Legislative Assembly

Thursday, 10 April 2008

THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling) took the chair at 9.00 am, and read prayers. MEMBER FOR ROCKINGHAM — APOLOGY TO ETHNIC COMMUNITY Standing Orders Suspension — Motion MR P.D. OMODEI (Warren-Blackwood) [9.01 am] — without notice: I move — That so much of standing orders be suspended so as to allow the following motion to be considered by the house — That this house calls on the member for Rockingham to apologise to the ethnic community of Western Australia for his comments in relation to ethnicity and that this apology be delivered in the Parliament today. The motion I put before the house today is very serious. I do not know what came into the mind of the member for Rockingham when he made his comments yesterday about ethnic branch stacking in the Labor Party, but the member was obviously conscious of what he was saying and that it would be an insult to the people in this country who have ethnic backgrounds. We all know that in excess of 25 per cent of the people who live in Western Australia either were born overseas or are of ethnic extraction. Hundreds of thousands of people in this state have ethnic backgrounds. Those people should be entitled to stand for public office, be a member of any political branch or do anything that they want to do in this country. The comments made by the member for Rockingham in his public statement about the member for Ballajura were an absolute disgrace. I am surprised that the member has not already apologised in the public arena for his comments. I do not care what the Labor Party does with its branches and I do not care what is happening with Mr D’Orazio or the member for Rockingham or what they think about each other. What I do care about are the people who come to and make a positive contribution to this country. We only have to look at who those people are. There is the member for Carine, for example. The Minister for Multicultural Interests and Citizenship in Western Australia was born in Croatia. The Governor of Western Australia, the Mayor of Fremantle and the Mayor of Bayswater have ethnic backgrounds. The Mayor of Perth, Lisa Scaffidi, is married to an Italian. There are a range of people with ethnic backgrounds in local government. Does the member for Rockingham’s comments mean that if a person is ethnic, he or she is not allowed to be part of a party branch or hold public office in Western Australia? The comments made by the member for Rockingham were ill-conceived and stupid, because they will create division in the community of Western Australia. I believe that we should suspend standing orders to allow the member for Rockingham to rise in his place and apologise to the ethnic community of Western Australia. I have a few more things to say. Members on this side of the house are very concerned about the comments that were made. I do not care what is happening within the Labor Party; I could not give a damn. It is part of the political process. However, what I do care about are comments made about ethnic people in Western Australia who have made a fine contribution to this state and who should be respected for that contribution. DR K.D. HAMES (Dawesville — Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [9.04 am]: I am ready to speak on this issue but before I continue I want some indication from the government that it will agree to a suspension of standing orders. Will the Leader of the House make any commitment to that? He is still working it out. Is he going to agree to a suspension of standing orders? Mr J.C. Kobelke: No. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr K.D. HAMES: It is an absolute disgrace that the government will not agree to debate an issue that is of extreme concern to not just the ethnic community of Western Australia, but also all right-thinking people in Western Australia who do not have any ethnic bias and who believe that people should be able to participate in the political process in any way they wish. Would the member for Rockingham say the same thing about a Vietnamese candidate who quite rightly spoke to all his people and got them to join a branch and support him and the party for which he stands? Would the member for Rockingham object if someone of Chinese extraction did the same? Why has the member for Rockingham made an issue of so-called branch stacking of ethnic people because an Italian person, who has very strong support from his community, is involved? I come from that area. As members may know, I was on the Bayswater council for eight years. A large number of Italian people live within the communities of Morley and Dianella. I class many of them as friends. The children of many of those

2192 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] people go to the same school as my children. There is a very large Italian community in that region. They were very strong supporters of me, of John D’Orazio as mayor and of Stephen Smith, who is now the federal member. The SPEAKER: I am sure that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition will get to the suspension motion in a moment. We have heard his summary of what he thinks is the issue. However, why we should suspend standing orders has yet to be touched upon. Dr K.D. HAMES: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was hoping that you would give me a touch more than two minutes to develop the argument. We need to suspend standing orders so that the people on this side of the house and right-thinking people on the other side of the house can stand in this place and defend ethnic people against allegations of branch stacking just because they choose to support their former mayor and former pharmacist — Mr P.D. Omodei: Just because they live there. Dr K.D. HAMES: And just because they live in that area and want to become part of the political process. We need to suspend standing orders so that we can speak on behalf of those people who otherwise would not have a voice in this place. We need to suspend standing orders because the member for Rockingham, contrary to the wishes of his Premier, raced out to grab the attention of the media by criticising ethnic people in this place. Longstanding members of the Labor Party are suddenly now called branch stackers, when the reality is that the people who become members of those branches do so because they want to support their ALP member. We need to suspend standing orders so that we can defend those people, many of whom are former Liberal supporters who want to support their local member. We need to suspend standing orders so that we can defend those people who are neither Italian nor ethnic but have done exactly the same thing by joining branches to support their local member. The member for Rockingham has slandered all those people who are doing what they believe to be the right thing. This member gives poodles and lap-dogs a bad name. This member needs to stand in this house and apologise to ethnic people in this state, and to members in this house for the impression that he has given of the opinions members of this house have of ethnic people in this state. DR S.C. THOMAS (Capel) [9.10 am]: I would like to make a relatively important point; that is, the house will rise at the end of today and, effectively, not return for a month. If the member for Rockingham had any sense of honour, he would have immediately and publicly apologised for the statements he made yesterday. If the government had any sense of decency, it would have immediately moved to suspend standing orders this morning to allow the member for Rockingham to make that apology. If the member for Rockingham fails to apologise, the Parliament of Western Australia will have to wait another month before he can justify his actions and apologise to the state. It is a shame that the member for Rockingham did not show more sense, honour and decency by immediately apologising for his actions. I wonder whether there is a political motive for delaying this matter. The member for Rockingham should stand immediately and make his apology. MR G.M. CASTRILLI (Bunbury) [9.11 am]: I want to make a couple of points in support of the motion. First, except for the member for Yokine, I am probably the only true ethnic in this place born outside this country. I was born in Italy and I was three and a half years old when I came to Australia. When I started school, I could not speak one word of English. I can tell members about the things I and all the other ethnic—not only Italian— people went through. I can also tell members about the contributions that those same people have made to this country. I do not want to go into such matters because they are well documented. However, to say that the member for Ballajura is the worst ethnic branch stacker implies to me that every ethnic is a branch stacker. I have to tell members that I have never stacked a branch in my life; I do not need to and I do not want to. I stand on my own merits and I stand on my own two feet. The member for Rockingham made a terrible comment that has brought this house into disrepute. This house represents every person in Western Australia no matter what is their ethnic persuasion. Members on that side of the house are sure to understand better than anybody else the contributions that ethnic people have made to this country. I think the member’s comments were totally unfounded and ill-conceived. I do not care what is done inside the Labor Party. I am not here to support the member for Ballajura. The SPEAKER: Order, member! The member has to direct some of his comments to why we should suspend standing orders. If we suspend standing orders, I am sure the speech the member is now giving will be appropriate. However, we have to first deal with the question of suspending standing orders. Mr G.M. CASTRILLI: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will sit down in a minute because I thought that that was what I was doing. I was outlining the reasons I think the suspension of standing orders should occur; namely, to allow the member for Rockingham to stand and apologise to every person in Western Australia, irrespective of where they are from. Twenty-five per cent of people in Western Australia were born overseas and about 40 per cent of people in Australia either were born overseas or have one or both parents who were born overseas. I think we should suspend standing orders to allow the member for Rockingham to apologise. MR P.W. ANDREWS (Southern River) [9.14 am]: I cannot sit here any longer and listen to the expression “ethnic” being applied to separate a group of people and to identify a particular group as the “Italian ethnics”, the “Irish ethnics” or the “British ethnics” and so on. We are all ethnic. It is not a term that we apply to mean that

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2193 there is one “normal” Australian group, with these “ethnic” groups attached to the mainstream. We are all ethnic people in this place. Every single one of us comes from some sort of ethnic background. Western Australia is a multicultural society and when added together, we are all Australians. “Ethnic” does not mean separate. We are all ethnic. MR D.T. REDMAN (Stirling) [9.15 am]: I wish to make a contribution in support of the motion moved by the Liberal Party. For the record, my wife is Italian. From a personal perspective, I do not believe that the comments made by the member for Rockingham were necessary. I think it would be a very simple exercise for him to apologise to this house so that we can get on with business. For that reason, Mr Speaker, I support the suspension of standing orders. Bring on the debate. MR T. BUSWELL (Vasse — Leader of the Opposition) [9.15 am]: I acknowledge, in principle, the comments made by the member for Southern River. However, there is no doubt that the comments made yesterday by the member for Rockingham did not relate to that general principle of our broad ethnicity as migrants to this country over many hundreds of years. There is no doubt those comments were made specifically in reference to well- publicised activities—some may describe them as membership drives, others as branch stacking—that the member for Ballajura may or may not have been involved with in the past. The reason we need to suspend standing orders is quite simple. I have no doubt that at some stage today the member for Rockingham will rise to his feet and issue an apology. I have no doubt that that will happen. I have no doubt that that apology has been or is now being carefully crafted by the spin doctors who surround this government. The member will rise and give that apology. However, we need to suspend standing orders because this issue is broader than a simple spin doctor driven apology made to the Parliament to get the member for Rockingham out of a nasty political situation of his own creation. We need time to work through a range of issues. Premier, members on my side of the house and, I suspect, members on the other side of the house would like to participate in this debate to put on the public record their view of the comments made by the member for Rockingham. The nub of the situation and the nub of the argument raised by the member for Rockingham is that people who readily identify with a specific ethnic group do not have the right to collectively become involved in the political process. If such groups dare to participate, by the member for Rockingham’s determination it is ethnic branch stacking. We need to suspend standing orders because there are a range of reasons that people from specific ethnic backgrounds collectively become involved in the political process. We need to explore those reasons and defend their right to become involved. This is not a matter that the house can deal with simply by the member for Rockingham offering an apology. We need more time so that the members of this house can work through the specific issues raised. MR M. McGOWAN (Rockingham — Minister for Education and Training) [9.17 am]: Mr Speaker, if I could have a few moments’ silence, I would like to make it plain that, of course, in my remarks yesterday I meant no offence to anyone. I meant no offence to anyone of any background. I totally support the rights of people from all backgrounds to enter the Parliament and to play a role in political life in this state and in this country. The phrase I used yesterday is a commonly used phrase in political life. Several members interjected. Point of Order Mr C.J. BARNETT: Mr Speaker, the purpose of this motion to suspend standing orders is to enable the member for Rockingham to apologise. We need to suspend standing orders, and then he can make his apology. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr C.J. BARNETT: Mr Speaker, the member for Rockingham is not addressing the suspension motion. If the government agrees to suspend the standing orders, the member will have the floor. The SPEAKER: Technically, the member for Cottesloe is correct. However, every member who spoke attacked the member for Rockingham. I think it common decency to allow him an element of capacity to respond in his opening address. Debate Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN: As I was saying, the phrase I used yesterday is a commonly used phrase in political life. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr M. McGOWAN: I can point out numerous articles in the press and numerous similar comments by Liberal party politicians who have used that phrase before. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr M. McGOWAN: For people unaware of that use of the word, I am, of course, sorry. For people who are unaware of that and who have taken offence at my use of the word, of course I am sorry.

2194 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

However, I want to make one thing plain: I do not apologise to those people who stack branches and those people who take advantage of vulnerable people. We have important business to get on with in this place today. That is the business concerning the one-punch laws and more money for our Swan River, and I think we should get on with that business. MR P.D. OMODEI (Warren-Blackwood) [9.20 am] — in reply: We have a very important issue before us today. I believe that the member for Rockingham has failed to answer the allegation appropriately. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE: In light of what the member for Cottesloe indicated, the member needs to talk to the matter of the suspension of standing orders. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.C. KOBELKE: When everyone has spoken so far, leniency has been shown as a standard practice so that they could put matters relating to the matter of substance, before going into the reason that standing orders should be suspended. The member for Warren-Blackwood has already had an opportunity to speak. As the member is speaking again, I would suggest that the application of the standing orders should be much, much tighter and he should be required to speak only to the matter before the house, which is the suspension of standing orders. The SPEAKER: The usual rule for a member’s reply is that he is allowed to summarise what has been said in the debate. I presume that is why people are given a chance to reply in a debate. The member for Warren- Blackwood has been speaking for only a short time, and he is allowed to summarise what he thinks has happened. Debate Resumed Mr P.D. OMODEI: I do not take this matter lightly. This motion is about suspending standing orders so as to allow debate on the substantive motion, which calls for the member for Rockingham to apologise to ethnic people in Western Australia for his comments. A proper apology is needed; not the half-hearted comment that we heard just before. This goes right to the heart of the government; it was the Premier who said that the member for Ballajura was his rising star. It is important that we suspend standing orders to allow the Premier to explain why he has not censured his minister and why he has not apologised on behalf of the member for Rockingham. If the member for Rockingham does not have the courage to stand in this place and make a proper apology to the ethnic people of this state, the Premier can get up and do it, because, in the end, John D’Orazio was the champion of the Premier. Mr C.J. Barnett: They’re still doing it in Cabinet! The SPEAKER: Order, member for Cottesloe! Mr P.D. OMODEI: John D’Orazio was the Premier’s rising star. This is so important. We had the member for Rockingham get up and give the most pathetic example of an explanation of his actions that I have ever heard in this Parliament. There are hundreds of thousands of good Western Australians who want to know that this member is prepared to apologise. That is why we need to suspend standing orders. We need the Premier to be able to make a comment about this matter as well. Question put and a division taken with the following result — Ayes (16)

Mr C.J. Barnett Mr M.J. Cowper Ms K. Hodson-Thomas Mr D.T. Redman Mr T.R. Buswell Mr J.H.D. Day Mr J.E. McGrath Dr S.C. Thomas Mr G.M. Castrilli Mr B.J. Grylls Mr P.D. Omodei Dr J.M. Woollard Dr E. Constable Dr K.D. Hames Mr C.C. Porter Dr G.G. Jacobs (Teller) Noes (24)

Mr P.W. Andrews Mr J.C. Kobelke Mr A.D. McRae Ms J.A. Radisich Mr A.J. Carpenter Mr F.M. Logan Mr M.P. Murray Mr E.S. Ripper Dr J.M. Edwards Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan Mr A.P. O’Gorman Mr D.A. Templeman Ms D.J. Guise Mr J.A. McGinty Mr P. Papalia Mr P.B. Watson Mrs J. Hughes Mr M. McGowan Mr J.R. Quigley Mr M.P. Whitely Mr J.N. Hyde Ms S.M. McHale Ms M.M. Quirk Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)

Pairs

Mr G.A. Woodhams Mrs M.H. Roberts Mr T.K. Waldron Mr T.G. Stephens Mr G. Snook Mrs C.A. Martin Question thus negatived.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2195

PRIVATE HOME SALES Petition MR A.P. O’GORMAN (Joondalup) [9.27 am]: I have a petition containing 64 signatures — To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned, are selling our houses privately in WA or may consider doing so in the future. Selling our homes privately (ie not using a Real Estate Agent) can save us approximately $15,000 in fees. Now we ask that the Legislative Assembly review current legislation dealing with Real Estate Agents to include:

• provision for home sales by private vendors, without harassment from registered Real Estate Agents;

• incentives (currently available to vendors listed with Real Estate Agents) to be offered to private vendors; and

• full advertising rights on real estate websites. This petition has been certified as correct by the Clerk. [See petition 298.] BOORAGOON PRIMARY SCHOOL Petition DR J.M. WOOLLARD (Alfred Cove) [9.28 am]: I have a petition with 122 signatures for a proposal to connect Booragoon Primary School to mains sewerage — To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned residents of Western Australia, respectfully request that the Government undertakes to connect Booragoon Primary School to deep sewerage and to disconnect its septic tanks for the following reasons:

• In recent years, the pre-primary children have had to be evacuated to the school’s library several times because of the extremely unpleasant odour coming back up the pipes from the septic tanks located at the rear of the pre-primary building. The terrible smell, like rotten eggs, is often a clear sign that the septic tanks need attention.

• The rest of the suburb of Booragoon has been connected to deep sewerage for years but the school remains on septic tanks despite the deep sewerage line running along the eastern boundary of the school, within five metres of the pre-primary septic tanks.

• The suburb of Booragoon is close to the Swan and Canning Rivers, which are highly vulnerable and sensitive environments where the seepage of sewage pollution into the groundwater could cause a lot of harm. We ask, in light of these serious health and environmental concerns, that the Legislative Assembly direct the Government to take action as soon as possible by connecting the school to deep sewerage the same as the surrounding residential homes. [See petition 299.] PRIVATE HOME SALES Petition MR A.P. O’GORMAN (Joondalup) [9.29 am]: This petition is similar to the first petition I presented. It has 71 signatures — To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned, are hereby represented by ComFree Private Home Sales and we are selling our houses privately here in WA using ComFree to assist us. We are each saving approximately $15,000 e by selling privately and not using a Real Estate Agent.

2196 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

Now we ask that the Legislative Assembly review current legislation dealing with Real Estate Agents to include provision for home sales by private vendors, without harassment from registered Real Estate Agents. [See petition 300.] PAPERS TABLED Papers were tabled and ordered to lie upon the table of the house. LOBBYISTS — CODE AND REGISTER Statement by Premier MR A.J. CARPENTER (Willagee — Premier) [9.30 am]: When I first announced, in November 2006, that the government was developing the Contact with Lobbyists Code and the Register of Lobbyists, I said that the code and the register would be reviewed by a committee of Parliament after the first 12 months of operation. The code and register have been in operation since 16 April 2007. Since that date, any lobbyist wishing to lobby a government representative has had to be listed on the government’s register. As members are aware, the Corruption and Crime Commission has been looking at the activities of a number of lobbyists and the impact of their activities on government. I understand that the commission will be releasing a number of reports in the coming months, and that one of the topics the commission may make comment about is lobbying in Western Australia. When I tabled the Contact with Lobbyists Code in the house in March last year, I indicated that the review should take account of any recommendations regarding lobbyists that emerged from the Corruption and Crime Commission’s investigations. Given that, it seems premature to conduct a review of the code and register at this stage. I therefore intend to delay such a review until the Corruption and Crime Commission’s observations and recommendations can be taken into account. As I said earlier, the code and register have been operating for a year, and no major problems with either have been brought to the government’s attention. In fact, I note that the commonwealth government’s recently released draft code closely follows that of the Western Australian government. In the meantime, anyone who wishes to do so, is welcome to comment on the operation of the code or the register to the Director General of the Department of Premier and Cabinet. HOSPITAL BED NUMBERS Statement by Minister for Health MR J.A. McGINTY (Fremantle — Minister for Health) [9.32 am]: I table a document that sets out the current and projected hospital bed numbers that will result from the reconfiguration of the metropolitan hospital system and associated capital works program under our health reform agenda. The key parameters that underpin future health planning are constantly being adjusted. As a result, the projected need for hospital services is at a dynamic figure, requiring constant, ongoing refinement. The population growth in Western Australia, and its impact on demand for health services is a good example of this. Additionally, more detailed clinical services planning results in more accurate bed numbers. The total metropolitan hospital bed capacity was formally planned to increase by around 680 beds under the 2005 clinical services framework, with 220 beds planned as part of stage 1 developments and a further 460 beds under stage 2 developments. Stage 1 completion will coincide with the opening of Fiona Stanley Hospital in 2013-14. However, the most current planning figures propose more beds earlier. During stage 1 of the building program 345 extra beds will be built, with a further 385 beds under stage 2; a total of 730 extra beds. Originally, beds at adult tertiary hospital sites were planned to reduce by around 300 after the completion of stage 1 developments, with an offsetting 695-bed increase at secondary hospital sites. Under the updated clinical services plans, the reduction in bed capacity provided at adult tertiary sites is now expected to be around 575 after stage 1 developments, with a significant increase of around 1 045 beds at secondary sites. This move to replace tertiary beds with increased secondary or general hospital beds was a key foundation of the Reid reforms, ensuring appropriate care is provided in the most appropriate setting, enabling tertiary hospitals to refocus and deliver their key role: tertiary hospital services. This change reflects two key changes in policy since the clinical services framework. Firstly, the CSF planned for the retention of a significant number of secondary level services at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital for residents south of the river. This was less than optimal and disadvantaged southern residents. Current policy aims to improve north and south self-sufficiency once stage 1 developments are complete. As a result, the updated planning moves around 200 secondary beds away from the original planned location of Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital to secondary hospitals south of the river. Secondly, the more efficient provision of subacute services via contractual arrangements with non-government organisations has resulted in around 50 subacute beds initially planned for Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, under these stage 1 developments, to be replaced by

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2197 contracted services. These two policy changes have changed the planned future mix of capacity within the metropolitan system, whilst increasing the total planned bed capacity. They also ensure the most efficient use of our hospital beds and workforce, and the most appropriate clinical care for our patients. The key principles of strategic vision, which are underpinned by the Reid Recommendations 2004, remain the guiding principles for health reform and rebuilding our public health care system. [See paper 3793.] CANE TOADS Statement by Minister for the Environment MR D.A. TEMPLEMAN (Mandurah — Minister for the Environment) [9.36 am]: As part of the state cane toad initiative, a program coordinator position has now been established in Kununurra to promote cooperation and a coordinated approach among the various stakeholders involved in cane toad control operations. This is an important position that will ensure that we deliver the best value for the state’s $12 million investment in stemming the westward march of the toads. The role will also provide executive support to a stakeholder working group, as well as a liaison point for Department of Environment and Conservation staff and external groups on cane toad management issues. The stakeholder working group will provide a forum for interested stakeholders to contribute to the development of management strategies for cane toads in the Kimberley, and to provide advice to government on cane toad management initiatives. Specifically, the group will promote a coordinated approach to cane toad management across the region, as well as developing and reviewing strategies for mitigating the impact of cane toads on the region. Members are aware that since December 2004 the state government has committed more than $12 million to the state cane toad initiative. This amount includes $900 000 a year for a government control program, and more than $1.2 million for community action. The Kununurra volunteers, under the banner of “Kimberley Toadbusters”, as well as “Stop the Toad Foundation” and others, along with the state’s own cane toad team, have worked very hard over the past four years to stop toads getting to Western Australia. Despite these efforts, toads are reportedly within 15 to 30 kilometres from our border. Actions that have taken place in the past 12 months include control operations at major breeding sites in the Northern Territory, developing strategies to identify sites at high risk from the introduction of these noxious animals, and the identification of sites of significant ecological and environmental importance. The Kimberley island’s biological survey has also begun and will identify fauna sanctuary sites to protect priority wildlife from cane toads. Efforts against cane toads in the Northern Territory continue, and a key focus now will be identifying dry season refuges and eliminating as many toads as possible from these areas. We hope to keep the toads out of Western Australia at least for another year. I applaud the Kimberley community, led by Kimberley Toadbusters, for their contribution to the cane toad battle. Their efforts have demonstrated fantastic resolve, and we hope that their efforts will be successful. Biological control remains our best hope for the long-term control of cane toads on a regional level. This is why the state government is investing in scientific research to map the cane toads’ genome. This is the first genome project in Australia. It will put the search for the cane toads’ Achilles heel on to a systematic basis, thereby maximising the prospects for success. The government also remains committed to working collaboratively with the Northern Territory, other states and territories, and the commonwealth, to develop a nationally coordinated approach to cane toad control and management. AIR CONDITIONING — PALMYRA PRIMARY SCHOOL AND YANGEBUP PRIMARY SCHOOL Grievance DR J.M. WOOLLARD (Alfred Cove) [9.39 am]: My grievance is about the lack of classroom air conditioning during 44-degree temperatures at Palmyra Primary School. I acknowledge the parents and primary school children in the gallery today from Palmyra Primary School and Yangebup Primary School in the Cockburn electorate. Members can see that many students in the gallery have fans that they have made to try to cool themselves down in the classroom when the temperatures have been 44 degrees. I am sure they will all remember their trip to Parliament this morning and the fireworks in this chamber. My grievance is that these children are suffering from heat exhaustion in the classrooms. State schools are workplaces, minister. Regulation 3.15 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations states — An employer must ensure — (a) that work practices are arranged so that employees are protected from extremes of heat and cold; and (b) if the workplace is in a building or structure that, as far as practicable, heating and cooling are provided to enable employees to work in a comfortable environment.

2198 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

There are stiff penalties for noncompliance, yet many teachers at public schools throughout the metropolitan area, similar to those at Palmyra Primary School, have to teach children in classrooms where the temperature has reached as high as 44 degrees. Minister, why is the government allowing this double standard whereby employees and children are exposed to extremes of temperature? Why is the government not protecting them? On 24 January last year, the WorkSafe commissioner put out a media release and stated — Workplace safety laws require an employer to provide a working environment in which workers are not exposed to hazards and—as far as is practicable—to protect employees from extremes in temperature. She also said — Guarding against heat stress and heat stroke is part of providing a safe and healthy workplace, and I urge employers to ensure that preventative measures are in place. The employer in this case is the minister. What preventive measures has this government put in place to ensure that classrooms throughout the state do not expose teachers and schoolchildren to extremes in temperature? In South Australia, the Department of Education and Children’s Services has a policy relating to heating and cooling, which states — Learning areas in schools and children’s centres shall have heating and cooling equipment capable of maintaining temperatures within the range of 20-26oC . . . The temperatures at Palmyra Primary School were 44 degrees. Minister, this is not acceptable, and these children and their parents want to know what the minister and this government are going to do about it. Will they hide behind some outdated policy that helps them save money while students suffer, or will they act to protect these vulnerable young children? School classrooms often experience extreme temperatures that are much higher than outside temperatures because of the build-up of heat as a result of the classrooms not having air conditioners, curtains or tinting on the windows. In fact, teachers at Palmyra Primary School are making curtains themselves for their classrooms to try to cool the classrooms for the children. As the minister is aware, several times this summer young schoolchildren and their teachers at Palmyra Primary School, and many other schools, were subjected to extremely high temperatures. In some cases, parents were forced to keep their children at home because the classrooms were so hot and the children were suffering in these terrible conditions. However, the teachers continued to work in that unsafe workplace. All government departmental offices are air-conditioned and most homes are air-conditioned, so why is the government, in these boom times, dragging its feet on installing air conditioning in our public schools, where classroom temperatures are so very high? Plenty of heat stress studies have been undertaken that clearly outline the powerful effect that temperatures have on people, and link temperature extremes with irritability, aggression, discomfort, lower attention capacity and distress. People’s abilities deteriorate in the heat, and it can have a detrimental effect on the learning abilities of young children, as well as their physical health. Minister, why do so many parents and citizens associations, such as those at Palmyra and Yangebup Primary Schools, have to fundraise tens of thousands of dollars to provide basic equipment and facilities for their schools? New schools have wonderful, modern facilities, yet older schools such as Palmyra Primary School, which is 94 years old, receive very little in the way of upgrades and struggle to get even basic work done at their schools. In correspondence to me, the minister has advised that the state government uses the relative strain index to work out which areas of the state should get air conditioning installed in their schools. The minister should not give us in his response the same old inadequate calculations that he uses as an excuse for not cooling down schools. He should tell the house, and the children and parents in the gallery, which index or calculation was used when Parliament was air-conditioned two years ago, following numerous complaints from members that the building was too hot to work in. At that time, more than $570 000 was spent on air conditioning the upper and lower houses, minister. If it is good enough for members of Parliament to enjoy the benefits of air conditioning, why is it not also good enough for teachers and young students in state schools? It is impossible for teachers and young students to work to their full potential in schools in archaic conditions that breach the government’s own occupational health and safety laws. When state schools experience temperatures such as those at Palmyra Primary School—44 degrees—they should be air-conditioned, the same as Parliament House and other government departmental offices. Minister, I ask that this government fund air conditioners for Palmyra Primary School, where children are suffering from heat stress. Will the minister please tell the house and the parents and children in the gallery whether his government will do anything to help those children? [Interruption from the gallery.]

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2199

The SPEAKER: I have a couple of comments for the people in the gallery. They are entitled to be here, but they are not entitled to participate in the debate. The fact that the member for Alfred Cove participated in an orchestrated political statement by way of children having fans worries me greatly. The fact that it involved children is the only reason I did not take any action on it. People in the gallery are not permitted to make comments or, in fact, to disrupt the house in any way. MR M. McGOWAN (Rockingham — Minister for Education and Training) [9.46 am]: I thank the member for the grievance. I outlined to the member in question time last week the policy on air conditioning schools; that is, that we air-condition schools based upon what is called the relative strain index, which assesses the stress that climate imposes on people. Based upon that data, schools in the Kimberley, the Pilbara, the goldfields, the wheatbelt and the eastern part of the metropolitan area have been provided with air cooling, which has been funded by governments of all persuasions. This has been, as I understand it, a bipartisan policy on the air conditioning of schools. In addition to that, all transportable school buildings—they are scattered around primary schools and high schools throughout the state—education support centres and education support units, irrespective of their location, are air-cooled. Over recent years, we have certainly improved our management of the effects of the temperature, the climate, the sun and so forth. We now expect students at school to wear appropriate clothing that covers their skin and to wear hats for outdoor activities. We try to limit the amount of time that students spend in the sun, where practicable, and we try to inform students of the dangers of too much time in the sun. As someone who has had some experience of serious skin cancer, I can fully recommend that practice. I will deal with Palmyra Primary School. Of course I acknowledge the people in the gallery, and I acknowledge that the school itself and the broader school community have some concerns about this issue. I realise that they are genuinely held concerns by the parents and other people involved with that school community, and that those people would like their school to be air-conditioned. There are some options for the school regarding that at present. Many schools—I have visited nearly 200 schools in my time as Minister for Education and Training— fundraise to provide air conditioning at their schools. That is a common practice in many schools around Western Australia, including many schools in lower socioeconomic areas that have set up programs by which they fundraise each year to make sure that they can deliver air conditioning, even if it is installed progressively at their schools over time. Schools can also use part of their annual minor works funds. Using that money, they can air-condition one to two rooms a year, and of course they can also air-condition their schools progressively in that manner. I am informed by the Department of Housing and Works that there are no plans to replace the heaters at Palmyra Primary School. Therefore, that money does not exist and cannot be used for air conditioning. That is the advice I have received from the Department of Housing and Works. On a broader level, of course I would like every classroom in Western Australia to be air-conditioned. That would be a nice thing to do, especially for the period between December and February when it is hot; I would love to do that. However, as I explained to the member for Alfred Cove recently, there is always the matter of opportunity cost. If we spend money on one thing, we cannot spend it on other things to do with education. During the government’s time in office we have poured an enormous sum of money into education; in fact, we now spend three times as much as the previous government did on capital works for schools around Western Australia. It is also very much a program of renovating, improving or replacing older schools around Western Australia. It is all a question of opportunity cost. That is a policy that has been agreed upon between the Liberal Party and the Labor Party over a long period. However, as I have explained to the house, to the representatives of the school community in the public gallery and to the member for Alfred Cove, there are options available to the school if it wishes to progress along those lines. There are some good ways for the school to go forward. GREENWOOD AND WHITFORDS TRAIN STATIONS Grievance MRS J. HUGHES (Kingsley) [9.51 am]: I have to apologise; I have left my glasses behind. I will be able to manage this if I can hold my notes far enough away! My grievance is to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and concerns the Greenwood and Whitfords train stations. The first train on the northern line leaves Clarkson at 5.05 am and arrives at Whitfords station at 5.17 am. It arrives at Perth Underground station in the city at 5.37 am. One of my constituents is very concerned about the pressure and stress involved in making the connection to the Midland line first thing in the morning. After discussions with him in my office, I decided it would be a good idea for me to go on the train with him to see the problems that were being experienced on the first train on the northern line. We arrived at Whitfords station in time to catch the 5.17 am train. I might say that the early morning train carries a large number of passengers. I was quite surprised at how many people travel on the first train. When we arrived at Perth Underground station, passengers making the connection to the Midland line said to me that I would have to keep up with them because they were concerned that they would not make the connection in time. One of the reasons

2200 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] for this is that the northern line terminates at Perth Underground station on the furthest platform from the platform from which the connecting train to Midland departs, which is platform 9. When northern line connecting passengers arrive at Perth Underground station, they have to go up an escalator, walk along a small concourse, go up another escalator, and walk through the old bus terminal to Perth railway station. They are unable to take the first crossover, which goes only to the central platform, so they have to walk the entire concourse and up another escalator, walk across the top concourse and back down another escalator to reach platform 9. This is quite a long distance and most of the passengers are over the age of 50 or 55 years. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: Where are they actually going? Mrs J. HUGHES: They are going to Midland to work. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: What is the work? Mrs J. HUGHES: To be quite honest, I am not sure what they do, but they do it every morning. There are at least 12 passengers who make this connection. There is also a cyclist among the connecting passengers who has to do the same thing, but he cannot take his bike on the escalators; he has to take the elevators. By the time he has taken four elevators there is no way he can make the connection in time. There is a seven-minute gap between trains for this connection. I had a look at the timetables; the time gap for the Fremantle and Armadale connections are 10 minutes and 13 minutes respectively. The time gap for the Midland connection is roughly half that, and the connection is made at the furthest platform. There are concerns. People have told me that they are stressed because they sometimes miss their connection up to two or three times a week, depending on how the trains are running. My concern is that the train departing for Mandurah from Perth Underground station leaves seven minutes earlier than the time at which the first northern line train arrives; the second train leaves two minutes earlier. This train does not become the Mandurah train; it terminates at Perth Underground station. There is a seven-minute gap between the time the Mandurah train departs and the first northern line train arrives. Allowing two minutes for the platform to clear, that could provide an extra five-minute period to allow interconnection between the first northern line train and the Midland train. My grievance is that there is really no reason for this train to create stress for these passengers. If it were possible for the train to leave Clarkson station at 5.00 am rather than 5.05 am, it would give passengers who need to make the early morning connection to the Midland line the opportunity to make the connection without running the risk of missing the train. The next connecting train on the Midland line departs 15 minutes later, which makes passengers run a little late. If they could catch an earlier train, it would not be a problem, but they do not have the option of catching an earlier train to meet the connection to Midland; it is the only one they can reach. It is probably not necessary to have such a small gap between connecting trains. I ask the minister whether it is at all possible for the first northern line train to depart Clarkson station at 5.00 am rather than 5.05 am so that the connecting passengers from Whitfords station, and others who are making the connection to the Midland line, can do so without undue stress. Greenwood station is another issue. Trains terminating at Whitfords station do not stop at Greenwood station; they stop at all stations between Perth and Whitfords except Greenwood. I have received many complaints; people want to know why the train stops at all stations except Greenwood. It is a little frustrating for some of my constituents. It appears that Greenwood is being omitted. They could understand it if the train also bypassed other stations, such as Leederville or Glendalough, but it stops at every station except Greenwood. People are a bit perplexed about why this should be. Greenwood station is serviced only by the train that stops at all stops between Perth and Clarkson. Greenwood station is absolutely fabulous and is used heavily by my constituents. It is a wonderful asset to them, but they are concerned about it being left out by the Whitfords train. I hope the minister will be able to assist me with these couple of issues. On behalf of my commuting constituents, I put this grievance to the minister. MS A.J.G. MacTIERNAN (Armadale — Minister for Planning and Infrastructure) [9.58 am]: I thank the member for the grievance and for giving me considerable time to look at these issues. She has described the issue of the connection between the northern and Midland lines quite clearly, although there will obviously be some dispute about the times. Mr Italiano from the Public Transport Authority, although not exactly a senior citizen, is a man whom I would presume to be of approximately the same vintage as the member’s connecting passengers. He tells me that he has clocked himself making that connection in four and a half minutes at a fairly leisurely pace. He thinks that if he really pushed himself, he could do it in three and a half minutes. I acknowledge that there is always the possibility of trains running late, although—I will check this—one normally finds that the first train is not late; because it is the first train of the morning, there has been no build-up of problems. I am prepared to consider changing the departure time of the first train from Clarkson from 5.05 am to 5.00 am. We will consult with other passengers. For example, from our most recent survey, it appears that about 12 people made the connection from that train on the northern suburbs to the Midland line. Obviously, if

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2201 we move the departure time forward five minutes, those people will have another five-minute wait. We must think also about the consequences, because I think 12 is the peak number of people who transfer from that train and it would mean that the other 160 people who regularly catch that train would also have to start five minutes earlier. It is a question of getting a balance. Therefore, we will look at the frequency at which the first train runs late. Our experience is that it is very unlikely that that first train runs late. However, we will search our records and get an accurate idea of its on-time running. If it is on time regularly, it seems to us that perhaps there is no merit in adjusting the departure time. However, we will also do a passenger survey of all the people who use the train to get their feedback about whether they will be happy for the timing to be put forward five minutes and, from that, make a decision. It is something that we certainly can do. We would probably not want to do it until a change of timetable, and we will probably change the timetables in around six months. As I say, in that interim period, we will do an analysis of the on-time running of that first train and something of a passenger survey. If everyone is happy with it, we will do it. We obviously want to increase connectivity but we must be mindful that others are always affected by these sorts of changes. In terms of the train stopping at Edgewater, I think we are providing — Mrs J. Hughes: Greenwood. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN: Greenwood, sorry—we are providing an excellent service. During peak periods, basically until 7.48 am, trains stop there every four minutes. That is a pretty good service, but it was not included when we established the Whitfords shuttle. That is absolutely true but the services run every 10 minutes. That is almost as good as we will ever get on the Armadale or Midland lines along which there are stations that handle many more patrons per day. Greenwood is a relatively small station. I urge people to think about the system. If we stopped every train at Greenwood, that would have consequences for all the other patrons. Quite frankly, I must say, member, that a service that provides a train every four minutes almost to eight o’clock and thereafter a train every 10 minutes is a pretty good service. Given the relatively small number of patrons who catch the train at Greenwood, I see no justification for changing that. It is exactly the same service pattern at Clarkson, Currambine, Joondalup and Edgewater and, for much of the day, Glendalough and Leederville. The train service to Greenwood is excellent. I do not think we can complain when a train stops there every 10 minutes. That is a good quality service. As I say, it is comparable to the very best that is offered on the Armadale, Midland and Fremantle lines. The Whitfords shuttle is designed to move lots of people through. I cannot see any justification at this point for changing that. We are trying to move as many people as possible, as quickly as possible. However, if there is a very considerable change in patronage at Greenwood, then, of course, we will reconsider it. At this point, the provision of the service in that way is the most rational allocation of resources across the northern suburbs line. SWANBOURNE HOSPITAL COMPLEX — DEVELOPMENT Grievance MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe) [10.03 am]: My grievance is also to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. I acknowledge at the beginning that the issue I raise relates to both the planning portfolio and the housing and works portfolio. I welcome to the public gallery residents of Mt Claremont, particularly the Mt Claremont Residents Association who, like me, have been concerned for a long time about the use of the remaining buildings on the former Swanbourne hospital complex, the mental health facility. The issue of those buildings and the heritage-listed Montgomery Hall have been going on for more than 20 years, certainly since I have been the member for Cottesloe. I say at the outset that many alternative uses have been looked at and tried and there is acceptance that what is only realistic now is a largely mixed-residential development. I stress that the community and I, as the local member, acknowledge and support that. The residents are particularly concerned, however, that the development proposed by Sealcrest Pty Ltd goes beyond what was originally tendered and agreed with the community and the state government when the site was sold in January 2006. We are talking about an area of some two and a half hectares, with six large buildings on the site, the most prominent being, as I said, the heritage-listed Montgomery Hall. They date from 1900 and are, in fact, a magnificent set of buildings. It is an important package of land and was once the site of the state’s mental health facility, which has progressively closed down. The buildings have been essentially vacant since 1987. Some of the surrounding buildings were demolished, and of course, that made way for the St Johns Wood residential development and John XXIII College. The health department ceased any use of the buildings in 1987. Due to the lack of use of the buildings they have been obviously subject to weather damage and vandalism and, indeed, at one stage, a chain saw was used to remove an entire staircase, which has never been recovered. A number of attempts have been made to find suitable uses for this large complex of buildings. During the time of the coalition government in 1993, around $2 million was spent, largely at my urging, which resulted in securing the site and the restoration of power, water services and the like. At the same time, an expression of interest process was undertaken between the government and the City of Nedlands to find a suitable tenant and use for the site. It did not work

2202 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] out. Lots of good ideas came forward, but, given the ramifications of occupying large buildings with high maintenance costs, all the good intentions did not come to much. Perhaps the exception is that the state government of the day restored the ground floor of the south-wing building, which was occupied by the Western Australian Music Academy. That restoration to the required heritage standard highlighted just how magnificent those buildings are. I understand that the complex has cost the state government in the order of $100 000 a year to maintain. At one state, John XXIII College considered the site for a performing arts theatre complex but, unfortunately, that came to nothing. After all those events, there is, I guess, almost a reluctance but an acceptance that, essentially, residential development will be the only feasible way to ensure that those buildings are used and restored to the right heritage standard. With that in mind, I support the fact that in 2003, town planners Taylor Burrell Barnett—no relation—were employed by the state government to undertake a study and public consultation on the future use of the buildings. They developed a plan that was broadly agreed to and accepted both by the community and the City of Nedlands. In October 2005, the state government offered the former Swanbourne hospital buildings for sale by public tender. There was great interest in that, as we would expect. Some 50 tenders were received and, ultimately, the site was sold for $6.65 million to Sealcrest. Things seemed to be going all right to that stage. The City of Nedlands rezoned it as “Special use” and under that zoning determined that a local planning policy would be implemented. However, the objective must be that the development is consistent with the conditions of the tender, with what the community agreed and with what the City of Nedlands hoped would eventuate. Unfortunately, after this long saga, it again seems to be in danger of going off the rails. The developer has submitted a proposal that contains a number of features that simply do not comply with the 2005 development plan—the plan under which it was offered for tender and for which, finally, there was agreement within the community and the local authority. There are a number of very significant differences between what the developer now proposes and what was offered for tender when the site was sold by the state government. They include an extra apartment-style building that has been added to the existing courtyard area. That building is proposed to be five storeys high and would rise above the heritage-listed Montgomery Hall, which sits on the peak of the hill. Significant changes are proposed for the curtilage around the south wing of the complex. The developer is proposing 48 dwellings, compared with the original 40 dwellings, a 20 per cent increase in what was offered for tender. There are issues with vehicle access and road design. Provision had been made for visitor parking but it now appears not to be there. There is a danger that the significant landmark presence of Montgomery Hall itself will be lost. The use of the hall is an issue, with a proposal for a swimming pool to be built within the basement of the building. The point I am making is that what Sealcrest is proposing is not consistent with what went out to tender and what has been agreed to. I stress that the community accepts the mixed development. I am not opposing the process that this government is now pursuing. I call upon the minister to ensure, perhaps in consultation with the Minister for Housing and Works and the City of Nedlands, that whatever development is finally approved for that site is consistent with the development plan that was put out by the planning consultants and agreed to by the City of Nedlands. I stress that the community is not saying that it is totally inflexible. There may be some minor changes. I urge the government to ensure that the conditions that were reached after a long and difficult process and that have community acceptance are now abided by. After 20 years we might finally see a resolution of the problem with the Montgomery Hall complex. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr M.J. Cowper): I thank the people in the gallery for being here today. I remind them that they are not able to participate in or interfere with parliamentary debates, otherwise I may be forced to do something that I would not like to do and ask them to leave. I thank them for their consideration. MS A.J.G. MacTIERNAN (Armadale — Minister for Planning and Infrastructure) [10.12 am]: I thank the member for Cottesloe for his grievance and for providing me with considerable detail yesterday so that I was able to prepare to speak on this issue. As the member would be aware, the land has been sold to a private firm, Swanbourne Estate. I am unable to conceive what possible role the Department of Housing and Works would have in this arrangement at the moment. An outline development plan was required under the amendment to the town planning scheme that was signed off. It was an unusual arrangement. The outline development plan had to be agreed to by the Western Australian Planning Commission before it was advertised, which is very unusual. In the first instance, the outline development plan had to be considered by the City of Nedlands. It is true that the developer made a range of changes to the outline development plan. I understand that the City of Nedlands then refused to advertise that outline development plan. The developer took that refusal to the State Administrative Tribunal. There was a negotiated outcome through SAT that resulted in a new plan. That plan had to be considered by the WAPC. The WAPC has concerns about the outline development plan that was negotiated with the City of Nedlands and the developer. Its concerns principally relate to the adequacy of the public open space that has been provided. If we looked at this site in isolation, there would be an adequate amount of public open space. However, it has always been part of the broader plan that this site would compensate for the rest of St John’s Wood Estate, which did not have enough public open space. Of the issues that the member has raised, the issue that exercises the commission’s mind is that relating to the adequacy of public open space. I understand

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2203 that the commission has said that it will allow the outcome that was negotiated between the developer and the City of Nedlands via SAT to be advertised. It is an improved configuration of public open space over that proposed by the developer, but the WAPC is not necessarily content that that would be the right thing. Mr C.J. Barnett: Thank you for that. I think also the proposed new building in the courtyard of the heritage buildings is a significant variation. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN: We will certainly look at that. That issue does not seem to have particularly concerned the Planning Commission. The developer negotiated the extra apartment-style building in the courtyard of that complex with the Heritage Council of Western Australia. It is not really a planning issue. From a planning point of view, this is a disappointing site because of the number of apartments that will be built. We have to accept that Perth is growing, and all municipalities have to play their part — Mr C.J. Barnett: These are existing buildings though. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN: Yes, they are existing buildings, but the issue of whether it is appropriate to have another building in the courtyard was really a matter for the Heritage Council. I understand that that has been negotiated with the Heritage Council. Mr C.J. Barnett: The Heritage Council doesn’t see that as compromising Montgomery Hall. I may not agree with it, but it is true what you say. When the site was put out to tender, that was not envisaged. This is something the developer has brought in after the tender process. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN: It has to be considered whether that is a reasonable proposition, primarily from a heritage point of view. From a planning point of view, the City of Nedlands’ ability to increase population and absorb part of the growth to assist the general endeavour of growth has been very limited. In fact, the City of Nedlands was probably the worst performing local authority in the 2007 statistics. Perth had a population growth of 2.3 per cent, which is a very considerable growth rate in one year. The local authority that did least to contribute to that growth was the City of Nedlands, which had a growth of 0.3 per cent. From a planning point of view, for an area such as that that is blessed with riches in terms of infrastructure, jobs, public open space and sporting facilities, that is not a very good performance. From a planning point of view, I would not expect the Planning Commission to resile from allowing additional housing on that site. However, as I said, the commission is primarily concerned about the public open space and the fact that that area was always seen over the longer term as providing public open space or the public open space deficit on St John’s Wood estate. The negotiated outline development plan will be advertised by the City of Nedlands. The commission has indicated that it is not necessarily happy with the public open space provision. The community will have an opportunity to comment. It will then go back to the City of Nedlands and, presumably, to the WAPC for final sign-off. When I look at what the building will be used for, a gym and a lap pool for residents seem to be a very good idea. STIRLING TERRACE, ALBANY — ASSAULTS Grievance MR P.B. WATSON (Albany — Parliamentary Secretary) [10.19 am]: My grievance is to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, who is also the Minister for Community Safety. Last week I received a phone call from the Albany police informing me of yet another vicious and unprovoked bashing in the Stirling Terrace pub and nightclub district. It seems to me that these bashings are almost always associated with the excessive consumption of alcohol and/or drugs. They occur because either the perpetrators are so fuelled up that they have lost any sense of self-control or the victim is so drunk or stoned — Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY: I hate to be pedantic but it is against standing orders to read a speech verbatim to the house. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr M.J. Cowper): I have to take advice on that. Mr P. Papalia: He is consulting his notes. Mr R.F. Johnson: Verbatim! Mr M.J. BIRNEY: I think it is against standing orders, Mr Acting Speaker. The ACTING SPEAKER: I understand that one can refer to notes, but reading verbatim is not generally accepted. I ask the member to continue discussing his very important issue. Mr M.J. BIRNEY: I am sure he is suitably across it. Mr P.B. WATSON: This will be going out to all the police in Western Australia! The ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Albany, you may proceed.

2204 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

Debate Resumed Mr P.B. WATSON: I have lost track of where I was after the rude interruption from the member for Kalgoorlie. Mr M.J. Birney: So the member was reading! Mr P.B. WATSON: Yes, I am, because Stirling Terrace is a very important hub of my community. Point of Order Mr M.J. BIRNEY: Mr Acting Speaker, I am sure that you just said that it does offend standing orders to read a speech verbatim, and the member for Albany has now said that he is doing exactly that. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr M.J. Cowper): I ruled that that is the case, and I am sure that the member for Albany will proceed with that in mind. Debate Resumed Mr P.B. WATSON: I have been approached by concerned people in my community about the number of drug- fuelled and alcohol-fuelled incidents in our pub district. I have been approached by Jenny Spanbroek, whose son was bashed, and Ronnie Sochaki-Kennedy. Those two mothers have come to me with their issues about what has happened in this area. I ask the minister to get the police in Albany to convene a meeting between various members of our community, including the drug and alcohol health sectors, the hospital and concerned parents—all the different groups—so that the community can take hold of this issue itself. I do not want one meeting to be organised and then for nothing else to happen. We have had meeting “fests” to which people have come along and talked about things, but after which nothing gets carried on. I have spoken to Senior Sergeant Dave Hornsby, who is the sergeant in charge at the Albany Police Station, and he has some very good ideas about community safety and crime prevention programs. The City of Albany has not come on board with the community and safety program. I am not only calling on the minister to ask the police to have input into this situation, but also asking the City of Albany to come along and be a part of it. While I was out on patrol with the police in Albany two or three weeks ago, I witnessed the very hard job that they have in maintaining control. A lot of the young people do not have respect for the police, and that was discussed yesterday when the member for Hillarys’ legislation was debated. We have to not only gain respect back for the police on the streets, but also take part as a community. We have to take hold of this issue ourselves; we cannot leave it to the police or the drug and alcohol authorities to do it. We have to get everyone together and take control of our actions. Ronnie Sochaki-Kennedy came to see me, and she wants to get the community involved. We throw everything back on the police or the law-makers and say that they must do this and that. We have to get together as a group, and involve the families in the community, the police and the drug authorities. We do not want to have just one meeting and walk away with a strategy for only the next two or three months. We want to work out strategies and follow them through. We may not get it right the first time—some of the strategies might not work—but it would be better than sitting on our backsides and simply increasing the penalties. People have to take more responsibility for their actions. A lot of young people are getting bashed, as I said, because they are vulnerable. When I was out with the police on patrol, I felt quite safe walking along York Street, but walking along Stirling Terrace, with its little alleys on the side, was a different matter. Young people go to the hotels there, and when they close, they all head along to the nightclub. The guys at the nightclub do a good job, but they can only do so much. I sat across from the nightclub in an unmarked police car and saw that the nightclub guys check everyone and their drivers’ licences, and if anyone is drunk, they send them on their way. One of the concerns we have relates to vulnerable people coming out of the nightclubs. While in the car park with the police, I saw young girls, probably younger than my daughter, walking out in the latest gear — Mr R.F. Johnson: Looking older than they are. Mr P.B. WATSON: —looking older than they are. People were sitting in cars nearby, and the area is not very well lit. We need to start educating these young people that they can go and have a drink and, if they want to be silly enough, have a smoke, but when they start doing the other things — Mr R.F. Johnson: Not cannabis. Mr P.B. WATSON: No. I am not saying young people should smoke a cigarette, but that is a choice young kids make. They can smoke a cigarette, have a drink, have a good time, but they should be very wary of the circumstances when leaving nightclubs and hotels. I have called on the City of Albany to install better lighting on Stirling Terrace. I would not walk along there after 11 o’clock at night, and I can run! Imagine these young people in high heels and things like that.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2205

I ask the Minister for Police to request the police to coordinate a meeting in the community. Senior Sergeant Dave Hornsby has had success holding such meetings up north. He got groups in the town together to act as a unit and they met on a regular basis. I ask the minister to request the police in Albany to organise a meeting. If that happened, it would be much easier and much safer for young people to walk on the streets of Albany. MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta — Minister for Police and Emergency Services) [10.26 am]: I thank the member for his grievance but also for the leadership he is showing in his community to try to deal with a real concern. It is that sort of leadership in bringing people together that the member for Albany has a real talent for and I am sure that by doing that we will see results. I certainly want to see how I can work with him to achieve that. The community concern for law and order is always present, but I expect it has been heightened by the recent violent attacks that have occurred in Albany. The attacks have been given a lot of media coverage and that has caused great concern to the individuals involved and their friends and family, as well as the wider community. I went to Albany a few weeks ago, and the member for Albany and I received a briefing from senior police. I went through the station the next day and met Senior Sergeant Dave Hornsby. I was certainly very impressed with the officers and the job they are doing. Going on the statistics, overall they have effected marked reductions in crime. They are doing a brilliant job there. However, there are new challenges, and the police and everyone else need to move to see what we can do to deal with those. As the member indicated, at the heart of this problem is alcohol and drug use. The briefing note that I have received from the police indicates that the proportion of alcohol-related aggravated non-domestic assaults in the Albany subdistrict is higher than the state average and higher than that in other comparable regional centres. Currently there is a real problem in Albany. However, for 2007-08, the total number of aggravated non- domestic assaults is currently 2.4 per cent lower than during the same period in 2006-07, and 21.2 per cent lower than 2003-04. The Albany subdistrict has experienced a decrease, rather than an increase, in the incidence of violent public assaults. However, it is still higher than in other regional centres, and that is a real cause for concern. The police are doing a range of things to tackle that, such as issuing move-on orders and enforcing the Liquor Licensing Act. The police operation to enforce the Liquor Licensing Act has resulted in one liquor licence infringement to the value of $7 000. I understand that actions are being taken against another licensee, but the case is yet to go to the Liquor Commission. The police are proactive in dealing with irresponsible people who have control over liquor outlets and do not comply with the act. That is only one element associated with this issue. The member for Albany said that there is no point addressing only one element. The member is very keen to bring all the elements together—the police, liquor licensing, government agencies, the local government authority and various members of the community—to determine what action should be taken to address these issues. That would be a very good thing to do. Clearly, the police will engage. I would not direct them to do that, because that is what they already do. They will engage with the community in a range of ways. The police will fully engage in a forum, if it is held, at which they can get their message across to the community and gain the community’s support. The officers in Albany give me great confidence that they will do that in a productive way. Additional assistance can be offered. The Office of Crime Prevention has a role in bringing the community together to deal with an issue such as the one outlined by the member for Albany. It can work with the police and local government to achieve that end. The Office of Crime Prevention has the expertise in environmental design that can assist in preventing these violent crimes from occurring. That office has undertaken a great deal of work on environmental design, which addresses the question of buildings, lighting, vegetation and those things that could contribute to the failure to create safe spaces. The office suggests measures to ensure that streetscapes are well lit to make them safer. The Office of Crime Prevention can bring that expertise in considering this issue. The office also engages with local government. Over 100 local authorities have signed crime prevention partnerships with the office. Unfortunately, the City of Albany has not done that. However, that does not mean that the Office of Crime Prevention cannot work with the City of Albany in suggesting street lighting that will assist in making Albany a safer place. My staff spoke to the Office of Crime Prevention this morning and it will be happy to assist the member for Albany with a community forum with a view to establishing an ongoing local arrangement. The office can provide the technical advice, assist in holding a forum and provide the facilitators to ensure that the forum will be successful. It can provide the technical advice to provide safer streetscapes in an endeavour to decrease the incidence of crime. The police will engage with the City of Albany because it is already proactive in recognising that the abuse of alcohol has been a major issue involved in the assaults and the lawlessness that attaches to that. I thank the member for Albany for his willingness to take this lead. I trust that he we will get the support of the community to engage with the City of Albany and the police, with the assistance of the Office of Crime Prevention, to tackle this problem, which is of concern to the people of Albany, in the most effective way

2206 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] possible. The member is absolutely right in saying that the whole community must understand what the problem is and how it can make a positive contribution if there is to be a marked reduction in the number of violent assaults in public places that are generally alcohol fuelled. I give an undertaking to work with the member for Albany to make inroads into what is a very serious problem. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND JUSTICE STANDING COMMITTEE — SIXTH REPORT — “INQUIRY INTO THE PROSECUTION OF ASSAULTS AND SEXUAL OFFENCES” Member for Hillarys — Extension of Time to Speak to Report — Suspension of Standing Orders MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta — Leader of the House) [10.34 am]: I move — That so much of standing orders be suspended as is necessary to allow the member for Hillarys, who was Chairman of the Community Development and Justice Standing Committee’s subcommittee undertaking an inquiry into the prosecution of assaults and sexual offences, to speak for an additional 10 minutes to the committee’s report, which will be tabled on Thursday, 10 April 2008. I will say nothing more in support of this motion because I am sure that the member will say more than enough. Question put and passed. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND JUSTICE STANDING COMMITTEE Sixth Report — “Inquiry into the Prosecution of Assaults and Sexual Offences” MR A.P. O’GORMAN (Joondalup) [10.35 am]: I present for tabling the sixth report of the Community Development and Justice Standing Committee, entitled “Inquiry into the Prosecution of Assaults and Sexual Offices”. [See paper 3794.] Mr A.P. O’GORMAN: I am pleased to present to the Legislative Assembly the sixth report of the Community Development and Justice Standing Committee in the thirty-seventh Parliament. This report finalises the committee’s inquiry into the prosecution of assaults and sexual offences, which commenced on 25 October 2006. Sexual assaults and violent crimes are issues of great concern to all Australians in all walks of life. This inquiry was initiated in the Assembly following concern expressed by the member for Hillarys about a widely publicised case involving Mr Dante Arthurs, who pleaded guilty in 2007 to the unlawful detention and murder of eight- year-old Perth girl Sofia Rodriguez-Urrutia Shu. At this point I apologise to Sofia’s family for once again bringing this case to the fore and into the public arena. It is a form of revictimisation. Unfortunately, it is the way things pan out, but, once again, I do apologise to Sofia’s family for bringing this case into public view. Hopefully, the committee’s recommendations will move some way to preventing this situation happening again in the future. The member for Hillarys was concerned that in 2003, prior to this tragic event, a police interview of Mr Dante Arthurs on an unrelated case of aggravated indecent dealing with a child under the age of 13 was deemed inadmissible. This precluded the use of the police interview by the Director of Pubic Prosecutions and led to the subsequent discontinuance of the prosecution of that case by the Director of Public Prosecutions. Therefore, this inquiry was established to review the extent to which prosecutions of sexual offences are more generally impeded by aspects of the investigatory and judicial processes that are poorly executed, as exampled in the 2003 case involving Dante Arthurs. In addition, this inquiry set out to examine the extent to which investigations and prosecutions are negatively impacted upon by the prevailing justice culture and the systems that make up the formal responses to these horrendous crimes. The inquiry, together with the report, seeks to ensure that there will not be a similar tragedy to that of Sofia in the future because of deficiencies in the Western Australian justice and investigatory systems. At this time, the precise causes of what went wrong in the 2003 investigation are still to be determined. However, the deficiencies of the police in their handling of the case shocked the committee, as they did the broader community. In particular, the committee was struck by the failure of the Western Australia Police to follow standard operating procedures in the interview, and, therefore, their failure to have a key piece of evidence forensically analysed until a cold case review was ordered by the Director of Public Prosecutions in 2007. Of course, this was after the murder of Sofia. Victims of sexual offences are clearly at the heart of this inquiry. I acknowledge and express my personal appreciation of the courage of the victims of sexual offences in coming forward and providing statements to the committee, again at the risk of being revictimised and reliving their personal traumas. Without their stories this inquiry would have been significantly less able to identify and respond to the issues surrounding the investigation and prosecution of sexual offences. The impact of sexual offences not only affects the victim, but also impacts severely upon their family. To demonstrate this, I will read an extract of a mother’s story that expresses this so well. According to my notes, this mother said —

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2207

The past 16 months have been the worst nightmare any parent could wish for. The trauma suffered by this now 16 year old beautiful girl is more than most people suffer in a lifetime. She has been diagnosed with severe depression, anxiety and stress, which in turn also caused epileptic seizures; she has been diagnosed with extreme self-harm risks by way of eating disorders and medication mis-use . . . Medically, yes he destroyed her, and there is a chance she may not be able to have children in the future, and she still suffers stomach cramps and pains for which no diagnosis can be found causing medical practitioners to assume they are ‘phantom’ or anxiety related. At night, sleep is not often welcome due to horrifying nightmares. Her safe place is home . . . nowhere else is safe, and she has no trust in anyone. This experience is not abnormal. It is worth noting that sexual assaults have the lowest reporting rate of any crime. In fact, it is estimated that only 10 percent of all sexual assault cases are reported. The reasons for this are discussed in the Community Development and Justice Standing Committee’s report. In addition, not every incident that is reported to the police results in an offender being apprehended or charged. The statistics make for dismal reading. Less than 15 percent of all cases reported to the Western Australia Police reach the Director of Public Prosecutions. Of those, 59 per cent result in a conviction. In other words, less than nine per cent of reported cases secure a conviction. Not surprisingly, some witnesses expressed a lack of confidence in the judicial system. Confidence in the judicial system is critical if offenders are to be brought to justice. It is against that background that the committee reviewed the extent to which prosecutions of sexual offenders are impeded by aspects of the investigatory and judicial process that are poorly executed. The way in which the criminal justice system handles sexual offences is a vast and controversial topic, as is the issue of adequate victim support. No single inquiry could do justice to all aspects of this topic. However, in its report the committee attempted to highlight many of the key concerns within the community, including those of the legal profession, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Western Australia Police, the general public, forensic agencies and support services. Such concerns centred on the contributing reasons for the high rate of attrition in reported cases, from the initial call to the police—if, indeed, the offence is reported at all—to the final outcome in the court. Because of the community’s lack of confidence in our systems, there is very little reporting of sexual offences. The member for Churchlands will refer to the incidence of reporting, which is based on research. Current work practices and procedures were examined by the committee in light of victims’ experiences to establish their quality and effectiveness and the degree to which—if it is possible—they have an impact on the high attrition rate in this area of major crime. In the course of this inquiry, the committee examined, among other things, all the discontinued cases of assaults and sexual offences that occurred between 2002 and 2006 for evidentiary insufficiency and/or indications of poor quality briefs from the police to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Those cases were shared among members of the committee. They were a very disturbing read, to say the least. Even more disturbing was the fact that it did not matter what walk of life the victims came from, they all seemed to feel the same thing. I refer to a case—I will not identify the victim—that involved a high- profile woman who was sexually assaulted. Because of her position in the community and her lack of trust in the system, she decided not to proceed with her case because of her perception—and the community’s perception— that if she made details of her sexual abuse public, her career would have been terminated. It is disturbing that such a strong, organised and professionally successful woman could not go forward after she was sexually assaulted. We read many accounts of children who were sexually abused but whose cases did not go forward when they were adults because they were not considered reliable witnesses. They were not considered reliable witnesses because the offence had been committed in the past and because they had blocked the sexual offence from their minds. They could not speak about the offences until they were much older. We read how the court process dealt with those people and how the investigative and justice process deals with young victims today. Things are done a little bit better now. We now have the Specialist Child Interview Unit, which involves a collaboration between the Department for Child Protection and the police. It provides a safe environment in which a young victim can be interviewed to determine exactly what happened and to get as much evidence as possible that can be presented in court. The interviews are videotaped and the tapes are played in court as primary evidence. That is a great move forward. However, is it enough? The issue is not only about charging and convicting a perpetrator; it is also about finding ways to resolve the issues that a child faces for the rest of his or her life. The quote to which I referred earlier demonstrated the trauma that victims of sexual offences go through at not only the point of the assault, but also during the investigatory and judicial process and throughout the rest of their lives. This is a huge issue. We must put supportive procedures and systems in place for those who have been the victims of sexual assault. The committee has suggested recommendations that seek to do that. Those recommendations include setting up a taskforce and directing departments to do certain things. I hope that the ministers involved take those recommendations as they are meant to be taken and implement them as quickly and as professionally as possible so that victims of sexual assault do not feel disenfranchised and so that they can overcome the offence that was committed against them, if that is possible, and get on with their lives.

2208 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

The committee examined many facets of the 2003 investigation and the subsequent discontinuance of the case against Dante Arthurs, who in 2003—prior to the Sofia case—was charged with indecent dealings with a child under 13 and the deprivation of liberty. In its review of the Dante Arthurs case, the committee reviewed the video recording of the police interviews with Dante Arthurs, including those interviews that failed to follow procedures, resulting in an inadmissible confession. The member for Hillarys will talk about this aspect of the inquiry in more detail. There was a move away from standard operating procedures. After the police discussed the case with the Director of Public Prosecutions, the DPP said that, based on the video evidence, the case would not go forward. The forensic evidence involved in the case just sat there and was not looked at until after the murder of Sofia Rodriguez-Urrutia Shu. It is shameful that the police, as well as all of us in this place, have not set up procedures to ensure that when an investigation such as this gets so far and is going to fall over, other things are in place to ensure that other items of forensic value can be investigated. The committee received 32 submissions over the course of this inquiry. The committee also undertook extensive consultation with a range of state government agencies both here in Western Australia and in Queensland and New South Wales. I thank all those agencies. Their contributions to this inquiry are greatly appreciated and acknowledged. I also thank my fellow committee members for their individual and collective contributions over the course of this inquiry. In particular, I thank the members for Churchlands, Maylands and Hillarys, who formed the subcommittee for this inquiry. I also thank the members for Carine, Geraldton, Kingsley and Roe, who are the members of the substantive committee. I thank them all for allowing us time, which was taken away from other inquiries, to conduct this inquiry. It was really good of them to do that, but I think they recognised the importance of this inquiry. I also recognise and acknowledge the significant contribution of the committee’s principal research officer, Dr Brian Gordon, and research officer, Jovita Hogan, together with that of Mr Nigel Lake, the former Clerk Assistant, who worked with us in the early months of this inquiry. Both my fellow committee members and our staff provided professional and enthusiastic support throughout this inquiry. I thank all those people for their invaluable assistance in the preparation of this report. I also thank some of my other colleagues in this place and my family. I had great difficulty dealing with some of the issues detailed in this report and I know I was probably not the best person to live or work with at times. I thank all those people for helping me to get through this report. I hope that we have brought down a number of recommendations that will help us to move forward and make the experience a little better, at the very least, for the victims of sexual assault. The committee has made 37 recommendations for the reform of the criminal justice system and associated processes in the state of Western Australia. These recommendations are, in our opinion, both far-reaching and significant. One recommendation is to overturn a long-held practice of our criminal justice system; that is, the right to remain silent. That is one of the most significant parts of this report in detailing how we can move forward in dealing with these cases. If adopted, this recommendation would prevent a perpetrator from bringing something up much later that was not volunteered during the initial interview process. It is a very significant move away from how law has been practised both in this state and throughout the commonwealth. It would significantly move forward the criminal justice system in Western Australia. The report contains many other recommendations and I am sure that the committee members who will speak after me will allude to them. I recommend that all members take time to read this report and that the ministers who will need to respond to the report do so in an expedient fashion. I also hope that, once they have dissected the report, they will implement the recommendations as quickly as possible. MR R.F. JOHNSON (Hillarys) [10.53 am]: In 2006 I was specifically concerned about initiating the inquiry that is the subject of the report before the house today. I wanted to set up a select committee whose membership would include me, as an opposition member, as well as a Labor member and an Independent member. I specifically asked the member for Maylands whether she would be prepared to serve on this inquiry, which was a very sensitive one. I also asked the member for Churchlands the same question, because I wanted two members on that committee, along with me, who I thought represented a tremendous amount of parliamentary experience. We did not form a select committee. The Leader of the House said that the inquiry had to go before the main committee. I accepted that. We then became a subcommittee of that main committee. I thank the members for Maylands and Churchlands for agreeing to be part of that subcommittee. I also thank the chairman of the main committee, the member for Joondalup, and the deputy chair, the member for Carine. The committee worked extremely well. I thank each and every member of the committee for agreeing to take part in this important inquiry. I also thank our principal research officer, Dr Brian Gordon, and our research officer, Ms Jovita Hogan, who played a very important part in the committee and did a tremendous amount of work. On the day in 2006 when the tragic news broke of the brutal murder of an eight-year-old girl, Sofia Rodriguez- Urrutia Shu, I, along with, I would suggest, every Western Australian, was not only shocked but also tremendously saddened. Tremendous sadness certainly overcame me, and I am sure every Western Australian felt the same. For parents to lose a child in those circumstances would be every person’s worst nightmare. For me, and I suggest for many other people, that feeling of sadness later became a feeling of anger, because it became known that the monster who murdered Sofia—Dante Wyndham Arthurs—had attacked another young

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2209 girl two and a half years prior to the attack on Sofia. That anger mounted, because the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions had decided to not continue with the prosecution of Dante Wyndham Arthurs for that earlier assault. My initial anger was with the office of the DPP. I wanted to know why it did not proceed with that prosecution. The DPP himself, Robert Cock, explained to me that it was because of the techniques used in the video interview of Dante Wyndham Arthurs in 2003, which he believed made that interview inadmissible as evidence. The DPP himself offered me an opportunity to have a copy of the transcript of that interview. He also later offered me the file notes from the DPP prosecutors who made the decision to not prosecute that case. I went through the transcript in great detail and looked at all the file notes. The office of the DPP said that it would not prosecute the case because normal procedures and protocols were not followed in that interview. When the two detectives who interviewed Dante Wyndham Arthurs were halfway through the interview, they thought the video recorder was not working. The detectives neglected to remind Dante Wyndham Arthurs that he was still under caution and that he did not have to say anything if he did not wish to. They continued to interview him. That is not a crime, but it is not the normal, accepted protocol. The other reason given by the prosecutors of the DPP was that they felt that the two detectives had overborne the suspected offender, Dante Wyndham Arthurs, and therefore the interview was not admissible. I have to say that on reading the transcript I did not share that view. When the subcommittee was eventually set up, it had the opportunity to look at the actual video interview. I accept completely that normal procedures were not adhered to. That was a very big mistake on the part of the police officers who took part in that interview. At the end of the day, I must say that I think the police were rigorous in the interview, rather than unduly overbearing. I know some other members of the committee feel the same way I do. Notwithstanding that, the interview procedure was the reason the Director of Public Prosecutions decided not to prosecute. I must also say that the prosecutor’s file notes indicate that he wavered from one side to the other about whether he should recommend against continuing the prosecution. At the end of the day, another prosecutor said that the prosecution should probably not continue. I think that was a mistake and that the DPP should not act as judge and jury in a case as serious as an alleged sexual assault of a young child. I know that other committee members believe, as I do, that the case should have gone to court for a judge to decide whether the interview could be admitted as evidence. When something dreadful happens, everybody looks for someone to blame. In many respects I would suggest that both camps share the blame. The police can be blamed for the way they conducted the interview; for the fact that they did not follow the normal protocols. The DPP also has some blame for not going further with the prosecution and allowing a judge to decide what evidence was admissible. I agree with the member for Joondalup that the biggest, most tragic mistake the police made was to not send all the forensic evidence they had gathered to the forensic analysis department. Had they done so, the shorts that Dante Arthurs wore on the day of the assault of the other young girl in 2003 would have shown blood from that young girl. That evidence would have been enough to allow the prosecution to continue. I dare say that it would have been a very successful prosecution. We have seen some tragic incidents result in what I believe was the unnecessary death of a precious child—a tragedy for a wonderful family and the people of Western Australia generally. I do not look to assign blame today because the clock cannot be turned back; we cannot undo what has been done. The reason I was so adamant that a parliamentary committee should conduct an inquiry of this nature was that I did not want a similar situation to happen again. I knew that the members who would help form the committee, and I suggest most Western Australians, would also not want a similar situation to happen again. We do not want another tragic death, particularly of a young person—an innocent child—in these circumstances and decisions to be made not to prosecute. The committee spent a lot of time on that matter. I should also say that the committee received some independent legal advice about whether the video recording of that interview was lawful, whether the interview followed normal procedure and whether the interview should have gone to court. The independent legal adviser said that he believed there was a prima facie case and a judge should have decided whether the interview was admissible evidence. That really clears up, if I can put it that way, the tragic events—and there were many of them—that resulted in the DPP’s decision not to prosecute Dante Arthurs in 2004, when the DPP stopped the case. One can speculate that if the prosecution had proceeded and if the forensic evidence had been sent to the forensic department for analysis, Dante Arthurs would have been found guilty, because there was forensic evidence to back up the charge, even though the interview technique used was inappropriate. One can then speculate whether the tragic death of Sofia in 2006 would have occurred. I have some sympathy for the police in some cases, particularly in sexual assault cases, when they try to interview suspects who act dumb, do not want to answer questions or tell outright lies. One recommendation in the Community Development and Justice Standing Committee’s sixth report deals with this scenario. I sincerely hope that the Attorney General, the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, the Premier, the government as a whole, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Western Australia Police will act on the recommendations that the committee has put forward in its report. I think those recommendations are very, very good. I believe, and I know the committee believes, that those recommendations will go some way towards alleviating the problems we have seen in the past. Finding 16 of the report is quite clear about what the legal system can do

2210 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] about the situation in which police interview a suspect who, as I said, sits there dumb, tells lies or does not want to say anything. It states — The right to silence when questioned by police is understood by the general public to be a universal fundamental of Anglo Saxon law. In Australia, the common law right to remain silent is broadly recognised by State and Federal Crimes Acts and Codes. However notwithstanding the right to silence, in a number of overseas jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, the court or jury is specifically permitted to draw strong adverse inferences where the accused person did not provide certain information to police when asked to do so. This applies when the accused fails, when questioned (under caution, charged, or officially informed that he or she might be prosecuted) to mention a fact later relied on in defence, which he or she could reasonably have been expected to mention when questioned. This is known as the PACE legislation—the Police and Criminal Evidence Act—which was introduced in the United Kingdom to overcome circumstances in which an accused person interviewed by the police says nothing but then introduces an alibi for that night and other factors once the case gets to court. The beauty of this legislation is that if a suspect when first interviewed does not bring up something that could be relied on later in court, that can be seen as an adverse aspect from the jury’s perspective. It works in England. I know the Commissioner of Police is in favour of this legislation, but, of course, he cannot do anything unless the Attorney General introduces the appropriate legislation. It is one of the recommendations in the report and I urge the Attorney General to introduce that legislation as soon as possible to deal with somebody who remains silent. Mr J.A. McGinty: The adverse inference. Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Yes, the adverse inference. I think it is absolutely essential law and it has worked in the United Kingdom and other jurisdictions. I think we are running behind the eight ball here. Mr J.A. McGinty: Is that a recommendation in the report? Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Yes, it is indeed a recommendation in the report. It is a very, very urgent recommendation from the committee’s point of view. I suggest that most of the recommendations are urgent, but this is particularly urgent. It would overcome the problems that detectives and other police officers sometimes have when they interview suspects who say nothing or “no comment” and remain silent. It makes the job much harder for the police. Their job would be easier if this PACE-style legislation was introduced to ensure that they could still continue with the prosecution and that those offenders could not bring in information that they did not introduce during the interview. The committee has suggested in other recommendations in this report that a prosecutor from the office of the DPP should take a more active role in the interviewing of suspects of serious crimes. Obviously, a serious crime would be when an adult sexually assaulted a child. I do not think that, short of murdering a child, there is any bodily harm more serious to a young child than a serious sexual offence by an adult. Obviously, there are funding obligations, but in the United Kingdom a Crown prosecutor is very often assigned to a large police station to oversee the interviewing of suspects. In a way, this is a bit like an insurance policy, because they can inform the officers who are interviewing the suspect not to go down a certain path because it would not be admissible evidence. These prosecutors can often advise police investigators what points they should bring out and what they should try to cover. That happens in the United Kingdom. They often have two-way mirrors so that prosecutors can watch the interview. We have recommended that either that happen or at least a senior police officer with legal experience observe what is happening in a police interview. I do not think the police would have any problem with that, because it would simply make them more accountable and transparent, and I think the police would welcome that recommendation from the committee. The committee took the opportunity to go to Queensland and New South Wales to see how the police, and in particular their sexual assault units, operate. We also went to the Offices of the Directors of Public Prosecutions in both those jurisdictions to see how they operate. There is a much more cogent line of communication from the police to the ODPP in those states than we have at the moment. The Director of Public Prosecutions in Western Australia is looking at installing a computerised information technology system whereby information will be much more readily available, and I know that the Attorney General has in fact made that funding available. We are recommending more than that; we are recommending that there be a trail from the police department that goes all the way through the IT system to the office of the DPP so that it can follow up immediately to see where the police have got to. The DPP will be able to monitor those cases. In Western Australia a lot of cases are taking far too long to get before the court, and this is very often because there are delays by criminal justice lawyers who keep asking for different information, and sometimes it is not the same DPP lawyer who takes the case to court. We would like that to be avoided as much as possible. There should be a clear trail of all the evidence, including the forensic evidence, where the forensic evidence is and a description of that evidence. If that had happened in 2003 in the original Dante Arthurs case of serious sexual assault against a young girl, and if that forensic evidence had been logged properly by the police, when the DPP came to look at all the evidence that the police had obtained, he would have seen that there was a pair of shorts there. The police were at fault for not

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2211 doing that. However, under our recommendations, I believe that that trail of forensic evidence, interview evidence and witness evidence would all go from the police to the DPP, and one would hope that that would result in a successful outcome for justice in Western Australia. The problem with the court system at the moment is that it is taking too long for many cases to get before the court. Justice delayed is justice denied, and I think that has been the situation in many cases. I want to reiterate the comments that the member for Joondalup made. The committee spent hours—probably hundreds of hours—going through a lot of evidence that the DPP gave us about many sexual assault cases. I know that every member of the committee had his or her own terrifying experience, if I can put it that way, when looking at some of the tragic cases that have occurred in Western Australia. These are cases that will not necessarily be before the courts now. We looked in particular at cases that have been discontinued; however, some of those cases have gone through the courts. It was a very harrowing time. However, at the end of the day, I believe that if these recommendations are accepted by the government and the departments, they will go a long way to ensuring that justice is done more appropriately in Western Australia and that victims, in particular, are protected more and given the support and assistance that they need, particularly in cases of sexual assault. I certainly commend the report to the house. MS K. HODSON-THOMAS (Carine) [11.14 am]: I rise to speak to report 6 of the Community Development and Justice Standing Committee on its inquiry into the prosecution of assaults and sexual offences. As has already been stated, the inquiry commenced on 25 October 2006. The subject matter of this investigation was, without doubt, the most confronting that I have dealt with during my membership of the standing committee. Early in the inquiry, much of the written material that we were provided with was very distressing and incredibly heart-wrenching, particularly that involving cases against children. A sexual assault on a child or an adult is a horrendous act, and it was very difficult to remain unaffected, dispassionate and clinical throughout the course of the inquiry. As others have already indicated, the genesis of this inquiry was a motion moved in the Parliament by the member for Hillarys, and consequently a subcommittee was formed under the umbrella of our standing committee. In my mind, that was not the most ideal set of circumstances in which to run the investigation, as the Community Development and Justice Standing Committee proper had other inquiries running parallel to this inquiry. As the deputy chairman, I felt it was important to be part of this inquiry, and I felt at that time that a better way to manage the inquiry would have been to coopt all three members—the member for Hillarys, the member for Maylands and the member for Churchlands—to the substantive committee, with full voting rights, for the duration of the inquiry. The member for Hillarys, the member for Churchlands and the member for Maylands were absolutely diligent in and dedicated to this inquiry and its investigation. I would also like to commend them for their hard work during this investigation, and add that the committee structure enables us to put our political hats aside and work in a bipartisan way. There are 40 findings, two committee comments and 37 recommendations for which ministerial responses are sought from the Premier, the Attorney General, the Minister for Health, the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, the Minister for Indigenous Affairs and the Minister for Child Protection. I implore anyone who has an interest in this area of criminal justice to take the time to look beyond just the findings and recommendations and to read the report in its entirety. I thank our principal research officer, Dr Brian Gordon, and our research officer, Jovita Hogan, for their energy, professionalism and hard work. I also take the opportunity to praise the men and women who work in this area of criminal justice, whether they work in the area of policing, the Sexual Assault Resource Centre, victim support services, forensic services, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the legal profession or others. During our investigation, the committee examined what are obvious gaps in this field, and our report is intended to deliver better outcomes to address those gaps. I believe that the findings and recommendations address the gaps, given the information we were privy to. It is indeed a very complex area, and, as the chair’s foreword states, “enabling victims to have confidence in the criminal justice process is critical if offenders are to be brought to justice”. I will focus my address on a few findings and recommendations. The first of those findings are findings 3, 4 and 5, which relate to the low rate of reporting and the high attrition rate in the investigative stage, and the perceptions of shortcomings in police investigations. Finding 3 states — There is a low rate of reporting (10%) of sexual offences. On the Committee’s data only 1% of all alleged sexual assaults (both reported and unreported) result in conviction. This stems in large part from perceptions of the justice system, a fact confirmed through national and international research and reinforced to the Committee by testimony of witnesses who felt let down by the legal process. Finding 4 states — a) There is a significant attrition rate in the period between the reporting of a sexual offence and the offence being tried in a court of law. b) Re-victimisation during the process is one of the reasons why victims/complainants withdraw at the investigative stage.

2212 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

Lastly, finding 5 states — There are broad based community perceptions of shortcomings in the police investigatory approach to cases of sexual assault. Such perceptions are shared by members of the legal profession. This is often attributable to a lack of investigatory interest by the police in sexual offences where the alleged perpetrator may be known to the victim. The Australian Institute of Criminology research shows that sexual assault is less likely than any other type of violence to be reported to law enforcement agencies. From both research and our investigation we learnt that only a minority of victims report sexual offences to the police. Chapter 3 of the report deals with non-reporting and the attitudes, barriers and perceptions of the justice system. Chapter 4 deals with the attrition of the complaint investigation and prosecution process. These were all matters I felt were very important in understanding why victims were reluctant to come forward and report the offence to the police in the first instance. The perceived lack of interest by police in investigating the matter contributes to a victim’s reluctance to pursue the matter further. Issues of police workload and pressure certainly add to this negative outcome. Recommendation 4 calls on the Western Australia Police, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Sexual Assault Resource Centre, the Victim Support and Child Witness Service, the Office of the Public Advocate and the courts to design reliable and valid victim satisfaction instruments appropriate for each agency. The results must be published in each agency’s annual report or equivalent. The members of the committee are calling on the government to look at that very seriously. The United Kingdom has run a number of pilot programs to examine why victims, or complainants, withdraw from the judicial process. We should certainly pursue this matter further to identify any deficiencies with the long-term objective of delivering better outcomes. I refer now to disparity in the area of criminal justice in regional Western Australia. It is simply not good enough for there to be inequities in criminal justice between regions and the metropolitan area. Page 176 of the report examines the gaps in policy and practice in regional Western Australia and acknowledges what the geography of our vast state means to communities in remote or regional parts of the state for existing services. We heard during our visit to Queensland that the Queensland Director of Public Prosecutions had introduced a chambers system to address the problems arising from the tyranny of distance. I acknowledge that the Western Australian Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has endeavoured to address the needs of some Indigenous communities and established a Kalgoorlie pilot program in April 2004. That pilot program is described on page 177 of our report. I realise that I am running out of time. In closing, I refer to recommendation 36, which calls on the Attorney General to ensure that funds are available to extend the Kalgoorlie project and to implement the chambers model in selected regional areas, commencing in Broome. On page 19 of its 2006 annual report the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions discusses development policy for the Kalgoorlie pilot program. I recommend that members take the time to find out more about that program and that it be implemented in the first instance in Broome, particularly in light of the growing number of sexual assault cases that are occurring in the Kimberley. DR J.M. EDWARDS (Maylands) [11.23 am]: I too rise to support and commend this report to the house. Of all the reports and activities I have been involved in over many years, this has been, emotionally, the most challenging issue I have had to deal with. I commend the members of the subcommittee, particularly the member for Hillarys and the member for Churchlands, for the way they embraced this task. I also thank the members who served on the substantive committee, our chair, the member for Joondalup, and the member for Carine, who contributed everything to this report. The findings and recommendations in this report are, in part, very controversial in my view. I hope they get the attention they merit because this area is so serious and some of the deficiencies we have identified are so severe and profound that they need some controversial recommendations to make sure that we as members of Parliament set out a better way forward. From the outset, I thank the victims and complainants in this area who so willingly, often under greatly difficult emotional circumstances, shared their stories and views openly with us. Underpinning all of this is that, according to the committee’s information, only one per cent of alleged sexual offences are ever seen through totally to result in a conviction. Yes, there continues to be problems in the community with people being sexually assaulted and deciding not to report it to anyone. Even when they get into the system, to a very large extent, they are being failed. That is something for which we all need to share the shame and make sure that, as a Parliament, we continue to pressure government to get better responses for these victims. In the short time I have available to me, I will touch on two things that I, as a member of this subcommittee, found very disturbing in examining this area. They are disturbing in two different ways, both of which are equally important. The first thing I found disturbing was that I left the subcommittee with a very strong impression that some of the services are less responsive now in 2008 than they used to be. I base this comment on the fact that 20 years ago, for a number of years I worked in the area of sexual assault as a medical practitioner who, at times, ended up in the courts as an expert witness. I also worked as a member of a team, and

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2213 for a year I was the part-time job-sharing coordinator of what was the Sexual Assault Referral Centre, now the Sexual Assault Resource Centre. I have some old, nonetheless valuable, expertise in that area. I am a former medical practitioner who dealt with literally hundreds of cases. In bringing up that number I spent many hours on call and working in the area. I obviously have biases, both as a mother and a woman, but my strong impression, with my biases up-front, is that since I have worked in the area, things have moved on but, in some ways, the system in the past was more responsive than it is today. With respect to urgent cases, we heard from a number of victims and complainants that the system had not responded to them in the way it should. We also heard from people from the country and people who provide services to victims in the country that the system continues to let people down, particularly with respect to urgent medical and forensic examinations. As a doctor practising more than 20 years ago, on a number of occasions in the middle of the night I walked other doctors through how to collect forensic evidence; the system was in place to overcome that problem. Having made those criticisms, I acknowledge that things have vastly improved in a number of ways. The police receptiveness to the crime of sexual assault has improved vastly in my view. I was impressed with the fact that police take this seriously in a way that they did not 20 years ago and that, in some ways, some of the complaints we received resulted because the police were responding, even if they were flicking them upstairs to the DPP when perhaps more attention could have been paid to some of the detail. Praise should go also to people who work in the area of sexual abuse of children. We now see a better response to that problem than we ever did before. None of the comments I make takes anything away from the people who work in the area. It is an extremely difficult area to work in and I commend all the people who do so. As the member for Carine said, a couple of recommendations relate to victim and witness assistance. I ask the government to urgently implement recommendation 21 and establish a victim and witness assistance service team in the office of the DPP; and recommendation 26 so that the Department of Health makes available a victim support officer to help people who have been sexually assaulted interact with health services. The second very disturbing issue is the case of Sofia Rodriguez-Urrutia Shu. Other members alluded to this case. I apologise to Sofia’s family for raising this case again but we needed to because we were so profoundly shocked and moved by her murder and because the case underpins some of our controversial recommendations. Sadly, there will always be doubt in my mind. If the system had responded in a better way in 2003—knowing that hindsight can be a very dangerous thing—perhaps a brutal murder may have been averted. Like everyone else on the committee, I was extremely disturbed to see the police interviews. However, I parted company with other members of the committee because of my bias and sympathy for the police who broke with procedures and went against their standard operating protocols. I believed that they had picked up something about the seriousness of the case and what was involved. Some recommendations flow directly from this case, such as the need to look at better police training, particularly specialised training. I call on the government to implement that recommendation. The controversial area is contained in finding 16, which relates to the universal right to remain silent. In recommendation 14 we ask the Attorney General to implement changes to bring the principles of the United Kingdom’s Police and Criminal Evidence Act into Western Australia. That will be very controversial. I really had to think about whether I could agree to such a recommendation. The system needs a very good shake to better respond to victims in this area. Similarly, we made a less powerful finding and recommendation relating to the whole area of what might be called therapeutic approaches to jurisprudence. In some ways the slip-up by the police in 2003 was an intuitive thing. Certain police officers felt as if the offender they were interviewing at the time had done something serious. That intervention was needed, whether by way of counselling through to severe punishment, but the police acted wrongly. I am not being critical of anything that the DPP did, but we need to find a better way forward for the victims in this area. We made findings and recommendations about therapeutic approaches to jurisprudence, recommending that there does need to be punishment while pointing out the tension that can exist. We are asking the Attorney General to look at that issue in depth in a way that we could not. My time is about to expire. In closing, I thank the chair, the other committee members and, in particular, our principal research officer, Dr Brian Gordon, and research officer Jovita Hogan. Above all, I want to thank the people who came forward and shared their stories. Without their emotion touching each and every one of us, we would not have this report and these controversial recommendations. DR E. CONSTABLE (Churchlands) [11.34 am]: I wish to add some comments to those made by my colleagues on this inquiry. It is quite difficult being the last speaker because I will no doubt repeat some of the things that have already been said. In this case, repetition is really important. Firstly, it will reinforce the issues that we all have found to be extremely important and, secondly, perhaps it will direct the Attorney General—and wearing his other hat of Minister for Health—and the Minister for Police and Emergency Services to address some of the things that we found very important. I am glad that the Minister for Police has returned to the chamber, at least at the end of the debate on this report. I do not see a copy of the report on his desk but I hope that he gets one very soon and looks at the recommendations that apply to his portfolio.

2214 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

Mr J.C. Kobelke: I have already done that. Dr E. CONSTABLE: I am very pleased to hear that. I too found this a very difficult inquiry. I have been involved in quite a number of committees over the past 17 years. This is by far the most difficult inquiry that I have been involved in. I thank the other members of the committee—the members for Joondalup, Hillarys, Carine and Maylands. It was very important to have some mutual support, especially when we took evidence from victims of sexual assault, from colleagues so that we could share and discuss those experiences. The committee worked incredibly well together. I would also like to thank the staff—Brian Gordon, the senior research officer, and Jovita Hogan, our research officer. They put in a great deal of work over the past 18 months in supporting us. We certainly could not have produced this report without their support. Eighteen months is a long time for an inquiry. Many things developed over those 18 months. By taking evidence from some major players in government agencies, such as the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Commissioner of Police and the Deputy Commissioner of Police, early on and then speaking to them at the end of the inquiry, the inquiry already started to have some effect on the thinking of those people. In the end, in many ways they found us supportive of the things that they found frustrating in their daily work. As was mentioned, the committee made 40 findings and 37 recommendations. I ask every member of this house to read those findings and recommendations and update their knowledge in this area. We tried to tackle a vast and controversial subject. At the end of the day, we covered a great deal of information in many areas. There are probably some areas that we did not cover as well as we would have liked. There are some very powerful recommendations. The inquiry was very long and difficult because the subject of sexual assaults and sexual offences covers so many different portfolios and government agencies. They tend to act quite separately in many ways. There are some recommendations in the report that ask those agencies to work closely together. For instance, we have recommended that a common case numbering system be implemented so that agencies can talk to each other via modern technology and share information. That would make a huge difference as they all seem to have different systems that do not match and it is often very difficult to look at a particular case. For instance, the Attorney General, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Minister for Health, the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, the Minister for Child Protection, the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, the Sexual Assault Resource Centre, the child protection unit, Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, PathWest and other agencies are involved. A number of the recommendations ask them to work more closely together. The committee suggested that the office of the Premier coordinate the effort of getting those people and agencies to work together on certain issues. I will not go into all those recommendations now. Last year I visited New South Wales and had a meeting with officials from the Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care. It was conducting an interdepartmental study that is now complete. The police, the Department of Health and the department of ageing worked together. By having another agency such as the Premier’s office coordinating their efforts, they came together and are now working really well together. At least four recommendations of the committee recommend that the Premier’s office coordinate the effort for those agencies to get together, solve some of the issues and work in a more streamlined fashion. I will not go into the details of those recommendations at this point. Another reason this was a long and difficult inquiry relates to the nature of sexual assault itself. Often the perpetrator is known to the victim, or a child victim has been assaulted by a member of his or her family. Within that family, people often do not know where to go and they are frightened, and often those crimes go unreported. In such crimes, it is often very difficult to gather information and evidence and there are often delays in the investigation process, which may result in the victim withdrawing the complaint. It is often very difficult to gather sufficient evidence for the Director of Public Prosecutions to take a case forward to the courts, and victims withdraw from the process because of what they describe to us in graphic detail as revictimisation. From the moment a person reports the assault to the police, he or she moves into this new area of revictimisation. A victim might ring the police one day, tell her story, give a statement, and then the next time she contacts the police—because she had not been contacted—it is another police officer that she has to repeat that story to. Many victims have to repeat the same story and they feel revictimised by the system from the very beginning, let alone after getting into the court system. Along the way there are many points at which a victim is likely to withdraw. I am concerned about how many cases of sexual assaults occur and how few end up with a conviction. I quote a report from the Community Development and Justice Standing Committee, page 136, section 6.4, “Victim support and Indigenous communities”— Fergusson and Mullen suggest that the incidence of sexual assault is one in three women and one in six men in the mainstream population.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2215

Thirty three per cent of women and 16 per cent of men—that is extraordinary; absolutely extraordinary — The Sexual Assault Resource Centre reports that “from communications with both medical practitioners and indigenous community health workers in the north of Western Australia, the incidence of sexual violence in some regional and remote communities is much higher than Fergusson and Mullen suggest.” In some areas in our state it is even higher than those horrific figures of one in three women and one in six men — This is also articulated in the Gordon Inquiry 2002 Report. We start off with a huge number of crimes being committed. When we work our way down through that, we find that nine per cent of cases reported to the police end up with a conviction and, overall, that is one per cent of all sexual assault offences. That is an appalling record and we have to do something about it. I hope that cross- government agencies will work together to improve this situation so that more victims feel that they are well supported by the system and that more culprits, more of these hideous people that commit these crimes, will end up being punished for those crimes.

ROAD TRAFFIC AMENDMENT BILL 2008 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Mr J.C. Kobelke (Minister for Community Safety), and read a first time. Explanatory memorandum presented by the minister. Second Reading MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta — Minister for Community Safety) [11.43 am]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. Following a horror start to the state’s 2008 road toll, the Premier announced in February a number of penalty changes and road safety initiatives that could be introduced in the short term. We committed to implementing these changes within six months of their announcement. We have already implemented regulatory changes to penalties for speeding drivers, people not wearing seatbelts and people driving while using hand-held mobile phones. They came into effect on March 30. This bill will give effect to the announced anti-hoon and reckless driving penalties. A total of 2 274 drivers have had their vehicles impounded under the state’s current hoon laws, which were introduced in September 2004 and further expanded in 2007. So far in 2008 we have seen 356 vehicles impounded for 48 hours. Unfortunately, there are people who continue to fail to take responsibility for their own actions and endanger the lives of themselves, their passengers and other road users, and that is why we are now strengthening these laws even further. The bill contains amendments that will increase the effectiveness of the government’s antihoon laws. In this regard the bill will — increase the period of time a police officer may impound a vehicle used in the commission of an “impounding offence (driving)” from 48 hours to seven days for a first offence and 28 days for a second and subsequent offence; extend the definition of “road rage circumstances” to include places other than a road, such as car parks and private property; and amend vehicle confiscation provisions as they relate to both hoon and road rage offences so that where an application is made by police to have a vehicle confiscated, a court may order the impounding of the vehicle for a period of up to six months as an alternative to confiscation. Currently, when a police application for confiscation is unsuccessful, there is no avenue for the court to order the impounding of the vehicle instead. To target those drivers who speed excessively, this bill also increases the court imposed fines for reckless driving, which includes exceeding the speed limit by 45 kilometres an hour or more. The fines will increase from $1 000 to $2 000 for a first offence, from $1 200 to $3 000 for a second offence and from $2 400 to $4 000 for a third and subsequent offence. This bill also includes the first of the initiatives arising from the government’s repeat drink-driving strategy; namely, vehicle sanctions for certain types of unauthorised driving. The repeat drink-driving strategy will provide that drivers convicted of certain drink-driving offences will be able to regain authorisation to drive subject to the condition that they drive vehicles fitted with alcohol interlock devices only. While the interlock scheme is not part of this bill, in preparation for this, the amendments in this bill will provide a strong deterrent to unauthorised driving.

2216 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

In this regard the bill broadens the definition of an “impounding offence (driver’s licence)” so that a person will commit such an offence if he or she is driving unauthorised because — the Director General of the Department for Planning and Infrastructure has suspended, cancelled or refused to issue or renew the person’s driver’s licence in any circumstance; a court has imposed a licence disqualification upon the person; the person’s licence is subject to a disqualification because of the accumulation of an excessive number of demerit points; or the person has an extraordinary licence and is driving contrary to a licence condition relating to that licence. The bill also increases the period of impoundment by police for this offence from 48 hours to 28 days. There is concern that a large number of people who have lost their drivers’ licences continue to drive on our roads. Police will now have, in addition to the existing sanctions, the ability to impound the vehicle being driven by these unlicensed drivers for 28 days. These changes to the government’s antihoon laws and the introduction of vehicle sanctions for certain types of unauthorised driving should be a strong warning to all Western Australian road users. Driving comes with responsibilities and all WA road users need to adhere to the laws to ensure that their actions are not endangering themselves, their passengers or other road users. What may appear to be a brief moment of fun for some can lead to lifelong consequences, if not fatal consequences, for those breaking the law or, worse still, for innocent people who end up in the wrong place at the wrong time. Drivers who choose to abide by the law have nothing to fear from these new laws and penalties. I hope the Liberal Party will help to expedite the passage of this bill both here and in the other place so that these tougher provisions will be available to police to assist their efforts to make our roads safer. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Mr A.J. Simpson. EMPLOYMENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION BILL 2007 Returned Bill returned from the Council with an amendment. CASINO (BURSWOOD ISLAND) AGREEMENT AMENDMENT BILL 2007 Second Reading Resumed from 9 April. MR A.J. SIMPSON (Serpentine-Jarrahdale) [11.50 am]: In continuing my contribution to the second reading debate on the Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Amendment Bill 2007, I would like to set the record straight. Some members have referred to my anti-gambling stance. I am not anti-gambling, but I believe that we must take a role in protecting people from the ills of gambling. Last night after Parliament rose, I had the opportunity, along with the member for Alfred Cove, to visit Burswood Casino. We met with Michael Egan, Pam and Lauren. Pam is a social worker and Lauren is a psychologist and they work for the Burswood Casino. They took us through their responsible gambling program. It is a very good system. This bill is about increasing the funding that comes from Burswood Casino for the maintenance of the Swan River. I will provide members with some information on Australia’s casinos. Australia’s first casino opened in Tasmania in 1973. The opening of Wrest Point Hotel Casino on 10 February 1973 in Hobart marked the beginning of massive expansion of Australia’s gambling industry. The development of a casino was the subject of a referendum conducted before an act of Parliament was passed in 1968. The referendum proposal was successful by a slim majority, with 53 per cent of voters in favour of the development. The next two casinos to open in Australia were in the Northern Territory: Skycity Casino in Darwin in 1979 and Lasseters Hotel Casino in Alice Spring in 1981. At that time casinos were seen as a major tourist attraction for these more remote locations. Other states soon formed the view that establishing casinos would stimulate tourism and create economic growth. That began a process of extensive planning and public consultation that lasted for a number of years. In 1985 casinos were opened in Western Australia, South Australia and Queensland. New South Wales and Victoria remained opposed to opening casinos at that time. An inquiry in 1977 found that New South Wales did not need casinos to aid in the development of tourism or entertainment centres. It found that casinos would seriously damage the viability of registered clubs and their poker machines. It was not until December 1994 that New South Wales got its first casino—Star City Casino. The last casino to open in Australia was, of course, Crown Casino in Melbourne, which opened in May 1997. Today every state and territory has at least one casino

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2217 within its jurisdiction. In total there are 13 casinos in Australia, all of which are the subject of state government regulation. In addition to casino gaming, the expansion of electronic gaming machines has had a significant impact on the size of Australia’s gambling industry. There has also been a significant increase in the number of race meetings and lotteries in the past three decades. In 1972-73 Australians spent, or one could say lost, a total of $3 billion on gambling. By 2004-05 that figure had increased more than fivefold, with Australians spending more than $16 billion on gambling in that financial year. This rapid expansion was the result of the increased accessibility and convenience of gambling. Market forces have played an important part in this development. The traditionally government-run gambling operations—TAB and lotteries—have moved into private hands. As a result, large corporations control the gambling market through combined ownership of major casinos and other forms of gambling. Widespread advertising and promotion has also helped to shape public opinion about gambling. The overall result has been the rapid growth of the industry over a 30-year period, with the most significant growth in the past 10 to 15 years. The industry continues to grow. Until 1972 the Australian gambling industry was predominantly made up of racing-related activities. In 1972-73, 84 per cent of all money spent on gambling in Western Australia was spent on racing. However, the advent of gaming, through casinos and lotteries, has led to a significant change in the market share for racing. In 2003-04 racing expenditure made up just 26 per cent of the market in Western Australia. The proliferation of electronic gaming machines in other states has had an even more profound impact on the market share for racing. Today racing expenditure accounts for just 12.5 per cent of total gambling expenditure across Australia. Despite this decline in the traditional racing industry, the Spring Racing Carnival remains a symbolic feature of Australia’s gambling culture. The public acceptance of gambling is evidenced by the ongoing popularity of the Spring Racing Carnival and the Melbourne Cup. Colloquially known as “the race that stops a nation”, the Melbourne Cup race, run on the first Tuesday in November every year, is a constant reminder of Australia’s interest in racing, and gambling more generally. The race has been run every year since 1861. Public interest in this event has grown over time, largely due to increased prize money, interest in off-track festivities, such as fashion parades, and participation in office sweepstakes. It was estimated that 80 per cent of Australian adults bet on the 2000 Melbourne Cup. For many people, the Melbourne Cup is one of the few times they gamble throughout the year. While gambling is regarded as an acceptable recreational activity, for some people it can become a problem. Today it is estimated that approximately two per cent of adults are problem gamblers. Gambling addiction affects not only addicts, but also their family and friends. For every person who experiences gambling problems, at least five other people are affected. Using these estimates, as many at 1.5 million Australians are adversely affected by problem gambling. In 1999 the Productivity Commission undertook the most comprehensive survey of Australia’s gambling industry. The survey found that seven per cent of people believe that gambling did more harm than good. This finding could reflect the fact that most people know of someone who has had problems with gambling or have witnessed first-hand the adverse effect it has had on lives. Any public debate about problem gambling will inevitably turn into a discussion about what many people consider to be the most insidious form of gambling; that is, poker machines. Poker machines have been given a variety of colourful names, including fruit machines and one-arm bandits. At last count there were more than 185 000 electronic gambling machines across Australia. Of these, more than 100 000 are found in the birthplace of poker machines; that is, New South Wales. Considering that most other states did not introduce electronic gambling machines until the early 1990s, their growth rate has been exceptional. The growth rate of electronic gambling machines has far exceeded Australia’s population growth. It might be assumed that the expansion of the electronic gambling machine industry is the result of increases in demand. However, the Productivity Commission’s survey found that this was far from the case. It found that 92 per cent of people surveyed did not want to see any more increases in the number of electronic gambling machines. These machines are regarded by many people to be antisocial and highly addictive. The latter factor might explain why Australians spent a staggering $9.5 billion, or 59 per cent of all gambling expenditure, on electronic gambling machines in 2003-04. Today the public perception of poker machines is in stark contrast to that which pervaded New South Wales during the 1920s and 1930s. Perhaps some of the excitement of the illegal gambling culture is missing from today’s highly commercialised and highly regulated industry. Gambling is big business and state governments are heavily reliant on gambling revenue. The industry has grown so fast that there has been little time to analyse the costs and benefits of that growth. Over the past decade the average increase in gambling expenditure has been 8.01 per cent. In 1993-94 a little over $9 billion was spent on gambling and in 2003-04 that figure was more than $16 billion. Governments have a responsibility to the public to regulate activities that are known to cause social, economic and health problems. State governments have developed policies to promote responsible gambling and have provided counselling services for people adversely affected. Research has shown that the accessibility,

2218 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] acceptability and convenience of gambling activities are significant factors for those people who develop gambling problems. The gambling industry is in a similar position to the position that the tobacco industry was in a decade ago. Governments and private gambling organisations have promoted informed choice as a means of fulfilling their moral and social responsibility to the public. State governments are reliant on gambling taxes and fees to generate a sizeable proportion of their revenue. Revenue from gambling in Australia is derived primarily from direct state and territory taxes, licence fees and mandatory contributions. On average, revenue from gambling accounts for 11 per cent of all the revenue state governments collect. This figure varies from state to state. For example, in Victoria and South Australia gambling revenue made up 13 per cent and 14.8 per cent of total state revenue respectively. In contrast, Western Australia and the Australian Capital Territory relied on gambling revenue for just six per cent and 6.5 per cent of their total revenue, respectively. In 2003-04 gambling taxes in Australia amounted to $4.1 billion. By far the most heavily taxed form of gambling is lotteries, with 65 per cent of money spent being collected as tax. Racing- related gambling is taxed at an average rate of 17 per cent, and the states reap the benefits of the licensing fees and other ongoing fees charged to private casinos. These arrangements vary from state to state. I have highlighted where we are at. After the winter break—I am yet to finalise some provisions—I will introduce a private member’s bill that deals with problem gambling. The Treasurer will probably argue that only one per cent of the Western Australian population has a gambling problem compared with the 15 per cent and 25 per cent in other states. However, the government must address the problem for that one per cent of the population. The Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Amendment Bill provides for an increase in the number of gaming machines at Burswood to 1 750. It was great to hear yesterday that the casino is changing its culture. Casinos never have clocks on the wall and they never have open windows. People are kept in the dark and do not know what time of day it is. There has been a move away from that at Burswood. The Pearl Room has windows from floor to ceiling, while another room also has a lot of natural light. The rooms are now far more open. That is definitely a good step forward. The Burswood Casino management is being socially responsible. It has set up good programs. When I refer to gambling problems, I refer to not only casinos, but also the TAB, Lotterywest and small bookmakers. The government has also allowed the introduction of Bet West, which has a full licence. People can set up an account over the internet and gamble from home. When we talk about helping a problem gambler, we must consider the overall picture. I hope the government supports my private member’s bill. Last night when I visited the casino, I noticed a line of four or five automatic teller machines. I do not have a problem with a person going to a casino and betting with his own money; however, I do have a problem if that person gambles with the money he gets as a cash advance on his credit card. The government has stopped tobacco advertising. All we are trying to do is to protect the innocent. People know where they can go if they want to gamble. They can go to their local TAB to place a bet, to the local newsagency to buy a lotto ticket or to the casino. Gambling advertising must be curtailed, because it seems to be increasing. Even Lotterywest is encouraging people to spend big. I know that lottery wins are taxed and that they are a great earner for the state. That money is allocated to good projects. However, the government must support those people who have a gambling addiction. We must look at the issues of gambling advertising and betting on credit. We must also look at payouts. When I was at the casino, I asked whether, if I won a large sum of money, I would get the winnings in money or whether I would get it in chips so that I could continue to gamble. If I were to win first division lotto, it would take a few weeks before I would receive a cheque. There is a cooling-off period. There should be a cooling-off period between winning money at the TAB, the casino or Lotterywest and collecting that money. If I were to win more than $500 at the casino, I should be given a personal cheque so that I cannot access that money until it has been banked and cleared some four or five days later. If the casino continues to up-sell and give gamblers their winnings in money, they will continue to chase their losses. The private member’s bill that I will introduce also relates to the issue of internet gambling. We have already had a discussion about Betfair. The opposition supports the bill. Last night when I was at Burswood Casino, I asked why Burswood is putting money into the Swan River when no other business in Victoria Park is doing so. Should other organisations be asked to contribute money? An agreement was struck between Burswood and the government whereby a certain percentage of its earnings would go into managing the public golf course and the park areas, which are well maintained. The extra machines mean extra revenue. I think $6 million will be in that account at any one time. Money will go into maintaining the Burswood foreshore and the Swan and Canning Rivers. I support the bill. We should always welcome money that is spent on improving our rivers. My private member’s bill, which will deal with problem gambling, is a debate for another day. DR J.M. WOOLLARD (Alfred Cove) [12.07 pm]: During the debate on the Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Amendment Bill, many members have said that it is a smokescreen because of the deal that was struck between the government and the casino to increase the number of machines at the casino. I congratulate previous governments for not going the way that other states have gone with multiple gambling venues. We are all aware of the problems that those states have experienced. We have been lucky that former Premiers have chosen to not follow that path.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2219

I am concerned that the trade-off for an increase in the number of machines at the casino is money to improve the Swan River. The Swan River, as nominated by the Premier, is our first icon. The Swan River should be cared for by the government. The government should be looking after it; it should not source money from elsewhere to look after it. When the bill was introduced, I wondered what measures the community would like to see introduced to help those who are addicted to gambling. The community wants the government to help those people beat their addiction. Last week when I travelled on the train from Canning Bridge to Mandurah, I sat next to a lady who had just come from the casino. It is interesting that that happened just prior to my debating this bill. The woman had spent $900 at the casino, which was $900 that she could not afford. I do not know how many other people like her go to the casino and gamble the money that should be used to pay bills or buy their children clothes. We should be focusing on how we can help people who have become addicted to gambling. I am not anti-gambling. Indeed, as I have said in this house previously, I go to the dogs and I bet on the Melbourne Cup. I have been to Gloucester Park, as have many other members. Some people in the community are not able to curb their gambling to the odd occasion and it becomes a real problem for them. I was very pleased when the Director General of the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor, Barry Sargeant, invited me and the member for Serpentine-Jarrahdale to visit the casino last night to meet with some of the staff who assist problem gamblers. We met with a social worker and a psychologist. From what they were saying, I could tell that they care about what they do. They told us about the Centrecare service and the self-exclusion program, so there are services and counselling services available once someone has been identified. However, to me, what came out of that meeting was that the problem was in identifying those people. How do we identify people who are having those problems? The casino is rolling out a program with its staff on the indicators of problem gambling. For example, an indicator might be someone thumping the table or not answering his or her telephone. Staff are being given an idea of what to look for with people who may have a problem with gambling, so that they can perhaps be called in. They came over as very genuine people, but when I left I thought that the problem for them was in identifying when an addiction to gambling was causing problems for the families of those people. We did a tour of the casino. As the member for Serpentine-Jarrahdale mentioned, there are a lot of automatic teller machines at the casino from which people can withdraw money. Membership to Club Burswood is open to people who go there on a regular basis. How can we, as a Parliament, help in the identification of people who have addictive gambling habits? I thought that if the casino is having problems in identifying those people, there may be another way that they could be identified. I will leave it to the government to look at the finer points of this. There is already a Club Burswood card. I now have, as I am sure do many other members of this Parliament, a smart card for travelling on public transport. I must admit that the first time I used it I forgot to log off at the other end. When I thought about it a couple of hours later, I wondered whether I had invalidated my card! We know how often the holders of smart cards use public transport. Although we do not know to whom those cards belong—we do not know that a particular card belongs to the member for Belmont or the member for Wanneroo, for example—we can tell how much money has been put on each card. If we took that idea a step further, it would be possible to have an identification system at the casino that showed how much money people were spending on gambling. Casino staff would then be able to see that a person was coming back on a weekly basis and spending $100, $200, $400, $5 000 or $10 000. If the casino could identify who was coming back on a regular basis, that might help in identifying the people who have a gambling addiction. The casino could collect those statistics, which could then come to the Parliament in an unidentifiable way on an annual basis. We could then look at what was happening at the casino and at whether people were spending more money on an annual basis and just what the problems were. We might be able to use that information to look at addictive gambling habits. I will move an amendment during the consideration in detail stage that will seek to insert the words — , following both Houses of Parliament approving an agreement between the Minister, Burswood Nominees Ltd and Burswood Resort (Management) Limited, for the collection of comprehensive statistics on the monetary level of individual gamblers at the Burswood Casino, for use — (a) by the Casino management to detect individuals who have a gambling addiction so that appropriate counselling and social work intervention can take place; and (b) in an annual report to be presented to each House of Parliament on the level of and change in personal gambling habits at the Casino, but not so as to disclose any personal identifying information. I do not think this would infringe in any way on people’s rights. When I use my credit card at my local supermarket, the supermarket knows how much I am spending on a weekly or monthly basis. I am already providing that type of information to my local supermarket, my drycleaner, my butcher and all other service providers in the community. We do not have a problem with those businesses having that information. This bill may not be the right mechanism to introduce something like this. I believe from Mr Sargeant—and I thank the

2220 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

Treasurer for allowing me to have a briefing with Mr Sargeant—that the government could do this through the regulations. The government could gather information like this now, possibly through current legislation. When we move into the consideration in detail stage, I will ask the Treasurer about that, because I believe that no-one in this house wants the problem of addictive gambling to get any worse. Everyone would like to help. If there were some way in which we could help those people to break that habit, I think everyone would like to come on board and help. I ask that the Treasurer respond to this idea either in his response to the second reading debate or during the consideration in detail stage. There is a gambling problem in the community. As I said, just last week, out of the blue, I met a woman who had this problem. Because of that conversation, I discussed this issue with other people over the past week. I could not believe what I was hearing. I guess it brought back to my mind the Burswood bill that was before the house a few years ago. It is not gambling per se that is the problem; it is just unfortunate that some people are not able to control their gambling behaviour. Because those people develop that addiction, their partners, families and children may suffer. They may lose their homes. There are many repercussions. We do not want more people to become homeless. I believe that the Parliament wants to help those people. I ask that if it cannot be done within this bill, the Treasurer and the government give serious consideration to how those statistics could be gathered and how we could help to identify people who have a problem with addictive gambling behaviour, so that we can support those people and their families in dealing with the terrible consequences of their addiction. DR S.C. THOMAS (Capel) [12.19 pm]: I will make a few comments on the Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Amendment Bill 2007. We have talked about the environment and about problem gambling, but this is, in effect, a taxation bill. It is, in effect, a revenue-raising exercise for the government. It is quite clever because, instead of raising another tax for the additional expenditure needed for some environmental outcomes at Burswood Park and the Swan and Canning river system, the government is allowing the Burswood Group to put in a few more machines so that the government can raise the taxes. Once again, this is an example of the Carpenter Labor government raising the taxes for the community. That is what this bill is about. We can debate good environmental outcomes, bad environmental outcomes, problem gambling and non-problem gambling as much as we like, but this is, in fact, a revenue raising bill. Of course, we already raise some revenue from gambling. The problem gambling issue will not go away. My understanding is that there are plenty of opportunities at Burswood and other locations for problem gamblers to gamble away their money and ruin their lives. That is about to get much worse because of the High Court decision to allow Betfair into Western Australia. I think the government opposed that decision and I personally opposed it as well. The situation will become far worse because people will now be able to gamble online in the comfort of their own chairs with the simple use of a credit card. That is a poor outcome and one more example of what, I suspect, is the misuse of the ideals of the Australian Constitution, when it was first put together in 1901. It is another example that, effectively, allows for a complete override of the states’ ability to manage their own people and their own affairs. It is disgraceful and I am disappointed that the Constitution is used in this way. However, I am not surprised, because the courts have generally spent some time overriding the states’ ability to manage their own affairs. That is my first point. My second point, of course, is that this bill is a revenue-raising exercise. The government needs to spend additional money on environmental outcomes and land issues at Burswood Park and the Swan and Canning river system. It is much more popular to raise revenue in this way. The community will accept an additional taxation process more easily if it applies to a group of people who are basically gambling. It is a bit like taxing cigarettes; unless people smoke, they are generally pretty happy with that because it is almost seen as a punishment for the crime, so to speak. This is another example of the government using that type of process. That is not necessarily a bad thing. If people have spare money to gamble, the theory is that they have spare money available to pay an additional tax. We might argue that some of the people who will pay the most are the people who really cannot afford it. However, that is a debate for another day. This is not the appropriate bill for a debate on the positives and negatives of gambling and problem gambling. I do not think those issues apply to this bill. The Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Amendment Bill is designed to raise revenue for expenditure on the Swan and Canning river system and Burswood Park. I suspect that is one reason the opposition supports this bill; not because the opposition favours or opposes gambling but simply because this is a revenue-raising exercise that allows more expenditure. The argument is whether the government should make those payments anyway and whether the sort of additional work required for the Burswood Park and Swan and Canning river areas should be funded out of the government’s coffers. That is another argument for a different day. However, there is a strong argument to say that this government has under-invested in the environment in those areas. This is one way to try to fund increased expenditure for that. It is an additional tax on the people of Western Australia, some of whom may struggle to afford it, but for the most part, the community will probably see this as a relatively positive step because of the self-inflicted component of this tax. As I say, it is similar to a tax on cigarettes or alcohol and it is generally much like the revenue raising from speeding fines; if people do not do those things they do not pay those additional taxes. This bill is another revenue-raising exercise along those lines.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2221

MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont — Treasurer) [12.24 pm] — in reply: I thank members for their comments on this legislation. I think it is fair to say that members support the Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Amendment Bill 2007, although they have taken the opportunity to raise a number of issues about the management of gambling. First of all, I will make a couple of comments about the nature of gambling policy in Western Australia. Our policy is significantly different from that of other states. We do not allow poker machines at all in Western Australia. We allow electronic gaming machines at Burswood but nowhere else. This is not only this government’s policy; it has been a policy of successive governments over the years and I understand that it is a bipartisan position in the Parliament. This means that we avoid the significant social damage that occurs as a result of the proliferation of poker machines in pubs and clubs in other states. I do not have the statistics immediately in front of me, but gambling losses per capita in Western Australia are considerably lower than gambling losses per capita in other states. That would seem to be an indication that the issue of problem gambling in Western Australia is probably much less serious than it is in other states. The community of Western Australia does not receive the revenue from gambling that other states receive. Again, I do not have recent figures to hand, but I recall being advised some years ago that, were Western Australia to have the penetration of gambling that Victoria does, we would raise an additional $400 million a year from gambling taxation. As a community, we forgo that revenue and consequently put more weight on other tax bases because as a community, through successive Parliaments and on a bipartisan basis, we have decided not to have poker machines, and electronic gaming machines are permitted only at Burswood. While discussing the question of problem gambling, I probably should briefly respond to the member for Alfred Cove’s suggestion. There is merit in seeking better information on the issue of problem gambling. That is an issue that can be taken up by the Gaming and Wagering Commission. In fact, it is probably better that the commission takes it up on a policy or administrative basis, rather than amend this bill, which is not really the appropriate vehicle for that sort of amendment. I must say I would have some reservations about this information being collected on an individual-by-individual basis. I think there are considerations of privacy at play, which individuals have a right to be concerned about. Nevertheless, problem gambling is the sort of issue that, if we had better information, we would be better equipped to deal with. Dr J.M. Woollard: Will the minister take an interjection? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Yes. Dr J.M. Woollard: Will you give an assurance that you will ask the commission to look into this matter? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Yes, I will ask the Gaming and Wagering Commission to consider ways in which it can improve our information base on problem gambling. Dr J.M. Woollard: Identify. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am not certain about identifying individual problem gamblers; I would need to take some advice on that. However, I will ask the commission to examine the issue the member has raised. Dr J.M. Woollard: Thank you. Mr E.S. RIPPER: Naming rights was another issue raised during the debate. The Burswood Park Board will fund Swan and Canning river system projects, which will provide opportunities for naming rights for various projects. There was some debate about how much of the levy would be expended on the Swan and Canning river system. I should take this opportunity to also comment on the member for Capel’s comments. The member pointed out that the levy on gaming machines will be increased. That is a public return from the benefit to Burswood of an expected increase in the number of gaming machines at the time this agreement was struck. Therefore, there is a return to the public in the form of an increase in the gaming levy and that return will be spent on behalf of the public in improving the amenity of the Swan and Canning river system. When the changes were negotiated, Burswood was not keen to stipulate a percentage of the levy to be spent on the Swan and Canning river system. Some thought was given to hypothecating that proportion of the levy emanating from the increase in the gaming machine levy from one per cent to two per cent. However, this was not proceeded with, because some of the money available for the Swan and Canning rivers projects would also come from the total levies paid on the increase in table games and gaming machines. Burswood had its own interest. It wanted to ensure that the board had sufficient control over the levy to maintain Burswood Park and the golf course to their present high standard. The minister—in this case the Minister for the Environment—is not able to direct the board on how much of its levy to expend on Swan and Canning river projects, nor is the board able to expend money on these projects without the approval of the minister. The agreement stipulates that Burswood, as a minimum, must pay a levy to the Burswood Park Board of $1 million. Burswood is confident that the annual levy paid will be sufficient to maintain the parks and golf course to their present high standard, plus fund approximately $3 million annually for the Swan and Canning river projects. The 2007-08 and the

2222 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

2008-09 budgets and forward estimates for the Burswood Park Board have allocated $3 million annually for Swan and Canning river projects. There was some debate about whether we should tighten the legislation to stipulate that a certain percentage or a certain amount annually be spent on the Swan and Canning Rivers. I believe that the opposition and others may present amendments to that effect. When that debate comes up, I will argue that we really need to give the board some flexibility to deal with these matters. However, we are putting the information that we have before the house in good faith. On the information available to me, I think we can expect about $3 million annually at least spent on Swan and Canning river projects. In the end, the house will be able to hold the government accountable for communicating that expectation because, as has also been pointed out, the government will have three representatives out of five on the Burswood Park Board—two nominated by the Minister for Racing and Gaming and one nominated by the Minister for the Environment. Therefore, members will be able to come into this place and ask why the government representatives did not ensure that the board did X or Y with the Swan and Canning Rivers. I think that deals with the issue. However, if the amendments are moved, we will debate the legislation at greater length during consideration in detail. I have mentioned changes to the composition of the board. Given that extra money is to be available to the board and that the board’s powers have been extended to allow it to invest in Swan and Canning river amenity, I think it is appropriate that there be the changes that give the representatives of the public interest—that is, the government appointees—more say in the operations of the board. It is also important, I think, to note that what we are really doing is ratifying an agreement between the government and Burswood; and Burswood, which is the other party to the state agreement that could conceivably have objected to the change in board composition, has agreed to that change. I have a little more information on Burswood Park Board levies. I have indicated that the agreement requires the Burswood Casino to pay $1 million annually, or a levy based on gaming revenue. In the early years, only $1 million was paid. Prior to the tenth supplementary agreement increasing the levy on electronic gaming machine revenue, the Burswood Park Board received annually $2 million to $3 million. With the increase in the electronic gaming machine revenue levy to two per cent, the increase in the number of table and electronic gaming machines in recent years and the growth in gaming revenue because of the buoyant Western Australian economy, in 2008-09 the Burswood Park Board is budgeted to receive $7 million. Therefore, it is quite a considerable increase in the revenue flowing to the Burswood Park Board. Members asked some questions about the scope of projects to be funded. The words defining the scope are taken from the Swan and Canning Rivers Management Act 2006, so it is the scope of that act that will determine the scope of projects to be funded by the Burswood Park Board. I think this is a worthwhile agreement. It will return additional moneys from gambling activities to the public, and on behalf of the public, that revenue will be spent on improving the amenity of the Swan and Canning Rivers and their environmental condition. I think that is a purpose that has very strong public support. Therefore, I commend the bill to the house. Question put and passed. Bill read a second time. Consideration in Detail Clause 1: Short title — Mr C.J. BARNETT: We heard in the second reading debate about the content of this bill. In the debate on the short title, I would appreciate some brief comments from the Treasurer, perhaps with the help of his advisers, on how he sees the operation of this legislation. I think Burswood Park is superb. It provides a magnificent gateway to Perth, in contrast with what preceded it. I wonder what longer-term plans are in place for the management of this part of the agreement and of the park itself. We would want the park to continue to be maintained to its current level, if not enhanced. However, I look at it and wonder what else could be done, because it is quite magnificent. I just wonder whether the Treasurer would like to add any further comments on the future arrangement of this funding and whether there are any grand plans for the park that we are unaware of. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have been discussing with my advisers the fact that the Burswood Park Board will receive $7 million. I have advised the house that about $3 million will be spent on the Swan and Canning Rivers, which leaves a rather large amount of money—$4 million annually—to be spent on the park. The advice available to me is that in fact rather more than $3 million may be spent on the Swan and Canning Rivers, although there are some issues with the park that could be reasonably expensive. For example, there are some issues with water supply from the bores, so the bores may need to be made deeper, and that could be an expensive exercise. I am advised that there may also be a need to change water management on the park in other ways. A couple of processes going on also introduce some uncertainty into park planning. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is considering overall planning decisions for the entire area, and Burswood, itself, is considering

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2223 new development plans. The outcome of those two sets of considerations will have an impact on what needs to be done by the management of the Burswood Park Board. I think I would advise the board, just as a local visitor, that perhaps the intensification of statues in the park has reached its limit! Mr C.J. Barnett: I was going to ask you about that. I support art, but statues seem to be popping up all over the place. I was looking for mine and I haven’t noticed it! Mr E.S. RIPPER: I also advise the board to avoid any statues of any politicians. I hope that answers the member for Cottesloe’s questions and achieves the objects of his comments. Mr C.J. BARNETT: As I said, the park area is magnificent. We trust it will remain that way. Are there any implications for the park and its management, particularly expenditure as a result of the residential development that is taking place with the Mirvac Fini project around it? Will that have any overflow or consequences? Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am advised that it is not causing an issue for the park; in fact, it will improve the utilisation of the park. Overall, it will be complementary. Clause put and passed. Clauses 2 and 3 put and passed. Clause 4: Section 3 amended — Dr G.G. JACOBS: This bill seeks to amend the Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Act 1985, does it not? Section 3 of the act lists a supplementary agreement, a second, a seventh and an eighth. This clause seeks to insert — (v) the Eleventh Supplementary Agreement; It also seeks to add the word “and” to link each paragraph. If we include the eleventh supplementary agreement to the act—I might be naive in this question, but the minister can correct me—there is no mention of the ninth or tenth supplementary agreement in this bill compared what is in the act, although I notice that it refers to the ninth and the tenth in the recitals. Mr E.S. RIPPER: It is an interesting question. As the member was proceeding, I was trying to work out the answer with my advisor. He knew it, but I did not. Some agreements are ratified by Parliament and some are ratified by being laid on the table. They are then inserted into the original agreement via regulation. The agreement will read sequentially but not all the supplementary agreements have been inserted via legislation. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mrs J. Hughes): Does the member for Roe have any more questions? Dr G.G. JACOBS: Thank you, Madam Acting Speaker; I was a little slow on the uptake. Mr A.D. McRae: Can we quote you? Dr G.G. JACOBS: Thank you very much. Perhaps the member for Riverton can give me a hand. This bill affects all Western Australians. Rather than trying to poke fun at me — The ACTING SPEAKER: Can we deal with the bill before us, please? Dr G.G. JACOBS: I was trying to ask some sincere questions; I was not politicking or anything else. Mr A.D. McRae: It was a moment of lightheartedness that you have taken very seriously. The ACTING SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.G. JACOBS: Although the Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Act 1985 inserts the eleventh supplementary agreement, the amendment will not be in the re-written legislation. Will the legislation actually refer to the seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh agreements, or will it read: supplementary agreement, second supplementary agreement, seventh supplementary agreement, eighth supplementary agreement and then eleventh supplementary agreement? Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am advised that the supplementary agreements, which are in the schedule to the act, will read consecutively. It will go from the first supplementary agreement to the second and so on, in order, to the eleventh supplementary agreement. It may be that the consolidated act will not be reprinted for some time and, therefore, the act itself may not reflect that addition; however, the agreement will because of the combined action of the principal legislation and regulations. I am not right across the detail of this, as the member for Roe might understand. Dr G.G. Jacobs: You too admit to not being across it. When I did that, I got some criticism from the other side of the house. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I sincerely apologise for any offence that may have caused the member. The director general will be happy to talk to the member for Roe about this issue if the member for Roe wishes to pursue it.

2224 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

Dr G.G. JACOBS: For the want of being accused of being pedantic, political, not being across it or anything else—I thought this process was about asking questions and sincerely trying to get across issues—I wonder why proposed section 4(1)(b) is necessary. It reads — after each of paragraphs (b)(i), (ii) and (iv) by inserting — “ and ”. It was not included in the Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Act. Is this an opportunity to finetune the legislation or something else? Mr E.S. RIPPER: One of the interesting things about being a minister responsible for legislation is that one finds out about the power and the nature of the role of parliamentary counsel and that parliamentary counsel has its own view about the way in which legislation should be drafted. I can only imagine that this is a parliamentary counsel initiative. Debate interrupted, pursuant to standing orders. [Continued on page 2249.] BETHWYN FLACK — RENTAL ACCOMMODATION Statement by Member for South Perth MR J.E. McGRATH (South Perth) [12.51 pm]: Madam Deputy Speaker, I direct your attention to the presence in the gallery of Bethwyn Flack and her eight children. They are the face of the severe rental crisis that exists in our state today. Bethwyn is a full-time mum and her husband, Jason, has a full-time job as a form worker. Eight weeks ago their private rental home in Cloverdale burnt down. The fire was caused by an electrical fault in the air conditioning unit. They lost everything in the fire. They have contents insurance so they can buy furniture but right now they are living with very kind friends. There are 10 children and four adults in the house. The Flack family is sleeping on the floor and wherever mattresses can be found. Bethwyn and Jason have a belief that children should be raised to be responsible, law-abiding adults and respect people. Everyone has a right to be treated equally, even when one is from a big family. The office of the Minister for Housing and Works told Bethwyn today that she should register with Homeswest for emergency housing and that it will assist with the bond and one month’s rent. It also spoke with Bethwyn direct today and appeared sympathetic. However, it said that there are a lot of families in this position. This family wants private or Homeswest accommodation. It is prepared to pay rent but Bethwyn feels that she is being discriminated against because she has a large family. This is a great shame and another reason that the Carpenter government needs to fix the rental crisis in Western Australia today. CORRUPTION AND CRIME COMMISSION INVESTIGATION Statement by Member for Riverton MR A.D. McRAE (Riverton) [12.52 pm]: I asked my lawyers to write to the Corruption and Crime Commission a week ago. I seek leave to table a copy of that letter for the remainder of today’s sitting. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr A.D. McRAE: The CCC has responded to that letter with unprecedented speed. I advise the house that my lawyers received a response from the CCC dated today acknowledging that my rejection of the suggestion that I was involved in the CCC’s Smith Beach inquiry was correct and that the Smiths Beach matter had nothing to do with me. That is a good admission from the CCC and clarifies a misleading and damaging statement by the CCC. Whilst the letter states that the CCC issued a press release to that effect last Thursday, no such press release exists on its website. I also note that for the first time the CCC is acknowledging that there is an inordinate delay in dealing with these matters. It has given a commitment that a report on this matter will be prepared as a matter of urgency. I seek leave to table the CCC’s response to my letter for the remainder of today’s sitting. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] DONNYBROOK APPLE FESTIVAL Statement by Member for Capel DR S.C. THOMAS (Capel) [12.54 pm]: On a more positive note, I congratulate the organisers of this year’s Donnybrook Apple Festival for a job well done. The festival was well sponsored again. I congratulate the apple ambassador, Josephine Licciardello, and the apple royale, Melissa Lamb, who works for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. I also congratulate the chairman of the committee, Angelo Logiudice. The Apple Festival has struggled a little. It is in resurgent mode at the moment. I congratulate those members of Parliament who volunteered to stand on the dunking machine, a brave act. I also congratulate the organisers and the people who put together the apple fun park, the largest free entry fun park in Australia. It now exists in Donnybrook. It is a

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2225 magnificent spot where families are stopping continually. People virtually cannot move in the apple fun park for the amount of people who are in there and the kids who are enjoying it. My own children enjoy it immensely. I congratulate in particular the Shire of Donnybrook, the volunteers and organisers of the volunteers—particularly Peter McCabe—and all the people who put an enormous effort in, such as Neville and Mick Fry. It is a busy time down my way. The CapelFest was held last weekend; it was another outstanding event with another massive crowd. I congratulate the organisers of CapelFest on the work that they have done to put the event together. It was a top event. The Balingup Small Farm Field Day will be upon us before we know it, at the end of the month. CLIMATE CHANGE Statement by Member for Kingsley MRS J. HUGHES (Kingsley) [12.55 pm]: Climate change is probably one of the most important issues that face the community on a daily basis, albeit as a shadow in the back of people’s minds. Unfortunately, it is also an issue the ordinary person may feel powerless to find a solution for. The community is constantly hearing about the emerging reports of the increasing threats and changing time frames that need to be met and the quotas and economic factors that will impact on us as we tackle climate change. Now is the time for the community to become more acquainted with the technologies and ways in which we can contribute to tackling climate change by making changes at the grass-roots level. We see only a snippet here and there on the ways in which we can investigate solutions and actively participate in changes. In general, the population is very busy, and there is no doubt that time is a major factor for those interested enough to investigate and research options open to them and the companies that can deliver options, and to tap into agencies that harbour valuable information. As a member of this place and as a member of the general community who has a keen interest in this area, I will be hosting an energy and sustainability expo on 10 May. Graciously, the Greenwood Senior High School has offered its support and granted us the use of its grounds. I would like to thank the participating businesses, agencies and organisations for embracing this initiative with the enthusiasm that they have. Many of them gathered yesterday at Parliament House. I thank them for their valuable time, and for giving us the opportunity to bring focus onto our efforts and for adding additional thoughts that will allow us to further improve the expo. I look forward to working with them and bringing about a successful and practical expo to my community and beyond. LANDCARE AWARDS Statement by Member for Albany MR P.B. WATSON (Albany — Parliamentary Secretary) [12.57 pm]: I congratulate the winners from the south coast at the recent Western Australian LandCare Awards. These awards recognise individuals, community groups and schools who are committed to devoting their time and energy to caring for our environment. The federal government’s National Resource Management Region Award went to South Coast NRM Inc. This national award is for excellence and innovation in creating partnerships with the LandCare community for natural resources and environmental management. Under the direction of chairman Gary English and chief executive officer Rod Edkins, South Coast NRM has secured over $55 million on the ground for natural resource management work on the south coast. They have been successful due to a combination of strong interagency involvement, technical expertise and robust community engagement. The Alcoa LandCare Community Group Award went to the Oyster Harbour Catchment Group. This national award is for an outstanding community group that has adopted sound land management practices in enhancing or protecting an area on behalf of the community. Congratulations to natural resource management officer David Broadhurst; strategic catchment project officer Heather Adams; geographical information systems officer Ivan Edwards; weeds officers Lisa and Klaus Braun; and chairman David Williamson. The Murray-Darling Basin Commission Rivercare Award went to Wilson Inlet Catchment Group. This national award is for a community group that has made a significant contribution to the sustainable management, conservation or rehabilitation of a waterway ecosystem. The catchment group also won the Department of Water River Rats Living Stream Award. This state award recognises the commitment of groups and communities to work together to protect, rehabilitate and manage drains, creeks, rivers and estuaries. Congratulations to natural resource management officer Lynn Heppell; Wilson Inlet nutrient reduction project officer Craig Carter; Upper Hay Catchment project officer Murray Hollingworth; and chairman Michael Lanigan. BRIDGES FUN RUN Statement by Member for Roe DR G.G. JACOBS (Roe) [12.59 pm]: I congratulate Terry Waldron for becoming a grandfather. He is not here today because of that very welcome event in Albany last night and I will speak in his absence.

2226 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

I refer to the recent Bridges Fun Run. It was won by a girl in a wheelchair by the name of Madison. Madison is disabled and completed the course in a record time. In fact she has been selected to go to Beijing for the 400 metres relay and I congratulate her for that. I also congratulate Sarah Greenwood, an Esperance girl who won the five kilometre run for females in a time of 19 minutes and 05 seconds. There are two other girls I will mention— one is my daughter, Lucy Jacobs, who came fifth in the five kilometre run in a time of 19 minutes and 35 seconds, and the other is my wife, who in fact ran in the 10 kilometre run. My wife came second overall in the women’s event in a time of 40 minutes and 35 seconds. I congratulate the organisers of this great event and those girls on their great efforts. Sitting suspended from 1.00 to 2.00 pm EMERGENCY EVACUATION ALARM SYSTEM TESTING Statement by Speaker THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling): Before I give the call for question time, I remind members that an interruption will occur at three o’clock and last approximately five minutes. During this time a demonstration of the Parliament House emergency evacuation alarm system will be conducted, which will include the alarm sounds and a talk from our security officer. There is no intention to evacuate the building, as it is purely the warning system in relation to that. When the bells ring and the alarm system starts, proceedings in the chamber will be automatically suspended until the conclusion of the interruption. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE WESTERN POWER AND VERVE ENERGY 184. Mr T. BUSWELL to the Premier: I refer to the advice the Premier received from Western Power about which I asked a question without notice in Parliament yesterday, and the Premier’s subsequent letter back to Western Power of February 2006 addressed to Mr Neil Hamilton, which I am holding in my hand. (1) Given what has happened, does the Premier still believe that it was wise for him to request that Western Power resubmit budget forecasts which better achieve reasonable shareholder expectations of appropriate operational and financial performance and to further insist that Verve Energy’s performance move from a loss forecast to a profit? (2) Does the Premier accept that there is not even a basic economic case made in the letter or the attachments to the letter for any kind of revision to the original estimates? (3) Does the Premier accept that the figures for profit he demanded Western Power use were completely drawn from thin air to justify his political situation at the time; indeed, is this not proved by the fact that the Premier’s figure of $110 million of profit demanded from Verve in 2006-07 turned out to be a profit of only $13 million, a massive $97 million discrepancy? (4) Is the letter not clear evidence that the Premier, as Minister for Energy at the time, attempted to direct Western Power to cook the books in relation to Verve Energy, and in doing so has directly contributed to the loss of $1 billion and the massive increase in power bills — Withdrawal of Remark The SPEAKER: I ask the Leader of the Opposition to take his seat. Not only is that an extremely long question, which should be avoided at all costs, but also the Leader of the Opposition should immediately withdraw the inference in relation to dishonest implication. Mr T. BUSWELL: Mr Speaker, I will rephrase that last part. The SPEAKER: Withdraw! Mr T. BUSWELL: I will withdraw and rephrase it; thank you, Mr Speaker. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr T. BUSWELL: The fourth part of my question is — (4) Is the letter not clear evidence that the Premier, as Minister for Energy, directed Western Power to alter the books for Verve Energy, and in doing so he, as Minister for Energy, directly contributed to the loss of $1 billion and the massive increase in power bills that we are now facing? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(4) The short answer, of course, is no. I could leave it at that. It is ridiculous. All the parts of the Leader of the Opposition’s assertions are absolutely ridiculous. Mr J.H.D. Day: Did you direct Western Power or not?

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2227

Mr A.J. CARPENTER: No, not as a formal direction to Western Power. Mr J.H.D. Day interjected. The SPEAKER: Member for Darling Range! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The government undertook financial modelling in 2005 and 2006. This modelling was done by a joint project team involving Western Power and Office of Energy staff, overseen by a steering committee including senior executives of these agencies and the Department of Treasury and Finance. The government and I at the time accepted this advice. Mr T. Buswell: Over Western Power’s advice. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Western Power staff were on the team. Mr T. Buswell: Ha! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: They were. Mr T. Buswell: If they were on the team, why did you have to write back and tell Neil Hamilton to change his views? The SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: As part of this modelling, it was recommended that the government identify targets based on reasonable shareholder expectations, and that is exactly what we did. We took advice from the key departments of the time, Treasury and the Office of Energy. ANZAC DAY 2008 185. Mr P. PAPALIA to the Premier: Will the Premier please inform the house how the state government is helping to honour Anzac Day this year? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: My predecessor, Dr Gallop, was very keen to ensure that Anzac Day was properly celebrated and commemorated in this state. I, as Minister for Education and Training at the time, required that Anzac Day, by compulsion, be commemorated in state schools when some schools were moving away from that celebration. We have helped to commemorate Anzac Day in a number of innovative ways. Last year I went to Sandakan, Malaysia. The member for Avon and Hon Nigel Hallett, MLC, the member for South West Region, were also there and we took part in the first official commemoration of the Sandakan death march and the events around that in 1945. This year I have been very fortunate to have been invited to join the Anglican Dean of Perth, the Very Reverend Dr John Shepherd, in the presentation of the replica cross in Villers-Bretonneux, France, on Anzac Day. This year’s service will be especially important. It marks the ninetieth anniversary of the battle of Villers-Bretonneux. The Western Australian involvement in that battle was extremely significant through the 51st Battalion. Approximately 800 Western Australians were involved in that battle—in fact in the liberation of that village—two or three days before Anzac Day in 1918. Of those 800 or so Western Australians, something along the lines of 389 were lost or killed. It is a hugely significant day for Western Australia. History tells us that this battle was instrumental in turning the tide of the Great War and liberating the French from the occupying German forces. One can only imagine what would happen today if 389 young Western Australians were killed in a single battle in the space of a day or two. It is unthinkable in modern times, but that is what happened. It was not an isolated occurrence but it was an extremely important battle in the latter part of the Great War. To commemorate this battle, therefore, the state government on behalf of the Western Australian people has provided $35 000 to the St George’s Cathedral choir for the pilgrimage to the battle site of both the original Villers-Bretonneux cross and its replica. The Villers-Bretonneux cross represents the lives of those Western Australians who died there 90 years ago. It was actually relocated from Sydney in 1933, is housed in the cathedral in Perth and is still in excellent condition. The original cross was made as a tribute to those members of the 51st Battalion who fell in that battle and will be permanently housed at St George’s Cathedral, Perth. The replica cross, which was made in Western Australia out of Donnybrook stone, is also at the cathedral and will be gifted to the people of Villers-Bretonneux. It will be the focus of the dawn service and will be a proud monument to Western Australia right there at the site of the battle. At the service will be 12 students from across Western Australia who have been selected as part of the Premier’s Anzac student tour in 2008. Mr J.H.D. Day: Are you going? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I am not going on the student tour. It was an initiative put in place by Premier Gallop. I think he accompanied the students on the tour two or three times, and at least one year he took the then opposition leader, the member for Kalgoorlie, which was a memorable event. I apologise to the member for Kalgoorlie for raising the subject! I am not going on the tour, but my trip to Villers-Bretonneux will intersect with the tour while we are there. I understand that at least two members of the Liberal Party are attending there

2228 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] under their own steam on their imprest allowance. I look forward to seeing them there. The students will be taking part in a 10-day tour of the Western Front battle sites, an education tour that I am sure will be both enlightening and emotional for all those students. May I take this opportunity to inform the house that after the Villers-Bretonneux ceremony on Anzac Day, I will be travelling with a trade delegation to Russia where I will be undertaking trade and investment talks with government and business officials. It is an ideal time to promote investment opportunities in Western Australia. As some members in the chamber would know, Russia has emerged as an economic powerhouse. Australian exports to Russia have expanded rapidly from $180 million in 2001-02 to $660 million in 2006-07. Western Australia’s share of that has risen from 13 to 17 per cent. A number of Russian-based companies are investing, or are intending to invest, here in Western Australia, including Norilsk Nickel, Magnitorsk Iron and Steel, and Metalloinvest. Quite a few of those companies and others travelled through Perth to coincide with the Australian Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in Sydney last year. While in Russia, I am also hoping to meet some of the country’s leading radioastronomers at the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow to discuss Western Australia’s bid for the Square Kilometre Array, or SKA, project. As we know, this is a $2 billion project and potentially a vastly beneficial project for Western Australia. So far our efforts are working out very well. As members would know, a major radioastronomy conference is occurring in Perth right now. This will be an important trip for the state. I hope for the sake of the member for Geraldton that we are able to achieve support from Russian radioastronomers, and I look forward to promoting Western Australia, opening new investment doors and attracting wealth-creating opportunities for our state. MEMBER FOR ROCKINGHAM — APOLOGY TO ETHNIC COMMUNITY 186. Mr P.D. OMODEI to the Premier: (1) Is the Premier aware of comments made today by the President of the Ethnic Communities Council of WA in relation to the member for Rockingham’s comments yesterday and his refusal to properly apologise today. The president said, according to my notes — The comment that he made is not just intemperate . . . it is racist. He further said — The Premier should show some leadership and tick him off publicly. This is not the set of standards that you want West Australians to follow. (2) I understand that the Premier may have already apologised, but will the Premier direct the member to apologise properly and appropriately for his comments, which have caused offence to many Western Australians with ethnic backgrounds; and, if not, why not? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(2) The member for Warren-Blackwood is right: I went outside, I spoke to the media and I apologised for any offence that was taken. I apologised on my behalf and on behalf of the Parliamentary Labor Party. I indicated that the member for Rockingham had also apologised here in the chamber for any offence that might have been caused. The member for Rockingham also pointed out that the terminology is widely used in Australian political discourse. Nevertheless, I believe its use is offensive to people and it should not be used. I say that unreservedly. At the same time, I must say that this morning’s performance in the chamber caused my memory to go back a couple of years. I remember when the member for Ballajura was being pilloried with language like “Mafia” and “Godfather”, and I was the only person who was defending him. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I will get to those guys in a minute, because I have got them in Hansard. I remember that and the media conducting a campaign of vilification — Mr T. Buswell: Is he your hero again? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: No, far from it. The media conducted a campaign of vilification against the member for Ballajura. Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I say to the member for Ballajura that we can pursue that now if we need to, but suffice it to say that I have also said to the Parliament that the member for Ballajura’s behaviour two years ago was completely unacceptable, and I believe nothing has changed. Mr J.B. D’Orazio interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Let me just raise this issue.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2229

Mr J.B. D’Orazio interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Let me just raise the issue of the language and the appropriateness of the language. Who was it, do members think, who in this chamber described the member for Ballajura as the “Godfather”? Back in 2006 a member said — Let us look at the misdemeanours of the member for Ballajura, John D’Orazio, the rising star of the now Premier and now better known as the “Godfather”. Who do members think said that? It was the member for Cottesloe. Who else referred to the member for Ballajura in those terms? Does the Leader of the Opposition think that he might have done it? Mr T. Buswell: Done what? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Referred to the member for Ballajura as the “Godfather”. The member for Warren- Blackwood used that terminology — Mr P.D. Omodei: What? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The “Godfather”, in relation to the member for Ballajura. I do not see in Hansard anybody — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I remember many a press conference when I took great exception to the application of that terminology to the member for Ballajura. I do not recall at any time any member on that side of the chamber leaping to his feet and complaining when his own members were referring to the member for Ballajura as the “Godfather”. Mr T. Buswell: Did you? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I have just told the house what I did. Let us keep that little performance this morning in perspective. Mr R.F. Johnson: You are going to lose this. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I am happy to debate this matter day in and day out. Nevertheless, I have made my position clear on the use of the terminology that the member for Rockingham used yesterday. MEMBER FOR ROCKINGHAM — APOLOGY TO ETHNIC COMMUNITY 187. Mr P.D. OMODEI to the Premier: Does the Premier believe that the member for Rockingham’s apology this morning was an appropriate apology or does he believe that it was half-hearted? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I believe that the member for Rockingham apologised appropriately. WATER LICENCE MANAGEMENT FEES — DISALLOWANCE 188. Mr P.W. ANDREWS to the Minister for Water Resources: Given the work being done to reform water management and to meet the requirements of the National Water Initiative, what will the impact be of the Liberal Party’s disallowance of the regulations providing for water licence management fees? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for the question. Clearly, the disallowance of the regulations will delay the water reform in this state, which is very disappointing, but I suppose one comes to expect such things from the Liberal opposition — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the first time. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the second time. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: We have a Liberal opposition that cannot grasp the big issues, cannot create policies and cannot carry through on hard decisions that will deliver outcomes that will greatly benefit the people of Western

2230 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

Australia. When Premier Gallop in 2001 raised the whole issue of a drying climate and the issues we faced with water, Liberal members said that there was no problem, that it was being overstated and that we did not have to do anything. This government set an agenda of water reform to provide water security for the people of Western Australia—for our irrigators, businesspeople and householders. This disallowance is another very clear example of the fact that the Liberal Party does not understand the problems and has no solution for them. It was the Liberal Party that urged this government to sign up to the National Water Initiative. It has been absolutely clear from day one that the National Water Initiative requires us to implement cost recovery when we provide services to people who have water bores and dams. There is absolutely no doubt about that. The Liberal Party was telling us we should sign up to the NWI. It is now saying that we should not do all the things that we are required to do under the NWI just yet. The Liberal Party cannot take a position of substance and stick to it. We have signed up to the National Water Initiative. That requires that we implement cost recovery. The disallowance does away with a fairly reasonable level of cost recovery. That means we are now the only state in Australia that does not have cost recovery as required by the National Water Initiative. Even more important than that, a rigorous licensing system, with annual fees, is fundamental to — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I call to order the member for Roe and the member for Capel. Mr J.C. KOBELKE: — water reform and to providing greater security to our irrigators and businesses in this state. These people have put huge amounts of their own money into developing their dams, their bores, their irrigation systems and their businesses. However, with our changing climate, that is now at risk. We have a ridiculous Liberal opposition that will do nothing to help those people. Members of the opposition will take the plea of one person who has to pay this fee, but who wants to pay less and wants someone else to pay more, and say that is a good idea! That is their view. They will back one little group that wants to pay less and wants someone else to pay more! That is not a solution to dealing with the changing climate and the water issues in this state. This government is committed to reform and to providing greater security. The Liberal opposition has its head in the sand. It simply wants to play silly games and show no leadership on this issue. Members opposite should be absolutely disgusted with themselves. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I call to order the member for Roe and the member for Stirling.

EXTENDED TRADING HOURS 189. Mr D.T. REDMAN to the Premier: I refer to the fact that in the 2005 referendum Western Australians overwhelmingly rejected the introduction of extended trading hours. I refer also to the fact that the tourism precincts in Perth and Fremantle have been given the benefit of extended trading hours, and that no trading restrictions have been placed on prescribed small retail shops. Given these facts, can the Premier explain to the people of Western Australia which of the businesses that are not given the benefit of extended trading hours now will be given that benefit? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for Stirling for the question. My position on retail trading hours and the expansion of retail trading hours I think is well known. A few members of the National Party seem to realise that extended trading hours are already in place in all their electorates. I am assuming that the member for Stirling must be aware of extended trading hours, because as I understand it, his own personal businesses is a beneficiary. Is that correct? Mr D.T. Redman: No. We do not trade on Sundays, as your legislation prescribes. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: But the member is able to do that, is he not? Mr D.T. Redman: That is under the Liquor Licensing Act, Premier. That is a different act. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The member is able to trade on Sundays if he wants to. Mr D.T. Redman: No. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I think the member runs a liquor outlet, and he is able to trade on Sundays, because the council in Denmark, where the member’s business is located — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, member for Murray! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: — voted for extended trading hours. I think that Denmark council decision was to allow extended trading hours from 8.00 am to 8.00 pm seven days a week.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2231

Mr D.T. Redman: That vote does not impact on my business. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is the member’s electorate! Is the member for Stirling agitating in his electorate to overturn the council’s decision? Mr D.T. Redman: I am taking the bigger picture argument, Premier. There is a bigger picture here that the Premier is missing on this issue. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I think the short answer to my question to the member for Stirling is: no; the member is not agitating. In the member’s own electorate, he has accepted extended trading hours. Has the member on any single occasion agitated against extended trading hours in his own electorate? Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: No; I do not need the member for Merredin to answer. Has the member for Stirling on any single occasion — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr D.T. Redman: You need to research this a bit harder. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I have done my research. That is why all the members of the National Party were caught completely off guard when they raised the issue of retail trading hours. They were completely ignorant of the fact that there is already deregulated trading in all their electorates. That includes the member for Stirling’s electorate. I ask the member for Stirling again: has the member on any single occasion agitated against extended trading hours in his own electorate? Mr D.T. Redman: I did under the Liquor Licensing Act, where I did not support seven-day-a-week trading. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The member has just told me the Liquor Licensing Act is different! The fact of the matter is that the members of the National Party—who make the most consistent noise on this issue—do not agitate in their own electorates, because all their electorates have deregulated trading hours! The member for Bunbury made an unusual contribution to the discussion this morning—one of his rare entrées into political debate. Perhaps the member for Bunbury — Mr T. Buswell: Don’t you think he’s entitled to do that? What an ignorant man! Withdrawal of Remark The SPEAKER: Order, Leader of the Opposition! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for that comment and direct that he withdraw it. Mr T. Buswell: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I withdraw the use of the word “ignorant”. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The member for Bunbury has had time to think of the answer now. I understand that last night the council in Bunbury voted to accept extended trading hours in Bunbury. Is the member going to oppose that? Mr R.F. Johnson: Why not answer the member for Stirling’s question? The SPEAKER: Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: For the sake of Hansard, we have been waiting 10 to 15 seconds. Member for Bunbury — Several members interjected. Mr G.M. Castrilli: Do you know whether I have opposed it or not? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I am asking the member the question. Mr G.M. Castrilli: I am asking you! Do you know whether I have opposed it or not? Come on! Answer the question! Do you know whether I have opposed it or not? You do not know, do you? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I think the member is demonstrating a slight — The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr G.M. Castrilli: Answer my question! Do you know whether I have opposed it or not? Tell us! I want to know now! Tell us!

2232 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The member for Stirling has gone a bit red in the face and has slunk back there. Member for Bunbury, tell us! Mr G.M. Castrilli: No! You tell me! You know everything! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: No, I do not. I want the member to tell us. I want the member for Bunbury to give us his position on the Bunbury decision. Mr R.F. Johnson: You have not answered the question from the member for Stirling! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Yes, I have. I have answered him. Mr R.F. Johnson: No, you have not. Mr G.M. Castrilli: Tell me! Do you know whether I have opposed it or not? Mr J.A. McGinty: You have said that five times! How about answering the question! Mr G.M. Castrilli: Well, it’s about time the Premier answered the question! Come on! Tell us! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Mr Speaker, I think I have made a point. Mr G.M. Castrilli: You have made no point! Unless you’re a mate of the bloody mayor, how would you know? I want to know from you! How do you know whether I have opposed it or not? You’ve got a big league job going in the City of Bunbury! You tell me! Come on! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Let us see! We have an uncertain position here on extended trading hours! The National Party vehemently opposes it—except in their own electorates, where they are happy to accept it, and where they even get a benefit out of it for their own personal businesses. We know that the new and more enlightened member of the Liberal Party in this Parliament is a strong supporter of extended trading hours. Correct? Mr C.C. Porter: I cannot wait to see your bill! When is it coming? Where is the detail? Where is the bill? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: We know that the member for Bunbury will not tell us — Mr G.M. Castrilli: The Premier would not know! You tell me! Come on! I will tell you what, Premier—I will answer your question if you answer mine first. Come on! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I have answered the member’s question. Mr G.M. Castrilli: No, you have not. Come on! Tell me! Do you know whether I have supported or opposed seven-day trading in Bunbury? It is a simple question! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The answer to the member for Bunbury’s question is no. That is why I asked the member what his position was. What is it? Mr G.M. Castrilli: I have opposed seven-day trading in Bunbury. Is that all right? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Yes, it is. The member will now be able to go down to his electorate and oppose extended trading hours in Bunbury. That is good. Point of Order Mr D.T. REDMAN: Mr Speaker, I have to make the point that I was the member who asked the question. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members, the member for Stirling is particularly accurate in his summation that he asked the question; I remember him doing so. One of the problems of encouraging interjections is that we sometimes drift off from where the question came from. I am sure the Premier has already answered the member for Stirling’s question. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the member for Stirling. I think we now have his position on this matter. In relation to the question about which businesses would benefit from extended trading hours, businesses that want to operate under an extended trading hour regime can do so. Mr B.J. Grylls: Ninety-eight per cent of retail businesses in Western Australia currently can open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Then the member should not have a problem. I think he is answering the question: if they can, they do.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2233

EXTENDED TRADING HOURS 190. Mr D.T. REDMAN to the Premier: I have a supplementary question. Does the Premier agree that the major beneficiaries of his push for extended trading hours will be Coles, Woolworths and Harvey Norman? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: Did we not just hear the Leader of the National Party say that 98 per cent of small businesses already take advantage of extended trading hours? One would assume that they do that because they see an advantage in it. I see an advantage for the general public. Mr B.J. Grylls: Who voted against it in a referendum! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Why does the member for Merredin not oppose extended trading hours in his electorate? Mr B.J. Grylls: I do oppose extended trading in my electorate. No shops open on Sunday or after hours. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: They do not have to, but they can if they want to. The National Party’s position is completely at odds with the reality in its members’ electorates. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Yes; I believe that big and small businesses will benefit, but so will the general public. I ask the question rhetorically, but why is it that I can go to Bunnings on a Sunday but cannot go to an electrical distributor around the corner? Why is that? Why do we not take government out of the equation and let a person operating a business who wants to open on a Sunday do so—why not? GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT REFORM 191. Mr P.B. WATSON to the Treasurer: Will the Treasurer give an update on the government’s procurement reform program and its benefits for both urban and regional Western Australia? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: I will be pleased to do that because I know that the member for Albany is a strong supporter of our Buy Local program. I was very pleased to open a regional buying centre on behalf of the government during a recent visit to Albany. This week I spoke about the government’s commitment to tax reform. We also have a very significant reform program in government procurement that has brought benefits to not only the metropolitan area, but also regional Western Australia. We have tried to assess those benefits by surveying agency heads to canvass their views on the efficiency of government procurement. During the five years of the reform program they have overwhelmingly commented that the process has improved substantially. Ninety-seven per cent of the agency heads surveyed for the 2007 progress report were satisfied with the level of procurement service now provided by the Department of Treasury and Finance, with the mean score being 5.9 out of seven. Four years ago, the figure was only 62 per cent satisfaction with a mean score of 4.7 out of seven. Since 2003-04 the program has achieved gross cost and efficiency savings estimated at $310 million, with about $27 million in costs. Of the net savings of $283 million, about $257 million has been reinvested into key government priorities, with the rest remaining with agencies. We have modernised supply policies. We have updated the general conditions of contract and tender request documents. We have created a client procurement division within the Department of Treasury and Finance. We have introduced annual procurement forward planning as standard practice and we have expanded the use of purchasing cards to streamline low-value buying. Common-use contracts have been embedded into e- procurement systems, and there is a new contract and development management system. Outstanding progress has been made in procurement reform. The program has won the overall Premier’s Award for Excellence in Public Sector Management. However, I acknowledge that at the beginning of the program there were concerns about the Buy Local policy and whether the reform would have a negative impact on that policy. Quite to the contrary, it has had a positive effect on the Buy Local policy outcome. There are now four regional buying centres, located in Bunbury, Kalgoorlie, Geraldton and Albany, which is the new centre. During the first 18 months of operation of the initial three centres—Bunbury, Kalgoorlie and Geraldton—112 contracts valued at $32 million were awarded. Those contracts were won by 171 individual suppliers, 125 of which were based in the region. The Department of Treasury and Finance has also worked with the Department of Housing and Works to reform property services and building maintenance arrangements, resulting in further savings of $10.5 million by the

2234 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] middle of last year. The procurement reform program is a very successful reform program for the government and I have great pleasure in tabling the “2007 Procurement Reform Progress Report”. [See paper 3795.]

COMMUNITY-BASED ORDERS — SUPERVISION 192. Mr C.C. PORTER to the Attorney General: I refer the Attorney General to a report in The West Australian today that Magistrate Vose said, when referring to the absence in this state of real supervision of community-based orders, that non-custodial penalties handed down in the Children’s Court “boiled down to absolutely nothing”. Magistrate Vose further said that in one instance this meant that a 16-year-old offender would — receive a tick-a-box order so he can walk away from doing a ram raid thinking ‘that’s cool, the court put me on an order but I don’t have to do anything’. Will the Attorney General acknowledge that any justice system that does not properly supervise community orders is a system that completely fails to punish a range of offenders, including serious offenders; and that this situation is completely unacceptable? The SPEAKER: It is not within the Attorney General’s province to answer the parts of the question that ask for an opinion. Where facts have been asked for, the Attorney General may respond. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: I read the comments attributed to Magistrate Vose in this morning’s newspaper. I have not had the opportunity to discuss the matter with him. I agree with the member for Murdoch’s broad proposition that penalties handed down by the court, be they in the nature of a term of imprisonment, fine or community service order, should be enforced.

TAXIS — ACCESS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES 193. Mr A.P. O’GORMAN to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: Will the minister advise the house of the latest initiatives that have been put in place to improve access to taxis for people with disabilities? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Joondalup for the question. He has raised the issue of disability taxi services in this house on several occasions. I also want to acknowledge the member for Southern River, who has done very good work as the chair of the customer committee that helps the government constantly improve services. Today the government has been able to announce two new initiatives: first, the introduction of Braille signage on the side of taxis. We are the first state to introduce such signage, which gives visually impaired people confidence that they can know the number of the taxi they are getting into. The members from the blind community on the customer committee have told us that this is an important advance for them. We have again been able to fund this initiative out the government’s fabulous taxi industry development fund, which is a result of the incredible reforms in the taxi industry, including the removal of the investors to make sure that this is an industry that is run for the benefit of the customers and the people who operate the taxis. The second initiative—which the member will be very interested to know about—is that we have started a three- month trial with Black and White Taxis, which runs the majority of wheelchair taxis. The government will fund it to provide a standby taxi for the next three months, so that if a wheelchair taxi job is not allocated to a driver within the space of five to 10 minutes, it can pick that person up. We are very determined to improve the service levels to people in wheelchairs, who are so very dependent on our taxi services. If this system works, we plan to make this a compulsory requirement for taxi dispatch services that administer wheelchair taxis. This is more innovation from the state government to improve taxi services in this state.

ROYAL PERTH HOSPITAL COMPUTERS 194. Dr K.D. HAMES to the Minister for Health: I refer to the minister’s extraordinary claim on the Channel 10 news about his failure to protect the highly- sensitive and private information of patients of the Royal Perth Hospital, when he stated — The reporter stole the computer in order to fabricate a story. I also refer to the minister’s accusation that a journalist at The West Australian was “gormless” for not appreciating that — The winds of change are blowing.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2235

(1) Given that the minister has, no doubt, many pressing matters of government arising from being both the Minister for Health and the Attorney General, is involving himself in the criticism of journalism and journalists a good use of government time and resources? (2) Given that the computers with private patient information were left in an unsecured laneway, why was the minister defaming an individual when a formal investigation had not been carried out to determine the facts of what occurred? Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: Don’t you remember what you used to say about The West Australian journalists? You used to describe some of them as my press secretaries! Point of Order Dr K.D. HAMES: I believe I asked the question of the Minister for Health — Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: We were just trying to assist you. The SPEAKER: That is quite true. I am sure the Minister for Health does not need assistance from any of his colleagues. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) In answer to the question of what was I doing responding to questions from journalists: that is what I do. Dr K.D. Hames: I don’t think that is exactly what I asked. I said “criticising journalists”. Mr J.A. McGINTY: If they ask me questions and they ask me what my opinion is on things, I will give it to them. Mr T. Buswell: Not always; not if you don’t like the question! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will happily give it. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: It is inappropriate for two people, in a serial method, to ask and interject, and then the next to one to interject, and then the next one to interject. I call both the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The second question that was asked was about the computers at Royal Perth Hospital. They were not left in the laneway. I went to Royal Perth Hospital on the Sunday morning, immediately after that article appeared, and met with senior doctors and other staff responsible for IT, as well as for the management of the hospital. I got a comprehensive briefing on what arrangements were in place for the disposal of computers that were no longer required. It became apparent that keeping the computers under lock and key—which is what did happen—prior to those computers being put in a bin to be disposed of, was the appropriate thing to happen. In transit—and I made this point on television—there was always an element of risk. The bin into which the computers were put to be taken away and crushed, so that there was no prospect of them ever ending up on the market, was left unattended for a period of time in the heart of the hospital, in a place in the hospital to which the public had no reasonable access. Dr K.D. Hames: I heard it was no further than from me to you in an open laneway. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr J.A. McGINTY: No, it was not. I went to the hospital and I took the journalists through and showed them; so it was not in that way at all. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member ought to go and have a look; I did, on the Sunday morning, first thing. The important thing is that we can always learn from these matters, and there are always lessons on how things can be tightened further to protect public interest. Mr P.D. Omodei: Did the journalist steal the computer, or not? Mr J.A. McGINTY: He admitted to the Royal Perth Hospital people on the Saturday that he did. Yes, is the answer to that question. Mr C.C. Porter: He admitted theft? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes.

2236 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

Mr C.C. Porter: Did he admit that he stole it? Mr J.A. McGINTY: If a person takes someone else’s property with the intention to deprive him of it, that is theft, my friend. Mr C.C. Porter: Not from a tip! If you take something that is completely unowned, it cannot constitute theft. Mr J.A. McGINTY: I simply make the point that this occurred in the heart of the hospital in a place that the public had no access to. Mr C.C. Porter: Was it laneway or heart? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Sorry? Mr C.C. Porter: Laneway or heart of the hospital? Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was a courtyard in the heart of the hospital. Mr C.C. Porter: A courtyard in the heart of the hospital? Mr J.A. McGINTY: The journalist concerned made certain concessions to hospital staff on the Saturday. I was made aware of it when I came out of the Subiaco Oval after a great Fremantle Dockers win, and I arranged for the editor of the Sunday Times to be rung and told that one of his journalists had entered hospital property— arguably a trespass—and taken property that did not belong to him, which is arguably burglary, and I would have thought certainly theft if he has admitted that. The matter was then reported to the police. MEMBER FOR ROCKINGHAM — APOLOGY TO ETHNIC COMMUNITY 195. Dr S.C. THOMAS to the Minister for Education and Training: I refer to the minister’s comments — Mr M.P. Murray interjected. The SPEAKER: Take a seat, member. I call the member for Collie-Wellington to order for the first time. Point of Order Mr P.B. WATSON: I heard the member for Murray saying he should go back to smoking something, which is inappropriate. The SPEAKER: I did not hear any such comment. Questions without Notice Resumed Dr S.C. THOMAS: I will start my question again, Mr Speaker. I refer to the minister’s comments yesterday that the member for Ballajura was the “worst ethnic branch stacker in the history of the Labor Party in WA.” I also refer the minister to the Department of Education and Training’s policy on anti-racism, which states that the department “is committed to the elimination of racial discrimination and harassment in its structure, culture, curriculum and working environment”, and further states that it, “promotes the recognition and acceptance of equality of all employees, regardless of their race.” How do the minister’s comments yesterday and his refusal to properly and adequately apologise for them today reflect the policy of his department that, as minister, he promotes and endorses, and to which he expects his staff to adhere? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: Of course I endorse the policy of the department, which is opposed to racism, absolutely and completely. Indeed, the Department of Education and Training has a range of policies embedded into the curriculum to encourage students not to engage in racist behaviour and to ensure that students around Western Australia have a deep understanding of Aboriginal perspectives and how to understand Aboriginal culture. We have an inclusive school strategy which is all about ensuring that our students are tolerant and understanding of other students who come to our schools. We also have English as a second language programs, and so on and so forth. These are all policies that we endorse and support. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Warren-Blackwood to order for the third and final time. Mr M. McGOWAN: Of course I endorse all of those policies. Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition to order. Mr M. McGOWAN: I addressed the other issues that the member for Capel raised earlier this morning. I indicated to the house that if people had taken offence at what I said yesterday, I am sorry about that. I also indicated to the house that I do not have any tolerance of branch stacking and people who exploit vulnerable people, and that is my view.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2237

SPEED CAMERA FINES 196. Mr M.P. WHITELY to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services: I refer to the front page article in The West Australian on 7 April 2008. Do the figures given provide an accurate comparison between the states on speed cameras and the number of fines issued? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for his question. The short answer is no. There is an unfortunate lack of accuracy. The West Australian and other media outlets play a very important role in highlighting issues relating to road safety and road safety enforcement. There is an area of necessary debate about what is the best enforcement regime, whether it be Multanovas or hand-held cameras, and the way in which enforcement is carried out. The government is undertaking a review to find out how better to do that. This is primarily driven by the fact that we have to buy new equipment, so we need to make sure that we put a far better system in place. The government seeks to do so. Unfortunately, The West Australian made a few minor errors in a front-page article that sought to promote a very important debate. I will examine three of those errors. The article states — The analysis by The West Australian found 494,934 Multanova-generated infringements were issued to WA’s 1.42 million drivers last financial year . . . Those figures were taken from a freedom of information request to Western Australia Police by The West Australian. It asked how many civilian motorists were caught by laser or speed cameras. That is what the figure of 494 934 is in reference to. The West Australian was given the correct number in answer to the question asked, which was about lasers or speed cameras. However, the figure was somehow mistranslated on the front page of The West Australian, and it used the larger number in reference only to Multanovas, ruling out all the other infringements of which there are a very large number. Unfortunately, The West Australian got that one wrong. Further along, the article stated that in Victoria there were 170 speed camera infringements for every 1 000 drivers. However, The West Australian arrived at that figure after leaving out mobile speed cameras, red light cameras and point-to-point cameras. To make a comparison between Western Australia and Victoria, The West Australian took the larger figure for Western Australia and claimed that it applied to only one part of the capture, and published the figures for one part of the capture in Victoria and claimed it was the total figure. The West Australian got that slightly wrong. Further along, the article states — NSW’s 145 speed cameras are all fixed units. I rang the New South Wales police that day and was told that they do in fact have other speed cameras that are not fixed cameras. They have cameras mounted on cars. The infringement figures published in The West Australian, and the statement that all New South Wales speed cameras are fixed, are simply not true. It is a very important issue that needs to be debated, so we need to have accuracy. Western Australia Police has already acknowledged that it made an error when answering the freedom of information request from The West Australian. The police said that there were 494 934 Multanova-generated infringements, but the figure had been double-counted because under owner-onus, an infringement is counted twice because it is initially issued to the owner of the vehicle, who is not responsible for the offence. This means that approximately 55 000 infringements were double-counted. The figure should have been 439 363 for all infringements. If the hand-held camera infringements, numbering more than 114 000, were removed, the total number of Multanova speed infringements for 2006-07 would be 325 025. This is an important debate and we might make some progress if the debate is based on reliable statistics, rather than using numbers that simply make no sense. TRADING HOURS Standing Orders Suspension — Motion MR D.T. REDMAN (Stirling) [2.53 pm] — without notice: I move — That so much of standing orders be suspended as is necessary to enable the following motion to be moved forthwith and debated under the time limits applying to matters of public interest under standing order 101 — That this house calls on the state government to honour the 2005 referendum on trading hours and undertake to maintain the current regulated trading hour regime. I will not spend a long time on this motion other than to say that I have had discussions with the Leader of the House, who has indicated that the government will support the National Party’s wish to debate a motion under the guise of an MPI, given that the MPI allocation for this week has already been used up. I will not take long on this, but I thank the Leader of the House for giving the National Party a chance and for showing some equity in the house.

2238 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta — Leader of the House) [2.54 pm]: The government will support the motion to suspend standing orders for the reason that earlier in the week, when the Liberal Party moved to suspend standing orders, the government amended the suspension so that it became the MPI for the week. I was not informed at the time that the Liberal Party had promised this week’s MPI to the National Party. Unlike others, the government is not about dudding people, and we think it is appropriate for the National Party to have an MPI this week. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Question put and passed with an absolute majority. Motion MR D.T. REDMAN (Stirling) [2.55 pm]: I move — That this house calls on the state government to honour the 2005 referendum on trading hours and undertake to maintain the current regulated trading hour regime. The National Party has very strong views on this issue. I will take the opportunity to direct some remarks in response to comments made by the Premier. I highlight that the Premier made the strong point that he believes the National Party to be focusing on the issue as it affects regional seats and not as it affects the broader Western Australian population. The Premier made reference to my business. I point out that the Premier is quite wrong to draw a link between Denmark as a tourist precinct town with extended trading hours, and the trading regime of my business. It is quite different. My business falls under the current legislation, which means I am allowed to trade as a small business. There is no link at all with Denmark being a tourist precinct. The Premier should do some homework on that issue. I will give a quick summary of the National Party’s position. In common with 60 per cent of the Western Australian population, the National Party does not support deregulated trading hours. We oppose it on a number of grounds, not the least of which is the result of the 2005 referendum. The people of Western Australia voted against deregulation for a variety of reasons relating to the same concerns that are felt by the National Party. It is also to do with lifestyle, family time, working hours and other commitments that families in Western Australia have. The National Party is concerned about the market dominance of major supermarket chains, and the way in which the flow-on impact of this will reduce the market share of small to medium-sized businesses. The National Party’s position is that it supports small business in Western Australia. I highlight the market share of small businesses, because reference is made in some Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia reports about the increase in the number of small businesses in states in which trading hours have been deregulated. Something in the region of 81 per cent of businesses in Western Australia are small to medium-sized businesses. One could argue that that is a quite high percentage and that the high percentage is linked to the trading hours regime. The National Party’s concerns about market dominance extend to the impact on local producers. I will refer to comments that have been made about that issue and the issue of the reduction of Western Australian product on supermarket shelves. We know that Western Australians have very strong and parochial feelings about Western Australian grown product. People like to see Western Australian product on supermarket shelves. The National Party believes that the deregulation of trading hours in Western Australia would be a retrograde step for maintenance of the level of Western Australian product on supermarket shelves. I do not want to downplay this, but my third point concerns the social and community issues associated with market dominance. It is something that is often underrated in our communities. A number of people have brought to me their concerns about the family unit, the work/play balance and the potential impact deregulation will have on Western Australia’s social balance. These are the three points I make in summary of the National Party’s position on this issue. The history of debate on this issue in this house is quite long. The most recent review, in 2003, made recommendations about extending trading hours on weeknights in the metropolitan area. It also made recommendations to lift the staff limit for businesses designated as small retail shops to 20 during normal hours and on Saturdays. Under current legislation there is a limit of 13 staff on the floor at any one time. The 2003 review did not support the introduction of Sunday trading because it did not believe it to be in the best interests of Western Australians. Of course, the 2005 trading hours referendum followed that review. The first question related to trading until 9.00 pm from Monday to Friday, and 57.46 per cent of Western Australians voted no. The second question related to Sunday trading, and 59.56 per cent of Western Australians said no. Those numbers are also reflected in the seat of Willagee—the Premier’s seat—and in a number of metropolitan seats, which, it could be argued, would be more strongly of the view that trading hours should be deregulated. Following that, we had the issue of the Woolworths takeover of Action stores in Western Australia in 2005. The SPEAKER: I will interrupt the member’s contribution to this debate. I think the siren for the pretend fire is about to commence. The member will be able to continue his comments as soon as this test is over.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2239

[Emergency evacuation alarm system tested.] The SPEAKER: If anyone needs an interpreted copy of the procedure, I have a copy of what was said! Mr D.T. REDMAN: Following the most recent review of trading hours in 2003, the next major debate on this issue was about the Woolworths takeover of Action stores in Western Australia. That debate prompted this house to refer the matter to a standing committee for inquiry. The committee investigated a number of matters, one of which was the issue of market dominance of the supermarkets in Western Australia. I am referring to the fourth report of the Economics and Industry Standing Committee, “Report on the Inquiry into the Production and Marketing of Foodstuffs”. It is certainly a good report. It is also a good read for those who have the time to read it. I refer the house to a couple of findings in the report. On page 11, finding 3, which relates to market share changes, states — In the six years to 2002, the major supermarket chains increased their share of the national packaged grocery market by more than 16 percentage points. Contrasting the national trend, the major supermarkets achieved only modest gains (5 percent) in the West Australian packaged grocery market. I argue that a regulated trading hours regime keeps a measure of control over that market share. On page 13, finding 4, which relates to market share nationally, states — In 2004, the major chains (including Franklins) accounted for around 79 percent of the packaged grocery market nationally and 62 percent in Western Australia. Western Australia bucks the trend in the dominance of the major supermarket chains. On page 21, finding 8 states — There is a high level of concern, particularly amongst growers, that due to inequality of bargaining power between small suppliers and the major supermarket chains, there is considerable pressure to accept less than favourable terms of trade, and that margins for growers have not increased compared to retailer margins. That issue has gained a fair amount of publicity in the media in recent times. I refer to the concerns about monopsony power—the power of supply. Finding 9 states — The value of fresh produce being purchased by the major supermarkets from Central Markets around Australia fell by 26 percent between 1999 and 2004 as supermarkets bypass wholesale markets in favour of direct supply contracts with growers. The committee report is an interesting read, and it highlights the National Party’s concerns with market dominance issues. We make a strong link between this debate on trading hours and those concerns that have been highlighted in this parliamentary committee report. I was co-opted to the standing committee, along with the member for Warren-Blackwood, and I know that people were concerned about raising issues directly with the committee for fear of repercussions that might affect the contracts that they had with major players. It could be argued that this report does not highlight all the concerns in the marketplace, including the issue of unconscionable conduct, that we know are rife in the business. The committee report also refers to the Trade Practices Act. Again, that issue has been discussed federally on numerous occasions. I am referring in particular to concerns about predatory pricing, unconscionable conduct and creeping acquisitions. One of my biggest concerns, and the reason that I do not support deregulating trading hours in Western Australia, is that the Trade Practices Act does not effectively deal with these issues. In the absence of teeth in the Trade Practices Act, we must do something at a state level to maintain what we see as a sense of balance in the marketplace. At the time of the acquisition of Action stores by Woolworths, a letter was written on 15 June 2005 by Hon Kim Chance, the Minister for Agriculture and Food, to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. The letter states that, as revealed in the state referendum on retail trading hours, the public strongly supports the independent retail sector in WA on the basis of the services it provides, retail market diversity and choice, and the level of competition against the major supermarket chains. It goes on to state that the state’s primary producers are also deeply concerned about the growing dominance of the major food retailing chains and the expected impacts on producers, small businesses and regional communities. The letter points very directly at the concerns that we need to be cognisant of in making decisions about retail trading hours in Western Australia. As highlighted in the committee report, the Western Australian government’s submission to the committee states — Higher retail market concentration will further erode consumer choice, reduce supplier access to local markets and impact adversely on rural and regional communities to competitively supply a diverse range of quality groceries in the future.

2240 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

The Woolworths acquisition appears likely to result in a lower availability of local WA fresh produce and grocery lines to consumers, due to the tendency for the major retailers to source more product nationally and internationally, rather than locally. Coles and Woolworths have clearly demonstrated their preference for national buying strategies, with WA producers feeling the consequences in terms of lower prices and market access. I will now go through what I consider to be some statements of fact. First, the consequences of extended retail trading hours in Western Australia will lead to a greater market share of the grocery market by the major supermarket chains. That issue was acknowledged by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia. Page 17 of its September 2007 report titled “Retail Trading Hours in Western Australia: a case for reform” refers to the acquisition of Action stores by Woolworths and to the acquisition of Foodland by Metcash. The report states — . . . independents have a larger market share in WA than any other state, . . . It is likely that the current trading hours regime has contributed to this result, by providing independent retailers with a monopoly on weeknight and Sunday trading. I make no apology for supporting that position. The Chamber of Commerce and Industry has made a link between retail trading hours and the greater share of the grocery market by the major supermarket chains. I am pleased that the member for Cottesloe is in the chamber. During the debate on whether to send the issue of Woolworths’ takeover of Action stores to a standing committee, the member for Cottesloe was just two seats away from me when he said, “As an agricultural producer, I stand very proudly and therefore feel bound to support the National Party motion.” On Wednesday, 1 June 2005, the member for Cottesloe told Parliament — Competition policy has been raised to a status in Australia that it does not deserve, and has never deserved. It has always been misunderstood from its origins. The recent trading hours debate in this state was nothing to do with consumer choice, even though it was portrayed to be about choice—it was about market share. I give credit to Woolworths, as its representatives admitted to me that it was about market share; at least they were up front. They were acting in their business interests and the interests of their shareholders. I have a lot of respect for the member for Cottesloe’s knowledge, which is why I refer to the comments that he made at that time. The Australian concentration of the grocery market share is not repeated anywhere else in the world. A PricewaterhouseCoopers report from June 2007 for the National Association of Retail Grocers of Australia is titled “The economic contribution of small to medium-sized grocery retailers to the Australian economy, with a particular focus on Western Australia”. I will compare the market share positions of Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, which are arguably three of the major countries in the developed world. The top two grocery companies in Australia control 79 per cent of the turnover. That is their market share. The top two grocery companies in the UK control 48 per cent of the turnover and in the US they control 20 per cent. Australia has one of the most concentrated markets in the world. In Australia, the top five grocery companies control 86 per cent of the retail share and in the UK it is 80 per cent. The top five grocery companies in the UK control as much of the retail share as the top two companies in Australia. In the US, the top five companies control 42 per cent of the market share. Australia’s situation is not replicated anywhere else in the world. Members are aware that many other countries are dealing with the issue of market dominance, yet they do not have anything like the level of market concentration that we have in Australia. They are grappling with the issue well before it gets to the point it is at in Australia and in Western Australia, although Western Australia has a reasonable balance, which we need to protect. Greater market share of the major supermarket chains leads to monopsony powers; that is, the power over supply. Interestingly, the member for Cottesloe made that point in the same speech three years ago. If we want Western Australian products to be stored on supermarket shelves, we must support the independent grocery sector by maintaining a regulated trading hours regime. If we want to support small business, we must maintain a regulated trading hours regime. This issue is not just about country WA. The Premier seems to believe that the National Party is focused only on country WA. We are talking about the market dominance of the supermarket chains and the impact that has on all Western Australians. A written declaration was laid on the table of the European Parliament in October last year and was supported by more than half of the 785 members of that Parliament. The declaration highlights concern that the retail trade is increasingly dominated by a small number of supermarket chains and it raises concerns about retailers fast becoming gatekeepers who control farmers and other suppliers. The declaration suggests that the big supermarkets are abusing their buying power to force down the prices that are paid to suppliers to unsustainable levels. It refers also to the squeezes on suppliers having negative knock-on effects on the quality of employment and environmental protection. It warns that the number of diverse products and retail outlets could decrease, along with cultural heritage. European countries have introduced legislation to attempt to limit such abuse, yet

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2241 large supermarkets increasingly operate across national boundaries, making harmonised EU legislation desirable. The declaration was supported by 436 EU members. Countries that do not have the market concentration that exists in Australia are raising their concerns about market concentration in that forum. I refer now to the social and community benefits to small and medium-sized businesses. I have not argued this point strongly in this place. Nevertheless, it is a concern to people in the community. In 2006 a British cross- party inquiry released a report into extending working on the weekend and Sunday trading called “Whose convenience?” The inquiry concluded that there was a need to broaden the assessment of retail trading hours beyond the economic argument and that the social cost of extended trading was potentially too high a cost to bear. I strongly advise members that the debate of trading hours should extend to the social and community concerns, and not just the economic concerns that are often raised in isolation. The notion that extended trading hours operate in the rest of the world is also garbage. A number of members have said that we are behind the play. A number of people have told me that they have been to European countries—I cannot think of which ones off the top of my head—that neither trade on Sunday nor have extended hours; they shut after lunch. The notion that other countries are ahead of us is garbage and should not be the reason why we go down a particular path. I will now refer to the Chamber of Commerce and Industry report that I mentioned earlier. The CCI cites six case studies for why we should consider deregulating trading hours in Western Australia. Three of the six cases refer to businesses that have had the benefit of operating under extended trading hours because they are small retail shops. They have grown to the point at which they have reached the threshold at which they need either to make the decision to trade during normal hours or to cease growing. Therefore, they argue that it is unfair on them because they cannot expand their business. I can understand the principles of the CCI and why it would support the position of allowing those businesses to grow and develop. However, the existing trading hours legislation has allowed three of those six businesses to be successful. Those businesses get to a point when they are limited by the thresholds. They then change the rules and extend them further. I have a little difficulty with that argument. The report also states that one of the main tenets of extended trading hours will be an increase in sales, employment and investment in Western Australia. Who will get the increase in sales? If members have read widely on this issue, they would know that there is no evidence to show there would be an increase in sales but there is evidence to show there would be a shift in who would get those sales. As I said in this debate at the outset, I am concerned about a shift in market share to the major chains. The independent sector is also more labour intensive. The report refers to employment. Given the number of full- time equivalent staff per dollar of turnover, the independent sector is much more labour intensive. It is interesting to note that in the retail sector at a national level Coles and Woolworths control 78 to 79 per cent of turnover but employ only 43 per cent of staff, whereas the independents control around 19 to 20 per cent of turnover but employ 57 per cent of staff in the retail sector. I would strongly argue that the independents nationally are stronger on the issue of employment, and that applies obviously to Western Australia as well. On the issue of investment, who will invest under a deregulated regime? I argue that it will not be small businesses; it will be the bigger end of town. That is a concern for the National Party because members from all sides of the house often say that small business is the backbone of this country, and indeed the state. In summary, the retail trading hours debate is about market share of the retail dollar. Regulated trading hours are about preferential treatment of small business, and I make no apology for my support of that position. In the absence of a strong Trade Practices Act, regulated trading hours remain one of the few pieces of legislation that we can use to maintain a measure of balance in the retail sector in WA. Market concentration in Australia is not reflected anywhere else in the world. We have every reason to be concerned about the situation in Australia, and indeed Western Australia. The Labor Party wants to deregulate and the Liberal Party has guiding principles for an open-market philosophy. Clearly, the Labor and Liberal Parties are the Coles and Woolworths of politics in Western Australia. In closing, I say to them: listen to the people of Western Australia on this one. MR B.J. GRYLLS (Merredin — Leader of the National Party) [3.22 pm]: In the few minutes remaining I rise to support the member for Stirling for his contribution and for his extensive knowledge and research on this issue. The protection of small business in Western Australia is core business for the Western Australian National Party. I ask members thinking about supporting the deregulation of trading hours to please understand that they would be supporting an expansion in market share for Coles and Woolworths. If members want that to happen, they should go right ahead and support the deregulation of trading hours; but I ask them to please understand that that is what they will be doing. Western Australia will not be a better place to visit or a better place in which to shop if trading hours are deregulated. The only change members will see from deregulated trading hours will be that the key beneficiaries, Coles and Woolworths, will take market share from independent retailers. About 98 per cent of retailers in Western Australia currently fall under the threshold and can already open on weeknights and weekends. If the argument is that WA should have a vibrant retail sector open on weeknights and weekends, the counterargument is that 98 per cent of businesses in Western Australia can already open. They choose not to for lifestyle reasons, because they do not believe they will make money out of it and because

2242 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] they do not believe that enough customers would come into their stores. Members need not think that deregulated trading hours will be the panacea for making the central business district of Perth — The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The conversations of members on my left are competing with the member who has the call, which is unfair. I ask members to take their conversations outside or desist. I am sorry, member for Merredin. Mr B.J. GRYLLS: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Members need not think that the deregulation of trading hours will be the panacea for removing the “Dullsville” tag from Perth. I do not believe the Dullsville tag actually exists. However, if it is perceived by some people to exist and that it can be removed by allowing people to shop at Coles or Woolworths, it may be that we have some serious problems. There is much more for people to do in Western Australia than to shop at Coles and Woolworths. This issue is very important for regional small business. It is often suggested that regional small business is deregulated by decree of shire councils. Members should please understand that we argue this case because of the strength of Metcash in its role as supplier to independents. It is important for Metcash to have that buying power and leverage in the market. If Metcash, and therefore the independents, lose that buying power and leverage, Coles and Woolworths will continue to use their economies of scale to offer better specials that will continue to drive up the market share of Coles and Woolworths and continue to decrease the market share of smaller stores. The Premier today, in one of the examples he used, gave the best example. He was talking about Bunnings. Obviously Bunnings is the best example of what happens when one player is allowed to dominate the sector. Mr E.S. Ripper: Do you enjoy shopping at Bunnings? Mr B.J. GRYLLS: Everyone shops at Bunnings because it has decimated the small independent hardware sector. Mr E.S. Ripper: So you choose to go to Bunnings? Mr B.J. GRYLLS: I try to go to small independent hardware shops as often as possible; in Merredin it is Two Dogs Hardware. It must have buying power to compete with Bunnings. If Bunnings increases its market share, Two Dogs will not have an opportunity to compete in the buying environment and higher prices will be passed on to consumers in the Merredin community. Retailers might not agree with it, and I have no problem with that. The National Party has clearly put its position that deregulation of trading hours is a pat on the back to Coles and Woolworths, which will result in the expansion — Mr J.H.D. Day: What do all the Wesfarmers shareholders think about it? Mr B.J. GRYLLS: I can tell the member for Darling Range what Western Australians think. I am very clear on it because we held a referendum on this issue. Western Australians voted strongly against Sunday trading—I think 60 per cent—and 58 per cent voted against an extension of weeknight trading. The National Party’s position is to support the majority of Western Australians—they live in the country and in the metropolitan area—who opposed the extension of trading hours because they felt it would affect small business. The National Party makes no apology for that. DR J.M. WOOLLARD (Alfred Cove) [3.26 pm]: I will be supporting this motion, which reads — That this house calls on the state government to honour the 2005 referendum on trading hours and undertake to maintain the current regulated trading hour regime. In talking to the motion I remind the government that it has a contract with the community and is accountable to the community for that contract. Prior to the last election this government said to the community that it would hold a referendum on this issue and that it would abide by that referendum. All we have heard since the government won the 2005 election is that it will change trading hours. That is not being accountable to the community. The community overwhelmingly said no. Why is the government, therefore, trying to impose an extension of trading hours by stealth? That is what the government is doing at the moment. I am sure the government has some major initiative lined up but I hope it will not impose an extension of trading hours prior to the next election. I hope this matter becomes an election issue again so that people can see that the government is not accountable. The government made a commitment to hold a referendum and that it would live by that referendum. People who voted in that referendum across Western Australia—certainly those in my electorate— said no. Members of this house should have a conscience vote on this matter. They would know whether the people in their electorates voted for or against extended trading hours. I know that my electorate said no to Sunday trading and to an extension of weeknight trading. Mr B.J. Grylls: The member for Central Kimberley-Pilbara is the only member who could support deregulated trading hours because his was the only electorate that actually supported it. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: One electorate? In that case, this motion that is on the table today should have bipartisan support. It may be that all members today should congratulate the member for Stirling who gave us a

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2243 very good summary of what the community said about this issue. I hope that all members will support this motion and that the government will honour its contract with the community, be accountable to the community and not ignore the community’s wishes. If the government does ignore the community’s wishes, when the next election occurs the community will make the government and all members of this Parliament realise that we are here to represent local communities, local businesses and local families. That is what this debate was about last time; it was about supporting local business and sporting groups. The community said no. Different people in the community said no for different reasons, but the overall response was no to Sunday trading and to the extension of weeknight trading hours. I hope that this government will support this motion today and that the Liberal Party will also remember how the community voted. I hope the Liberal Party will support the National Party today, because the message that the National Party has put into the motion is to listen to the community. The National Party is reminding us of what the community wanted. I hope that members will adhere to that and be accountable to the community. MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont — Treasurer) [3.31 pm]: The motion moved by the member for Stirling is misplaced. The government has honoured the results of the 2005 referendum. We have come into this Parliament and amended the legislation to accord with the referendum result. What we all need to do as a community, though, is debate what we will do during the next four-year parliamentary term. The government has clearly indicated that extended shopping hours should be implemented in the next term of Parliament. The National Party says that it has a strong position on this question. It appears to have a strong position on the metropolitan area, where it never runs any candidates and never wins any seats, but in the areas where it does contest elections and does represent electors, there is a different story. The National Party wishes to preserve an element of deregulation in the areas that it represents while imposing regulations on the areas that it does not represent. Let me give the Leader of the National Party a list of local governments where there is some measure of deregulation of trading hours. They include the City of Albany, the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River, the Shire of Busselton, the Shire of Dandaragan, the Shire of Dardanup, the Shire of Denmark, the Shire of Donnybrook-Balingup, the Shire of Dundas, the Shire of Gingin, the Shire of Harvey, the Shire of Irwin, the City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder, the City of Mandurah, the Shire of Manjimup, the Shire of Mingenew, the Shire of Narembeen, the Shire of Northam, the Shire of Northampton and the Shire of York. I am advised that shopping hours in the Shire of Narembeen have been completely deregulated from 12.01 am to midnight; in other words, there is pretty well twenty-four hour trading available in the shire. I am not sure whether anyone will rock up to a supermarket in Narembeen at two o’clock in the morning and seek to make a purchase, but the opportunity is available should they want it. What we have had from the National Party is a substantial measure of hypocrisy: choice in the areas that it purports to represent; regulation in the areas that other political parties represent. The interesting thing about the argument from the National Party is that it focused entirely on producers and their interests. I ask: what about the customers? We should be thinking about the customers and their rights to make choices about which businesses they will shop at and give them the freedom to shop when they want. The concern of this Parliament should be the rights of the customers. They are the people whom we represent. Customers should have the individual right to make the choice that they want. The National Party laid a complete emphasis on producers and a defence in particular of the IGA franchisees. The IGA franchisees, being backed as they are now by Metcash, are in effect a third supermarket chain. They are a big business with a slightly different structure to the big businesses of Coles and Woolworths. However, they are a big business, and what the National Party wants to do is to use the law of the state to back the interests of that business against the interests of other businesses. I do not see why we should be playing commercial favourites in that way. We should be supporting the rights of the customers. We have not had any contribution from the Liberal Party to this debate. Perhaps the National Party consumed all the time that the Liberal Party might have used. Dr S.C. Thomas: Two minutes. Mr E.S. RIPPER: It has two minutes. What I thought I might do is make a contribution for Liberal Party members, since they seem incapable of making one for themselves. I could not do better than to quote the views of the Liberal Party candidate for Cottesloe, Deidre Willmott. She is an excellent campaigner on this issue. Deidre Willmott said — What we’re really in favour of is choice, choice for business and choice for consumers. The opportunity for people to open their shops and trade on Sundays in competition with those many shops that are already open on Sundays, but across all sectors. It’s not just food, it’s furniture, it’s clothing, it’s office materials, it’s the whole gamut. So we say, why should an activity that is legal for some on a Sunday, and legal for everybody on other days, suddenly be illegal for some, who are doing something perfectly normal, and everyday, on a Sunday, leaving that field clear for some . . . for a particular minority? Deidre Willmott was speaking on 6PR Drive on 12 September 2006. I think that is a very cogent argument for the deregulation of shopping hours; giving customers choice about what they do and not favouring one group of

2244 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] large businesses against another, as the National Party wants to do. Deidre Willmott has made other contributions. In another statement she called on both sides of politics to embrace deregulation before the 2009 election and to end the inconsistencies and inequities in the current law. Because of exemptions granted to various products, she was quoted as saying, it was possible to buy hardware and outdoor furniture on a Sunday, but not indoor furniture and electrical goods. She said — Why should it be illegal to buy electrical goods on a Sunday? That is a very good question: why should it be illegal to buy electrical goods on a Sunday? Why does the National Party want to outlaw the purchase of electrical goods in the metropolitan area on a Sunday? What a stupid position for the National Party to adopt in an area of the state that it has never purported to represent and where it has never been successful in elections. Although I have quoted Deidre Willmott’s comments approvingly, I am a bit more concerned about the position of the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Flip Flop, on the question of retail trading hours. I warn regional members of Parliament that we monitor what they say in regional newspapers and we notice when they say something regionally that they do not say when they are in the Parliament. This is what the Leader of the Opposition said in the Busselton-Margaret River Times of 17 February 2005, according to my notes — I am encouraging people to vote no to both questions of the upcoming referendum, because I feel that the proposed changes will in the long run reduce consumer choice, consumer convenience and impact negatively on many small businesses. That is where the Leader of the Opposition was in February 2005. This was the flip! Later, there was the flop! An article in the Sunday Times of 25 March 2007 states — Mr Buswell said he was preparing a discussion paper on deregulated trading hours to take to the Liberal Party. The article states also — Mr Buswell said one scenario was to deregulate shopping hours, but give councils the right to reject changes in their areas. The Leader of the Opposition repeated that position in The West Australian of 12 July 2007, when he said — “There is an argument to suggest it is not the role of government to determine when a consumer can and can’t shop and similarly when a business can and can’t open,” . . . I agree with that position expressed by the Leader of the Opposition. I also agree with his comment in the Sunday Times of 15 July 2007 — “My view is that we need to reform retail trading hours and move towards seven-day trading,” . . . We have had the flip, and we have had the flop! I fear that we are now going back to the flip! I say that because after the Liberal Party state conference in March 2008, the Leader of the Opposition refused to be drawn on his stance on deregulated trading hours. He simply said, as quoted in The West Australian of 17 March — “I welcome robust debate from the lay party but ultimately it is the parliamentary Liberal Party that will develop the policy,” . . . “We’ll do that and that will be presented to the people of this State for consideration at the next election.” We have had the flip, and we have had the flop! As I have said, we now seem to be going back to the flip! I say that because unfortunately the views of Deidre Willmott did not prevail at the Liberal Party state conference, and the Leader of the Opposition now appears to be running scared of the internal ructions in his party on this issue. I hope Deidre Willmott does win. I hope the Leader of the Opposition goes back to the flop position in his flip, flop, flip and supports the position that he put when he said his view was that we needed to reform retail trading hours and move toward seven-day trading. Some references have been made to the referendum result. We need to recognise that in 1933, Western Australians voted for secession. Are we still bound, Leader of the National Party, by that 1933 referendum result? Has every generation of politicians since 1933 betrayed the will of the people of Western Australia by not supporting that referendum result? That example leads us to consider for how long we should accept the legitimacy of a referendum vote. We are not proposing there should be any change to retail trading hours in this parliamentary term. We have implemented the outcome of the referendum result, and we are not proposing to change that for this parliamentary term. Mr C.J. Barnett: Did it say in the question that the result of the vote would apply for only one term? Was that in the referendum question?

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2245

Mr E.S. RIPPER: It certainly was not in the question. We will be going to the next election with a policy for extended trading hours. We want to give our people and our businesses the right to make a choice about these matters. We want to give our businesses the right to make a choice about when they open. We do not want to favour one group of businesses or one business structure over another. We certainly do not want to force our customers—for market share consideration—to shop at stores that they would rather not shop at. That is the logical conclusion of the argument put by the National Party. The National Party is arguing that market share is wrong; therefore, on certain days of the week, customers will be forced to shop at shops that they do not really want to shop at. Market share is ultimately determined by the individual decisions of individual customers. If people do not want to shop at Coles, they do not need to shop at Coles. The National Party is saying that even if people do not want to shop at IGA, on Sundays they will be forced to shop at IGA, because the National Party is worried about IGA’s market share! I do not believe that is the right approach. I believe people should be free to choose where they want to shop and when they want to shop. That is the policy that we will be taking to the next election. In the meantime, we have honoured the outcome of the 2005 referendum. DR S.C. THOMAS (Capel) [3.44 pm]: What an arrogant and out-of-touch government we face! Did the government say at the last referendum that the result of the referendum would be valid for only one term of government? If for this government a referendum result is valid for only four years, does that mean that referendums are a waste of time? The Treasurer should go to Geoff Gallop and tell him that it was a waste of time to hold that referendum, because it is valid for only four years! Mr C.J. Barnett: He would have to tell Bev Gallop that, because it was her idea, not his! Dr S.C. THOMAS: What an arrogant and out-of-touch government! I have only two minutes in which to speak, so I will be brief. In 2005, when I was elected to Parliament, the Liberal Party took to the election a policy that there would be no change to the trading hours regime. That policy has not been changed in any way. It is my job as shadow Treasurer to develop a policy to take to the next election, guide it through the party room, and deliver it to the people of Western Australia at an appropriate time and an appropriate place, and that is what the Liberal Party will do. We will deliver a trading hours policy that the people of Western Australia can examine and judge us on, in the fullness of time, at the appropriate time and at the appropriate place. Mr M.P. Whitely: Is your position to have a position eventually? Dr S.C. THOMAS: That is exactly the same process that Kevin Rudd used when he talked about his budget. We will announce our policy at the right time and at the right place. In the meantime, the Liberal Party can support, under its existing policy, the motion moved by the National Party, and that is what we are doing. At the next election, we will release a full and proper trading hours policy, and the public will make its judgement at that time. MS S.M. McHALE (Kenwick — Minister for Consumer Protection) [3.46 pm]: I am speaking on this motion in my capacity as Minister for Consumer Protection. However, I may also make a comment on this issue in relation to tourism. I wish to move an amendment to the motion. Amendment to Motion Ms S.M. McHALE: I move — To delete all words after “house” with a view to substituting the following words — recognises that the state government has honoured the outcome of the 2005 referendum on trading hours. The reason I have moved this amendment is that I think the wording of the motion moved by the member for Stirling essentially just needs a bit of a tweak. We have actually already given effect to the referendum result in 2005. The retail shops and fair trading legislation was introduced in November 2005, following the referendum. It was eventually proclaimed on 11 May 2007. It is clear from both my second reading speech and my brief ministerial statement in May that the government has honoured its commitment to implement the outcome of the 2005 retail trading hours referendum by cementing in legislation the existing trading hours arrangements for tourism precincts and holiday resorts, for non-metropolitan areas, and for small retail trading shops and so on. More importantly, that legislation confirmed the legal validity of the existing arrangements under the Retail Trading Hours Act 1987, because, as members would know, a degree of uncertainty had existed about those arrangements. Point of Order Dr S.C. THOMAS: Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask for your ruling as to whether the amendment moved by the minister is a direct negative of the original motion as moved by the member for Stirling. The motion calls on the government to honour the outcome of the referendum. However, the amendment states that the government has already honoured the outcome of the referendum. That appears to me to be a direct negative of the intent of the

2246 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] motion. I suspect, Madam Deputy Speaker, that that is the case, so I ask you to examine that process. However, at least this amendment will remove any difficulties the Liberal Party might have had in opposing the government, because there is no way that we can support something that is an untruth. Mr E.S. RIPPER: On that point of order, a direct negative would be a motion that called upon the government to not honour the results of the referendum. In fact, the motion points out that the government has already achieved what the National Party is calling for it to achieve. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: In addressing that point of order, the Treasurer is correct and I rule accordingly. Debate Resumed Ms S.M. McHALE: I would hate to put the member for Capel in a position in which he had to vote for an untruth and I chose my words very carefully to make sure they were in accordance with the standing orders. The government kept to its commitment not to make changes to the retail trading hours during this parliamentary term. No doubt community debate on this issue will continue and the government welcomes that debate. We have made clear our intention to re-examine the issue in the lead-up to the next election, and I am sure the Liberal Party will do the same. However, in support of my statement that the government has honoured its commitment to the referendum, the minister stated in the second reading speech for the Retail Shops and Fair Trading Legislation Amendment Bill 2005 that the legislation would give effect to the outcome of the referendum and that, apart from a small number of key changes—including the removal of the extension of night trading hours until 9.00 pm—the government would ensure that the referendum intent was clearly enshrined in the legislation. In fact, the government’s amendments to the legislation governing tourism precincts made it more difficult to make changes. No longer can a minister issue a ministerial order; wholesale changes to or increases in the tourism precincts now have to come back to the Parliament. Not only did the government give effect to the referendum, it also made it harder to amend retail trading hours. I informed the house in May 2007 that the Retail Shops and Fair Trading Legislation Amendment Bill 2005 had been proclaimed and I indicated at that time that that bill reflected the government’s commitment to implementing the outcome of the 2005 retail trading hours referendum, and cemented the existing trading hours arrangements for tourism precincts, holiday resorts, non-metropolitan areas and so on. On two occasions, this government has indicated that it has enshrined in legislation the outcomes of the referendum. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Members on my left, the noise from your conversation is making it very difficult for Hansard and others in this place. Ms S.M. McHALE: On two occasions the government indicated to the house that it had complied with the referendum outcomes and enshrined them in legislation. On no occasion was that questioned and I think it was taken at face value that the 2005 amendments gave effect to the referendum. I would like to speak about a number of other matters. I would have to say that no new material was introduced in the member for Stirling’s deliberations. The essential core of the member for Stirling’s argument—market dominance and market share—was in favour of maintaining the market share of IGA and the independents. We need to talk about many more of the retail trading elements from the consumer’s perspective. Grocery shopping is just one of those elements. People want the opportunity to choose when and where they shop. This debate has been around market share, market dominance and the protection of IGA and its market dominance. That is a very narrow view to take in a public debate on retail trading hours. As we know, people would like a choice about when and where they shop. It makes no sense that somebody can go into the Perth tourism precinct on a Sunday and buy a set of sheets, but they cannot buy them at Karrinyup or at Garden City. The other point I want to put on record in response to the member for Stirling is the issue of grocery pricing. I remind the member, although I am sure he is already aware of this, that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is currently inquiring into grocery pricing and, should its inquiry find that current legislation and current laws are ineffective it will—or may—recommend amendments to the Trade Practices Act to address the issue of predatory pricing. I remind the member about the inquiry and about the report it will make to the federal government on 31 July 2008. I once again touch on why the issue of retail trading hours needs to be addressed, and I think the Liberal opposition certainly acknowledges this to some extent. The anomalies in trading hours are extraordinary. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Hillarys! Ms S.M. McHALE: The anomalies are quite extraordinary. I think the leader of the opposition has, in one of his moments, called it a dog’s dinner and I think the facts probably show that. Nineteen regional local governments have quite extensively extended their precinct trading hours. The Deputy Premier listed most of the shires or local governments that have extended trading hours. Several members interjected.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2247

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I have been relatively tolerant but I think that members have been in this place long enough to know how to access an interjection if they wish to try. Yelling across someone and trying to talk over the top of someone with the call is not the way to do it. Ms S.M. McHALE: Retail trading hours in areas above the twenty-sixth parallel are not regulated. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Cottesloe! Ms S.M. McHALE: We have tourism precincts in Perth and Fremantle. The Perth tourism precinct has requested a change to its operating hours from 12 noon to 6.00 pm, to 11.00 am to 5.00 pm. That change will be granted. As a result, the Perth tourism precinct will have one set of trading hours and the Fremantle tourism precinct will have a slightly different set of hours. The City of Rockingham has had extended trading hours since 1974 because of its historical status as a holiday destination for metropolitan and regional Western Australia. In the City of Wanneroo, the localities of Two Rocks and Yanchep have enjoyed extended trading hours for many years. They too were regarded as holiday destinations under the now-repealed Factories and Shops Act 1963. A whole range of different regimes govern retail trading hours—some as holiday destinations and some as tourism precincts. Then there is Rottnest Island, which has had extended trading hours since 1993. The government cannot continue to allow such variety and nonsensical variation in trading hours. That is what the government is endeavouring to change. We have given a commitment that the trading hours regime will not change and we have indicated that we will review the situation and possibly have a different set of trading hours in subsequent years. However, I think it is important that members realise there is no real apparent reason for the variation between trading hours in our state, and that this issue needs to be addressed. The other area that I will comment on regarding retail trading hours is the importance of protection for small businesses and their rights to ensure that there are fair dealings between them and their landlords. When the government amended the retail trading legislation, it also introduced a small raft of amendments to increase protection for tenants. One should never pre-empt what Parliament will ultimately do, but I am working on a raft of amendments to the Commercial Tenancy (Retail Shops) Agreements Act 1985, and I inform the house—because I think it is important that it knows—that I am considering further amendments, in the context of retail trading hours, to improve and redress the perceived power imbalance in the relationship between tenants and landlords. The government wants to ensure, by way of these amendments, that tenants have much more informed information about their leases and that there is security of tenure by protecting the rights of tenants — Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Ms S.M. McHALE: — relating to options to renew their leases. The member does not want to protect tenants? Mr B.J. Grylls: I said that I’m glad you’re talking about this because I see absolutely no way for a small family owned business in a shopping centre to have absolutely any leverage over the owner of that shopping centre as it currently stands. I’m glad to see you’re supporting our position. Ms S.M. McHALE: Hopefully, then, the member will support our amendments when they come — Mr B.J. Grylls: I look forward to seeing them! Ms S.M. McHALE: I have no doubt that the member will want to support the amendments to the commercial tenancies act when they come into Parliament. I am glad that that is a vote in support of the legislation. Several members interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson) Order, members! Ms S.M. McHALE: I think it is incumbent upon me to flag that the changes to the commercial tenancy act will target redressing the power imbalance between landlords and tenants to ensure that some of the unconscionable behaviour that the member for Merredin talked about is further addressed. Obviously, if there is an increased level of deregulation, we need to ensure that we consider the impact on commercial tenancies, which is why I am flagging that. That is also why clause 12C(1) of the commercial tenancy act provides that a lease cannot contain a provision that would require a tenant to open the retail shop the subject of the lease at specified hours. That sort of clause would make the lease void. That is basically — Mr B.J. Grylls: They don’t renew the lease. The shopping centres just don’t renew the leases. The ACTING SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms S.M. McHALE: — ensuring that a tenant does not have to comply with the requirement of a shopping centre to open at that time. Mr B.J. Grylls: You understand that. The shopping centre just doesn’t renew the lease — Ms S.M. McHALE: Whatever happens at the end of the lease has to be negotiated, and the member knows that, too. Several members interjected.

2248 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

The ACTING SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms S.M. McHALE: All I am saying is: be aware of the protective measures that are currently in the commercial tenancy act. I am moving the amendment because the government has demonstrated on numerous occasions that it has complied with the referendum in very clear and certain terms. The amendments to the retail trading hours legislation that was introduced in November 2005, and proclaimed in 2007, give effect to the referendum and make it harder for a minister to change the retail trading hours by restricting the capacity of a minister to introduce any new tourism precincts. This is about ensuring greater choice. It is about improving the capacity of Perth and Western Australia as a tourism precinct. My motion will give both National Party members and the Liberal Party opposition the capacity to vote in support because we have already given effect to, and have honoured, the 2005 referendum. Amendment (deletion of words) put and a division taken with the following result — Ayes (26)

Mr P.W. Andrews Mr J.C. Kobelke Mr A.D. McRae Mr E.S. Ripper Mr A.J. Carpenter Mr R.C. Kucera Mr M.P. Murray Mr D.A. Templeman Mr J.B. D’Orazio Mr F.M. Logan Mr A.P. O’Gorman Mr M.P. Whitely Dr J.M. Edwards Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan Mr P. Papalia Mr B.S. Wyatt Ms D.J. Guise Mr J.A. McGinty Mr J.R. Quigley Mr S.R. Hill (Teller) Mrs J. Hughes Mr M. McGowan Ms M.M. Quirk Mr J.N. Hyde Ms S.M. McHale Ms J.A. Radisich Noes (20)

Mr C.J. Barnett Mr M.J. Cowper Mr R.F. Johnson Mr A.J. Simpson Mr M.J. Birney Mr J.H.D. Day Mr J.E. McGrath Dr S.C. Thomas Mr J.J.M. Bowler Mr B.J. Grylls Mr P.D. Omodei Mr M.W. Trenorden Mr T.R. Buswell Dr K.D. Hames Mr C.C. Porter Dr J.M. Woollard Mr G.M. Castrilli Ms K. Hodson-Thomas Mr D.T. Redman Dr G.G. Jacobs (Teller)

Pairs

Mrs C.A. Martin Mr G. Snook Mr T.G. Stephens Mr T.K. Waldron Mrs M.H. Roberts Mr G.A. Woodhams Independent Pair Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan Amendment thus passed. Amendment (insertion of words) put and a division taken with the following result — Ayes (27)

Mr P.W. Andrews Mr J.N. Hyde Ms S.M. McHale Ms J.A. Radisich Mr J.J.M. Bowler Mr J.C. Kobelke Mr A.D. McRae Mr E.S. Ripper Mr A.J. Carpenter Mr R.C. Kucera Mr M.P. Murray Mr D.A. Templeman Mr J.B. D’Orazio Mr F.M. Logan Mr A.P. O’Gorman Mr M.P. Whitely Dr J.M. Edwards Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan Mr P. Papalia Mr B.S. Wyatt Ms D.J. Guise Mr J.A. McGinty Mr J.R. Quigley Mr S.R. Hill (Teller) Mrs J. Hughes Mr M. McGowan Ms M.M. Quirk Noes (19)

Mr C.J. Barnett Mr J.H.D. Day Mr J.E. McGrath Dr S.C. Thomas Mr M.J. Birney Mr B.J. Grylls Mr P.D. Omodei Mr M.W. Trenorden Mr T.R. Buswell Dr K.D. Hames Mr C.C. Porter Dr J.M. Woollard Mr G.M. Castrilli Ms K. Hodson-Thomas Mr D.T. Redman Dr G.G. Jacobs (Teller) Mr M.J. Cowper Mr R.F. Johnson Mr A.J. Simpson

Pairs

Mrs C.A. Martin Mr G. Snook Mr T.G. Stephens Mr T.K. Waldron Mrs M.H. Roberts Mr G.A. Woodhams Independent Pair Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan Amendment thus passed.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2249

Motion, as Amended Question put and a division taken with the following result — Ayes (27)

Mr P.W. Andrews Mr J.N. Hyde Ms S.M. McHale Ms J.A. Radisich Mr J.J.M. Bowler Mr J.C. Kobelke Mr A.D. McRae Mr E.S. Ripper Mr A.J. Carpenter Mr R.C. Kucera Mr M.P. Murray Mr D.A. Templeman Mr J.B. D’Orazio Mr F.M. Logan Mr A.P. O’Gorman Mr M.P. Whitely Dr J.M. Edwards Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan Mr P. Papalia Mr B.S. Wyatt Ms D.J. Guise Mr J.A. McGinty Mr J.R. Quigley Mr S.R. Hill (Teller) Mrs J. Hughes Mr M. McGowan Ms M.M. Quirk

Noes (19)

Mr C.J. Barnett Mr J.H.D. Day Mr J.E. McGrath Dr S.C. Thomas Mr M.J. Birney Mr B.J. Grylls Mr P.D. Omodei Mr M.W. Trenorden Mr T.R. Buswell Dr K.D. Hames Mr C.C. Porter Dr J.M. Woollard Mr G.M. Castrilli Ms K. Hodson-Thomas Mr D.T. Redman Dr G.G. Jacobs (Teller) Mr M.J. Cowper Mr R.F. Johnson Mr A.J. Simpson

Pairs

Mrs M.H. Roberts Mr G.A. Woodhams Mr T.G. Stephens Mr T.K. Waldron Mrs C.A. Martin Mr G. Snook Independent Pair Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan Question thus passed. JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE CORRUPTION AND CRIME COMMISSION — INQUIRY INTO THE EFFICACY OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Extension of Reporting Time — Statement by Acting Speaker The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): Members, I have received a message from the Joint Standing Committee on the Corruption and Crime Commission in the following terms — Dear Mr Speaker Inquiry into the Efficacy of Public Hearings Further to my letter of 18 March 2008, I advise that the Committee resolved today that as a result of it being under-resourced, and the priority of other urgent matters, it will table its report on the above inquiry by 9 April 2009. CASINO (BURSWOOD ISLAND) AGREEMENT AMENDMENT BILL 2007 Consideration in Detail Resumed from an earlier stage of the sitting. Clause 4: Section 3 amended — Debate was interrupted after the clause had been partly considered. Dr G.G. JACOBS: Before the debate was interrupted for other business, we were considering clause 4. I asked about the addition of the word “and”. It is apparently a way of clearing up the bill. Mr E.S. Ripper: Are we going on to the comma issue next? Dr G.G. JACOBS: No. I refer to the eleventh supplementary agreement referred to in clause 4. Can the minister provide some advice to the house and people like me who are not entirely around state agreements? The eleventh supplementary agreement is a state agreement. It is different from the tenth supplementary agreement because it has been amended somewhat. If there is something in the eleventh supplementary agreement that the opposition should take issue with, what method is open to me in this forum to have any say in changes to the agreement? The minister has already done the deal with other parties. What avenues does that leave to the opposition to have a say in these issues—for example, the composition of the board? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The situation with state agreements is that the opposition can vote for the legislation that ratifies the state agreement, or it can vote against it. However, the state agreement is the state agreement; it is not

2250 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] possible to amend the agreement. If the opposition feels strongly that the agreement is wrong, it can vote against the legislation. If the opposition is successful, the agreement will not be ratified. I understand that that is a frustrating position. It is a matter that quite often arises during debate on state agreements. Dr G.G. JACOBS: The Treasurer is saying that it is all or nothing. I am relatively new to Parliament. The government has introduced this bill to amend the Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Act, but essentially the agreement is a done deal. Most of the bill relates to the eleventh supplementary agreement and refers to the recitals and the parties. However, it also refers to amending the composition of the board from two, two and two, to essentially one, one, one and two. That means that the composition of the board will be reduced from six members to five, and the number of ministerial appointments will be changed from two members to three. Members on this side of the chamber cannot say anything about the composition of the board because it is a done deal. Where is the democracy in that? Where is the ability for members on this side of the chamber to talk about expenditure on projects? This agreement is being touted as a good thing, because some of the money raised from the levy will be used to manage environmental issues threatening the riverpark and the river shoreline. However, members have no say on the matter. It is essentially a done deal. If the agreement is written in stone, how can members on this side of the chamber have any input on changes? There could be some interesting changes that the Treasurer should take on board. They could be good changes. Something positive could come out of it. It is essentially a done deal and the other bits are just a bit of a shell for it. I wonder how members can have an input to make any difference. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have sat on the opposition benches as state agreements have been debated in the past. They apply in many cases in the resources sector. It is essentially a package deal: either members support the agreement that has been negotiated or they do not support the agreement that has been negotiated. Unfortunately, Parliament cannot do the job of the executive and negotiate the details of agreements such as this. I appreciate that that means that opposition parliamentarians feel—non-executive members of the government also may feel this way—that they do not have the ability to influence the detail, but that is just the situation that applies. The executive negotiates an agreement and submits it to Parliament for ratification. If Parliament rejects the bill, the agreement is not ratified and does not apply. If that were to happen, it would mean that the Burswood Park Board would collect the increased revenue from the levy, because that has been increased via another process, and would not have the capacity to spend it on anything other than the park. I am sure that we do not want the Burswood Park Board spending $7 million a year on the park. That would be overkill. It would be difficult to see what it could do with that amount of money. That $7 million would buy a lot of statues, but it would ultimately be to the detriment of the park. I understand the member’s frustration, but I think the package that has been negotiated is a good package overall and should be supported. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I point out to the member for Roe that other state agreements have come into this house. I remember when the Gnangara state agreement came into this house and I argued that a few ministers should not have made that agreement and then presented it to this house as a fait accompli. In the past, state agreements have been very detrimental to Western Australia. We need look only at the issue of old-growth forests in the south to see how state agreements have been detrimental to the state. State agreements last for many years. They are not necessarily made in the best interests of the community. The Treasurer is saying, “If you don’t accept this agreement, Burswood will keep the money. Don’t you think it’s a good idea that this money go elsewhere?” Mr E.S. Ripper: The Burswood Park Board will keep the money. Dr G.G. Jacobs: That’s a threat. Mr E.S. Ripper: No, it’s not a threat; it’s just a statement of reality. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: If this agreement had been put on the table for members of this house to negotiate, we might have been able to get a better deal for Western Australia and the community. I agree with the member for Roe that it is not a good idea for this government, because it has the numbers in this place, to put together a state agreement and tell us to take it or leave it, otherwise it will let the board keep the money. If we vote against this bill, it will keep the money. This may not be the optimum way of negotiating on behalf of the community. I am happy to support the member for Roe in opposing this bill. Ms S.E. WALKER: I am sorry, Mr Acting Speaker; I was racing around madly looking for my keys. Mr A.J. Simpson: No; I’ve been racing around madly looking for your keys! Ms S.E. WALKER: Yes; I am sorry. Actually, so has the member for Cottesloe! While the member for Serpentine-Jarrahdale was looking for my keys, I slipped out of the chamber to look for my keys and they are nowhere to be found. However, I return to the bill. It has been a very interesting exercise. I wanted to make some general comments and I can do that during debate on this clause because it refers to the eleventh supplementary agreement. I have listened to the comments of the members for Serpentine-Jarrahdale and Alfred Cove about the underprivileged

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2251 and the difficulties that people with gambling addictions have when they are at casinos. I took on board what the Treasurer said about Western Australia not being in the same position as, say, Victoria. I have read the comments of Mr Tim Costello about the poker machines that operate in the eastern states, and they are quite disturbing. I wonder about the mechanics of this agreement. The member for Capel said today that it is a bit like the heavy tax that was put on tobacco. I would like the Treasurer to tell me how this is different, because I think it is different. A tax was put on tobacco so that the people who purchase cigarettes are put off smoking. A message is being sent to them via the tax not to smoke. However, although the government gave the casino permission to have extra machines, will the people who use those machines pay more to use those machines and will the money go towards counselling for them? That question relates to the comments of the members for Alfred Cove and Serpentine-Jarrahdale. I came across a speech given by Hon Giz Watson in the other place on this bill. She said that back in the 1950s and 1960s the United Kingdom government decided to take a heavy toll from the sales of tobacco and tobacco products for the health budget. I can see that connection. I cannot see the connection between getting the people who gamble and who are addicted to gambling to pay more for the machines and not putting that money towards counselling to stop them gambling. There is nothing in this bill that provides that the board can use the money from that levy or the increased operational expenses for those machines for counselling for those people. Does the Treasurer get my drift? It is an addiction. Mr E.S. Ripper: Yes; I understand the argument you are making about smoking. Governments have in the past increased taxes on smoking and have used that revenue to fund treatment programs, and that has been both a negative and a positive in combating that addiction. However, this is not a measure aimed at problem gambling; it is an agreement that Burswood Casino can apply to the Gaming and Wagering Commission for an increased number of machines, which it did and which was approved. In return, if that were to happen, the state would increase the levy and get a return for the public. Ms S.E. WALKER: Sure, but how is that passed on to the consumer? Mr E.S. Ripper: It is passed on to the public through this bill, which proposes to spend that money on the river. Ms S.E. WALKER: Yes, but how is it passed on? How is Burswood Casino passing on the 100 per cent increase in the levy from one per cent to two per cent? Where will it get the money from? Mr E.S. Ripper: I have just been discussing with the director general whether that means the return to punters has been adjusted. He says that it has not and that the increased levy comes out of the profit take from the machines. The casino is still required to provide a 90 per cent return on average. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I am interested to hear more of the member for Nedlands’ line of questioning. Ms S.E. WALKER: It is an important point because the member for Capel almost convinced me this morning when I listened to him. I thought that it was tax, but it is not. It is not a tax on people to make them stop smoking or gambling. Mr E.S. Ripper: No, it is a tax on Burswood Casino. Ms S.E. WALKER: That is right. I thought it was similar to increasing the tobacco tax on the tobacco producer. The government did not do that; the increase was passed on to the consumer. Therefore, it is not the same. On 6 December last year Hon Giz Watson said that this bill could present the same scenario. She was talking about tobacco and health care, but I argue that it does not present the same scenario. I am very interested in what the members for Serpentine-Jarrahdale and Alfred Cove have said about counselling. I read what Tim Costello had to say about the shocking statistics on problem gambling. I accept that the situation in Western Australia is different from that in other states because we do not have pokies. It would appear that we do not have an issue but I think we probably do. An article by Tim Costello in The Sydney Morning Herald on 20 September 2007 was quite complimentary to Western Australia. He wrote — State and territory governments rake in more than $4 billion a year in pokies taxes. The only exception is Western Australia, which apart from videopoker games in Perth’s Burswood Casino, is pokies free. Last year the gaming industry took more than $10 billion out of Australian wallets. And it is those who are least able to afford it who are most affected. The Productivity Commission’s landmark 1999 report revealed that 42.3 per cent of pokies losses came from problem gamblers. . . . When I was asked to address Britain’s House of Lords on this issue recently, they were so staggered by the saturation of poker machines in Australia—and NSW in particular—they thought they had misheard me. I would like to put on the record that I am pleased that when I was a Liberal Party member, members of the Liberal Party argued most passionately against pokies, as they have done for as long as I have been a member of Parliament. That is a genuine concern of members on our side. Tim Costello also wrote — Gambling counsellors—those at the front line of treating pokies addiction—

2252 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

We do have a problem with that in Western Australia — all too often recount the frightening links between problem gambling and crime, kids going to school hungry, domestic violence, family breakdown and most tragically of all, suicide. Some parents in Western Australia have left their children in the car while they have been at the casino. I support the members for Serpentine-Jarrahdale and Alfred Cove in raising the issue of providing counselling to gambling addicts. I want to look at what was said about Burswood Casino in Parliament on Thursday, 3 May 1984 when the original Casino Control Bill was agreed to, because it is quite prophetic and relevant to the new clause that we will debate shortly and to my amendment concerning what the board will be able to do. Hon D.K. Dans was a Labor member of Parliament, and so it must have been a Labor bill. He said — A casino tourist resort complex will add a much needed social amenity to Perth. It will stimulate employment, both directly and indirectly, and will further enhance the economy of the State through increased tourism. He was right. He also said — Quite apart from the revenue to be derived from the casino operations, the type of complex envisaged should become a tourist attraction of world-class standard. The Burswood Island area was chosen for a number of reasons. The land is owned by the Government; it therefore places the Government in a sound bargaining position when dealing with potential developers . . . Although there will be a number of constraints encountered in the development of a casino complex on Burswood Island, the fact remains that it is a prime river site which is sadly under-utilised and in need of development. The decision to select Burswood Island also took into account the advisory committee’s recommendation . . . That recommendation states in part — The most appropriate site is one which is at present under-utilised, in need of development and is isolated from adjacent residential areas . . . Mr A.D. McRAE: I know Des Dans and I am sure that he would be delighted that the comments he made in Parliament in the 1980s when he was the minister responsible for the introduction of the legislation governing the establishment of Burswood Casino are now being quoted. However, I am equally sure that he would be aghast at the fact that they are being quoted by the member for Nedlands! Nonetheless, I would like to hear her comments a little further. Ms S.E. WALKER: I am very flattered that the member should defend my honour. I will not have a go at Hon D.K Dans; well, not until I get to the end, anyway! The advisory committee’s recommendation further stated — The site should also be attractive in outlook, i.e., river, ocean or hills views and/or setting. Hon D.K. Dans said that when the government made the announcement, it was very careful to qualify the announcement by stating that any proposal would be subject to satisfactory transport, environmental and planning requirements. He concluded by saying — The Government has given long and careful consideration to the matter of casino gaming in this State. It is convinced from all the evidence available throughout Australia that problems attributable to casino operations are in the main unsubstantiated by facts. That was my go at Hon D.K. Dans—we know that is not true. The point is that Burswood Island was chosen because of its location near the river and because of the environmental issues that had to be dealt with. This bill will give the new board greater powers over where it can spend the money. Currently the money can be spent on administration and keeping the grounds, which is done beautifully. We are also giving the board the power to spend money on projects for the Swan and Canning Rivers. However, we are not ensuring that they do that. I am not sure what happens with the money. I would like to know how much money comes in. How much money has been coming in on average since the casino started? How much more will come in? How much money does the government expect will be paid? Why has a percentage of the money not been apportioned to protect the Swan and Canning Rivers, given that the government has spent a lot of time and has gotten a lot of media coverage on the matter? Mr E.S. RIPPER: I have answered some of the member’s questions in my second reading response. I have indicated that the board has received $2 million or $3 million and is likely to receive $7 million per annum. Some $3 million has been set aside in the board’s forward estimates for expenditure on the river. There is no

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2253 requirement that a set amount of the board’s revenue be set aside for expenditure on the river. That was an outcome of the agreement that we negotiated with Burswood Casino. Burswood Casino has a private interest in this matter and, from its point of view, sufficient money must be spent on Burswood Park and the golf course to maintain the environment on which the casino complex is situated. For all the reasons of promoting flexibility—because the actual revenue that the Burswood Park Board receives is dependent on the extent to which people gamble, and the extent to which people gamble is partly dependent on the prosperity of the economy—it was not agreed that there ought to be a definite and precise allocation. However, on the basis of what we know now, all the indications are that about $3 million a year will be spent on the river. It is quite possible that much more will be spent. This is not the only expenditure on the river. The core funding of $25 million over five years comes from the Swan River Trust budget. This will add another $15 million over five years. It is therefore likely that this will be a contribution to an overall $40 million over five years program of expenditure to improve the amenity of the Swan and Canning Rivers and associated lands. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The government is saying in this bill that expenditure of the money collected will go — on projects approved by the Rivers Management Minister for the protection and enhancement of ecological and community benefits and amenity of the Swan and Canning Rivers and associated lands; That is money that will be expended on the wider community; is that not correct? The Swan River is our number one icon and many people enjoy the Swan River. Mr E.S. Ripper: I am saying that the public will get a return on something for which there is strong public support for investment. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: That is where I can foresee money going to the Swan River. However, as the bill states, “expenditure on or directly in relation to the Resort Site” will not be expenditure on the wider community. Mr E.S. Ripper: That is the parklands to which the wider community has access. That has always been the purpose of the board. What we are doing is broadening the board’s purposes beyond that to allow it to spend beyond the park, as it will have, quite frankly, too much revenue for the needs of the park. The board will therefore be able to spend it on the needs of the rivers. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: At the briefing I attended last night I was told that there is already more than enough for the resort site and that is why this money will go to the Swan River. Mr E.S. Ripper: That’s right. That’s exactly what I have just said. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The only problem I have with the amendment standing on the notice paper in the name of the member for Nedlands is that it states — , following both Houses of Parliament approving an agreement between the Minister, Burswood Nominees Ltd and Burswood Resort (Management) Limited, for the establishment of a fund to ensure that 50% of any levy received by the Board must be applied . . . If that amendment comes up later today for debate, I think it should be amended to say “at least” 50 per cent, because the Treasurer will be taking that additional money off the wider community, not just people who live in and around that area or who go there. It will be taken off people throughout Perth and the wider metropolitan area who gamble and people who are addicted gamblers. Not everyone who goes to Burswood Park goes to enjoy the resort site. A lot of people who go there go to gamble and after they gamble they go home. Currently, various sums of money are already left over. I believe that most people would want at least 50 per cent of any levy received by the board to go to projects approved by the rivers management minister for the protection and enhancement of ecological and community benefits and amenity of the Swan and Canning Rivers and associated land. Mr A.J. SIMPSON: I suppose a deal was done with Burswood Resort (Management) Ltd to increase the number of gambling machines and give some money back to the rivers. I have a question for the Treasurer, though. I am holding an advertisement for Bettingwest, which was advertised in The West Australian about three weeks ago. It states — Bettingwest — A new era in WA racing and sports betting begins today. Based at Gloucester Park, Bettingwest offers a full range of sports betting markets plus selected racing events. Bet with the best — Bettingwest. It goes on — Chairman Denis McInerney and Directors Wade Annear, Kent Swick and Andrew Darbyshire invite you to experience better returns and better service . . .

2254 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

The advertisement contains a Gaming and Wagering Commission of WA licence number. Does the Gaming and Wagering Commission pay anything towards the rivers? Does Lotterywest? Does Racing and Wagering? Are we just targeting one group at Burswood Casino because it is a casino? My point is that there is a whole approach to gambling, but is the Treasurer picking on just one little group in the gambling industry? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The rest of the gambling industry does pay tax. Mr A.J. Simpson: Yes; so does Burswood Casino. Mr E.S. RIPPER: RWWA pays tax, bookmakers pay tax and Lotterywest distributes its profits to the community by funding hospitals, arts, sports organisations and by direct grants to community groups. Mr A.J. Simpson: And does Burswood Casino pay tax or not? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Yes, it pays tax. Mr A.J. Simpson: It pays tax too? Mr E.S. RIPPER: Yes. I think members should recognise that this is an agreement between Burswood and the government. It may not be 100 per cent to the liking of the Parliament, but we are one party to the agreement. The other party also has to agree if we are to get an agreement. We have therefore negotiated an agreement with Burswood, and I think it is quite reasonable. I hear what members are saying about the expenditure on the river, but this is for $3 million a year. Arguably, members are demanding more control over the detail of $3 million a year expenditure than they would over $300 million of expenditure undertaken in other ways by the government. Members should just think about the relatively small size of this expenditure and how much scrutiny they are proposing this be subject to compared with the other $17 billion in the budget. The amendment on the notice paper proposes more control over this expenditure, which is only $3 million, than members would propose over $300 million or $3 000 million. Dr J.M. Woollard: I think many of us would like a lot more than that, Treasurer. I would like a lot more say. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The member for Alfred Cove would then need to be elected to this side of the house! The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): Members! The member for Roe is on his feet. Dr G.G. JACOBS: What came across from the Treasurer was that we should be thankful for whatever we get. Mr E.S. Ripper: No. Dr G.G. JACOBS: Yes, just be thankful for what we get, because the government has had to do the deal, the deal has been done and it is in the state agreement. The Treasurer has told me that I have no input into any change. What the Treasurer has enticed me with is the concept that some of this gambling levy can go to the environment. As the shadow Minister for the Environment I am concerned about the environment and the Treasurer is saying that I should say, “That’s good, that’s great, I feel good about that.” Mr E.S. Ripper: I’m glad you feel good about that, but if it does not happen, you can come into the house and ask the Minister for Racing and Gaming: “The government said $3 million a year was expected to be spent on the river. Has it been spent? Will you provide me the detail?” If the minister says that that is determined by the board, you can say that the government has three out of five representatives on the board. You can hold us accountable. Dr G.G. JACOBS: That is what the Minister for Health says when we talk about other issues on which we want accountability. He just says, “Pin me at the budget estimates.” Mr E.S. Ripper: If you can. Dr G.G. JACOBS: Yes. He says, “Don’t worry about this accountability. There’s no accountability in here but you can come and talk to me during budget estimates.” My point is that, in one way, the Treasurer has enticed us into a concept. He has said that the expenditure could be $3 million but that he could not be held to that. He has said that there will be a bit of an overflow and whatever overflows from the management of Burswood can go to the river. What happens if Burswood Resort (Management) Ltd decides that it wants to do something else and it spends the money on the resort park, so there is no money for the river park? The Treasurer will have sucked me in to going along with it because I had seen some environmental benefits, but there would be none because there is no assurance. Clause 6 of the schedule deals with amended clause 23 of the agreement and seeks to insert the words — “The Board must apply moneys received under this paragraph solely for the purpose of performing the functions for which it was or is constituted and to be expended on or directly in relation to the Resort Site and the reasonable administration expenses of the Board.” Over the page it refers to — . . . expenditure on projects approved by the Rivers Management Minister for the protection and enhancement of ecological and community benefits . . .

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2255

I have no assurance that will ever happen. It may happen, but how much would it be, how would I know it had been spent, and would I see some mitigating mechanism on the shores when I run through Burswood Park on my morning or evening run? Will I know that something is happening with the river? Will I know how the money has been spent? The Treasurer says to ask him or the director general about it and make sure it happens every year, but that is not great law. I go back to my previous question. We could introduce an amendment to clause 5 that deals with section 4E, but it will have no impact on what the Treasurer is saying on the agreement, even if we could get it passed. I do not understand the process. Maybe I am just thick and do not get it. Mr E.S. Ripper: I hope not. You’re a medical practitioner. I wouldn’t like a medical practitioner to be thick. Dr G.G. JACOBS: I am not a lawyer, but I have some process that has got me where I am. I understand a little bit of science. The Treasurer says that the agreement has been done. It is an absolute done deal. Clause put and passed. Clause 5: Section 4E inserted — Ms S.E. WALKER: I refer to the amendment in my name. I have already spoken to it, so I think we can go straight to it. The question is gnawing away at the conservative side of the house because we are concerned with the environment, unlike the Labor Party. Where is their passion for the environment? Mrs J. Hughes: I did not realise you had such a good sense of humour, member for Nedlands. Ms S.E. WALKER: If the member for Kingsley had any passion she would have asked about the money. Did she not ask the Minister for the Environment or the Minister for Racing and Gaming where the percentage was in this? Did she not say that the minister had issued a press release saying that this money would clean up the environment of the Swan and Canning Rivers? I would have asked where it was. Dr J.M. Woollard: Will you take an interjection? Ms S.E. WALKER: No. I know the member for Alfred Cove wishes to move an amendment to my amendment. I will leave her to deal with that, but she should not knock out my amendment. I want to make sure that the board has to spend 50 per cent—the member for Alfred Cove will say at least 50 per cent—of the levy on projects approved by the rivers management minister for the protection and enhancement of ecological benefits and amenity of the Swan and Canning Rivers and associated lands. That is fair enough. There will be more money than they would normally have and there will be a 100 per cent increase in the levy, from one per cent to two per cent. In that way we will be making sure that the board does what the Labor Party says it will do, which is to contribute some money, even though it is a drop in the river, to the environment of the Swan and Canning Rivers. It is very important, and therefore I move — Page 3, line 14 — To insert after “authorised” the following — , following both Houses of Parliament approving an agreement between the Minister, Burswood Nominees Ltd and Burswood Resort (Management) Limited, for the establishment of a fund to ensure that 50% of any levy received by the Board must be applied as designated under clause 23(1A)(c) Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I think this is a good amendment because we have been given assurances by the Treasurer that the money that is left over will go into the enhancement of the Swan and Canning Rivers. This amendment ensures that the money that is left over does that. We have been told that there is currently a surplus before the additional income comes on board. If there is a current surplus before it comes on board, I cannot see why at least 50 per cent of the additional income is cannot go to the sweetener for this bill, which is that the number of machines and the number of people who can gamble at any one time at the casino are being increased, but additional revenue will come back and some of that additional revenue will be invested in the environment of the Swan and Canning Rivers. It may vary from year to year, which is why my concern with the member for Nedlands’ amendment is that it is being limited to 50 per cent. I would like to think that if more money is in the kitty, rather than that money remaining with the resort, it should be invested in the Swan River. I do not know that I need to amend this but I think I can support it as it is — The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): The member can amend the amendment by inserting words. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I was going to insert some words. I was going to insert “at least” before “50%”. Is the member for Nedlands happy if I insert those words into her amendment? If so, may I just check with you, Mr Acting Speaker, if I insert “at least”, if there is a division and we lose that division, will the member for Nedlands’ amendment still be on the table without the words “at least”? Would it go to another division because it does not change the overall intent of the clause? The ACTING SPEAKER: Whether the member loses or not will not affect the member’s right to talk to the amendment. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Could there be a vote on the original amendment?

2256 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

The ACTING SPEAKER: There will be, yes. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: In which case, I move — To amend the amendment by inserting before “50%” the words — at least The reason I have moved that amendment is that I would like to be optimistic and think that that additional money will be spent on the Swan and Canning Rivers. While I do not agree with state agreements being made outside this Parliament and being presented to this Parliament as a fait accompli, I am hoping that under this agreement a large amount of money will be made available for the protection and enhancement of the Swan and Canning Rivers for the benefit of the community. Therefore, I will support the amendment with the insertion of those words. Mr J.E. McGRATH: I have listened to the debate and the points made by the member for Nedlands and the member for Alfred Cove. I am handling this bill as the shadow Minister for Racing and Gaming. I need to make a very important point. No-one is more passionate about the river than I am. As I said in my speech at the second reading stage, my electorate is bordered on three sides by the Swan and Canning Rivers. I have made many speeches in this place criticising the government for not spending enough money on the maintenance of the Swan and Canning Rivers. The Casino (Burswood Island) Agreement Act was brought into this place in 1985. We need to take into account that one of the parties to this agreement is the Burswood trust and Burswood casino. It is in the interests of Burswood to ensure that the park in which the casino is situated is maintained to the satisfaction of the people of Western Australia. That includes the member for Avon, who has said that he likes to play golf there. If we specify a statutory amount that must be spent on the Swan and Canning Rivers, it may create a problem for Burswood if there is a breakdown in the pumping system or the reticulation system, or a lot of work needs to be done on the golf course, and Burswood needs to spend that money for that purpose. Burswood has made a commitment to the government that it is happy for whatever money is left over in any given year, after its requirements have been met, to be spent on maintenance of the Swan and Canning Rivers. We do not need to legislate for the distribution of a fund of this amount. That will only cause this process to be unworkable and unwieldy and become bogged down in bureaucracy. We should leave it to the board. The minister has assured us that there will be accountability. We need that same commitment from the Treasurer, and that is what I want him to give us today. Every time a major funding decision is made, the minister should be required to report that to Parliament. The public has a right to know how much money from this agreement between Burswood and the state government will be spent on maintenance of the Swan and Canning Rivers in any given year. I think there is great public interest in that matter. However, as I have said, we need to leave it to the board. I understand that the Town of Victoria Park is not happy, because it has lost its representative on the board. The government needs to be open and accountable. If anything dodgy is done, I am sure that we as the opposition will be onto it, as will the member for Nedlands and the member for Alfred Cove. This is a state agreement. We have been told that once a state agreement has been signed, it cannot be altered by the Parliament. We need to move on and take this at face value. We have been assured that $3 million a year will be spent on the Swan and Canning Rivers. If that money is not used for that purpose, we will be asking questions about that, and we will hold the government accountable for that. We will also hold the government accountable for the overall spending on the Swan and Canning Rivers. That will come out of another budget. During the upcoming budget estimates, the shadow Minister for the Environment will be making certain that the Carpenter government is spending enough money on the Swan and Canning Rivers to ensure they are maintained in a pristine and healthy condition. As I said yesterday, the Swan River is the great icon of Western Australia. We must protect it. This Burswood agreement is only one small way of protecting those rivers. I am sure that a lot more funding will go into the maintenance of those rivers than from just this Burswood agreement. From a racing and gaming point of view, I respect what Burswood is trying to achieve with this agreement. Burswood is a magnificent complex. It is the biggest tourism destination in Western Australia. A lot of people enjoy themselves at Burswood Park by jogging around the park and having picnics in the park. It is a fantastic facility. We should not do anything detrimental to that by restricting the amount of money that Burwood may be able to spend on that facility in any given year. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I actually think that the amendment on the amendment improves the amendment. Therefore, the government will not oppose the amendment on the amendment. However, we will oppose the amendment as amended, because, if it is passed, it will have the effect of altering the agreement, and that may make it difficult for the board to manage its financial arrangements. For example, the board may be required to spend an extraordinarily large amount of money in one year on a major water management issue in the park. I would not want to hamper the board’s financial management in that way. It is the government’s expectation that $15 million over five years will be spent on the Swan and Canning Rivers as a result of this legislation and associated agreements. The minister will be subject to all the usual parliamentary avenues for accountability on this matter. I have also confirmed with the director general that the board’s annual report will provide a full account of how much of this money has been spent on those rivers.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2257

Dr G.G. JACOBS: I want to get back to the legislative mechanism, minister. Even if the minister were to agree to this proposed amendment to clause 5, the state agreement, schedule 11, is already in place. If this amendment were to get up — Mr E.S. Ripper: We would then need to go back and renegotiate the agreement. We would then have schedule 12, if we could get agreement. In the meantime, the power of the board to expend money on the river would not exist. Dr G.G. JACOBS: My point is that we are doing this the wrong way. When I get over to that side, perhaps we will do things differently. Mr E.S. Ripper: I do not want to encourage you too much, but the way for you to have the influence you want is to come over to this side! The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): The question is to insert before “50%” the words “at least”. Amendment on the amendment put and passed. Amendment, as amended, put and negatived. The ACTING SPEAKER: The question now is that clause 5 stand as printed. Dr G.G. JACOBS: I have an amendment about the composition of the board. I move — Page 3, line 14 — To insert after “authorised” the following — , following both Houses of Parliament approving an agreement between the Minister, Burswood Nominees Ltd and Burswood Resort (Management) Limited, varying the State Agreement to provide that the Board referred to in clause 6 of the State Agreement consist of — (i) 2 natural persons nominated to the Minister by the Local Authority; (ii) 2 natural persons nominated to the Minister by the Manager; (iii) 1 natural person nominated to the Minister by the Minister for the Environment; and (iv) 1 natural person nominated to the Minister by the Minister for Lands. Mr E.S. RIPPER: The government cannot support this amendment for the reasons I have previously outlined. In effect, it amends the agreement and would invalidate the whole agreement process. We would have to go back and negotiate a twelfth supplementary agreement and come back to the house again. The arrangement of the board actually promotes accountability of the Parliament. If the government has less than a majority on the board, how could the government demand that the board take particular action? If the government had a majority of appointees on the board, it would give the opposition an opportunity to say that the government should use its appointment powers to secure a result that the Parliament thinks should be secured. We have changed the composition of the board so that the government does not have a majority. This amendment actually undermines that accountability mechanism. We could have a long debate about this but I would really like to get the bill passed and adjourn the house. If we are to have a half-hour debate on this matter, I will adjourn the house now because we are testing members’ patience—we are already 10 minutes past the normal finishing time. I do not know how the member wants to handle it but our exchange of views is now on the record and that may satisfy the member or he may wish to have a longer debate. Dr G.G. JACOBS: I understand the pressures of time. However, I will ask one more question about the composition of this board. What is wrong with the board’s composition now; that is, in the eleventh schedule? Why do we need to change its composition from that in the previous agreement—the tenth agreement? As the member for South Perth has already said, the Town of Victoria Park is somewhat miffed because it has lost one community council member. Essentially, why was it necessary to change it from the two by two by two model to this new composition? I am not trying to frustrate the process, but I want to know why it has changed. The minister may say that it gives the government more accountability because there are more government members or ministers on the board, but what was wrong with it before? Mr E.S. RIPPER: The issue was that the board had six members and, given the nature of the business before the board, it was possibly too large. However, the extended powers to expand on the river required someone from an environmental portfolio to join the board, which would have meant extending the members on the board to seven, which would have increased the unwieldy nature of the board, given the nature of its business. Therefore, the decision was made to reduce the board to five members. Further changes are required because even with a smaller board, someone is still needed from the environment portfolio. I think it is not a bad board. If the board makes decisions that people do not like, such as taking a position that the Town of Victoria Park does not like, then the town can approach the member for Victoria Park and the matter can be taken up in the Parliament. I

2258 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] hope we do not need to have a long debate on this matter. The board composition was changed for the reasons that it would have been too large with six members, it needed an environment representative, and the board would be even larger with seven members; therefore, we will scale it back to five members. Dr G.G. Jacobs: While the minister is on his feet, was there a situation in which there could be a hung vote; that is, 3-3. Is that the issue? Does the board need an uneven number of members? Is that what the minister is saying? Mr E.S. RIPPER: On my advice, that has never occurred in the history of the board. Amendment put and negatived. Clause put and passed. Clauses 6 and 7 put and passed. Title put and passed. Leave granted to proceed forthwith to third reading. Third Reading Bill read a third time, on motion by Mr E.S. Ripper (Treasurer), and passed. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE On motion by Mr J.C. Kobelke (Leader of the House), resolved — That the house at its rising adjourn until Tuesday, 6 May 2008 at 2.00 pm. House adjourned at 5.15 pm ______

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2259

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

Questions and answers are as supplied to Hansard.

GOVERNMENT SECONDARY SCHOOLS — MAINTENANCE 3064. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Education and Training I refer to the Education Estimates hearing on 20 May 2004, where a request for supplementary information regarding the maintenance needs and their estimated costs for each Government high school in Western Australia was made and ask: (a) can the Minister provide a current table of this information in the format previously supplied; and (b) can the Minister also provide a current table of the maintenance needs and their estimated costs for each Government primary school in Western Australia? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: The State Government is spending a record $300million on the maintenance of school buildings over four years. For the information of the Member, this is in contrast to $206 million spent on maintenance during the final four years of the previous Coalition Government. Information relating to school maintenance is obtained from the Building Condition Assessment (BCA) process. The BCA process is conducted at periodic intervals and identifies maintenance needs that result from gradual wear and tear and deterioration of building components. Information is currently being collated by the Department of Housing and Works. SCHOOLS — AIR CONDITIONING 3126. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Education and Training (1) How many schools in Western Australia outside the air cooling zone have air conditioning? (2) Of these schools, what percentage of classrooms are air conditioned? (3) How many schools in Western Australia within the air cooling zone have air conditioning in classrooms? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (1)-(2) Consistent with the policy of the previous Liberal-National Government, the Carpenter Government provides air-conditioning to schools in the air-conditioning zone, all demountables and in all new rooms where air conditioning previously existed Approximately 520 schools are outside the air-cooling zone, however many have used school funds to partially or totally air-cool their classrooms. As the Department of Education and Training does not allocate funding for air-cooling to these schools, this information is not readily available. (3) The classrooms in all schools located within the air-cooling zone are air-cooled. ROYAL AGRICULTURAL SHOWGROUNDS — SPECIAL EVENTS RAILWAY STATION 3130. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure How many times each year is the special events railway station at the Royal Agricultural Showgrounds in Claremont used? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: In 2008 the Showgrounds special events station will be used on 52 days. GAS SUPPLY CRISIS, JANUARY 2008 3161. Mr J.H.D. Day to the Minister for Energy With reference to the energy supply crisis that occurred in early January 2008 as a result of a breakdown at the North West Shelf domestic gas plant, and to the Minister’s involvement in sourcing replacement gas for Verve Energy, I ask: (a) did Verve Energy request the Minister’s involvement; (b) did anyone else request the Minister’s involvement, and if so, who;

2260 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008]

(c) was there any specific discussion about the price of gas in any of the Minister’s approaches, including to Burrup Fertilisers, and if so, what are the details? Mr F.M. LOGAN replied: (a)& (b) No. (c) I did not discuss the price of gas with Burrup Fertilisers. In my subsequent conversation with Verve Energy, I did not discuss the price of gas other than to advise that I had not discussed the price matters with Burrup Fertilisers and that Verve Energy would need to discuss price availability and other matters directly with Burrup Fertilisers. SCHOOLS — CANTEENS 3188. Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Education and Training (1) In relation to canteens at the schools within the current electorate of Alfred Cove (Applecross Primary School, Applecross Senior High School, Ardross Primary School, Attadale Primary School, Bicton Primary School, Booragoon Primary School, Melville Primary School, Melville Senior High School, Mount Pleasant Primary School, and Palmyra Primary School), I ask: (a) is the Department of Education and Training aware if any of the above schools are having difficulty maintaining school canteens: (i) if so, could the Minister specify which schools; and (ii) the reasons behind the difficulty for each school; (b) has the Department of Education and Training considered centralising the provision of food services for any State Government schools located in the Perth metropolitan area, if so can the Minister list which schools and which services have been centralised; and (c) if the Department of Education and Training has not considered the centralisation of food services in Government schools located in the Perth metropolitan area, why not? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: (a) No (i) Not applicable. (ii) Not applicable. (b) No. (c) Food services are generally managed by Parents and Citizens Associations in the Perth metropolitan area. Arrangements for centralising food services are made between schools in a locality where appropriate. AUSTRADE OFFICE, TOKYO 3242. Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Public Sector Management I refer to the State Government’s Austrade office in Tokyo, and ask: (a) how many staff are employed on either a full-time, part-time or casual basis; (b) what is the annual total of salaries and remuneration paid to these employees; (c) what costs, if any, are incurred to provide rental assistance or housing for these employees; (d) what is the floor space of the office; (e) what is the annual rental paid for this office space; and (f) what are the total outgoings for the running of this office? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises: The State Government operates a trade office in Tokyo. The office is not part of the Federal Government's Austrade network. (a) There are 5 staff within the office. (b) The annual cost of salaries is approximately 32,000,000 yen (approximately $350,000 AUD). (c) A rental allowance of 500,000 yen per month is paid to the Regional Director of the office.

[ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 10 April 2008] 2261

(d) The floor space of the office is 89.11m2. (e) The annual rent for the office space is 10,027,020 yen. (f) The total 2007/08 budget for the Tokyo Office is $1.25 million (AUD). OFFICE OF E-GOVERNMENT — WEBSITE GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK 3285. Mr A.J. Simpson to the Minister for Public Sector Management In reference to questions on notice 3027 and 3121, can the Premier advise: (a) When agencies have been provided with pre-prepared surveys of their websites, which according to the Premier’s answer to question on notice 3121 should have required only minimal time to complete, why is it that according to the Premier in his answer to question on notice 3027, 13 agencies completed the survey up to 22 days late and 22 agencies had not completed the survey as of 22 days after it was due; (b) why was it that as of the 26 February 2008 the Department of Premier and Cabinet had not completed the audit; (i) has the Department of Premier and Cabinet now completed the audit; (ii) if yes, when was it completed and what was the cause of the delay; or (iii) if the Department of Premier and Cabinet has still not completed the audit, why is this the case; and (c) what specific details were asked of each agency in this audit? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises: (a) The reasons given were predominantly changes to personnel and administrative issues. I refer the member to Question on Notice 3027. (b) (i)-(iii) The Department of Premier and Cabinet had completed and returned the audit prior to the 26 February 2008. (c) I refer the member to the Freedom of Information request (20070049) in response to which the Department of Premier and Cabinet provided specific details of the audit on 2 January 2008, with subsequent information provided on 9 January 2008. ______