as well as in Wollongong, the Illawarra and the Blue Mountains.
The Hon. Catherine Cusack: When?
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: The member should listen up. From mid-2011 new bus driver consoles will begin to be installed on some private bus operators. These new consoles will help private bus operations to be more efficient. The consoles will sell MyZone cash tickets first and they will later be installed with other electronic ticketing system technology that will be compatible for smartcard travel when it starts to rollout on government and private bus networks. From late 2012 commuters will start to see the new electronic ticketing system being rolled out on the government ferry network. This will be followed by the progressive rollout of the system across the train network from mid-2013, and government and private bus networks from the second half of 2013. The Government expects the rollout of the new electronic ticketing system to be completed in the second half of 2014 at which time commuters across all modes of public transport will be able to enjoy the benefits of a world-class ticketing system.
COLLATERALISED DEBT OBLIGATIONS
The Hon. GREG DONNELLY: My question is directed to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on the issue of collateralised debt obligations?
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: As members may recall, collateralised debt obligations were one of the triggers for the global financial crisis. These collateralised debt obligations were dodgy because of the way in which they re-packaged and sold risky debt. Collateralised debt obligations have been condemned by economists around the world for their role in the credit crisis that sparked the global financial meltdown. In fact, Malcolm Edey, the Assistant Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, said on 19 March 2009 that collateralised debt obligations:
… came to play an important part in the spreading of the crisis.
Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize winning economist and Professor of Economics at Princeton from 2 July 2007, commented:
It's starting to look as if C.D.O.'s were to this decade's housing bubble what Enron-style accounting was to the stock bubble of the 1990s. Both made investors think they were getting a much better deal than they really were … the housing bubble, like the stock bubble before it, is claiming a growing number of innocent victims.
The shadow Treasurer even admits they were rotten debt products. Members should be concerned at the startling admission by the shadow Treasurer about his role in developing and selling collateralised debt obligations. Yes, the former merchant banker from Manly, Michael Baird, has made a startling YouTube admission that he is still haunted by his involvement with selling collateralised debt obligations. What a startling lack of judgement. With a sickening smirk on his face, the alternative Treasurer of this State can be seen on YouTube talking about making "something that is so rotten smell so wonderful". This is what he said at a University of Western Sydney economics symposium on 15 July 2010:
I reflected on my time in the late 90s on a dealing desk with National Australia Bank over in the UK, and a Scotsman was brought in to launch National Australia Bank into collateralised debt obligations.
He was a character—but he never bought lunch.
But I was particularly taken by his comments as he built these packages.
He said to me, he said: It is amazing how you can get something that is so rotten smell so wonderful.
And as time's gone on, those words have haunted me as I've looked back.
They were his exact words. I am sure they have haunted him. Michael Baird was so worried about his slip up in the symposium when he confessed his involvement with collateralised debt obligations that he decided to cover it up. He removed those words from the official transcript of his speech. It seems that even former merchant 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28815 bankers have moments of honesty. He quickly covered them up and deleted them from the transcript on his website. Unfortunately for the canary from Manly his words are still on YouTube and his collateralised debt obligation smirk is immortalised forever. Let us contrast those words with his hypocritical comments in this Parliament on collateralised debt obligations. He said in the other place on 3 December 2008 that collateralised debt obligations were "risky investments linked to the sub-prime mortgage crisis". He deliberately did not mention his involvement in this product.
The question today is what was his role in selling collateralised debt obligations? Why did he confess it in a symposium and then cover it up and delete any reference to it on his website? How intimately involved was he in these products? These are questions that Barry O'Farrell needs to carefully consider. The murky background of this former merchant banker will be revealed.
HEXACHLOROBENZENE WASTE TRANSPORTATION
The Hon. IAN COHEN: My question is directed to the Minister for Transport, representing the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment.
The Hon. Robert Brown: This is your last question.
The Hon. IAN COHEN: And I still do not have any expectation of receiving an answer! Has the Foreshore Road Orica facility, currently storing hexachlorobenzene waste, complied with its environmental protection licence? If not, what is the extent of the non-compliance? Does the Minister and the Department of Environment and Climate Change support the transportation of 16,000 tonnes of hexachlorobenzene waste to the Nyborg incinerator in Denmark and Germany? Is the Minister satisfied with the plans of Orica to transport to and load the waste in Port Botany?
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: As much as I would like to provide an answer to the Hon. Ian Cohen's last question in this House—
The Hon. Ian Cohen: Go on, give it a try.
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: I resist the temptation. I will, however, refer the matter to the appropriate Minister and undertake to get an answer.
TAMWORTH HOSPITAL REDEVELOPMENT
The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: My question is addressed to the Attorney General, representing the Minister for Health. It was reported in the Northern Daily Leader this week that the State Government will be making a bid for funds under the Commonwealth's Health and Hospital Fund—that is, round 3, regional priority round—for the redevelopment of Tamworth hospital. How much money will the State Government be seeking from the Commonwealth in this bid? If the full amount applied for is not awarded, will the State Government commit to contributing any shortfall in order to make good its commitment to the redevelopment of the hospital? When can the people of Tamworth expect the redevelopment of the hospital to be completed?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I will refer the question to the Deputy Premier, and Minister for Health, although I take this opportunity to again put on record the fact that the aspiring member for Tamworth from The Nationals, who was also the candidate at the last election, said that Tamworth did not need a new hospital.
The Hon. Michael Veitch: Are they running him again?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: Yes, they are running him again; they are recycling him. I do not know whether he holds the same view today as he did when he made that announcement—I would be interested to know. Perhaps the Hon. Trevor Khan will tell us. But it is a bit rich for The Nationals—who have put up the same candidate for this election, and as far as I am aware he has not changed his views—to be asking questions again about the redevelopment of Tamworth hospital when clearly they do not believe in it.
PARLIAMENTARY QUESTIONS
The Hon. HELEN WESTWOOD: My question is addressed to the Attorney General. Can the Attorney General acquaint the House with some of the questions he has encountered in recent years? 28816 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: It is that time of the year when everyone is called to recount efforts. We all know there are staffers who take a lot of time to prepare questions to probe the Government. This is an opportunity to shine the light on those efforts, to actually acknowledge them, reward them and give them the acknowledgement that, unfortunately, so far they have not been given. I start with some of the very interesting questions, and in doing so I make the point that some American schools actually have Ask a Stupid Question Day on the last day in September, when acknowledgements are given similar to those I am about to give.
One sociologist, a fellow named Larry Kersten, once wisely observed that there are in fact no stupid questions, just inquisitive idiots. I am not seeking to draw any connotations from that particular phrase, but I am going to call these awards the Kerstens out of some acknowledgement for that expertise. I start first with the Today show, which on 1 February 2010 asked my office this question: Is it a crime to wear budgie smugglers in a shopping centre? I can only imagine there was some concern about the member for Vaucluse walking around Woolworths in budgie smugglers, carrying a shopping basket. On 3 February 2010 the ABC asked this question: Is it a crime to show the wrong time on a public clock? That was a very important question! It received one of the two media Kersten awards for the year.
I now turn to the Kersten awards for members of Parliament. Who can forget that famous question from none other than David Clarke, who wins a Kersten award for asking me this: On what exact day was the second phone line installed at Windsor courthouse? That one deserves a real Kersten! He is followed by his factional adversary John Ajaka, who aspires one day to hold the office of Attorney General. I have never ascertained the reason for that until he asked me this question: How many pianos does each department, agency and entity own and lease? He followed that up by asking me how many grand pianos we have. Obviously the member has some hidden talents that he wants to explore if and when he comes into the office of the Attorney General. Then I had one from Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes, who is not with us at the moment.
The Hon. Robert Brown: That is an unfortunate turn of phrase
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: Yes, he is not with us—at the moment, I said. He asked me the following question about pole dancing: Will the Minister indicate what measures the Government is taking to prevent this disturbing trend? That trend is pole dancing. But the final Kersten—the gold Kersten; the Kersten of the year—goes to our favourite, David Shoebridge. On his first day in this place he asked the following question of the Minister for Planning:
Given his responses ... concerning the Cessnock City Council in which he alleged that a Cessnock farm could not obtain approval for a chook pen, has [the Minister] been able to identify the farm yet? Or, better still, has he found the mystery homeless chook?
I take this opportunity to wish everyone well for the Christmas break and congratulate all our Kersten award winners.
The PRESIDENT: It is a brave member who would seek the call to ask a question after that.
SYDNEY TO NEWCASTLE TRAIN SERVICE
Ms CATE FAEHRMANN: My question is directed to the Minister for Transport. Can the Minister confirm the Labor Government's current position in relation to cutting the Newcastle train line? Given that the Newcastle city renewal transport management and accessibility plan proposes to terminate the Newcastle line at a new Wickham station, will he rule out today, on the last day of sitting for the year, cutting the line at Wickham and maintaining the current service right through to the Newcastle terminus?
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: The New South Wales Government is committed to the revitalisation of the Newcastle central business district for the benefit of the people of Newcastle and the entire Hunter region. On 15 November the New South Wales Government released two transport studies that will contribute to the development of an Infrastructure Australia submission for the revitalisation of the Newcastle central business district. Both studies have been commissioned by the New South Wales Government and prepared by transport experts AECOM. The two studies have been provided to the Newcastle Central Renewal Steering Committee, which will develop the submission to Infrastructure Australia in consultation with local councils and the local community. The Government remains committed to a rail-based solution for Newcastle but recognises that work needs to be done to improve connectivity in the city centre. These reports provide some options for the steering committee to consider in consultation with the local community. Further questions on this process should be directed to the Minister for the Hunter. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28817
PORT KEMBLA MARINE PILOT SHORTAGE
The Hon. JOHN AJAKA: My question without notice is directed to the Treasurer, Minister for State and Regional Development, and Minister for Ports and Waterways. Is the Minister aware of significant delays to ships visiting Port Kembla due to the shortage of pilots available to service ship visits? Has the Minister received any representations on this matter and, if so, what action has he taken? Will he guarantee that the New South Wales economy will not suffer from bottlenecks being created at Port Kembla? Will the Minister meet with the affected parties to find a resolution to this issue?
The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: That was a long and detailed question so I will take it on notice.
MAJOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS
The Hon. KAYEE GRIFFIN: My question is addressed to the Minister for Planning, Minister for Infrastructure, and Minister for Lands. Can the Minister inform the House how the Government is enforcing conditions imposed on major projects approvals?
The Hon. TONY KELLY: The New South Wales Government takes compliance conditions with its planning approvals very seriously. The Department of Planning recently published a new compliance policy and associated guidelines following an exhaustive review of compliance policies and guidelines of other organisations, both nationally and internationally.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Charlie Lynn will cease displaying a poster in the Chamber, and I direct the Attendants to remove it. I place the Hon. Charlie Lynn on two calls to order.
The Hon. TONY KELLY: It includes clear principles for choosing an enforcement response appropriate for the breach and clarification of the responsibilities of departmental officers in identifying, recording and investigating potential breaches. Its publication is timely, with the department establishing a new compliance team of three officers at Singleton. This office will strengthen compliance with conditions of consent in the coalfields, undertake independent audits, and develop and implement strategies for sustainable coalmining in the region. The policy and guidelines will underpin the work of the new office.
In 2009-2010, the Department of Planning conducted 86 inspections and audits, representing more than double the number of inspections and audits undertaken in 2008-09 following the allocation of additional resources. The department also carried out 114 enforcement actions, ranging from negotiated outcomes and warning letters for the less serious offences, orders and penalty notices for moderately serious offences and prosecution for highly significant offences. Just last week Hunter Quarries Pty Ltd was fined $70,000 and ordered to pay legal costs by the Land and Environment Court.
The Greens do not seem to be interested. For their benefit, I repeat: Just last week, Hunter Quarries Pty Ltd was fined $70,000 and ordered to pay legal costs by the Land and Environment Court. In the 12-month period between August 2008 and July 2009, 784,527 tonnes of hard rock was transported from the quarry when its limit is only 500,000 tonnes per annum. The breach was identified by the New South Wales Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water during a routine inspection. The company's failure to adequately monitor its operations led to an increase in truck movements. A developer who illegally began construction on a ski lodge redevelopment located just 60 metres from the site of the Thredbo landslide was also prosecuted. Inspections by the department revealed building commenced on the New Kirk Lodge before the development consent was issued and a construction certificate granted for the new apartments. The developer, Fancott Pty Ltd, was convicted by the Land and Environment Court, and fined $24,500 and ordered to pay legal costs.
In August Moolarben Coal Mine was fined $70,000 and ordered to pay court costs for breaching planning laws at its operations near Ulan, in the State's Central West. Moolarben unlawfully cleared vegetation, including endangered native species, without planning approval so a boundary fence could be erected. The company is now required to rectify the situation by revegetating and setting aside similar vegetation in other areas for permanent protection.
The number of enforcement actions taken in the reporting period represents a 46 per cent increase over the number of enforcement actions taken in 2008-09. In August and September 2010 the department also undertook a joint compliance audit campaign with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, and Industry and Investment NSW. The campaign audited compliance at nine coalmines against licence approval and lease conditions relating to dust management. A summary report of the audit outcomes is currently being finalised. 28818 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: If members have further questions, I suggest that they place them on notice.
PARLIAMENTARY QUESTIONS
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: Further to the question that was asked of me by the Hon. Helen Westwood early in question time today, I inform the House that there has been the late presentation of a further Kersten award, and it goes to none other than the Hon. Marie Ficarra. I saw her sitting there earlier in absolute despair that she had missed out on an award. She just got in with a very late entry, and it came to my office yesterday. In relation to a recent function she asked the probing question, "What exact food and drink did the morning tea involve?" We are researching it.
PEST AND FERAL ANIMALS
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: On 27 October 2010 the Hon. Robert Brown asked me, representing the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (Cancer), a question without notice concerning pest and feral animals. I am advised as follows:
The Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) undertakes integrated pest animal control programs on parks and reserves in accordance with Regional Pest Management strategies. As these programs are aimed at protecting biodiversity, DECCW monitors native species to determine how effective these programs have been, rather than the total number of pest animals removed from each reserve or national park.
DECCW does not maintain a state wide count of animals culled on an annual basis.
WOLLEMI NATIONAL PARK BUSHWALKING EVENT
The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: On 27 October 2010 the Hon. Robert Borsak asked me, representing the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, a question without notice concerning a Wollemi National Park bushwalking event. I now provide the following response:
I am advised that the National Parks Association "walks program" is consistent with the Wollemi National Park Plan of Management.
Under the Plan of Management, the National Parks and Wildlife Service assesses applications and where appropriate, issues formal exemptions for larger than usual groups to experience parks and reserves.
I am advised the National Parks and Wildlife Service does not have a record of an exemption issued to the National Parks Association Deep Pass camp in October 2008, The National Parks and Wildlife Service will raise the issue of party size with the Association to ensure that group sizes are appropriate for future outings, and that exemptions are sought by the Association for larger groups.
THORNTON RAIL BRIDGE
The Hon. TONY KELLY: On 28 October 2010 the Hon. Robyn Parker asked me a question on notice concerning Thornton Rail Bridge. I now provide the following response:
The NSW Government is working as quickly as possible to build the new bridge at Thornton. The Roads and Traffic Authority (RT A) has been appointed on behalf of the NSW Government to manage its construction.
Following our $10M commitment in this financial year's state budget (2010/11), we got to work straight away on the detailed design and environmental assessment for the bridge.
A contract was awarded to Cardno Pty Limited in August 2010 to finalise the detailed bridge design and environmental assessment for the project.
The plan consists of two adjacent, two-lane bridges, which will be completed in stages. The first stage will involve building a new eastern bridge and road approaches.
The old bridge will then be demolished to allow a new western bridge.
Two new bridges cannot be built at the same time as the existing bridge must remain open to traffic while the first eastern bridge is built.
This information was contained in a community update which was distributed to the areas around Thornton in October 2010.
Final planning and pre-construction activities for the new bridge are now taking place. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28819
Planning approval for the new bridge will be obtained as soon as the RT A completes:
• environmental and heritage assessments; and • detailed engineering designs.
These works are expected to be completed in December 2010.
The RTA is also performing a traffic study, at the request of the Department of Planning, to determine the number of properties that can be released in relation to the timing of the construction of the new bridge.
The RT A is currently managing a number of activities so that the new eastern bridge can be built as quickly as possible.
As part of the environmental assessment aboriginal artefacts of low archaeological significance were found on the site.
The RTA is currently consulting with the local aboriginal community about the artefacts.
Tenders for building the new eastern bridge and road approaches are expected to be called in early 2011 with work to start in mid-2011.
DARLING HARBOUR PROPERTY ASSETS
The Hon. TONY KELLY: On 28 October 2010 Dr John Kaye asked me a question without notice concerning Darling Harbour property assets. I now provide the following response:
I am advised that the Harbourside car park at Darling Harbour was built in 1988 to comply with the existing building codes.
Before the car park was offered for sale through the government's asset divestment program, a building condition report confirmed that the car park was structurally sound and all essential services were generally in good condition for a building of that age.
The Government decided to offer the asset in its existing condition and provided the building condition report to the market.
HIGH-LIMIT POKER MACHINES
The Hon. PETER PRIMROSE: On 9 November 2010 Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile asked a question without notice concerning high-limit poker machines. I now provide the following response:
(a) The number of no bet limit gaming machines installed at Star City casino at any one time fluctuates within a limit of 250 such machines the casino is permitted to operate in accordance with a Ministerial Direction issued in respect of the casino in 2008.
(b) The Casino, Liquor and Gaming Control Authority is responsible for approving the layout of the casino gaming floor and other gaming-related controls in accordance with the terms of the Casino Control Act 1992 and the Ministerial Direction.
(c) No.
(d) The Productivity Commission recommended a one dollar bet limit on gaming machines in its draft report on gambling, released in October 2009. In response the NSW Government took the position that any proposal to reduce the bet limit should be subject to a full analysis of whether a one dollar bet limit, or another amount, is appropriate, including all associated impacts. The NSW Government's position has not changed on this issue.
Questions without notice concluded.
[The President left the chair at 1.05 p.m. The House resumed at 2.35 p.m.]
ROAD TRANSPORT (DRIVER LICENSING) AMENDMENT BILL 2010
PARLIAMENTARY ELECTORATES AND ELECTIONS FURTHER AMENDMENT BILL 2010
PUBLIC HEALTH BILL 2010
WORKERS' COMPENSATION (DUST DISEASES) AMENDMENT BILL 2010
Messages received from the Legislative Assembly agreeing to the Legislative Council's amendments.
CRIMES (SENTENCING PROCEDURE) AMENDMENT BILL 2010
Message received from the Legislative Assembly returning the bill without amendment. 28820 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
BIOFUELS
Ministerial Statement
The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Planning, Minister for Infrastructure, and Minister for Lands) [2.39 p.m.]: The Biofuels Act 2007 requires prime wholesalers and major retailers in New South Wales to achieve a minimum average ethanol content of 4 per cent of all petrol sold in New South Wales. On 1 January 2011 that percentage is scheduled to increase to 6 per cent, and from 1 July 2011 all regular grade unleaded petrol sold in New South Wales is scheduled to be replaced by E10—the result of legislation that, from my recollection, was unanimously passed in this House. The prime wholesalers and major retailers have been working hard to increase their ethanol percentages in New South Wales. I am pleased to advise that in the September quarter the average ethanol content was 3.6 per cent, meaning 36 per cent of all petrol sold in New South Wales was E10. It was very difficult to get started but everybody has now come on board. It is an excellent result for New South Wales. However, progress has stalled since September due to industry-wide ethanol supply constraints.
A major objective of the biofuels Act was to encourage local biofuel production to drive regional jobs, improve fuel security, reduce the import of expensive foreign petroleum fuel, and provide cheaper, cleaner, greener fuel for New South Wales motorists. Supply has increased over recent years but, despite a lot of hard work, not enough to meet the higher mandatory levels. The planned increases in local production of ethanol have unfortunately not been delivered. This is due to a number of factors. The global economic crisis has led to difficulty in raising capital for investment and difficulty in borrowing funds for new ventures. Low oil prices have made biofuels less competitive and a higher Australian dollar is making imports of both petroleum and biofuels relatively cheaper. Indeed, these factors have affected the confidence of the ethanol industry in New South Wales and Australia, volume sellers and New South Wales motorists.
The new fuel excise provisions agreed to by the Gillard Government in the weeks after the Federal election provide welcome support for the local ethanol industry in the short term. It is certainly a vast improvement on the previous Government's stance on alternative fuel, which would have had the industry in tatters today. However, some issues remain to be worked through, and I have written to the Federal Government suggesting some alternative proposals to provide additional certainty for the domestic industry.
With the backdrop of this uncertainty and insufficient ethanol supply to meet the higher mandatory levels, the Biofuels Expert Panel has consulted industry and provided me with advice. Having considered the recommendations of the expert panel and reached a decision, I inform the House that the volumetric ethanol percentage required will remain at 4 per cent until 1 July 2011 and that the date on which all regular unleaded petrol is to be replaced by E10 will be deferred until 1 July 2012. It is effectively a delay of six months in each case. The suspension of the 6 per cent mandate will be gazetted this month and a regulation to prescribe the new date on which all unleaded petrol is to be replaced by E10 will be promulgated as soon as possible. The Government will continue to manage the impacts of the supply constraints on individual volume sellers by conditional partial exemptions and, of course, will continue to encourage and support new investment in the biofuels industry. The legislative review required under the Act has commenced and the report will be ready to be tabled in Parliament by July 2011. The review will provide an opportunity for all stakeholders to present their views on future mandate settings. This will enable a further decision to be made by mid-2011.
I take this opportunity to thank the volume sellers for the considerable effort and resources they have already put into achieving compliance with the mandate. When we introduced the mandate four years ago there was considerable resistance. Now all the major fuel companies are on board and they are keen to see this initiative come to fruition. They did not originally support the Government's mandate but now they support it wholeheartedly. We have reached the eleventh hour. We must make sure that it comes to the final conclusion. It is important to note that 36 per cent—probably now closer to 40 per cent—of all fuels sold in this State is E10. We are also making progress on biodiesel. As members opposite would know, this initiative has underpinned more than 1,000 jobs in this State. It has contributed to a significant number of jobs in places such as Nowra, Manildra and Gunnedah, plus the biodiesel industry at Rutherford in Newcastle and just five kilometres over the border at Barnawartha in Victoria, which takes its supply from New South Wales. It creates a great number of jobs. It is an important initiative and we have come a long way. We want to make sure that the policy has a safe landing.
I thank the NRMA for its support and the estimated 1.8 million New South Wales motorists who now use E10. Since the mandate was introduced almost four billion litres of E10 have been used in New South 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28821
Wales. This has replaced approximately 320 million litres of petrol imports, worth more than $220 million. That means that $220 million has stayed in Australia, supporting local industry, farmers, workers and regional communities. Emissions of cancer-causing particulates from petrol engine vehicles are now about 10 per cent lower than they would have been without the introduction of E10, and about 240,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions have been saved. The New South Wales Government has led the way in supporting and promoting this alternative view in Australia. The mandate introduced almost four years ago has driven a huge uptake in the use of ethanol and its acceptance by the community. However, we must acknowledge market realities and adapt to them. Let there be no doubt that once supply constraints are addressed this Government will have the legislative framework in place to continue to provide support for our domestic alternative fuel industry and to send a positive message to industry and consumers alike about the benefits of a strong, robust and forward-looking alternative fuel industry in New South Wales. Once again, I thank the House for its continued unanimous support for this industry.
LEGISLATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
Report
The Hon. Kayee Griffin tabled, on behalf of the Chair, Report No. 2/54, entitled "Public Interest and the Rule of Law: Report on Responses to the Discussion Paper", dated December 2010.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Kayee Griffin.
TABLING OF PAPERS
The Hon. Penny Sharpe tabled the following papers:
(1) Annual Report (Departments) Act 1985—Report of the Department of Human Services for the year ended 30 June 2010—Volumes 1 and 2.
(2) Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001—Report of the Nature Conservation Trust of New South Wales for the year ended 30 June 2010.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Penny Sharpe.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders: Order of Business
Motion by the Hon. Rick Colless agreed to:
That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow a motion to be moved forthwith that Private Members' Business item No. 184 outside the Order of Precedence, relating to the Battle of Fromelles, be called on forthwith.
Order of Business
Motion by the Hon. Rick Colless agreed to:
That Private Members' Business item No. 184 outside the Order of Precedence be called on forthwith.
BATTLE OF FROMELLES
Debate resumed from 23 September 2010.
The Hon. RICK COLLESS [2.84 p.m.], in reply: I thank the House for allowing me to bring on this motion on the last day of sitting. This important motion in relation to the dedication of Pheasant Wood Military Cemetery at Fromelles should be brought to its proper conclusion. First, I thank all members who have made a contribution to this debate: the Hon. Lynda Voltz, the Hon. Charlie Lynn, Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner and the Hon. Trevor Khan. I will run briefly through some of the issues that came out in the debate. The Hon. Lynda Voltz, who has been a long-time supporter in this House of military issues, moved an amendment that slightly changed the wording of the second part of the motion. Her amendment was to make the second part read: 28822 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
2. That this House recommends the NSW Government's Office of Veterans' Affairs give consideration to suitable means of acknowledging the importance of the Battle of Fromelles and all other battles currently not recognised within the Anzac Memorial Building.
I have thought about the amendment and I do not think that I can support it. I noticed that Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile in his contribution acknowledged the amendment but seemed somewhat confused about what difference it would make to the motion. I hold the same view. I do not think the amendment will contribute to the overall substantive motion and therefore it should not be supported.
The Hon. Charlie Lynn's dedication to military issues is legendary in this place. He spoke about the work of the commander of the 15th Brigade on the day of the Battle of Fromelles, Brigadier-General "Pompey" Elliott, who was engaged in discussion with Major Howard, a British officer who was taken to the front line to see what was going on there. Brigadier-General Elliott attempted to convince Major Howard that the British should call off the attack. Despite Major Howard agreeing with Brigadier-General Elliott that they should call off the attack, it was not called off but just delayed for a few hours—and of course the rest, unfortunately, is very much history.
The Hon. Jennifer Gardiner in her address made the very important point that the Commonwealth war grave would not exist but for a remarkable Australian who has dedicated his life to finding the graves of those soldiers. He is Victorian schoolteacher Mr Lambis Englezos, who undertook all the initial research and eventually was able to identify exactly where the mass graves were located. We should very much acknowledge the work that he did in allowing the soldiers to be found and buried properly at the Pheasant Wood Military Cemetery.
As I said in my substantive speech, the opening of the new Commonwealth war grave was a very moving ceremony. A couple of days after the service at Fromelles I had the opportunity to move around some of the other battlegrounds and places in Belgium and France. Places like Passchendaele and Tyne Cot, Hill 60, Pozieres—they are all names that roll off the tongues of most Australians very easily, and we know the history of what happened in all those places. I also had the opportunity to attend a military funeral at a little cemetery called Prowse Point. A soldier, Private Alan Mather, from Inverell—my home town—who had been lost since 1917 had been found a few months before and he received a full military burial at that cemetery. It was a most moving occasion. I saw many people I knew from Inverell, and the soldier's family were overawed by the fact that his body had been found and identified as being their long-lost uncle and great-uncle. It was a very moving ceremony.
With those few comments, I thank all members for their contributions and I thank the House for its forbearance in allowing me to discuss this important event. I thank you, Madam President, and the Speaker of the House in another place for granting me the opportunity to represent the Parliament at the dedication of the Pheasant Wood Military Cemetery at Fromelles. I commend the motion to the House.
Question—That the amendment of the Hon. Lynda Voltz be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Amendment of the Hon. Lynda Voltz agreed to.
Question—That the motion as amended be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion as amended agreed to.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT (CONFISCATION OF ALCOHOL) BILL 2010
Bill received from the Legislative Assembly, and read a first time and ordered to be printed on motion by Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes.
Motion by Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes agreed to:
That standing orders be suspended to allow the passing of the bill through all its remaining stages during the present or any one sitting of the House. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28823
Second Reading
Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [2.56 p.m.]: I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Local Government Amendment (Confiscation of Alcohol) Bill 2010 amends the Local Government Act 1993 to provide for the confiscation of alcohol in alcohol prohibited areas. The object of the bill is to amend the definition of "alcohol prohibited area" so that the power to confiscate and tip out alcohol may be exercised in an area in which the drinking of alcohol is prohibited by a notice under section 632 of the principal Act, regardless of whether that area is situated in the precinct or area to which a precinct or community event liquor accord applies. The bill also contains provisions relating to the creation and enforcement of alcohol prohibited areas and alcohol-free zones. These provisions do not create offences in relation to drinking in public places or streets but instead provide for confiscation and tip-out powers.
Section 632A of the Local Government Act 1993, the principal Act, authorises police officers, and certain local council employees who have been approved in writing by the Commissioner of Police, to confiscate alcohol from persons who are drinking in an alcohol prohibited area. This term is currently defined as a public place—for example, a public beach or a public park—that is situated in the precinct or area to which a precinct liquor accord or a community event liquor accord under the Liquor Act 2007 applies and in which the drinking of alcohol is prohibited by a local council by notice under section 632 of the principal Act. The power to confiscate alcohol from persons drinking in an alcohol prohibited area includes the power to tip the alcohol out from the receptacle in which it is contained.
The Local Government Amendment (Confiscation of Alcohol) Bill 2010 simply removes section 632A (4) (a), which restricts the type of alcohol prohibited area to which the confiscation and tip-out powers apply— that is, in the area situated wholly or partly in the precinct to which a precinct liquor accord within the meaning of the Liquor Act applies or in the area to which a community event liquor accord applies. In order to simplify this legislation, to ensure that both law enforcement officers and the broader community responsibilities are clearly defined, confiscation and tip-out powers must be extended to include all alcohol prohibited areas. In a recent Focus on Family Values Forum, which I run every month, guest speaker Mr Geoff Munro, Policy Director for the Australian Drug Foundation, spoke on the topic of Australia's binge drinking epidemic. Mr Munro said:
New South Wales Magistrates had recently said they were sick and tired of alcohol-related violence clogging our courts. When people become intoxicated they lose their inhibitions, their aggressive impulses take over, and they can become violent. Unfortunately, we will not get the chance to change legislation until the community demands it—we desperately need to listen to the community and to the Magistrates when they say "enough is enough".
That is why I am here today introducing this bill, which I support entirely. I want to say enough is enough. We need to give the police the authority to confiscate and tip out alcohol in alcohol prohibited areas, where unfortunately the current laws allow for only the issuing of fines. Most sensible people would assume this power exists and that the police can do it, but it does not and the police cannot.
I will briefly explain the difference between alcohol-free zones and alcohol-prohibited zones. They are both very different and very relevant to this bill. Alcohol-free zones already provide for confiscation and tip-out powers with regard to alcohol but are restricted to being established over a public road or part of a public road, or a public place that is a car park or part of a car park. Where a council has the control and management of parks or reserves it may erect notices stating "Alcohol Prohibited Area" to prohibit the consumption and possession of alcohol and/or other activities. However, in these areas police officers do not have the power to confiscate and tip out alcohol. Unless the area is part of a community liquor accord precinct current laws only allow police to issue infringement notices for acting contrary to notices erected by council, which carry a maximum fine of $110. Simply put, police can confiscate and tip out alcohol in alcohol-free zones but not in alcohol-prohibited zones.
This legislation would not force police to confiscate alcohol from responsible adults but would give them the ability to protect public safety and community amenity where it was deemed to be in the public interest. It is not my intention to quote authorities from around the world about binge drinking and the adverse impact of alcohol on social amenity; that was done recently during debate on another bill. However, the member for Port Macquarie stated: 28824 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
The report "Range and Magnitude of Alcohol's Harm to Others", released in August 2010, puts the annual cost from alcohol misuse in the Australian community at $36 billion. The research estimated that 70,000 Australians would be victim of an alcohol- related assault this year, and that 24,000 of those will be victims of domestic violence. The report also noted 20,000 children across Australia would be victims of substantial alcohol-related child abuse.
Communities across the State are struggling to deal with the effects of alcohol-fuelled violence and anti-social behaviour whether through the pubs and clubs, domestic issues or, more worryingly, in public places where often large groups gather to drink excessively.
This is a matter of real concern to the police, particularly at this time of the year. For that reason it is essential that we support this bill today, not only to help the police control binge drinking and alcohol-fuelled violence but also in preparation for the upcoming Christmas and New Year's Eve celebrations, which are followed by holiday beach functions. The New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research is often asked whether the incidence of crime increases over the Christmas and New Year period. In response to these enquiries it carried out an analysis of crime statistics for selected offences such as assaults, domestic violence and sexual assaults. The bureau found:
There is an obvious spike in both types of assault on 1 January and an increase in sexual offences on 31 December and 1 January. Twice as many incidents of domestic violence related assault are recorded on New Year's Day compared with other days during the four-week period. The number of recorded incidents of sexual offences around New Year is approximately double that of other days in the period. Of all personal offences, non-domestic violence related assault incidents showed the largest increase on New Year's Day, with over two and a half times as many of these incidents occurring on January 1 compared with other days during the period examined. The spike in these offences is likely due to the higher levels of alcohol consumption and social interaction.
When I was involved in providing Lifeline counsellors across the State I found that I had to double the number of counsellors on duty 24 hours a day from 24 December until 2 January because during that time we had double the number of calls taken at any other time of the year. What we are talking about is a worldwide binge drinking epidemic that increases violence towards individuals, families and the community. What can we do to address this growing problem? I would like to think that we can at least begin by giving the police officers the authority to confiscate and tip out alcohol in alcohol-prohibited areas. Removing the problem is far better than ignoring it or dealing with the consequences. Of course, the Police Association welcomes this bill. It stated:
… [it] will make it easier for police to patrol our streets and keep the community safe. This bill makes it clear that anyone drinking in an alcohol prohibited area can and will have that alcohol confiscated and tipped out. Giving police this power makes a real difference and ensures the community is safe from anti-social behaviour—especially late at night, in and around liquor hotspots.
In summary, this bill is simply about taking steps to prevent alcohol-fuelled violence and a potential binge- drinking epidemic. It will also allow the police to confiscate and tip out alcohol in alcohol-prohibited zones, which already occurs in alcohol-free zones. It is a simple but essential piece of legislation. I commend the bill to the House.
Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE [3.08 p.m.]: The Greens cannot support the Local Government Amendment (Confiscation of Alcohol) Bill 2010, but we commend the member's clear good intentions in introducing it. We have some reservations about expanding the power of police officers to confiscate alcohol in this way. We are concerned that it may have a disproportionate impact on young, homeless and indigenous people. It is those people who are more often found drinking in a public place, as opposed to middle class people, who tend to drink at home. Our concern is that it may have a disproportionate impact on people who are already marginalised. Equally, good arguments can be put in support of the bill regardless of its impact because it would empower police officers to confiscate and dispose of alcohol as opposed to issuing a fine or an infringement notice. If police officers were to exercise discretion in that way—that is, by getting rid of the source of the problem but not issuing an infringement notice—it may well have a beneficial impact.
Those two concerns are somewhat in balance. If it were just on the balancing of those two concerns, given that there are some benefits and detriments in the bill, it may have been supportable. But the real concern the Greens have is that the bill will give this power not just to police but also to enforcement officers as defined in the Act, and that includes employees of councils who are authorised by the commissioner to be enforcement officers for the purposes of this section.
This morning I came away from attending a launch by the United Services Union and a task force of local government groups focused particularly on rangers and parking officers. These local government officers are already at the front line of interaction with the community, facing harassment, many facing assault, almost all facing psychological difficulties in having to deal with the amount of abuse—physical and mental—they are 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28825 subjected to when performing their existing duties. Their real concern is expanding the obligations of that class of officer, albeit only those who have been authorised in writing to be enforcement officers. Expanding those duties to local council officers potentially involves a shift down of the kind of responsibility, and that kind of potentially intimidating and violent situation, onto local council officers. I will be interested to know what the Reverend's response to those concerns is and to hear about any consultation on the matter that was had with the local government sector, with the Local Government and Shires Associations, and particularly with those who will be potentially caught up with these additional powers—and there will be an expectation by the community that they will use them.
One only has to think of the circumstances the member referred to in his speech—drunken revelry, and large numbers of quite intoxicated, sometimes angry people gathered together. That is a pretty intimidating place to send a local council enforcement officer, and there is concern that that will expose them to further occupational health and safety risks, further harassment, further intimidation and, although I do not like contemplating it, further physical assaults. So, on balance, although recognising there are good elements in the bill and that they come, to use a tried and true phrase, from a good place, the bill is not supported by the Greens.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [3.12 p.m.]: I put on the record the support of the Christian Democratic Party for the Local Government Amendment (Confiscation of Alcohol) Bill 2010, the aims and purposes of which have been explained in detail by Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes so I will not repeat them. I believe, however, that the bill provides valuable powers for the police and other council qualified employees in seeking to control alcohol abuse in our society.
The Hon. PENNY SHARPE (Parliamentary Secretary) [3.12 p.m.]: On behalf of the Government, I speak in support of the bill, which was introduced in the other place by Peter Besseling, the member for Port Macquarie, and will help to build on action the Government has already taken to combat antisocial behaviour fuelled by alcohol. The bill sensibly expands tip-out powers to all alcohol-prohibited areas declared under section 632 of the Local Government Act 1993. This commonsense approach will help ensure council parks, gardens and reserves remain safe places for the entire community to enjoy. I agree with the intent of the private member's bill—the issuing of fines and dealing with people through the court system is not always the best way to address antisocial behaviour.
However, the Government's further amendments, agreed to in the other place, are necessary to ensure that the consistency in the policing of these areas that the member's bill seeks is realised. It is appropriate before the Government introduced requirements that prior to the establishment of any new alcohol-prohibited area the approval of the local area commander of that area be sought. This will allow community safety precinct committees or other groups to be consulted and to help ensure that the decision to declare an area as alcohol prohibited is done in harmony with the community's wishes. I believe that deals with some of the issues raised by Mr David Shoebridge in his contribution. The bill sensibly brings into line the provisions of alcohol- prohibited areas with those of alcohol-free zones, which apply to public roads, footpaths and car parks by allowing confiscation and disposal of alcohol. The Government believes this is a sensible change and one that will help keep our communities safe as well as allowing others to enjoy the outdoors. I commend the bill to the House.
The Hon. DON HARWIN [3.14 p.m.]: This private member's bill was initiated in the other place by the member for Port Macquarie and seeks to amend the Local Government Act 1993 to provide for the confiscation of alcohol in alcohol-prohibited areas by allowing for an extension of the definition of alcohol- prohibited area. Where a council has the control and management of parks or reserves, it may declare an alcohol-prohibited area by erecting signage that prohibits the possession and consumption of alcohol. However, in these areas New South Wales police do not have the power to confiscate and tip out alcohol. Unless the area is also part of a precinct liquor accord under the Act, police are only empowered to issue infringement notices.
The principal aim of the bill is the removal of section 632A (4) of the Local Government Act. This is the part of the Act that restricts the type of alcohol prohibited areas to which confiscation powers and associated tip-out powers can apply. The effect of this excision will be to allow for the confiscation and tipping out of alcohol in any area in which the consumption of alcohol is prohibited by a notice under section 632 of the Local Government Act, regardless of whether that area is situated in the precinct or area to which a precinct or community event liquor accord applies under the Liquor Act 2007.
With many communities struggling to deal with the effects of alcohol-related violence and antisocial behaviour in public places, this is a sensible change and one that I welcome because it gives effect to one of the 28826 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 key recommendations made by the Sydney beachside councils in May of last year. Frustrated with the Labor Government's response to the challenge of alcohol-related violence and antisocial behaviour, early last year Manly, Pittwater, Randwick, Sutherland, Warringah and Waverley councils met to discuss the issue and strategies for tackling the problem. Randwick council, under the leadership of the mayor, Bruce Notley-Smith, had already established itself as a leader on this matter by instigating a lockout policy for venues with a high rate of alcohol-related violence or incidents of malicious damage. The report by the Sydney beachside councils, entitled "Managing the Challenge of Antisocial Issues Experienced by Sydney Beachside Councils", was an admirable extension of this lead. The report made several recommendations, including the changes proposed by this bill. Section 2.2 of the council's report identified:
… inconsistency in regulating and enforcing Alcohol Free areas in public places under the Local Government Act 1993.
The report stated:
Improving the legislation relating to consumption of alcohol in designated Alcohol Free Zones and regulated parks and beaches would further support authorities in regulating these areas … the regulation of alcohol in public places can be more effective and easier to manage through streamlining regulations under the Local Government Act 1993 so that they are consistent and support each other. This can be achieved by amending the Local Government Act 1993 and Alcohol Free Zone guideline so that an Alcohol Free Zone encompasses streets and neighbouring beaches and parks and one set of enforcement rules and penalties apply.
Further, on page 12 the report reads:
It is also recommended that the penalty for "acting contrary to notices directed by Councils" such as a "no alcohol" sign in parks that may not be within an Alcohol Free Zone and/or form part of the beachside precinct should include the ability for authorised officers to confiscate the alcohol.
The report concluded with recommendations including that:
The Minister for Local Government and Minister for Gaming and Racing review [the] Local Government Act 1993 and amend the appropriate regulations to improve consistency in enforcement and penalties applied so the same regulations and penalties apply to streets, parks and beaches.
Of course, this recommendation is the very thrust of the proposed legislation before the House today. Sydney beachside councils have worked extremely hard to promote the findings of their report and engage the Keneally Labor Government. When the report was released the then mayor of Randwick, Bruce Notley-Smith, said:
We've reached the limit of powers to deal with this issue; and we need the State Government to give us more ... These beachside suburbs are special places that Sydneysiders flock to for entertainment. We need to ensure they are properly managed so their popularity doesn't destroy the amenity of the surrounding residential areas.
He identified uniform alcohol-free zone regulations with a consistent ability to confiscate alcohol as a simple change that could have a dramatic effect. Meanwhile Sally Betts, the Mayor of Waverley, has raised the report and its recommendations with Government Ministers, including then planning Minister Keneally, at a community cabinet meeting in Bondi Junction in August 2009 and again in November 2009 during one of the Premier's New South Wales State Plan community consultation meetings. On the latter occasion then Minister Keneally confirmed to Mayor Betts that the Government had received the councils' report and was aware of its recommendations.
Despite these direct discussions, unfortunately the Government has made no formal response to the beachside councils' report over the past 18 months and has failed to implement the kinds of small but effective changes advocated by the councils and contained in this bill. I warmly congratulate Bruce Notley-Smith, Sally Betts, the other four mayors and their staff on putting their ideas and proposed reforms on the agenda, and on making valiant attempts to engage with this broken, dysfunctional Government to implement strategies to address alcohol-related violence and antisocial behaviour. I regret that the Government has ignored their hard work for the last 18 months but with this legislation, introduced into this place by Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes, we are on our way to rectifying the matter. The New South Wales Liberals and The Nationals do not oppose the bill and we commend it to the House.
Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [3.21 p.m.], in reply: I appreciate the contributions made by each of the speakers to the bill and I take a moment to reply to some of the concerns of Mr David Shoebridge. He pointed out that the bill might disproportionately be applied to different groups, including young people, homeless and indigenous people and the like, because they drink in public places. That is precisely the point. If they drank at home, for example, there would be no need for the bill. I acknowledge the difficulties 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28827 associated with homelessness, indigenous communities and so on, but I understand the problem of drinking in public places, and that is exactly why police need these powers to keep order within public places.
Mr David Shoebridge raised concerns over powers for law enforcement officers approved in writing by the Commissioner of Police. If law enforcement officers appointed by councils are concerned about possessing these powers, the councils should reconsider their position because originally they wanted their officers to have law enforcement powers. It is not our role to determine what they should seek. Indeed, they have been given what they asked for, and if it is suggested that that has not been a wise choice, the Local Government and Shires Associations should make a decision about the matter.
Police cannot be in all parts of the community at all times, and that is why councils, in their duty of care to citizens, find it necessary to provide their own law enforcement officers, approved by the Commissioner of Police, to patrol car parks, beach areas, streets and other public places. Mr David Shoebridge asked about consultation with beachside councils. The Hon. Don Harwin clearly outlined that a long period of consultation, at councils' request, had already been held. Councils wanted two things: first, to remove existing inconsistencies between places; and, second, to make the powers to act more consistent. This bill does both those things, and I have pleasure in commending it to the House.
Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put.
The House divided.
Ayes, 30
Mr Ajaka Mr Gay Ms Robertson Mr Borsak Ms Griffin Ms Sharpe Mr Brown Mr Khan Mr Veitch Mr Catanzariti Mr Lynn Ms Voltz Mr Clarke Mr Mason-Cox Mr West Mr Colless Mr Moselmane Ms Westwood Ms Cotsis Reverend Dr Moyes Ms Cusack Reverend Nile Ms Ficarra Ms Parker Tellers, Mr Foley Mrs Pavey Mr Donnelly Mr Gallacher Mr Pearce Mr Harwin
Noes, 4
Mr Cohen Mr Shoebridge Tellers, Ms Faehrmann Dr Kaye
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Leave granted to proceed to the third reading of the bill forthwith.
Third Reading
Motion by Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes agreed to:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Bill read a third time and returned to the Legislative Assembly without amendment. 28828 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders: Order of Business
Motion by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile agreed to:
That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow a motion to be moved forthwith that Private Members' Business item No. 30 outside the Order of Precedence, relating to the Alcoholic Beverages Advertising Prohibition Bill 2010, be called on forthwith.
Order of Business
Motion by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile agreed to:
That Private Members' Business item No. 30 outside the Order of Precedence be called on forthwith.
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ADVERTISING PROHIBITION BILL 2010
Bill introduced, read a first time and ordered to be printed on motion by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile.
Second Reading
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [3.34 p.m.]: I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Alcoholic Beverages Advertising Prohibition Bill 2010 is a very straightforward bill. It almost deserves no debate, because there is now such widespread support for a prohibition on the advertising of alcoholic beverages across Australia. The object of the bill is to establish the Alcoholic Beverages Advertising Prohibition Act 2010 to limit the social and personal impact of alcohol abuse in New South Wales. The purposes of the Act, as set out in the bill, are:
(a) to discourage alcohol consumption by:
(i) persuading young people not to drink and not to abuse alcoholic beverages,
(ii) limiting exposure of young people and children to persuasion to drink alcoholic beverages,
(iii) encouraging drinkers of other beverages not to start drinking alcoholic beverages, and
(iv) assisting those who wish to limit or give up alcohol consumption, and
(b) to reduce alcohol-related:
(i) domestic violence,
(ii) deaths,
(iii) road accidents, and
(iv) crimes and violence, and
(c) to prevent alcohol-related illness (such as cirrhosis of the liver), and
(d) to reduce the harmful impact of alcohol in the workplace and in industry generally.
The Act will prohibit advertising and other promotional activities aimed at assisting the sale of alcoholic beverages; provide for the declaration of local option areas within which the purchase, sale or delivery, or the consumption in a public place, of alcoholic beverages will be an offence; establish the Alcohol Advertising Prohibition Committee, which will prepare a timetable for the removal of advertisements promoting alcoholic beverages and determination of sponsorships related to the promotion of any such beverages; and provide for limited exemption on the Minister's discretion.
As I said, the bill is straightforward. I was tempted to call it the John Della Bosca Bill, because when Mr Della Bosca was Minister for Health he led the discussion about the restriction on alcohol advertising. John 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28829
Della Bosca called for a stronger stance on the restriction of alcohol advertising at the Australian Health Ministers Conference in Brisbane. He said:
The Garling Report into acute health services across NSW … advises that we need to focus on prevention when dealing with the health and well-being of children and young people.
He went on to say:
We need to avoid creating a new generation of binge drinkers and to do that we need to use preventative strategies such as restricting alcohol advertising.
The cost of alcohol abuse to the community nationally is estimated to be more than $15 billion which is mostly made up of sickies, road accidents and healthcare.
Nationally, it is estimated that a total advertising ban could reduce drinking by 25 per cent and road fatalities by 30 per cent. It could also reduce the social costs of alcohol abuse by $3.86 billion, and the social costs of road accidents by at least $960 million. Mr Della Bosca went on to say:
According to NSW Health, since 2000 the biggest increase in alcohol-related Emergency Department admissions has been among 18-24 year-olds—up 130 per cent—while female admissions within that group have risen by 200 per cent.
There is also a lot of community support for the restriction of alcohol advertising.
Mr Della Bosca referred to the 2007 National Drug Strategy household survey, which found that 72.2 per cent of people aged 14 or older supported a ban on all alcohol advertisements before 9.30 p.m. and that 48.5 per cent of people supported banning alcohol company sponsorship of sporting events. Mr Della Bosca went on to say:
There is no simple response to deal with alcohol abuse—it is a complex area.
He went on to make the following point:
Alcohol advertising is among the most sophisticated and persuasive I have seen and it is increasingly clear alcohol companies are not prepared to take a responsible approach on this matter.
Mr Della Bosca concluded:
It is time we took the influence that alcohol advertising can have on our younger people seriously.
I totally agree with that. As members know, I successfully moved the banning of cigarette advertising— legislation which was successfully passed through both Houses of Parliament and became law. This bill has the same principle. If we supported the banning of cigarette advertising, then we should support banning alcohol advertising. Professor Michael Good, Director of the Queensland Institute of Medical Research and Chair of the National Health and Medical Research Council, has stated:
Australians currently enjoy near the best health in the world. Furthermore, our life expectancy continues to increase. Averaged over the last 100 years, our life expectancy is increasing at three months per year. This rate of increase is showing no signs of slowing and has come about in more recent times in large part because of the reduction in smoking rates for Australians, who are now near the lowest in the world. However, other risk factors for chronic diseases in Australia are not improving relative to the rest of the world and these will slow any further gains in life expectancy and improved health.
Chief among these are overweight, obesity and alcohol consumption for which Australia ranks in the lowest and middle third of OECD countries, respectively.
The lessons from the successful anti-smoking campaign can be applied to both of these lifestyle risk factors, but it is alcohol abuse that most closely resembles smoking and for which the lessons are most easily translated. Both are addictive drugs derived from cultivated crops. Both have well accepted health-risk profiles
While deaths and morbidity attributed to alcohol are not as high as those attributed to cigarette smoking, data nevertheless show that acute and chronic alcohol abuse account for 45,000 hospitalisations in Australia per year.
Anyone concerned about the health of Australians and the pressure on our public health system, which is cracking under the strain, should support this legislation. This bill, if passed, will reduce 45,000 hospitalisations in Australia per year. Professor Good said further:
It can also contribute to fetal growth retardation and can cause fetal alcohol syndrome. It is estimated that alcohol abuse costs the Australian community in excess of $15 billion per annum. 28830 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
What could the Federal and State governments do with the money if they were to save $15 billion per annum? Professor Good posed the question: How can we diminish risky alcohol consumption? And he concluded:
The factors that were most successful in reducing cigarette smoking included public education, "de-normalisation" of smoking, taxes on cigarettes, graphic labelling and bans on smoking in public places. However, the policy that was most closely associated with the drop in smoking rates was the ban on smoking advertising.
This history of risk factors associated with the decline in cigarette smoking is instructive and may provide the way to improve Australia's position in alcohol consumption from the middle third of OECD countries and consequently deliver Australians further gains in life expectancy, further improvements in quality of life and significantly reduced health expenditure.
If we do not learn from the past we will squander a precious opportunity for the future.
Professor Good concluded his remarks with this question, which I pose to all members in this place:
Those who may disagree with the idea of a ban of advertising [on alcohol] should ask themselves if they would support a re- introduction of smoking advertising. No single positive thing comes from advertising either cigarettes or alcohol.
The obvious answer to Professor Good's rhetorical question about the reintroduction of smoking advertising would be no. That demonstrates how public opinion has changed, and even the opinions of members of Parliament have changed over the years. A submission from the Alcohol and other Drugs Council of Australia [ADCA] said, in part:
... (ADCA), the national peak body for the alcohol and other drugs sector, provides a voice for people working to reduce the harm caused by alcohol and other drugs.
Alcohol and Other Drugs Council of Australia member organisations employ approximately 2,500 people working directly within the alcohol and other drugs sector and include treatment and prevention agencies, law enforcement officers, research organisations and policy bodies. The submission continues:
It is estimated that in 1997-98 alone the misuse of alcohol resulted in 63,164 years of lost life (before 70 years), a total of approximately 3,290 premature deaths and over 400,000 hospital bed days ... Despite this, the alcohol industry has a privilege of almost complete self-regulation in regard to all forms of advertising and promotion. There is growing concern within both the health sector and the broader community about the sheer bulk of alcohol advertising around today and its appeal and effect on young people.
That organisation has come out strongly calling for action. It is also very critical—and I believe the criticism is justified—of the Alcoholic Beverages Advertising Code. It said:
The only other advertising restrictions are through alcohol industry self-regulation—namely, the Alcoholic Beverages Advertising Code (ABAC)—and through the broad standards for all advertisements that are articulated in the Advertiser Code of Ethics. The voluntary ABAC stipulates (among other things) that alcohol advertisement must not appeal to those under the age of 18 or associate alcohol with social, sporting or sexual success.
Any member who has seen an alcohol advertisement would know that is exactly what they do. We cannot trust the liquor industry to regulate itself in advertising. The Alcohol and Other Drugs Council of Australia recommends that the New South Wales Government should support the development of a national regulatory framework for alcohol advertising. The framework should examine such issues as the televising of alcohol advertisements, the use of point-of-sale promotions, internet and radio advertisements, and the sponsorship of sporting events by the alcohol industry. I support those recommendations.
The Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences of the University of Wollongong conducted research into the question: What does alcohol advertising tell young people about drinking? And the research has proved that self-regulation does not work. The report on that research says:
Alcohol has long been known to be the cause of significant physical, emotional and social harm in our society. Given that the manufacture, distribution and sale of alcoholic products is big business all over the world, clearly the marketing, advertising and promotion of these products is essential. However, there is an ongoing debate regarding the relationship between advertising and alcohol consumption and, importantly, the influence of this advertising on harmful drinking patterns.
The report continues:
We found that the majority of adolescents believe alcohol advertisements often include several messages which breached the Alcohol Beverages Advertising Code (ABAC), highlighting the ineffective nature of the self- regulatory scheme.
The research included surveys of both adults and young people. From May 2004 until March 2005 television and advertising campaigns, national and regional, were monitored for alcohol products. The alcohol industry is 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28831 achieving its aims through advertising, as is shown by the research. As to the results of the surveys, the research paper states:
Perceived messages in the alcohol advertisements
There were some strong indications that respondents see several social benefits of consuming alcohol in general … 74% of responses indicated that the advertisement contained the message that drinking the advertised product would make them more sociable and outgoing; 89.9% that the advertisement suggested that the product would help them have a great time; 69.8% that it would help them fit in; 64.9% that it would help them feel more confident; 58.9% that it would help them feel less nervous; 46.5% that it would help them succeed with the opposite sex; and 42% that it would make them feel more attractive.
These subliminal messages are deliberately planned by the advertising agencies on behalf of the liquor industry to reach out to young people. These survey results provide further evidence to prohibit advertising. They show that the liquor industry's advertisements are achieving their objectives. We must step in to protect the youth of our society from this manipulation by the liquor industry. The University of Wollongong Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences report stated:
Results regarding the clearly demonstrated perceived social outcomes of consumption of alcoholic products are of particular importance. It must be noted that the respondents did not necessarily believe that consuming the product would lead to such social benefits, but rather (in most cases) the majority believed that the advertisement contained messages which inferred that such social benefits are likely. However, this is a very concerning finding, given that the ABAC [Alcohol Beverages Advertising Code] states that alcohol advertisements must not suggest that consumption or presence of alcohol may create or contribute to a significant change in mood or environment.
The advertisements are breaking the industry's own Alcohol Beverages Advertising Code. The intention of the advertisements is to suggest that alcohol may create or contribute to a significant change and the liquor industry would not spend money on advertising if it did not produce the desired results. I commend the faculty's research paper to all members of the House. Many other organisations have called for a ban on alcohol advertising. The Alcohol Policy Coalition, a group of health agencies that include the Australian Drug Foundation and the Cancer Council of Victoria, has demanded tougher rules for sponsorship of sporting events and teams in Australia. I am pleased that so many authoritative organisations have taken a strong stand. The Alcohol Policy Coalition, in a paper, praised the previous Federal Rudd Government for many of its positive initiatives, but it went on to say that there were serious key gaps.
The Alcohol Policy Coalition criticised the Federal Government for failing to address the impact of alcohol advertising by continuing to trust the liquor industry to voluntarily protect young Australians from alcohol advertising. I could spend a great deal more time going through all the evidence I have collated on this issue, but I believe I have presented sufficient reasons for the House to support the bill. It is a simple, straightforward bill similar to the legislation prohibiting cigarette advertising. All members would acknowledge that the legislation prohibiting cigarette advertising has been successful and has dramatically reduced cigarette smoking rates in our State and Australia. This bill will have the same response and result in a far healthier society. I commend the bill to the House.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Don Harwin and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders: Order of Business
Motion by Mr David Shoebridge agreed to:
That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow a motion to be moved forthwith that Private Members' Business item No. 216 outside the Order of Precedence relating to the Dust Diseases Tribunal Amendment (Damages—Deceased's Dependants) Bill 2010 be called on forthwith.
Order of Business
Motion by Mr David Shoebridge agreed to:
That Private Members' Business item No. 216 outside the Order of Precedence be called on forthwith.
DUST DISEASES TRIBUNAL AMENDMENT (DAMAGES—DECEASED'S DEPENDANTS) BILL 2010
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 11 November 2010.
Dr JOHN KAYE [3.57 p.m.]: I support the Dust Diseases Tribunal Amendment (Damages— Deceased's Dependants) Bill 2010. This important legislation will restore some degree of justice to the widows 28832 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 of individuals who have died from the scourge of asbestos. Our society faces a major problem from asbestos. Asbestos kills many people and leaves many widows, and other dependants, with a diminished payment for compensation for mesothelioma and other diseases that killed their husband or partner. This legislation attempts to restore some degree of justice to these people. I commend the bill to the House.
The Hon. GREG DONNELLY [3.50 p.m.]: I move:
That this debate be adjourned to the next sitting day.
Question put and resolved in the affirmative.
Dr John Kaye: The noes have it.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The member is too late. The question has been put and passed.
Motion for the adjournment of debate agreed to.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Greg Donnelly and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
Motion by the Hon. Penny Sharpe agreed to:
That this House at its rising today do adjourn until Tuesday 1 March 2011 at 2.30 p.m. unless the President, or if the President is unable to act on account of illness or other cause, the Deputy President, prior to that date, by communication addressed to each member of the House, fixes an alternative day or hour of meeting.
SEASONAL FELICITATIONS
The Hon. PENNY SHARPE (Parliamentary Secretary) [4.01 p.m.]: I move:
That the House notes its thanks to the members and staff of the Parliament and wishes seasonal felicitations to all.
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER (Leader of the Opposition) [4.01 p.m.]: As the parliamentary year and the term of the Fifty-fourth Parliament comes to a close I would like to place on record my thanks to all those who contribute to the conduct of this House and the parliamentary precinct, giving all of us as legislators support in performing our role. To my colleagues in the Liberal Party and The Nationals—John, David, Rick, Catherine, Marie, Jenny, Duncan, Don, Trevor, Charlie, Matthew, Robyn, Melinda and Greg—I thank you all for your hard work and commitment over the many years.
Importantly, I would like to thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in this House, Duncan Gay, for his continued support, advice and friendship over the years. Between the two of us we have negotiated the challenges of this House, the wider Parliament and the demands of leadership of two political parties in Coalition, and I believe we have done it admirably. I have been lucky to have shared the leadership of the Opposition with both Duncan and, prior to Duncan, Richard Bull. I thank the Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox, the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party in this House, for the great work he has performed as a member of this House representing our great party. Matthew is a quiet achiever who I am sure will continue to provide leadership in the next Parliament.
To Don Harwin, the Opposition whip, and Rick Colless, his whippette, I take this opportunity to express my thanks to you both for the sound advice that you continue to give Duncan and me, particularly when we see an issue and we race towards it like bulls at a gate. Both Don and Rick are always there to offer that steadying advice that 99.9 per cent of the time turns out to be right.
I thank all of our personal staff for their blood, sweat and tears: they have worked so hard over the past four years. Without them none of us would be as prepared to perform our work in this House and be as punctual for meetings outside of this place. I extend my appreciation to my staff, Suzanne Fosbery and John Macgowan, for everything they have done this year. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28833
Election years are particularly difficult on members, staff and their support networks of family and friends. Over the past few months we have seen a number of changes to members of this House, and with the election next year we will see more retirements and two of our members seeking lower House seats. The untimely death of Roy Smith came as a shock to all of us. He was not the only friend of this House we lost during this term of the Parliament. We also marked the passing of former members—Virginia Chadwick, Jeff Shaw, Andy Manson, Charles Anderson, Peter Philips, Sir John Fuller, Marie Fisher, Gordon Ibbett, Donald Burton, John Doohan, Thomas Erskine and Richard Evans. It is tragic to recall that, of the 40 members who were here when Peter Primrose and I were sworn in to fill casual vacancies in April 1996, six of them have since passed—Virginia, Jeff, Andy, Jim Kaldis, Doug Moppett and Marlene Goldsmith.
During the term of this Parliament we also lost former long-term staff members of the Parliament, including Virginia Knox, Sandra Vella and Elizabeth Ward. It is therefore timely as we look back over the past four years and look forward to a time of celebration for Christmas that we also take this opportunity to remember those who have contributed not only in the past four years but for many years in the past, both as members and people who have supported the Parliament. To all of their families it is important that they also are being remembered at this time.
As I indicated, there are changes in relation to people within the Parliament leaving to pursue other careers in the lower House and there are those who are leaving to pursue life outside the Parliament. I take this opportunity to mention some of those people. Without a doubt, first and foremost in my mind is Robyn Parker. On behalf of all of us I pass on our best wishes to you, Robyn, as you take on the challenge of the mission for Maitland. Robyn has been a long-term advocate for the Maitland community and the Hunter. She knows the concerns of locals and how to put in place the solutions to those problems. She knows it will not be an easy task for her. However, I believe that Robyn is the right person for Maitland, and next year when both Houses come back following the election we will be congratulating Robyn on her election as the new member for Maitland.
John Robertson came to this House in 2008, filling the boisterous and colourful shoes—some would argue the odd-fitting shoes—of Michael Costa, which is a tall order for anyone. John, while you are also in the process of seeking to make that transition through hard work into the lower House—and be assured we will be assisting to make sure that you do not—on a personal level, I think it is fair to say that you will take with you the good wishes of all those who have come to know you in the short time that you have been in the Parliament, and of those who have known you prior to coming into Parliament, in whatever role you take on in the future. There is no doubt in my mind that before the dust settles you will be seeking to stamp your mark on a major leadership role within your party.
To Christine Robertson, it was a great day to see you return to this House in 2005 after suffering such a serious injury. The perils of our role were brought a little closer to the fore after your car accident. We all drive long distances and long hours in the service of the community and there but for luck and grace go all of us. I wish you a long and happy retirement with your family with plenty of time to picnic on the shores of Chaffey Dam. With the retirement of Ian Cohen comes the end of an era. He is the last of the truly green Greens. His ability to work constructively with both sides of this House will be sorely missed. But, Ian, I am convinced we will continue to see and hear you pursuing environmental issues for many years to come, and may that happen.
To Ian West, your election in 2000 came at a time when our State's industrial relations and workers compensation systems were in a state of flux. You came with a long history in the true labour movement. You raised hell and high water over the changes you believed were not in the interest of workers and you were not shy about your opposition to reforms that were pursued by any government, including the former Federal Government. The backbench on your side of the Chamber will be the emptier without you in the future. For all members who we will not see return to these red benches next year, may your time outside of these hallowed halls be fulfilling.
I thank all the parliamentary staff for their hard work, long hours and patience. I thank Lynn, David, Susan, Steven, Kate and Malvyne. I hope that Steven's wife, Liz, continues to show steady improvement in 2011. We all wish her well. I would love to think that when we come back to this place next year we will hear better news about her condition. To everyone else upstairs: Thank you, we most certainly appreciate your dedication.
To Maurice, Charles, Lucy, Mike, Mark, John and Richard, I thank you. Your roles are rarely celebrated but they are integral to this entire building. I offer my best wishes to all of the staff of the administrative section: security, ITS—including Ashley Toms—the dining room, Cafe Quorum, room service, the library, building services, and people close to my heart, the special constables and the cleaning staff, in particular Irene Melas.
The Hon. Duncan Gay: You were once a very special constable. 28834 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I stood out the front of this building in 1980 wondering why on earth anyone would want to be here. I wish the Leader of the Government, the Leader of the House and all members opposite an enjoyable Christmas and New Year with their family and friends. I advise them to take a nice long holiday and do not hurry back.
To John Hatzistergos and Tony Kelly I extend my thanks for the personal and professional relationship that has developed between the two sides of this Chamber over the past four years. Without an ability to communicate, negotiate and, where necessary, respectfully disagree this place would never function. To Lee- Ellen and Lenda, I have appreciated that communication has developed that allows issues to be resolved efficiently and for all of us to plan throughout the sitting week. I wish members of the crossbench a wonderful break with their family and friends and I thank you for your assistance and contribution this past year.
I also ask Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile to pass on our thoughts and well wishes to his wonderful wife, Elaine. In conclusion, over the next 114 days, until the fate of half of this House is cast at the ballot box, we look forward to the contest of ideas, beliefs and direction that 2011 will bring.
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS (Attorney General, Minister for Citizenship, Minister for Regulatory Reform, and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [4.12 p.m.]: On behalf my colleagues, Ministers and Government members in this House I take this opportunity to extend my gratitude to one and all in the Parliament for their energy, diligence, perseverance and good humour over the past year. I extend to Lynn Lovelock, the Clerk of the Parliaments, and the other clerks my sincere thanks for the dedication, hard work and commitment to ensuring that this place functions as it should. I thank all the staff of the Legislative Council for their passion and commitment to this House. I am sure that I speak for all members in saying that it is very much appreciated.
A great deal of work is done in preparing for the sittings of this House. Indeed, a lot more is done after the House has adjourned to prepare for the next sitting. The work done while the House sits is only a small portion of the effort put in by staff of the Legislative Council. It is appropriate that I acknowledge the staff of the Legislative Council in servicing of the needs of members of Parliament and the broader community. I thank the parliamentary attendants for the work they do—often behind the scenes. I thank the Hansard staff, who transform the spoken word into the written word. They make us all sound eloquent and ensure that our lively debates are preserved for posterity. I thank the staff of the Parliamentary Library, who have stewardship of a cornucopia of knowledge. I also thank the staff of the parliamentary dining room and the catering staff, who feed and water us. Other staff also do a fine job and they often go unnoticed, particularly the cleaning and security staff.
I take this opportunity to acknowledge the committees of this House and the members who have participated in them. The general purpose standing committees, the ad hoc committees and the standing committees do an enormous amount of work. Committees provide the community with a great opportunity to interface with legislators and to express their views. They also offer members of all political persuasions an opportunity to hear those views and to report their findings to the House. The various committees have presented an enormous number of recommendations and in many instances they have found their way into legislation for the improvement of our community. It is important to acknowledge those members who have served on the committee and, in particular, their chairs. I particularly reflect on the work of Christine Robertson as chair of the Standing Committee on Law and Justice. I also acknowledge the work of her colleagues. I echo the comments of the Leader of the Opposition and thank him for acknowledging Christine's contribution. The committee has worked extremely hard and I have sent it a large number of references on some complex issues. They have involved complex consideration and balancing different perspectives. The achievement of agreement about how to proceed is testimony not only to the members of the committee but also to Christine Robertson's fine leadership.
One of her lasting legacies is the legislation that we have enacted as a result of those inquiries, in particular the inquiry into the prohibition of the publication of names of children involved in criminal proceedings and the inquiry into judge-alone trials. Other inquiries involved strong differences of opinion, for example, the inquiries into same-sex adoption and surrogacy. The different perspectives so clearly articulated in the committee reports were useful in guiding members when casting the conscience vote. Thank you, Christine, and congratulations on an outstanding effort in the New South Wales Parliament and all the best for the future.
I take this opportunity to acknowledge some other colleagues who are leaving. My colleague John Robertson is seeking election to the Legislative Assembly. I thank him for his contribution in this House and 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28835 wish him all the best in his future endeavours. Ian West came into this House not long after I arrived. He has a staunch trade union background and a very strong commitment to working people, which he has maintained over the years. His contributions have been integral to debates on legislation dealing with working people. His commitment to working people has been long lasting—it predated his arrival in this Chamber. As a member of this House he has chaired the Standing Committee on Social Issues. The committee has carried out a large number of inquiries. Of particular interest to me is an inquiry that I referred to the committee with regard to substitute decision-making. The Cabinet will respond shortly to the committee's recommendations. I thank the Hon. Ian West for his work on that inquiry.
The Hon. Robyn Parker is also seeking election to the Legislative Assembly. She has been with us for some time. I particularly congratulate her on the work she undertook on two general purpose standing committee inquiries in relation to bullying and the Ambulance Service. I have read those reports—I do read most committee reports—and they are useful contributions to public decision-making. I thank her again for her contribution to those inquiries and more broadly for the measured approach she has taken to debating legislation before the House.
Ian Cohen will be leaving us after a very long period of service in this Chamber. He is another person who came into this place with a very strong and passionate interest in particular issues—in his case, the environment. I will not say that he is the last true Green in this House because that might be a bit provocative.
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: The last of the environmentalists.
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: Well, Cate Faehrmann has joined us recently and I am sure she also has a passionate interest in environmental issues and she has demonstrated that over a period of time.
Dr John Kaye: And I don't?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: This is a farewell for Ian Cohen, and I am not sure why the member takes exception to my congratulating Ian Cohen on his contribution. I am aware that Ms Rhiannon published an article some time ago saying that members should only have one term in this place. She published an article and distributed it around the place during Ian's last preselection to come into this place. She said members should only have one term in this House. Fortunately, her Greens colleagues did not agree with that; otherwise, there is a strong possibility that Ian Cohen would not be with us. That was a view she expressed at that time and she held that view until it came to herself. I congratulate the Greens because they had the wisdom to reject that approach from Lee Rhiannon and, as a consequence, Ian was able to make it back into this Chamber and make an appropriate, dignified, respectable contribution on behalf of the interests he espouses in this Chamber. I extend to him all the best for the future. I know he will continue to be passionate about the issues he supported in this Chamber. Whether you agree or disagree, I do like conviction, and he has a lot of conviction when it comes to environmental issues and that should be appropriately acknowledged as well.
As we farewell another year of Parliament I draw everyone's attention to the large volume of legislation that has been passed—119 government bills, 26 of which belong to me. Between 1 January and 1 December this year 1,043 questions without notice had been asked in this place, and some of those will be appropriately acknowledged in the awards ceremony which will take place in my office later this evening. In the same period some 989 questions have been placed on the notice paper and 27 Legislative Council committee reports have been delivered. Once again I congratulate all those hardworking members of the committees. I should also mention the committee staff because they have also done an outstanding job in assisting the committees in their work.
An enormous amount of work has been undertaken ensuring that this Chamber operates effectively at the political level. I particularly acknowledge the Deputy Leader of the Government and Leader of the House, Tony Kelly, and thank him and his staff for the assistance and coordination they have been able to provide to the House. I thank Lenda Oshalem for her assistance and good humour in very difficult times. She has shown enormous patience. I am pleased to be able to say that many members of the House have come to me at various stages and acknowledged her work and good humour in being able to do all the late nights and still have a smile on her face at the end of it. Thank you, Lenda, for your work and assistance.
The Hon. Greg Donnelly: Good lollies too. 28836 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: Yes, I tried some yesterday. I also take this opportunity, if I can, to acknowledge the excellent work that has been undertaken by my department, the Department of Justice and Attorney General, which comments on every piece of legislation that comes before this House. It would not be possible to do so without a large number of people. The Attorney General's portfolio has the largest volume of legislation that comes into Parliament and many staff have to stay back late at night—not only in relation to our own legislation but very often in relation to legislation from other Ministers—to comment on various amendments and proposals put by others. As I said, we wake them up at all sorts of hours. I acknowledge their hard work, as I do of all the other departments who have contributed in their way and their staff as well.
It would not be possible for me to end a speech of this kind without paying significant tribute to my own staff, who tried, when writing the speech, to add in the words that they were overworked and underpaid. They have certainly worked very hard. Pay is something someone else can comment on. They and officers of the department work extremely long hours—weekends and around the clock. I get annoyed when the media describe members' staff in derogatory and dismissive terms as though their contributions are somehow to be sidelined. Those of us who work with staff and acknowledge their hard work have an interest to rebut that kind of ill-informed commentary which, unfortunately, does take root in some of the more scurrilous publications. Our staff work extremely hard. I know mine do and I know all staff who work for members work extremely hard in order to advance the interests of the community, and this is an appropriate occasion to acknowledge that.
This House has had an industrious year and all honourable members have enthusiastically and passionately contributed to the debates. Although from time to time there may be disagreements, it is important to reflect on the fact that the democratic right to express your point of view is something we must cherish. All of us have benefited from that right, as has the community. I make particular mention of that freedom because it is important, as we end this term and a number of members will face their makers, to reflect that the democracy we enjoy in this State and nation is something we are all too often somewhat dismissive of and take for granted. But it is something that many other communities across the world are fighting for and it is something we should continue to nurture and respect. Part of that is to ensure that we respect each other.
I acknowledge the significant contributions that have been made throughout this Parliament and finally, Madam President, I thank you and all your staff for the cooperation and assistance you have been able to provide. I wish all members a merry Christmas, a safe festive season and a peaceful New Year.
The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [4.27 p.m.]: On behalf of The Nationals I add my comments to the Christmas felicitations and, in the first instance, congratulate my colleague Mike Gallacher on his contribution and echo his words about the people who are leaving. I am not going to mention the people who were covered as Michael and John covered them well and appropriately. I do not know what Chinese year it is but it really is the year that Hatz discovered his sense of humour. It has been a vintage year of Hatzisms and, as fabulous as Hansard is, I suspect they have not been able to capture that real nuance that goes with the delivery and the smile that breaks out on occasions. I pay tribute to the Government. While it continues to be hopeless at running the State, in the last month or so it hit its straps at running the House. I suspect a large part of that is to do with Lenda, so congratulations to her, but congratulations to the Government for employing her and letting her do it. It has been a vintage few months and one of the best final terms that I have seen.
In 1988 when I first entered this House I stood in a queue behind a lefty from Monash University called Ian Macdonald. He also left this House this year—I suspect not as lefty as when he first joined. When he left he was father of the House and now he has gone he has left me as father of the House. I do not know what that means; I just thought I would put it in.
Other members have left us during the year. It would be remiss of me not to acknowledge the former Leader of the House, John Della Bosca, whose contribution to State politics has been quite outstanding. When friends of mine ask me, "What are they like on the other side?", I say, "Some of them are all right; some of them are trying to do the right thing. But they are not as good as we are." John Della Bosca really was a Renaissance man; he had a great knowledge of the classics and a determination to do the right thing. The head of Disabilities Australia and former Chairman of the New South Wales National Party, Patrick Maher, phoned me one night and said, "Look, just a heads up, we are making an announcement tomorrow that we have John Della Bosca joining our team." I said, "Congratulations on two fronts: firstly, you've got a great guy with a great brain and a big heart; and, secondly, you've removed some of the serious grey matter from the ALP." And that is the fact. He really is a decent bloke and a good operator and he is a loss to the State. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28837
I thank the members of my team. First, I thank my deputy, Jenny Gardiner, whose constancy is fabulous. It is great to have a person with her ability to run our small team. I thank also our Whip, country Rick Colless, as some of you call him; Mel, who is making a name for herself in her portfolio and doing a really good job; and Trevor, who is the good conscience of our team and always keeps us on our toes. I thank them for their support and help during the year. I hope that our small team is added to next year by Niall Blair and Sarah Johnston, but that will be in the hands of the electorate. I thank my staff, Emma Logan and Alice Hardy. They are the nice people you speak to when you contact my office. If you make the mistake of ringing the other number, you will get the grumpy bloke. It is best to ring the right number. I thank them for their time and effort.
I wish everyone all the best over the break. I want to see all those who are returning to come back safely. May you all have a great holiday over the Christmas period. We hope, of course, as my colleague Mike Gallacher said, that the Government takes a longer holiday than the rest of us so that we can get to work in an open field afterwards. I thank the President and the staff of the Parliament for their help and support during the year; it has been terrific.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [4.32 p.m.]: I join with other members to speak on this motion of seasonal felicitations. On behalf of the Christian Democratic Party I wish all members of the House a happy Christmas. I thank them for their friendship and cooperation, particularly the Leader of the House, Tony Kelly, for helping us and informing us of Government legislation and plans. It is always helpful to be in the loop and to know what is happening. I thank his offsider, Lenda, who has been a big help in guiding us as we introduce bills and other matters. I thank the Leader of the Government, the Hon. John Hatzistergos, for his help and cooperation. I thank the President, Amanda Fazio, and the Deputy-President, Kayee Griffin, for their help and support. I thank the Clerks, particularly, Lynn and David, for their help and advice. I thank also the Hansard staff, the Attendants, Security, the dining room and room service staff and the staff of the Parliamentary Library. I thank my personal staff, Judy Russell and David Copeland, who have spent many years with me in our office on Level 11.
I wish the members who are leaving us a happy retirement—the two Ians and Christine. May you all have a very happy retirement from this place. I wish John Robertson and Robyn Parker, who hope to transfer to the Legislative Assembly, all the very best and that your hopes materialise. Every year for the past 29 years I have made a little comment about why we celebrate Christmas, and I will not disappoint members today. The answer to the question, "Why do we celebrate Christmas?" can be found in the Gospel of Luke when the angels appeared to the shepherds and said:
Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you: Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
The answer to the question "Why did Jesus Christ come?" was given by Jesus Christ himself in the Gospel of John, chapter 3. He said:
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world: but that the world through him might be saved.
May we all experience that message of Christmas and salvation. God bless you all and have a happy Christmas.
Dr JOHN KAYE [4.36 p.m.]: On behalf of the Greens I speak on this motion and remind myself that every year I try to get a list of all the people in this Chamber and in this building who make our work possible. I always go through the list and I always miss out somebody. I will now try to mention the groups of people who facilitate what we do, but I apologise in advance to those I fail to mention. The list is quite awesome. I start with Catering, Cafe Quorum and Room Service, who keep us fed and watered; and move on to staffs of Information Technology Services, who keep us smart; Cleaning, who keep us clean; the Parliamentary Library, who keep us informed; Security, who keep us safe; Engineering and Building Services, who keep the building and a roof over our heads; the mailroom, who keep us connected; Hansard, who translate our words; the committee staff, who take complex evidence, convert it into sensible reports and do a remarkable job; the Chamber, who look after our needs; the Legislative Council and administration; and the Clerks. 28838 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
We are all in awe of their dedication, hard work and commitment to keeping this place going. I make a specific remark about all those groups of people this time round with respect to David Shoebridge and Cate Faehrmann and the way they have made welcome our exciting and quite brilliant new members. They have given them an easy entree into the life of a parliamentarian. They have them connected and skilled up, and have made it work for them.
On behalf of the Greens I thank the Government, the Opposition and crossbench members. We all come from different political places, and that is an extremely good thing. That is the virtue, excitement and benefit of being in a Chamber that is elected by proportional representation. It is impressive that we mostly have civilised debates and we mostly have respect for each other. That respect for individuals and their beliefs is important. Over the four years that I have been a member of this place we have had some heated and excellent debates, and some not so excellent debates. In general, each and every one of us, in our own way has tried to serve the people who have elected us. I want to echo remarks made by previous speakers in respect to the Government's capacity to run the business of the Parliament over the past four months. In my first three years and eight months the Government often did not get it right. There were many times when we were left wondering what was happening in the Chamber, and preparing for legislation became very difficult.
It is true that under the gentle hand—or not so gentle hand—of Lenda Oshalem the sweet part of her undertaking is in her drawer. It is absolutely true that she has steered this House into a far more efficient and functional form where a lot of the unnecessary procedural rancour has been removed. I hope that the Coalition, if it does come back as a government, understands and learns from that lesson, and replicates it, and maybe even employs Lenda, if she is so minded.
This is an opportunity for me to say farewell to some people who are still members of this place and some who are not. It has been my pleasure to be tutored in many aspects of politics by Christine Robertson. Her acerbic and insightful views of the world have certainly informed mine in ways that she would be quite surprised about. It is true that people who have a lifetime working as a nurse, or as a teacher, or as an ambulance driver, or in other service industries, have a particular view of the world and a good understanding of humanity. There is no question that Christine brought that to debates in this Chamber and, as the Attorney General referred to, specifically to committee work. It was my pleasure to serve on committees with Christine. To be told by Christine in no uncertain terms when you are wrong is a unique pleasure. I think all of us know what that means. I thank you for that, Christine, and I wish you the very best.
I had the pleasure of being a drop-in on General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2, which Robyn Parker chaired, through three inquiries that I believe were very important—the bullying inquiry, the special needs education inquiry, and the Building the Education Revolution inquiry. In all three cases, from my perspective Robyn showed a remarkable understanding—as only a former teacher can show—of how to maintain order in a room, how to get the best out of people, and how to do so in a way that serves everybody in the room. I take my hat off to the way in which Robyn did that. It was also a pleasure to have Robyn's support on issues to do with TAFE and Tillegra Dam. Robyn is somebody we will miss—perhaps not as much as we will miss Christine, because Robyn probably will not be that far away from us. No doubt we will see her around this place. Of course I want the Greens to win the seat, but, Robyn, I wish you the very best.
Ian West has brought to this Chamber something unique—that is, having worked as a representative of working people. I get quite annoyed when I hear people attack former union officials who become members of Parliament. Union officials have the perfect training for being a parliamentarian: they have represented their members. Ian West translated his skill in what was then known as the LHMU into a skill in this Chamber in a quite remarkable, impressive and effectual fashion. I worked as a staffer for Lee Rhiannon when Ian first became a member of this place, and I learned a lot from Ian about workers compensation and the need to protect injured workers. Ian understood those matters because he had worked with people who had been injured in the workplace.
I also had the great pleasure of serving on the Standing Committee on Social Issues, with Ian as the chair, through a number of quite difficult inquiries. The inquiries into substitute decision-making and closing the gap on Aboriginal life expectancy, in particular, had difficult moments. I have said before in this Chamber, and I say it again as Ian is about to leave this place: I cannot imagine anybody having steered through those difficult situations with the dignity, the care for humanity and the concern for the witnesses that Ian showed time and time again. For me, over the years Ian has been one of those highly influential individuals whose skills in negotiating their way through difficult situations while maintaining a quality commitment to their principles is quite single. I must also say that Ian's role during the power privatisation debate was highly controversial but 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28839 also deeply appreciated by those who did not want to see the electricity industry privatised, including me. The courage and insight he showed throughout that debate will go down in the history books as an important contribution to New South Wales.
The Leader of The Nationals pointed out that there are other people who have left this place during the term of this Parliament who are not here today. He spoke of John Della Bosca, a man of unique capacities and intelligence. There were three other people who left during that period that come to mind. One of those people is Michael Costa, who personally gave me a baptism of fire. I still have the burn marks. But, as they say, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. So I often feel the need to attribute to Michael Costa that whatever small success I have in politics is largely because of him. The Attorney General was extremely mean in his remarks about Michael Costa. I acknowledge that I have just been mean to Michael Costa as well, because I paid him a compliment—and I know he will be distressed by that.
I want to pay tribute to my two former colleagues and mentors, and very, very close friends, Lee Rhiannon and Sylvia Hale, who have left this place. I acknowledge the Attorney General's obsession with my former colleague Lee Rhiannon. I understand that he finds it very difficult to let go of that connection to Lee. That is an interesting factor in itself!
[Interruption]
He keeps mentioning her in a way that I find very interesting. Lee Rhiannon will make a spectacular contribution to the Senate, as will Sylvia Hale make a spectacular contribution to the pursuit in which she has engaged.
I leave the best till last. I turn now to my colleague, my friend, and my oftentimes sparring partner Ian Cohen. I will not mention Ian's age, because I am not sure I know it. But throughout many years Ian has always been a path maker—whether it was the path he made in front of a nuclear war ship or the path he made in this place. There are many principles that Lee, Sylvia, Cate, David and I work to that were laid down by Ian. When I say "principles", I genuinely mean the word "principles". The fact that the Greens do not do deals across legislation is something that Ian Cohen created for us. He created for us a sense of mission, and many of the things we do are a result of what Ian has done.
Ian has, in many senses, been a mentor to me, and to many people in the Greens. By following many things he has done and by learning from what he does, we are a stronger party, and we live very much in gratitude to the work Ian has done as a member of Parliament. Ian will go on from this Chamber to do some quite remarkable things. I am glad I am not a cane toad! I am sure we will hear a lot more about Ian, both on the North Coast and across the environment around New South Wales.
I have omitted to acknowledge John Robertson, whose brief period in this place has been enlightening and who no doubt we will see in some role, in either government or opposition, after March 2011.
I want to finish by thanking my staff and the staff of all Greens members of Parliament. Sometimes we say it is not easy being Green. But I think it is much harder being a staffer for a Greens member of Parliament. We have eclectic portfolios and eclectic views of the world, and we put large demands on our staff. I must say that in the four years I have been here I have turned over a few staff members, but I have never heard a complaint that was not justified. In saying that, I have never heard a complaint that I was not able to, in some way, defend myself from. I want to thank all of them. A number of them are in the Chamber today. On behalf of my colleagues who are still members of this place and those who are no longer here, I want to thank all of our staff for the way they represent the principles and policies of the Greens, the way they interface with the community, and the way they interface with us.
I finish by wishing you all the very best for the festive season. More importantly, I wish you all the very best for whatever spiritual activities you wish to engage in. Some of you will wish to celebrate Christmas, and some of you will not. But of us will spend some time reflecting on the last four years and looking forward to what is going to be a very heated election campaign—an election campaign that will write an important chapter in the future of this State.
Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [4.50 p.m.]: I speak on behalf of the Family First Party. I will not go through the great list of important names that have been mentioned in the excellent speeches of those before me, but I wish to make some brief comments about my time in this place. I knew this Chamber for 28840 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 many years before I came here. As I said in my inaugural address, when I entered this Chamber I felt at home immediately. In 1960 I wrote a thesis on what was known as the Iron Churches—that is, churches that were brought to Australia by various denominations and used, most particularly, in the goldfields. They were used also for other purposes after the gold ran out. One of them became the first New South Wales public library— just next door to us. It was removed when the Mitchell library was built and taken as a chapel to Lilyfield. This Chamber was one of the Iron Churches. I took an interest in the architecture and the form of structure of those churches, and the subsequent purposes for which they were used. Why were they made of iron? Termites. In 1960 I travelled around Australia, to Darwin and other places, to visit the Iron Churches that were still standing. Quite remarkably they have stood the test of time. In a sense I knew this Chamber long before I came here.
I sit in the back corner of the crossbench working on my computer, writing material for blogs and magazines and, of course, for the debates that are coming up. I have come to some conclusions from that particular corner: first, we are more human when we lighten up a little; second, I have never met a member I did not like; third, I discovered I am not indispensable to God; and fourth, most of us are ordinary people elected to extraordinary responsibilities, and in the way we discharge them we prove we are ordinary people.
I have always been a Christian democrat of the European style, so I will accept the people's vote at the next election, whatever it is, with gratitude. I promise members that I will not be making a second coming through the backdoor. One cannot improve legislation for people who are deaf to all suggestions. After coming into this Parliament in 2002 to replace the ailing Elaine Nile, I contested the 2003 election by taking five months of long service leave to campaign all over the State, in every regional city and community. I hope to regain the seat by the same method.
I wish to make a comment on political trends. I believe the extreme Left with their radical social engineering are to be watched, but the extreme Right is to be feared. Beware any group that unfurls the banners that have White Australia or the League of Rights on them. Democracy is created by hopeful people, but it is ruined by our self importance. As we come to Christmas, for a Christian the meaning of Christmas is that our God is contracted to a span, incomprehensibly made man. To those of you who are staying on in Parliament, I expect to see you when I return after the re-election—because you all look fairly healthy to me. To those of you who are not returning, may I say in the words of classic opera: So long—it's been good to know ya!
The Hon. ROBERT BROWN [4.53 p.m.]: I speak to this felicitations and compliments of the season motion without notes, so my contribution will be brief. As other members before me have said, it is not necessary for us to name all those in this place who help us to do our jobs; we are all workers for the people of New South Wales. However, on behalf of myself and my colleague the Hon. Robert Borsak I would like to make mention of those who are leaving this place.
I served with Ian West—Westie—on the Staysafe committee. I have never been a unionist—I have had a couple of physical fights with a couple of unionists—but if I were a unionist, you would be the bloke I would want at my back. Your loyalty to the working people of Australia cannot be questioned. To Christine Robertson I say: Christine, your humour is not acerbic—as you and I discussed this morning—it is black humour. It has been a pleasure working with you, and I wish you good health and a long future. This morning the Shooters and Fishers Party held its own private ceremony for my colleague from the Greens Ian Cohen. We presented him with the tools he will need in his future endeavours after he leaves this Parliament. Good luck hunting those cane toads, mate! Don't forget to wear blaze orange because there could be a lot of hunters out there in those national parks next year. Robbo and Robyn will have their challenges ahead of them—and not just getting into the Legislative Assembly but also once they get there. I wish both of you the very best.
I would also like to pay tribute to those who have left us during the session. Some of them went out of their way to try to help the Shooters and Fishers Party with our various bills, some of which were successful and others not so successful. I miss Ian MacDonald, I miss Michael Costa, and I miss John Della Bosca. I will not name others who have helped us for fear of giving them the kiss of death. Finally, I would like to pass on my congratulations to the Clerk of the Parliaments. Lynn, you have done a fantastic job. I thank both the President and the Deputy-President for your forbearance and assistance. It has been a pleasure working with you both. I hope to see most of you back here next year. Merry Christmas.
The Hon. ROBYN PARKER [4.56 p.m.]: Whether it is on a daily basis or only at times of significance, there are moments in time when we pause and reflect on our own lives and those of others. I speak today in what is my last opportunity in the Legislative Council of New South Wales to reflect on my time within this House and its significance to my life. As my time as a member of the Legislative Council comes to a close 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28841
I am incredulous that it was almost eight years ago that I took my place in this Chamber as part of the incoming class of 2003. I recall a sense of great anticipation and a feeling of honour and privilege, all of which are emotions still present with me today. I recall my inaugural speech—my introduction to this place—outlining the path I had taken, the hopes and aspirations I had for the political process on behalf of the people of New South Wales, and my own contribution. I, like most members, was driven by the clichéd but nevertheless true motivation of wanting to make a difference. I was determined to maintain my own integrity, and I always said the day I felt my integrity compromised I should leave.
I am pleased to say that I conclude my time in this place with confidence in the knowledge that I have not broken that promise. The party I represent and the values that I hold dear are still the values that drive me. The different paths I have walked throughout my working life are linked with one underlying theme: to help the most marginalised and downtrodden amongst us. It was this desire to effect change for the betterment of others that led me to the Liberal Party and to the Legislative Council. In my inaugural speech I spoke of the basic tenets of the Liberal Party philosophy that has been instrumental in shaping my own political philosophy: equality of opportunity, freedom of choice, a commitment to care for the disadvantaged, and a balance between economic growth and environmental protection. My journey has, in a way, been a personification of these ideals and the Liberal belief that hard work and self-sacrifice delivers reward.
I entered Parliament on the back of those who believed in me. There were so many people who encouraged and supported me to realise my political dreams. I am pleased to say that many of them are still mentoring and supporting me. I would particularly like to acknowledge the many members from all sections of the Liberal Party whose support and guidance I have received over the years and to whom I will remain eternally grateful. Of course, election to Parliament is only the first step. I would never have managed to navigate my way around if it were not for the guidance of my colleagues, in particular, our party Leader Barry O'Farrell and Deputy Leader Jillian Skinner. Barry has led our party through the past four years with conviction and has fostered our discipline, energy and focus. Deputy Leader Jillian Skinner has been there as a shoulder to lean on. Despite her incredible workload, she has always found the time to encourage, listen and assist. In this place I thank my Hunter-Central Coast colleague and Leader, the Hon. Mike Gallacher. We have fought a few battles together in the Hunter and on the Central Coast, and I am sure we will fight some more. It has been a great pleasure being in this place with you, Mike. Our Deputy Leader, the Hon. Duncan Gay, whispers a quiet word of advice in my ear from time to time. It has been a great pleasure to work with you, Duncan. And, of course, I thank all of my colleagues in the Chamber now and in the past.
There is insufficient time to name all of my colleagues who have helped me along the way but I especially wish to acknowledge the friendship and support of the wonderful Don Harwin. Don's wisdom and political knowledge is truly remarkable. Don is a great statesman and I would not have been in Parliament if it were not for his assistance. Thank you, Don. I have cherished the friendship of my colleague in the other place the member for Hornsby, Judy Hopwood. We were both proud to be the first two presidents of the NSW Women's Council to become members of Parliament. As I leave this place, Judy also leaves the Legislative Assembly. The electorate of Hornsby and the Liberal Party have been fortunate to have her as their dedicated and hardworking representative and she will be missed. It is often said that friends in politics are rare, but I know the friendship forged between Judy and me will endure long after our political careers are over.
I also have been fortunate to have benefitted from the mentoring of the former member for Epping Andrew Tink, who always offered fearless advice—often quite loudly down the phone—and a confidential ear. It was much appreciated. Former Legislative Council colleagues have also offered me great support. I enjoyed sharing this side of the Chamber with the Hon. Patricia Forsythe and the Hon. John Ryan. Since the last election I have been joined on the back benches by the Hon. John Ajaka and the Hon. Trevor Khan. We were placed together on a duty roster, at first as the A team. I think the idea was that I would mentor them and show them the ropes. Sometimes I think I failed miserably. I will miss that camaraderie, but I hope following the next election they will be seated on the other side of the Chamber with a batch of "newbies" for them to mentor.
A couple of years ago I attended a meeting to discuss the poor funding of community-based preschools. At the end of the meeting a woman who had been sitting next to me poked my name badge which read, "Robyn Parker MLC". She said, "For a person who works in insurance and investment you sure know a lot about politics". Her lack of understanding of the title is not uncommon. Indeed, I am often asked: What does an MLC do? When I explain that the Legislative Council is like the State version of the Senate there is a flicker of recognition. But there is no job description for an MLC and each of us fulfils a role outside the traditional parliamentary role in our own particular way. 28842 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
As I come from the Hunter region, which is one part of New South Wales desperate for alternative political voices, I have focused my attention on that region during my time in the upper House. Port Stephens was one such electorate I focused on. For four years I worked tirelessly as duty MLC in the electorate raising issues such as the need for a local area police command, the need for a new police station at Raymond Terrace, better police manning on the Tilligerry Peninsula, safer access to Tea Gardens and Hawks Nest, better health services and, of course, the marine park issue, to name just a few. Although we did not win the March 2007 election it was a great moment in my political life to see Craig Baumann elected as the member for Port Stephens—with a landslide result of 68 votes—and to know that I had made a contribution to that victory.
Maitland is the fastest-growing regional city not just in the Hunter but in New South Wales. It is a place that is very close to my heart. My association with the city began nearly 30 years ago when, in the early 1980s, I began working with the Maitland Neighbourhood Centre. That job was the beginning of my long and close relationship with the city, which continues to this day. In the many years I have been living and working in Maitland, one of my proudest achievements was establishing in 1983 the Community Activities Team mobile— affectionately known as the CAT mobile—which provided support to isolated families in the Maitland community. I have been a fierce advocate for the people of Maitland in this House and I have always strived to protect their best interests against a Government that sometimes did not. On a more personal level, I have enjoyed raising my children there and giving them the opportunity to undertake their formative years in such a community-minded and welcoming city.
As many members will know, operating as a regional member of the Legislative Council has its challenges. Poor Internet connections—members have heard me often lamenting that fact—a lack of an office base and the travelling distances have meant I have spent way too much time in cafés meeting constituents. McDonalds has become like my superman phone booth, as I rush in to change clothes between events, and I have worn out more than one car driving up and down the F3.
When I was elected I asked my children for their advice. "Keep it real, Mum", they said. I have tried to do just that. The reality for them having a mother in politics is something the public really cannot fully appreciate or understand. Family friendly hours, for example, are meaningless when you live two hours away. None of us could do this job without the support of our families. I am no exception. My children have made great sacrifices and have never complained, apart from the fact that too many meals have consisted of casseroles or soup that I cooked in preparation for a week away in Parliament. The past almost eight years have seen enormous changes in their lives. Dylan, Chelsea and Heath are brilliant young adults now. All three are already making a mark on the world in their own way. Apart from their academic, musical and sporting achievements they have a great sense of self-confidence and high ethical and moral standards and are actively involved in contributing to those less fortunate than themselves. I could not be a prouder mum.
Of course, the other integral member of "Team Parker" is my husband, David. He is my rock, my soulmate and greatest supporter—and sometimes my greatest critic. I cannot ever begin to thank him for his love and guidance. Like many families we have had moments when life has dealt us challenges. It is at these times that we really appreciate the support of our friends. Politics is of course adversarial. However, the level of respect and genuine care for one another as individuals is something I have appreciated over the years. When my son Dylan was very ill I felt that groundswell of support from both sides of the Chamber and it certainly helped me through some tough times.
The very nature of our work in the Legislative Council means that we work closely on committees. Through my work as chair of the General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 I have enjoyed working closely with other committee members, in particular, the Hon. Christine Robertson, Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes and the Hon. Dr John Kaye. I also acknowledge the contribution to our committee work by two other colleagues who are leaving today, the Hon. Ian West and the Hon. Ian Cohen. Ian West has made a great contribution to the Standing Committee on Social Issues. We sat together under a different leadership. Ian, can I say, your leadership and the way in which you have embarked on inquiries have been much appreciated. Ian Cohen, I admire you for your conviction and your stance, your passion for what you believe in and the way in which you have contributed to the committee process. I wish you both well in the future. I certainly wish the Hon. Christine Robertson well in the future. It has been great working with you particularly, Christine.
The committee process is democracy at its best. Many members of the community have shared their lives with us and bared their souls in the hope that our conclusions and recommendations will lead to an improvement for their families, themselves or those they represent. I have had a quote on my wall the whole time I have been in Parliament from American anthropologist Margaret Mead. It has not just been an inspiration 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28843 to me as a member of Parliament, but I believe it represents the common ideals that have driven every one of us to become a member of this place. She said:
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
As members of this House are aware, it is a rare privilege to be elected to represent the people of New South Wales, and every day that I have spent in this House I have done so with the impetus to work towards the betterment of this State. I leave the Legislative Council proud of what I have achieved. One objective I had in coming into Parliament was that I would have a paperless office. As I embark on clearing out that office I realise how unrealistic that was. Although there are electronic records of almost everything, I have enjoyed the satisfaction of putting each report from General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 up on the shelf. The inquiries we have undertaken have been into challenging areas, but three of the most recent ones have proven to be significant for a number of different reasons.
Of all the inquiries I have chaired in the New South Wales Parliament, none has been as distressing as the Inquiry into the New South Wales Ambulance Service, which exposed the extremely high rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm, poor mental health and even suicides within the Ambulance Service. The Inquiry into Bullying of Children and Young People demonstrated that there needs to be a concerted effort to address bullying, particularly given that in the most extreme cases bullying can result in the loss of young lives to suicide. The recommendations made by the committee aim to, amongst a number of other things, equip schools and teachers with the knowledge and tools to prevent and intervene in incidents of bullying.
The Inquiry into the Provision of Education to Students with a Disability or Special Needs identified significant inadequacies in the New South Wales education system for students with disabilities and special needs and our report made over 30 recommendations that seek to improve the education of students with disabilities or special needs in New South Wales schools, including improving the assessment process for individual disability funding, increasing access to professional support and enhancing teacher training. I look forward to the next government enacting some of those recommendations.
None of this would have been possible without the support of the parliamentary staff. The often onerous and laborious committee work conducted in the upper House would have been made much more so without the expertise of the committee staff, who perform their roles with commitment, professionalism and grace. They rarely receive the accolades they deserve for the professional work they do in dealing with complex issues and, in many cases, vulnerable members of the public. I hold all committee staff in very high regard, but, in particular, my role as committee chair has been enormously assisted by the wonderful Beverly Duffy, Teresa McMichael, and Madeleine Foley, amongst many others.
I would like to place on record my thanks to all the staff who work in this building. They are too many to name but I appreciate each and every one them. Their experience, patience and professionalism have made my time here much easier. While there is no accurate job description for members of the Legislative Council, the job description for our staff is ever-expanding. I have been supported by wonderfully capable and talented people who manage anything from media, parliamentary work and electorate work to event management for meetings through to organising parking for guests. It has been a longstanding joke in our office when we discover yet another task that needs to be added to the job description.
I would like to thank my long-serving staff members Angela Felton and Anna Fitzgerald. They both come from the Hunter and understand the area's needs. I was fortunate to benefit from their incredible professionalism and loyalty. Both of them have moved on from politics now and I am pleased to say that we maintain a friendship and a bond created by so many years working so closely. John McGowan and my current staff member Jeremy Scott have a wealth of political knowledge and both of them have bright careers ahead of them.
In this House I have had the honour of speaking on a number of issues that have shaped the future course of the great State of New South Wales. I have had the honour of contributing to legislation that will make a difference to people's lives. It has not been easy at times to effect change from Opposition, but I have particularly enjoyed being a part of the political process that improved and strengthened the legal protections for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, provided better outcomes for Aboriginal people and brought about improvements to roads, particularly in my local area with the Hunter Expressway and Harpers Hill. 28844 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
I have fought long and hard for people who felt disenfranchised when planning guidelines were ignored through the rollout of the recent stimulus package public housing program. So too was the case in education, and I worked hard to try to get better outcomes for students, parents and teachers. However, over the years the most satisfaction in this role is often gained from being able to advocate on behalf of people and assist them in small ways in their lives. One such case in which I was involved was helping the family of a beautiful little girl called Sarah to keep her at her local school. Sarah has since passed away but I was pleased to be part of ensuring her last few years were in an environment she loved.
Issues on which we have had a conscience or free vote I believe are when we are at our best as we are allowed to remain true to the ideals that led us here in the first place. One of the greatest strengths of the Liberal Party I have been most proud of is the ability for us to come together from all different walks of life. We truly are a broad church, a party committed to individual and social liberty. This was perfectly captured by Robert Menzies when he said:
We took the name "Liberal" because we were determined to be a progressive party, willing to make experiments, in no sense reactionary but believing in the individual, his rights, and his enterprise, and rejecting the socialist panacea.
One of the aspects of this job I have enjoyed most has been my work in areas such as population and development and Aboriginal reconciliation. I have co-chaired and enjoyed working with the Hon. Penny Sharpe as we have worked on issues in relation to population and development and also on the Parliamentary Friends of Reconciliation. I have also enjoyed being an active member of the Parliamentary Friends of Asia Pacific. Madam President, I am particularly pleased that the New South Wales Parliament, under your leadership, has adopted a twinning program with the Parliament of Bougainville.
When I feel the stresses of this job or the strain of another trip down the F3, I remind myself of the former Bougainville member of Parliament Magdalene Toroansi, an inspirational woman, who in order to get to Parliament would walk for two days up a hill, two days down a hill, through a number of villages and onto the bus in which she would sit for two hours. Whatever the future has in store for me I hope to have the opportunity to continue to provide assistance to the people of the Asia-Pacific region.
While I remain a fierce advocate of the role of the Legislative Council and the vital work carried out within it by my colleagues, I leave it to pursue what I personally see as a great challenge. In March I will contest the seat of Maitland and seek to become a member of the Legislative Assembly in the next, hopefully, Liberal and Nationals government. My decision to do so was in response to the many people who have implored me to consider becoming involved in politics at what they call a more grassroots level.
None of us can truly predict the outcome of the next election but I sincerely wish all honourable members the best of luck for the future. When many years ago I sat on the red benches for the first time and imagined what it would be like to be a member of the Legislative Council, in my wildest dreams I could never have imagined how it was to be. As I sit on the red benches for the last time it is with mixed emotions. I look forward to the challenges ahead. I can assure honourable members that if I have an opportunity to serve in another capacity I will not forget my experience of the Legislative Council and all it has taught me. It is with great pleasure that I can say I leave this place with many fond memories and many great friends.
I concluded my inaugural speech with the following statement, with which I will also conclude my last speech in this place: At the end of my days when people discuss me I hope they will say, "She was enthusiastic about life, about people; she cared. She worked tenaciously to make a difference whilst at the same time she was a wonderful wife and mother."
The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON [5.20 p.m.]: Madam President, I thank you for many decades of friendship. I thank the previous speakers for their very kind words today. It took only seven years and a global episode of swine flu to get squirt soap in the toilets. I remember my amazement when I first used the toilets here and found old cakes of soap with deeply ingrained black-grey stripes. I complained and was informed that it was appropriate. I thought it was mad and decided to call on my friends in the public health sector for help. I sent them a letter about it, to which they replied that soap was appropriate. However, they never came to look at the soap. The Hon. Kayee Griffin and I supplied the squirt soap in our toilet for many years. Change happens slowly and it is now supplied by the Parliament.
Like all major periods of life—and eight years is a major period—there have been ups and downs and good and bad times. Like all members, I came to this place with high expectations and aspirations, but not for personal success. I relished the opportunity to continue to work for the people of New South Wales and, to be 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28845 truthful, the people of country New South Wales. Please excuse my bias. Apart from literally knocking myself off my feet for the best part of a year, many of the goals I came here with have been achieved. The place has suited me and the way I work—most of the time. Country New South Wales has done well over the past eight years. I will not give a long political dissertation, suffice it to say that whenever Labor is in power in New South Wales we get better services and infrastructure in the country. It has been great to be a part of that. That is because Labor knows how to govern for the whole of the State. I am proud to have had the opportunity to represent the Australian Labor Party and country people in the New South Wales Parliament
Chairing the Standing Committee on Law and Justice has been a great honour. I remember when then Treasurer Egan—the Leader of the House at that time—rang me to sound out whether I would be any good at the job. That is really why he rang. My answer was that it would be a challenge and that I would have to read a lot. He agreed, and that is what happened—I have read a lot. Listening to and absorbing evidence and then working through the issues as a team to produce good policy and recommendations for legislative change is an important role of this house of review. That role should never be rejected. I was shocked when we received a message from the other House informing us about new parliamentary procedure that in a sense negated the value of this House. I congratulate the Leaders of the House at that time for ensuring that that did not happen. We ended up getting an endorsement of our role. This House is a very important part of this State.
The members of the Standing Committee on Law and Justice were not a nonsense group think team or a team overwhelmed by political agendas. I am talking about a collection of representatives from many walks of life and philosophical bases. Both the people providing the evidence and committee members themselves must get a fair and just hearing. That is not easy and often creates conflicts in each individual's own philosophical base, but the outcome is worth it. This process produces good, solid evidence-based recommendations that potentially enhance legislation or policy. All of the members who worked with me over the past very successful and productive eight years as part of the Standing Committee on Law and Justice Committee deserve credit. Much of our work has been implemented as legislation and it was a huge compliment to have the recommendations from the community-based sentencing options for rural and remote areas and disadvantaged populations inquiry produced as the New South Wales Law Society agenda for the 2007 election. That was a huge compliment to the entire committee. Like many of our enquiries, almost all of the recommendations have been implemented over the past four years.
In recent years our committee has been used to gather evidence and generally air controversial issues. I heard the Attorney General's comments earlier and smiled wryly. This has meant at times considerable stress for all involved. However, it has meant that there has been public debate as well as the analysis of evidence, both written and oral. I must confess that each time we were given one of these interesting references my nerve temporarily left me. I think I even whined a bit. However, if a job is worth doing it is worth doing properly, and the committee did its job properly. I congratulate everyone who has participated in the process.
None of this could happen without the highly skilled professionals from the Legislative Council committee secretariat. I especially thank them. It may be rude, but having worked on a joint committee I know our secretariat staff are much better, much more professional and have a much better attitude than those in the Legislative Assembly secretariat. Whatever is said, our secretariat should keep that in mind. That is an honest statement; it is just how it is. Having come from the public sector, I was disturbed when I first got here that the staff were locked in back rooms in the Parliament. They were not out in the public sector working on policy. However, I now believe they are essential here. It is no use our being here with all our aims and beliefs without professionals such as these to pull everything together. I especially thank the secretariat for their dedicated and professional work on often complex and sometimes controversial questions presented to the committee.
Many people have given excellent service to the Standing Committee on Law and Justice over the years. I made a decision not to mention individuals in this speech, but I must thank Rachel Callinan. She kept me under control with great diplomacy. There are many people in this place who work hard to support the functions of the Parliament and therefore the members, thereby allowing us to participate properly in the legislative process. The Clerks of the Legislative Council—first John Evans and then Lynn Lovelock—and the knowledgeable and impartial resource of their staff have been essential to me as a backbencher and occasional Chair. I thank them all. The Hansard staff are wonderful. How they do not die of boredom, I do not know. The Law and Justice Committee did create some excitement at times. However, the stress of the excitement could have been worse than the boredom. Their tolerance and diligence must be commended. I thank Carol for rescuing my childhood dolls. Anyone who has inspected them will know what I am talking about. I thank the chamber support staff, who spend so much time with us. It is a team of happy and willing people who quite rightfully watch us like hawks to keep us going. Thank you. 28846 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
Two special people have been essential to my work in this place. I refer to Antony Dale and Robin Schuck. They are entirely different people. They have both taught and supported me over the years—keeping me on the straight and narrow. This place is full of controllers. Their job title is secretary/research assistant. As the Hon. Robyn Parker said, it means "do anything and everything", from researching issues for speeches to taking phone calls from disaffected electors—they are sometimes very exciting phone calls—working with the Country Labor Parliamentary Group and supporting my job as convenor, and on and on. The job is endless. I do not know how members of the Legislative Council coped with a small, shared typing and stenography pool. I can remember creating a defensive reaction in a duty MLC many years ago and hearing plaintively, "But we don't have any resources." This was in the days before the general population had computers and could type so I know just how valuable the likes of Antony and Robin are. I thank them both and wish them both well for their long and I know fruitful futures.
I would be remiss if I did not thank this place as a whole for allowing me to move from being a cripple to returning to a physically functional human. I know some did not cope with having such a sick looking thing in their midst but mostly it was accepted that I could do my job. A special friend had fun trying to push me through the back of the lift one day. Physical and mental support was given. Being able to get back to work here stopped me from becoming a permanent invalid and I learnt just how important the right to work is. Being in a job that means you can use your brain when you are still in a fairly physically incapacitated state and generally being treated as an equal is a right many workers do not have when they have a major injury. I fully recognise that situation. It would be so easy to fall into an invalid mode when you do not have the opportunity to go back to work. It is an important process and something we should all have in mind when people are injured and are trying to get better. It is so important that you are able to do a job.
The work in my duty electorates has been pretty good. It is important for the upper House members to remember that we are not the local member. If we can help individuals well and good but most of our work relates to the general community and the State as a whole. I have been lucky to have had as my duty electorates almost the same geographic area I had been working in before I came here, so I have been there for 20 years or a bit more. Over recent years I have shared the distress and pain of the drought with north-west New South Wales and this year the joy of the rain, and now claim a share in the distress of the rain not turning off.
Another honour I was given in recent years was to be appointed as the convenor of the Country Labor Parliamentary Group. Country Labor is a great group of people and we have worked towards and got many of the benefits for country people that I have heard others in this House claim over the last couple of weeks, but that is politics. Another thing this experience gave me was the chance to find a very good neighbourhood and community offered in Arncliffe—with my son and my daughter-in-law—which has been my Sydney base since 2005. It might sound nonsense but having left Sydney in 1979 and only visiting as an outsider, it has been very easy to accept media observations of Sydney. It has been very valuable to be a part of a powerful community and recognise that there is still such a thing as community in Sydney, which Arncliffe has offered me.
The life here is hard and often lonely. You never can really do enough or you often feel you have done everything you could but it was not enough. I guess that is the lot of all politicians, and I suppose we have all heard these words. There is an extra stress for the families of members of Parliament who live in the country. The first person who pointed this out publicly at a conference was John Della Bosca, registering just how interesting it is for country members in politics. There is no anonymity for you or your family and some individuals in our home town environments unfortunately perceive they are helping their political cause by attacking the known politician and their families personally. Everyone who lives in the country knows this. You know this when you take the job on. However, it is heavy pressure on the family. I recognise the load that country families have taken on.
I will finish up talking about us here. Some of us are good to be with; some of us are not. In my mind, some of us deserve respect and some do not. This has nothing to do with political affiliation and a lot to do with honour. Having something personally defined as a principle does not give permission to be dishonourable. I have been around party structures for many years. People such as Garrett Ryan, Terry Sheahan and Robert Allen have taught me about maintaining honour. Whatever it takes is not good enough for the people of New South Wales. These days we have people such as Kristina Keneally and John Hatzistergos as honourable role models. I urge those members of this House who are honourable to maintain their honour and those who are not to find it. Goodbye and thank you everybody.
The Hon. IAN WEST [5.34 p.m.]: I thank the House for allowing me the indulgence of this valedictory contribution. I will be as brief and as concise as I can. I give thanks and express my gratitude for the 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28847 many opportunities I have been extended over the years. As we know, Australia in every sense is recognised as one of the most affluent countries in the world. We are fortunate to take full advantage of the political stability and economic wealth of this country and this State to engage in the political process or, in my case, fortunate to be able to participate directly in our parliamentary democracy.
For a democratic system of government to function effectively it requires a certain level of awareness and indignation about the deficiencies and shortcomings of our society. Sadly, not nearly enough individuals or citizens seek the power of elected office to change our country for the better. When you look closely at Australia and scratch beneath the sensationalist slant on current affairs by many so-called political journalists it becomes clear why this is the case. Australia's prosperous economy, decent working conditions and enviable social system, by and large, present very little cause for indignation or discontent.
In that context, as we drive into our double garages and our multistorey homes to watch our 50-inch plasma televisions we ought to consider who got the short straw in relation to the privileged existence we lead in this State and country. I make some reference to the comments made by the Attorney General. After 500 years of global colonisation we still depend on the suppression of Third World countries to support our economy and our demand for the finer things of life. Our demand for those finer things of life is still being serviced by the misfortune of others. One example is the global boom in demand for mobile phones. This has resulted in teenagers, some as young as 13 or 14, being forced to work at gunpoint in mines to mine minerals used for the manufacture of mobile phones, such as coltan. So lucrative is our appetite for technology and luxury that civil wars are now being funded by coltan instead of blood diamonds or even gold.
My decade in Macquarie Street as a government backbencher has been marked by some very healthy and stressful tensions within the Labor Government. Some of them have been referred to here today. I will not refer to all of them but to a couple that have been referred to already. As has been indicated, my term has been wedged between two issues that will, in hindsight, come to define the existence of the modern Labor Party. These issues were the changes to the Workers Compensation Act in 2002 and the proposed sale of electricity assets in 2008. It so happened that these were precisely the issues that defined my time as a union official for more than 2½ decades. So, as you can imagine, when I came here and was confronted on just about my first vote in this House changes to the workers compensation system it was quite an interesting time for me. I was a member of the Workers Compensation Advisory Board—established by Jeff Shaw—from 1995 to 2000, so I was confronted with what I considered to be a fire sale of workers' rights and conditions. It was a baptism of fire, to say the least. It led to an official picket line of the New South Wales Parliament by the unions. I will take it no further than that. In 2008, as we all well know, the parliamentary wing of the Australian Labor Party flirted with the idea of ignoring the position of the party's supreme governing body, the Annual State Conference—not the smartest of moves and those rather healthy tensions were dealt with in the appropriate ways.
I can say that in my time there have been three Treasurers—Uncle Scrooge, who was Michael Egan, Uncle Fester and Uncle Sam. Those three Treasurers have had some interesting ideas, leaving aside the green shoots. Uncle Scrooge was someone who squirrelled away the assets and was not keen to spend. I had some difficulties with that philosophy but Uncle Scrooge indicated that was the way to go. He said, "Don't spend any money because you might lose the triple-A rating". Uncle Sam has a similar philosophy. My view is that I do not really understand the obsession with the triple-A rating: that if you do not spend anything and just squirrel away all your money and do not invest in anything, you can keep your triple-A rating. I have difficulty with that concept, but better brains than mine have told me that it is the way to go. Uncle Fester had some great ideas with the Walker report, the Boston report, the Owen report and the Vertigan report. He had some great ideas about privatisation, rail maintenance contracting, public sector changes and cuts, amalgamation of departments and government property sales. Uncle Fester now is in the appropriate place, in retirement.
I have two badges of honour that I wear. One is the defamation charge taken against me by Hillsong Church and the second is the recent assault charge taken out against me by a representative of a developer around Breakfast Point. In terms of the defamation charge, I was very happy to be able to represent the Aboriginal community at Blacktown. It has been proved that they were taken for some $430,000-odd by Hillsong Church. To this day I am quite proud of the fact that they won that matter and the community has been able to settle the matter with Hillsong Church.
I am extremely proud and fortunate to have been able to represent many people and industrial organisations within the community. Some of those involve the Maritime Union of Australia [MUA] and the Hungry Mile, the procurement of the tender processes for school cleaning and the Department of Commerce outsourcing programs, the Transport Workers Union's [TWU] long distance haulage, the asbestos industry, 28848 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
International Cleaners Day, outworkers with the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Union [TCFU] and Day of Mourning and occupational health and safety harmonisation. I thank everyone for their support over the past decade and a bit. I give everyone my best wishes and I hope they have their expectations fulfilled. I can say to the Opposition that although my understanding of racing is fairly slim on the first Tuesday in November there is a race called the Melbourne Cup and I understand that favourites do not fare too well. I leave you with these words:
I don't care if the cause be wrong or if the cause be right, I've had my day and sung my song and fought in the bitter fight. In truth at times I can't tell what the men are driving at, But I've been Labor 40 years and I'm just too old to rat.
The Hon. IAN COHEN [5.46 p.m.]: I speak for the final time in this House and I acknowledge that we are on the traditional lands of the Gadigal people of the Eora nation. I seek the indulgence of the House to speak for a few moments for each year that I have spent in this institution. I suspect that I hold two records in this House. First, I come here probably as the most arrested member—approximately 35 times off the top of my head clocked up in my prior career as an environmental and social justice activist. Even in political campaigning during the 1987 elections when I was the Greens Senate candidate—at the time there was no preselection, they just looked around for someone stupid enough to do it—I was able to participate, you might say, in Bob Hawke's Federal election campaign launch, when he came leisurely across the harbour in the admiral's launch. I hopped in the water with my wetsuit and my surf mat and managed to get in front of the admiral's launch and achieve front page news along with Bob Hawke.
The interesting thing, I suppose, is that I balanced it out by disguising myself as a Liberal Party supporter just a few days later and sneaked into the State Theatre where John Howard, the Leader of the Opposition at the time, was making his launch. I was able to get out with a banner in the middle of the place— remembering that Alexander Downer was the shadow environment Minister—and on one side of the placard I had "Greens not Greed" and on the other was "Libs environment policy, a Downer". I felt I had a balanced campaign and I was interested in developing a theatre of the environment and social justice. Parliament is a bit B-grade, nevertheless the tradition continues here.
I have the other point of difference to many and it certainly puts paid to the snouts in the trough mentality—at least I can stay out of that one. I have achieved a legal debt of some $1.5 million for opening my big mouth. Yes, I did call a developer a bully and a thug; I stand guilty of that, but it has been a very interesting process and certainly defamation in this case should achieve resolution and not be used as a weapon. I think it is important that we recognise that parties should pay their own costs, or at least that the costs should be commensurate with the damages awarded by the court. I believe the costs awarded are out of proportion to the crime that is committed. At times I reflect on Christian values: Though I walk through the valley of "debt", I fear no evil.
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Psalm 23.
The Hon. IAN COHEN: Thank you, Reverend Nile. Perhaps closer to my heart is a Buddhist saying that I repeated incessantly during times of good meditation, as one does as a Buddhist—not that I am a Buddhist; I am a failed Buddhist if anything. Buddhists say: Now that my house has burned down, the better I can see the moon. So I look at my experience as a lesson very well learned. It was a difficult time, and I thank those in this Parliament who supported me. I guess the lesson for me is that while other people have suffered in similar ways, with family and relationship breakdown, and others have done it tough, my experience is insignificant compared with the plight of those who lose loved ones, have car accidents, and have life- threatening diseases proclaimed. It is important to recognise that one survives and one does get stronger from the process that is undertaken.
However, in this House the Government passed a bill that made the loser pay GST. When the costs are up around $1 million, that becomes a very substantial attack on an individual's ability to survive. On top of that is the fact that the New South Wales court process has taken some 10 years, or a decade, to resolve the situation, and therefore has compounded interest to the point of about $230,000. I really believe there needs to be some change to this situation. Prior to my election in 1995 I had been a most unsuccessful, but enthusiastically spontaneous, candidate for high office. After five theatrical attempts at public office—in one of which, in 1991, I narrowly lost a Legislative Council spot to Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, an electoral contest that was very much touted by the media after the elections, tragically I might say, as the battle between heaven and earth— 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28849
The Hon. Robert Brown: Which one were you?
The Hon. IAN COHEN: I will let you judge. Nevertheless, I eventually landed in my first proper job. I had been told that I was pretty much unemployable for anything else. In 1995 I made my entry into Parliament, and I rode the wave of awareness about the need for greater environmental protection in New South Wales. The ideas and vision of the Greens had long been articulated by the conservation and social justice movement but were not reflected in the laws that guide our society. The campaign of 1995 was a natural extension of years of activism rallying against nuclear weapons, calling for protection of our old-growth forests, and ardently striving to protect our beaches and coastline from overdevelopment and pollution—might I say, while just having a lot of fun, I admit. It was a fantastic time working with people who were there with no investment but their own ideals, and working with wonderful people in the early days of idealism, really wanting to change the world.
While my first four years in this place involved a steep learning curve, it presented a time of great opportunity to leave my mark on the statute book of New South Wales and make my contribution as the single Greens member. That was a very exciting time, in large part because we have a fine balance in this House. There were many Independents and small party groups, and the Government was not able to control things so well. I will come to that later. It was certainly a very interesting time to be introduced to the Parliament.
There has been significant inspiration. It was a wonderful time, with many creative, colourful and talented people on both sides of the House. I would like to mention but a few of those people. First I acknowledge Johno Johnson, whom I travelled with on the State development committee and who had a story to tell about every single town in country New South Wales. As we drove into town he would recall when he was there as a travelling union representative. While few members would be more opposed to my politics than Johno, nevertheless he treated me with a level of generosity and friendship that was extremely endearing.
On the other side of the great divide was the Hon. Doug Moppett, in respect of whom there was some glitch in my mind because I just kept calling him the Hon. Dog Muppet—even beyond when I really wanted to. It was terrible. The only time you really comprehended that Doug Moppett was going to make a speech was when he quietly and thoughtfully flicked through one of the dictionaries. To my recollection, the Hon. Doug Moppett never used notes. His talent, creativity and command of the classic English language were really something. I felt quite honoured and humbled to be able to listen to a man, in an old-fashioned way, deliver his speeches word perfect and so eloquently, as did Doug Moppett.
Another wonderful learning experience for me was to sit in awe and trepidation—because I had to make a decision at some stage—as I listened to the debates between Jeff Shaw and John Hannaford, as the Attorney General and shadow Attorney General. I must say, my general tendency was towards my good friend Jeff, but John Hannaford was so skilled. He was an orator in the House. So often while he was speaking in the House he just glared at me. I thought: Oh my God, this is a very difficult situation. They were two people who contributed very significantly to the fabric of society and to justice in New South Wales. We have lost a great man in Jeff Shaw. I wish John Hannaford well in his endeavours. He always treated me with a great deal of respect. Given the bumbling, new Green idiot that I was in the House, he was fantastic in the patience and time he gave me in explaining his point of view.
Others I would like to acknowledge, from my point of view as a conservationist, include the various environment Ministers. In particular I acknowledge Bob Debus, and also his staffer Mark Aarons, who did a fantastic job—I must say, plotting and scheming against all and sundry, against all sorts of odds—in seeking to achieve great conservation outcomes. In recent times—and we have had our moments—Frank Sartor has been a brave advocate for the environment, and we have worked well. Certainly I consider him a friend and ally, and someone who has taken to the role of Minister for Climate Change and the Environment with a great deal of integrity and enthusiasm. Of course, the sum of a member is always the quality of their staff. I acknowledge Paul O'Grady, who was once a member of this House and is now a very active staffer to Frank Sartor. I thank him for his creativity, his genius, his wicked sense of humour, and the fact that we have been able to have great fun with the process as we have fought to gain what we can.
I would like to also reflect on those early days and acknowledge the past Presidents. I recall that when I first came to this place I had a significant battle with the Hon. Max Willis. The Hon. Max Willis sat in the President's chair in great grandeur, wearing robes and a full wig—nothing small, but the full wig, with full- length hair—
The Hon. Melinda Pavey: Not his own hair. 28850 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
The Hon. IAN COHEN: Definitely not. And often he wore buckled shoes. In that environment it was quite intimidating to press the point that whilst the rules said that one had to dress respectfully, there was nothing to say that one had to wear a tie. I had to demand my right to speak and ask questions of this rather formidable, bewigged and robed individual who ruled the House with an iron fist. It was only when I had to threaten the poor suffering Clerk at the time, John Evans, that if he did not agree with me coming into this House without a tie, I would come into the Chamber wearing a dress. That seemed to resolve the issue. I succeeded without having to wear a tie and I demanded to be heard. It is with certain chagrin that I see fellow Greens of the next generation—after all my hard work—resuming the habit of wearing a tie. To each his own. We are all different personalities. It is important that we express ourselves in the way we wish and that we feel comfortable in this place.
It has been a trying but not unfulfilling experience, scratching away at the armour of the most conservative establishment in society, an institution that purports to lead society yet so often just follows and mimics populist sentiment. However, whilst I am not good on processes—as many I am sure will have noticed in this House—I do marvel at the slow, steady process of this place wrought by the passage of history: bills being introduced, their first readings, the second reading debates, the Committee process and, finally, their third readings. It feels as though the process, wrought by time, has been delivered into very good hands. It feels as though we can all participate by representing our respective constituencies in a process to which a great deal of thought has been given. And I appreciate that. It is important that we acknowledge—and a previous speaker commented on this—that very few places in the world enjoy the luxury of allowing one the basic right of democracy to stand up and speak without being in fear of one's life. Importantly, this institution reflects that.
My time in this place has brought me into contact with many of the State's disadvantaged and marginalised. I have been moved by many of those representations and the willingness of individuals and communities to share experiences with me. I have often been humbled by the resilience and frailty of the soul, and the endurance of some in the most desperate or painful situations. They have inspired me to use this place as a way to enhance the lives of those forgotten in the midst of daily news headlines, and who have fallen through this State's safety nets. Holding the disability and ageing portfolio for the Greens has been a highly rewarding experience for me. I have met some truly amazing people and I have been exposed to some harrowing personal situations. We should all acknowledge the important work this place has done on disability rights through the inquiries into the Program of Appliances for Disabled People, the provision of education to students with a disability or special needs, and, more recently, the services provided by Ageing, Disability Services and Home Care. As a long-time surfer, I have been able to work with people with a disability through disabled surfing to give them the joy of weightlessness in the surf—something I look forward to continuing after I leave this Parliament.
I return to the fall—or, if you would prefer, the slide—of the Hon. Max Willis. That was a monumental night in this Parliament. Few things surprise me in life—I have had wide and varied experience—but to see the Hon. Max Willis slither out of the chair that is now occupied by you, Madam President, was a sight to behold. The Hon. Max Willis was replaced by a most magnificent woman. Virginia Chadwick came to the chair and restored decorum in the House like no other. She was fair, wonderful, quick witted and generous of spirit. I will not recount the conversation I had with Virginia about my wearing a tie in the Chamber; I have spoken about that on another occasion. She really did add a great deal in—and I might say outside—this House. Virginia Chadwick did as much as any Green has ever done in support of an environment with her stewardship of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, and for that we should all be very grateful. She was a woman ahead of her time and she did wonderful things in her personal life—she loved farming, orcharding and weaving. Her balance was a refreshing development and modernised this House; she brought it into the twentieth century. Her successor, Meredith Bergman, continued on with an air of liberalism and progression, as did Peter Primrose. I would like to thank the present President, Amanda Fazio, for her wit and her style. Your intonation has always been interesting, and you have always been most helpful as we make some very serious decisions in this place.
I move now to a matter of great importance. I have been a long-term member of the Parliamentarians for Drug Law Reform, and was a member of the original safe injecting room committee. Through this process I learned so much about the lack of human kindness in some areas of society. To judge people on the basis of their addictions and to deem them second-class because of that, fails to recognise that most of these people are suffering and the only thing that lessens their pain is drugs. I have discovered that many of those who are addicted to drugs have suffered at the hands of others, have been abused as children, and are unable to face the pain.
As the Greens spokesperson for the Aboriginal portfolio I have witnessed the efforts of so many members to engage in meaningful reconciliation in this House. New South Wales still has many miles to walk in 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28851 the path of reconciliation: we still have so much to do collectively and in partnership to close the gap on Aboriginal disadvantage. From advocacy on the Aboriginal Trust Fund Repayment Scheme to support for New South Wales Aboriginal land councils, I have tried to play my very small role in walking this path and addressing disadvantage. I recall a conversation I had with the chair of the Mutawintji Land Council, Mr William Bates, about the Aboriginal Ownership Bill in 1996. That conversation decided my approach to the bill, and my approach to many reform initiatives involving Aboriginal communities that have since been presented to this Parliament. This year I was fortunate enough to be invited down to river red gum country by Yorta Yorta elders and representatives. My listening to their vision for the Riverina red gums and their people has given a sense of worth to my time here.
I am from the North Coast of New South Wales, the area of Arakwal people of the Bundjalung Nation. In 1994 I met with local Aboriginal elders from Byron Bay to discuss their native title claim and gave a commitment to support them. One of their key issues was to seek protection for important areas of coastal land. I made representations to the Australian Labor Party to seek their support for the dedication of land south of Cape Byron as a national park. Fifteen years later I am proud to say that there has been an outstanding success story for the respectful recognition of the Arakwal, Bundjalung people of Byron Bay. This was achieved via an Indigenous land use agreement [ILUA]. In fact, three Indigenous land use agreements have delivered the return of land that was the home of these people prior to their removal; a site for a cultural centre and freehold land including a caravan park at Broken Head—which is also in my home area and part of my biography—to secure an economic future and other lands for development. These outcomes were in addition to the dedication of the Arakwal National Park, which has provided protection for ecological and culturally significant coastal land in Byron Bay and delivered jobs to many Aboriginal people, ensuring that they are involved in actively caring for country.
I spent many years supporting the processes of implementation. I must congratulate former Premier Bob Carr on his ongoing commitment and other Ministers involved: Kim Yeadon, Pam Allan, Bob Debus and former Premier Iemma. I would also like to acknowledge the strong support of my home community to deliver this outcome. Byron Shire Council was the first local government area in New South Wales to develop a formal agreement with claimants, which was celebrated by former Premier Carr and Bob Debus in 1998.
One of the important lessons I have learnt as a member is the value of committee work. I have had the experience of sitting on many committees to consider issues of public importance. I thank the many members who have sat with me through committee hearings and regional tours. The process of committees travelling to hear directly from the community is truly better than any other in the New South Wales Parliament. I was a member of the committee that inquired into the transportation of radioactive material that was chaired by Peter Primrose, and very fairly I might say. I have been a member of inquiries into fisheries management—the current inquiry is under the chairmanship of Robert Brown. It is tough working with the Shooters and Fishers Party on a committee. Nevertheless, our adversarial attitudes towards many matters are treated with a high degree of generosity and, like a pair of cartoon characters, we bundy on and bundy off and remain firm friends outside the committee room. That is very satisfying for me.
I was a member of the safe injecting rooms committee. I acknowledge the wonderful work done in this area by a former member of this House, Ann Symonds. I also acknowledge the work done by another former member, John Della Bosca, in this very difficult area. I worked as a member of the committee chaired by Jenny Gardiner that inquired into the various Pacific Highway upgrades. The ebb and flow of alliances were most interesting, but we worked well together to bring a degree of justice to the people on the north coast of New South Wales, who are very much hurting from many of the Pacific Highway upgrade developments. Another extremely important inquiry on which I served related to pesticides, and there were quite a few other.
I cannot complete my final speech in this Parliament without saying thank you to a few people. I thank all the volunteer staff who have worked in my parliamentary office over the years. They have all shown exceptional commitment, professionalism and loyalty. They include Jules Bastable, Kathy Ridge, Noel Plumb, Paul Sheridan, Ben Oquist, Jeni Emblem, Nic Clyde and Dominika Rajewski, and current volunteers Bobby Chen and Anna Carolina Carneiro. I particularly thank my current staff, who have been exceptional. I thank Jocelyn Howden, who has worked with me for many years and has been the mother of the office. She has looked after us so well. For me, with my lack of attention to the many details of paperwork, she has gone beyond the call of duty to make sure that I would not fall foul of the greater parliamentary system by not filling in my forms correctly and, therefore, break the rules. I thank you, Jocelyn. Scott Hickie is my current legal adviser—and don't I need one! Scott has been strikingly able. He has a very clever and clear legal mind. He possesses a level of loyalty that belies his years of service to me. When he applied for the job I made it very 28852 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 clear to him that I needed someone who would see it through to the end. He obviously had no idea of what he was in for. He gave me that undertaking and he has stuck by it.
The Hon. Robert Brown: And he's a good bloke too.
The Hon. IAN COHEN: Indeed. I have seen many other people in Parliament come and go. The assistance given to me by all the members of my current staff has been immeasurable. Alice Pryke, who is wonderfully pregnant, brings joy and laughter to the office on a constant basis. I thank her for her efforts. I acknowledge all the staffs of the Parliament for the work they do for us as members and in the service of the people of New South Wales. From cleaners to the Clerks, Hansard, the staff of the procedure office, the committees and Parliamentary Counsel, they all contribute so much to the operation of the New South Wales Parliament. Some have been here, like Lynn Lovelock, as long as I have and others for longer. I thank you all for your wonderful support during my time in this place. The technical and daily support that they provide to enable us to do our job as representatives of the people is significant.
As I step off this stage and make way for others I would like to acknowledge my Greens colleagues. Dr John Kaye has made a significant contribution to this place and has tirelessly fought for a progressive education agenda in New South Wales. David Shoebridge, while only new to the House, will make a valuable contribution to the Attorney General portfolio in the future—although I am not so sure the Attorney General will agree with that sentiment. Nevertheless, I can confidently say that David will definitely be here next year in that role. Cate Faehrmann comes to this place with a wealth of experience and dedication from years in the conservation movement. She will be an effective advocate for a sustainable environment in New South Wales. Jeremy Buckingham, polls permitting, will be our first Greens member from west of the sandstone curtain. I look forward to seeing him in this House—I hope without a tie. We shall see; it will be his choice. Number two on the upper House ticket will be Jan Barham. She has been an adviser to me for all these years. Jan worked with me from 1995 to 1999 in this Parliament when I was brand new and somewhat overwhelmed. She is a friend and collaborator. She will be a wonderful and substantial addition to the Greens team next year.
To all members of this current Parliament and Parliaments past with whom I have shared a laugh, philosophical debate, terse argument, intriguing political plots or a friendly exchange of cane toad skinning techniques, I thank you for your friendship over the years. We are all guilty of operating as political animals at one time or another. The Greens, like members of any other party, are not excluded. This place works best when we let the political party beast dissolve and draw down the ideological barriers to sincerely debate in good faith and personal honesty. At those moments this place shows integrity and spirit.
I am convinced that arrogance and eventual decay in government comes with too much power. There is a role to reduce the absolute winner-take-all approach of majority government. From 1995 to 1999 we saw what I would consider to be democracy in action in this House. I hope we see a similar outcome after the next election, regardless of which major party wins a majority. Unfortunately, tragedy can befall the people of New South Wales when a government, because of long-term ineptitude, is thrown out with such massive force that it results in the entry of victors who squander the goodwill of the electorate with arrogance because they have won a massive majority. We will see. It is up to the people of New South Wales to decide. It will certainly be a very interesting election. With that in mind, I come to the conclusion of my speech and my career. As I get ready to throw myself off the precipice of uniformity into a new and unknown future, it is appropriate to consider the importance of the coming election. I end my political career with a quote from Woody Allen:
More than any other time in history, humanity faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.
The Hon. KAYEE GRIFFIN [6.19 p.m.]: Today I join colleagues in wishing members and staff a happy and safe Christmas and a wonderful New Year. There have been highs and lows but we have shared much laughter, and I believe that we have achieved some excellent results, not just as a Labor Government but as a Parliament as a whole. Although as members we come into this Chamber with very different opinions and views on issues, often even within our own parties, I am confident that we all offer those opinions and views with the best of intentions and with the utmost passion and conviction. I acknowledge those differences and similarities and know that we all want to make valuable and worthwhile contributions to the betterment of our great State.
As members of the Legislative Council a lot of our time revolves around committee work. The committee process in the New South Wales Parliament seeks to encourage people and organisations to engage and participate in inquiries. In so doing, our parliamentary committees promote transparency of public decision- 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28853 making by providing a forum for public debate and promoting discussion and deliberation. Whilst no system is perfect by any means, I firmly believe that our committee system has the beneficial consequence of enhancing the credibility of the institution of Parliament as a whole by providing members of the public with the opportunity to have effective input into the decision-making process. This participation in the committee process leads ultimately to more informed government, administration and policy-making.
A committee with which I have been pleased to have been involved since my election to this House is the Committee on Children and Young People. Issues involving children and young people are close to my heart and I have thoroughly enjoyed participating in that committee. The close association of that committee with the New South Wales Commission for Children and Young People has resulted in some excellent work being done in the realm of legislating for and about children and young people, having regard to their interests and concerns.
As a member of the Legislative Council and as Deputy Chair of the Committee on Children and Young People I have been able to observe firsthand the ways in which committees in the New South Wales Parliament have approached the question of how to involve children and young people in inquiries that directly impact upon them. I maintain that the participation by children and young people in processes that affect them is paramount. Children who are involved in their community have a sense of belonging to that community. Through their involvement they gain new skills and benefit from new experiences and self-awareness. They also gain some agency over decisions that affect them.
Involving children in a parliamentary inquiry is procedurally complex. In the inquiry into the missing middle the Committee for Children and Young People followed appropriate avenues in seeking permission to involve young people. Once this permission was granted measures were taken to make the process more inclusive for them. The committee then reframed the terms of reference for questions, and students worked collaboratively in an in-school project to answer questions in order ultimately to prepare submissions for the committee and to present their findings. The opening loquitur statement from the Chair at this hearing was simplified, procedures were changed to enable the swearing-in of groups of children, media representatives were excluded from the hearing to enable evidence to be given by minors, and the names of witnesses were de- identified in the transcript. The contribution of children and young people was one of the highlights of the inquiry process. I am proud of the measures that were taken to ensure the participation of young people in this process.
Although I will not be here in the next term of the Parliament, because I will not be recontesting the election, I hope that in the next Parliament more consideration will be given to having children and young people provide evidence to committees, whether it be to the Committee for Children and Young People or some other committee. The next Parliament should consider also how to encourage children and young people to come forward to participate in inquiries. I am very proud to have been a part of the inquiry into the missing middle. It is a great piece of research on children aged from 9 to 14. There is less research done on the missing middle than there is on younger children and older adolescents. It took a considerable time, but it is a great piece of work and it augurs well for the involvement of children and young people in the future.
I note that tomorrow, Friday 3 December, marks the United Nations International Day of Persons with Disabilities, which celebrates the achievements and contributions of people with a disability. Recently I moved a motion to congratulate everyone involved in the Don't DIS My ABILITY campaign for their work in putting on more than 100 events throughout November and December to celebrate the diversity and ability of people with a disability. The importance of raising awareness about the challenges faced by people living with disabilities cannot be underestimated. With increased awareness we can continue to move forward when developing and implementing public policy with a more inclusive approach to integrating people with disabilities into day-to- day activities, many of which have proved inaccessible in the past.
My goddaughter, Jenny McCullum, is a familiar face around Parliament. Indeed many members and staff know Jenny personally. Jenny has Down Syndrome and is a remarkable woman who overcomes adversity every day. Her achievements and contributions are paramount. Jenny has become a regular fixture in my office, visiting us frequently. She loves to be involved where possible, assisting us with a variety of administrative tasks. Jenny has formed friendships with staff and members in this place of her own volition. Always smiling and quick to compliment others, Jenny has an infectious laughter, and her positive attitude has been welcomed by all the people she has crossed paths with here at Parliament. Despite the challenges she faces, Jenny greets every day with a smile, taking great pleasure and pride in each and every one of her achievements—and rightly so. I could not make this speech without mentioning Jenny. 28854 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
Since my election in 2003 I have seen many changes in this place and also around the Parliament as a workplace. It was a privilege to have been elected by my party and by the Parliament just over one year ago to serve as Deputy President. Madam President has been a friend of mine for many, many years, and it has been a great honour and privilege to serve as her deputy. The New South Wales Parliament is a unique place in which to work for a number of reasons, and arguably it is the people who work here that contribute most to its uniqueness.
I would like to place on record my appreciation for the hard work of the many who contribute to the smooth running of Parliament and for the services and facilities provided to members and staff. There are many hardworking, talented people in this place who ensure that things run smoothly and in a timely manner. Many work behind the scenes and often do not receive public acknowledgement. I would like to place on record my thanks to all those people who have assisted my staff and me during my time in this place. Rather than thank people by name I will be more general for fear of unintentionally missing out someone whose contribution has been no less valued.
The Clerks, their assistants and the procedural staff of this House have been wonderful and I thank them for assisting me in my duties as Deputy President and as the Chair of the Privileges Committee. I thank them very much for the assistance and support they provide on a daily basis to enable us to do the work that we have to do in this Parliament. I thank the library staff and the Department of Parliamentary Services. The excellent catering and hospitality staff are most generous with the time and support they give us, whether it is the members dining room, the strangers dining room, the bar or Café Quorum. They are always extremely pleasant, and I am quite sure that sometimes the hours that they are required to spend waiting for the Houses to rise do not exactly endear them to the parliamentary process. Nonetheless, they support us with a great deal of charm, and for that I thank them. I thank maintenance and building services, the security staff and the special constables, information technology services, printing and stores, accounts and members' services.
I would also like to sincerely thank the staff of Hansard for their tireless work. It must be a terribly difficult job to record what is said in this place on occasions, trying to work out who has said what—particularly during animated discussion. They work very long hours preparing drafts and amending proofs. I sincerely appreciate and acknowledge the hard work of the Hansard staff. As someone who used to write shorthand, I am always amazed by their efforts to report our speeches and committee contributions, especially on those occasions when it seems that 10 people are talking at once. It is not easy. Thank you very much.
To the many committee staff who do such an excellent job organising and facilitating our meeting and inquiries, I thank you also. I do not envy the tasks of timetabling the various deliberative meetings, hearings and site visits, especially given that it involves a group of parliamentarians. Preparing committee reports and the administration of the submission process also involves an enormous amount of work and I place on the record my appreciation for the efforts of all our committee staff.
I return to my inaugural speech in this place in which I thanked my late parents, family and extended family for their ongoing support. I echo these sentiments today, as I reflect on the years since I was elected in 2003. I have particularly enjoyed spending the past eight years here with my friend Christine Robertson. It was wonderful to welcome her back to work after her accident. The Labor movement has always been an extremely important part of my life. I am very proud to have been a member of the Labor Party and grateful to serve as a Labor member of Parliament. I thank Premier Kristina Keneally for her determined leadership. I also thank the staff at the New South Wales ALP party office for their work. I thank all my caucus colleagues. If you have not yet made corrections to the minutes I prepared as caucus secretary over the past eight years, it is now too late!
As a Labor member of Parliament I think it is also very important to acknowledge the selfless commitment of local party branch members across New South Wales and to thank them for their contribution to our party. I am also grateful for the friendships I have made in the party over the past years in this place and over the 37 years that I have been a member of the party. I thank my current and former staff for their support and loyalty. I particularly thank Clare Daly, Daniel Sharpe, Nicole Duffy, Vanessa Geoghegan, Leigh Pickford and Rickey Geoghegan, who are all great friends and have been very supportive of me during their time in this place. Clare was a glutton for punishment; she came back here after travelling overseas. She is now pursuing a new career as a primary school teacher. I wish her well. I value the time I have spent in this place. I reflect on this chapter in my life with fond and interesting memories given some of the things that have happened.
Finally, as I did in my inaugural speech in this place, I will quote the words of Ben Chifley from his "No Glittering Promises" policy speech, which was broadcast 14 November 1949. He said: 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28855
We .. the Labour Party, feel we have a sacred responsibility to see that all sections of the community receive justice .. and that the less fortunate section of the community has protection from want .. unemployment and insecurity.
We affirm for every man the right to receive a fair return for his labour enterprise and initiative. But we do say that it is the duty and the responsibility of the community and particularly those more fortunately placed to see that our less fortunate fellow citizens are protected from those shafts of fate which leave them helpless and without hope. That is the objective for which we are striving. It is ... as I have said before, the beacon, the light on the hill to which our eyes are always turned and to which our efforts are always directed.
We work and fight not for personal gain but that our fellow citizens may labour under good and ever-improving standards and conditions free from want insecurity and misery.
Thank you.
Question—That the motion be agreed to—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
TABLING OF PAPERS
The Hon. Michael Veitch tabled the following papers:
(1) Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Act 1984—Reports for the year ended 30 June 2010:
Motor Accidents Authority of New South Wales New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council NSW Self Insurance Corporation SAS Trustee Corporation State Water Corporation.
(2) Mental Health Act 1990—Report of the Mental Health Review Tribunal for the year ended 30 June 2010.
(3) Passenger Transport Act 1990—Report of the Office of Transport Safety Investigations entitled "Ferry Safety Investigation Report: Systematic Investigation into Training of Ferry Crews Operational Procedures and Emergency Drills Sydney Ferries, November 2007—May 2009".
(4) Victims Support and Rehabilitation Act 1996—Report of the Victims Compensation Tribunal for the year ended 30 June 2010.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Michael Veitch.
JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON ELECTORAL MATTERS
Report
The Hon. Luke Foley tabled, on behalf of the Chair, Report No. 4/54, entitled "Public Funding of Local Government Campaigns", dated December 2010.
Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Luke Foley.
The Hon. LUKE FOLEY [6.35 p.m.]: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Luke Foley and set down as an order of the day for a future day.
ADJOURNMENT
The Hon. MICHAEL VEITCH (Parliamentary Secretary) [5.36 p.m.]: I move:
That this House do now adjourn.
CHRONIC PAIN AUSTRALIA
Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [6.36 p.m.]: As the parliamentary leader of Family First I speak on Chronic Pain Australia, a national community-based, not-for-profit organisation dedicated to improving the lives of people with chronic pain. This is one of a series of speeches I have given about helpful organisations dedicated to ordinary people. Established in 2006, the mission of Chronic Pain Australia is to reduce the unnecessary suffering and isolation caused by chronic pain in the Australian community. Many people think that chronic pain means extreme pain. Although chronic pain can be really extreme, it actually has to do with the duration of pain rather than the severity of pain. 28856 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010
We all understand acute pain. We hurt ourselves, experience pain, then heal and the pain goes away. That is normal. Chronic or persistent pain is pain that lasts for more than three months, or beyond normal healing time. It does not obey the same rules as acute pain. It is seen as somewhat of a mystery. It can be a result of chronic illness, like arthritis or diabetes, or it can be a result of traumatic injury that leaves lasting pain, such as the damage caused in a motor vehicle accident, and sometimes it is called "medically unexplained" pain. This does not mean there is no physiological reason for the pain; it is just that it cannot be described or detected using current medical technologies such as X-rays and CT scan.
Managing persistent pain is about much more than just using medicine. By being actively involved in a multidisciplinary approach to managing pain, one can help one's recovery and improve the quality of one's life and how it is lived even though the pain persists. A multidisciplinary approach means people consult a number of health professionals, including a general practitioner, a physiotherapist, a pain specialist, a social worker, a nurse, an occupational therapist pain specialist, a rheumatologist, a psychologist or psychiatrist or a rehabilitation counsellor to develop a range of strategies to use in managing pain.
Caring for someone in pain is a very special challenge because pain can be frightening not only for the person experiencing it but also for people close to them. "Frustration" is definitely the word for the chronic pain scenario. Most people recover from their injuries or illnesses. People are sympathetic and help out for a short while and then their relationship returns to normal. When a condition becomes chronic, we do not know how to deal with it. Medical science does not have any straightforward answers for chronic conditions. Meanwhile, life goes on and we all have to learn to live with the situation and try to achieve the best quality of life possible under the circumstances.
How can a chronic pain sufferer cope? The sufferer should learn everything possible about the condition. When the person living with pain has undergone medical examinations and all dangerous conditions have been ruled out, the time has come to realise that life is passing and that the person most concerned needs to learn about self-management of their pain and other symptoms. There is a delicate balance between ignoring someone in chronic pain and trying to do too much for them. The mistakes of love can mean doing for others what they can do for themselves. Treat someone as ill and they become ill. A loved one or friend has a genuine problem and most likely cannot do everything that someone without a pain problem can do.
However, many people in pain are quite inactive and become physically unfit, which can lead to unbalanced muscle groups and strange postures. Avoid doing for the person in pain what they can do for themselves. This does not mean you must stop doing favours or acts of kindness, but carefully consider what you are doing and whether you are really helping them stay inactive by doing things for them. Show appreciation when they do something for themselves or for others and accept feeling angry and guilty as normal human emotions and try to put them into positive actions.
Chronic pain can destroy a family through role reversals, financial and legal worries, medicines, doctors and hospital visits, emotional trauma, and other factors. Learn all you can about the medicines your loved one or friend is taking so that you can be aware of side effects and what the medicines are for so that you can help them manage wisely. With patience, knowledge, humour, persistence and a dose of courage, you the chronic pain sufferer and you the relative or friend can make a difference and improve the quality of the lives you are living. Chronic pain is something we have to learn to live with if it comes our way. These simple suggestions I have given here may be of help to you. May God bless you.
COMPUTER GAME CLASSIFICATION
The Hon. GREG DONNELLY [6.40 p.m.]: Members may be aware that there is an ongoing discussion about whether Australia should go down the path of introducing an R18+ classification for computer games. I know there is a further meeting of the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General on 10 December to examine this matter. I did not intend to canvass all of the issues associated with this important matter; time does not permit. I would say, though, for the record, that I remain unconvinced by the yes case that has been advocating for change. I am yet to be persuaded that introducing an R18+ classification for computer games would serve the common good.
As part of the public consultation process associated with the review of whether or not an R18+ classification category for computer games should be introduced, I would like to draw attention to a significant submission made by the eight children's commissioners and guardians from around Australia. It is dated 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28857
26 February 2010. I encourage those interested in this matter to read the submission. The children's commissioners and guardians stated in their summary that they:
… do not support the introduction of an R18+ classification category for computer games because of the:
1. increased availability of, and risk of exposure to, high impact content including violence, domestic and sexual violence and illicit drug use
2. potential negative impacts of exposure to R18+ computer games, particularly for vulnerable at risk children, and
3. difficulties parents and regulators experience in monitoring and controlling children's access to computer games
I also take this opportunity to express my disappointment at what can only be described as a shallow and, I would argue, jaundiced literary review on the issue of the impact of playing violent video games on aggression. It was in a media release yesterday by the Hon. Brendan O'Connor MP, Minister for Home Affairs and Justice. I am not sure who prepared the review—the authors are not cited. People can read for themselves and draw their own conclusions. It seems to me that the review was not prepared by experts in the field. Indeed, in its very first paragraph the review seeks to strike down the validity of most research done in this area because it has been conducted in the United States "in a controversial political context of free speech, disputes and school shootings". All I can say is such a valueless-laden, sociologically flawed statement does not deserve a place in such an important review. Quite frankly, it is embarrassing.
Despite the implications of the review document, the consensus of scientists on the issue was demonstrated in an amicus curiae brief submitted in relation to the United States Supreme Court case brought by the State of California against the Video Software Dealers Association and Entertainment Software Association regarding a proposed law to prohibit the sale of violent video games to minors without parental consent. For that brief, 14 respected researchers in the field, including a number of the world's leading researchers—including an Australian—collaborated to produce a statement that summarises the scientific evidence regarding the effects of exposure to violent video games. The statement was also endorsed by a further 43 researchers in the field. That statement reads:
Both the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Paediatrics had issued formal statement stating that scientific research on violent video games clearly shows that such games are causally related to later aggressive behaviour in children and adolescents. Extensive research has been conducted over many years using all three major types of research designs (experimental, cross-sectional, and longitudinal). Numerous original empirical research studies have been conducted on children and adolescents. Overall, the research data conclude that exposure to violent video games causes an increase in the likelihood of aggressive behaviour. The effects are both immediate and long term. Violent video games have measurable and statistically significant effects on both males and females. Theoretically important effects of violent video games have been confirmed by many empirical studies. The effects have been replicated by researchers in different settings and in numerous countries. The psychological processes underlying such effects are well understood and include—
And it names a number of the effects. I conclude by saying that I congratulate Barbara Biggins, chief executive officer, and Elizabeth Handsley, vice-president, of the Australian Council on Children and the Media, and Dr Wayne Warburton from the Department of Psychology at Macquarie University, who are all making an important contribution to this debate.
PORT MACQUARIE TOXIC WASTE DUMPING
The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK [6.45 p.m.]: The strange case of the former member for Port Macquarie, Rob Oakeshott, and his role in an Environment Protection Authority prosecution against one of his political donors is disturbing. At issue is Mr Oakeshott's intervention in a tier one prosecution by the Environment Protection Authority into illegal dumping of up to 10,000 pounds of waste containing trybutyltin on Birdon's 7.5 hectares site adjoining the Pacific Highway on the banks of the Hastings River. Trybutyltin is a toxic chemical associated with marine paints, banned since 2003, that builds up in the environment causing irreversible harm to marine life, including marine mammals such as dolphins and whales.
In 2005 the Environment Protection Authority received a tipoff of a massive trybutyltin-contaminated waste dump on the Birdon site at Port Macquarie. This was confirmed by the authority in 2006. The waste was used to fill in a large creek bed on the site and, as a result, is leaching around the area and also running off into the river. Some time in either 2005 or 2006 the Environment Protection Authority met with Mr Oakeshott about the case. Mr Oakeshott has publicly confirmed having meetings but will not say with whom and, importantly, says he only met after the issue had been stalled for 12 months. This does not make sense, because the Environment Protection Authority advice is that its meeting occurred by 2006. At that point the investigation was just ramping up, not stalled. We know the investigation was still progressing in 2007 because it was not 28858 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 until early 2008 that the brief concerning the tier one prosecution was put to the Environment Protection Authority board for a decision, and it rejected it.
So we are left wondering whether Mr Oakeshott forced the investigation onwards or did he slow it down? If Mr Oakeshott succeeded in slowing the investigation, it clearly benefitted the Birdon group. Once the more serious charges were abandoned by the Environment Protection Authority board, lesser charges could not be brought as the statute of limitations had expired for lesser charges. I have received allegations that the expiry of the statute was something very much wanted by the principal of Birdon, who was also a donor and campaign adviser to Mr Oakeshott, and his wife worked as a casual staff member in Mr Oakeshott's office. The man in question was allegedly hoping for this and, indeed, counting down the days knowing his business would escape legal consequences for his crimes against the environment.
What is required from the Environment Protection Authority is a clear statement as to the progress of its investigation and what the impact of Mr Oakeshott's interference was in its prosecution. Who in the Government did he meet with, when, where and why? There are allegations that the Environment Protection Authority's star witness and Sydney businessman, Russell Byrnes, had two meetings with Mr Oakeshott about the case, at least one in New South Wales Parliament. One meeting involved just Byrnes and Oakeshott. The second involved Oakeshott, Byrnes and representatives of Birdon, and involved a dinner. The witness has been quoted as saying he was influenced not to agitate further about the case. He then withdrew his evidence. The Environment Protection Authority's case then collapsed.
I struggle to imagine a reasonable or credible explanation as to why an experienced member of Parliament would intervene so directly in a serious legal prosecution of any sort, let alone on behalf of a political donor. Nevertheless, I invite Mr Oakeshott to make public details of meetings held on this matter, to indicate who initiated these meetings, who was present at those meetings, when did they take place, what was discussed and on what basis did he agree to meet? During the meetings, did Mr Oakeshott discuss the witness's evidence? Did he raise the witness's own business interests and were threats made or implied to the witness?
Since these matters were raised publicly, Mr Oakeshott has made further admissions about his interventions on behalf of Birdons. During those heady weeks when the Federal Independents were negotiating with Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard with a view to determining the national Government, Mr Oakeshott sought to extract a business advantage for Birdon by suggesting to each leader that they should alter public tender rules in favour of Birdon.
There was no disclosure at the time that Birdon was a financial donor. This latest revelation is not a matter that can be investigated by the State of New South Wales but it should firm our resolve to get to the bottom of how the Environment Protection Authority's case against Birdon came to collapse. Mr Oakeshott is one of three individuals who chose Labor as our national Government and questions about his integrity and the integrity of such a gravely important decision demand answers.
I am flabbergasted by the passiveness of the Environment Protection Authority in conducting an expensive investigation, which then collapsed and no-one took any steps to understand what happened to the case and no effective action was taken to protect the environment by ordering a clean-up. How is it that the matter was allowed to lie undisturbed until it was raised in the media? I am disappointed in the Greens in that a matter of critical environment concern has been brushed aside with the line, "We don't want a witch-hunt". The Greens' call for papers will not get to the bottom of the matter, as it will not explain Mr Oakeshott's meetings with the Environment Protection Authority witness, and that is at the core of the matter. It is not possible to have a parliamentary inquiry because the Greens have prematurely collapsed the Legislative Council committee that would have conducted such inquiries. The Greens, like Labor, do too many deals and look after their mates. No wonder Mr Oakeshott felt able to brazenly intervene in such a serious prosecution, securing a favourable outcome for his donor, albeit a very negative outcome for the Hastings River and the public interest.
EDUCATION OF CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS
Dr JOHN KAYE [6.50 p.m.]: Last Friday I had the singular honour of attending a stop-work meeting and rally at Sarah Redfern Public School with more than 500 public sector teachers from Camden, Campbelltown and elsewhere around Sydney. These dedicated professionals were driven to industrial action by the intransigence of the New South Wales Department of Education and Training and Minister Verity Firth over the plight of 10 year 6 Sarah Redfern Public School students with disabilities who faced the prospect of not having a support class placement for 2011. 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28859
It is a tribute to the professionalism and commitment of the teachers and the leadership at Sarah Redfern Public School that they would not sit back and allow these students to progress from their school without an appropriate placement that would provide them with the best chance of becoming capable learners and successful citizens. It is also a tribute to the educational professionalism of those teachers from other schools that so many of them turned up to the stop-work meeting at Sarah Redfern Public School to support their colleagues in this important matter.
One of the remarkable features of the day was the strong sense of collegiality, a palpable feeling of shared concerns for the welfare of children with special needs and a sense of common professionalism. Every school in the region and around the State knows exactly what happened at Sarah Redfern Public School because they confront it themselves on a yearly basis. From beginning to end the meeting was a powerful and remarkable experience and I remain humbled by it to this day. The specific contingency that led to the actions raises substantial concerns for all public schools around New South Wales.
As the school year drew to a close, staff at Sarah Redfern Public School started looking for placements for their special needs children who were leaving to go to high school next year. It became apparent that for these 10 students no placement would be available. Despite being made aware of the problems quite early on, the department obstinately refused to do anything to help these students. The failure of the department to respond left these teachers little choice but to take industrial action to protect the rights of their students. Of course, on the night before, when it was too late to call off the action, the department resolved the issue by finding placements for these year 6 students. However, the department scored an own goal by its behaviour. Not only were the teachers able to demonstrate the sort of fate that would befall any future government or administration that might try the same trick, the rally also raised important system-wide issues about the treatment of children with special needs.
General Purpose Standing Committee No. 2 this year tabled a report on resources and funding for special needs children in public education. No party in New South Wales now has any excuse for not finding placements and support for integrating children and for continuing with the trial in the Illawarra and the south- west that is so damaging to the needs of children with special needs. There is no question that what is needed here is more money. We cannot solve these problems simply by ignoring them; more money needs to be found. We face an election in just three months and at that election the issue of special needs children will be very important. We look to all political parties to come up with solutions to these important problems.
However, that election will happen in the context of a funding review brought on by the Gillard Government—a funding review that is conducted by a panel with six members of whom four at least either have a position that is profoundly hostile to public education or have a connection to a particular private school by holding a position in respect to that private school or by holding a position in respect of a system of non- government schools. The funding review panel is stacked with members who have allowed either a predetermined position or a close relationship with a non-government school. Public education will struggle to get a fair hearing from this panel. The members' track records speak volumes about the world view and experience they bring to this task. At least four of the six members are closely involved with a private school or are on the record with views that are hostile to public education. The review findings will exert enormous influence on the future of education funding. The track record of the majority of the panel members points towards little or no sympathy, with the objective of tipping the resource imbalance back to public schools.
This is not a panel that is likely to find that non-government school funding is excessive and that there needs to be a substantial increase in resources for public schools. It might not even recognise the unique and central role that public education plays. The Gillard Government had a particular objective in mind when it appointed this panel. It was clearly set on advancing its agenda of blurring the difference between public education and private education. Mr David Gonski has been accused of a conflict of interest. That will be removed if he resigns from his position with the Sydney Grammar School board, but the fact remains that Mr Gonski has had a leading role at an exclusive private school in Sydney. His sympathies are clearly not with public education or the values it represents. [Time expired.]
MARINE PARKS
The Hon. LUKE FOLEY [6.55 p.m.]: There are few certainties in life, but it used to be that one could rely on there being plenty of fish in the sea. Increasingly, and sadly, that is no longer the case. Pollution is responsible for some of the drastic drop in marine life, but overfishing is by far the biggest threat. Eighty per cent of the world's fish stocks are either being fished to their absolute limit or are already overfished. Global 28860 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 2 December 2010 catches peaked in the late 1980s and have fallen drastically ever since. The numbers have not fallen because the world's fishing nations have acknowledged the problem and resolved to do something about it. No, the catch is falling because fish numbers have fallen so dramatically. Ninety per cent of big species such as blue fin tuna, swordfish and sharks are already gone. Not that one would know this from the actions of the Liberals, The Nationals and the Shooters and Fishers Party. Listening to them one would think the seas are still teeming with fish.
The Hon. Robert Brown proposed a moratorium on marine national parks and was supported by the Hon. Duncan Gay on behalf of the Opposition. On 11 November in this place the Hon. Duncan Gay alleged that the Government's decision not to support the Marine Parks Amendment (Moratorium) Bill was "in fact, a dodgy deal for the Greens to support the Government's election funding bill". There is not a skerrick of truth in the allegation. The Hon. Duncan Gay simply made it up. There was no deal, dodgy or otherwise. The truth, to paraphrase Tony Blair, is far worse. We in the Labor Party support marine parks because we believe in them.
The Marine Parks Act 1997 has as its principal objectives the protection of marine biodiversity, ecological processes and marine habitats while at the same time allowing recreational and commercial activities within marine parks that do not violate those primary objectives. This is a plainly stated aim, simple enough for even the Liberals, Nationals and the Shooters and Fishers Party to understand, or so one would think. But this cabal, through lies, outlandish distortions and blatant scaremongering, seek to portray themselves as the heroes of the hour, saving fish for recreational and commercial fishing. The truth is that their ideas would achieve exactly the opposite. Their plans would allow for carte blanche overfishing and the ultimate collapse of marine life. Where would the fishermen be then?
The truth is that marine parks allow for commercial and recreational fishing in the majority of their waters while their sanctuary areas protect key habitats. Fishing is permitted in over 93 per cent of the New South Wales marine jurisdiction, and in an average 80 per cent of New South Wales marine park waters. Marine parks and sanctuaries help to restore and replenish fish stocks—boosting the number, size and breeding potential of fish—and to strengthen the marine environment's ability to respond to human pressures such as climate change.
Marine parks can bring economic benefits to local communities through increased tourism. In 2010-11 the recurrent budget allocation for the Marine Parks Authority is $5.87 million. This represents around $17 per hectare across the 345,100-hectare system, or around 82¢ per person for each of the 7.13 million people in this State. By any stretch, this represents good value for money, at least to those not advocating the destruction of Australia's fishing stock or seeking to score cheap political points. This Government stands by its marine conservation legacy.
BATHURST ELECTORATE CANDIDATES
The Hon. RICK COLLESS [7.00 p.m.]: With voters less than four months away from heading to the polls, the electoral prospects Bathurst voters will face at the ballot box are gradually becoming clearer. Recently we had the announcement that Hartley-based conveyancer and self-described award-winning playwright Dale Turner was the man who was going to take the reins from retiring local member Gerard Martin and fight to retain the seat for Labor. Since then Mr Turner has taken to the role of endorsed Labor candidate with some enthusiasm, setting up a Twitter account and a Facebook page on which he proudly documents his first forays into the local media spotlight.
A recent example of this was when Mr Turner drew attention to an article that had appeared in the Lithgow Mercury, to all intents and purposes his local newspaper. And while he was obviously quite proud of the profile piece that appeared in the paper, I think it was telling that the headline read, "So, who is Dale Turner, the man who would be our State Member", before going on to describe how he, despite being a long-time local, has until now "maintained a low profile in the community". I think even to say he has maintained a low profile in the community might be something of an understatement, because until he bobbed up as the local Labor candidate early last week the bloke was more anonymous than a wrong phone number.
So, in choosing a complete unknown as its candidate, can we assume that the Labor Party machine is resting its hopes on retaining the seat on the strength of the Labor brand? I certainly hope not. With Labor lurching from one record-breaking poll slump to the next, and the party on the nose so badly that even in traditional strongholds such as Lithgow party members are deserting in droves, it is clear that even the die-hard supporters are tired of being taken for granted. Labor cannot rely on a solid core of rusted-on supporters to bolster their support and help them over the line in Bathurst. So what exactly is Labor's strategy to retain the seat? 2 December 2010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 28861
I think we saw the first hint of this strategy in the comments from outgoing New South Wales Labor President Bernie Riordan—the comments that forced his resignation—in which he encouraged his union cronies to back non-Labor candidates ahead of those officially endorsed by New South Wales Labor if they thought it would advance union interests. There are now persistent rumours circulating around Lithgow that well-known local mayor Neville Castle will be standing as a heavily union-backed Independent for the seat of Bathurst.
It is no secret that Mr Castle has long had ambitions to run for the seat and has consistently maintained that, while he would love the opportunity to stand as a Labor candidate, he would never do so if competing for preselection against his long-time mate Gerard Martin. Mr Castle has refused to categorically rule out the possibility of running as an Independent for the seat when questioned in Lithgow council meetings, and has proven quite testy whenever the issue is brought up, further fuelling suspicions. Similarly, he has been prickly when asked if he has handed in his Labor party membership in preparation for this move.
It is no secret that disenfranchised unionists are looking to bankroll the campaigns of Labor-leaning Independents who they feel present a more palatable option at the ballot box than Labor-branded candidates. The question only remains as to whether complete unknown Dale Turner has been set up as a dummy candidate to give the impression that Labor is not giving up on the seat, allowing Neville Castle to slide in as Labor's preferred contender. The switch from an endorsed and properly funded and supported Australian Labor Party candidate to a recently resigned Australian Labor Party Independent is a well-known Sussex Street strategy.
I am not seeking to pass judgement on the soundness of this reasoning but merely to say that if Sussex Street and the union mates think they can hoodwink Bathurst voters by performing some elaborate bait and switch at the ballot box, they have another think coming. I would strongly urge Mr Castle to come clean on his intentions, in the interests of transparency so that Bathurst voters are not faced with this duplicity at the polls. And while the inner workings of Labor's ploy for the seat of Bathurst may all appear a bit murky, one thing is clear—The Nationals are serious about contesting the seat of Bathurst, and in local champion Paul Toole we have just the candidate to do it. That is the last word of this Parliament.
Question—That this House do now adjourn—put and resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
The House adjourned at 7.05 p.m. until Tuesday 1 March 2011 at 2.30 p.m.
______