PARLIAMENT OF VICTORIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

(HANSARD)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

FIFTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT

FIRST SESSION

TUESDAY, 10 SEPTEMBER 2019

Internet: www.parliament.vic.gov.au/downloadhansard

By authority of the Victorian Government Printer

The Governor The Honourable LINDA DESSAU, AC The Lieutenant-Governor The Honourable KEN LAY, AO, APM

The ministry

Premier ...... The Hon. DM Andrews, MP

Deputy Premier and Minister for Education ...... The Hon. JA Merlino, MP

Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development and Minister for Industrial Relations ...... The Hon. TH Pallas, MP

Minister for Transport Infrastructure ...... The Hon. JM Allan, MP

Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice and Minister for Victim Support ...... The Hon. BA Carroll, MP

Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change, and Minister for Solar Homes ...... The Hon. L D’Ambrosio, MP

Minister for Child Protection and Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers ...... The Hon. LA Donnellan, MP

Minister for Mental Health, Minister for Equality and Minister for Creative Industries ...... The Hon. MP Foley, MP

Attorney-General and Minister for Workplace Safety ...... The Hon. J Hennessy, MP

Minister for Public Transport and Minister for Ports and Freight ...... The Hon. MM Horne, MP

Special Minister of State, Minister for Priority Precincts and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs ...... The Hon. GW Jennings, MLC

Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, and Minister for Suburban Development ...... The Hon. M Kairouz, MP

Minister for Health and Minister for Ambulance Services ...... The Hon. J Mikakos, MLC

Minister for Water and Minister for Police and Emergency Services .... The Hon. LM Neville, MP

Minister for Jobs, Innovation and Trade, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, and Minister for Racing ...... The Hon. MP Pakula, MP

Minister for Roads, Minister for Road Safety and the TAC, and Minister for Fishing and Boating ...... The Hon. JL Pulford, MLC

Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Veterans ...... The Hon. RD Scott, MP

Minister for Local Government and Minister for Small Business The Hon. A Somyurek, MLC

Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Agriculture and Minister for Resources The Hon. J Symes, MLC

Minister for Training and Skills, and Minister for Higher Education .... The Hon. GA Tierney, MLC

Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, Minister for Women and Minister for Youth The Hon. G Williams, MP

Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing and Minister for Multicultural Affairs ...... The Hon. RW Wynne, MP

Cabinet Secretary ...... Ms M Thomas, MP

OFFICE-HOLDERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FIFTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT—FIRST SESSION

Speaker The Hon. CW BROOKS Deputy Speaker Ms JM EDWARDS

Acting Speakers Ms Blandthorn, Mr J Bull, Mr Carbines, Ms Couzens, Mr Dimopoulos, Mr Edbrooke, Ms Kilkenny, Mr McGuire, Mr Richardson, Ms Spence, Ms Suleyman and Ms Ward

Leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party and Premier The Hon. DM ANDREWS

Deputy Leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party and Deputy Premier The Hon. JA MERLINO

Leader of the Parliamentary Liberal Party and Leader of the Opposition The Hon. MA O’BRIEN

Deputy Leader of the Parliamentary Liberal Party The Hon. LG McLEISH

Leader of The Nationals and Deputy Leader of the Opposition The Hon. PL WALSH Deputy Leader of The Nationals Ms SM RYAN

Leader of the House Ms JM ALLAN

Manager of Opposition Business Mr KA WELLS

Heads of parliamentary departments Assembly: Clerk of the Legislative Assembly: Ms B Noonan Council: Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the Legislative Council: Mr A Young Parliamentary Services: Secretary: Mr P Lochert

MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FIFTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT—FIRST SESSION

Member District Party Member District Party Addison, Ms Juliana Wendouree ALP Maas, Mr Gary Narre Warren South ALP Allan, Ms Jacinta Marie Bendigo East ALP McCurdy, Mr Timothy Logan Ovens Valley Nats Andrews, Mr Daniel Michael Mulgrave ALP McGhie, Mr Stephen John Melton ALP Angus, Mr Neil Andrew Warwick Forest Hill LP McGuire, Mr Frank Broadmeadows ALP Battin, Mr Bradley William Gembrook LP McLeish, Ms Lucinda Gaye Eildon LP Blackwood, Mr Gary John Narracan LP Merlino, Mr James Anthony Monbulk ALP Blandthorn, Ms Elizabeth Anne Pascoe Vale ALP Morris, Mr David Charles Mornington LP Brayne, Mr Chris Nepean ALP Neville, Ms Lisa Mary Bellarine ALP Britnell, Ms Roma South-West Coast LP Newbury, Mr James Brighton LP Brooks, Mr Colin William Bundoora ALP Northe, Mr Russell John Morwell Ind Bull, Mr Joshua Michael Sunbury ALP O’Brien, Mr Daniel David Gippsland South Nats Bull, Mr Timothy Owen Gippsland East Nats O’Brien, Mr Michael Anthony Malvern LP Burgess, Mr Neale Ronald Hastings LP Pakula, Mr Martin Philip Keysborough ALP Carbines, Mr Anthony Richard Ivanhoe ALP Pallas, Mr Timothy Hugh Werribee ALP Carroll, Mr Benjamin Alan Niddrie ALP Pearson, Mr Daniel James Essendon ALP Cheeseman, Mr Darren Leicester South Barwon ALP Read, Dr Tim Brunswick Greens Connolly, Ms Sarah Tarneit ALP Richards, Ms Pauline Cranbourne ALP Couzens, Ms Christine Anne Geelong ALP Richardson, Mr Timothy Noel Mordialloc ALP Crugnale, Ms Jordan Alessandra Bass ALP Riordan, Mr Richard Vincent Polwarth LP Cupper, Ms Ali Mildura Ind Rowswell, Mr Brad Sandringham LP D’Ambrosio, Ms Liliana Mill Park ALP Ryan, Stephanie Maureen Euroa Nats Dimopoulos, Mr Stephen Oakleigh ALP Sandell, Ms Ellen Melbourne Greens Donnellan, Mr Luke Anthony Narre Warren North ALP Scott, Mr Robin David Preston ALP Edbrooke, Mr Paul Andrew Frankston ALP Settle, Ms Michaela Buninyong ALP Edwards, Ms Janice Maree Bendigo West ALP Sheed, Ms Suzanna Shepparton Ind Eren, Mr John Hamdi Lara ALP Smith, Mr Ryan Warrandyte LP Foley, Mr Martin Peter Albert Park ALP Smith, Mr Timothy Colin Kew LP Fowles, Mr Will Burwood ALP Southwick, Mr David James Caulfield LP Fregon, Mr Matt Mount Waverley ALP Spence, Ms Rosalind Louise Yuroke ALP Green, Ms Danielle Louise Yan Yean ALP Staikos, Mr Nicholas Bentleigh ALP Guy, Mr Matthew Jason Bulleen LP Staley, Ms Louise Eileen Ripon LP Halfpenny, Ms Bronwyn Thomastown ALP Suleyman, Ms Natalie St Albans ALP Hall, Ms Katie Footscray ALP Tak, Mr Meng Heang Clarinda ALP Halse, Mr Dustin Ringwood ALP Taylor, Mr Jackson Bayswater ALP Hamer, Mr Paul Box Hill ALP Theophanous, Ms Katerina Northcote ALP Hennessy, Ms Jill Altona ALP Thomas, Ms Mary-Anne Macedon ALP Hibbins, Mr Samuel Peter Prahran Greens Tilley, Mr William John Benambra LP Hodgett, Mr David John Croydon LP Vallence, Ms Bridget Evelyn LP Horne, Ms Melissa Margaret Williamstown ALP Wakeling, Mr Nicholas Ferntree Gully LP Hutchins, Ms Natalie Maree Sykes Sydenham ALP Walsh, Mr Peter Lindsay Murray Plains Nats Kairouz, Ms Marlene Kororoit ALP Ward, Ms Vicki Eltham ALP Kealy, Ms Emma Jayne Lowan Nats Wells, Mr Kimberley Arthur Rowville LP Kennedy, Mr John Ormond Hawthorn ALP Williams, Ms Gabrielle Dandenong ALP Kilkenny, Ms Sonya Carrum ALP Wynne, Mr Richard William Richmond ALP

PARTY ABBREVIATIONS ALP—Labor Party; Greens—The Greens; Ind—Independent; LP—Liberal Party; Nats—The Nationals.

Legislative Assembly committees

Economy and Infrastructure Standing Committee Ms Addison, Mr Blackwood, Ms Connolly, Mr Eren, Mr Rowswell, Ms Ryan and Ms Theophanous.

Environment and Planning Standing Committee Mr Cheeseman, Mr Fowles, Ms Green, Mr Hamer, Mr McCurdy, Mr Morris and Mr T Smith.

Legal and Social Issues Standing Committee Ms Couzens, Ms Kealy, Mr Newbury, Ms Settle, Mr Southwick, Ms Suleyman and Mr Tak.

Privileges Committee Ms Allan, Mr Guy, Ms Hennessy, Mr McGuire, Mr Morris, Ms Neville, Mr Pakula, Ms Ryan and Mr Wells.

Standing Orders Committee The Speaker, Ms Allan, Ms Edwards, Ms Halfpenny, Ms McLeish, Ms Sheed, Mr Staikos, Ms Staley and Mr Walsh.

Joint committees

Dispute Resolution Committee Assembly: Ms Allan, Ms Hennessy, Mr Merlino, Mr Pakula, Mr R Smith, Mr Walsh and Mr Wells. Council: Mr Bourman, Mr Davis, Mr Jennings, Ms Symes and Ms Wooldridge.

Electoral Matters Committee Assembly: Ms Blandthorn, Ms Hall, Dr Read and Ms Spence. Council: Mr Atkinson, Mrs McArthur, Mr Meddick, Mr Melhem, Ms Lovell and Mr Quilty.

House Committee Assembly: The Speaker (ex officio), Mr T Bull, Ms Crugnale, Ms Edwards, Mr Fregon, Ms Sandell and Ms Staley. Council: The President (ex officio), Mr Bourman, Mr Davis, Ms Lovell, Ms Pulford and Ms Stitt.

Integrity and Oversight Committee Assembly: Mr Halse, Mr McGhie, Mr Rowswell, Mr Taylor and Mr Wells. Council: Mr Grimley and Ms Shing.

Public Accounts and Estimates Committee Assembly: Ms Blandthorn, Mr Hibbins, Mr Maas, Mr D O’Brien, Ms Richards, Mr Richardson, Mr Riordan and Ms Vallence. Council: Ms Stitt.

Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee Assembly: Mr Burgess, Ms Connolly and Ms Kilkenny. Council: Mr Gepp, Mrs McArthur, Ms Patten and Ms Taylor.

CONTENTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS Acknowledgement of country ...... 3109 CONDOLENCES Maxwell John McDonald ...... 3109 MEMBERS Minister for Planning ...... 3109 Absence ...... 3109 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS Drug driving ...... 3109 Ministers statements: Monash Freeway ...... 3110 Drought assistance ...... 3111 Ministers statements: Solar Homes package ...... 3113 Waste and recycling management ...... 3113 Ministers statements: World Suicide Prevention Day ...... 3114 Mildura West Primary School ...... 3115 Ministers statements: Victorian Honour Roll of Women ...... 3116 Eastern Freeway ...... 3117 Ministers statements: school maintenance funding ...... 3118 CONSTITUENCY QUESTIONS Rowville electorate ...... 3118 Mount Waverley electorate ...... 3119 Gippsland East electorate ...... 3119 Bass electorate ...... 3119 South-West Coast electorate...... 3120 Wendouree electorate ...... 3120 Prahran electorate ...... 3120 South Barwon electorate ...... 3121 Sandringham electorate ...... 3121 Lara electorate ...... 3121 BILLS Owners Corporations and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2019 ...... 3122 Introduction and first reading ...... 3122 Land (Revocation of Reservations) Bill 2019 ...... 3122 Introduction and first reading ...... 3122 BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Notices of motion ...... 3123 COMMITTEES Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee ...... 3123 Alert Digest No. 11 ...... 3123 DOCUMENTS Documents ...... 3123 BILLS Environment Protection Amendment Bill 2019 ...... 3124 Flora and Fauna Guarantee Amendment Bill 2019 ...... 3124 Public Holidays Amendment Bill 2019 ...... 3124 Council’s agreement ...... 3124 Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2019 ...... 3124 Professional Engineers Registration Bill 2019 ...... 3124 Royal assent ...... 3124 Environment Protection Amendment Bill 2019 ...... 3124 Flora and Fauna Guarantee Amendment Bill 2019 ...... 3124 Public Holidays Amendment Bill 2019 ...... 3124 Royal assent ...... 3124 Health Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill 2019 ...... 3125 Marine and Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019...... 3125 Police Legislation Amendment (Road Safety Camera Commissioner and Other Matters) Bill 2019...... 3125 Appropriation ...... 3125 COMMITTEES Privileges Committee ...... 3125 JOINT SITTING OF PARLIAMENT Senate vacancy ...... 3125

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Program ...... 3125 MEMBERS STATEMENTS Yarra Glen Bowling Club ...... 3129 Dirty Heels ...... 3129 Healesville High School ...... 3129 Western Chances ...... 3130 Kaniva chemical waste dump site ...... 3130 Kangaroo pet food trial ...... 3130 Synergy Auto Repairs ...... 3131 Eastern Freeway heritage listing ...... 3131 Foster and kinship carers week ...... 3131 Global Climate Strike ...... 3132 Flemington Community Centre ...... 3132 Cressy aerodrome ...... 3133 Sarah Henderson ...... 3133 Mordialloc electorate schools ...... 3133 Water policy ...... 3133 Emergency services mandatory sentencing legislation ...... 3134 Bayside Community Information & Support Services ...... 3134 Elwood Bowls Club ...... 3134 1st Elwood Scouts ...... 3134 Brighton Bayside Men’s Shed ...... 3135 Croxton Special School...... 3135 Clifford Baker ...... 3135 Kinship Carers Week ...... 3136 Pick My Project ...... 3136 A Walk in the Park ...... 3136 Independence Cup badminton tournament ...... 3136 Michael Zerafa ...... 3136 Aged Care Employee Day ...... 3137 School maintenance funding ...... 3137 Ringwood North Primary School ...... 3137 Ringwood electorate sporting achievements ...... 3137 Engineered stone workplace safety...... 3137 Melbourne Firefighter Stair Climb ...... 3137 Seaford North Primary School ...... 3138 JOINT SITTING OF PARLIAMENT Senate vacancy ...... 3138 BILLS Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019 ...... 3138 Second reading ...... 3138 Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 ...... 3171 Second reading ...... 3171 ADJOURNMENT Brownport Almonds ...... 3196 Melbourne-Lancefield Road ...... 3197 Port Fairy CFA and SES ...... 3197 Holmesglen Education First Youth Foyer ...... 3198 Energy Safe Victoria ...... 3198 Sydney Road parking ...... 3198 Birth certificates ...... 3199 Bus routes 302 and 304 ...... 3200 Endometriosis ...... 3200 Boronia shopping precinct ...... 3201 Responses ...... 3201

ANNOUNCEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3109

Tuesday, 10 September 2019

The SPEAKER (Hon. Colin Brooks) took the chair at 12.03 pm and read the prayer. Announcements ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY The SPEAKER (12:03): We acknowledge the traditional Aboriginal owners of the land on which we are meeting. We pay our respects to them, their culture, their elders past, present and future, and elders from other communities who may be here today. Condolences MAXWELL JOHN MCDONALD The SPEAKER (12:04): Order! Before proceeding to question time I wish to advise the house of the death of Maxwell John McDonald, member of the Legislative Assembly for the districts of Evelyn from 1982 to 1985 and Whittlesea from 1985 to 1992. I ask members to rise in their places as a mark of respect to the memory of the deceased. Members stood in their places. The SPEAKER: I will send a message of sympathy from the house to the relatives of the late Max McDonald. Members MINISTER FOR PLANNING Absence Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (12:05): I advise the house that the Minister for Planning will be absent from question time today and that the Minister for Water will answer in his place. Mr T Smith: On a point of order, Speaker, the Minister for Planning all of 7 minutes ago tweeted something, so where is he? The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! I wish to acknowledge a former member for Macedon in the gallery, Joanne Duncan. Questions without notice and ministers statements DRUG DRIVING Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (12:06): My question is to the Premier. Earlier this month Victorian magistrate Franz Holzer stated while sentencing a repeat drug driver:

There’s a gap in the legislative regime where drug drivers don’t have the same consequences as drink drivers and I really hope that situation changes … Given the road toll has increased by 58 people this year, why hasn’t the government strengthened the state’s weak drug-driving laws to bring them into line with penalties for drink-driving? Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (12:07): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question, and I am happy to provide some further advice on that particular matter. I am sure that due consideration has been given by Victoria Police, the Transport Accident Commission (TAC), the department of justice and others in terms of the finding that he cites. I have got no announcements to

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS 3110 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 make today in regard to that, but there are a number of different changes that we have made during our time in office to try and give Victoria Police the tools they need, particularly when it comes to drinking— Members interjecting. Mr ANDREWS: As I said the police, the department, the TAC and others are, I am sure, giving due consideration to the commentary provided in the judgement of the magistrate as cited by the questioner. I have got no announcements to make to that effect today, but if I need to update the member or other members of the house, then I will do so. Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (12:08): Earlier this year the same magistrate lamented that he was unable to jail a driver caught with a cocktail of ice and cannabis in his system while driving to collect his children from school. The magistrate said: It is bizarre that parliament does not think the consequences for (drink driving) should be the same for drug (driving). How much longer will the Premier continue to allow the lives of Victorian motorists to be imperilled with soft drug-driving penalties? Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (12:08): I again thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. There is work being done by a number of different agencies. Cabinet will soon consider a raft of other reforms and changes that will address the issues that the Leader of the Opposition highlights, and we will have further announcements to make in due course. The Leader of the Opposition and others should be in no doubt— Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Warrandyte! Mr ANDREWS: There was a time when these matters were given the bipartisan support that they are absolutely owed. One death on our roads is one death too many, and it would be my presentation to the Leader of the Opposition— Members interjecting. Mr M O’Brien: On a point of order, Speaker, relating to relevance. The question was how much longer will Victorians have to wait until these laws are fixed so that drug driving is treated as seriously as drink-driving. ‘In due course’ does not keep Victorians safe. The Premier should answer the question. The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Premier is being relevant to the question. Mr ANDREWS: There was a raft of changes that came into effect in April, which I think you will find predate some of the decisions that the Leader of the Opposition is quoting. What I am indicating to the Leader of the Opposition is two further points: bipartisanship is important in this, and make no mistake, the government will have more to say in due course. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: MONASH FREEWAY Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (12:10): I am delighted to be able to inform the house that work is proceeding on a massive widening of the Monash Freeway in Melbourne’s south-east. I cannot tell you how pleased I was to be out there with the Prime Minister— Members interjecting. Mr ANDREWS: Well, some people were not invited and they are a little bit sore about that. They are a little bit sore about that, that they were not invited, and why would you have them there? They

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3111 stand for nothing, delivered nothing, had their chance and widened nothing except the gap between themselves and this government. That is the only widening you were any good at. The key point here is that this project is proceeding, 36— Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! Just before calling the member for Kew, I ask members not to jeer and shout across the chamber. Mr T Smith: On a point of order, Speaker, you have constantly informed the opposition that the word ‘you’ is unparliamentary, and I ask you to apply that to the Premier. Mr Richardson interjected. The SPEAKER: I warn the member for Mordialloc. I ask the Premier to direct his comments through the Chair. Mr ANDREWS: I should, Speaker, have said of course ‘that small group opposite’. That is what I should have said. The 470 000 trips, the busiest road in our road network— A member: The road is a disgrace. Mr ANDREWS: Apparently it is a disgrace to widen the Monash. It is a disgrace. Mr M O’Brien: On a point of order, Speaker, I am not going to be verballed by the Premier. His arrogance is a disgrace and Victoria deserves better than the arrogance of this one. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition is not raising a point of order. Mr ANDREWS: The Leader of the Opposition can say these things all he wants. The fact of the matter is we are getting on and widening the Monash Freeway. It is part of a partnership with the commonwealth government, one that upsets some people quite a lot, but we are getting on and creating jobs, getting people home more safely and sooner—36 kilometres of extra lanes. This is a very significant project and one that we are pleased to be proceeding with. These additional lanes in the outer south-east but also a different treatment and some extra capacity, a bit closer to the city around that Warragul Road area, the interchange between EastLink and the Monash Freeway—this is all about getting people where they need to be safer and sooner, creating more jobs and, where you can, work in partnership with the government. I am sorry that those opposite were not invited, but they are not relevant. DROUGHT ASSISTANCE Mr WALSH (Murray Plains) (12:13): My question is to the Premier. The Premier has been to China more times than he has been to our drought-affected regions since taking office. It is a simple request from these communities in genuine need: why won’t the Premier visit our drought-affected farmers? Mr Richardson interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Mordialloc has already been warned. Ms McLeish interjected. Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (12:13): The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party has just called me the Premier for China, so we will put that on the record and we will note that those opposite love to play this card, and it did them a world of good in the election last year, didn’t it? Members interjecting.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS 3112 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier will resume his seat. The member for Warrandyte has already been warned. Mr Walsh: On a point of order, Speaker, on the issue of relevance and as a matter of respect for our drought-affected communities in Victoria, I would ask you to ask the Premier to come back to actually answering the question that has been asked. This is about communities and people who are in desperate need who would like to see their Premier actually come to visit and acknowledge the issues they have. Ms Allan: That isn’t a point of order. Mr Walsh: It is a point of order—actually bring him back to show some respect to those people in answering the question. Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! The member for South-West Coast! Order! I do ask the Premier not to respond to interjections. Mr ANDREWS: The Minister for Agriculture was in Millewa last week, I think, is the important update to provide to the house, and the minister will continue to visit relevant communities and I will do exactly the same. More than $50 million has been provided by our government, and I have made the point a number of times and I will make it a further time for the benefit of those opposite: if there is need for the government to do more as we move into spring and have the status of this season confirmed—and the Leader of the National Party and I have had this exchange recently about the fact that this season looks to be patchy; some, particularly grain farmers, are reporting in some parts of the state that this is set to be quite a good season, others are in very real trouble with record low rainfall— Mr R SMITH: On a point of order, Speaker, the Premier was asked why he won’t visit these drought-affected areas. If he does not care about those Victorians, he should say so and sit down. The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr ANDREWS: As I was saying, Speaker, it would seem that this will be a patchy season, particularly for grain growers, and that is a deep frustration to those who, despite only a short distance between them and others doing quite well, are doing it very tough. That is why the government has provided more than $50 million in additional support. We continue to monitor the situation in terms of how the season unfolds, and if there are further things that we can do—if there is more work that we can do—then the government stands ready to do that. Mr WALSH (Murray Plains) (12:16): Premier, we asked you in February, we asked you in March, we asked you in April and in August, and now I am asking you again: when will you provide assistance to pay shire rates and fixed-water charges to Victoria’s drought-stricken farmers? Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! I will allow the question, but I remind the Leader of the Nationals to address the question through the Chair. Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (12:16): Thank you, Speaker. As I was just saying, the government has provided more than $50 million worth of assistance—practical assistance—to affected communities. If there is a need for us to go further, to do more, then the government stands ready to do that. The nature of that assistance will be in line with the assistance that we have already provided. If there is more that we can do, particularly in further areas— Mr Walsh: On a point of order, Speaker, I would ask you to bring the Premier back to actually answering the question that was asked about assistance for shire rates and fixed-water charges. That is the ask that the Victorian Farmers Federation (VFF) is making, that is the ask that the farmers are

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3113 making. On behalf of those people, we are raising it in Parliament again—nearly monthly now—and I would ask you to bring the Premier back to actually answering that question. The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier is being relevant to the question that the Leader of the Nationals asked. Mr ANDREWS: The questioner references the VFF, and the government is in constant contact with the VFF about these issues and many other issues, and we will continue that approach. That has always been our approach over four and a half years, and it has seen not just this $50 million in drought assistance but significant assistance in early, very challenging circumstances, I think in the first two years of our term in office. I have no announcements to make as called for by the Leader of the National Party, but when we are ready to have more to say on this matter, we will. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: SOLAR HOMES PACKAGE Ms D’AMBROSIO (Mill Park—Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change, Minister for Solar Homes) (12:18): I am very pleased to update the house on our bill-busting Solar Homes program. Victorians have embraced this program in record numbers— Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! When the house comes to order! The Leader of the Nationals—sorry, Leader of the House. I don’t know who that offends more, sorry. My apologies. Mr R Smith: On a point of order, Speaker, I wanted to correct the minister. I think she meant ‘business busting’—a lot of businesses have gone to the wall, a lot of people have lost their jobs. It has been a terrible, terrible program. Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Warrandyte knows that is not a point of order. Ms D’AMBROSIO: Victorians have embraced this program in record numbers. As we speak, 39 000 Victorian households now have a solar power station on their roofs, thanks to the Solar Homes program. The benefits are being shared right across our state. This means, for example, 1523 households now have solar on their roofs in Tarneit. I know that the member for Tarneit welcomes this fantastic news for her constituents. It also means that more than 2200 households in Cranbourne now have solar on their roofs, and I know that the member for Cranbourne is very, very happy with this news. As a result also of Solar Homes more than 500 households in Bendigo East— and I know the member for Bendigo East, the Leader of the House, is absolutely delighted for her constituents—are now creating energy from the sun while driving down their power bills. In response to this incredibly popular program we are bringing forward 23 000 more rebates in this financial year. We are also shifting it to fortnightly releases. This means that more Victorians can get more frequent access to this program. We have announced more audits for solar systems, stronger fraud protections and a new industry and consumer reference group. I am very, very pleased also to have stood next to industry, who have welcomed these announcements. As I can quote, John Grimes from the Smart Energy Council said: The Victorian Government has listened to solar businesses and solar workers … This is what good governments do. The Clean Energy Council’s Kane Thornton also warmly welcomed our changes, saying— (Time expired) WASTE AND RECYCLING MANAGEMENT Mr MORRIS (Mornington) (12:21): My question is to the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change. Last sitting week the minister confirmed that a $10 million loan had been extended

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS 3114 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 to the SKM receivers to clear out the accumulated recyclables at four company facilities. The minister said, and I quote, ‘our priority is to get those dangerous stockpiles cleared up’. Minister, why are the stockpiles at these four SKM facilities more dangerous than those at other sites? Ms D’AMBROSIO (Mill Park—Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change, Minister for Solar Homes) (12:22): I thank the member for Mornington for his question. I think the member fails to understand the purpose of the loan that was given to the receivers of SKM. Our priority has been very clear: to get these operations, these sites, cleaned up so that they can start to resume collection from kerbside. This is the point of this loan to the receivers. It is as simple as that. I also remind those opposite that it is the role of Environment Protection Authority Victoria (EPA) to monitor safety, together with other agencies right across government—a joined-up process—to ensure that any stockpiled materials, whether it is in this area or in other areas, are deemed safe, and those who control the sites and the operators are actually held to account and are ultimately responsible for the management of these sites. Our priority is to get recycling moving back here in Victoria. Our first priority is to get these locations up and going and cleaned up. I know from information from the receivers that they are well on the way to achieving that outcome. Mr MORRIS (Mornington) (12:23): Five warehouses remain packed to the roof with recyclables—five equally dangerous stockpiles. When will the minister act to clean up these five dangerous sites? Ms D’AMBROSIO (Mill Park—Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change, Minister for Solar Homes) (12:23): I thank the member for the supplementary question. I would suggest to the member that the EPA and other agencies across government have the responsibility to consider the safety and the conditions within which the owners of these sites maintain their facilities. Mr Morris: On a point of order, Speaker, the minister has intervened to clean up four sites. The question was: why won’t she intervene to clean up the remaining five? The SPEAKER: I understand the point of order, but the minister is being relevant to the supplementary question that was asked. Ms D’AMBROSIO: The facts are these: these areas that contain these stockpiled materials are matters for businesses that are going concerns, and there are contractual arrangements in place for those operators, the owners of these facilities, to be able to work their way through it with— Mr M O’Brien: On a point of order, Speaker, is the minister saying that if you run a failed business, you get government money to clean up, but if you are an innocent victim, you get nothing? That is what she seems to be saying. The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Ms D’AMBROSIO: Thank you, Speaker, and I think the Leader of the Opposition, for the second time two weeks running, has actually got it wrong. The receivers are in charge of these sites. They are getting on with the business of cleaning them up, reducing the risks associated with that and getting these operations back in place so that they can start to receive recycled material. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: WORLD SUICIDE PREVENTION DAY Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Mental Health, Minister for Equality, Minister for Creative Industries) (12:25): I rise to update the house on developments to bring down the national tragedy that is our suicide toll, which currently stands at over 3000 people nationally. Victoria’s sad stake in that stands at over 620 people. That of course is twice the road toll and suicide is the leading cause of death of Australians aged 15 to 45. I do so today on the occasion of World Suicide Prevention Day, which is a day on which we remember the people, the lives and the impact that suicide has on us all.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3115

We pause today because every suicide is a tragedy, and we use this as an opportunity to resolve that every life that is lost to suicide is in fact preventable. We do so here in Victoria particularly because we have resolved that it is up to governments to lead in this space to make sure that it is the role of all of us to look after, support and assist those individuals, families and communities that continue to be so tragically impacted by suicide every day. That is why it is so important that this government is to lead a royal commission into our mental health system, the first of its kind. It is why the Premier’s contribution at the recent COAG meeting saw, in partnership with the commonwealth and other states, suicide prevention placed as a national priority. It is why only on Sunday the Premier and the Minister for Health were part of launching part of our $3 billion worth of ongoing investment in suicide prevention out at the Monash emergency department. I use this occasion just to remind all Victorians and indeed Australians that the support we bring to support services such as Lifeline and Beyond Blue is important to make sure they are there to reach out. I use this occasion to urge any Victorian who is looking for support from those agencies to contact Lifeline on 13 11 14 or Beyond Blue on 1300 22 46 36. MILDURA WEST PRIMARY SCHOOL Ms CUPPER (Mildura) (12:27): My question is for the Minister for Education. Will the minister commit to funding the completion of the master plan for Mildura West Primary School? Last week I visited the school, and the school community is frustrated at the state of their school buildings. In 2009 a master plan was developed and the school jumped through several hoops to progress this work with the department. The plan lapsed following a change of government and the blocks of land purchased for the new master plan are still sitting vacant. After significant effort put in by the staff and school council over 10 years will the minister commit to funding the completion of the master plan? Mr MERLINO (Monbulk—Minister for Education) (12:28): I thank the Independent member for Mildura for her question. Well, it is refreshing to have in this house such passionate and strong advocacy for local schools in the Mildura region, because there certainly was not before. So those opposite can laugh all they want, but I want to acknowledge the advocacy of the Independent member for Mildura. In the last budget, in our 2018–19 budget, we provided Mildura West Primary School with $1.8 million, which will include the construction of two classrooms and a learning hub and the demolition of old buildings. Just last month Energy Architecture was appointed to the project, and they will work with the school to develop a detailed design. That capital project is scheduled for completion in late 2020. I will get to the member’s question in terms of the full master plan and the ambitions of the school, but I also want to put on record my thanks for what the school is doing inside the school gates, inside the walls of the school. Mildura West Primary is a great school, with principal Anne Robinson currently working hard to get the school accredited as an international baccalaureate school. The school is also showing— Members interjecting. Mr MERLINO: You do not like regional schools improving their results. The school is showing strong results and improvements, with students achieving 88 per cent above the national minimum standard in reading, 82 per cent in writing and 86 per cent in numeracy. We want to support the great work that is happening within the school with the very best in terms of facilities. I know that there is more to do at Mildura West Primary School. We are working as hard and as fast as we can. Over our last five budgets $6.1 billion into school infrastructure—$6.1 billion, the greatest investment that this state has ever seen. Our challenge is the ongoing needs and the variety of needs

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS 3116 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 across all our 1500-plus schools. There is more to do. The Victorian School Building Authority will work with the school in finalising the current capital project and ensure that the asset management plan incorporates potential future stages—so picking up the master plan, going through detailed design with the architect for this $1.8 million project and making sure that we have got the design in place for future budget allocations. But across Mildura in our first term, $28 million for schools in Mildura—$9 million when those opposite were in government. On this side of the house we will invest in Mildura’s schools, like Irymple Secondary College, $7 million; Merbein P–10 College, $2.25 million; and Red Cliffs, $7 million. Ms CUPPER (Mildura) (12:31): My supplementary question is also to the Minister for Education. While many schools in the state receive significant amounts of funding, Mildura West Primary School is left wanting. Contributions to date have been piecemeal and have only allowed the school to undertake urgent repairs and maintenance, including the amount of funding you have mentioned. Remembering that students at Mildura West Primary School are Victorians too, I ask: will you commit to visiting Mildura West to talk to staff and students and see the state of these buildings firsthand? Mr MERLINO (Monbulk—Minister for Education) (12:32): I thank the Independent member for Mildura for her supplementary question. Indeed I will. I enjoy visiting Mildura. I was there back in April, and we opened the brand-new facilities at Red Cliffs Secondary College. We also visited De Garis kinder as we were implementing and seeing firsthand the impact that school readiness funding has. I will be very pleased to visit Mildura West Primary School to speak to the principal, teachers, parents and, most importantly, the students. We are investing—in our last budget $1.8 million. I understand that there is more to do, and I will visit the school with the Independent member. I am very happy to. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: VICTORIAN HONOUR ROLL OF WOMEN Ms WILLIAMS (Dandenong—Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, Minister for Women, Minister for Youth) (12:33): I rise to update the house on our government’s commitment to recognising women’s leadership in our community. Twenty years ago next year the late Joan Kirner, of course Victoria’s first and only female Premier, created an initiative which would forever elevate the status of women in our state because she knew that marking their achievements—making them visible—would encourage others to follow in their footsteps. And so the Victorian Honour Roll of Women was born. Since then more than 600 women have been honoured for their contributions to their community, to our state and of course to the nation as well. These women have made profound contributions across many fields of endeavour, from the arts to sport, from science and technology to community activism. Some of them are household names and others are champions in their local communities, but each and every one of them is immensely worthy of recognition. Joan’s vision has endured. Almost 20 years on we have a commitment to ensure that government boards and Victorian courts have gender equal representation, and we know how important that is. We have made record investments to support and promote women’s participation in sport. We have our state’s first-ever gender-equal cabinet, backed up by government benches comprising 48 per cent women, and we are implementing Victoria’s first gender equality strategy. Later this year we will be introducing nation-leading gender equality legislation. If Joan were standing here today, she would be right to feel very proud of her legacy, and she should be very proud indeed. The Victorian Honour Roll of Women is a powerful way to recognise the importance of women leaders across our state. Our government is very proud to be celebrating this program, and I encourage all members in this place to nominate inspiring women in their local communities and to get onto it quickly as nominations close this coming Sunday.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3117

EASTERN FREEWAY Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (12:34): My question is the Premier. Transport expert Andrew O’Brien has confirmed that widening the Eastern Freeway to 20 lanes will channel up to 100 000 extra cars onto the Eastern Freeway, causing chaos at the T-intersection with Hoddle Street. Premier, how much longer will people need to sit in their cars at the end of the Eastern Freeway because you only have a plan to make their morning commute worse instead of better? Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (12:35): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question, and I reject the assumptions and assertions contained within it. If that means that I reject the views put forward by the transport expert he quotes, well, I suppose I am rejecting them too. The only expert opinion that I think is relevant here is the opinion of the Victorian community in November last year, when in record numbers they said, ‘Get on and build the North East Link. Get on and finish the ring-road. Get on and deal with the embarrassment that says we are the only major city anywhere with a ring-road with a great big gap in it. Send traffic around the city; don’t pipe it through the middle’. That is the expert opinion that matters to me and every member of this government, and that is why we are wasting no time in delivering the biggest road project this state has ever seen, creating thousands of jobs, and that will not change. Mr M O’Brien: On a point of order, Speaker, relating to relevance, the question was: how much longer will people need— Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr M O’Brien: The question was: how much longer will people need to sit in their cars at the end of the Eastern Freeway? If the Premier is seriously suggesting that putting up to 100 000 extra cars on the Eastern Freeway will not exacerbate the already existing problems, he should come out and say so. What is his basis for saying it? The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier is being relevant to the question that was framed. Mr ANDREWS: Speaker, what I am most definitely and seriously suggesting is that we are going to deliver the project that Victorians voted for, and that is the North East Link. That is what we are going to deliver. That is why we have wasted no time in the design and procurement phase. There is an environment effects statement going on at the moment, and there will be other people who have a different view to me. That is fine in a democratic Victoria. But the expert opinion that drives me every single day is the view that was put forward in record terms at the election last year, and that was to get on and get things done, get on and finish the ring-road, get on and deliver the biggest road project in our state’s history—not simply talk about it but actually get on and deliver it—and that is what we will do. Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (12:37): Premier, how much longer will Victorian motorists have to suffer being stuck on the end of the Eastern Freeway for hours because this Premier is too arrogant to accept $4 billion from the commonwealth government to build the east– west link? Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (12:38): I do thank the Leader of the Opposition for his supplementary question. I think the only arrogant submission here is that we should set aside the verdict of the Victorian community. That is the height of arrogance—‘Oh no, you got it wrong’. The community got it wrong apparently. Apparently 57-plus per cent got it wrong. The communities in Mount Waverley and Burwood and Box Hill and Ringwood and Bayswater— Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Bayswater will leave the chamber for the period of 1 hour.

CONSTITUENCY QUESTIONS 3118 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Member for Bayswater withdrew from chamber. The SPEAKER: Order! I ask members to calm down and cease shouting across the chamber. Mr M O’Brien: On a point of order, Speaker, relating to relevance, the question was: why won’t the Premier accept the $4 billion on offer from the commonwealth government to just build the east– west link? It is a fair question, and the Premier should address that. The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier is being relevant to the question that was asked. Mr ANDREWS: An appropriate thing to do, Speaker, is to deliver against the commitments that we make, and that is what this government has done every day we have had the honour and privilege of serving this community and it is what will do every day that we retain that honour and privilege. We have delivered—as a community, an economy, a government—more infrastructure than this lot have even talked about, so we will not take any lectures from those opposite. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: SCHOOL MAINTENANCE FUNDING Mr MERLINO (Monbulk—Minister for Education) (12:40): I rise to update the house on the Andrews government’s maintenance blitz, which will benefit every single government school— primary, secondary and specialist. Schools will share in $515 million of additional funding, which will help them fix the little things that often make a big difference: fixing leaking taps, replacing carpet, tree inspections, a new lick of paint, bushfire safety. This is the largest boost to maintenance funding in our state’s history. This funding will ensure Victoria’s more than 1500 schools are safe and properly maintained, because the difference on this side of the house is we want the quality of our buildings to match the quality of our teachers. Unlike other approaches, we do not just audit schools and walk away; we get on with the job. In our first term we doubled maintenance funding, and over the next two years we are doubling it again. We are investing more this financial year alone than the former Liberal-Nationals government managed in four budgets—four times more every year on school infrastructure. And everyone benefits. In the Leader of the Opposition’s seat, Malvern Primary School, $80 000 of additional funding; the Leader of the National Party, Swan Hill College, over $312 000; the shadow Minister for Education, Mansfield Secondary College, over $225 000; Mildura West Primary School—we just spoke about that—over $126 000; the member for Tarneit, at the Grange— Ms Ryan: On a point of order, Speaker, how about Benalla College, where you are sacking 13 staff? The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr MERLINO: There is more money for Benalla as well. Every single government school in this state. Only on this side of the house. Constituency questions ROWVILLE ELECTORATE Mr WELLS (Rowville) (12:43): (1111) My question is to the Minister for Public Transport. Minister, can you advise why there was no money in the 2019 budget to improve the frequency and reliability of the bus service in the evenings to convey train passengers from Glen Waverley railway station to Stud Park in my electorate of Rowville? In April this year I asked you if there was any money for these upgrades in the budget. Your answer was as follows:

As you know, the Andrews Labor Government has invested more than $200 million to build stronger, better- connected bus networks. This includes adding routes and services, creating more direct routes, and increasing service frequencies. The Member can find all items for the 2019–20 State Budget in the budget papers.

CONSTITUENCY QUESTIONS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3119

Minister, I have searched everywhere in the budget papers. There is not one upgrade to the public transport system in Rowville, meaning once again my constituents in Rowville have been shafted by the Andrews government. MOUNT WAVERLEY ELECTORATE Mr FREGON (Mount Waverley) (12:44): (1112) My question is to the Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, and I ask: what is the Andrews government doing for my constituents of Mount Waverley district who are experiencing family violence? Recently I sat down with Monash council and we discussed areas of mutual interest for our constituents. One topic that was raised was the issue of family violence and the need for coordinated family violence support services for residents in the City of Monash. The Andrews Labor government has invested $448 million to establish support and safety hubs across the state, a key recommendation of the Royal Commission into Family Violence, and the investment formed part of the government’s record $2.7 billion investment towards ending that. These hubs are now known as the Orange Door, bringing family violence services together. A key principle of the Orange Door is that there is no wrong door for families seeking support or advice. The Orange Door is welcoming and evokes a sense of hope, giving people the support they need, hopefully before they reach crisis point. I look forward to hearing from the minister about what we are doing in the family violence space— (Time expired) GIPPSLAND EAST ELECTORATE Mr T BULL (Gippsland East) (12:45): (1113) My constituency question is to the Minister for Regional Development in the other place, and the information I seek is: what investments are being planned in Lakes Entrance, specifically to offset the economic impact of the buying out of the 10 commercial fishing licences in that town? Apart from impacting on families this will also impact on the Lakes Entrance Fishermen’s Co-operative and transport companies and will have other flow- on impacts in that community as well. Whilst we have a commitment for a cafe on Bullock Island, which the coalition committed to several weeks before the government did prior to the election, more is needed. The Hazelwood closure attracted a very significant package of investments in the Latrobe Valley. Whilst we obviously do not need anything of that magnitude, this issue is significant for Lakes Entrance, and the government ought to invest in economic development in that town. I look forward to hearing what their plans are to provide that for the community of Lakes Entrance. BASS ELECTORATE Ms CRUGNALE (Bass) (12:46): (1114) My question is to the Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers. What can we do as a state government to pressure the federal government to reduce the wait time between aged-care package assessment and the receipt of the package itself? Home care packages are so important to many people living in my community. They allow our elders to maintain their independence by accessing the support and services they need to stay in their own homes and also be healthy and connected to their local community. I have received numerous inquiries from my constituents, with some looking at wait times of up to 18 months to receive the funding they are assessed as needing. Some of my constituents that are assessed as needing a higher service—a level 3 or 4—are left waiting while only receiving a lower level package, insufficient to support their care needs. It is unacceptable. The commonwealth must fund additional home care packages as a matter of urgency. Thank you, Minister, for your support.

CONSTITUENCY QUESTIONS 3120 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

SOUTH-WEST COAST ELECTORATE Ms BRITNELL (South-West Coast) (12:47): (1115) My question is to the Minister for Roads in the other place, and I ask her for the latest information on requests from the Glenelg Shire Council and industry for the government to address height restrictions on the Portland ring-road. Minister, as you know, this road leads to the port of Portland, but the Bridgewater Road overpass is causing issues for trucks transporting wind tower components imported through the port. Right now they are being forced onto local roads to get around the height restrictions this bridge is creating. This is not a long- term solution. The solution is simple, in my view and the view of others who I have spoken with: simply dig out underneath the overpass and lower the road. If drainage becomes a problem, install a pump, like farmers do when building cattle underpasses. There is no need for long and expensive studies and no need to spend millions of dollars replacing and rebuilding the overpass. Height restrictions have the potential to hamper other industries into the future, and as such may force companies to avoid the port of Portland. As the local member and the shadow minister, this is something I do not want to see happen. As you are also an upper house member representing our region, I ask you to do this urgently. WENDOUREE ELECTORATE Ms ADDISON (Wendouree) (12:48): (1116) My constituency question is for the Minister for Solar Homes, and it is about the uptake of the Solar Homes package rebates in my electorate of Wendouree. I am proud the Solar Homes initiative is helping Victorian households to cut their energy costs by utilising renewable energy. Minister, can you please advise how many households in Wendouree have applied to take advantage of this innovative program that will not only reduce the cost of living by driving down power bills but also benefit the environment? I am also interested to know from the minister about the interest in the solar rebate program to tenants living in rental properties in Wendouree. I welcome the leadership the Andrews Labor government has shown in supporting people who rent as well as those who own their home, and I am pleased that they can access the many benefits of solar power. I really do look forward to hearing from the minister and thank her for her work to date, and I will encourage more residents in Ballarat to benefit from this great package. PRAHRAN ELECTORATE Mr HIBBINS (Prahran) (12:49): (1117) My constituency question is to the Minister for Public Transport, and I ask: when will the minister fix the dangerous tram stop on the corner of Chapel Street and Toorak Road, stop 128 outbound on route 58? Commuters are frequently experiencing or witnessing near misses from vehicles not stopping for stationary trams, creating a risk of injury for passengers getting on or off the tram. With the new Capitol Grand Tower opening soon, this unsafe tram stop is going to get busier and busier. I am currently running a petition to upgrade the tram stop, and I will just read out some of the Facebook comments from locals: This is by far the most dangerous stop. I have seen so many near misses. So pleased to see this petition. Another: The tram drivers always tell people to be careful at this stop. Has to change. And another:

Finally!!!! The numbers of times I’ve almost been hit by a car getting off at this stop is ridiculous. And then there’s the times I’ve stopped other people from being hit. And then there are all the times I’ve had been walking past and seen cars speed through to get the lights not even caring about the people getting off. If the minister is still not convinced, I would certainly invite her to come down and just stand at the stop for a few minutes and she will see what I am talking about.

CONSTITUENCY QUESTIONS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3121

SOUTH BARWON ELECTORATE Mr CHEESEMAN (South Barwon) (12:50): (1118) I direct my constituency question to the Minister for Education. The announcement that Oberon High School will keep its name when it moves to my electorate was greeted with much relief by the school community. A number of my constituents are already sending their kids to Oberon in expectation of this transition. I recently visited the construction site of the new school and was impressed to see the progress that has already been made. My question to the minister is this: what facilities will the students of Oberon High enjoy when they move to the new site, and when can we have an update on the latest time line for when the school will move to the new site? SANDRINGHAM ELECTORATE Mr ROWSWELL (Sandringham) (12:51): (1119) My question is to the Minister for Education. Beaumaris North Primary School has one flagpole. However, grade 3 students, led by classmates Emily Overell and Clementine Conlan, have recently studied the significance of Australia’s recognised flags, and they wrote to me seeking assistance in having all flags displayed on school grounds. In response to my initial letter of advocacy the Minister for Education indicated in a letter dated 13 August that the Department of Education and Training undertakes to make funds available for the installation of just one flagpole at each school. I am advised, however, that the sole flagpole standing at Beaumaris North Primary School was in fact purchased and installed through private fundraising. On that basis I ask: would the minister now be prepared to fund the purchase and installation of just one flagpole at Beaumaris North Primary School? LARA ELECTORATE Mr EREN (Lara) (12:51): (1120) My question is to the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change. Our government has committed funding for Environment Protection Authority Victoria to step in and manage the clean-up of the Broderick Road recycling site in Lara. This was the result of poor site management practices by the previous operator, C & D Recycling, which resulted in an unacceptable risk to the local community, the environment and emergency services in the event of a fire at that site. My question to the minister is: when will clean-up works begin at this site and will the community be informed of the process going forward for this very important site? Ms Kealy: On a point of order, Speaker, I am just asking for clarification around the structure of constituency questions. In the past you have only been able to ask one question as part of your question, whereas I did notice today that the member for South Barwon asked two questions. He asked: what programs will the school offer and when will the school be relocated? I am asking for your clarification on that matter as to whether we can now ask multiple questions as part of our constituency question or whether that question will be ruled out of order. The SPEAKER: Order! The rule applying to all questions—so question time as well as constituency questions—is really that there should be one question asked as part of the question. I will review the question that was asked by the member for South Barwon and come back to the house with a ruling. Mr R Smith: On a point of order, Speaker, I refer you back to a discussion we had in this chamber a little while ago about ministers defying your ruling with regard to sitting down. I note that the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change continued quite significantly after you asked her to sit down when her time had run out today. At the time I pointed out that there were few consequences for ministers who embarked upon that approach. It appears that it is creeping back in again, and I ask your guidance on how you can prevent that going forward. The SPEAKER: Order! I did not notice the minister doing that, and I do not intend to reopen matters well after they have occurred in the house.

BILLS 3122 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Mr R Smith: On the point of order, Speaker, with great respect I saved it to the end of question time to avoid interrupting the flow of question time. When we had that discussion last time you were very content to have these issues canvassed after question time— Mr Staikos interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Bentleigh will come to order. Mr R Smith: At the time you were happy to have these issues canvassed at the conclusion of question time, and I am simply following the precedent that you yourself have set. The SPEAKER: Order! I take on board the member raising this matter at a time that is convenient to the operation of the house. I did not realise that was the case, so I appreciate that. I did not notice the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change, I think you mentioned, staying on her feet longer than required. I thought during today’s question time the ministers making statements resumed their seats very promptly when points of order were raised or when they finished their statements. I am happy to have a look at the footage and consider that matter. But I thought the running of question time today was quite good on both sides of the house, despite a little bit of shouting across the chamber. Bills OWNERS CORPORATIONS AND OTHER ACTS AMENDMENT BILL 2019 Introduction and first reading Ms KAIROUZ (Kororoit—Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Suburban Development) (12:55): I move:

That I have leave to bring in a bill for an act to amend the Owners Corporations Act 2006, the Retirement Villages Act 1986 and the Subdivision Act 1988 and for other purposes. Mr ANGUS (Forest Hill) (12:55): Could I request from the minister some further explanation of the bill. Ms KAIROUZ: The Owners Corporations and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2019 will amend the Owners Corporations Act, the Retirement Villages Act and part 5 of the Subdivision Act 1988. It will implement the outcomes of the consumer property law review with regard to the regulation of owners corporations and modernise and improve the abovementioned acts, taking into account stakeholders’ experiences and industry developments since the OC act commenced in December 2007. Motion agreed to. Read first time. Ordered to be read a second time tomorrow. LAND (REVOCATION OF RESERVATIONS) BILL 2019 Introduction and first reading Ms D’AMBROSIO (Mill Park—Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change, Minister for Solar Homes) (12:56): I move:

That I have leave to bring in a bill for an act to provide for the revocation of certain permanent reservations of Crown land at Frankston, Camberwell, Geelong and Coleraine, to revoke related Crown grants and to re- reserve certain land and for other purposes. Mr R SMITH (Warrandyte) (12:56): Could I please ask the minister for a further explanation of the bill.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3123

Ms D’AMBROSIO: It will revoke permanent reservations of Crown land to facilitate new management arrangements for future use and development of the land. In particular the bill will also facilitate the government’s commitment to redevelop Frankston Hospital. Motion agreed to. Read first time. Ordered to be read a second time tomorrow. Business of the house NOTICES OF MOTION The SPEAKER (12:57): I wish to advise the house that notices of motion 1 to 20 will be removed from the notice paper unless members wishing their notice to remain advise the Clerk in writing before 2.00 pm today. Committees SCRUTINY OF ACTS AND REGULATIONS COMMITTEE Alert Digest No. 11 Ms KILKENNY (Carrum) (12:57): I have the honour to present to the house a report from the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, being Alert Digest No. 11 of 2019, on the following bills: Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2019 Children Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 Children’s Services Amendment Bill 2019 Dangerous Goods Amendment (Penalty Reform) Bill 2019 Health Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill 2019 Local Government (South Gippsland Shire Council) Bill 2019 Marine and Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 Police Legislation Amendment (Road Safety Camera Commissioner and Other Matters) Bill 2019 Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 Public Administration Amendment Bill 2019 Racial and Religious Tolerance Amendment Bill 2019 together with appendices. Ordered to be published. Documents DOCUMENTS Tabled by Clerk: Melbourne City Link Act 1995: Melbourne City Link Thirty-Eighth Amending Deed City Link and Extension Projects Integration and Facilitation Agreement Twenty-Sixth Amending Deed Ombudsman—OPCAT in Victoria: A thematic investigation of practices related to solitary confinement of children and young people—Ordered to be published Planning and Environment Act 1987—Notices of approval of amendments to the following Planning Schemes: Banyule—C114

BILLS 3124 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Boroondara—C266 Cardinia—C242 Glenelg—C95 Greater Dandenong—C218 Greater Geelong—C389 Hume—GC137 Kingston—GC137 Knox—C173 Mitchell—C128 Whittlesea—C237 Yarra Ranges—C166 Statutory Rules under the following Acts: Children, Youth and Families Act 2005—SR 75 Parliamentary Salaries, Allowances and Superannuation Act 1968—SR 74 Residential Tenancies Act 1997—SR 72 Supreme Court Act 1986—SR 73 Subordinate Legislation Act 1994—Documents under s 15 in relation to Statutory Rules 70, 73, 74, 75. Bills ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AMENDMENT BILL 2019 FLORA AND FAUNA GUARANTEE AMENDMENT BILL 2019 PUBLIC HOLIDAYS AMENDMENT BILL 2019 Council’s agreement The SPEAKER: I have received messages from the Legislative Council agreeing to the following bills without amendment: the Environment Protection Amendment Bill 2019, the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Amendment Bill 2019 and the Public Holidays Amendment Bill 2019. BIRTHS, DEATHS AND MARRIAGES REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL 2019 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS REGISTRATION BILL 2019 Royal assent The SPEAKER (12:59): I inform the house that the administrator, as the Governor’s deputy, has given royal assent to the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill 2019 and the Professional Engineers Registration Bill 2019. ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AMENDMENT BILL 2019 FLORA AND FAUNA GUARANTEE AMENDMENT BILL 2019 PUBLIC HOLIDAYS AMENDMENT BILL 2019 Royal assent The SPEAKER (13:00): The Governor has given royal assent to the Environment Protection Amendment Bill 2019, the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Amendment Bill 2019 and the Public Holidays Amendment Bill 2019.

COMMITTEES Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3125

HEALTH LEGISLATION AMENDMENT AND REPEAL BILL 2019 MARINE AND FISHERIES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2019 POLICE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (ROAD SAFETY CAMERA COMMISSIONER AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2019 Appropriation The SPEAKER (13:00): I have received a message from the Governor recommending an appropriation for the purposes of the Health Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill 2019, the Marine and Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 and the Police Legislation Amendment (Road Safety Camera Commissioner and Other Matters) Bill 2019. Committees PRIVILEGES COMMITTEE The SPEAKER (13:00): I wish to advise the house that I have received the following letter from the Privileges Committee:

Referrals under s 30 of the Members of Parliament (Standards) Act 1978 The Committee is currently working on guidelines for how the Privileges Committee should deal with matters referred to it under s 30 of the Members of Parliament (Standards) Act 1978. The Committee has resolved that, before considering any matter referred to it under s 30, it needs to know the identity of the member who made the allegation. The Committee requires this information so it can test the veracity of the allegations and provide procedural fairness. The Committee will report further once its other guidelines have been finalised. I ask that you advise the House accordingly. It is signed by the chair of the Privileges Committee. Joint sitting of Parliament SENATE VACANCY Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure) (13:01): I move, by leave:

That this house meets the Legislative Council for the purpose of sitting and voting together to choose a person to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator the Honourable Mitch Fifield, and proposes that the time and place of such meeting be the Legislative Assembly chamber on Wednesday, 11 September 2019, at 6.15 pm. Motion agreed to. Ordered that message be sent to the Council informing them of resolution. Business of the house PROGRAM Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure) (13:02): I move:

That, under standing order 94(2), the orders of the day, government business, relating to the following bills be considered and completed by 5.00 pm on Thursday, 12 September 2019: Dangerous Goods Amendment (Penalty Reform) Bill 2019 Health Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill 2019 Marine and Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 3126 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

In making a few brief comments on the program today, this is a busy and full government business program. There are five bills on the program that canvass a range of different policy matters that I am sure will excite and interest members of the house to become involved in vigorous debate and ultimately—I hope—enable their successful passage through this place to the Legislative Council. I do note for completeness’s sake that the opposition, through the Manager of Opposition Business, have requested three bills to be considered by the government to be taken into consideration in detail. As the usual form on these things is, should time be available later on Thursday we will see if there is time to take those three bills, which I understood to be the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019, the Dangerous Goods Amendment (Penalty Reform) Bill 2019 and the Health Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill 2019, into consideration in detail. Can I also note, as the house has just resolved, that there will be a joint sitting tomorrow evening, should the Legislative Council agree—and I think we can perhaps anticipate their agreement to that request— for the appointment of a new senator from Victoria who has been chosen by the Liberal Party to replace Mitch Fifield in the Senate. Having had a little bit to do with Mitch Fifield over the years, I would like to wish him all the very best for his next stage of his professional career. I have always found Mitch to be a reasonable and considered person to deal with, so I wish him all the very best in his new role and I am sure the Parliament will wish the new senator for Victoria all the best in her new role as she fairly and equitably represents Victoria’s interests in the Senate in the Australian Parliament. Can I also just note for completeness sake for the program this week the passing of former Labor member Max McDonald, who we had a minute’s silence for earlier today. Max was a member for Evelyn and then for Whittlesea when there was a seat of Whittlesea in the Victorian Parliament many, many redistributions ago, and I pass on and we all pass on, I am sure, our sympathies to Max’s family and loved ones. We thank him for what was a very long period of service to the Victorian Parliament, the Victorian community and also the Australian Labor Party. With those brief comments it is always with optimism and hope in my voice and in my heart that the house will agree to this government business program. As I said, there is a lot on the program and it is another good, strong program by the Andrews Labor government as we get on and deliver on our policy agenda, on our program and project agenda, in the interests of the Victorian community. Mr WELLS (Rowville) (13:05): As the manager of government business made mention, there are a couple of bills that we are very keen to go into consideration on detail on. We have put in requests in the past, and for one reason or another we have not been able to actually go into consideration in detail. The manager of government business is correct that we did put in a request for us to go into consideration in detail on the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019, Dangerous Goods Amendment (Penalty Reform) Bill 2019 and the Health Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill 2019 because we want to be able to test some of the detail in the bill and to be able to ask questions of the minister. If we are not satisfied, we want to be able to move an amendment, and under the current situation we are unable to do that if the government is unable to allow us to go into the consideration- in-detail stage. However, putting that aside, we are not opposing the government business program, because there has been cooperation—significant cooperation—in regards to a joint sitting of the house on Wednesday at 6.15 pm. We are grateful that that cooperation was able to be met and that we will be able to put forward from the Liberal Party the Senate nominee Sarah Henderson, who is well known to everyone in the house for her work when she was the federal MP for Corangamite. With those few notes, we will not be opposing the government business program. As I said, we have concerns that we want to be able to raise on some matters before the Parliament in regards to the primary industries, dangerous goods and health legislation. That aside, we feel that because of the cooperation in regards to having the joint sitting to be able to put forward our Senate nomination we will be not opposing the government business program.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3127

Mr PEARSON (Essendon) (13:07): I am heartened that the Manager of Opposition Business joins with us in great acclamation for this outstanding government business program. As Lord Byron said:

But words are things, and a small drop of ink, Falling like dew, upon a thought, produces That which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think … I am sure many millions will be thinking as a consequence of this outstanding government business program, this extensive government business program, which really builds on the momentum of the second term of the Andrews Labor government. It is always a joy to be in a position where you can move and support legislation from this side of the house. Indeed as I was preparing for the debate today I was reminiscing about the great work of Publius Clodius Pulcher when he was a tribune of the plebs in late Republican Rome and particularly the Lex Clodia Frumentaria, which established the grain dole in late Republican Rome. When you think about it, Pulcher took this position as tribune of the plebs and moved this motion as his very first act, and the grain dole, as it became known, was established for probably around about 500 years. I am sure that some of the bills on the notice paper today when they enter the statute books perhaps will not last 500 years, but nonetheless they are an outstanding demonstration that we are enjoying ourselves very much, being afforded this great privilege of delivering good government in the state of Victoria, fulfilling each and every one of our election commitments and being able to ensure that there is a very firm hand on the tiller of state. With those brief notes, I am delighted to support the Leader of the House’s motion. Ms STALEY (Ripon) (13:09): I rise to speak on the government business program, and as the lead speaker for the opposition, the Manager of Opposition Business, has noted we will not be opposing the government business program, although we would reiterate the request to go into consideration in detail on the Dangerous Goods Amendment (Penalty Reform) Bill 2019, Health Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill 2019 and Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019. However, the main reason I have requested and received the call to speak today is to express my delight at the choice of Sarah Henderson to go into the Senate and the joint sitting that we will be having on Wednesday at 6.15 pm. Of course senator-elect Henderson represented the Liberal Party in the seat of Corangamite from 2013 to 2019, and she became the Assistant Minister for Social Services, Housing and Disability Services. She has delivered great service to the people of Corangamite and the people of Geelong, and I look forward to her continuing that service as a senator for Victoria, with her base in Geelong. She is of course the daughter of Ann Henderson, who was the member for Geelong in this place from 1992 to 1999, and the Henderson family has given enormous service to the community of Geelong. I am sure that Ann, were she still alive, would be very proud to see that her daughter has gone from being a member of the House of Representatives to now being in the Senate, where I am sure she will do great, great things. I do also note that with Sarah’s appointment as a Liberal senator for Victoria the Senate is for the first time 50 per cent female. It of course has taken a Liberal Senate appointment to get the Senate to 50 per cent women, a thing that we should all celebrate. Ms Allan: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, I was quite comfortable in giving the member for Ripon quite a large degree of latitude and space to stray from the substance of the government business program motion in her observations about the new senator-elect from Victoria. I felt it would be churlish to have interrupted the member while she was going through those matters. However, when it comes to her editorialising on the number of women in the Senate, I would like the record to show that the Labor Party in the Senate has more than 60 per cent of its numbers as women, so it is Labor that is doing the heavy lifting with women in the Parliament. I ask you to bring the member for Ripon back to the substance of the motion.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 3128 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I do ask the member for Ripon to return to the government business program. Ms STALEY: Continuing on the joint sitting, which is a matter on the government business program, I note that the reason we have this joint sitting is that Senator Mitch Fifield has resigned from the Senate to take up the position of ambassador to the UN. He of course has given a distinguished career to the Senate and to the Liberal Party, and we wish him well in his new role representing Australia at the UN. With those few brief remarks, I commend the motion. Mr CARBINES (Ivanhoe) (13:13): I would like to start by not only commending the government business program but also acknowledging the late Max McDonald, a former Labor MP for Evelyn and Whittlesea from 1982 to 1992. In particular I know he was a strong campaigner. Every time when I was learning to drive I would travel up to McDonalds Road in South Morang and head back to the family home off Northumberland Drive in Epping, near the Greenbrook shopping centre, and there would be Max McDonald signs. You would see them around, right through the South Morang area. Max was a very strong campaigner. I know that when I see my constituent, and Max’s leader for most of the time he was in the Parliament, John Cain, I will be interested to hear what he has to say about the contribution that Max made in those growing suburbs out there in northern Melbourne that have changed so much since Max’s time. Max fought very hard to make sure that the vital services that were needed in that community were provided. My father taught at Epping High School. He has fond memories of the activism of Max in the community and the involvement that he had in local schools and services. We certainly acknowledge his contribution and the groundwork that he laid to ensure that at that redistribution in 1992 Labor, in pretty horrific election circumstances, retained what then became the seat of Yan Yean. That was very much due not only to the wherewithal and campaigning skills of André Haermeyer but also to the groundwork that was laid in that community by his predecessor Max McDonald. Can I say also in acknowledging the joint sitting tomorrow that we will obviously be endorsing Sarah Henderson to fill that Victorian Senate vacancy. I want to also acknowledge that her successor in the federal seat of Corangamite, Libby Coker, will be giving her inaugural speech today at 4.20 pm. We wish her well. I was a former colleague of hers at the Geelong Advertiser and I know that she has hit the ground running and is well advanced in the work that needs to be done in the Corangamite electorate. I acknowledge her big day today in the federal Parliament. I note also that the opposition has suggested going into consideration in detail for several bills. Of course the government has a strong record of providing those opportunities to the opposition. Certainly I have been part of that process over several years in this house, including one around cattle grazing. We removed cattle from the High Country. That was certainly one that I particularly recall debate and discussions on as a bill that went into consideration in detail. There are many others listed here in what will be a very busy week. We will see whether we are able to get to some of those. I also want to remind the house as we draw to a conclusion in the government business program debate that next week, 18 September, marks the anniversary of the 1999 state election; so the election of the Bracks government will be 20 years ago next week. It is interesting to pick up on the comments of the member for Ripon, because I remember in 1999 handing out cards in Geelong for the person who became—by a mere 16 votes—the member for Geelong, Ian Trezise. Of course in the upper house at that election my stepmother Elaine Carbines was also elected to Geelong Province, so it was a very significant time for our family and those who have Geelong connections in particular. I know across regional Victoria that those places that became Labor electorates through the hard work of many people have retained Labor representation. As we reflect on the many changes that happened after the election of that government some 20 years ago, the hard work continues by Labor governments to pick up on that legacy. I know as the son of schoolteachers who understood when 350 schools were closed, who understood when 700 teachers lost their jobs, the importance of our

MEMBERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3129 reflections on that government. People in my electorate particularly remember the attempts to privatise the Austin Hospital and the important victory in 1999 that saved that public hospital and saw the Bracks government build two new hospitals on the one site, the Austin and Mercy hospitals in Heidelberg. I commend the program to the house. Mr McCURDY (Ovens Valley) (13:18): I am delighted to say a few words on the government business program. As we have heard from the Manager of Opposition Business, we will not be opposing the government business program. I am stepping in for the member for Gippsland South, who is unwell this week. We wish him a speedy recovery. We have some very important legislation that we will be interested to contribute on this week, including the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019 and the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019. I am delighted to see that primary industries is on the agenda and I hope that somebody tells the Premier. Hopefully the Premier might even speak on the legislation on primary industries, or at the very least acknowledge that we still have primary industries in Victoria. Hopefully he will commit to giving some support to those struggling farmers in Gippsland and the embattled dairy industry in northern Victoria. There is the Marine and Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 about an industry that is vital to local economies in East Gippsland. There is the Dangerous Goods Amendment (Penalty Reform) Bill 2019 that personally I will have a bit to say on, as will many others, and the Health Legislation Amendment and Repeal Bill 2019. As always the government can talk the talk in this place, but the proof is whether the government and the Premier will back their words up and get out of Melbourne and really understand what is going on. We are showing good faith by not opposing this government business program. We hope that the government reciprocates by delivering rate relief for regional Victoria. Motion agreed to. Members statements YARRA GLEN BOWLING CLUB Ms McLEISH (Eildon) (13:20): Well done to the Yarra Glen Bowling Club, who provided all the funding and the work to build a wonderful new deck at the club. I took great pleasure in attending the opening and putting down the first bowls of the season. The club looks great and I commend all involved on the wonderful spirit of volunteerism that they demonstrate. DIRTY HEELS Ms McLEISH: A group of like-minded women in the Murrindindi and Mitchell shires have got together to form the women’s networking group Dirty Heels. I want to commend the founders, Sharon Hedger, Alison Elliot, Alison Rouget and Vicki Kennedy, for this much-needed local initiative, which is aimed at supporting and connecting women with women. I have attended a couple of their events and I highly recommend the group, noting that many people do turn up to those meetings with dirty heels as this is very common in the country. HEALESVILLE HIGH SCHOOL Ms McLEISH: It is always a pleasure to attend the annual Healesville High School production. Despite a couple of hurdles and challenges, we know the show must go on, and indeed it did. The school did a great job presenting The Wedding Singer. Old hands Marc Jones and Alec Peterson were joined by fellow year 12 students and first-timers Jessica Forbes and Kobe Thorsen. I am sure this was a wonderful distraction from study for them. They were joined by Ryan Pratt, Perryn Wickenden, Estelle Peterson, Jessica Commans, Chloe Lorgelly, Monique Willemsen, Kiah Galletti and Dakotah Heatherich and many first-timers, including Taylah Chipperfield, Jacinta Scragg, Felicity Latin, Hannah Bligh, Ettie McCarthy, Elektra Demopoulos, Lisa Kirkwood, Phoebe Fenwick and Grace

MEMBERS STATEMENTS 3130 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Howie. They were supported by the crew on lights and backstage and the wonderful director Trent Morison— (Time expired) WESTERN CHANCES Ms HORNE (Williamstown—Minister for Ports and Freight, Minister for Public Transport) (13:22): Last month I was delighted to attend the annual Western Chances Good Business Forum. Through its scholarships, opportunity programs and ongoing support Western Chances gives young people in Melbourne’s west the chance to fulfil their potential. The sold-out event saw close to 400 business, educational, local government and community representatives from across Melbourne dig deep to support young people who may not otherwise be able to pursue their education. We also had the privilege of hearing from some exceptional young people, who described their journeys in overcoming personal hardship and how support from Western Chances allowed them to pursue their educational goals and dreams—truly inspiring stories. That support might simply have been funding for small but essential things like a Myki card or a calculator, textbooks or stationery, or a laptop or internet access. Since 2004 Western Chances has invested $6 million in scholarships, awarded more than 6900 new and renewed scholarships and through its scholarship program helped over 3000 young people in the west finish and extend their education and career opportunities. These outcomes speak for themselves: last year 99 per cent of Western Chances scholarship recipients were offered places in tertiary institutions, training or employment— (Time expired) KANIVA CHEMICAL WASTE DUMP SITE Ms KEALY (Lowan) (13:23): Last week I spoke to Kaniva locals about the lack of information from and action by the government on cleaning up the illegal toxic waste dump which threatens the local environment and waterways, agricultural produce and the health of those living in the Kaniva region. It has taken far too long for the government to act and locals have been kept in the dark, receiving only one briefing from the Environment Protection Authority Victoria since discovery of the site in July 2018. While it is a step forward that the EPA finally issued a clean-up notice to the landholder last week, much more still needs to be done by the government to ensure this site is cleared of all hazardous waste as soon as possible. On behalf of the Kaniva community I ask the minister: why has it taken so long for the EPA to act to catalogue the site and take action to issue a clean-up notice? Why haven’t adjacent landholders been notified what chemicals are stored on site so they can establish their own risk management plan? When will the CFA fire prevention burn be approved by the EPA, and will it occur before the upcoming fire season? When will the minister guarantee the site will be totally cleaned up to completely eliminate all risk for the Kaniva region? KANGAROO PET FOOD TRIAL Ms KEALY: Earlier this year the government extended the kangaroo pet food trial to 30 September to provide continuity to current participants in the kangaroo pet food trial while arrangements for the new program are established. The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning website states: Further information about this program will be provided as its development progresses. But with less than a month before the current program ends no information about the new program has been made available to local farmers, shooters or businesses. We must actively manage our kangaroo population, and I urge the minister to act as soon as possible to inform our locals when this information will be forthcoming.

MEMBERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3131

SYNERGY AUTO REPAIRS Mr CARROLL (Niddrie—Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice, Minister for Victim Support) (13:25): I rise today to speak about an outstanding social enterprise that is doing important work to make sure that young people do not enter the criminal justice system. Synergy Auto Repairs, operated by Mission Australia in North Melbourne in partnership with the National Motor Vehicle Theft Reduction Council and Suncorp Insurance, is giving young people with histories of motor vehicle offending a chance to create a better life for themselves and live a life of purpose. Participants are taught skills in auto repairs so that they can go on to start an apprenticeship in panelbeating or spray painting or work towards TAFE qualifications delivered through Bendigo Kangan Institute of TAFE. We know that one of the best ways to turn young people away from the path of criminal offending is to give them opportunities through employment to take a different path. This program does just that by giving people a vital pathway to jobs and further training. I was pleased recently to join the workers and young people to celebrate Synergy’s fifth birthday. Over the past five years more than 100 people have participated in training and helped repair more than 3000 vehicles. We need more innovative programs like Synergy. There is a lot that can be done to improve outcomes for young people that we can learn from. Pathways to training and employment are an important part of our justice system both for adults and young people. The Andrews Labor government is committed to supporting young people before they go down a path of criminal offending. That is why we have invested more than $1.2 billion over four years in our youth justice system. Our work to strengthen the youth justice system is complemented by fantastic work like Synergy’s. I commend them on their fifth-year anniversary and I say keep up the great work. EASTERN FREEWAY HERITAGE LISTING Mr WELLS (Rowville) (13:26): This statement condemns the Victorian Labor government’s desperate attempt to heritage-list the Eastern Freeway. This is a really dumb idea. Finally, the Victorian government have done something more stupid than lose $1 billion on a road that they did not build. They have tried very hard for the last five years to top that, even refusing a generous $4 billion from the federal government so they would not have to backtrack and build the east–west link. But now I think they might have finally done it, and Greens, Independent and Animal Justice Party MPs have backed them all the way. Most Melburnians have lots of memories of the Eastern Freeway. Anyone using the freeway inevitably spends a lot of time driving very slowly, sometimes slowing to a complete halt on the road. Now the government wants official acknowledgement that by the time you finish a trip on the Eastern Freeway it will have taken so long that your car will be worthy of a heritage listing. When members of the public mistook the announcement for another episode of the ABC comedy Utopia, the government doubled down, defending themselves and claiming they needed to provide certainty for the north-east link. The government can add as many lanes as they like to the Eastern Freeway, but without the east–west, the north-east link project is in trouble before it has even started. FOSTER AND KINSHIP CARERS WEEK Mr DONNELLAN (Narre Warren North—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers) (13:28): This week is Foster Care Week and Kinship Carers Week. Foster carers and kinship carers love and care for some of Victoria’s most vulnerable children and young people. They are the unsung heroes in our community. The caring role they take on is critical, and without carers our current children and family services system could not exist. Carers are faced with many challenging situations like navigating courts, child protection, family relationships and family visits.

MEMBERS STATEMENTS 3132 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

They navigate all of this while they are providing 24-hour support for the child or young person in their care, helping them heal from trauma and build positive relationships. We have done much work in this space to improve our support for carers, but we know that there is a lot more to do. We are continuing our investment in the Fostering Connections campaign run through the Centre for Excellence in Child and Family Welfare. The service includes advertising to look for further foster carers, an online information portal and a dedicated phone line and access to support services. We also introduced the Carer Kafe program for training and support for new carers. Over 3800 carers have attended the sessions. We know that supporting foster and kinship carers is the best way to achieve better outcomes for children and young people in our care and grow our carer community. This week I was very fortunate to join both Anne McLeish from Kinship Carers Victoria and Sam Hague from the Foster Care Association of Victoria to meet many beautiful, caring, loving carers who do such a marvellous job for our community. I just want to say how lucky and fortunate we are to have people with such big hearts in our community. GLOBAL CLIMATE STRIKE Dr READ (Brunswick) (13:29): On Friday next week thousands of Victorians and millions around the world will join striking school students in the Global Climate Strike. I urge all members of this Parliament to join them at the rally in Spring Street to listen, to understand their sense of urgency, to learn what we have been doing wrong and what we now need to do. These young adults demonstrating next week know they will live their entire lives in a warming world, their lives punctuated by the consequences of global heating like seeing the Queensland rainforest ablaze in the first week of September. So before going to the rally down Spring Street, let us all just agree to tell the truth about climate. It will get worse before it gets better. Victoria is still burning 1 million tonnes of coal a week, logging native forests, building motorways and hooking up new homes to gas. We are not preparing for a hotter, drier future. We are not even talking about carbon draw down. Good luck at the rally, and afterwards back here in Parliament let us make up for past inaction and do as much as we can to turn this thing around. FLEMINGTON COMMUNITY CENTRE Mr PEARSON (Essendon) (13:30): The Flemington Community Centre is nearing the end of its useful life. Moonee Valley City Council had allocated $42.5 million in its own budget to rebuild this facility to meet the needs of not just public housing tenants living on the estate but people throughout Flemington and Travancore. There has been an enormous amount of excitement and enthusiasm generated about this project and the benefits the community will derive from this investment. There is a fantastic opportunity to ensure that people living on the estate have modern facilities that support families and engage with young people, particularly those young people who are at risk of disengaging from school, from sport and from their families. Council suggested to me throughout the process that building a new community centre in Flemington was a top priority. Yet before the consultation had even concluded, the six councillors from the two neighbouring wards conspired to slash the funding by $20 million, which went against their own officers’ recommendation. Think about this for a moment. This project is a key feature of council’s advocacy strategy. It is a project that will deliver a huge amount of benefit for some of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable members of our community. The consultation is not even finished, yet these councillors have determined to remove $20 million and will not fess up as to where this funding will go. Moonee Valley councillors are not planning on saving this $20 million; they have not ruled out redeploying this funding to other projects in other communities. If there is one good thing to come out of this appalling act, it is that young people from the estate are fighting back. The Facebook group Stand With Flemington has been formed and I am so pleased that

MEMBERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3133 so many young people are standing up and making their voices heard. I stand with Flemington. Moonee Valley council, it is time you stood with us. CRESSY AERODROME Mr RIORDAN (Polwarth) (13:32): I rise today, Deputy Speaker, to congratulate Paul Lamont and Siobhan Perera and their drive to remember and recall the 100th anniversary of the Cressy aerodrome. Despite the appalling weather, rain and low cloud on Sunday causing the complete absence of aeroplanes, hundreds of locals and visitors gathered at the old Cressy airfield to celebrate the day and the hour the first plane landed back in 1919. As an important training base following World War I, and again as an important training hub during World War II, the Royal Australian Air Force base at Cressy provided an important service. With the two largest grass runways in Australia, running both east and west and north and south, this large infrastructure has lain beneath grazing cattle and recently some very excellent canola crops. However, with a love of aeroplanes and now owning their very own former Australian air force base, Paul and Siobhan are looking to provide a unique visitor experience in western Victoria. Fly in and fly out visitors will be able to land planes as big as a Boeing 767 in Cressy—we are waiting for John Travolta—to celebrate a wedding, a day out or just find themselves landing a plane in a sea of canola. SARAH HENDERSON Mr RIORDAN: Congratulations to Sarah Henderson. Victoria gladly welcomes the former federal member for Corangamite to her new role representing regional and rural Victoria in the Senate. Sarah was an incredibly strong and vocal voice for the seat of Corangamite and we know she will maintain that same vim and vigour. MORDIALLOC ELECTORATE SCHOOLS Mr RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (13:34): Recently I had the absolute privilege and honour to participate in principal for a day with the Mordialloc College principal, Michelle Roberts. I tell you, Michelle put me through my paces. It was fantastic to get amongst the staff, the students and leading teacher and assistant principals who each and every day give their very best to make sure our students locally get the very best outcomes. I have done that previously with Parkdale Secondary College, and I think it gives you a real perspective, both as a local member of Parliament but also in serving as the Parliamentary Secretary for Schools, on all the challenges, the opportunities and things that we need to do to improve our education. To speak to some of the year 10 students, year 7 students and the year 11 legal students was a real privilege and honour to share in how we better support our democracy, and how we support students’ health and wellbeing, particularly on mental health, which is something I am very passionate about, talking about anxiety—I shared that with the year 10s—as they embark on their career choices. But it was a real privilege and an honour. It was also great to recently announce the maintenance funding blitz and boost that is going to transform our schools across Victoria. Every single government school will share in maintenance funding, and locally it is some $1.8 million that will be shared across my local schools. I was out there with the principal and assistant principal of Chelsea Primary to celebrate that announcement. This will make a massive difference to Chelsea Primary School and all of my schools across the Mordialloc electorate. This is about making those important investments to make sure our schools get the very best. WATER POLICY Ms SHEED (Shepparton) (13:35): I would like to get up here today and talk about all the wonderful people and events in my electorate, but if I do not talk about bad water policy—about the effect that water policy is having on my region—nobody in this place will. I attended the Tocumwal rally last week. There was not a single person from any of the major parties on the day speaking to over 2000 farmers who are in distress. We need to do whatever we can whenever we can to do something that might help, and there is one thing the Minister for Water in this state could do right now. In the

MEMBERS STATEMENTS 3134 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Goulburn-Murray irrigation district (GMID) availability of water is a critical issue. It is well-known that as a result of the modernisation of our irrigation district and the water savings that we have achieved from that modernisation there is 75 gigalitres of water that is to come back to irrigators as part of that whole operation, and it still has not happened. I am reliably advised that 60 gigalitres of that water has now been audited and that there is no reason for any delay in that water being made available by way of delivery to every water shareholder in the GMID to assist them in the months ahead. I call on the minister to take whatever steps are required to release this water immediately. There is plenty of time to investigate how it might be delivered in the future, but right now our farmers need that water. It is their water, and they should have it. Minister, do not let committees stand in the way of it. EMERGENCY SERVICES MANDATORY SENTENCING LEGISLATION Mr McGHIE (Melton) (13:37): I rise today to talk about aggression and violence against emergency services workers, in particular paramedics. Firstly, I should say no worker should be assaulted at work. I assume members would know that my background was as a paramedic for 15 years and then assistant secretary and secretary of the ambulance union for 23 years. Over that time safety and welfare of paramedics had been a priority for me and the union. You will remember the war against paramedics waged by the Baillieu-Napthine governments. This war caused much mental anguish for our paramedics, but that pales into insignificance compared to the aggression and violence against paramedics and other emergency workers today. We saw an outcome two weeks ago in the Magistrates Court where a man was given a community corrections order for assaulting a paramedic by getting her in a headlock and repeatedly punching her in the face. This paramedic has been unable to return to work since that attack. The current mandatory sentencing legislation was passed through Parliament last year with overwhelming support. This amended legislation removed the loopholes found in the previous legislation, passed by the last coalition government, that provided offenders with a way of preventing their incarceration. While many people do not agree with mandatory sentencing, something has to be done to prevent people thinking they can use paramedics and emergency services workers as a punching bag or a football. Every time it happens it feels like one of my brothers or sisters have been abused. Please let us all work together to improve the laws that apply and to stop unnecessary violence against our first responders. I know we all want to make it safer for those that are protecting our communities. BAYSIDE COMMUNITY INFORMATION & SUPPORT SERVICES Mr NEWBURY (Brighton) (13:38): The Bayside Community Information & Support Services is a not-for-profit charity that provides a range of much-needed services to my community. I recently met with manager Karyn Doyle and the team to talk about the incredible work they provide, including up to a dozen food and blanket care packages for the homeless each week. Their work, with the support of Bayside volunteers, is invaluable. ELWOOD BOWLS CLUB Mr NEWBURY: Elwood Bowls Club is a community hub with a terrific age mix of members. Part of that success is the club’s close relationship with Elwood College. Another reason is that the club provides a great opportunity for locals to get together, meet new people and enjoy a game of bowls. I recently opened the season for the club. I wish club president Owen Hourigan and the whole team every success for the season. 1ST ELWOOD SCOUTS Mr NEWBURY: The 1st Elwood Scouts group is an institution in my community. I recently celebrated the year with the group and congratulated three Scouts who were awarded the Australian Scout Medallion. I also recognise group president Mark Richardson for 10 years of volunteerism. I

MEMBERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3135 congratulate group leader Tony Ashcroft, leader Catherine Gulliver and the group on their successes and wish them well for the future. BRIGHTON BAYSIDE MEN’S SHED Mr NEWBURY: Finally, men’s sheds have opened a new site in Dendy Street, Brighton. The shed is an updated version of the backyard shed, an iconic part of our culture. The community-based organisation provides men with the opportunity to come together to exchange ideas, learn new skills, work on community projects and most importantly build long-term friendships. I wish Roger Tyler and the shed team every success. CROXTON SPECIAL SCHOOL Ms THEOPHANOUS (Northcote) (13:40): Last week I joined the staff and students at Croxton Special School to celebrate the opening of their brand-new facilities. Croxton is one of those schools where the moment you walk through the gates you instantly feel like you are part of a family. Warmth emanates from the community there, a community in which students with an intellectual disability are valued and encouraged to achieve. I joined the Minister for Education for a morning with some very precious moments. Not only did we tour the new building but we were treated to a perfectly made cappuccino in the new kitchen from student and barista extraordinaire Nick V. We had a lovely chat with students Nico D, Olivia C, Stella K and Aicha A, who were very happy with their new classrooms. We also asked Peter Dwyer, husband of the late Judy Dwyer, a former teacher at Croxton, to say a few words. Judy dedicated 24 years to Croxton. She knew these kids have many challenges in their lives, and she was determined to see them get a leg up. Even through rounds of chemo Judy would find moments of strength by sharing a thought about these children. Judy recently lost her battle with cancer. In her memory, Peter told us he would donate funds to create a permaculture food forest—a garden and outdoor learning space—to help students to eat well, to grow food and, for some, to create a pathway to a job. Peter also told us there was a shortfall so the project could not quite get off the ground. What Peter did not know was that my office had secretly been in touch with the Minister for Education and hatched a plan. The highlight of the morning was standing with the minister as we told Peter we had found the extra $10 000 to make the food forest come to life right away—a moment that will stay with me for a very long time. CLIFFORD BAKER Mr FREGON (Mount Waverley) (13:41): I rise to mark the passing of a remarkable member of the Mount Waverley community, Mr Clifford Aubrey Baker, AM. Cliff passed away on 13 August at the age of 91 years. Using his skills and experience as a civil engineer, Cliff spent 40 years improving our nation’s testing standards in his capacity as a volunteer and chairman of the National Association of Testing Authorities. For this he was made a Member of the Order of Australia in 1999. I am further informed that Cliff’s work on internal PVC coating of sewage pipes was pivotal to our country leading the world in this field. As a parent of an intellectually disabled child, Cliff joined with others to convince the education department to increase the age at which children like his beloved Helen would leave school. His advocacy led to Victoria’s current three streams for children with learning challenges: primary school, secondary school and the step program for 17 and 18-year-olds. In 2003 Cliff became the volunteer regional coordinator for the annual Red Cross Calling fundraising campaign. Cliff would address students at our local secondary schools each year to great effect. Over 13 years Cliff raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Red Cross and grew the amount of local volunteers to well over 1000. In the final years of his life Cliff continued to give time and energy to Leisure Time, a group that meets at the Glen Waverley Uniting Church which aims to change the lives of isolated seniors by providing

MEMBERS STATEMENTS 3136 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 them with social activities. Cliff was a much-loved and respected man in our community of Mount Waverley. I wonder if we shall witness the likes of Cliff again. Vale, Clifford Baker. KINSHIP CARERS WEEK Ms COUZENS (Geelong) (13:43): This week is Kinship Carers Week, which is an opportunity to celebrate the work carers do. Kinship carers provide care to over 70 per cent of Victorian children in out-of-home care, and they come from all socio-economic and cultural circumstances and backgrounds. I want to acknowledge and thank all of those kinship carers across Victoria—and a special shout-out to those in Geelong. Thank you for your commitment and the vital work that you do in our community. PICK MY PROJECT Ms COUZENS: Pick My Project has been a great success in my electorate, with the Geelong community voting up a number of great projects. On Sunday I had the pleasure of launching the Humans in Geelong photo and story book, which highlights the many amazing people doing great work in the Geelong region. Humans in Geelong received over $51 000 to produce 2000 books that will be distributed throughout the community into schools, libraries and community spaces. This is a great way to honour their hard work and to record the history of those in the book. A WALK IN THE PARK Ms COUZENS: On Sunday I participated in A Walk in the Park to raise funds and awareness of Parkinson’s disease. In Victoria 2000 people are diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease every year. Hundreds of people—family, friends, supporters and volunteers—turned out to Eastern Park to walk with people with Parkinson’s disease. Congratulations to the organisers, in particular Kirsten George and her team, for running this great and successful event. INDEPENDENCE CUP BADMINTON TOURNAMENT Ms SPENCE (Yuroke) (13:44): Last month I had the pleasure of officially opening the fourth Independence Cup badminton tournament. Teams came from all across Melbourne for the tournament, which included men’s double, mixed double and junior match categories. Thank you to Craigieburn resident Satinder Chawla and the Landmark Community Sports Club for the opportunity to attend. Landmark Community Sports Club is led by a very passionate and dedicated executive, and I commend them on their efforts. Congratulations to tournament winners: juniors, Nikhil and Tony; men’s comp, Jinu and Jaison; and mixed doubles, Krystal and Thomas. Well done to all involved in organising and participating in this year’s tournament. I look forward to next year’s event. MICHAEL ZERAFA Ms SPENCE: And now to a much different sport: congratulations to Craigieburn resident Michael Zerafa, who defeated Jeff Horn in a ninth-round technical knockout to take out the World Boxing Association Oceania middleweight title in Bendigo. On 31 August a crowd of 4500 boxing fans went along to witness what has been described as one of the most exciting Australian bouts in years. Michael’s win has been met with a great deal of enthusiasm from his friends, neighbours and the local community more broadly. To those who are familiar with Michael’s commitment and dedication, his success comes as no surprise. Michael has been very actively involved in boxing since the age of 12 and is very passionate about his sport. I look forward to watching Michael’s career continue to go from strength to strength towards his goal of becoming a world champion. Michael was back in the local gym on Tuesday following his victory. Our community is very proud of him, and we wish him every success.

MEMBERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3137

AGED CARE EMPLOYEE DAY Mr HALSE (Ringwood) (13:46): I would like to start by acknowledging aged-care workers in my district of Ringwood and across Victoria as we celebrate Aged Care Employee Day today. I had the privilege of representing these outstanding workers when I was a union official, and I know the difficult but necessary job that they do. These workers are often overworked, underpaid and underappreciated, so I would like to recognise the important contribution that they make to our state in caring for older Australians. SCHOOL MAINTENANCE FUNDING Mr HALSE: Secondly, I would like to say how pleased I was to announce $1.94 million for Ringwood schools as part of our school maintenance blitz. I have been proud to work with our Deputy Premier to deliver for schools in my district. RINGWOOD NORTH PRIMARY SCHOOL Mr HALSE: Also I would like to congratulate the teachers and staff at Ringwood North Primary School, who have recently completed training as part of the Epilepsy Smart Schools program. They are creating a welcoming community for everyone and have made it safer and easier for students living with epilepsy to enjoy their time at school. RINGWOOD ELECTORATE SPORTING ACHIEVEMENTS Mr HALSE: Finally, I would like to congratulate the East Ringwood women’s football team, the Ringwood Saints baseball team, the Ringwood City soccer team, the Ringwood Redbacks football team and the Ringwood Spiders football team, who have all made it to finals in their respective age groups and leagues. Well done. ENGINEERED STONE WORKPLACE SAFETY Ms THOMAS (Macedon) (13:47): As of last week, new regulations to ban the uncontrolled dry cutting of engineered stone to protect Victorian workers from exposure to deadly silica dust are now in effect. Employers must now ensure power tools are not used to cut, grind or abrasively polish engineered stone unless on-tool water suppression or dust extraction devices are in place and respiratory protection is used. The Andrews government has an action plan in place to stamp out this debilitating disease, which is striking tradies in their prime. The plan includes free health screenings for Victoria’s 1400 stonemasons, a compliance blitz on high-risk workplaces, a tough new compliance code for businesses working with engineered stone and an awareness campaign to highlight the risks. The Andrews government will continue to campaign nationally to reduce the Australian silica workplace exposure standard. I want to acknowledge the work of the Victorian union movement and also respiratory physician Dr Ryan Hoy and dust diseases lawyer and Kyneton resident Claire Setches for their ongoing work and advocacy in highlighting the devastating effects of silica dust, and I want to thank the Minister for Workplace Safety for listening and taking decisive action to protect the workplace health and safety of stonemasons and tradies working in kitchen manufacture across Victoria. MELBOURNE FIREFIGHTER STAIR CLIMB Ms THOMAS: And now a shout-out to young Country Fire Authority volunteers Ashley Krive, Daniel Willinski and Ethan Brown for successfully completing the Melbourne Firefighter Stair Climb, climbing 28 floors fully kitted out in their structural firefighting and breathing apparatus gear.

JOINT SITTING OF PARLIAMENT 3138 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

SEAFORD NORTH PRIMARY SCHOOL Ms KILKENNY (Carrum) (13:49): Recently I caught up with the whole school community at Seaford North Primary School, led by this year’s school captains, Avi Jackson, Stella Walsh, Declan Molloy and Wilbur Hunter. Together we were celebrating the official opening of Seaford North’s brand-new sports and arts centre. The celebration was loud. In fact the students took exuberance to a whole new level—and so they should. This $5.02 million investment by the Andrews Labor government has created the most wonderful new space—a competition-grade basketball and netball court, a performing arts centre with retractable walls and soundproofing, a brand-new arts room, kitchen facilities, new toilets and lots of storage, and outside there is new landscaping, new outdoor courts and new open spaces. This is a facility the whole community can be incredibly proud of, now and for years to come. These projects come about because of a dedicated school community. Special thanks to principal Lee Murnane, assistant principal Anthy Seremetis, Leonie Lidgerwood, Stuart Thompson, Scott Boreham and all others from the school council past and present, and all the teaching, support and administration staff. I want to especially acknowledge the former year 6 student leaders who met with me and the Minister for Education way back in 2016: Eve Virgiotis, Kai Barker, Ally Barnard and Tristan Burley. These students made the most compelling case for the school’s new sports and arts centre, and whilst these students have since moved on, I want them to know they have left a most incredible and enduring legacy for so many children and families. Joint sitting of Parliament SENATE VACANCY The DEPUTY SPEAKER (13:50): I have a message from the Legislative Council: The Legislative Council inform the Legislative Assembly that they have agreed to the following resolution: That this house meets with the Legislative Assembly for the purpose of sitting and voting together to choose a person to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator the Honourable Mitch Fifield and, as proposed by the Assembly, the time and place of such meeting be the Legislative Assembly chamber on Wednesday, 11 September 2019, at 6.15 pm. Bills RAIL SAFETY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (NATIONAL SERVICES DELIVERY AND RELATED REFORMS) BILL 2019 Second reading Debate resumed on motion of Ms HORNE: That this bill be now read a second time. Ms RYAN (Euroa) (13:51): It is a pleasure to rise today to put the Liberals and Nationals’ views on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. In a nutshell, this bill transfers all of the regulatory functions around the safety of rail and tram infrastructure and rolling stock from Transport Safety Victoria to the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator under Rail Safety National Law. We are aware that there were some concerns about handing over responsibility to a federal body back in 2013, when the Rail Safety National Law Application Bill 2013 was first passed by this Parliament. At the time, the then Minister for Public Transport, Terry Mulder, made the statement that Victoria simply wanted the initiatives to deliver what we had been promised they would deliver—that is, improved rail safety in Victoria and across the country and reduced red tape for the rail industry in Victoria, which I certainly think is an ambition that all sides of this house would support. At the time that bill was first introduced into this place, back in 2013, Victoria chose, rather than handing regulatory oversight to the commonwealth, to instead sign a service-level agreement. Under that model, rail safety regulation continued to be provided in Victoria by Transport Safety Victoria in line with the agreement with the national safety regulator. New South

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3139

Wales, interestingly, also chose this approach, so you had the two most populous states in Australia choosing to maintain quite a degree of oversight around rail safety and to keep some hands-on involvement. I am not entirely convinced that the concerns which prompted Victoria back in 2013 to maintain that more hands-on involvement have been addressed. Nevertheless we will not be opposing this legislation. We do, however, believe that the bill requires some amendment, and I will come back to that a little bit later. One aspect that was a particular point of debate in the 2013 bill was that that legislation provided for particular exclusions in the legislation. So not just all tram and light rail operations—which this bill now includes—but also Victoria’s seven tourist and heritage railways, which operate on standalone lines, were excluded from that legislation. I would appreciate perhaps some clarification around that from government MPs who are seeking to speak on this bill—whether this legislation will impact particularly those heritage and tourist railway operators, since when the idea of a national scheme first came up they raised significant concerns about the cost imposition on them, and that was the reason why at the time the state chose to exclude them from the requirements of that legislation. The origins of this bill actually started back with the Council of Australian Governments and the National Partnership Agreement to deliver a seamless national economy. That agreement set out an agenda to deliver more consistent regulation across Australia, most particularly to reduce compliance costs on business, restrictions on competition and also distortions in the allocation of resources across the country. I think from memory there were 23 or 26 areas identified as part of that, and national reform to transport regulation was one of those areas that COAG opted to tackle. So in July 2019 COAG came to an agreement that they would establish national rail safety law and a national rail safety regulator. It was determined that South Australia would be the home of that national safety regulator. Subsequently there was an intergovernmental agreement around establishing the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator, and that decision came into effect in August 2011. A few months later the draft Rail Safety National Law and the regulatory impact statement associated with that was approved by the Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure. I think, generally speaking, that move towards harmonisation has been quite a positive step. In practical terms, when you think about it, we have rail operators, particularly on the freight network but also on the passenger network, which operate across jurisdictions. They were operating across more than one state or territory, but as a result of this move towards harmonisation they now only need to obtain one safety accreditation. So it is I think a fairly large step forward for a country that managed through Federation to build different rail gauges to different state borders and create a headache for all successive state and federal governments since. But of course in all of that safety has to be the paramount consideration. When you have a look at Victoria’s record on rail safety, of the five worst rail disasters in Australia’s history two have been in Victoria. The Southern Aurora rail disaster, which occurred in my own electorate, happened on 7 February 1969. It was before my time, but the consequences of that rail disaster are certainly still felt within the community. That accident caused nine deaths and 117 injuries, and indeed we marked the 50th anniversary of that just this year. The Southern Aurora was an overnight express passenger train that ran between Melbourne and Sydney. That accident occurred about a kilometre south of Violet Town when the train collided with a freight train that was travelling at great speed. If you ever have the opportunity to call into Violet Town and see some of the pictures of that disaster, it was really quite extraordinary. It was extraordinary from the scale of the catastrophe, but it was also extraordinary in terms of the community’s response to that catastrophe. A lot of people even this year have started talking about it for the first time, because members of the community were the first ones on the scene. There are many people who I think are still suffering from quite a degree of post- traumatic stress from that incident. People actually heard the crash from literally kilometres and kilometres away and saw this great plume of smoke go up.

BILLS 3140 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

I think the things that people witnessed that day in that particular incident have never left them, and there is still a significant degree of trauma among members of the community. But in actually coming together as a community earlier this year and commemorating those events some really extraordinary connections were made between people—for example, between one young girl who was a passenger on the train and the people who saved her. At the time she was too young to ever really go back and hear about what had happened, but through the process of holding this extraordinary community event these very, very powerful connections were actually created. The other very significant incident that occurred in this state, which I do not doubt most members of this chamber would recall with quite a degree of clarity, was the Kerang rail disaster on 5 June back in 2007. Seven adults and four children very tragically died in that V/Line incident and a further 23 people were injured. As most of us would probably be able to recall, there was a prime mover that was following its usual path. It was running a bit late travelling along the Murray Valley Highway, and it collided at some 100 kilometres an hour with the southbound V/Line train on a crossing on the Murray Valley Highway near Piangil. Again, I know that it has had very long-term ramifications for the Kerang community and the people there who were involved. There were 34 passengers on board at the time, as well as the train driver and two conductors. I think, very gut-wrenchingly, there had in fact been a fatal collision at that particular crossing back in 1995, and Transport Safety Victoria had in the time since then recorded a number of near misses. That particular level crossing where that accident occurred had flashing lights and bells, but it did not have any boom gates, which could have made the difference. The coroner who oversaw that case subsequently called for transport authorities to make changes, which included two level crossings, infrastructure and warning systems, and also requiring regional trains to carry first aid equipment. Now, in recent years I think Victoria’s safety record, if you have a look at the data, has actually become the worst in Australia. The reporting by the Office of the National Safety Regulator actually shows that more people die on Victoria’s railways than any in other state in Australia. Under the Rail Safety National Law rail operators have to report notifiable occurrences, so the data is quite good. Regulation 57 spells out that there are two different categories for reporting. There is category A, which is the higher level of an incident, and that has to be verbally reported to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau immediately and then in writing to the national regulator within 72 hours. Category B has to be reported to the regulator in writing, also within 72 hours of the occurrence. That data from the national regulator actually shows that in the four years from 2014–15 there have been 227 fatalities on Victoria’s railways. I was fairly shocked to read that number. I honestly think that we have a very real issue in this state that is largely escaping attention. We know that most of those fatalities have been suspected suicides, while some others have been from people who have been struck by trains or who have slipped and fallen. In the most recent data that I could find that was available, back from 2017–18, there were 103 category A occurrences in Victoria: there were 46 fatalities and 22 serious injuries. New South Wales, which had the next highest, had just 89 category A occurrences and 27 fatalities. So it is not just higher by one or two; the figures are really quite stark for Victoria in how many deaths there are on our railways. Obviously this requires a wider discussion particularly around the inadequate provision of mental health services in this state, but it is also an issue that certainly needs to be looked at by rail operators. Why is the number of suicides that are occurring on Victoria’s railways much higher—far higher— than in any other state in Australia? I think that is something that the government and the Parliament perhaps seriously need to consider. One possible explanation is the fact that our complicated rail arrangements leave the fencing and protection of train lines from the public more open. I know certainly in my own electorate I have the north-east rail line that runs through my electorate from the top end to the bottom end. That line has been leased to the Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC), and I have seen firsthand the real confusion that often exists around responsibilities for the land and even for things down to the control

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3141 of weeds around that line. It is a constant source of frustration for the community. I had a constituent contact me just last week trying to get to the bottom of who controls either side of the train line. I think because sometimes we have those more complex arrangements in Victoria it is easier for agencies to bounce responsibility between each other, and sometimes safety issues cannot be as fully addressed as they might be, or constituents or members of the public that raise those concerns can often be more readily ignored. I do think that that is an issue. I would particularly say that I think any move from the Andrews government in particular to palm off rail lines around the state—freight or otherwise—through long-term lease arrangements would need to be very thoroughly examined for that reason, both from a safety perspective but also from a community perspective. Therefore I would like to move a reasoned amendment: That all the words after ‘That’ be omitted and replaced with the words ‘this bill be withdrawn and redrafted to provide adequate parliamentary oversight to ensure safety measures are met before the sale, long-term lease or surrender of the ownership of rail or tram track assets in Victoria, including transfer to other jurisdictions’. It is not our intention that this would apply to existing arrangements—for example, to the heritage railway operators—but I do think that parliamentary scrutiny is really important for any plans that the Andrews government is cooking up. There is certainly very deep concern in the community at the moment that Labor is in fact planning to flog off regional rail lines in country Victoria, most particularly freight lines. I have to say that is particularly evident in the government’s management of the Murray Basin rail project. Ken Wakefield, who has been a very big rail operator in the north-west of the state— Mr T Bull: A long advocate. Ms RYAN: and a long-time advocate and proponent of the Murray Basin rail project, actually wrote an opinion piece in the Weekly Times back in July. This is what he said, and I think it is worth putting it on the record The Murray Basin Rail project was to be a game-changer for Victoria. It’s beyond frustrating to see it in disarray after four years’ work. This must be rectified, as a priority. The project aimed to convert the Mildura, Sea Lake and Manangatang lines from broad gauge to standard gauge; and to upgrade and convert sections of track between Ballarat and Gheringhap (near Geelong) and between Ballarat and Maryborough. These rail lines carry grain, mineral sands and horticultural produce to the ports for export. The $440 million investment was supposed to mean faster travel times and that trains could carry heavier loads. The upgrade would get more freight off trucks and on to rail. But after four years the only section that’s been standardised is Merbein and Ararat, and even then there are lots of problems with that work. Capacity on the line has actually reduced. Fewer trains can operate, and the length and weight of trains and their speed has been reduced. The Merbein to Melbourne trip has increased to 15 hours one way. So much for a 24-hour round trip. Mr T Bull: That’s worse. Ms RYAN: It is worse. It will cost money to get this project back on track but the State Government can’t keep stalling with that excuse. When meeting with Victorian Treasurer Tim Pallas, I reminded him that regional Victorians see the tens of billions of dollars going into Melbourne transport projects. On a side note, I might add there that my understanding is that the Treasurer met with him for a grand total of 7 minutes before he kicked him out of his office. Don’t treat our communities and industries like second class citizens and say you don’t have funds. I do believe the benefits of the project will compel the Federal Government to look at more funding. It will be

BILLS 3142 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

incumbent on the Victorian Government to prove beyond any doubt that they are capable of getting the project back on track. He concludes by saying: The future of Victoria’s rail freight network, and the industries that depend on it, are far too important for this opportunity to be lost. The Basin Rail project must be finished—in full—as a priority. Ken is not the only one who has expressed really significant concerns about the government’s completely botched management of this project, which is absolutely critical to the future of north- western Victoria and, most particularly, the agricultural communities in that region. There has in fact been a fighting fund called Save Our Tracks formed by the Rail Freight Alliance to ensure that that project is fixed and completed and—and here is the kicker—that it stays in Victorian government hands. The Rail Freight Alliance’s chair said: The State Government sells two State assets the Rural Finance Corporation and long term lease to Port of Melbourne which were funded on the back of rural and regional communities, agriculture was the financial back bone to these entities, yet rural and regional Victoria are left with the slops, when is this Government going to give rural and regional Victoria its fair share. They raise the very, very real concern that the Victorian government is planning, as part of funding negotiations to complete the Murray Basin rail project, to lease those standard gauge lines to the Australian Rail Track Corporation. They said: The Alliance believes that rail lines in Victoria should remain in the State’s control as part of its entire freight network. The ARTC has been successful in managing the national network, however, have shown little interest in managing lines within state boundaries. They go on to say:

The suggestion that part of the State network would be handed over to the Federal Government is completely rejected by the Alliance and should be by Minister Allan. These lines are owned by all Victorians, to hand these lines over to the Federal Government is a cop out and disaster for rail freight. We know from the last budget that just 4 per cent of this government’s total spend on public transport was invested into rural and regional Victoria. That is how little they care about actually investing and upgrading the infrastructure beyond the city tram tracks. That is the concern that the Rail Freight Alliance is expressing. That is the concern that Ken Wakefield is expressing; in fact he was virtually told that point-blank by the Treasurer when he went to see him. The Treasurer basically said, ‘Sorry, we’ve got no money left. We’ve obviously had huge cost blowouts in Melbourne in those projects where we’re happy to shovel extra dollars in, but when it comes to a critical piece of infrastructure in rural Victoria’—in fact one of the only pieces of infrastructure that is actually being funded in rural Victoria at the moment—‘and when that stuffs up because we’ve mismanaged it, well, sorry, you’re not going to get the remaining funds that are required to complete that project. The rest of it? Well, we’ve got our priorities in the city and that’s where we’re going’. So in conclusion I would say that Labor’s willingness to vote with us on this reasoned amendment to withdraw this bill and redraft it to include some stronger parliamentary oversight of any secret plans that they have to flog off the state’s freight network or country rail lines will be a real test of this government. I would urge them to consider our amendment and to ensure that this Parliament can scrutinise any secret plans that they have, which were flagged by the Minister for Transport Infrastructure when she talked about handing over the Murray Basin rail project to the federal government because she has botched the delivery of that project. Ms WARD (Eltham) (14:15): I also rise in support of the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019, and firstly I would like to assure the member for Euroa that there will be no material impact to operators as a result of this shift and that the national regulator is committed to working with those operators through their transition onto a national

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3143 scheme. It is really quite impressive how often those opposite can find reasons for not doing something, how often they find reasons to not get things done, and this is yet another example. Again they are reverting to scare tactics, to this idea that we will get out there and flog off regional and rural rail lines. All they can do is come up with scare tactics. They cannot come up with policy ideas. It is quite amazing. We are the party that is coming up with the big policy ideas. We have a big agenda, a Big Build agenda, and we are getting on with building the vital infrastructure our state needs to help us get around as easily as possible. This bill is yet another cog in the wheel of our Big Build. It will help rail safety in this state be monitored and delivered efficiently. It will eliminate duplication of administrative systems and enable cost savings to be progressively realised. In this bill the Andrews Labor government will firstly make administration in this area easier and get rid of the fragmentation of the regulatory responsibility between Transport Safety Victoria and the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator (ONRSR). It has taken some time to get to this point, and I have to tell you that we need to get this done. For those opposite to try to create even more delays is just insane. They want to delay things with their reasoned amendment. They do not want this legislation to be completed. They want us to slow down, and I can tell you, Acting Speaker, we have got no intention of slowing down in this state on getting things done. It is a process that began in 2011 when the Council of Australian Governments signed an intergovernmental agreement to establish a national scheme of rail safety regulation. What this bill will do is complete the national reform of the regulation of rail safety. This can only be a good thing. The process then moved to 2012, when under a federal Labor government the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator was established to administer the rail safety regulation and enforcement across Australia. However, this excluded the regulation of light rail transport operators and a number of standalone tourist and heritage operators, which currently falls under the responsibility of Transport Safety Victoria, and this bill will resolve that issue. It needs to be noted that the national rail safety regulator has been in operation in Victoria since 2014, and this bill will mean that the national reform will finally be completed with this transfer of residual rail safety, service delivery and regulatory functions from the Victorian regulator to the national regulator. It also means that it will be easier for the industry, who will only have one regulator which they need to deal with. In recognition that trams and local tourist and heritage operators were excluded from the national scheme, in 2017 Carolyn Walsh undertook an independent review to consider whether these transport areas excluded from the national scheme should be regulated by the ONRSR or continue to be regulated locally. It was found that the regulation of trams and local tourist and heritage rail operations would be more efficiently and effectively delivered under the national scheme, which really calls into question the motives of those opposite in putting forward a reasoned amendment. This bill will complement the significant investments that are being made by reducing administrative complexity and eliminating fragmentation of regulatory responsibility between Transport Safety Victoria and the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator. What will this mean for staff? This is always an important question for a Labor government—what about the workers? This transfer is timely and will support the retention of staff with the necessary skills and experience to work constructively with industry to ensure that risks to safety continue to be managed effectively and are minimised as fairly as is reasonably practicable. Staff retention in the current labour market is challenging. The unprecedented investment in rail infrastructure in this state that the Andrews Labor government is delivering across the country is making persons with rail engineering and operational skills and experience both valuable and scarce. The size and scale of the national regulator enables it to offer more attractive work experiences and packages so that it can actually retain staff. This is a real struggle for the Victorian regulator. The Andrews government is addressing gaps and building capacity in our rail system through the Big Build and is investing in new rolling stock to improve reliability, operational efficiencies and the

BILLS 3144 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 quality of public transport services. Of course a project close to my heart in our state’s Big Build is delivering the second stage of the upgrade to the Hurstbridge line. We have long waited for this to happen in my community. In fact as a teenager I wondered why we could not duplicate our train line, and I can tell you that it is one of the joys of being the member for Eltham, which is I am part of a government that is going to be able to deliver this duplication. As we know, planning for the second stage of the Hurstbridge line upgrade is now well underway. The $547 million stage 2 upgrade will deliver further train services, less crowding during peak times and better connections to public transport in our north-east. It will enable more consistent timetabling on my Hurstbridge line, as you would also know, Acting Speaker Carbines, as a regular user of the line. Ours is a bit of a patchwork of timetabling. It is not neat—it is not a neat timetable—it is a bit messy, so to be able to deliver a timetable that has efficiencies and that is easy to understand and monitor will be terrific. We want to increase the service capability of both the Hurstbridge and Mernda lines to manage expected population growth along the Whittlesea corridor. Commuters on the Hurstbridge line will have more trains, more seats and fewer delays as we continue our massive upgrade of the Hurstbridge line. We said we would deliver to locals in our north-east more peak-hour train services and less time stuck at boom gates, and we have. Stage 1, Acting Speaker, in which I know you played a very big role, delivered the removal of level crossings at Lower Plenty Road and at Grange Road, as well as the duplication between Rosanna and Heidelberg. I know my people are pretty happy with that and I know that your people are ecstatic. This will allow trains to run between 6 and 7 minutes at Greensborough, every 10 minutes at Eltham and Montmorency, and every 20 minutes at Hurstbridge, Diamond Creek and Wattle Glen, as well as two extra Hurstbridge express peak-hour services. Labor will also, importantly, protect the Eltham trestle bridge—an iconic landmark in my community, the trestle bridge. It is the last remaining timber bridge on Melbourne’s electric train network that is still in use, and it has local heritage protection and is an important part of my area’s local character. Stage 2 of the Hurstbridge line upgrade will create more than 950 jobs, with construction to start in 2020 and to finish by 2022, and I tell you what: bring it on. I cannot wait for this to start happening. We know how to deliver the second stage of the Hurstbridge line upgrade because we have already delivered the first stage, and we delivered it well. There are so many more projects that are part of our Big Build. It includes the Metro Tunnel, which will transform our network, getting more trains through the whole metro system, freeing up and helping those in regional areas get around our city faster as well. We are taking the Cranbourne- Pakenham and Sunbury lines out of the loop, allowing for more trains on other lines to go through the loop—more trains, more often, across Victoria. It is a 9-kilometre, city-shaping rail connection from South Kensington to South Yarra, boosting capacity of the entire rail network by nearly 40 000 people, creating around 7000 jobs for Victorians, including nearly 800 apprentices, trainees and engineering cadets—terrific work. There are a range of initiatives in place to grow the workforce that will support this massive infrastructure pipeline of projects in planning and delivery. It is does not just stop there, Acting Speaker Carbines: there is a Suburban Rail Loop, a fantastic project that will also benefit your community with a new connecting station at Heidelberg; and there is the regional rail revival, a once-in-a-generation investment that will improve the reliability of the regional public transport network, enhance the passenger experience and support local economies, and will also create more than 1000 jobs. I have to tell you in finishing up, Acting Speaker, the reasoned amendment has nothing to do with this bill. This bill does nothing around the ownership of tracks, nor does it impact or impede the Murray Basin project. This is pure theatrics, it is an absolute stunt and it is yet another attempt by those opposite

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3145 to create speed bumps and stop this government from getting on with its agenda, which is to get this state moving. I commend the bill. Mr GUY (Bulleen) (14:25): My colleagues say that I am a bit of a gunzel, so I am going to talk to you on this bill in a way that I am sure you are going to get a bit of an education about some of the parts of the Australian rail network and Australian rail history, which no doubt will be riveting to many. This bill is a good bill because it brings in a national approach to Australian rail policy. More to the point on Australian rail policy, it has been so important in this country that we have a standardised rail policy, given the kind of history that we have had in this country in building rail that has been so disparate. Now, we are not alone, because many countries in the world have had this, whether it is different companies such as in Great Britain, who had the LMS and the LNER and the GWS, or the United States, who had the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe and other railways which were privately run, such as Conrail, and nowadays there is Amtrak. Australia was formed with its rail network coming from its colonies, and of course as I think the member for Euroa correctly mentioned, the thing that has really divided our rail network from the start has been that. Because what that did was arrive at a policy of different rail gauges from the very start, and what that meant, of course, was that we had colonies with rail networks that did not interact. Now, this is the old Scottish-Irish-English joke, because it was an Irishman that was brought in to establish Victoria’s railways, and Victoria’s railways were built off an Irish system, the old broad gauge 5 foot 3, which is why we have got broad gauge 5 foot 3. That man was then contracted to South Australia to set in place the South Australian government railways—true story. They cut his pay and then he resigned. But then of course a Scotsman, who came from Great Britain, had put in place the railway network in New South Wales on 4 foot 8½, and 4 foot 8½, which is 1435 millimetres, was not compatible with the 1600 millimetre gauge in Victoria. So where do you say the Englishman comes in? And I note the Scotsman, the member for Broadmeadows, is leaving the chamber—why wouldn’t he?—because it was an Englishman who said, ‘We can do it cheaper’. He brought 3 foot 6 into Queensland, and it was the Englishman who then persuaded the Queensland government, who had less money—no gold rush—to then adopt a cheaper 3 foot 6 narrow gauge for Queensland, parts of South Australia and Western Australia, which is why Australia then had three different rail gauges. This became a glaring problem for us during World War II, when the movement of goods across this country from the factories in Melbourne to the bases in Queensland meant that they had to be changed at the border in Albury and had to be changed at the border going up towards Brisbane and then put onto the narrow-gauge trains to take them to what would have been then the perceived battlefront in northern Australia. So it was early on that we needed to have a national policy and approach to rail gauges—just one part of it. If you think back to when the trans-Australian line was built as part of the agreement of Federation, back then to get from Perth to Sydney you had to get on the train at Perth and take a narrow gauge 3 foot 6 train to Kalgoorlie. You would then change on the old overnight, the Kalgoorlie Express, to get the trans-Australian to Port Pirie. At Port Pirie you would then go on a broad-gauge train to Port Augusta. You would then get on another train and change again to another broad-gauge train that would take you on the Cockburn line to change at Peterborough; you would change at Peterborough to a narrow-gauge South Australian service that would take you to Broken Hill, which you would then change to a standard-gauge service take you to Sydney, and that is how you got from Perth to Sydney. It was not until 1970 that we had a national approach to rail travel on gauges so that you could go from Perth to Sydney. A member interjected. Mr GUY: Perth to Sydney in 1970—correct; 1930 from Sydney to Brisbane; 1962 from Melbourne to Sydney, as the member for Euroa mentioned earlier; and to Adelaide, in fact, from Port

BILLS 3146 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Pirie in the 1980s. There was the line which was changed from narrow gauge to standard gauge in 1980 to Alice Springs and expanded under the Howard government in 2004, I think it was, to Darwin. So we have not had much in the way of national policy. But it is not just track gauges, it is also around what is called loading gauge—so this means for instance the height and width of trains. This is why Sydney has double-deckers. In fact the first full concept double-decker trains in the world were in Sydney. We invented in Australia the concept of a power car or motorcar that was a double-decker; that did not exist. Sydney had the world’s first full double-decker trains, but their loading gauge is higher. So, higher in New South Wales than Victoria means there are only certain New South Wales locomotives that can be run onto a Victorian domestic network should we be standardised. Victorian trains are wider, so you cannot run a Victorian steam engine into New South Wales, even if it was gauge converted, because it is wider. Then of course you come to the currents that feed our overhead system: 1500 d.c., I think it is, in Melbourne and Sydney versus 25 a.c. in Brisbane and Perth. So we have different networks everywhere—as I said, differences in power, loading gauge and break of gauge—which has been a massive hindrance to a national rail policy in Australia for some time. What it has meant of course is that between our cities we have not had the ability to swap technology. Yes, we have swapped designs when it comes to potential rolling stock, but we have not had the ability to swap technologies. We have not had the ability to use locomotives, apart from our national rail network, which was set up originally as Commonwealth Railways and under the Whitlam government came under the Australian National Railways Commission, which of course has now been privatised, and we have seen a variety of national rail networks such as National Rail Corporation, QR National and others operating in the system around Australia. So we have changed dramatically the approach to rail infrastructure in Australia. I note the reasoned amendment. One thing I do want to talk about on that is around tourist rail, because it does not affect tourist railways. Tourist rail has a huge opportunity, particularly in a place like Victoria, which is the same size as the United Kingdom—227 000 square metres. The United Kingdom has massive rail tourism. A lot of people go to the North Yorkshire Moors Railway. They combine a holiday at Whitby and Robin Hood’s Bay to go and get the train through the North Yorkshire moors. It is very interesting; it is fascinating. That then lends to huge tourism for small communities. When we look at Victoria we now have tourist railways operating in the Mornington Peninsula. We have a small one on the old Walhalla line, which is narrow gauge. We have one at Maldon, now from Castlemaine. I used to see it when it went from about 3 miles down the line from Maldon. Now it is the full service—absolutely fantastic. We have a number of others—Daylesford to Muckleford, for instance—which are all getting underway. I hope the minister listens. She should provide greater support to these tourist railways. They are fantastic. They provide great tourism for country and regional Victoria and small towns. People can combine a day trip in our state with tourist railways. It pains me when I see the Australian Railway Historical Society museum in Williamstown. My father helped build part of the Williamstown railway museum—surprise, surprise. To actually see it out there rotting and rusting under many governments—yours, mine, all of ours—we have not done well when it comes to rail preservation in this state. We can all do better. The Williamstown railway museum I think is a travesty, when you look at the Powerhouse Museum in Sydney, the National Railway Museum in Adelaide and the National Railway Museum in York in the United Kingdom, which has massive tourism infrastructure. In Victoria we have a museum that is sitting out there in the open— Mr Richardson: Sounds like a study tour. Mr GUY: It may well be a study tour, member for Mordialloc. You can come with me and I will bore you silly the whole way. But what I would say is that this is very important, because we have some of Australia’s greatest rail infrastructure—and, I might add, tram infrastructure out there too— rusting and rotting out there in Williamstown. That should be incorporated into the Newport railway workshops—a beautiful building, a magnificent building. We have the largest single non-articulated

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3147 steam locomotive in Australia, Heavy Harry H220, sitting out there to rust. We have the ability to restore some of those locomotives, and people through our TAFE system who would do that, yet we leave our rail history out there in the weather, rusting away. As you know, the Liberal and National parties will not oppose this bill. What we do say is that the standardisation of Australian rail safety is very important. We all know that it is important. It is not a political discussion; it is a common sense discussion for all of us. We know that. We need to do better as a nation around rail infrastructure, around cooperation on rail infrastructure and around cooperation on rail policy to ensure that we have the best opportunity to exchange not just infrastructure but the use of technology to make our systems more efficient. I hope with that 9½-minute contribution I have enlightened you around rail gauges, rail infrastructure, rail history and, more to the point, why we need to preserve some of that history for the people and the volunteers who have worked so hard to get it there in the first place. Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure) (14:35): I am pleased to join the debate and make a contribution on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. This bill, as the member for Eltham just outlined to the house in her contribution, has had a very long gestation period. Indeed I was the responsible minister for this issue in the previous Parliament, in the first term of the Andrews Labor government, and I am very, very pleased to see this bill come into this Parliament, led by the Minister for Public Transport, to bring together under a nationally consistent framework the rail safety requirements under the leadership of the rail safety regulator. It is why I was quite surprised during the various contributions on this debate to hear and learn of the reasoned amendment that has been put by the Liberal and National parties. I think it exposes the Liberal and National parties badly in their desire to put a hurdle in the way. We are at the final stage of getting Victoria to be part of that national framework—a process that started in 2011, a process that spans the previous Liberal-Nationals government, a process that spans the first term of the Andrews Labor government. I am quite shocked to think that they would be prepared to throw a final hurdle in the way of moving to this nationally consistent approach when we have come so far. I would argue that given his contribution the member for Bulleen perhaps should have had more of a voice in his party room on this bill and on the drafting of this reasoned amendment, because if he had, this reasoned amendment would not have seen the light of day. It is a classic case of: if you do not have anything nice to say, then maybe do not say anything at all and let the bill proceed. The reason I am quite exercised about this is for all the reasons that the member for Bulleen outlined about why we need to move to a nationally consistent approach. It provides efficiencies in the operation of our rail network. It provides for improvements to the rail network and a standardised safety framework. But I think it also exposes that the only people who want to keep talking about the sale of our rail assets, the only people who want to talk about the sale to the private sector of our rail assets, are the Liberal and National parties. That is because we know they have had form on this time and time again. It is next week that we will mark the 20th anniversary of the election of the Bracks government in 1999. One of the key reasons why that government was elected was because regional Victorians resoundingly rejected their treatment by the previous Liberal-Nationals government, led by Premier Jeff Kennett and Deputy Premier Pat McNamara, as ‘the toenails of the state’. During that period of time what did those Liberal and National governments do? They sold off V/Line to National Express, and it was a complete and utter failure for services in regional Victoria. It saw a significant deterioration of services over that time. It massively disadvantaged country communities over that time. I know the member for Yan Yean has got very strong personal connections to the south-west. They went further in the south-west, where there was the privatisation of the Warrnambool line to, I think it was, West Coast Railway—a complete failure. There was the privatisation of parts of the Shepparton line as well during that time. There was of course the closure of country train lines—to Mildura, to

BILLS 3148 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Leongatha, to Ararat, to Maryborough. Train lines were closed. Communities were left without services. This was the record of the previous Liberal-Nationals government. The member for Euroa and those opposite are now coming back in and giving us the opportunity to go on a trip down memory lane, and it is not a pleasant trip. It is not a trip we like to take, because it was a very difficult period of time for those regional communities. I fear that once again this is what is on the minds of the Liberal and Nationals politicians. Why else would they want to come in with something like this? We know they have got form on this, because not only did they not learn the lessons of that period in the 1990s when they sold off our country train network and closed five country passenger lines—not only did they not learn the lessons of that period of time—but when they got back into government between 2010 and 2014, guess what. They had another crack at it. I refer to an Age article of November 2012 authored by Adam Carey in which he reported on the then Baillieu government, which I remind the house the member for Euroa was a press secretary for, so she had a front-row seat in these secret negotiations and conversations that were being held by the Baillieu government and the Metro Trains operator. The government had approached Metro to see whether it was interested in running V/Line. The member for Euroa saw—well, maybe she did not see what happened in the 1990s. Maybe she had forgotten what had happened in the 1990s, because she was sitting there in a front-row seat to see it all happen again. And the reason why it fell over? The reason why yet another attempt to privatise V/Line fell over was because it became public. The hypocrites opposite were exposed when they were in government. It became public and it was abandoned. So what has the Andrews Labor government done? When we introduced our Transport for Victoria legislation back in 2016 we included a provision in that bill, which is now in law because it was passed by the Parliament, to protect V/Line once and for all from the hands of any future Liberal-National governments trying to privatise it. That is what makes this reasoned amendment even more superfluous, even more redundant, because we have already taken measures to protect V/Line from any predatory behaviour from a future Liberal-National government. We made sure that the bill provided for the body known as V/Line Proprietary Limited to be dissolved. We brought V/Line back closer to the heart of government. And do you know what we have also done as part of that? We have invested in it. We do not close country train lines, we invest in them. That is why every single regional passenger line—every single regional passenger line—is currently experiencing an upgrade through our regional rail revival program. That is why we have been buying new rolling stock. That is why we have been adding services to regional communities. It is challenging work that is made even more challenging because for train lines like the one to Warrnambool and like the one to Shepparton there is the legacy of the additional layer of privatisation they faced because of the decline of the network during the Kennett years, when they were privatised and when there was a complete failure to invest in and maintain the network—a complete failure to invest in and maintain the system. So we have got a huge amount of work and we are doing it right now—upgrading train stations, building new train stations, upgrading every regional train line and purchasing rolling stock. Some of us remember—I know a number of us remember—those couple of years when those opposite were in government, the Baillieu government. Again, I remind those opposite that the member for Euroa was probably part of this decision-making as well: ‘Let’s not order any new trains for a couple of years. The network doesn’t need them’. They did not order one new regional train for two years. That gave us an additional backlog that the Andrews government had to come in and catch up on. Ms Halfpenny: What about the jobs? Ms ALLAN: Thank you. The member for Thomastown reminds me that the very first briefing I had as public transport minister back in December 2014 from V/Line was the revelation that the former government had a plan that they had kept from the Victorian community in the lead-up to the election to cut a further $100 million from the organisation and cut 100 jobs. This was the predicament we were faced with. We were determined to strengthen V/Line. We did that through putting additional protections in the Transport for Victoria legislation. We have invested in every single regional

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3149 passenger line, and we will fight tooth and nail to protect our regional passenger network from the hands of the Liberal-Nationals opposite, who might treat the country communities with disrespect and think that they will forget what has happened. I can assure Liberal-National members of Parliament that we will not let country communities forget what a Liberal-National government means for regional rail services. It means cuts, it means closures, and that is the complete opposite of the investment that the Andrews Labor government will make. Ms BRITNELL (South-West Coast) (14:45): It pleases me to rise on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019, particularly following on from the minister. I have got a lot to say about some of the things she claims that she is doing, certainly up my way on the Warrnambool line, but we will get to that soon. The main purpose of the bill is to amend the Rail Safety National Law Application Act 2013 to provide safety for all rail infrastructure and rolling stock operations and to provide for the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator to be the sole rail regulator. But what really stands out to me is that in the minister’s second-reading speech she claimed that:

The Andrews Government is addressing gaps and building capacity in our rail system through the Big Build and is investing in new rolling stock to improve reliability, operational efficiencies and the quality of public transport services. The minister also said:

Victorians deserve a safe, efficient and reliable rail system that gets them to work and play, facilitates the movement of freight, supports economic development and improves social mobility and inclusiveness. We have just heard the Minister for Transport Infrastructure talk about what the government is doing. Let me tell you, there is no new rolling stock for the Warrnambool line, just vague promises of works paving the way for the VLocitys. No commitments to when, despite the Premier indicating it would be when the work is finished. Now they are just saying they will run to Warrnambool eventually, with no firm time lines for the work. What really got me was that when the minister talked about a previous service on this line I think she called it the wrong name. I did not hear her say ‘west coast rail’, but it was called West Coast Railway. I remember very clearly because I used to be on West Coast Railway back in the days when it took 3 hours to get to Melbourne by train. Most times when I use the train from Warrnambool now it takes a good 4.5 hours. In fact it has taken 5 hours in the past. It is certainly very rare to get to Melbourne either by car or by rail in 3 hours, so we are definitely going backwards as a state under this government. The minister continued to talk about how well they are doing. Well, in the last decade the Warrnambool line has only been on time 12 times. They cannot even meet their own punctuality target of 92 per cent when they have only met it 12 times. What is the minister’s point? We are getting people coming to my office all the time telling us that West Coast Railway actually worked really well and V/Line—the evidence is here—are not meeting the targets because the minister is not investing. We have people coming onto the train who get there and have booked a seat and are disabled and there are no disabled services for them, so they are put in a taxi and sent to Melbourne that way. It is very degrading for people who need to plan and need to understand what their day entails to get to appointments on time when they cannot rely on the train. Victoria is not that big. We cannot keep making places seem further and further away by making the distances longer to travel when we have got the capacity as a human society to get much faster. But, no, this government is just getting slower. The minister raved and raved and raved about how much work has been done, but clearly, just like the Premier, she is focused on Melbourne and is completely missing the beat, particularly up in the South-West Coast area. We have got rolling stock from the 1980s with a minimal number of carriages with suitable disability access or disabled facilities, and the disability access toilets are often out of order. I have told the story in this Parliament before of a young man having to be carried by his father through several carriages because there was no wheelchair access, and then the toilet was actually out of order. It cannot get much worse than that—oh no,

BILLS 3150 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 actually it can. There was a lady who got stuck in the toilet in the Warrnambool station because it said that it was wheelchair accessible but it was not. The sign was not up to the standard of today. It was appalling actually. Anyway, I have talked a lot about disability access and it is just a disgrace that it is not prioritised. That is without talking about how often the train breaks down and we have to get buses. I remember being booked on the train once. I arrived and jumped on the bus instead of the train that I was booked on. I booked on my mobile phone; they had my mobile phone number so you would hope that they could notify you as they do for the metropolitan services, but no. I was on the bus and I said to the bus driver, ‘How do you work going back and forth?’, and he said, ‘Oh, I drove up so I’ll be back tonight’, so they actually had 4 hours notice for the guy to be able to get up to us to be able to drive the bus back to Melbourne but they could not notify the passengers. I am sorry, the minister is completely wrong when she is raving about how well this government is doing. The truth of the matter is our local federal member Dan Tehan was the one who secured the $104 million—the Andrews Labor government had put $10 million in—and that was secured some 18 months ago. Works are still not completed and what has been done has resulted in the train service not improving, as we can see from the failure to meet the punctuality target. But the minister’s really big omission was to completely miss talking about the botched rail project, the Murray Basin rail project. She has run out of money. We as a state in the time of the Napthine government gave $220 million and that was matched by the federal government with $220 million, so $440 million has been put into this project and she is now having to admit that it is actually making some freight journeys longer because of the poor level of work that has been done. They are actually going slower. The government now is looking to blame everyone for their stuff-up, and I wonder if something about this bill is actually more about off-loading the responsibility, because we certainly did not hear the minister taking responsibility and saying, ‘Yes, we’ve stuffed up and we’ll fix it’. No, no—rather than take $220 million, which is the cost of one rail crossing in Melbourne, and fix the project, she is prepared to leave it in a worse state than when she started. We have got the port of Portland that will be incredibly disadvantaged because there is already a $5 per tonne of grain disparity between the Geelong and Melbourne ports and the Portland port. The whole idea was to have competition. The Maroona line is now not even on the agenda, so it is time the government started to face up to the fact that they have stuffed up, and they should fix it. One point I also want to make about this bill is that it does talk about the tourist rail, which my colleague the member for Bulleen described quite articulately in his contribution to the debate. I note that we have in Portland the Portland Cable Trams service. It is a tourist service that is completely run by volunteers, many of whom are quite elderly community members—and young. I met a young boy last year who is 18 and has been doing it for, I think, two years. They take the tourists around to experience the tramway and it is really, really great for Portland. I hope the government does take a bit of time to look past the tram tracks of Melbourne to the tram tracks of Portland and respect and honour the work that is being done there that brings money into the local economy and therefore into the state coffers and help out these amazing volunteers who are giving enormous amounts of time. They are happy to do so but not to have to beg for support from the government. They do need some investment made, and I hope that Jacinta Allan, after that appalling— A member interjected. Ms BRITNELL: The Minister for Transport Infrastructure, sorry. You are quite right; thank you for that correction. The minister, after that appalling presentation where she focused on saying that they were investing right across the state—she even had the audacity to mention Warrnambool when Warrnambool is absolutely failing when it comes to rail—will not use the money that the federal government have given in an efficient way to actually improve the rail system. Even in Melbourne the times that all these improvements are supposedly helping with are actually slower times.

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3151

So we have a botched Murray Basin rail project, where the minister is completely ignoring her responsibility to fix what she has stuffed up. That is where she needs to begin and to realise that for the potential of the regions she needs to be able to make them connected and make sure that travel times are shortened, not lengthened. She needs to stop wasting taxpayers money on services where she is just buying in replacement transport to Melbourne like taxis and buses, which is probably very good for those two industries but not so great for the taxpayer. If you have got a breakdown and you get a call saying, ‘Hey, we need five, six, seven buses in Warrnambool’, I can only imagine the opportunity that provides to make a fair bit of money as a bus operator but at the expense, I am sorry, of the taxpayer. This has been going on for far too long. You do not keep investing in something that is stuffed. Those trains are pretty much buggered so it is time to invest, and that is where the minister says she is. Put your money where your mouth is and get some new trains for the Warrnambool line. Ms SPENCE (Yuroke) (14:55): I am not really sure that the member for South-West Coast actually spoke on the bill, but nonetheless I am very pleased to rise and speak in support of the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. One of the primary purposes of this bill is to complete the national scheme of rail safety delivery by transferring the residual service delivery and regulatory functions from the Victorian regulator, Transport Safety Victoria, or TSV, to the national regulator, the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator, or the ONRSR. After just a few short weeks ago welcoming Western Australia to the Legal Profession Uniform Law scheme, it is quite good now to be speaking on a bill that puts the final piece in the uniform rail safety scheme. To understand the purpose of this bill it is important to go over the history of how we got to where we are now in regard to rail safety regulation. This bill, as we have said, will complete the national reform of the regulation of rail safety, a process that began in 2011 when the Council of Australian Governments signed an intergovernmental agreement to establish the national scheme of rail safety regulation. This COAG intergovernmental agreement led to the approval of the rail safety national law that established the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator in July 2012, whose role is to administer rail safety regulation and enforcement across Australia. That regulator commenced operations in January 2013. Victoria entered into this single national regulatory scheme for rail safety in May 2014 through the enactment of the Rail Safety National Law Application Act 2013, referred to as the Victorian application act, which applied the national law as the law of Victoria. However, at that time there was concern about moving immediately to a direct delivery model, given the unproven record of the national regulator and the size and complexity of Melbourne’s metropolitan rail systems. As a result the Victorian application act provided for rail safety regulation in Victoria to be delivered through a service level agreement between TSV and the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator—a similar approach to what was adopted in New South Wales. Now, this bill implements the transfer of all rail safety service delivery and regulatory functions from TSV to the ONRSR by repealing the provisions in the Victorian application act that require that service level agreement between TSV and the ONRSR, and instead moving to a direct service level agreement. What is the difference between a service level agreement and a direct service level agreement, and why is that shift now appropriate? Firstly, a service level agreement sets out the boundaries under which the Victorian regulator will assist the national regulator to undertake its work. In Victoria this service level agreement applied to the regulation of heavy rail operations whereby TSV staff applied the national laws, including the national compliance and enforcement framework. TSV staff also applied the local laws in relation to tram and local tourist and heritage operators. In contrast, the direct service level agreement or direct delivery model means that the officers, which were formerly the TSV staff, are employed directly by the ONRSR whilst undertaking compliance and enforcement functions. This means that the rail safety officers will be transferred from TSV to the ONRSR as employees under the same terms and conditions that currently apply, and they will continue to regulate rail safety

BILLS 3152 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 of Victorian rail operators as employees of the ONRSR, not TSV. The transfer will support the retention of staff with the necessary skills and experience to work constructively with industry to ensure that risks to safety continue to be managed effectively and are minimised. The retention of these staff will also help to ensure that the final stage of the national reform is delivered seamlessly. In practice this means that around 35 Victorian public servants will transfer to the national regulator, with their employment terms and conditions under the Victorian public service agreement being retained for the life of that agreement and a guarantee that all employees will be no worse off under the national arrangements. TSV will continue to exist as a body which provides support to the director of transport safety in undertaking the remaining functions, which include regulation of recreational boating and piloting services as well as bus safety under the Bus Safety Act 2009. So why is this shift now appropriate? That is for two reasons. Firstly, the ONRSR has a proven record that it is an efficient and effective national regulator; and secondly, an independent review has affirmed this record. The ONRSR has demonstrated that it is an efficient and effective risk-based regulator that gives due regard to state issues and is responsive to state and territory government needs and priorities. The independent review that was undertaken in 2017 also provided specific recommendations on the most effective delivery model for rail safety regulation in Victoria. In considering the merits of removing the service level agreement and allowing the ONRSR to regulate Victoria’s industry directly, the review included consideration of safety risks, organisational risk management systems and ONRSR competencies and capacities, the result of which is that the Victorian government is confident that the ONRSR can take full responsibility for rail safety regulation in Victoria without any risk of reduced safety. The review also considered the most efficient and effective approach to regulating Melbourne’s tram network and tourist and heritage railways that operate on their own tracks and are regulated locally under the Rail Safety (Local Operations) Act 2006, which is repealed by this bill. In doing so the review considered whether regulatory responsibility of trams and tourist and heritage railway should transfer to the ONRSR, as is the case in other states. On this issue the review found that the regulation of trams and local tourist and heritage operations would be more efficiently and effectively delivered under a national scheme and that tram operators have significant differences in risk profile, engineering and technical and operational standards to heavy rail systems. It noted that a competent regulator needs to have sufficient skill and experience to understand these differences for the purposes of assessing an operator’s competence and capacity to manage their risks. The review found that on the assumption that the relevant TSV staff would transfer to the ONRSR under the direct delivery model, then the ONRSR would have available to it no less skills, knowledge and expertise than are currently dedicated to regulating tram operations in Victoria. Furthermore, the ONRSR would bring additional skill and experience to the regulation of trams and tourist and heritage operations in Victoria. As such, the findings of the review gave the Victorian government confidence that the time is right to complete the transition to national regulation. We expect the national regulator to deliver on its promises, and we are confident that it can. In conclusion, this bill complements the significant investments that are being made in our rail system by this government by reducing the administrative complexity and eliminating the fragmentation of regulatory responsibility between TSV and the ONRSR. It will eliminate the duplication of administrative systems and enable cost savings to be progressively realised. Importantly, it will also enable the final stage of regulatory harmonisation benefits to be delivered to the rail industry and it will provide certainty to rail safety officers about their future. The Victorian government has confidence that the consolidation of rail safety regulatory responsibilities, skills and knowledge will improve the oversight of our railways and bring about improvements to rail safety over time. I am very pleased that this bill completes the national scheme by Victoria removing that last bit of the service level agreement and going to the direct delivery model, and I commend the bill to the house. Mr McCURDY (Ovens Valley) (15:05): I am delighted to rise and make a contribution on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. We have

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3153 heard that the purpose of this bill is to amend the Rail Safety National Law Application Act 2013, the Transport (Safety Scheme Compliance and Enforcement) Act 2014, the Transport Integration Act 2010 and the Transport (Compliance and Miscellaneous) Act 1983. It will also repeal the Rail Safety (Local Operations) Act 2006 and make other amendments to other acts. We know that one of the main purposes is to amend the Rail Safety National Law Application Act 2013. In short, this will provide for the safety of all rail infrastructure and rolling stock operations carried out in Victoria and for all rail safety work carried out in Victoria to be regulated under the rail safety national law. The second part of this is to provide for the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator to be the sole rail safety regulator for the Victorian rail transport industry. This is very important on the north-east line, and we heard from the member for Euroa, the Deputy Leader of The Nationals, about how important trains and investment are in our part of the world. The other part of this bill is to repeal the Rail Safety Act 2006 and as a consequence re-enact the provisions for the alcohol and drug testing of all rail safety workers in the Rail Safety National Law Application Act 2013. We know that in July 2009, as part of the government’s seamless national economy agenda, COAG agreed to national transport regulation reforms which included the establishment of a national rail safety law and national rail safety regulator. COAG then agreed in 2009 that South Australia would host the national rail safety regulator, to be operational by January 2013. In August 2011 COAG then signed the intergovernmental agreement on rail safety regulation, a reform to establish that Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator in South Australia, as I mentioned. The draft rail safety national law was introduced into the South Australian Parliament in 2012 and successfully passed in May 2012. The draft rail safety national law and associated regulatory impact statements were approved by transport ministers at the first meeting. That was back in 2011. The national rail safety regulator became operational from 20 January 2013, administrating a single national set of rail safety laws for Australia. Again, as you heard from the member for Bulleen talking about the changes over the years from the 1930s right through until now with different gauges—standard gauge, broad gauge, narrow gauge, all the different gauges that we have had—what we really needed, or need, is a single national set of rail safety laws for Australia so we do not fall into those same problems that we had in the past. It was then agreed that other states and territories were each to pass enabling legislation to give effect to that rail safety national law within each jurisdiction. Therefore in Victoria the enabling legislation was the Rail Safety National Law Application Act 2013. This empowering legislation established two regulators: the national rail safety regulator and the safety director. The national rail safety regulator was to provide those regulatory services in accordance with the service level agreement, and the safety director was to provide regulatory services not covered by the service level agreement. That is pretty straightforward. The Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019 signals the conclusion of the service level agreement and transitions rail safety regulations in Victoria over to that national rail safety regulator. It also redefines the duties of relevant roles where part of the role will transition to the national regulator. Each state and territory maintains its own drug and alcohol testing procedures consistent with road safety procedures; this state maintains authority and procedures for alcohol and drug testing of all rail safety workers by Victorian authorities. Although the rail safety laws and the regulator fall under commonwealth jurisdiction, as a result of the amendments in this bill there is provision for state ministers to give a ministerial direction to investigate transport safety matters. I think that is important. Although the commonwealth is overseeing the rail legislation, state ministers can still step in and make ministerial directions where appropriate. We have heard the Deputy Leader of The Nationals, the member for Euroa, talk about a reasoned amendment that has been moved. Its purpose is to withdraw and redraft this bill to require any sale, lease or surrender of the ownership of rail or tram track assets in Victoria, including transfer to other jurisdictions, to be subject to parliamentary approval. In the Ovens Valley electorate we have many rail assets, and it is important—in fact vital—that parliamentary approval is given to ensure that

BILLS 3154 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 transparency. The government can be incredibly sneaky and underhand, so the people of Victoria are demanding more transparency. If you need proof of this government’s mismanagement of country rail lines, you have only got to look at Murray Basin rail. In fact, I noticed that not once in the minister’s contribution was she game to even mention the Murray Basin rail upgrade. This has been an absolute disaster, and this government has certainly pushed to one side country and regional upgrades so that the Premier for Melbourne can continue to be single-focused on Melbourne services. We know the sale of the Rural Finance Corporation and the lease of the port of Melbourne were supposed to bankroll further investment in regional Victoria. That has not happened, and Premier Andrews has again completely let regional Victoria slip and led us to Third World services. In the budget presented early this year—as I mentioned with the sale of Rural Finance a few years ago and the lease of the port—there was supposed to be far more investment in regional rail Victoria: 94 per cent of the total investment in rail from the Premier’s budget or the budget presented earlier this year is going to regional Victoria. So with all the stuff-ups and all the financial mismanagement that this government has done, it simply overlooks the Melbourne overruns and then it ceases to roll out the regional infrastructure build in Victoria. I heard the member for Eltham say that we need to trust this government to deliver major projects. Sadly, the Murray Basin rail project is an example of a project that was well funded until Labor blew the budget and botched this project. Now it says we will have to wait. So now when all the projects in Melbourne are running over time and over budget, the Premier just throws more cash at those projects, but when there is a regional blow-out, we are told it is going to be put on hold. I do have major concerns, and there is reason to believe that the Andrews government is considering the sale or privatisation of the rail freight network, of which the amendment if successful would require parliamentary consideration. It is important to make this government accountable and transparent, two actions that they simply cannot face up to. I seek that they consider our reasoned amendment and show some respect for the parliamentary process. Mr CARBINES (Ivanhoe) (15:13): I am pleased to speak on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. In particular, I want to pick up on a couple of matters in a broader context in regard to rail safety. I was listening earlier to the contribution of the member for Euroa, and she did talk in some detail about rail safety and particularly about rail fatalities in Victoria. I do acknowledge that she did touch upon the fact that a number of those statistics are also related or potentially related to suicides, which was a fair acknowledgement to make in relation to the rail safety history in Victoria, particularly in more recent times. I think we do need to be careful when we quote from some of the statistics that are available in relation to rail safety and rail deaths in Victoria that we are very mindful of the circumstances around some of those fatalities that have been recorded. Many members of this place would know—and some would have been in Parliament at the time—of the importance of rail safety, particularly when we reflect on very significant rail accidents such as the Kerang accident in which 11 people were killed and 23 people were injured on 5 June 2007. It was very significant in Victoria’s history and up to that time was one of the worst rail disasters in Australia since 1977. So it was a pretty significant disaster for all Victorians, particularly those in country and regional Victoria. Then Premier Bracks, when he visited that site with I think the current Leader of The Nationals and others, described it as a horrific scene. While many aspects have played out since that time, what we do know is there is a continued desire across Victoria, particularly across Melbourne now, to remove level crossings. Historically in Victoria level crossings have been part of the landscape. There was a decision by the Andrews government to remove those level crossings, which it took to the election back in 2014. Of course that is a program that we continue to roll out across the state, a program that is very significant in addressing rail safety. I think right across Victoria and certainly metropolitan Melbourne, including in the electorate that I

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3155 represent, Ivanhoe, there is a greater understanding of rail safety issues and a desire to make sure that we address those concerns. The removal of the level crossing on Lower Plenty Road, Rosanna, is a very significant indication, and also Grange Road in Alphington to the south of my electorate in the member for Northcote’s electorate but also on the Hurstbridge line. They are two very significant level crossings. I do hark back again to one part of the contribution by the member for Euroa. Unfortunately there have been some rail fatalities. I am certainly familiar with several on the Hurstbridge line in my electorate and also where my electorate office is located at Rosanna, and at Rosanna station where we have seen fatalities due to very desperate circumstances that people have endured in the past less than 12 months. I think outside of those tragic circumstances we are working very hard not only because we are removing level crossings in a congestion sense but also actually seeing great improvements in rail infrastructure and the infrastructure that people use every day, whether they are catching a train to work, to school, to university or for leisure. The upgraded station is a very significant indication. People had been desensitised to very poor rail infrastructure at which they would wait every day for a train. The upgrade of level crossings has also seen the upgrade of railway stations and precincts, and that is a very significant long-term public investment in infrastructure. It provides opportunities, for example, for social enterprise in the commercial space at Rosanna station. The Banyule City Council has taken a long-term lease on that, and it will potentially open this year. These opportunities have come about through the government’s investment in upgrading those rail services. Not only that, but the rail service upgrade on the Hurstbridge line has also seen 1.2 kilometres of single track replaced between Heidelberg and Rosanna. Why is that important? Because, if you look through history, single-track rail accidents have been very significant in Victoria’s history. The elimination of those bottlenecks on a single track between duplicated tracks is a significant safety measure for the community. We have seen pedestrian crossing improvements. There was certainly one in St James Road in Rosanna that did not have automatic gates. They have now been put in place. That is part of the whole rail upgrade, and although I stand to be corrected, I am pretty much aware that at this point in time there might be only one rail crossing point for pedestrians in my electorate—pretty much up towards the boundary of Bundoora electorate, there on Wattle Grove, I think, getting towards that boundary—that still does not have automated gates. That continues to be an aspect that we agitate for in the community to ensure significant further investment in rail safety on a very tight bend on the Hurstbridge line, which we continue to work to see improved and upgraded given the technological advances that are available and what we see subsequently along the line. Further, there is the half-billion dollar investment in the Hurstbridge line, north of my electorate, between Greensborough and Wattle Glen to duplicate track and build a brand-new station at Greensborough. We will see significant improvements in rail safety along that line for pedestrians and train users and of course for many rail workers, including our locomotive drivers and others. The upgrades of and investment in rail track, the duplication of the line, the improvements to pedestrian crossings and the removal of level crossings all add up to greater opportunities for communities but also safer opportunities for communities. I think it is very important that we acknowledge that that work is very significant. As we talk about rail safety and rail investment I also want to touch on the fact that we are approaching the 20th anniversary of the election of the Bracks government. At the time of that election I was working in Geelong, and the election of the Bracks government led to a lot of discussion about fast rail to regional Victoria, but I think the greatest achievement around a lot of that work was the improvement in rail infrastructure, particularly rolling stock infrastructure. As someone who works in this place and travels regularly on the train from Geelong, I can say the improvements in rolling stock were absolutely significant compared to what we had seen for so many years before. It is also paramount to mention that many of those opposite in their contributions on this amendment to withdraw the bill have tried to indicate that somehow the government might be committed to wanting

BILLS 3156 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 to remove rail lines or sell rail lines. That is particularly absurd given the history of those opposite. I think that is also part of the point around why the Bracks government was elected 20 years ago. If we want to touch on the contributions from those opposite in relation to the sale or closure of railway lines in regional Victoria, we only need to look at the Mildura service, the Vinelander, which was closed by the Kennett government on 12 September 1993. It serviced towns such as Dunolly and St Arnaud and Donald and Birchip and Ouyen and Red Cliffs and Irymple and Mildura. The Leongatha line was closed on 24 July 1993. It serviced many other towns. Other towns that have lost services include Ararat and Maryborough. That line has been invested in and reopened by the Andrews Labor government. The Koo Wee Rup service was closed in 1994 and the Lang Lang service was closed in 1994. There are many, many other lines that we could touch on that have been closed by those opposite. So we will not be taking any lectures on regional rail services and regional rail lines from those who chose to close them. It did not finish there. We could go to hospitals and schools, but we will confine ourselves to matters related to this bill: public transport and rail safety. If you want to improve rail safety, you need to invest in rolling stock and you need to invest in the people who drive the trains and who manufacture and maintain them in our many rail yards right across Melbourne and certainly down at Spencer Street. There are people who live in my electorate who do great work there. Can I also say you need to invest in removing dangerous level crossings and you need to invest in services across metropolitan Melbourne. That is what the Andrews government does, and I commend the bill to the— (Time expired) Mr TILLEY (Benambra) (15:23): I wish to make a brief contribution on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. We have heard quite a number of contributions from other members in this place during the day, and we certainly heard from my good friend the member for Bulleen about his experiences. It was great to hear some of those stories that I have shared with him on our journey over many years in this place. It is great to be the beneficiary of the wisdom that he shares with us. My little friend is a true rail gunzel and tragic. You should sit down and have a beer or a Jim Beam with him and share some of those lived experiences. The bill seeks to amend a number of statutes and make some consequential amendments. From the get- go this is an observation from the fourth estate. What did AAP’s Melbourne bureau chief, Kaitlyn Offer, say the other day—‘Victoria is a living, breathing Utopia episode’. The chief of staff at AAP stopped counting at 130 authorities, taskforces, offices, commissions and the rest. So well done on that. But on a serious note the important thing with this bill is the lived experience, particularly on the north- east line, where we have seen over the best part of a decade the transition and the evolving nature of national rail policy and how it is being laid out on the ground. The north-east includes the electorates of Benambra and Ovens Valley through to—I am trying to think where else—Euroa and down through Seymour and into town. We are seeing the experience of what for the past 50 years has been a train experience of about 3 to 3.5 hours now blowing out to in excess of 4 hours. The important thing is that we have transitioned to this national rail policy, safety being paramount for us—putting aside the N class engines and the old rolling stock, which the Auditor-General has told the government is long beyond its use-by date. But those lived experiences are important. I am in possession of a document. It has not been peer-reviewed, and it probably would be dismissed by a number of bodies and regulators as something from gunzels and rail tragics, which is unfortunate because they are not the gunzels from the Border Rail Action Group, which this Labor government frequently uses as a community representative body and an authority on rail in the north-east. A whole range of other people have prepared this document. They are all Victorian railway people who have a significant wealth of knowledge and experience in track work, which is important and which flows on to safety. When we are passing bills in this place, which eventually become legislation, passing that off to the Australian government as a responsibility, it is important to place this information on the record here in this place.

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3157

As we are aware—and we have spoken about this many times and I have made contributions about it—the north-east line from Wodonga is a major rail freight and passenger route between Sydney and Melbourne, but for more than a decade the line has significantly deteriorated under the stewardship of the Australian Rail Track Corporation, which is also a federal body. Today, as I mentioned earlier, it takes longer to get from Wodonga to Melbourne by train than it did 50 years ago. The track is a minefield of mud holes and drainage bogs that soften the track’s foundations and make the train jump and bounce, which rattles the trains, passengers and staff alike. Now, the line has always had issues, but it was the contractor, John Holland, in partnership with the Australian Rail Track Corporation, the federal body, and its cost and time-saving program to replace the wooden sleepers between 2008 and 2010, that has made it so much worse. That experience is not north of the border in New South Wales. That has not occurred with their sleeper replacement scheme. The contractor, John Holland, had at the time a $500 million project, but the important thing to note is they also had the ongoing maintenance works. Rather than take the advice of experienced railway engineers, the federal authority and its contractor agreed on what is known as the side insertion method. So simply, for the layman, it is pushing out the old wooden sleeper and punching through the new concrete one. This was simply slipping in a new sleeper—very simple, cost-saving and time- saving, and it sounded great at the time. The intention was to significantly reduce the time and cost of the maintenance and to deliver an interstate rail superhighway by improving—and this is the important thing—speed, reliability and efficiency. However, the use of this side insertion method did not deliver those outcomes. We are now experiencing the problems and we are hearing the ‘He said, she said’ and the blame game across all levels of government. Even opposition members are in the cheap seats throwing rocks. But the unfortunate thing is that the line is not improving and we are not necessarily getting close to it. The effect of this bill becoming legislation does not dismiss the concerns that I have in relation to rail safety. The trains that we run in Victoria are fairly heavy. It would be difficult for a train to become derailed here because they are so bloody heavy. It is a highly unlikely thing, but we are now looking at a new generation of trains coming onto those tracks. If we do not address this infrastructure, or those that are charged with the responsibility of fixing that infrastructure, heaven help us—touch wood. We do not want to see some tragedy on any part of our rail system. The side insertion method was a bit of a butchered job, and it is sad to see where it is heading. It did not deliver the outcomes it was intended to. It is estimated that more than $1.5 billion has been spent on this track since 2004 alone, and now a further $235 million will be spent between now and 2021 to hopefully run new VLocity trains on the line. That is an incredible amount of wasted money. Just that amount of money certainly calls for and warrants an inquiry—it does. Mind you, it would not be the first inquiry. What I am saying today forms part of other documents and things that I am in possession of. They are all facts. I am happy to see them peer-reviewed, but they should not be dismissed. A proper and appropriate inquiry should see to that to make sure that we do not have a tragedy on the rail lines that we have in Victoria. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau delivered its findings back in 2013 in relation to this side insertion method, and laid the blame on the federal authority’s lack of quality assurance and foresight. That is where I have concerns. Although we are the legislators in Victoria, the executive government is pushing this bill through to allow the federal government to do certain things. It is quite aspirational, I understand that. We did that with our road freight task as well, but we need to err on the side of caution. So, in simply putting it, with the current rolling stock we cannot serve hot drinks. Trains have been cancelled and passengers have been transferred to buses. Once again, we continue to play the blame game. We currently have something in excess of more than 20 speed restrictions along the north-east line which need to be addressed. Now, the gut feeling is the federal rail body responsible for this line has taken the foot off the pedal and is waiting to start the $235 million project to bring the track to a better standard. The track is also prone to alignment issues. It is just a shocking mess where we are transitioning. As legislators in this

BILLS 3158 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 place we are bringing in legislation to allow those same bodies to have oversight of these things. It was a former Premier, who at the time was the Minister for Regional Development, John Brumby, who announced and standardised the broad gauge line on that north-east line. Now, that is going back halfway through this episode, and that is unfortunately where this side insertion method changed. People have to own this. Regardless of what side of politics you are on, where you stand and where your station is, you have to own this to make sure that the legislation passes through, that we support train travel in the state of Victoria and that we do not see any tragedies. Mr FREGON (Mount Waverley) (15:33): I rise with delight to speak on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. It is a great title, isn’t it? It is good—a bit of a cracker. I would like to thank previous members for their contributions, and I will try not to throw any rocks from this not-so-cheap seat. We all use and rely upon our railways every day to transport us, our goods, our people and our friends and family around this great state of Victoria, but also further on. Trains get us to work and they get us home, and they connect us to our family and our friends. So we want to know that our family and our friends, our train and rail workers and tram workers are safe. That pretty much goes without saying. I would like to congratulate the Minister for Public Transport and the Minister for Transport Infrastructure, who spoke very well before, on the significant work that has been done on our rail network, from our level crossing removals to our fantastic and visionary Suburban Rail Loop—and I will get back to that; I am a bit of a fan boy. So for the nuts and bolts of this bill, the objectives of this bill are to reduce administrative complexity and eliminate fragmentation of regulatory responsibility between Transport Safety Victoria (TSV) and the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator; to eliminate duplication of administrative systems and enable cost savings to be progressively realised—so we are cutting red tape, which should get some general consent, I would have thought, as it sounds like a good idea; and to enable the final stage of regulatory harmonisation benefits to be delivered to industry stakeholders, following the establishment of the national rail safety regulator in 2012. So we are all in for harmonisation around here. Whilst this bill moves the safety regulation of our network to the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator, I know that our government will continue to also prioritise the safety of our network, as can be seen on projects like our very, very popular level crossing removal program, which again I will come back to because that is a cracker. The member for Ringwood is waiting with bated breath there, and I appreciate his patience on this exciting diatribe that I am giving you all! The bill will conclude those processes, as I said. The intergovernmental agreement signed by COAG in 2011 established this national scheme of rail safety regulation, and in 2014 the Victorian government made the move to enter our heavy rail operations into the national scheme. Now, in 2019, we are making the full transition of all our Victorian railways. Joining this national scheme of rail safety regulation will bring our state’s safety regulation practices into line with those of the nation, and this will be handled out of South Australia, as others have mentioned. Removing any convolution, this amendment means that the national rail safety regulator will take over full responsibility from TSV. This will see the end to our duplicated administrative systems, as I said, cut red tape and generally be a good idea. For the plethora of exciting rail projects we have started and planned it is important that here in Victoria we have the best regulators of rail safety guiding us and our practices. I notice that the staff that currently work for TSV will continue their great work and use those skills that we have obviously benefited from by now working for the office of the national regulator. So the rail projects that we are talking about include the Metro Tunnel—what a fantastic idea that is, and we are going to take a whole heap out of the city loop, which is just going to be better for everyone and move more people more often—the regional rail revival and the Melbourne Airport rail. And a bit of a shout-out to my daughter’s piano teacher about this. When I spoke to her in October last year she

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3159 said, ‘Oh, yeah, that’s right, there’s an election coming up, because I’ve heard people talking about airport rail’. Dot, if you are listening, I can happily tell you that that thought process will have to stop fairly soon because we will have built it, and then we will not be able to talk about it anymore because it will be done. And it will be the Andrews Labor government that gets that done. I reckon Dot would be pretty happy with that news. There is Sunbury rail upgrade; the member for Sunbury has left the room, but I am sure he is pretty happy about that one. There is fast rail to Geelong; we have got some Geelong members—Bellarine, South Barwon, Lara—and they are going to be excited. And last but certainly not least there is the Suburban Rail Loop, of which I said I am a little bit of a fan boy, and unashamedly so. We had the Premier at Monash University last week announcing the preferred interchange stations, and lo and behold, Glen Waverley is one of them. They had this map on an easel. It was so exciting. I almost felt like grabbing an armchair, sitting down with a bag of popcorn and just staring at it for 90 minutes. That is how encouraging it is. Ms Spence interjected. Mr FREGON: A copy! Well, I could take it home. I could do that. That is a great idea. I will have to get one of those. So a Suburban Rail Loop will drastically change Melbourne as we know it, especially for those of us in the east. We will be connecting all of our hospitals, all of our unis. Just the idea that the hospitality and business sectors in Glen Waverley, which will grow and grow and grow as a result of this, will be connected to Monash Uni, Deakin University, La Trobe University, the hospitals at Heidelberg and Monash, which is going to have a brand-new emergency department— as we said, we are working on that—is very exciting stuff. We, the Andrews Labor government, understand and respect the need to have the best possible safety regulator body in control as we push ahead with our forward-thinking and visionary plans for Victoria’s railway system, from fast rail to all of the other things that I have talked about—lots of things. But do not forget jobs, because in all of these projects there are jobs. As a parent, you want to know that your kids are going to have jobs when they grow up, because you want them to be hopefully more prosperous than you are. And the way we do that is through jobs. We had some regional members talking about some of their thoughts, but we have a regional unemployment rate of 3.7 per cent. The economy is doing well and jobs are being created, and that is a fantastic thing that we should be very happy about and proud of. When this national law was initially introduced the host, South Australia, at the time did not have a privacy act, and so there were some mechanisms in the original bill that meant it relied on our Victorian privacy law. I think in April 2018 nationally we adopted the national privacy law, so part of the minutiae of this bill is to remove the reference to the Victorian Privacy Act 1988, as it is no longer relevant. One thing I have not mentioned—and I have got a little under 2 minutes, so let us throw this in there— is level crossing removals. You cannot tell me—and nobody would try to, I imagine—that by removing level crossings we are not affecting the safety of our rail network, because we are. If you take out the possibility of a person or a car coming anywhere near a train, obviously it is safer. What this government did when it came in four years ago is it said it was going to get rid of—I think 20 was the original thought, wasn’t it? Well, we smashed that; we did 28. We have done 29 now, and we are going to do 75 level crossings by 2025. In 2016 on the Glen Waverley line we saw the Burke Road level crossing removed and Gardiner station put under there. And I know, for myself, that when I used it at the time it was much better, much quicker, driving around Burke Road. It was so much easier. Mr Halse interjected. Mr FREGON: We should. We’ll go and get coffee or something. Let us not forget though that the biggest excitement on the Glen Waverley line as far as the level crossings go is about the removal of the Toorak Road level crossing, and I know the member for Hawthorn is very excited about it. I am

BILLS 3160 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 too, because that intersection has been the bane of a lot of people’s lives for many a time, and we are going to get rid of it. This is all to do with the safety of our rail network and connecting our state to a national plan. There is no doubt in my mind about the benefits of improving the safety of our rail network. The Andrews Labor government is getting stuff done safely and on time, and I commend the bill to the house. Ms SHEED (Shepparton) (15:43): I am pleased to make a contribution on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019 currently before the house. It appears that there is very little controversy about this bill. It is aligning the regulatory responsibilities of Transport Safety Victoria and the federal Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator in a way that is prudent and that the government has decided finally to do, Victoria being one of the last to come to this position and to hand over that responsibility to the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator. Rail safety is obviously a really important issue, and we have seen some significant tragedies over a long period, really. The two that spring to mind are the Southern Aurora accident near Violet Town and of course the Kerang one more recently. That train crash, when a truck ran into a passenger train, was a devastating event, and they always are. Rail incidents where you have got so many people in a constrained space in carriages is always shocking. I often remember that I was at home packing on the day of the Granville train disaster, and as the news rolled out you just had that awful feeling of something very big and very tragic having happened. There is a sense in which you get on a train, you do not really think about safety. When you are behind the wheel of a car, you are very conscious about a whole range of things because you are in control, you are doing the driving, you are responsible. You hand all of that over when you get on a train and yet the need for government to ensure that trains are truly safe is a huge responsibility, and fortunately in this country we have only had few terrible incidents and we want it to stay that way. Much of the work that gets done is often behind the scenes. I know in my electorate people often complain about the fact that they will show up to the station to get a train and there is a bus waiting, and very often the reason for that is because necessary works are being done on the tracks somewhere between Shepparton and Seymour or Seymour and Melbourne that are required to ensure ongoing safety. People love to talk about trains—I know I do. I got elected on the back of a short campaign in 2014, and one of the major platforms that I had was to improve passenger rail services for Shepparton— faster, better and more of them. It was a long, hard campaign, but I am very pleased to say that by 2018 much of what we had asked for was funded. I have often travelled on the train between Shepparton and Melbourne, and as the train stops at a particular railway station you will be advised to make sure that you move to the carriage at the front because the platforms are simply not long enough for the train and you do not want to step out on to the ground where there is no platform. You would sustain a serious injury. I recall back in 2015 we had a demonstration where people from my community dressed in their pyjamas and got on the 6.30 am train from Shepparton all the way to Southern Cross. They marched up Bourke Street to the steps of Parliament, where we met with the Minister for Public Transport to make the point about, one, the lack of services; and two, how slow they were, how early you had to get up and even if you got up that early and got on a train you were not going to make it to Melbourne in time for any sort of 9 o’clock appointment. So there were a number of points that we sought to make, and over the ensuing years and with the strong advocacy coming out of our community we convinced the government that Shepparton did need better services. I am pleased to say we have now got a fifth service running every day. We have got many more bus services connecting us between Shepparton and Seymour, where there are 20 trains a day, and Seymour even has a few VLocity trains from time to time on it. It is still a pretty second-rate service in that the trains that we have between Shepparton and Seymour are the very old classic fleet. Once upon a time they would probably have been thought of as just fabulous trains, but 50 or 60 years later they are slow, they rattle around, they are really not what anyone else across the state experiences,

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3161 except I think those on the Warrnambool line and perhaps the Bairnsdale line. So we see when we stop at Southern Cross station the new trains that are going to Geelong, to Bendigo, to Ballarat—the VLocity trains that are new and modern, they have quiet carriages, they have free wi-fi—and we look longingly at those. The situation is that there is something like $356 million that has been allocated by the government to invest in our rail upgrades, and that will include the additional services we have. There is already the stabling at Shepparton station that enables an extra train, the fifth service, to stay overnight and be secure. There is a lot more work to be done and this includes signalling, which I understand to be a very expensive part of any upgrade of rail; lengthening the platforms, as I have mentioned; track work; and something like 58 level crossings just between Shepparton and Seymour. Now, a lot of those are cattle/sheep crossings. Some of them are on farms and some of them are on side roads, so they all present challenges and they will all have to be dealt with. Some of them will have to be maintained. Some of them will need boom gates on them when they are on more significant roads. But it is all those sorts of things which slow our trains down. So whenever the train comes towards any level crossing such as that, it has to slow down very significantly. There are very few parts of the state where the capacity of a VLocity train is actually able to be demonstrated, and I am told there is some area between Melbourne and Bendigo where a VLocity train can actually reach 160 kilometres an hour just for a little while. So we have a lot of challenges just in our landscape and in the way our countryside was developed in terms of roads, level crossings and the like that really stand in the way of getting the speeds that even our existing trains are capable of. Again, all that slowing down is part of the issue around safety. It is not only the safety of the people who may be in vehicles or moving animals or whatever on the ground, it is also about the fact that many of the train lines are old, the trains themselves are old, and they have to be at constrained speeds to run. So it really impacts on the regional services that we have. I think we look to a future when rail will be very significantly different, and for those who have travelled overseas we have seen what the future can hold in terms of speeds, in terms of trains that are just outstanding in their design and capacity, and we hope that one day we will get those. It would transform regional Australia to have those sorts of trains available to us because we are seeing a situation where populations are living in metropolitan areas. Many of our regional areas are losing population. This is a real challenge, and we hear people talk about decentralisation at great length, but little is being done to turn that around. Every election cycle we hear grand plans for fast rail services, but none of them have eventuated. Now, having the capacity to do that would be amazing. A fast train between Melbourne and Shepparton, for instance, along with the regular commuter service which you always have to have would transform Shepparton in terms of moving population there, people being able to commute from there, developing all the services within that town, and of course it takes pressure off your metropolitan areas. That is something that I think governments are very conscious of, but they do not how to persuade people to go there. People will not go to regional areas, and it is so difficult to recruit people to those areas unless they know that the education of their children will be well taken care of and that health services will be available and that their connectivity will be good. So these are all things that stand out about rail in regional Victoria. Mr PEARSON (Essendon) (15:53): I am delighted on this glorious Tuesday afternoon, right in the first week of spring, to speak on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. While I certainly have a spring in my step on this glorious day, I must comment on the rather desultory and lamentable contribution by the lead Opposition spokesperson, the member for Euroa. It really was quite a torturous contribution that the member made, and I say that because the member sought to raise and in fact has moved a reasoned amendment. I had thought reasoned amendments were a rarity in parliamentary procedure. I do like to think of myself as someone who pays attention

BILLS 3162 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 to these things, and if you look at the 58th Parliament, reasoned amendments were a rarity, but they certainly seem to be becoming more of a regular feature of the tactics of those opposite. I find it curious that you would move a reasoned amendment in relation to an issue like rail safety. For the benefit of new members, a reasoned amendment effectively says, ‘We think the government’s got it wrong. We think that the government needs to go back to the drawing board. We think that the government needs to re-present this bill to the house’. Now, I would have thought on an issue like rail safety and in trying to bring forward a level of harmonisation on an issue that relates to people’s lives, that that would be beyond parliamentary tactics. The opposition certainly might take exception to aspects or elements of the bill. It is certainly within their rights to say, ‘Look, we have got some questions about this bill’. That is absolutely the prerogative of those opposite to do that. Indeed that it is an important feature of our Parliament. But to haphazardly throw out a reasoned amendment on the issue of rail safety I find quite curious. I would have thought something like this really does deserve very careful consideration and to be taken quite seriously. This is particularly important when you relate to the fact that the member specifically talks about:

… the sale, long-term lease or surrender of the ownership of rail or tram track assets in Victoria, including transfer to other jurisdictions. I find this particularly curious. For the life of me I do not know why the member sought to insert these words in this reasoned amendment, because on this side of the house we have invested heavily in rail infrastructure. We have had absolutely no plans and we have committed no deeds, moreover, in relation to these matters. It was the former Kennett government that closed rail lines extensively in their time of office, aided and abetted by the National Party. It was the former Kennett government that had the former long-term lease to Freight Australia for the rail track network, which was run into the ground by the operator because effectively the cost of maintaining that asset was quite high and the revenue derived from moving freight—either vehicle or commercial freight—could not justify that investment. That led to the asset being surrendered and taken over by the state government. Moreover, we are coming up to the 20th anniversary of the election of the Bracks government. I recall Steve’s last press conference as Premier in July 2007. He was asked, ‘What do you think your proudest memory will be as the Premier of this great state?’. He said very clearly that it was regional rail. Bear in mind that regional rail was a promise that we took to the 1999 election—to build fast rail to Ballarat, Bendigo, Geelong and the Latrobe Valley, and that we would look at making those investments to enable fast rail to become a reality. If you look at the passage of time, you will see that those communities have grown, prospered and flourished as a consequence of having a good, reliable public transport offering. So for the member for Euroa to come in here, to move a reasoned amendment that relates to passenger safety and to almost allege or infer that this government is looking at flogging off these assets, I find this very, very curious as well. Really, you would expect that if you found yourself in the position of being a shadow minister coming into this place, then you would be pursuing areas of endeavour and activity which would seem to indicate that you are taking a degree of seriousness to the way in which you are discharging your duties. Moving frivolous reasoned amendments when we are trying to harmonise and standardise a really important issue like rail safety I find a very, very curious form of behaviour by the member for Euroa. I listened to the member’s contribution. This government and this party that I am a very proud member of have not closed down rail lines. We have not sought to sell off rail assets. That is not something that we have done. We have not done that over the last 20 years. So to move a reasoned amendment to indicate that that is what is being proposed I find is an incredibly curious thing for the member to do. In relation to the bill itself, I think it is important that we look at having a degree of harmonisation and standardisation across the state, so I listened to the member for Bulleen’s contribution. The wonderful thing about this place is that if you stay here long enough you see all different sides and facets to members as they make their contributions, and that speech the member for Bulleen gave was

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3163 something I had not seen before in my brief time in this place. I never realised he was such a gonzo— or gunzel, I think the term is. The bill is important because it provides that level of harmonisation across jurisdictions. The member for Bulleen in his contribution talked about and lamented the proliferation of divergent rail tracks and systems which were deployed in the 19th century in Australia. He used that as a starting position to talk about the greater need for harmonisation. Indeed looking at this process now it is wonderful to see that that is coming to fruition. I believe that the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator was actually an initiative of Anthony Albanese under the Gillard government at the time. I believe that he had carriage of that in this particular instance, and I think that is very important. Again, I think it is important that we also look at trams. If you look at the trams that rocket around the metropolitan network and potentially in regional areas as well, they are very heavy vehicles moving at speed. Unfortunately in this day and age people are often distracted on the roads, listening to devices or playing on their phones or listening to music, and that can potentially cause some challenges or issues from a safety perspective. So having that appropriate regulatory environment or framework for trams is really quite important because it does enable a greater level of safety so that people in our community can walk the streets. The bill also removes multiple data privacy exceptions from the national law. Again, I have spoken at length in this place about the importance of data. Big data, better data, is great data, and finding ways in which we can harness and utilise data to affect service reform and service level efficiencies I think is really important. Particularly from the point of view of encouraging greater levels of efficiency across public transport and private usage, I think it is really important if we are looking at being in an increasingly bigger and more congested world. This bill is really important. It does not warrant the actions of the member for Euroa in terms of frivolously moving a reasoned amendment and making spurious arguments that hold no water whatsoever with this government or our party. It is really those opposite that presided over extensive sell-offs and closures of our rail network system. To that end I absolutely commend the bill to the house, and I condemn the member for Euroa for using this as an opportunity to move such a frivolous reasoned amendment. Mr HAMER (Box Hill) (16:03): I rise to speak on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. This is a contribution that I am delighted to make because as a trained engineer who previously contributed to major transport projects I know this is a bill that will address gaps and improve reliability right across the rail system. Before I make my substantive contribution I also, like the member for Essendon, wish to briefly touch on the reasoned amendment proposed by the member for Euroa. Can I just say that bringing rail ownership into this conversation is just scaremongering from those to my right. This bill does not impact on the ownership of rail lines and has no impact on the delivery of our record infrastructure program. This reasoned amendment is a stunt and a roadblock for the regulatory harmonisation of Victoria’s rail systems. As every member on this side is aware, the Andrews Labor government has a strong infrastructure agenda, especially in the transport portfolio. We are getting on with the projects that have been talked about for years, from the Melbourne Metro tunnel project to the Suburban Rail Loop and, of course, the removal of 75 dangerous and congested level crossings. These projects will transform the way that we travel around Melbourne. Indeed I believe a large part of the reason I stand here today as the member for Box Hill is due to this government’s infrastructure program. People sent us a clear message at the election: get on with these projects. And that is exactly what we are doing and it is why this bill is so important.

BILLS 3164 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Like the member for Bulleen, I would also like to take a trip down memory lane in terms of the history of rail in Australia. Rail does have a somewhat interesting history in Australia, and it created a legacy that survived long after the states decided to federate. The first railway in Australia in fact opened in 1831. It was actually a coal railway. It was probably less of a rail line and more like an elevator on tracks. Wagons of coal were rolled down a hill from the pit to the wharf and then pulled back up by a rope. The first passenger rail service opened in Melbourne in 1854 between Flinders Street and Port Melbourne, and of course the first electric tramway opened in 1889 between Box Hill and Doncaster along what is now Tram Road. The tram has long gone, but I am glad that this government’s Suburban Rail Loop will again see a much-needed rail connection between these two important centres in the eastern suburbs. In these early years there was very little thought of Australia’s national interests when it came to developing our rail systems. Indeed most lines were built privately and sought to directly compete with other rail infrastructure that was being planned or already built. Similarly, each state took a very parochial approach when it came to developing new rail lines. For this reason, and despite advice to the contrary, gauges were adopted in different colonies and indeed within colonies without reference to those of other colonies. The American writer known as Mark Twain visited Australia in the late 1890s and took the express from Sydney to Melbourne. The gauge change at Albury mystified him. In Following the Equator, his non-fiction account of his travels around the world, Twain wrote:

Now comes a singular thing: the oddest thing, the strangest thing, the most baffling and unaccountable marvel that Australasia can show. At the frontier between New South Wales and Victoria our multitude of passengers were routed out of their snug beds by lantern-light in the morning in the biting cold of a high altitude to change cars on a road that has no break in it from Sydney to Melbourne! Think of the paralysis of intellect that gave that idea birth; imagine the boulder it emerged from on some petrified legislator’s shoulders. It took more than 100 years before the gauges between Victoria and New South Wales were standardised, and it was not until 1995 that all mainland state capitals were joined by one standard gauge. The history of rail safety in this country is not that much different. While safety has been at the forefront of rail operations from the beginning, there was never a national approach. Historically rail safety regulation has been managed by seven separate regulatory authorities, which collectively involved up to 46 pieces of state, territory and commonwealth legislation. As the national rail safety regulator itself notes:

… some 160 years after that first railway rolled out, the widespread social and economic benefits of a national approach to rail safety in this country were beginning to be discussed in earnest. We had been a federation for almost 100 years and we had almost completed a standard gauge connection to each mainland state capital, yet it was only then that we began the conversation on national rail safety in earnest. In 1993 the Australian Transport Council endorsed a report titled A National Approach to Rail Safety Regulation. The report flagged an intergovernmental agreement to establish nationally consistent regulation, which was subsequently signed in 1996. A decade later, in 2006, the National Transport Commission Act 2003 was amended to make provision for nationally consistent rail safety legislation while still providing for state-based rail safety laws. Finally, in June 2009, as part of the government’s seamless national economy agenda COAG agreed to national transport regulation reforms, including the establishment of a national rail safety law and national rail safety regulator. The Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator (ONRSR) was established by commonwealth legislation in July 2012, and that office commenced operations in January 2013, with Victoria entering the national scheme in 2014 through the enactment of the Rail Safety National Law Application Act 2013. This act brought us into the national scheme; however at

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3165 the time there were some concerns about the capability of the then unproven national regulator. That is why at the time the act applied to most heavy rail operations in Victoria and to some tourist and heritage railway operators, but did not apply to trams and light rail operations and seven tourist and heritage railways. Now, after a number of years of operation, it is appropriate to complete the transition of the regulation of all Victorian railways to the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator so that the safety of all rail infrastructure in this state, rolling stock operations and rail safety work in Victoria is regulated under the national scheme, and that is what this bill seeks to do. In particular, this bill transitions Victoria’s rail safety regulatory service delivery arrangements to a direct service delivery model under the regime. It also removes the regulation of trams and remaining tourist and heritage railways and includes those within the ambit of the national law. By bringing those operators into the national scheme we are ensuring consistency across all operators and in turn increasing safety. This process has taken some time because it is important to get it right in terms of rail safety. In striving for efficiency it is important that our long record of safety in the rail industry is maintained, not only in Victoria but right across Australia. Confidence in that safety record is vital to continued reliance on the rail network. I am pleased that we have taken this cautious approach. We can accept the desirability of a national regulatory framework without necessarily having to compromise our high standards of safety, and asking the ONRSR to effectively prove that it is capable of doing the job we are now asking it to do will no doubt give all stakeholders greater confidence in our rail system. This matter was the subject of a thorough and comprehensive independent review. I have taken the time to look at this review, and it is a well-researched and high-quality publication. It gives me the confidence that we are getting it right with the passage of this bill. The conclusions of the review should give us all the confidence that the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator has the ability and capacity to deliver the safety standards that we have come to expect. I agree with the minister, who noted in her second-reading contribution that we expect the national regulator to deliver on its promises. It is important to get it right in this space. The bill is fairly technical and in some ways almost routine, but that does not detract from its importance to rail safety in this state. That is because our reputation as world leaders for safety in transport is important to continue confidence in and reliance upon the rail network, and indeed the broader transport network. I would like to thank the stakeholders at all levels for their contribution to this bill. It is hard work with high stakes. The work is evident in this bill, and I thank them for it. As we continue to invest in major rail projects, every Victorian can have confidence in the integrity and capability of the Office of the National Safety Regulator to deliver the very level of safety standards that have become the norm in this country. I thank the minister for bringing this bill to the house and I commend the bill to the house. Ms GREEN (Yan Yean) (16:13): It gives me great pleasure to join the debate on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019 before the house and to immediately follow the member for Box Hill. I really enjoy listening to the very well thought through contributions of the member for Box Hill, as one of the few engineers or maybe the only engineer in this place— Mr Hamer interjected. Ms GREEN: He has just said he is the only one—and I know he has strong experience and a very deep passion for transport. He is to be commended on the informed contribution he made. Sadly we have not had completely informed contributions on this bill. In relation to the contribution of the lead speaker for the opposition, I think the Minister for Transport Infrastructure and Leader of the House certainly summed it up when she said that when you do not have anything to say, you will just completely oppose. It really abrogates any responsibility to move the reasoned amendment that is

BILLS 3166 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 before the house and I state my opposition to it. It was a very lazy effort on behalf of the member for Euroa to come up with merely a reasoned amendment along those lines. I want to commend the work of departmental officers that has gone into this bill, and particularly the review of rail safety regulations in Victoria undertaken by Carolyn Walsh. That is the difference between this side and the other in that we do take a very well thought out approach. I note that the member for South-West Coast is at the table. In her contribution she paid credit to West Coast Railway under their privatised regime. Ms Britnell interjected. Ms GREEN: You had your chance, member for South-West Coast, and you were heard in silence. I would hope you would pay me the same courtesy. As the minister said, I do know a lot about the south-west of Victoria in that I grew up in Warrnambool. I know that it was a deep disappointment that the then member for Warrnambool, John McGrath, did not take a stand against the privatisation of that service. He took the 30 pieces of silver, as so many National Party members do, to drive around in that white car rather than stand up for his community. I would contrast that with the then member for Murray Valley, Ken Jasper, who absolutely put it on the line and went toe to toe with Jeff Kennett and said, ‘You will not privatise the services in my electorate’. I think that is a very great measure of a good member of Parliament, that they will actually stand up to their leader. Unlike the— Ms Ryan interjected. Ms GREEN: Member for Euroa, you are out of your place. You were heard in silence, so pay me the same courtesy you were given. If you listen, you might actually hear some of the history of the way that Ken Jasper, the member for Murray Valley, did stand up for the rail lines of the north-east. As the minister said, the member for Euroa certainly did have a front row seat as a spin doctor for the Baillieu government. I think some people have said they made a decision not to order rolling stock for regional Victoria, but I think it is actually worse than that. I think they forgot. The member for South- West Coast and the member for Euroa have criticised the progress of the rail system and rail services across this state and say, ‘Don’t spend money in Melbourne’, but spending money on the metropolitan network does actually connect regional lines and improve the service reliability and the speed of travel. The member for South-West Coast points out that it is now taking 1 hour longer for that Warrnambool to Melbourne trip. Imagine if the party that she represents and her predecessor, the then member for South-West Coast, Denis Napthine, had given a toss for that line, they would not have been part of a government under the Kennett government that privatised that line. As a minister Denis Napthine sat there waiting for Premier Baillieu to fall over and then said, ‘Here I am, here to save the world’. I recall just before he retired he was saying that there were the worst— Ms Ryan: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, I think perhaps the member for Yan Yean has strayed slightly from the topic of rail safety. I wonder if you might draw her back to speaking on the bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: There has been some wideranging discussion on this bill from both sides of the house, but I do ask the member for Yan Yean to consider the bill. Ms GREEN: What you invest in rail systems is completely germane to safety and whether or not you cut it or whether or not you sell it off to others. Those on this side have always been about investing in our system. For those who actually want to do some numbers, if you look at the amount of infrastructure, not just this year but over the five years moving forward, this state is investing more in infrastructure than the federal government is investing across this great land. I know that an earlier speaker, the member for South-West Coast, mentioned Dan Tehan securing some investment for our regional rail services. Yes, he was supportive. But it was actually then minister Darren Chester who

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3167 secured that funding. I had a conversation with Darren Chester at Tim Fischer’s funeral in the last sitting week when I was pleased to represent the government. We had an absolute rail fan, par excellence, in the late great Tim Fischer. I was saying to Darren Chester that I really wished that he would come back into that portfolio at a federal level because what we had when he was the federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport were two regional MPs, one from Labor, one from the coalition, that actually negotiated that agreement for our state. I would hope those on the coalition benches would say to their friends in Canberra, ‘We want more of this in Victoria. We want some matching investment’. I am pleased to see that we seem to have a desire from Prime Minister Morrison to cooperate with the Premier, and I would really hope that this will occur, particularly on public transport. I did want to refer to the scope of the application of the legislation in that it provides for trams and tourist and heritage railways to be regulated by the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator. I must say that I did enjoy the contribution of the member for Bulleen, who outed himself as a gunzel. I would say that I am a bit of a gunzel myself. I grew up in a railway family—on both sides, Mum and Dad. It was really sad that the member for Bulleen when he was the Minister for Planning did not actually ensure that there was more investment in rail in a metropolitan way and in a rural way. Maybe he is revisiting that experience. But he did talk about the importance for tourism, trams and heritage railways. I would like to give a shout-out to a constituent of mine, Lachlan Campbell, who has been a gunzel all his life. He volunteered as a kid with his dad, David, who is a train driver on V/Line out at Puffing Billy. Now Lachlan has gone to university and is the rail safety officer there. It will be people like him that are going to benefit through working through the regime. Finally, I just had the privilege of meeting with Northern Grampians shire and all the councillors there. It is great that they come down and advocate to government and talk in a really productive way about the things we can do together. I did want to thank Cr Merrilee Reid, who is a small business owner in St Arnaud. She said, ‘The best thing that you’ve done—please tell the Minister for Transport Infrastructure—are the improvements in regional public transport, and we’re really noticing it’. I commend the bill to the house. Mr NORTHE (Morwell) (16:23): I rise to speak on the Rail Safety Legislation Amendment (National Services Delivery and Related Reforms) Bill 2019. This bill seeks to do a number of things, including reducing the administrative complexity and eliminate fragmentation of regulatory responsibility between TSV, Transport Safety Victoria, and the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator. It also seeks to eliminate the application of administrative systems and enable cost savings to be progressively realised. It enables the final stage of regulatory harmonisation benefits to be delivered to industry stakeholders following the establishment of the national rail safety regulator. There are a few keywords in the objectives of the bill that would certainly raise the eyebrows of commuters in the Gippsland region. When you talk about complexity, fragmentation and duplication, these are certainly at the forefront of the minds of many commuters in the Gippsland region. It has been well known, and certainly something that I and many other members of the Gippsland region have raised in this chamber before on behalf of our constituents, the service infrastructure and fragmentation of the services that Gippsland commuters continually have to contend with. And might I say, I understand that at the moment there is certainly some infrastructure investment between the state and federal governments and collaboration between both on investment in undertaking works on the Gippsland line. That is welcome to a degree. However, the long-term benefits to commuters in the Gippsland region are still really unknown, and that is of some concern. By way of background, Gippsland commuters, particularly over these last three to four years, have had to endure constant delays, disruptions and replacement services on an ongoing basis. To be fair, the minister and the government have recognised this, and on occasions when there have been those replacement services there has been free travel offered to commuters. That in itself, as I say, is a recognition of some of the disruption to those people. But people who do rely on the rail services are continually experiencing these issues. Whether one is working in town for the day and not able to

BILLS 3168 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 attend their work or certainly the number of hours of work that they should, it has been a regular issue raised to my office. On many occasions some of these workers work on a casual basis, and when they are trying to catch a train into Melbourne or the outer suburbs and their service is not running or delayed, when you are a casual worker obviously that means you miss out on pay for the day. But more than that, there are a number of commuters from our region who rely on the train service to get to medical appointments and to get to other destinations, to try and get to the airport and to visit friends. When that is disrupted on a continual basis it has an impact. Suffice it to say, the quality of our rail services in Gippsland is probably the biggest issue that comes through my office on a regular basis. As I say, there are Gippsland line upgrade works that are soon to commence, which do undertake some infrastructure upgrades that hopefully will help the reliability of services going forward. There is the Avon River bridge upgrade in Stratford, which will be important for those commuters further east to Bairnsdale and beyond. It will help that. There are station upgrades planned for Traralgon and Morwell, and that is terrific. There is the Bunyip-Longwarry duplication which is proposed, and that will help to some degree. But my biggest concern is on the basis that Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo have dedicated lines. They seem to have significant financial contributions ongoing to improve their rail services, but the same is not said for Gippsland commuters or Gippsland rail services. Our problem is that when the Gippsland line hits the metropolitan network, V/Line trains for Gippsland seem to be stuck at the back of the queue. If there is going to be a delay, it always seems to occur with Gippsland commuters. In the early 2000s the then Premier John Brumby promised that we would have faster rail services in the Latrobe Valley. At that time Premier Brumby spoke about services from Traralgon to Melbourne in 90 minutes. Despite much infrastructure being undertaken, that was never realised. In reality most of the services these days, particularly around peak times, are actually two and half hours. So we have gone from a proposal in the early 2000s of one hour and a half when in reality we are now two and half hours. The other issue from my perspective is that whilst Metro are penalised or incentivised for getting their metropolitan services to the destinations on time, the poor V/Line trains coming from Gippsland get shoved to the back of the queue, and there is no regard at all for whether they are on time or not. I have put a proposal previously to various ministers to say, ‘If Metro are going to be incentivised or penalised for their services on the Metro line, why can’t the same apply to V/Line trains coming from Gippsland?’. We just seem to be the poor cousin each time this occurs. There has been much discussion of course about dedicated lines, and as I have mentioned previously, Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo have dedicated lines into Melbourne. Billions of dollars were invested in 2009 on the regional rail link—nothing for Gippsland. So again, despite a massive uptake of patronage, we still do not have that dedicated line. And if it is too hard or too costly, surely we can explore the options of a series of dedicated lines passing loops on the Metro network to try and get better services and get our commuters to their destinations sooner rather than later. There have been a number of proposals around fast rail, and whether they eventuate remains to be seen. My concern somewhat, going back to the Gippsland line upgrade, is that we are seeing works on the line, but I just cannot see anywhere where travel times will be reduced for Gippsland commuters. You have got to feel sorry for the poor V/Line staff who continually have to deal with commuters who are irate, upset and frustrated at the continual replacement services or disruptions and delays that happen on a continual basis. One other thing that is quite grating for locals when we are talking about rail services and transport infrastructure is actually the cost of fares for Gippsland commuters. Again, this is an issue that I have raised in this place. The common saying amongst Gippsland communities is, ‘We actually pay more to travel less distance on inferior services’. I think that encapsulates it all, because if you are a senior, for example, and you live in Traralgon, on weekends you cannot even get from Traralgon to Moe for free, but if you live in Pakenham and you are an eligible senior you can actually travel into Melbourne and return all weekend for free. How that is fair is just beyond me. It is illogical, and again I think if we are having a standardised system and trying to remove some fragmentation and complexities, then

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3169 what we really need to do is make sure that we have also got a fair system for commuters. From my perspective, communities in the Latrobe Valley are not getting a fair deal. They are paying much more to travel less distance and, as I say, on services that are continually disrupted, delayed and replaced on an ongoing basis. Just finally, the bill also talks about tourists and tourist trains and railways. I certainly want to endorse the Walhalla community for the railway that they have. It is a very popular destination. They have got plans to grow and expand and really put Walhalla and district on the map even further over the coming years. It is very popular destination, and hopefully more and more people will get on board—pardon the pun—to Walhalla and other such tourist destinations that have railways at their disposal. Mr EREN (Lara) (16:33): I am delighted to be able to speak on this very important legislation before the house. I have heard a number of my colleagues on this side of the house make very good sense about why this legislation is needed going forward—not so much sense from that side, which is typical of them. I think what they are really jealous about and worried about is the cooperation that now exists between the state government and the federal government. This reasoned amendment does not make sense. We on this side of the house are not interested in privatising rail services, but they were and they are. So I think this is just smoke and mirrors in relation to what they are proposing. It is just for the sake of opposing and making themselves relevant potentially in these reasoned amendments that they are putting up before the house. But as I have indicated, there is a different level of communication and cooperation between the state government and the federal government. That is not rare; it happens on occasions, but on this occasion, seeing some of the decisions of the federal government, I think they want to be popular like we are. I think that is why there is a level of cooperation with the federal government. I think they have shunned the opposition. They are now refusing, probably, to speak to the opposition because there is no value in the opposition in terms of popularity. That is why we have cooperation on the Monash and on rail services and other investments that the federal government are making, because they understand the importance of Victoria. They understand the importance of Victoria in the sense that it is a powerhouse economically. It is the strongest economy in the nation, and the population is growing faster than anywhere else. So they put two and two together and say, ‘I think we’d better stick with the state government. They know what they’re doing. They’ve got a huge infrastructure agenda’. Mr Walsh interjected. Mr EREN: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition can laugh, but it is true—he knows it. The federal government is leaving them out of announcements. That is what is happening at the moment. We are making a high level of investment not only into rail but into road and other infrastructure that is needed across the state, and over the next decade our budget will be just as big as the federal government’s budget in terms of infrastructure spend. I am pleased to say that when you combine the regional fast rail link to Geelong, Bendigo and Ballarat and also Metro rail, there are literally billions of dollars that will be invested into our rail services. We need to be mindful that we need a streamlined process in the regulation of the rail system. That is why we are cooperating with the federal government, the national body, in relation to this very important issue. Another point I would like to make is that in Geelong, Bendigo, Ballarat and other regions—and I know the member for Gippsland East mentioned before some of the investments that need to be made into that part of the world as well—we are making record investments into services which connect people. We understand the importance of tourism. As the former Minister for Tourism and Major Events, I know Puffing Billy is obviously one of those iconic services that we have to attract tourists to the state not only from other states and territories but indeed internationally—to have people come and visit our state.

BILLS 3170 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

So it is not just about connecting Victorians to other parts of the state and other states but it is also about tourists who visit this wonderful state and making sure that they have the simplest form of transport to get them around our wonderful state. We have got to do that in a reasonably safe manner and fashion to ensure they come back and spend their valuable dollars in our state. Another very important part of rail services is freight. Freight services obviously keep the state moving. We cannot transport some of the goods around the state just by road alone. Trucks do a great job, but we need the help and assistance of the rail networks to get our freight around the state and indeed interstate—for some of the exports that we do and some of the imports that we make that we require to keep our population strong in terms of our economy. This legislation will make sure that we reduce the administrative costs and complexity and eliminate the fragmentation of regulatory responsibility between Transport Safety Victoria and the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator (ONRSR), and obviously we do not like duplication. This will go a long way to ensuring that there are cost savings to be progressively realised and enabling the final stage of regulatory harmonisation benefits to be delivered to the industry’s stakeholders following the establishment, as we know and as other members have mentioned, of the national rail safety regulator in 2012. It took us a couple of years—of course they have been operating since May of 2014—and we have watched them carefully because we wanted to make sure before handing over any of these responsibilities to another body that they were up to it. We are comfortable as a state now to do the handover. We understand the complexities of it and the duplication that is occurring, which is costing additional services and money, and so we are at the point now of reaching that agreement. That is what this bill is about. It is about making sure that there is a smooth transition. Let us not forget there are some people in the workforce who need some comfort in relation to this transition. As I understand it, no worker will be worse off under this transition, which is important. You have got to make sure you take the people along with you when you make determinations like this which affect their lives. We on this side of the house are very good at that. We make sure that we take stakeholders with us when it comes to making decisions like we are making in relation to this bill before the house. As I have indicated, the bill will complete the national reform by transferring residual rail safety service delivery and regulatory functions from the Victorian regulator to the national regulator, and I deliberately say ‘residual’ because the national rail safety regulator has been in operation since May of 2014. At that time there was an underlying concern about moving immediately to a direct delivery model. That was a genuine concern, given the unproven record of the national regulator on the size and complexity of Melbourne’s metropolitan rail systems, and we could not risk at that time going to that transition. The adoption of a service level agreement model was chosen to provide greater confidence that effective regulatory oversight would be retained and to mitigate operational risk as the national body became established and developed its own policies, systems and processes. Since 2014 the ONRSR practices and systems have matured too, and it has been able to demonstrate itself as an efficient and effective risk-based regulator that gives due regard to state issues and is responsive to state and territory government needs and priorities. That is why, as I will indicate in the short time remaining, this transformation of the rail network system that we are undergoing in relation to Metro rail and in relation to the fast rail to Geelong particularly—I am from Geelong, so I mention Geelong—and the connection to the airport constitutes such important infrastructure improvements that we will be making for the future of the state and this country. It is worth billions of dollars. I know that when the original rail link was proceeding about a decade ago that was the largest expenditure on rail infrastructure in the nation, which cost roughly around $5 billion.

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3171

We will spend tens of billions of dollars on our rail infrastructure in the next decade, and that is a lot of money. It is a lot of risk, so we need to have regulations in place to make sure that it is safe. That is why this side of the house categorically rejects the muddying of the waters by the opposition through their reasoned amendment in relation to this important bill before the house. It is unreasonable actually—it is not reasoned at all. This is nothing but scaremongering and cheap politics. They have just got to get over the fact that this state government is into a cooperation period with the federal government. If they are jealous about this cooperation, that is not our problem. The federal government has realised the popularity of the state government, so they want to cooperate. I do not blame them— why would you cooperate with an opposition that does not exist? Without further ado, I wish the bill a speedy passage in this house and I wish it a speedy passage in the next house. Ms WILLIAMS (Dandenong—Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, Minister for Women, Minister for Youth) (16:43): I move: That the debate be now adjourned. Motion agreed to and debate adjourned. Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day. PRIMARY INDUSTRIES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2019 Second reading Debate resumed on motion of Ms ALLAN: That this bill be now read a second time. Mr WALSH (Murray Plains) (16:44): I rise to make the lead contribution on behalf of the Liberal and National parties on the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019. All those who have actually read the bill would realise that this is basically the same bill that was debated in this house back in 2017, the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2017. It is an omnibus bill that amends quite a large number of pieces of legislation. In some ways I feel like saying: can I just have my speech from that time incorporated, because I will probably say a lot of the same things, because it is exactly the same bill. But I will work through the bill systematically by discussing those pieces of legislation that are amended by this bill. The first piece of legislation repealed by this bill is the Broiler Chicken Industry Act 1978. When I spoke about this two years ago I particularly mentioned a gentleman called Wally Shaw, who is a former president of the Victorian Farmers Federation. He actually preceded me as president of the Victorian Farmers Federation. He was a chicken meat grower and the president of the chicken meat industry for over 30 years here in Victoria, and he was the person that led the group to actually have that legislation, the Broiler Chicken Industry Act 1978, introduced in this Parliament so that that industry had regulation and protection. In some ways it was modelled on the Tomato Processing Industry Act 1976. I came from the tomato industry and understood that act and the systems that act gave us as tomato growers to negotiate with processors to set prices, and it did the same for the broiler industry here in Victoria once it was brought in. To get to the point where there was legislation, I know Wally, as the leader of that industry, led a number of strikes where the chicken broiler growers at the time actually refused to take day-old chickens until they could actually come to an accommodation with the chicken processors to get a decent price for those chicken birds, because at that time there was an imbalance in negotiating strength between a small number of chicken processors and a large number of broiler growers. That legislation was brought in to help correct that imbalance in negotiating position in the same way that the tomato industry legislation was brought in for the tomato industry at that particular time. That legislation was very successful for a long time, but the chicken industry negotiating committee has not met since 2001, so the legislation has

BILLS 3172 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 been sitting on the legislative books for a long time and not enacted. Currently the industry has an exemption under the ACCC act to directly negotiate between growers and processors. Through the time of that legislation I can remember it was the Public Bodies Review Committee of this Parliament that reviewed a large number of instrumentalities that were covered by legislation from the Victorian Parliament, and both the tomato industry act and the chicken meat industry act were reviewed at that particular time. The Public Bodies Review Committee held hearings which both Wally and I attended, and Bernie Dunn in the other place was part of that committee when he was in the Parliament here. Part of that report explained that there was a need for legislation like the Broiler Chicken Industry Act 1978 and the Tomato Industry Act 1975 to stop the exploitation of growers by processors, be it in the tomato or the chicken industry, so the legislation actually continued for quite a lot longer than those that were trying to get rid of it by putting submissions in to the Public Bodies Review Committee. Following on from that I can remember going out and presenting to the Industries Assistance Commission, which was a predecessor of what is now the Productivity Commission, about the benefit of having the negotiation strength of growers coming together to deal with processors. But eventually events overrode both the tomato industry and the chicken industry, and their legislation was lost. Can I put on the record again, like I did last time I spoke on this legislation, my appreciation for and acknowledgement of all the work that Wally Shaw did in making sure this legislation was there for the chicken growers. I know when I was the minister for agriculture the department actually put forward to me that perhaps as the minister for agriculture I might have liked to have repealed this piece of legislation. For the decency of the record, I will not use all the words that I used to the department. But effectively I said that there was no way known that I, as a personal friend of Wally Shaw, who had been a mentor of mine, would be the minister that repealed the legislation that he fought so hard to get. So it has sat on the statute books for quite a few more years since we were in government. The government tried again in 2017 and it did not happen. It is here again now and most likely it will be repealed in the future. It amends the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994. This is about the ability of the department effectively to recover costs. I know this is issued for the control of pest animals or pest weeds. One of the challenges the department has is that if they do issue an order and the farmer does not comply and they then send in a contractor to control the pest animals or the pest weeds, they then have to have a civil action to recover that money from that particular landholder, which is a long, convoluted and expensive process. So this simplifies the way they can recover costs. I do note in talking about that particular issue that if you look at the output figures in the budget for the department over the last few years the number of property inspections the department has been doing is reducing. One of the concerns that farmers have is that there is not enough compliance work done by the department on those recalcitrant neighbours who do not control their pest animals or do not control their pest weeds. I know I have met with a number of Landcare groups over the years that do a lot of good work in their community controlling whatever particular pest weed or pest animal is in that community, but if there are one or two that do not do it, then the weed seeds blow around the district and reinfest properties, or if it is rabbits or foxes, then they breed up and invade other properties. So hopefully these extra powers, where the department will be able to recover costs for clean-up notices for pest plants or pest animals, might encourage them to actually go out and do more compliance checks and particularly issue orders whereby pest animals and pest plants are controlled into the future. The next piece of legislation that this omnibus bill amends is the Dairy Act 2000. What this change does is actually bring camel milk into being regulated under Dairy Food Safety Victoria. The last time I spoke about this, at that stage I had two camel dairies in my electorate, and I believe there is only one functioning now. There is the camel milk company in Kyabram; Megan and Chris Williams have a camel milk dairy there. The challenge they had while waiting for this legislation to go through—it is

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3173 a pity it did not go through two years ago—was that their regulation was actually under the Local Government Act 1989, and it will not be under Dairy Food Safety Victoria until this legislation is actually passed and given royal assent. So they are not regulated by Dairy Food Safety Victoria, they are regulated by local government. When I was dealing with them at that particular time local government did not know what they needed to do to regulate a camel milk farm, which effectively left them stranded in no man’s land as to how they could get the licence to do what they wanted to do. So this legislation will simplify that into the future for those that want to run a camel dairy, where they will come under Dairy Food Safety Victoria. Effectively it makes sure that all processing of milk from animals is actually dealt with by Dairy Food Safety Victoria into the future. It is quite a challenging business to run a camel dairy. There are some unique challenges which I think I spoke about last time on this legislation as well. Having had the opportunity to visit a number of very large cow dairies and camel dairies in the Middle East, the whole concept of shedding and milking cows is something that has happened over hundreds of years, and they are very domesticated. The challenge with camels is that once the young camel is taken away it is very hard to get the milk out of the camel; you actually have to keep the young close by so that they will actually let their milk down to be milked. So there are some unique challenges, but there is a market for those that want camel milk. I know in the Middle East particularly, although it is a lot more expensive and a lot more difficult to get camel milk, the sheikhs there believe that their children should have camel milk rather than cow’s milk. I know there is a growing ethnic community in Victoria that would prefer to have camel milk to cow’s milk. So it is great that there are people taking the opportunity to supply that particular market into the future with camel milk, and this legislation will mean that they will be able to go about their business a lot more simply with the regulation under Dairy Food Safety Victoria. The other one I want to briefly speak on is amendments to the Fisheries Act 1995. The particular change here is around allowing those eight licences that are still fishing in Port Phillip Bay to be able to surrender their licences earlier and allow them to take their compensation early. That is something that they have sought. I think with the buyout of the other licences in Port Phillip these particular fishers would also like to exit the industry now, and this gives them the opportunity to do that. It also transfers the powers and functions of the fisheries Licensing Appeals Tribunal to VCAT to simplify it and bring it into line with other licensing processes here in Victoria. Given we also have legislation in this house being dealt with about the buyout of the Gippsland Lakes commercial licences, there are probably not a lot of Victorian licences left in Victoria for the Licensing Appeals Tribunal to deal with. Whether that has been a good thing over the long term or whether it has not, given that we now import most of the fish that we eat, I think it is something that we do need to think about, as to where our fish will come from in the future. The amendments that I would also like to spend a little bit of time talking about are amendments to the Game Management Authority Act 2014. In relation to that particular amendment I would like to circulate a reasoned amendment in my name. I move:

That all the words after ‘That’ be omitted and replaced with the words ‘this house refuses to read this bill a second time until the government has consulted with game hunting stakeholders about the role of the Game Management Authority in promoting responsible game hunting and proposed additional guiding principles to regulate and improve the game hunting sector’. This legislation makes some changes to the Game Management Authority, particularly around issues of the way the board functions, and it talks about how the government will set some priorities for the Game Management Authority. But the reason I am moving this reasoned amendment is that last time this legislation was dealt with in our house and it then went across to the other place, Daniel Young from the Shooters and Fishers actually moved textual amendments to this legislation in the other place. They were actually passed and that bill came back to this house, and I was actually the sponsor and reintroduced the amended bill into this house back at that particular time.

BILLS 3174 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

My understanding is that because, I assume, the government of the day did not want the legislation passed with those changes to the Game Management Authority the bill then just sat on the notice paper for over 12 months and obviously lapsed with the proroguing of the Parliament last year. What I am doing by moving this reasoned amendment is signalling to the government, to this house and to the other house—when the legislation gets there—is that in the other place we will actually be reintroducing the textual amendments that Mr Young actually proposed last time to that particular piece of legislation. So that is the reason for moving the reasoned amendment. The intent behind that is: if you look at the new Victorian Fisheries Authority, it has set out very similar intents to what we would like to see put into the Game Management Authority—that not only are they a regulator of the industry but they are actually there to promote the industry and in this case promote responsible hunting in Victoria. When we were in government we did a study of the economic benefits of hunting in Victoria, and that found that there was over $400 million worth of economic benefit from hunting in Victoria. A lot of that economic benefit went into our regional councils, and from memory the Shire of Wellington in Gippsland and the Shire of Gannawarra in the north in my electorate were the two local government areas that benefited the most from hunting. We would like to see the hunting sector promoted and grow in Victoria because there is an economic benefit for the whole state and particularly an economic benefit for regional Victoria. There are some that would like to see the hunting industry closed down. There are some who are violently opposed to duck shooting, for argument’s sake, in this state, and what I would say to those people is that it is a legal activity and it is a multigenerational pursuit where whole families go away duck shooting, camping, enjoying the great outdoors and actually creating food for themselves to eat. I would love the government in this house to actually support our reasoned amendment. I am not that optimistic to think that they will support our reasoned amendment, but I look forward to the debate in the other place. Some of the crossbenchers may have support for this legislation where those changes to the Game Management Authority might actually happen. Another piece of this legislation that I want to talk about are the changes to the Livestock Disease Control Act 1994, particularly the changes around how the money from the Cattle Compensation Fund and the Sheep and Goat Compensation Fund will be spent. At the moment the legislation specifies that they can only spend the interest from that legislation on projects or programs that benefit the industry. This changes it so that in the future capital will be able to be spent as well on projects and programs that benefit their respective industries. Currently that capital is reserved for compensation for major disease outbreaks, but this opens it up for the capital to be spent. A word of caution, I suppose: these particular changes to the Livestock Disease Control Act would be making sure that the department still does have to go to the particular committees of those funds to get the okay as to how the money is spent, but there is a degree of nervousness, I think, from some in the industry that the department may look at these funds as effectively a recurrent expenditure body that can help make up for some of the funding that is created by the shortfall from the government into these particular sectors within the departments. Although the Liberal-Nationals will not be opposing that legislation, we would like to make sure that there are very, very good guarantees that the department is not going to start to use these compensation funds that are collected from contributions from the sale of cattle and the sale of sheep or goats to actually make up for a reduction in recurrent funding to the department. The other piece of legislation I want to talk on is the amendments to the Melbourne Market Authority Act 1977. For the Melbourne Market Authority, effectively the changes here are around the amount of money that can be spent by the authority without getting ministerial approval. It lifts from $500 000 to $750 000. I suppose, in talking about the Melbourne Market Authority and the Melbourne Market, for those who have ever been involved with the Melbourne Market there has always been a fair amount of controversy around the people in the market and the rents that are charged—the costs of the rents.

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3175

I know the current incumbents out at the market are very unhappy about the automatic increases that are happening in the rents since they moved out to Epping. They are also very unhappy about the price of power and the price of refrigeration. I think if anyone wanted to get up early and go out to the Melbourne Market and walk through the stalls out there they would find that most people are pretty concerned about the costs of doing business in the market, the costs they are paying in rent and power and refrigeration and the fact that with the dominance of the supermarkets there is less produce actually going through the markets and there is more produce going direct to supermarkets. There is a real squeeze on people out there. I had the opportunity to actually attend a Fresh State ball a couple of weeks ago where they gave awards for the various stakeholders in the market. There is a real culture around the market. It is a great culture and there are great people there, but they are doing it tough with the increased costs of doing business and the reduction in throughput with produce going direct to the supermarkets. But it was very pleasing to see Lou Gazzola, who I have known for years—the Gazzola family are down on the Mornington Peninsula—receive a This Is Your Life award at that particular ball for the decades that he had actually spent at the Melbourne Market and for the work that he has done with the vegetable growers here in Victoria. It was great to see Lou get that particular recognition. The third generation of that family is now still involved in the Melbourne Market and growing vegetables here in Victoria. The other thing I would like to just mention while I am talking about the Melbourne Market is the issue of how they have tried to treat some innovation in this particular state. Steritech is a business that runs an irradiation business in Brisbane and was looking to come to Victoria. They had such an unpleasant experience—that is the most polite way I could put it—in actually dealing with the market authority; they wanted to actually set up at Melbourne Market so they could irradiate fruit that was being exported or was going interstate from a pest point of view, particularly from a fruit fly point of view. They found the Melbourne Market Authority were that unreasonable to deal with that they had to set up down the road away from the market, which means a lot of double handling of produce now out of the market if it is going to go to Steritech, be irradiated and then be taken to the airport or taken to the port to be sent out. It is just a pity that the Melbourne Market Authority could not have actually worked through the issues that Steritech had so that Steritech could have actually set up at Melbourne market. They could have actually made sure that they value-added to the produce that went there rather than pushing extra pricing onto growers that would have to take stuff from the market to Steritech and then take it to the airport or to the port. The other piece of legislation that is amended by this omnibus bill is the Meat Industry Act 1993, and this is a core part of this legislation that a lot of people are waiting to get through. There are people who were sweating on actually getting this changed when this bill was originally introduced back in 2017 but have had to wait. This is around the issue of mobile abattoirs and the opportunity for small-scale producers here in Victoria to be able to access mobile abattoirs. Chris Balazs is someone who is actually really wanting to get this legislation through and set up a mobile abattoir here in Victoria. As I said the last time I spoke on this, I had the opportunity at that time to go to a couple of SproutX presentations. SproutX is an agri-tech business incubator where those with innovation come along and do a pitch for investment to further develop their particular concept in agricultural technology. Chris actually did a presentation at one of those SproutX presentations that I went along to on his development of this particular mobile abattoir process. In the time that this legislation was resting on the notice paper prior to the election and the time taken to come back in this term of government, New South Wales has introduced legislation now that does allow mobile abattoirs, and Chris has a mobile abattoir that he is operating in southern New South Wales very successfully. It was only a couple of weeks ago that he made contact with our office asking when this legislation was finally ever going to be debated, because it has sat on the notice paper this time for a period of time as well. But this legislation will enable Chris and others like him to set up mobile abattoirs where they will go onto property and kill and butcher livestock rather than that livestock having to be carted long distances to

BILLS 3176 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 the larger abattoirs, which is particularly relevant for smaller producers who do not have a large number of stock to process. There are also changes in the Meat Industry Act 1993 around implementation of the Sustainable Hunting Action Plan. This will also enable game meat to be harvested and game meat to be processed for the hunter’s personal consumption, so if it is someone that has shot deer and wants to process that meat for their own personal use, it will not be captured by the licensing arrangements of this particular act. It is a bit like the discussion earlier about pest plants and animals. Deer in Victoria are out of control. If you talk to anyone in the High Country or now even down out of the High Country, there are deer everywhere; you are finding that the outer suburbs of Melbourne are now having issues with road accidents because of collisions with deer. There was an article in the Weekly Times only recently about a number of smaller wineries up in the Strathbogies that are having trouble with deer coming in and destroying their vines. Any way that we can find a useful purpose for deer meat will help lead to the control of deer, so this allows for the personal use of deer meat without being captured in the licensing of the Meat Industry Act. One of the things that I would like to see is that we open up the industry further to allow the use of deer carcasses into pet food. Unfortunately the current Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change and the current Minister for Agriculture do not appear to be handling well the trial of using culled kangaroos for pet food. I think it was working very, very well. That looks like it is not going to continue after October unless there is a change of heart from the government, or if it is going to continue, it is going to continue in such a way that it is going to be impractical to make it work. If you think that there are hundreds and hundreds of thousands of deer running around Victoria, they are breeding and there are more all the time, there is a lot of protein there that could be used, particularly in the pet food system, rather than having it shot and quite often just left there to feed wild dogs and foxes. If you leave that food source there for wild dogs and foxes, they are going to breed up even more and cause more trouble, more predation of not only our native fauna but also domestic animals. So these changes to the mobile abattoirs and to the personal use of deer are a step in the right direction, but we need to open that industry up more if we can into the future. The last couple of things I want to touch on in the few minutes left are changes to the Plant Biosecurity Act 2010, which is about providing additional support for the potato and viticulture industries in making sure you control two insect pests—grape phylloxera and potato cyst nematode. Those that know anything about the wine industry, the grape industry, would know that the grape industry in Victoria was nearly wiped out back in the early 1900s with phylloxera. They have now gone across to phylloxera-resistant rootstock for a lot of their grapes, but there are areas that are phylloxera-free, and this assists with the knowledge and the control of moving grape material between areas to make sure those that are phylloxera-free stay phylloxera-free, and the same with potato cyst nematode, PCN, which is a really big issue for Victorian potato growers around being able to not only export potatoes but also send potatoes interstate. Unless they have got a certificate that they are PCN free, they actually cannot send potatoes to Sydney or to Brisbane to be processed or into the ware market in those particular markets up there. The last thing to touch on is the Veterinary Practice Act 1997. This is about enabling the Veterinary Practitioners Registration Board to hear unprofessional conduct cases. It simplifies the process there and increases the maximum penalties for serious professional misconduct in the veterinary industry. The veterinary industry—not only with commercial and production animals but particularly with domestic animals, with the numbers of pet dogs and cats that we have in Victoria—is a huge industry, and this enables it to be better regulated into the future. So in finishing off can I just again draw the other side of the house’s attention to the reasoned amendment that I have moved and the further amendments we will move in the other place to make changes to the Game Management Authority to better align it with the Victorian Fisheries Authority about having the Game Management Authority not being a regulating body but also actually

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3177 promoting responsible hunting in this state, which as I said earlier not only increases the economic activity of the state but is a major benefit to a lot of the regional communities where people do actually go hunting. Whether it be duck hunting in the north, in Gannawarra and those shires, or in Wellington down in the east, or whether it be deer hunting as I spoke about, with changes to the Meat Industry Act, there are huge opportunities for sustainable hunting in this state, responsible hunting—something that I think is a great part of our community and our society—and I would hate to see the lefty crazies out of Melbourne stop those things happening in country Victoria. Ms THOMAS (Macedon) (17:13): It is my pleasure to rise today to speak on this bill. Can I say at the outset that the government will not be supporting the reasoned amendment as put by the member for Murray Plains, and it is disappointing that he would want to move an amendment that would put everything that is in this bill at risk. This is a terrific omnibus bill that speaks to a lot of important reforms for primary producers across Victoria and very important reforms in our agricultural sector, and so I am very proud, as I said, to rise and speak on this bill. It is probably a good time to note that the Labor Party now holds more seats in regional Victoria than the National Party does. I feel very proud of that and very proud to represent an electorate that still has a very strong agricultural focus, and I will talk about some of the fantastic innovations in agriculture that are happening in my electorate in my contribution today. I did want to touch on three points of the bill before us. I wanted to talk about camel’s milk, I wanted to talk about mobile abattoirs and I wanted to also talk about fishing if I have the time. This is a bill of course that includes the capacity or makes it clearer for camel milk producers to be able to sell their product and for that product to be regulated, and there is a camel milk farm in Kyabram, I note. I am yet to drink camel’s milk, I have got to say. I am the granddaughter of a dairy farmer and have grown up on full-cream dairy milk and have been very, very pleased to do so. I have got to say that I like my milk pasteurised and homogenised. I have not had camel’s milk, but I have done a little bit of reading about it and I have got to tell you this is a really great opportunity. It is a very healthy proper milk with all the benefits that we get from cow’s milk, and in fact it is three times as rich in vitamin C and it is rich in iron, unsaturated fatty acids and B vitamins. I am a great supporter of cow’s milk, and I stand here ready to become a supporter of camel milk. I think it is a great opportunity, and this is an important piece of legislation that will enable, as I said, camel milk production to continue to expand in Victoria. While I am talking about milk, can I be very clear: camel’s milk I am right behind, cow’s milk I am right behind, but almond and rice—these are is not milk. These are watery carbohydrate milk substitutes that in my book are not milk, and in fact those people who want to drink rice and almond milk would do well to have a look at the nutritional benefits of those two so-called milks. One of the things I have also discovered in doing a little bit of research for this bill today is that it is quite difficult to find information about these milk substitutes that is not put out by vested interests. But anyway, that is enough about milk. Bring on camel milk. I also of course wanted to talk about this bill and how it will enable mobile abattoirs to operate in Victoria. My electorate is home to a number of extremely innovative farmers, people who have farmed for generations as well as first-generation farmers. We have looked with some interest at Provenir, which is a business that has established and is now operating mobile abattoirs in New South Wales. The mobile abattoir industry is driven by a desire to minimise the suffering of animals. It is driven by a desire to produce, kill and dress meat as close to the farm as possible, and therefore to be very assured of the provenance and so on of that meat. Now, what I am told is that as it is currently operating, Provenir is serving kind of medium-sized farms, and I of course have a number of smaller farms in my electorate, but any change that will continue to drive and foster innovation in the agricultural sector, I think, is a welcome one. So I do welcome this bill that will enable mobile abattoirs to be established in Victoria. Now, as I have said, many producers in my electorate are at the cutting edge of innovation in agriculture, and I did want to use this time that is available to me to thank in particular the Macedon

BILLS 3178 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Ranges Agribusiness Forum, which brings together primary producers across Macedon and advocates for the interests of people farming, particularly in this peri-urban environment. But one of the things that I would say about the people that are members of the agribusiness forum is—again, I have already use this word a bit—they are innovative, they are at the cutting edge, they are very interested in restorative and regenerative farm practices, they are interested in the ethical production of food, they are interested in the food debate, they are interested in issues of food security and they are very passionate about what they do. So I would like to particularly call out and thank Noel and Lyndsay Henderson, who are at Avington farm, which is one of Australia’s premium merino sheep producers. They are the first wool-growing property to be certified under the international sheep and wool welfare program, the Responsible Wool Standard. This is a beautiful farm and I have had the privilege of being able to take the Premier there to show him this incredible merino stud. Can I also acknowledge the work of Sam White from Sidonia Beef. Sam’s family have been farming beef cattle for more than 150 years in Sidonia and what Sam is doing at the farm now—he has been farming organically since 2005—is using planned holistic grazing management for his farm, with this real emphasis on recognising the detrimental impacts that farming can have unless you take a considered decision to try and work with nature, with the environment and care for the land that cares for you. Can I also acknowledge Tamsyn Murray and Josh Murray from Josh’s Rainbow Eggs. Josh has been farming eggs for the last 10 years. He started when he was nine. I have had the pleasure of visiting this farm and it is really fantastic to go to an egg farm, I must say, where the egg producers are happy to show you the farm in its entirety because the welfare of the chickens is absolutely paramount in the way in which they produce their eggs. So these are just some of the farmers in my electorate who, as I said, are always interested in what is before this house and what this government is doing. And I might say, they are very pleased to see the work we are doing in supporting artisanal and fine-food producers through the Minister for Agriculture but also the reforms that we made to planning to make it easier for people to farm in the farm zone. In fact one of my Kyneton constituents, Claire Moore, who also happens to be the AgriFutures Rural Woman of the Year, was one of the first people to use our new, streamlined farming planning laws for her poultry farm. But might I also say that she won her award for the very interesting work that she is doing breeding disease-resistant queen bees right there in Kyneton and exporting those queen bees around the world. So this is a very good bill and I absolutely commend it to the house. I thank all of the primary producers in my electorate for their great work. Ms McLEISH (Eildon) (17:23): The Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 that we have before us now—it is a bit of a deja vu moment for me, having spoken on this exact bill in December 2017 when this bill actually passed through here and really got held up in the upper house. A number of changes that could have been made at the time the government chose not to pursue there for whatever reason, and we are now back having a look at this same bill. The bill is very wideranging and covers many areas that are particularly relevant to my electorate. I want to touch first of all on the reasoned amendment that was put forward by the Leader of The Nationals. The changes in this reasoned amendment were put forward by the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party last time, and they had some support. We would like to see those changes actually reflected. I am not very confident that the government will. As the member for Macedon said, it is unlikely to be supporting our reasoned amendment. The importance of primary industry to Victoria can never be underestimated. Our country and our state were founded on this industry, and it remains just as important today. Agriculture, fishing, meat processing, fresh food markets and hunting are a few of the areas that are touched on in this legislation. Other than just the production, we also have other legislation which is really important to maintaining

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3179 the health and strong productivity, and that is around disease and biosecurity. A couple of the acts that are being amended include the Livestock Disease Control Act 1994 and the Plant Biosecurity Act 2010. I always think it is a good thing that we look at those elements. Among many other acts being amended we have the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994, the Dairy Act 2000, the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981, the Fisheries Act 1995 and the Game Management Authority Act 2014, and I will be talking on that a little bit. I am going to start with the Dairy Act 2000. This is very much around putting measures in place for dealing with camel milk. We heard the Leader of The Nationals in his opening speech talk about two camel milk dairies that had been operating in his electorate. Now there is only one. The lack of legislation highlighted issues in helping them operate under the existing scheme. It made it very difficult for the council to understand and know exactly what to do, but through these amendments we will see camel milk incorporated into dairy food safety, as will all animal milk. I will pick up the comments that the member for Macedon made: milk does not come from fruit; milk comes from animals. In fact my colleague the member for South-West Coast was an acclaimed dairy farmer. I have many cattle and goat dairies in my electorate. We have a camel milk dairy, which was referred to, in Kyabram. Camel milk I think is perhaps a little bit underestimated. In the Middle East a lot of people drink camel milk, but they do so much less here. One of my constituents Heather Ellis rode her motorbike through Africa. She did not have a lot of opportunity to have fresh fruit and vegetables, and so she developed scurvy. She did not realise that she had scurvy. She was in Mauritania. She met some local tribesman. They looked at her and they said, ‘Oh my goodness, you’ve got scurvy’, and prescribed her good, healthy doses of camel milk. This was a bit of a cure-all, really. Within 24 hours Heather was over the worst of the effects of scurvy—tiredness and a very sore tongue and gums. Heather actually wrote a book, Ubuntu, about her motorbike ride through Africa, which is definitely worth reading. The benefits of camel milk she documents very well. I think as people look for different alternatives in Australia and Victoria, camel milk may become much more prominent. I want to focus now on the Game Management Authority Act. The Leader of The Nationals, as Minister for Agriculture and Food Security in 2013, introduced the Game Management Authority (GMA). I think it is important to understand that game management and in fact hunting are particularly important. I do not think there has been any more recent report than the report Estimating the Economic Impact of Hunting in Victoria in 2013. At that time data revealed that hunting was worth in excess of $439 million to Victoria’s economy. That is very significant economic activity. At that time there were some 46 000 licenced game hunters supporting 3500 Victorian jobs. This report is several years old now, but I cannot find any more recent data. This certainly was a report on the industry to the industry, and it really validated the industry. We know that sustainable and responsible hunting is particularly important. We have thousands of hunters—duck hunters and deer hunters in particular. I spoke only last Parliament about the issues associated with the explosion—and I mean absolute explosion—of deer in Victoria and on the city fringes. It has always been thought that game was in the High Country and that deer were in the High Country, but now they are on the fringes—in the Yarra Ranges and in Nillumbik in the outer suburbs of Melbourne. We have even had some actually venture into some suburbs like Ringwood. We have got the Game Management Authority. The bill aims to clarify the operations of the board, introduce changes requiring the GMA to act consistently with any agreed governance framework and amend the definition of ‘authorised officer’ in the Conservation, Forests and Lands Act 1987. It also proposes new principles that the authority must have regard to when exercising its powers. The example there is the principle of equity amongst stakeholders. Understanding and dealing with game hunting is very important. We have got a lot of illegal hunting as well as a huge number of illegal hunters, and I think how we deal with the authority that manages this is quite important. I want to now move to mobile abattoirs. This I think is quite interesting and important. When my father grew up, his family had land and they had a butcher shop. They were able to do the killing for

BILLS 3180 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 themselves to sell in the butcher shop. Some of these smaller family operations do not work like that anymore. Having mobile abattoirs gives smaller landowners the option of having a mobile abattoir come to their property, slaughter the animals and enable the landowners to use, freeze or refrigerate them. I have been lobbied about this for quite a number of years. Different people have thought that mobile abattoirs are a good idea. They are a great opportunity for small-scale producers. There are some issues around whether or not smaller abattoirs are going to be subject to the same regulatory regime as abattoirs that are fixed. One of the other issues that comes up is the use of mobile abattoirs to harvest game meat, particularly deer. A lot of people when they shoot deer, depending on whether or not they are out for a few days, have a carcass to use for themselves that they want to have stored in a cool environment and processed immediately. If they are able to take that carcass somewhere, an abattoir can deal with it almost on the spot. I think this is quite important because there are a lot of hunters out there now who hunt for their own purposes. Sometimes they will use it for pet food, but also they very much use it for their own food. I have been to many barbecues. The Australian Deer Association, for instance, have had barbecues where they have had large legs of deer and different things on offer as evidence of what they have caught and also how seriously they take sustainability and their responsibilities as hunters. As I said, the bill covers quite a number of changes to many different acts. I am not going to cover off all of them. There are a few that I think are particularly relevant, including the Dairy Act and the Game Management Authority management of mobile abattoirs. Certainly these will help in my electorate. I would like to think the government would at least consider the reasoned amendment that we have put forward rather than dismissing it without having any regard for it or taking any notice of what it is about. But I will end my comments there. Mr PEARSON (Essendon) (17:33): If I was going to have a guess, I think the National Party have been spending a fair amount of time reading up on studying procedure and maybe spending a bit of time with our illustrious Clerk, because in the history of this place it is usually members of the Labor Party and the Liberal Party that tend to pay particular attention to parliamentary procedure. Tuesday must be reasoned amendment day because this is the second reasoned amendment moved by members of the National Party. Perhaps all of a sudden reasoned amendments are de rigueur when it comes to the National Party. I fail to see why, again, the National Party is seeking to prevent this government from getting on with the job of delivering on its legislative commitments. I note the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party in her contribution talked about speaking on this bill in 2017, as did I. It would have been passed as law if the lazy lounge—those members in the other place—in the 58th Parliament had bothered to actually pass legislation. Ms McLeish interjected. Mr PEARSON: I will take up the interjection. The issue was that despite the best endeavours of the government, the government did not have a majority in the 58th Parliament in the other place. This is not a new phenomenon for Labor governments. Whereas in the period 1999–2002 the then opposition did agree to passing legislation on a fairly regular basis, this did not occur in the 58th Parliament. You had a set of circumstances where you had the opposition frustrate the electoral mandate of the Andrews Labor government, and a whole swag of bills were held up by the Liberal Party in particular, which led to this bill now re-presenting itself. The bill talks about camel milk. I seem to recall talking extensively about camel milk because I am very privileged to have a large Somali community in my electorate, many of whom live in Flemington and Ascot Vale. Abukar runs Macca Halal Meats in Racecourse Road, Flemington, and sells camel milk there, and camel meat in fact. This forms part of the very rich tapestry of the state electoral district of Essendon by having those goods and services offered by Abukar to meet the needs of my community, and by doing so it makes for a far richer environment as a result.

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3181

The bill is quite extensive and covers off a number of issues. I was reflecting upon my own upbringing, because the bill before us makes amendments to the Meat Industry Act 1993. I had the privilege of growing up in a household where my father was a butcher. It is quite curious when you look at the passage of time. You see sorts of bumps and changes and you think they are owing to the particular circumstances of the time, but I think they often represent long-term change. By that I mean in the 1970s you had people eating meat three times a day, and butchering in the 1970s was a very good industry to work in. I think if you look at a number of the abattoirs, they employed lots of people and the meat industry was quite burgeoning. I recall that when the recession hit in 1982–83 off the back of the drought there seemed to be a marked change in people’s consumption and behaviour. I think what happened was a combination of factors. A lot of that Great Depression generation started to pass on. They had weathered the Great Depression, and when they came out of the Second World War it was a sign of affluence that they would eat meat three times a day. By the time of the recession in the early 1980s some of those people had started to pass on. But diets changed and people started changing what they ate. If people had less money then they would not be eating steak as much and they might have eaten mince. If they were eating mince they might go to other cuts of meat or not eat meat at all. That led to that sort of consumer change in the way in which people would consume meat. Similarly, I think, in the recession of the early 1990s my parents underwent a similar change, where people again started to eat meat less frequently. I remember talking with my father in the 1990s, and his sense at that stage was that consumption was going down two paths: you were either looking at high-volume, low-margin, six butchers working in a shop trying to turn over a lot of product in order to be profitable; or you would have smaller niche butcher shops aiming more for that high-end market, so you were looking at lower volumes but higher profitability off the product in order to make a living. I think now we are changing again and we are seeing more of those changes occurring where people are having a number of different tastes. I would not say that people have a more sophisticated palate, but as they are embracing multiculturalism they are starting to go down a path of having a wide range of different cuisines and having different tastes. You are seeing some significant changes around that. I appreciate the indulgence of the house because it is probably a circuitous argument that I am putting up, but if you look at the fact that we are now looking at having those sorts of mobile abattoirs, I think that represents another change in the way in which people are consuming meat. I think that people are looking at having a different approach as opposed to saying, ‘All right, I will eat red meat five nights a week and I will get my meat either from Woolworths or Coles or the local butcher shop’. So I think having that level of flexibility to reflect the fact that people have probably made changes and have different tastes—and indeed we are a far more multicultural community now than what we were in the 1970s—is a very good thing. I think to that end it is important that we ensure that the legislation reflects the interests and desires of our community. I remember having a conversation with Andrew Robb probably about seven or eight years ago. He talked about the rise of the middle class in South-East Asia and said if you swung an arm from Indonesia across to India and went all the way through China, by 2030 you would have 1 billion people enter the middle class. I think that what we have got in Victoria is a very good reputation for being a good environment for food and fibre—that we are clean and that we are seen as being quite a high- end niche market. I do think there is an opportunity to start thinking about making sure that our meat industry is in the best possible position to compete with those growing and maturing markets. They are not emerging any longer; they are maturing. So rather than having live exports, where you put cattle on a boat and send them off to these markets, you can look at whether there is the capacity to kill the animals here, process that meat, put it on a boat or on a plane and go straight to market. I think that if we can start thinking about making sure that we have got the right regulatory framework and the right environment to enable that to occur, then we are pushing ourselves up the value chain and we are providing more opportunities for Victorian workers to service those grey markets. Indeed, I think that would be most welcome.

BILLS 3182 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

The final point I do want to talk on is the $46 million allocated for the Target One Million program. This is a fantastic initiative because it is looking at putting more fish into our waterways and into our bays. I have spoken many times in this place about my strong desire to have more fish in the Maribyrnong, to try to find ways in which we can ensure that the Maribyrnong can be rehabilitated as closely as it can be to what it would have been like before white settlement in the 19th century and to find ways in which we can improve that environment. I think that if we can improve our waterways, like the Maribyrnong, if we encourage more people to frequent and utilise that great open space and be out on the water, then I think we will find a way, by virtue of people being around it, to take care of it. The bill is an important bill. I am pleased to see that it has been re-presented and that we have the opportunity of passing it. I look forward to its speedy passage, not just through this place but through the other place as well. Ms BRITNELL (South-West Coast) (17:43): I rise today to speak on the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019, which is a bill that I spoke on in 2017. It has been said by the speakers before me that it is very much like deja vu. For me, this reflects that the government talk the talk but do not actually believe what they are spouting. We have got a bill here that will assist businesses, will protect the environment, will protect our industries’ reputations—all sorts of things that will help the state, will help farmers and will help protect the environment. I am not surprised, because it has happened a lot, that I am able to stand here and say it is 2019, nearly two years on and we are talking about the same thing. It should have been well and truly passed by now, but it does tell me that the priorities of this government are not about what they purport them to be. This is an omnibus bill. The parts I will talk about are probably more the changes to the Dairy Act 2000, the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 and the Meat Industry Act 1993. I will start with dairy. The Dairy Act will actually take the camel milk industry, which is a new industry to Australia, and put it under the responsibility of Dairy Food Safety Victoria. Previously it was left languishing under the responsibility of local government. For local government, in these areas where businesses want to start up and need to be licensed—which is a very important part of running a dairy business because of the implications of food safety and what we need to make sure we protect as a dairy industry because we have got a great reputation internationally and we want to make sure that remains—it is really good that this is being brought under the Dairy Food Safety Victoria umbrella, just like goat milk, sheep milk and all milk that comes from mammals. That is what milk is: milk is not a plant-based product, which some people claim, because that sends mixed messages to the consumer about the nutrition and value of the product. This, for me, is a time to really share with our Parliament the importance of our local primary industries. As a producer of dairy for some 20 years and having been very involved in the industry to work to ensure that we had good legislation that protected our industry, I have been very involved in making sure the reputation of milk was protected. I have a great understanding of the importance of agriculture, and it does concern me that this particular government do not really embrace and optimise the opportunities before them. We could do so much more for the producers, but we hinder them rather than help them. Just an example of that is a report that was released not that long ago—a few weeks ago—about the cost of transport in this state and how much that is hampering the ability of export products to be competitive. What is happening is that our roads are falling apart, so consequently that puts an increased pressure on transport businesses. They are doing kingpins within 18 months, which would normally have taken five years to damage, or they are destroying the undercarriage of the trucks. Businesses are telling me that the costs of maintenance on their trucks are going up by 40 per cent, and of course that gets passed on to the producer. When the producer is trying to supply an international market competitively, it really does do a huge amount of damage. I think the government could do a lot more. I also want to talk about the Catchment and Land Protection Act, or CALP act, and what will be the result of this. Supposedly the changes will give more powers to the Department of Environment, Land,

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3183

Water and Planning to be able to ensure that people comply with weed management and the control of noxious weeds and pests. This is a real issue. When we heard the member for Murray Plains speak earlier, he talked about the explosion in deer numbers. It is not only in deer, but certainly we are seeing them. I was on the motorbike a little while ago, probably two or three years ago actually because I have rarely gotten to do much milking in the last three years, and was getting the cows up in the morning and sure enough there was a deer running through the paddock. It was not something that I had ever seen before, but the point I am making is they are certainly coming down throughout Victoria, right down to the coast from the High Country, where I suppose they began. We are also seeing rabbits, a real explosion in rabbits, despite all the good work that a lot of people do in the environment space. Without being able to have the department really impose some sort of penalty on those who are not abiding by the law, we are just not seeing any management at all. We are seeing Paterson’s curse down our way. This is something that 10 or 15 years ago was right through South Australia in the northern areas, but you just did not see Patterson’s curse down our way at all. You do now. Unless we do something—make a concerted effort—we are actually destroying the biodiversity of our area by destroying the roadsides, which we say we need to protect to look after our native grasses, but we are not. It is all talk. We are not really putting our money where our mouth is. I hope this does give the imprimatur to the department to actually do something, but they cannot do it without government support. They have got the imprimatur; I understand they want to do it, but they do not have the resources and that is what we have seen in this budget again. The amount of money put towards being able to have property inspections has been cut. It is all good having laws, but you have to support them with money as well. I also said I wanted to talk about the abattoirs. We have a large abattoir in our area, which is one of the biggest employers. I spoke with these guys when we had this bill before the house two years ago, and they were quite concerned about making sure that the regulations did not have any unintended consequences—again, compromising the reputation of our producers. It does not matter even if you are not exporting, which this company is, but one incident in Australia ruins our reputation. That is why it is so important that we actually work very hard with our laws and with players like Dairy Food Safety Victoria to ensure we do protect the product so that we can ensure right through the supply chain that there are no compromises. I think that the abattoirs have concerns, but I am pretty confident that everyone’s intention is right and the people who are now operating in New South Wales will come to Victoria. It is good for the whole state if we grow industries and grow jobs. Primary industry is a very, very important industry. We are seeing our fishing families down in Gippsland losing their ability to actually fish, and we have got to remember that you just cannot keep compromising food production and expect that we are embracing farmers, because at the end of the day if you do not actually provide the opportunity for farmers to thrive, they will walk away. Who will look after the landscape then? The member for Macedon implied, when she was referring to a chap who was an organic farmer—and I have great respect for all styles of farming—that one style of farming is better than the other, but you cannot say that. All farmers have to and do, I believe, prioritise the environment. We have all been working for years as farmers for the benefit of our future generations, and it is often our children and grandchildren that we are thinking of. So clearly you get up in the morning and you think about the best way to operate in the environment. I was chairman of a research board, prior to coming here, for the dairy industry, and we spent an enormous amount of the levies that came in on research that made sure the waterways were managed well and that the soils were managed well. We were constantly investing in research so that we could leave the land that we are responsible for—for the short time we are—in the hands of the future generations better than we left it. It is time to really embrace farming and agriculture. We could actually import everything. We could survive quite easily without the industries, but I am not sure you would have the landscape cared for

BILLS 3184 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 the way we do now. You would have blackberries, you would have vermin, you would have foxes, you would have rabbits, you would have wild boar—you would have an amazing onslaught of challenges for the environment. So let us look after our best environmentalists, the farmers. Let us make sure we do put regulations in place so that they can work with the landscape and the environment. Let us make sure that everyone has to take responsibility for weed management. And if you do not, you have to be penalised. That is just a basic way of controlling the weeds that we have got and that we need to work with. I back the reasoned amendment proposed by the lead speaker. My son is actually a hunter, and he goes up into the High Country and shoots deer, so— (Time expired) Mr MAAS (Narre Warren South) (17:53): It gives me great pleasure to speak to this bill, the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019. As we are all aware and indeed have been made aware, this bill has been in this place before but did not pass during the last term of Parliament. But it is the unwavering commitment of this government to primary industries and agriculture to ensure that this bill gets through in much the same form it was in the last time it was here. The reason why is that the government wants to assist Victorian industries. We want to assist them to grow to ensure that primary industries will continue to attract investment, increase exports and create jobs across the state. The reform framework that this amendment bill sets up also assists in the setting up of priorities to enhance and reflect changing practice, changed environments, global competitiveness, innovation and resilience too. As has also been stated, the bill is an omnibus bill that repeals the Broiler Chicken Industry Act 1978 and the Broiler Chicken Industry (Amendment) Act 1991, which is now redundant, and it seeks to amend 11 other different acts. Those acts are the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994, the Dairy Act 2000, the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981, the Fisheries Act 1995, the Game Management Authority Act 2014, the Livestock Disease Control Act 1994, the Meat Industry Act 1993, the Melbourne Market Authority Act 1977, the Plant Biosecurity Act 2010, the Veterinary Practice Act 1997 and the Wildlife Act 1975. In short, the amendment bill is about making changes to agriculture, fisheries, meat processing, dairy, fresh food and market industries and to make changes that improve the administration and management of those relevant acts, to remove operational difficulties as well as to make other minor and technical changes. As a former official of the National Union of Workers (NUW), whose membership, amongst other things and amongst other industries, worked in these industries and across Victoria, it is now great to be part of a government that is bringing these long-overdue changes before the house. I acknowledge the work of the current Minister for Agriculture, Ms Symes, and the former Minister for Agriculture, Ms Pulford, also a former NUW official, in bringing this bill before the house again. Those acts that are being amended under this bill, as I said, include the Broiler Chicken Industry Act. That act will actually be repealed. As I said before, it is now redundant. Victoria is in fact the only state whose broiler industry collective bargaining legislation has not been repealed, and the Broiler Industry Negotiation Committee, established under the act, has not been in place for over 16 years. Repealing this act will not have any adverse impacts on the chicken meat industry. In terms of the Catchment and Land Protection Act, the purpose of the amendment is to achieve efficiencies by allowing civil debts to be recovered as part of criminal proceedings and thus remove the need to commence separate civil proceedings to recover these debts. Currently the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning must go through a civil court to recover those costs, and it takes up the time and the resources of the department. In terms of the Dairy Act 2000, there has been a fair bit of discussion about this in the chamber. The act only applies to the production and processing of dairy from cows, sheep, goats and buffalo.

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3185

Regulation of the processing of milk from other animals is currently undertaken by local governments. But, as has been said, several businesses have shown interest in establishing a camel milk industry in Victoria. Camel milk businesses that are already operating are being regulated by local government but have expressed an interest in being regulated by Victoria’s specialist dairy regulator. Amendments to the Dairy Act will bring the regulation of camel milk production under Dairy Food Safety Victoria and facilitate future access to export market opportunities. In terms of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act, the government is committed to supporting and growing the hemp industry in Victoria, with the recent announcement of a cross-party taskforce to investigate the industrial uses of hemp and identify opportunities to keep growing that industry. The purpose of the amendments to that act is to improve the administration of the licensing scheme for industrial hemp, which is grown mainly for fibre and hempseed production in Victoria. In terms of fisheries—that is a big one—Victorians, as we know, do love their fishing, and we know that it provides a significant contribution to our economy as well as to jobs. The government recognises the importance of recreational fishing and has committed $46 million to growing recreational fishing under the Target One Million program. Whilst the act has served government, fishers and the community well, an ongoing review has ensured it remains an effective and relevant management tool. The proposed amendments under the act will see some 20 changes to the Fisheries Act. In terms of the Game Management Authority Act 2014, the bill updates the act for consistency with changes to the Public Administration Act 2004 made in March 2017, substituting for ‘chairperson’ the title ‘CEO’ as the public service body head. It will also resolve legal uncertainties as to what enforcement activities officers authorised under the Game Management Authority Act 2014 can undertake. In terms of the Livestock Disease Control Act, there are many minor amendments that are aimed at increasing response capability and boosting the effectiveness of managing animal disease events, which is critical in effectively maintaining our biosecurity and protecting human health. In terms of the Meat Industry Act, it sets up a licensing system that enables the adoption of national food safety standards for the hygienic production and processing of meat. However, mobile businesses are a growing trend but are not supported by the existing legislative framework. Amendments in this bill have been made in recognition of the industry development opportunity that mobile abattoir operators provide for producers and butchers across Victoria, particularly in regional areas. Amendments to the Meat Industry Act are also being made to support the government’s implementation of the Sustainable Action Hunting Plan. In terms of the Melbourne Market Authority Act 1977, there are amendments to the act which are proposed to address governance limitations and administrative burdens for the authority and to reflect the current ongoing operating environment. There are also amendments to the Plant Biosecurity Act, which will provide additional support for the potato and viticulture industries in controlling two insect pests. Then there is the Veterinary Practice Act 1997, which is also being amended to improve the functionality of the Veterinary Practitioners Registration Board of Victoria to hear cases of unprofessional conduct. The bill will also increase the maximum penalty for serious professional misconduct from $2000 to $10 000, and that will bring it into line with other professional standard bodies and interstate veterinary registration boards. Provision for the issuing of infringement notices for minor offences is also inserted. The changes will result in a more effective and efficient functioning of the board and will support increased community awareness and expectations regarding animal welfare. Finally, the bill also amends the Wildlife Act 1975 to include the offence of hunting, taking or destroying game during an open season as a relevant offence in relation to which a controlled operation may be conducted. For those reasons, I wish the bill a very speedy passage through the house.

BILLS 3186 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

Ms STALEY (Ripon) (18:03): I rise to speak on the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019. I will be restricting my remarks to the parts of this bill that seek to amend the Meat Industry Act 1993 to allow for mobile abattoirs. But before I do, I could not go past concurring absolutely and entirely with the member for Macedon when she said that almond milk is not milk. Camel’s milk is milk, cow’s milk is milk, sheep’s milk is milk, as is goat’s milk, but almond milk is not milk. That brings me, though, to the main part of the bill that I want to discuss, and that is the provisions that allow for mobile abattoirs. I think we need to put in context just how important for employers the existing abattoir system is, particularly in my electorate of Ripon. There are two major abattoirs in Ripon. They are both export abattoirs. They are Ararat Meat Exports and the Frew Group Abattoir. Between them they employ hundreds of people, and they are very important components of Victoria’s—in fact the world’s—safe, delicious and wholesome meat industry. I for one am a huge supporter of the meat industry, both in my electorate and across Victoria. I note how important having major abattoirs is as part of the whole food chain, that has delivered extremely delicious, nutritious and cheap meat for consumers, notwithstanding the very high prices of lamb that we see at the moment. Of course these abattoirs are a very big avenue for local sheep farmers to send their sheep to locally. However, what this bill does is provide for the creation of mobile abattoirs. Perhaps one of the most interesting proponents of mobile abattoirs and why you might want them is a farmer called Joel Salatin. He farms in the US. He describes himself, or says he is known as—and this is off his website—a Christian libertarian environmentalist capitalist lunatic. I first came across Mr Salatin when I worked at the Institute of Public Affairs, because Mr Salatin wrote a great book, which I absolutely commend to the house, called Everything I Want to Do Is Illegal: War Stories from the Local Food Front. Mr Salatin runs this great farm, and what he tells in this book are a number of stories about his battles with regulation in the US. One of them was to do with the fact that he had a mobile abattoir come to his farm, and at various points in the history of this farm the regulators sought to shut him down because of the way that they had created effectively a loophole that allowed him to get around having federal or state inspection—in other words, in a big abattoir. I was very taken by his arguments, which I refreshed my mind of today. He makes the point that the product has to be safe, and if it is not safe, then there should be no capacity to sell it in any circumstances. But if it is safe, then how it gets there is not necessarily going to be the same way for a big industrial abattoir or meat processing centre compared to a small mobile abattoir that might be doing 10 to 12 head of cattle a day. He makes the point that in his view it can be done safely, and therefore the arguments against mobile abattoirs are not about food safety; they are about, in his words, ‘denying market access to appropriate scaled transparent products, and thereby ensuring de facto market protection for the current big players’. I do think there is something in that, because there is enough in our multifaceted food production system for us all to have part of the pie. I completely support the large abattoirs in my electorate, but I do think there is a place for mobile abattoirs to service people, such as a small producer, also from my electorate, called Brooklands Free Range Farms. Brooklands are at Blampied, run by Jono and Nat. They breed Berkshire pigs and British White grass-fed cattle—and if they could have a mobile abattoir come to their farm, they would. That is all about their grass-fed, sustainable, chemical-free practices, and they absolutely would prefer to not have the transport stress and the additional stresses that cattle and sheep, and in their case pigs, are put under in big slaughterhouses. They believe that; that is part of their ethos. I very much support them having access to a way to slaughter their animals which is in absolute accordance with their values and the values of many of their customers, including me—I have been a customer of theirs and will be again. A lot of their customers buy from them because they want to know how their animals were raised and also how they died. Having a mobile slaughterhouse come to your farm and be part of that process on-farm is part of that story, so I very much support this aspect of the bill. I do think it can exist in absolute harmony with the large abattoirs that are always going to be the vast majority of the slaughter

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3187 business in Victoria. Well over 90 per cent will always be through very big in-one-place abattoirs. I support giving this option to boutique operators and to individual farmers who want to slaughter on their own properties. I will make a comparison: when I farmed—we were grain growers—seed cleaners would come and clean seed on our property rather than us buying in new seed each time. So we would use the seed that we had grown. To me this is very similar. It is keeping things local, keeping things on your own farm, and if you are going to sell that product to people, the whole chill chain and the safety aspects from the beginning of the slaughter process through to the sale need to be there, and I am sure we can have regulations to deliver that. But within that envelope of allowing people to have some variety and be small scale, if that is what they want to be, and to attract perhaps the higher premium prices that they get from marketing that dream of small scale—more power to them. I am a strong supporter of this part of the bill. The whole bill does a number of things which other speakers have canvassed and I will not. I will therefore conclude my remarks by saying that I support the reasoned amendment moved by the Leader of the Nationals, and beyond that I very much support this part of the bill. Ms GREEN (Yan Yean) (18:12): It is with great pleasure that I join the debate on the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019. As others have canvassed, it is a very extensive omnibus bill. I note there have been numerous speakers on the opposition side, starting with the Leader of the National Party. Overall his contribution as lead speaker was incredibly supportive of the totality of this bill, so it beggars belief that he would have led with a reasoned amendment saying, ‘Go back to the drawing board’ essentially, purely just around a very, very small section of this bill. I note that the member for Ripon overall seemed to be very supportive of a particular part of this bill, from when I came into the chamber, and then she finished by saying she supports the reasoned amendment. I am opposed to the reasoned amendment. This is the second bill today for which the National Party has proposed a reasoned amendment, and it is just a recipe for doing nothing. We know that the National Party in government have form. The only reason they are part of the coalition is to drive the white cars of government around and actually not look after their electorates. Now we are on the government benches and we have actually done the hard work in relation to this omnibus bill, the Leader of the National Party has the temerity to come in here as a former president of the Victorian Farmers Federation and say that he opposes the totality of this very good bill. I understand his opposition is purely in relation to the Game Management Authority. I have the reasoned amendment here; thank you, member for Box Hill. He is always so helpful. The reasoned amendment states that: … this house refuses to read the bill a second time until the government has consulted: with game hunting stakeholders about the role of the Game Management Authority in promoting responsible game hunting and proposed additional guiding principles … We consult regularly with the stakeholder group. If the Leader of the National Party had taken in anything at the briefing, then he had he would have understood what a small component of the bill this issue covers. I think that this reasoned amendment is purely for show—to try and cosy up to the Bush Users Group United, which had its rally here in the last sitting week, and try to propose this idea that we do not support outdoor pursuits. We absolutely do support outdoor pursuits in this state. We have a country caucus in this place as part of the government, and I am proud to be the Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Victoria. Our country caucus membership is more than double that of the National Party. Regional and rural Victorians have voted with their feet and they have said that they do not want the National Party to represent them. The country caucus of the Labor Party is the largest it has ever been. I note that the Independent member for Shepparton and the Independent member for Mildura are here. Next to them is the Independent member for Morwell. Country people in record numbers are saying, ‘We’re not voting for the National Party’, and I think we can see why. We saw in government that they allowed cuts to schools and cuts to health services. Educational attainment went down. If you look at jobs, and jobs particularly in the agriculture portfolio—the bill

BILLS 3188 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 is a primary industries bill—the Leader of the National Party when he was the minister for primary industries even cut offices in his own electorate. The number of offices that were cut then meant that there was less service delivery and less support for farmers—for the farming community that they say they care about more than anything else. They are very good at lecturing others. When we are on the government benches we do the hard work, and yet when they are in government it is situation normal. The people in regional and rural Victoria and the farming community can get the scraps that the National Party throw off the table or that they have been able to secure out from their city counterparts. It is simply not good enough for the leader of a so-called recognised party in this place to come in with a reasoned amendment that says, ‘Start again and do not go forward with this bill’. I think that particularly the broiler industry wants us to proceed with this bill. The Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 will be changed by the bill to allow costs for expenses to be recovered through criminal proceedings rather than civil proceedings only. This is an absolutely good measure that will be supported by country people. In the Dairy Act 2000 the definitions of ‘milk’ and ‘dairy farm’ will be expanded to include camels, reducing the burden on local government of regulating camel milk production and processing. I had the privilege of representing the Victorian government at the ministerial council for health and agriculture ministers during the last term of Parliament, and I was pleased to sign off on a protocol there that took 17 years to achieve to allow the production of hemp seed to be used in food production. We are amending the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 to improve the administration of authorities for low-THC cannabis and provide a licensing framework for the cultivation and processing of alkaloid poppies. I mentioned the food production there and the innovation. We were elected in 2014 particularly on the fact that we said we would support the introduction of medicinal cannabis. There are hundreds of Victorians who are now reaping the benefits of that trial. We lobbied the federal government very strongly for reclassification so that it could be utilised. I really want to commend Cassie Batten and Rhett Wallace, who live in Mernda in my electorate. They lobbied so hard for their little boy, Cooper Wallace. They had been breaking the law because they thought that really there was only one solution to support and ease Cooper’s suffering and that was to illegally use cannabis oil. They really thought that it was going to be a palliative care measure for him, and when they saw the results that the cannabis oil gave to that little boy—he was never expected to walk on his own and he was never expected to roll over or to be able to get out of his cot. I could not stay silent after seeing how the suffering of that little boy was relieved and after seeing them charged with an offence and having visits from child protection officers when in fact they were just doing the best for their little boy. It really was one of my proudest moments as a member of Parliament to be able to see that we actually tackled that difficult social issue. We stared down the naysayers who were concerned about the illicit side of cannabis, as we have seen in other countries, particularly in the US. Now here in Victoria we have a growing industry and the bill provides for part of that. This bill abolishes the Licensing Appeals Tribunal within the Fisheries Act 1995 and transfers its review function to VCAT. It makes various amendments to offences and penalties and other enforcement mechanisms in relation to fisheries. And that is something else. Those in the opposition keep trying to mislead groups, such as the bush user groups and others, saying that we do not support outdoor pursuits, but our Target One Million policy is to get more people fishing, more often, together in our beautiful waterways. We are taking the fees away for boating. It is making a huge difference. This bill before the house is one of the many that we are doing that supports the activities of regional and rural Victoria. I oppose the reasoned amendment. This is about getting stuff done, not opposing it. I commend the bill to the house.

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3189

Ms SHEED (Shepparton) (18:22): I feel a sense of deja vu in speaking on this bill because I did so in 2017. Indeed my speech seems vaguely familiar to me when I read it. This is an omnibus bill that makes amendments to numerous pieces of legislation, some of them are minor and others are of a more significant nature. I would like to just refer to a few in particular that are obviously interesting to me as a regional representative in this Parliament. The Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 will be amended to enable the secretary of the department to recover costs for carrying out certain works. The situation is that while it is possible to recover costs in civil proceedings, this amendment will now extend the capacity of the secretary to recover the costs during the course of criminal proceedings that might be taken against a person for failure to comply with the legislation. So if they have not performed a task that they have been ordered to undertake, the catchment authority may go in and undertake that work and may incur costs in doing so. So wrapped into the one proceeding will be the capacity to not only deal with the criminal aspect but also recover the costs of the work that was undertaken—an eminently sensible amendment I would have thought. The Dairy Act 2000 is being amended by this bill. Under this act Dairy Food Safety Victoria is established as the licensing body and regulator. Currently the act only applies to milk from cows, sheep, goats and buffalo. Clause 5 of the bill amends the definition to cover milk from any milking animal, excluding humans. It will amend the definition of ‘dairy farm’ to include premises where an animal is kept or milked for the purpose of producing milk for sale. There has been a lot of talk around camel milk in previous contributions. I would just like to let the house know that at the Shepparton saleyards in 2015, 200 camels that had been rounded up in outback Australia were sold in response to a growing interest in the production of camel milk. There are now a number of properties in the Goulburn Valley that produce camel milk and certainly others more broadly across Australia. Feral camels have been deemed to be a huge problem in outback environments. They have been very difficult to manage. They are in very large flocks as they travel across the country, and there have been a number of methods that have been used to try to control them. So to provide an opportunity for some of them to be farmed for some financial gain and the production of milk that is actually popular and sought after is a great opportunity. I think it is fair to say that in many areas of regional Australia we are looking for new industries that are of high value, and that would be particularly the case where we have irrigation industries. The price of water now is so high that in any farming enterprise that relies on irrigation you need to be producing something that really gives you back the value of the water. Things like camel’s milk and other specialty products do it. And just in relation to that I would like to refer to the amendments to the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 that are included in this piece of legislation. Other legislation debated later in the week will deal with various amendments about access to medicinal cannabis, but this particular piece of legislation and this act will provide an authority scheme for the cultivation and processing of low- THC cannabis—industrial hemp—for non-therapeutic purposes. Industrial hemp is grown in Victoria mainly for the production of fibre and hemp seed. But again just in terms of the developments that are taking place in regional Victoria—in terms of the production of new products, new crops and new industries—Shepparton has just recently been selected as a place where medicinal cannabis will indeed be grown. The Greater Shepparton City Council has just recently approved the permit for a very large farm just outside of Shepparton, where medicinal cannabis will be grown under cover in glasshouses and really provide a very significant impetus for our community. Of course it is a way of producing a crop with very efficient water use, under cover. If you look at what has happened in other countries in terms of food production and specialty crops, there is an area in Spain where over 200 square kilometres of the countryside is under protected cropping—in other words, in glasshouses. There is the opportunity to expand industries into newer areas and to utilise more efficient ways of farming that are not only dealing with water use but also

BILLS 3190 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 dealing with a whole range of other aspects of climate and weather that can be so damaging to crops, as we all know, in our own regions, where we have drought, storms and floods and hail that will damage fruit crops at the most unexpected times. And so this is a welcome addition to the agricultural productivity in the Shepparton region. Moving on to other aspects of the bill, I think it is important to note that there are amendments to the Meat Industry Act 1993. This is another amendment that in some ways creates another opportunity to grow an industry in a regional area. It expands the definition of ‘abattoir’, and the definitions of ‘general meat processing facility’ and ‘pet food processing facility’ are being amended. So, for instance, an abattoir will now include ‘a vehicle used for slaughter of consumable animals for human consumption’. The Meat Industry Act 1993 establishes the licensing system enabling the adoption of national food safety standards for the hygienic production and processing of meat for human consumption and for pet food. It has not previously provided for the slaughter and processing of meat to be undertaken in vehicles, even though this could have occurred in compliance with the national food safety standards. So there are quite a few business opportunities which could be enabled by these changes. Firstly, there has been a decrease in the number of abattoirs across Victoria, with some closing down completely and others only operating for a small part of the year. This has led to a call on the government to enable an appropriate framework to be put in place so that small operators can kill and process meat for human consumption or for pet food. Farmers markets have also become extremely popular in recent years, and the opportunities for farmers to sell their own animal products will be facilitated by these amendments. As camel milk creates a new business opportunity, so too will farmers’ ability to use vehicles as mobile butchers, effectively. This will create diversification in the industry. This legislation also supports the government’s implementation of the Sustainable Hunting Action Plan. It will enable hunters to use game harvested by them and also process the meat for their personal consumption. It will also make clear that the processing of wild deer that is not intended for sale is not captured by the licensing requirements. It is estimated that there are anywhere between 750 000 and 1 million sambar deer roaming in the High Country of Victoria. Hunting of the deer is seen as very important because of the population explosion and the damage that they do to the environment. They are spreading right across the state, and indeed in our own Barmah forest up on the Murray River there have been sambar deer seen to be roaming around. Given that venison has some popularity and can be consumed by humans, it is again practical to enable the killing, the butchering and the sale of that animal. It should be noted that clause 62 of the bill now provides that a person does not commit an offence if the meat processing facility solely processes game that is not intended for sale. There are many acts that have been affected by this legislation. I have chosen to refer to those which I think will have a positive impact on regional communities to the extent that they actually are creating opportunity for the development of growth in an industry or a new aspect to an industry, something that we really know that we need out there in regional communities. I commend the bill to the house. Mr RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (18:32): It is great to rise and speak on the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019. There is a bit in this one; there are a lot of different subparts. Mr Pearson: There’s something for everyone. Mr RICHARDSON: There is. As the member for Essendon says, there is something for everyone in this one. There are a lot of amendments to various sections and acts. There are a few that I will reflect on. Having been on the invasive species inquiry in the 58th Parliament I will take up some of the points made by the Independent member for Shepparton as well. One of the subparts of the amendment to the Melbourne Market Authority Act 1997 took me down memory lane. I have a connection to the former site in West Melbourne, which was the first job I had, at the Melbourne Market Authority. That was obviously a significant part of Victoria’s food

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3191 production and processing that went through there as well. If you got down there on a Sunday early enough, you could pick up a cheap bouquet of flowers for a better half. I spent about six years painting lines—forklift lines, bays, truck bays, stencilling, the works. That facility was such a significant resource and asset for the state, and the move out to Epping is substantial. Some of those amendments to support the operation of the Melbourne Market Authority are really important. It is a significant resource for job creation out in the north. But as well as taking me back to the 38 kilometres of forklift lines that we used to paint, that is an extraordinary bit of infrastructure out there, and the amount of truck movement and interaction is really important. So I just wanted to give a plug to that amendment and some of the changes that have been made to the Melbourne Market Authority Act. The authority is an important resource for our community and indeed for our state from an agriculture and job creation standpoint. The other parts of the bill that I am really keen to focus on are the amendments concerning fishing. The Andrews Labor government is committed to doing all it can to support people in getting out on the water, whether it is out on the bay, whether it is in our great lakes or whether it is on our rivers. That recreational passion for getting out with your family, fishing or boating, is what we want people to have. We want to free up their time. When you look at infrastructure that we are investing in, it is about getting people back to their communities so they can enjoy that time with their family and their loved ones. Those that are passionate and love fishing and love boating will have their stories and their fondest memories about fishing in their communities. I remember trying my hand at fly-fishing with my pa and my nan back in the day. You reflect on those joyous moments, those moments that define your childhood and set you up in your future and really define who you are, and you want more people to get involved and access those great fishing communities as well. Acting Speaker, as the member for Frankston you would know very well that the number of people who get out into Port Phillip Bay and all the way through to Western Port is significant. You cannot get a boat into the Mordialloc Creek and out there soon enough. The bill makes changes to parts of the Fisheries Act 1995—obviously around fishing nets, the abolishment of the Licensing Appeals Tribunal and the transfer of its reviews and functions to VCAT—with various amendments to offences and penalties and other enforcement mechanisms and clarification of the inspection and seizure powers of fishery officers. They do an incredible job. I have been down with the fishery officers for events such as Target One Million events. We have gone down there with Rex Hunt for the free rod program down on Mordialloc Creek, and I can tell you that with the almost 2000 people that came down to these events it was just amazing—absolutely amazing. We want to do all we can to strengthen the industry, to strengthen this recreational passion and engagement into the future and make sure more people get joy and access to that end. I will just reflect quickly on the fact that we have still got the removal of boating fees at Mordialloc Creek as well, and I will take the opportunity to say that we would be a lot closer if Kingston council came and played ball with us on this front. That is the last thing. Kingston council and Queenscliffe are the two stumbling blocks in this at the moment. It has to be amended, it has to be moved and it is time for Kingston council to back in this extremely popular policy. I announced it with the Premier during the campaign with his beautiful wife, Cath, and a few of our local residents. It was great and a great event down there as well. So Kingston council, if you are tuning in tonight, get out of the way, get on board with boating and fishing in our community and make sure that fishing and boating go free—the removal of fees and the free boating policy that is so popular in our community—and that we get that access and get that on board. The member for Shepparton talked about something that we covered off in the parliamentary inquiry into invasive species, and I must say that I was quite a novice in this area in my understanding of hunting and game management in our communities—something that is not abundantly clear to you as a member of Parliament on Port Phillip Bay. One thing that we talked about and covered off was in relation to the hunting of deer and the some millions of deer that are potentially in the north-west. We went up to hearings. The member for Thomastown and I went up to regional hearings in Wangaratta

BILLS 3192 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 and heard directly of the impact on farmers and livestock and their interaction and also the issue of not being able to safely butcher and process the meat and the like. So some of those provisions around clarifying that and the mobile abattoirs as well are part of a really important discussion about where we go as an industry and making sure that at all times with PrimeSafe and the work that they do—the great work that they do to keep our industries and our communities safe—we make sure that that is always adhered to as well. It is a really important part of that interaction and how we manage invasive species going forward. We heard about the significant damage and impact and interaction that happens and what that means for livestock and community safety more broadly. Really as well what we heard and what was clear in evidence during the invasive species inquiry was that hunting and professional hunting are really not making many inroads into the significant deer population that we confront in Victoria. It is an evolving and continuing issue that we confront as well, so if there are opportunities for industry, for job creation and for employment, we always should be looking towards that through a management prism as well. It is a chance also with the changes and amendments to the Game Management Authority Act 2014. The work that they do we heard a lot about during the inquiry around their resourcing and the great work that the members of the Game Management Authority do in enforcement and keeping people safe. Obviously during various seasons it can be quite tense out there and can be quite a difficult interaction. They do extraordinary work, and we thank them for the work they do to keep communities safe and various interest groups at peace as well. Some of those amendments to introduce and modernise fit-for-purpose governance for the Game Management Authority include allowing the board to appoint the CEO and clarifying current legal uncertainties over the powers of authorised officers appointed under the act. I think that is something that we heard play out during our hearings and during that interaction in the evidence that we heard as well, and it might have been part of the recommendations we put forward to strengthen that interaction with the legislation going forward. So there are a number of different parts to this bill, which also looks at the Wildlife Act 1975 to clarify that the Game Management Authority may conduct a controlled operation in relation to hunting, taking and destroying game during both a closed and an open season. I think that is another part of that interaction as well. As I said from the outset, there is a lot to contend with in this bill. An omnibus bill will bring up different areas, but I think some of the key things I am passionate about are around the interaction with the Fisheries Act 1995—something I am really passionate about. It is good to see further support and strengthening of our legislation in Victoria for getting out there in the community. When you walk through Aspendale Gardens, Chelsea Heights, Mordy, Chelsea, Edithvale, Aspendale, Parkdale, Mentone or Cheltenham, you cannot go a few doors without seeing the tinny, the boat out there. That is our life and that is our community out in Port Phillip Bay, and we want more people to enjoy the recreational outcomes that come from fishing. We need to strengthen that more, and the Target One Million campaign has been amazing—seeing more people getting that access and making sure that we replenish and nourish those numbers of fish species in our community. I still have a number of open requests to get down to Mordy. Mr Halse interjected. Mr RICHARDSON: The member for Ringwood is casting out a line. I am not too good on that. Down in Mordy I am pretty good at catching some seaweed off the pier, and that is about it with the set-up I have. It gets back to values. You know, when you talk about interaction of infrastructure, the pressure that people are under and trying to get them home safer and sooner to get out there and enjoy their recreational outcomes, that is what we are about. Target One Million and these reforms are all about this, so I commend the bill to the house.

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3193

Ms CUPPER (Mildura) (18:42): I rise today to speak in support of the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019. This bill presents a range of legislative amendments in one package, but I would like to focus on one particular amendment, that being the amendment to the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981. The act and its associated regulations control and regulate medicines and poisons in Victoria. Medicines and poisons that are controlled under the act include prescription medicines, pharmacy-only medicines, drugs of dependence and many household, industrial and agricultural chemicals. Of particular relevance to my speech today is that the act provides an authority scheme for the cultivation and processing of low-THC cannabis for non-therapeutic purposes, more commonly known as hemp. I have chosen to speak on this aspect of the bill as hemp is an important focus of mine as the member for Mildura. I have recently joined the government’s hemp task force, along with the Minister for Agriculture, Jaclyn Symes, and our colleague Fiona Patten from the other place. The industrial hemp task force is set to engage with industry stakeholders, participants and research organisations to understand where the hemp industry in Victoria is at, where it wants to go and how we can help get it there. This might mean changes to regulations or policies if necessary. The Victorian hemp industry currently focuses on hemp seeds used for food, but the opportunities for hemp are far more extensive. The fibre has a variety of potential applications across a diverse range of products including textiles, biocomposite plastics, paper, automotive products, construction products, biofuel, oil and cosmetics. There are innovations taking place in the hemp space such as the development of bioplastic polymers that are light and strong but also biodegradable and renewable and an alternative to the petroleum-based plastics that we use now. Bioplastics are derived from renewable biomass sources and, depending on the manufacturing process, they can be biodegradable, 100 per cent non-toxic and sustainably produced. The idea for bioplastics is nothing new but they have been largely ignored for their cheaper, petroleum-based alternatives for a very long time. Hemp plastics are made from the stalk of the plant. The stalk provides a high cellulose count which is required for the plastic construction, providing both strength and flexibility. This amendment to the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act makes two key changes. Firstly, it allows the Secretary of the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions to delegate his or her authority to approve individuals to grow industrial hemp to the relevant officials within the department. I think it is a no-brainer that the harvesting of hemp in Victoria is going to increase. We are starting to learn— and I expect the work of our task force to show—that hemp is the product we should have been growing in our dry nation for many years. We only need to compare hemp to the fibre which is routinely grown in the Murray-Darling Basin, which is cotton, to see that hemp is far more suited to our dry inland. As online newspaper The Fifth Estate stated in its aptly titled story ‘Five ways hemp can help save the planet’:

Per hectare, hemp uses about a third of the water used by cotton, and whatever cotton can do, hemp can do, too. The earliest Levis jeans manufactured for California gold miners in the 1800s were made from hemp, and Levis has now come full circle, with a new range of “cottonised” hemp garments. The article goes on to say:

Given the water savings, it’s easy to imagine the positive benefits it could have for the Murray-Darling River system and other regions where water supplies are at crisis point, if thirsty industrial cotton crops were swapped for hemp. And as climate change makes for more unstable weather patterns and the flow of water down our rivers becomes increasingly insecure it is inevitable that we will need to move to less water-intensive, more sustainable crops for fibres. The second amendment to this act expands the definition of a serious offence under the act. In context, certain serious offences committed prevent certain individuals from being granted an authority under the act to grow industrial hemp. Specifically, the wording will enhance the definition of a serious offence to remove the words ‘where the maximum penalty exceeds three months’.

BILLS 3194 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

In real terms this expands the range of indictable offences to include even the smallest of offences. While I am supporting this bill, this particular change does cause me some concern, and I hope our colleagues in the other place will spend some time examining this particular change and considering alternative wording. The cause for my concern is that while the intention of checks and balances on individuals applying for authority to grow industrial hemp are good, the inclusion of offences for which the penalty does not exceed three months may become so overly prohibitive as to make pursuing a career farming or growing hemp simply too difficult. For example, if a person in their late teens was to be arrested and convicted of possessing a gram of cannabis, this could mean that they are prevented from growing hemp as a business 20 years later when their teen years and their cannabis smoking are both a distant memory. Of additional concern to me is that in considering the expanded definition of ‘serious offence’ this new expanded definition will also be applied to associates of the applicant. So if we take the example I just explained, it might even be the brother or a cousin of the applicant who was convicted of possession of just 1 gram of cannabis, and still the applicant could be barred from holding an authority to grow industrial hemp. It is worth noting at this point that any hemp to be grown for industrial purposes in Victoria is required to be low THC. THC is short for tetrahydrocannabinol, which is the psychoactive chemical compound found at high levels in marijuana, which is a different strain of cannabis, and at very low levels in hemp. The strain of cannabis grown in Victoria for industrial hemp must not contain more than 0.35 per cent of THC. This makes the heavy restrictions on applicants for authority to grow quite excessive in my view. My concerns have not been so great that I will not support the legislation, especially considering the range of changes that are captured in the other parts of this bill; however, I do hope that our colleagues in the other place may have broader time and space to consider the impact of broadening the definition of ‘serious offence’, particularly in the context of its application to associates of those who are applying for an authority. In closing I want to again focus on the many benefits that industrial hemp can bring us and the increasingly important role that legislative change can have in fostering and growing our industrial hemp industry here in Victoria. Firstly, hemp can be used in at least 50 000 different ways, including the entire plant from root to tip and seeds. The stalk can be used for fibre, rope and boards. The seeds can be used for oils, dietary supplements, milk and dairy replacements, granola, protein powder and beer. The leaves, flowers and roots can be used for bedding, mulch and organic compost. Hemp increases biomass while also storing carbon and can be used for sustainable building materials. Car manufacturers, including Mercedes-Benz and Porsche, are using hemp fibre composites in new luxury car models. Zeoform, an Australian company, is using hemp to manufacture products, including surfboards made of hemp instead of fibreglass, bioplastic furniture and rapidly biodegrading plastic substitutes for throwaway consumer items. The best part is we can get all of these uses from a plant which can be grown with about a third of the water that we use for cotton. It would be fair to say that I am fangirling for hemp, and with good reason. As part of the joint hemp task force I hope I will be able to effect and support any changes necessary to make Victoria and my electorate of Mildura the home of industrial hemp in Australia. Changes such as the amendments to the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 as captured in this bill should be just the first in many steps towards that end. I commend the bill to the house. Ms HALFPENNY (Thomastown) (18:51): I also rise to speak in favour of the Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Bill 2019. I want to start with a quote: Consistent with good regulatory practice, I have ensured that the functions of the GMA do not conflict with each other—a good regulator cannot both regulate and promote the industry. As such, the GMA will promote sustainability and responsibility in game hunting, however, it will not have an explicit role in promoting the industry.

BILLS Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3195

Guess who said that in 2013? It was the Leader of the National Party who made these comments, and here we are and the same person, the member for Murray Plains, has moved a reasoned amendment, which goes to this very issue. It is seeking to amend this motion we are debating today by expanding the role of the Game Management Authority so that it does promote responsible game hunting and by proposing additional guiding principles. What a turnaround and what a contradiction. I think this shows the calibre of the opposition when it really is unable to find anything to argue about in a lot of these pieces of legislation that the Andrews Labor government proposes. What it does instead is clutch at straws. It wants to look like it is relevant and therefore puts up reasoned amendments that contradict the thoughts of the opposition in the past. This bill was put to this Parliament in the last parliamentary session. It was passed, but of course in the usual style of the opposition all the filibustering and delay meant that it did not pass the upper house. I want to talk about the changes to the Game Management Authority Act 2014. These are very minor changes that really just go to some of the very small technicalities and administrative changes that in fact stakeholders, including the shooters and fishers organisations, have supported. It does things such as if, for example, there is a resignation from the Game Management Authority board, which oversees the authority, then there is the ability to replace the person who resigns. They are small things that can come up as time goes on. We just need to make sure that there is legislation that covers all possibilities when it comes to the proper governance and management of the Game Management Authority. A previous speaker, the member for Mordialloc, spoke in quite some detail about the work of the Environment, Natural Resources and Regional Development Committee that both he and I were members of in the last Parliament. The Game Management Authority does do a lot of good work. Of course there is always more that organisations such as this can do, but these are all works in progress. The overseeing authority that the Game Management Authority has at the moment has been supported. Yes, we would all like to see a whole lot of things, and of course those things take time to develop, but as has been said, this was something that we wanted to get through quickly and make sure that it met the needs of the stakeholders. The stakeholders supported these changes. If we were to go further and look at a much larger review of the Game Management Authority, that would require a whole lot of extra time and there would have to be a much wider consultation period. Of course the reasoned amendment does not provide for that. There is no consultation in a holistic or proper way. Rather, if this reasoned amendment got up, it would mean that there would be no proper consultation and we would not really know what stakeholders want. They would not have input. It would be something that would probably upset a lot of people. If we are really talking about the wishes of the Victorian public, we really have to take note and give stakeholders a proper opportunity to make sure that they are able to have proper consultation and that we can all understand exactly what any amendments to legislation mean and ensure that we go forward with that. Another part of this multipronged bill, which is looking at changing many things, is the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994. Again, we are looking at fixing up areas that are lacking or where there are loopholes or gaps. The purpose of the amendment to the Catchment and Land Protection Act is that at the moment the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions spends significant time and resources to recover outstanding debts incurred in carrying out its work under the Catchment and Land Protection Act. The purpose of the amendments that we are debating today is to ensure that there are efficiencies by allowing these civil debts to be recovered as part of criminal proceedings. That removes then the need to commence separate civil proceedings, which of course are often much more expensive, and they are separate to the penalties that apply for breaching the act. The member for Mildura talked about the legislative change around opening up and supporting the hemp industry. I understand she also has some concerns, while not necessarily opposing the idea that we want to look at increasing and growing our industries. We just need to be wary of what other things are going on in the world and how they may impact our industries and laws.

ADJOURNMENT 3196 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

When we talk about the changes to the Fisheries Act 1995, I guess the first thing I think of is the electorate of Thomastown and the many, many people who fish—not in Thomastown, of course— those who live in Thomastown and fish in other areas of the state. I must admit that the booklets and the stickers that we have been able to distribute to members of the public have been snapped up by all those very keen fishermen and fisherwomen who live in the Thomastown electorate. There have been a lot of changes to legislation and regulation and there has been support for the fishing industry, especially the recreational fishing industry, in Victoria. I also note that getting rid of the payments applied when you launch a boat to go fishing has been received with great enthusiasm. The state Labor government promised to remove those fees, and I know that in the electorate of Thomastown the very keen fisherpeople have been really excited and happy about this election commitment, which over time can be very expensive—on top of the expenses of purchasing and maintaining a boat and getting it to where you need to go, because you always have to drive a fair way, so it is all the petrol to get there and that sort of stuff as well. So in total there have been 22 changes— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I am required under sessional orders to interrupt business now. The member may continue her speech when the matter is next before the house. Business interrupted under sessional orders. Adjournment The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is:

That the house now adjourns. BROWNPORT ALMONDS Mr WALSH (Murray Plains) (19:00): (1121) My adjournment matter tonight is for the Minister for Planning, and it is on behalf of Brownport Almonds Pty Ltd of Hattah, who have written to the Minister for Planning. It is to ask the Minister for Planning to call in Brownport Almonds’ planning application to build a new almond processing plant at Hattah. Brownport has approval from the Mildura city council, it has approvals from VicRoads, it has approvals from the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning and it has approvals from the CFA, but there is an objection from one neighbour who actually lives 5.6 kilometres away from the proposed processing plant. Brownport Almonds have invested in 5000 hectares of almonds. They currently employ 120 people at their site at Hattah. Their 2020 harvest will produce something like 10 000 tonnes of almonds, with a potential income of nearly A$100 million. This project is time sensitive. They are investing something like A$63 million in the processing plant, and it needs to be onstream for this year’s harvest. If it is not onstream for this year’s harvest, there will not be enough processing capacity for the industry, and because of the time critical nature of processing—and later in the season, weather damage—almonds could actually not be of the quality that they prefer being processed. When this plant is up and running it will employ an additional 30 people at that particular site and create something like 100 casual jobs during the processing season. It will process product worth about $250 million. I would like to emphasise to the minister and to the house that this particular project actually has no government subsidies. It is all Brownport’s investment. They just want the opportunity to get on and invest this money to build this processing plant so that they can actually process this year’s harvest. As I have said, there is a risk to the quality of the almond harvest if it is not built in time to be done. They believe that the one objector has effectively a frivolous objection, and they would like the minister to call in this planning application—the machinery is already there—so that this project can actually be built and be ready for this year’s almond harvest.

ADJOURNMENT Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3197

MELBOURNE-LANCEFIELD ROAD Ms THOMAS (Macedon) (19:02): (1122) The matter I wish to raise is for the attention of the Minister for Roads in the other place, and the action I seek is that the minister arrange a briefing for me with Regional Roads Victoria to discuss the next stage of the Melbourne-Lancefield Road upgrade. The $20 million safety upgrade on the Melbourne-Lancefield Road is certainly much needed. Mr J Bull: Hear, hear. Ms THOMAS: Thank you, member for Sunbury. Between June 2010 and the end of July 2019 there were six deaths, 76 serious injuries and 91 minor injuries on this road. The Melbourne- Lancefield Road has been identified as one of Victoria’s top 20 highest risk rural roads. There is no doubt that this has been a challenging project, and I thank the people of Romsey and Lancefield for their patience while sections of the road have been rebuilt and new overtaking lanes installed, along with widening of road shoulders and the installation of flexible safety barriers and rumble strips. I know that people in my community are very eager to know when stage 2 works can be expected to commence and what these works will entail. I look forward to continuing to work with the minister and with Regional Roads Victoria and my community to deliver the next stage of this vitally important upgrade. PORT FAIRY CFA AND SES Ms BRITNELL (South-West Coast) (19:04): (1123) My adjournment matter this evening is for the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, and the action I seek is a commitment to the co- location of the Port Fairy CFA and SES to the soon-to-be former Ambulance Victoria site. I have raised this matter in the house several times, but there is still no firm commitment that this project will happen, other than a government-authorised sign being stuck up with no time frames. The community want to know when this is going to happen. There are some time restrictions around this for the SES, who are on a leased site which the landlord, the Moyne shire, have flagged they want back in the future. The SES want security to know they are going to have somewhere to go when the time comes for the shire to take the land back. I also want to make it clear that the shire and the SES are working together on this matter. There are no feelings of ill will between either of the parties. The co-location makes perfect sense. Both the CFA and SES are in facilities that are not fit for purpose. Recently I had the honour of attending the 10th anniversary of the opening of the Warrnambool SES headquarters on Walsh Road. Just quickly, I want to congratulate the Warrnambool SES on this milestone. The new headquarters were built on land kindly donated by Warrick Loft. Since its opening, the unit has responded to 1600 calls for help. I also want to congratulate Gerry Billings, who was awarded life membership of the Victoria State Emergency Service on that day, recognising his 42-plus years of volunteer service to the organisation. Gerry is well-known in Warrnambool and is highly regarded across the state. I have been to both the Warrnambool and Port Fairy SES bases many times, and there is no comparison between the two. For a start, the Warrnambool base does not have holes in the roof or the floor like the Port Fairy one does. There is room for equipment, and it has modern volunteer amenities. Port Fairy unfortunately has neither of those things. The Port Fairy CFA is in a similar situation. It is a building that is 160 years old and has no change rooms for the many female volunteers, and getting trucks in and out of the shed is an operation in precision. A wrong move and there would be a lost mirror or a dinted roller door. These two groups work together, the community want them to work together and the organisations they are associated with want them to work together. The government has put up a sign on the site saying it is the future home. The only thing missing is government funding for the project to happen. Both the SES and CFA need new facilities to attract and retain volunteers and to be able to appropriately respond to their community’s calls for help.

ADJOURNMENT 3198 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019

With the new Ambulance Victoria station at Moyne Health Services approaching completion, the Port Fairy CFA and SES are asking when they will have some funding certainty and a time line for their much-needed new space. I ask the minister to provide them with that. HOLMESGLEN EDUCATION FIRST YOUTH FOYER Mr FREGON (Mount Waverley) (19:06): (1124) My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Housing. The action I seek is for the minister to visit my electorate of Mount Waverley to see the Education First Youth Foyer based at the Holmesglen institute’s Waverley campus. The Holmesglen foyer, which has been in operation since 2013, is one of the first of its kind in Victoria, with foyers also successfully running in Broadmeadows and Shepparton. Aimed at breaking the cycle of homelessness, the Education First Youth Foyers provide a safe and secure place for young people who are unable to live at home and are willing to commit to staying in education and training. The results speak for themselves. Prior to entering the foyer, only 6 per cent of participants were in their own home. A year after exiting the foyer this rose to 50 per cent. Going in, 28 per cent were in crisis accommodation, and this fell drastically to just 1 per cent. Eighty-five per cent of participants were in work or education the year after exiting, with 75 per cent having completed year 12, a cert III or higher. I could go on about this fantastic program, but I am reminded that a quick adjournment is a good adjournment. ENERGY SAFE VICTORIA Mr RIORDAN (Polwarth) (19:08): (1125) My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change. The action I seek is for the minister to ensure that the July 2019 promise of an investigation by retiring Energy Safe Victoria chairman Mr Paul Fearon into issues affecting the long-term sustainability of power pole maintenance in the south-west and the determination on prosecutions following the St Patrick’s Day fires is completed before he leaves his 10-year tenure. An elaborate press release today from the Andrews government is titled ‘New direction for Energy Safe Victoria’. Constituents in my electorate hope that this new direction, on the eve of some very important, vital and much-anticipated findings by Energy Safe Victoria, is not used to bury or hide these two very important reports. It is important that no excuse is used to delay these findings on the eve of what is predicted to be another volatile fire season. I have brought to this house’s attention on numerous occasions deficiencies identified by me, my community and others in the knowledge that has been sat on for years by Energy Safe Victoria. As early as 2004 Energy Safe Victoria was being advised by its own consultants and those of the power distribution companies of a bow wave of old and near-end-of-life distribution assets coming to the end of their useful lives. The St Patrick’s Day fires have highlighted the consequences of past safe life infrastructure being relied upon beyond its useful life. Energy Safe Victoria is a vital regulator which my community needs to have on its game. The minister cannot allow the changing of CEOs to be used as an excuse to avoid delivering clear regulatory guidance and necessary penalties and enforcement if distribution companies have failed in their duty of care. SYDNEY ROAD PARKING Ms BLANDTHORN (Pascoe Vale) (19:10): (1126) I appreciate the opportunity to raise a matter for the attention of the Minister for Roads. The action I seek is that the minister assure the community that there is no planned trial of the removal of parking on Sydney Road between Bell Street, Coburg, and Park Street, Brunswick. The Pascoe Vale electorate is home to the Sydney Road precinct that spans from Park Street in Brunswick to Bell Street in Coburg. The narrow corridor of Sydney Road is also a key route for people travelling in and out of the city, it is a major arterial route for commuters to the northern suburbs of Melbourne and indeed it is the road to Sydney. Commuters utilising Sydney Road in Coburg and Brunswick travel to and along this route for diverse reasons and by various modes—they are on foot, they are on bike, they are on trams and buses and of course they are in cars. The continued success of

ADJOURNMENT Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3199 this precinct is dependent on it remaining accessible for all commuters, particularly for those with mobility issues, including the elderly, the disabled and parents with prams. This is why I was disappointed to learn that Moreland City Council has suggested a trial, whereby parking on Sydney Road gives way for permanent bike lanes. Mind you, a suggestion is all that it is, or perhaps it is a stunt, because Sydney Road is an arterial road. The road is the responsibility of the state government and any decision to change the design of Sydney Road is the prerogative of the state government, not of Moreland City Council. There is no consensus amongst the various user groups on a preferred design to trial, no funding has been allocated for a business case or design works for a preferred option and there is certainly no current budget allocation to make infrastructure changes along Sydney Road. The state government understands that this is a diverse precinct. Bridal stores, well-known cafes, bars and restaurants, function venues, culture- and religion-specific stores and unique fashion boutiques— just to name a few—make this area a real destination. Shops on Sydney Road cater to the diverse needs of local consumers. However, this strip is also heavily dependent on customers travelling to this area from the far reaches of Melbourne. Since I have been the member for Pascoe Vale traders have been telling me how their businesses are hurting with the popularity of online shopping. Successful traders are telling me that at times they can barely pay their bills. In the last couple of weeks I have had several conversations with local traders. Roger from the Statewide Sewing Centre told me about a 90-year-old lady who, via car, came with her sewing machine in hand. Roger is adamant that with on-street parking removed from Sydney Road his store would close. Another trader, Jessicakes, in the bridal area of Sydney Road told me how dependent people picking up their wedding cakes are on being able to park out the front and how she recently was going to lease part of her shop to a florist but the florist pulled out on the basis of the threat to parking on Sydney Road. For Moreland City Council to suggest that parking should be removed for bikes is to pit one user of Sydney Road against another. The state government is not interested in playing those kinds of games, and our local community— (Time expired) BIRTH CERTIFICATES Ms SANDELL (Melbourne) (19:13): (1127) My adjournment matter is for the Attorney-General. As the Parliament would be aware, today is my first day back from parental leave since the birth of my son, Gabriel. I am very lucky; he is doing really well, growing like a champion, growing so much in fact we are hopeful of his chances of playing ruck for the Tigers in 2038, so put that in your diaries. I look forward to sleeping again some time in the next decade hopefully. My adjournment matter today regards something strange that I discovered when I tried to register his birth. When a baby is born in Victoria, in order to obtain a birth certificate you must fill in a form on the Victorian Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages website. On that form you must choose the mother’s and father’s occupations from a predetermined list. When doing this for Gabe, to my surprise I discovered that this list is actually quite sexist. For occupation one can choose mother but not father and not parent. You can choose businessman but not businesswoman or businessperson. You can choose salesman but not saleswoman; strangely you can, however, choose saleslady/home duties. You can choose housewife but not househusband, handyman but not handywoman, and the list goes on. I understand that births, deaths and marriages uses a list of occupations provided to them by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. I have written to births, deaths and marriages and to the ABS asking them to change the list, and today I ask the Attorney-General to instruct births, deaths and marriages to discontinue using this ABS list and to also write to the ABS requesting that they change the list. I know that this government is committed to gender equality. While this change would be a small one, it is a significant one because if we are serious about equality in parenting, which is a key part of achieving gender equality more broadly, we do need to ensure that men take an equal share of

ADJOURNMENT 3200 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 10 September 2019 parenting duties, yet on my son’s birth certificate my husband, a stay-at-home father, cannot even list father or househusband as his occupation. This change is a small action that we can take to make a difference. While frankly I am surprised that it has not happened already, I do look forward to it happening in the near future. BUS ROUTES 302 AND 304 Mr HAMER (Box Hill) (19:15): (1128) My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Public Transport. The action that I seek is for the minister to increase peak hour services on bus routes 302 and 304 that run from Box Hill and Doncaster through to the city. These are vital routes that travel through the heart of the Box Hill electorate, connecting residents of Balwyn, Mont Albert North and Box Hill North to the Box Hill railway station, local schools and the CBD. These services have continued to grow in popularity with commuters in my electorate over the last few years. Many residents have been in contact with my office to advise of the increased demand experienced as these routes have increased in patronage. As a former transport professional, as well as a strong advocate and user of local public transport, I know how important frequent and reliable bus services are to the operation of a fully integrated public transport system. The provision of additional services on these routes in the morning peak would provide a much-needed boost to public transport in the eastern suburbs and would be very much welcomed by my community. ENDOMETRIOSIS Ms VALLENCE (Evelyn) (19:16): (1129) My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Health. The action I seek is for the minister to urgently assist women in my community who are on surgery waiting lists to receive treatment for endometriosis. Endometriosis is a poorly understood and crippling condition. Australian government statistics released in August 2019, just recently, reveal that there were 34 200 endometriosis-related hospitalisations in 2016–17, with 80 per cent of cases being women aged 15 to 44. Endometriosis is painful, it can affect family and it can reduce one’s ability to participate fully in work, sport and everyday activities. Given the scope and reach of this traumatic condition, the federal coalition government launched the National Action Plan for Endometriosis in 2018, which aims to improve the quality of life for women with endometriosis and improve the consistency and accessibility of clinical care. Under this scheme laparoscopic surgery, the main avenue for treatment of endometriosis, was changed to the status of semi-urgent treatment. This means women should now expect to wait only two to 90 days to access treatment, rather than the previous wait time of more than 180 days. However, actual wait times for laparoscopic surgery at Eastern Health frequently exceed the up-to-90-day turnaround time, as has been experienced by my constituent Jadie Hunter of Coldstream along with many other women that Jadie knows. It is the Victorian state government’s duty to deliver public surgery in a timely and consistent manner and to reduce barriers to assessment and treatment. However, this Labor government has failed to deliver. It has failed to sufficiently help women struggling with the crippling nature of endometriosis, leaving women like Jadie struggling in its wake. The prolonged wait for surgery has severely impacted Jadie’s life, and the prescriptions she is required to purchase have caused considerable impost on her physical and mental health. It is pleasing that after my colleague the Shadow Minister for Health raised the question on my behalf to the minister in the other place that Jadie has now, miraculously, received a surgery appointment with Eastern Health. However, it should not take a question in question time for the minister to act. The action I seek is that the minister delivers on her responsibility to the thousands of other women with this chronic condition. The minister likes to talk about investing in elective surgery, but testaments from women like Jadie demonstrate how protracted waiting times and the failure of this government to deliver have resulted in deteriorating quality of life for women with endometriosis.

ADJOURNMENT Tuesday, 10 September 2019 Legislative Assembly 3201

I request the minister urgently investigate waiting times for laparoscopic surgery at Eastern Health and detail what measures she is taking to ensure women in my community diagnosed with endometriosis can promptly access treatment and surgery. Every moment spent not doing this is a moment spent curtailing the freedoms of these women who deserve to live life fully. BORONIA SHOPPING PRECINCT Mr TAYLOR (Bayswater) (19:19): (1130) I wish to raise a matter with the Minister for Suburban Development, the member for Kororoit. The action that I seek is that the minister join me in Boronia to tour the shopping and activity precinct and to see firsthand the enormous potential that exists there. I am proud of the Andrews Labor government’s track record on suburban revitalisation. Indeed in both Frankston and Broadmeadows this government has performed significant work to breathe new life into each of those activity centres. It has seen new infrastructure, the start of community projects, upgrades to access for pedestrians and cyclists and enhancements to community safety and youth engagement. All in all it has been a real success story for these two proud communities in the south- east and northern suburbs respectively. In the city’s east Boronia is another proud community. The Boronia precinct is the largest shopping and activity hub in the eastern suburbs outside of the Knox City and Eastland shopping centres. Sitting at the intersection of Dorset and Boronia roads, it is busy almost 24/7 and has a diverse range of specialty stores, large shopping centres and multicultural food offerings. Indeed Plan Melbourne rightly identifies the precinct as a major activity centre. Anybody who has been down there in the last 10 years would absolutely agree. That said, this precinct is looking tired and is in need of a bit of attention. The Knox council has recently published a document called the Draft Boronia Renewal Strategy which sets out a vision of what this precinct could become. Since being elected I have doorknocked and held mobile offices in and around Boronia, and the overwhelming feedback I hear is that our community would like to see a bit of love come their way and for the Boronia precinct to live up to its true potential and to the aspirations that each and every member of this community has for it, as echoed in Knox council’s renewal strategy. Recently I was very pleased to host the Minister for Public Transport, the member for Williamstown, at the station at the heart of the precinct. I would welcome the Minister for Suburban Development to come down to also see this area for herself, to see the real opportunity that this area has. I thank the minister for her consideration of this request and for the work that she and this government are doing in the area of suburban revitalisation. RESPONSES Ms NEVILLE (Bellarine—Minister for Water, Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (19:21): Before I respond to members, I just want to welcome back the member for Melbourne and hope that she does get some sleep soon, in the next decade or so. I thank the member for South-West Coast for raising that issue, and I will seek some advice around the timing. We certainly rely on the CFA to determine when and how they allocate the capital budgets that we provide them with. So I will seek some advice and I will also seek some advice from ESIA, the Emergency Services Infrastructure Authority, about where it sits and what they are doing in order to progress that and get back to the member. A number of other members have raised issues for ministers, and I will pass those issues on. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The house now stands adjourned until tomorrow. House adjourned 7.22 pm.