Legislative Council

Tuesday, 26 June 2007

THE PRESIDENT (Hon Nick Griffiths) took the chair at 3.30 pm, and read prayers. CLERK ASSISTANT (COMMITTEES) - MR PAUL GRANT Statement by President THE PRESIDENT (Hon Nick Griffiths): Honourable members, a selection process commenced in May this year to fill the vacant position of Clerk Assistant (Committees). I am delighted to announce that Mr Paul Grant has been appointed Clerk Assistant (Committees) for the Legislative Council. Paul is well regarded for his high level of professionalism, and brings with him seven years of parliamentary experience as an advisory officer (legal) in the Legislative Council Committee Office. I wish Paul all the best in his new role. Members: Hear, hear! HON MARGARET ROWE Apology for Absence from Legislative Council - Statement by President THE PRESIDENT (Hon Nick Griffiths): Honourable members, I advise the house that on Thursday, 21 June 2007, I received the following letter from Hon Margaret Rowe, MLC - Mr President I have received from the Deputy Clerk an order to attend to answer a question of why I have been absent for more than six sitting days. I wish to formally apologise to the house for my lack of attendance. Resignation from Legislative Council - Statement by President THE PRESIDENT (Hon Nick Griffiths): Honourable members, I advise the house that on Friday, 22 June 2007, I received the following letter from Hon Margaret Rowe, MLC - Mr President Due to ill health I have decided to resign as a member of the Legislative Council as of today. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL - VACANCY Motion HON KIM CHANCE (Agricultural - Leader of the House) [3.34 pm]: Mr President, in light of your statement, I move without notice - That a vacancy in the membership of the Legislative Council is declared by reason of the resignation on Friday, 22 June 2007, of Ms Margaret-Anne Rowe, member for the Agricultural Region. Question put and passed. REGIONAL RESOURCE RECOVERY CENTRE - WASTE COMPOSTING FACILITY, CANNING VALE Petition HON SIMON O’BRIEN (South Metropolitan) [3.35 pm]: I present a petition containing 54 signatures, couched in the following terms - To the President and Members of the Legislative Council of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned residents of Western Australia are opposed to the continued operation of the Regional Resource Recovery Centre’s Waste Composting Facility in Canning Vale. This facility creates a noxious odour, affecting the health and lifestyle of the residents in surrounding suburbs. Your petitioners therefore respectfully request the Legislative Council to support residents and others affected by this Waste Composting Facility and recommend to the Government that the South Metropolitan Regional Council relocate the facility away from any residential area. And your petitioners as in duty bound, will ever pray. [See paper 2835.]

3592 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

MENTAL HEALTH - COMMUNITY SUPPORTED RESIDENTIAL UNITS Petition HON HELEN MORTON (East Metropolitan) [3.36 pm]: I present the following petition - To the President and Members of the Legislative Council of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned residents of Western Australia call on the Legislative Council to oppose the establishment of clusters of 25 or more community supported residential units (CSRU) on hospital sites throughout WA for people with a mental illness, and, seek the support of the Legislative Council to ensure that CSRU are established for no more than eight people in one cluster in normal homes in normal streets, and adequately resourced to ensure that residents successfully integrate within communities throughout Western Australia. Further, we the undersigned residents of Western Australia, call on the Minister for Health to provide balanced, truthful, and objective information to the public; genuine and honest consultation with the public; and transparency and accountability as it pertains to this matter. And your petitioners as in duty bound, will ever pray. The petition bears 68 signatures and I certify that it conforms to the standing orders of the Legislative Council. [See paper 2836.] GENETICALLY MODIFIED FREE ZONE - WESTERN AUSTRALIA Petition HON GIZ WATSON (North Metropolitan) [3.37 pm]: I present a petition containing 3 513 signatures, couched in the following terms - To the President and Members of the Legislative Council of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned residents of Western Australia say that Genetically Modified (GM) foods (and products from GM crops) pose a great risk to human health and the environment and are opposed to commercial growing of GM crops and the introduction of GM foods in this State. Your petitioners therefore respectfully request the Legislative Council to maintain Western Australia’s status as a Genetically Modified Food (and products from GM Crops) free State in perpetuity. And your petitioners as in duty bound, will ever pray. [See paper 2837.] STANDING COMMITTEE ON PROCEDURE AND PRIVILEGES Thirteenth Report - “Absence of a Member: Hon Margaret Rowe MLC” THE PRESIDENT (Hon Nick Griffiths) tabled the thirteenth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and Privileges, in relation to the absence of a member. [See paper 2828.] HON GEORGE CASH (North Metropolitan) [3.38 pm]: I move - That the thirteenth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and Privileges, “Absence of a Member: Hon Margaret Rowe MLC”, as tabled by the President, be printed and that the recommendation be adopted and agreed to. Mr President, for the benefit of members I indicate, pursuant to the order of the house, that on 21 June 2007, Hon Margaret Rowe was served with an order to attend before the Standing Committee on Procedure and Privileges at 1.00 pm on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 at the office of the President. On 21 June 2007, the President received a facsimile letter from the member dated 21 June 2007, apologising for her absence. On 22 June 2007, the President received a facsimile letter from the member, dated 22 June 2007, advising of her resignation as a member of the Legislative Council. The committee, pursuant to the order that the member was required to appear before the committee at 1.00 pm on Tuesday 26 June 2007, considered the issue, and in light of the member’s apology and resignation due to ill health, the member did not appear before the committee. The committee indicates in its report that although the member is noncompliant with the order, it considers, in view of all the circumstances, that no further action should be taken in relation to the contempt of the member pursuant to standing order 57. The committee recommends that no further action be taken in relation to the contempt of Hon Margaret Rowe MLC, pursuant to standing order 57. Question put and passed.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3593

PAPERS TABLED Papers were tabled and ordered to lie upon the table of the house.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION Criminal Law and Evidence Amendment Bill 2006 - Extension of Reporting Time Hon Graham Giffard presented a special report of the Standing Committee on Legislation, in relation to the Criminal Law and Evidence Amendment Bill 2006, seeking an extension of time in which to report from Tuesday, 7 August 2007 to Thursday, 16 August 2007, and on his motion it was resolved - That the report do lie upon the table and be adopted and agreed to. [See paper 2839.] Eighth Report -“Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition (Western Australia) Bill 2005” Hon Graham Giffard presented the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Legislation, in relation to the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition (Western Australia) Bill 2005, and on his motion it was resolved - That the report do lie upon the table and be printed. [See paper 2838.]

JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE CORRUPTION AND CRIME COMMISSION Twenty-seventh Report - “Hearing with the Parliamentary Inspector of the Corruption and Crime Commission on 9 May 2007” Hon Ray Halligan presented the twenty-seventh report of the Joint Standing Committee on the Corruption and Crime Commission, in relation to the hearing with the Parliamentary Inspector of the Corruption and Crime Commission on 9 May 2007, and on his motion it was resolved - That the report do lie upon the table and be printed. [See paper 2840.]

SELECT COMMITTEE INTO PUBLIC OBSTETRIC SERVICES Extension of Reporting Time HON HELEN MORTON (East Metropolitan) [3.42 pm]: I am directed to report that the Select Committee into Public Obstetric Services has resolved that the time in which it has to report be extended from Thursday, 28 June 2007 to Thursday, 30 August 2007. The inquiry’s terms of reference require the committee to inquire into the adequacy of government decision making in relation to maternity services in Western Australia. The health department’s “Future Direction in Maternity Care” consultation and policy development process has been made public in stages that have essentially run parallel to this inquiry. Consequently, in order to give the current process due consideration, an extension of time to report is requested. I move - That the report do lie upon the table and be adopted and agreed to. Question put and passed. [See paper 2841.]

FINANCE BROKERS CONTROL (GENERAL) AMENDMENT REGULATIONS (NO. 3) 2007 - DISALLOWANCE Notice of Motion Hon Ray Halligan gave notice that at the next sitting of the house he would move - That the Finance Brokers Control (General) Amendment Regulations (No. 3) 2007, published in the Government Gazette on 20 April 2007 and tabled in the Legislative Council on 3 May 2007 under the Finance Brokers Control Act 1975, be and are hereby disallowed.

VEHICLE LICENSING OPERATIONS Urgency Motion THE PRESIDENT (Hon Nick Griffiths): Members, I have received a letter in these terms - Dear Mr President I hereby give notice that pursuant to Standing Order 72 I intend to move today:

3594 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

“That this house consider as a matter of urgency the Carpenter Government’s chaotic approach to vehicle licensing operations reflected in the mixed messages being sent to the motor trade industry and the public over the outsourcing of inspection services. Yours sincerely Simon O’Brien MLC In order for Hon Simon O’Brien to move his motion, at least four members should stand in their place. [At least four members rose in their places.] The PRESIDENT: At least four members having stood, I call upon Hon Simon O’Brien to move his motion. HON SIMON O’BRIEN (South Metropolitan) [3.44 pm]: I formally move the motion. The motion invites the house to consider the question of vehicle licensing operations generally but focuses, as indeed shall I, on the specifics of the recent mixed messages that are being sent to the motor trade industry and the public and the chaotic shambles that is this government’s attempt to outsource inspection services. It is becoming abundantly clear to even the most casual observer of Western Australian politics that this government could not organise a bunfight in a bakery or a booze-up in a brewery. It certainly cannot organise a system of motor vehicle examination services. What is more, as with so many of its other failings, the government cannot admit that it has a problem and look for some solutions that will work. It has been a matter of public record and public concern, and the government’s disgrace, that for some years the vehicle examination regime and system has become increasingly more overwhelmed and less able to cope. The people of Western Australia are paying the price through extra costs incurred by the motor trade industry and through the incredible inconvenience caused for any member of the public who seeks to have his vehicle examined for licensing purposes. As the government points out to us, we are in the middle of some extraordinary economic circumstances and lots more people are moving to Western Australia. It is interesting that the refrain that things are good, the economy is booming and people are flocking to Western Australia is used by the government as an excuse for every failure it has. There are plenty; this is only one failure in a long catalogue of complaints that have been aired in this house and publicly in recent years. The one other consistent factor about the catalogue of complaints of the government’s failure to address the issues of the day is that the government refuses to recognise that it has a problem. It refuses to be frank about it and promotes itself as some sort of spin doctor that can convince people - who will not be convinced - that there is no problem. In fact, anyone involved in the particular activity at issue can see that there is a problem, as can any outside observer of the problems that beset this government. However, it is the members of cabinet who persist in putting their heads in the sand and who fail to recognise what has been happening. Vehicle licensing is a fundamental hands-on activity of government. Increasingly, it has been carried out by overworked staff at the Department for Planning and Infrastructure, who simply cannot cope with the job that the government has assigned them with the resources the government has given them and in the way that the government insists they go about business. If members go to licensing centres and talk to the examiners and others involved, they will be told that the examiners have suggested alternatives to the government. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: How many have you been to? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN: Probably more than the minister. We will find out from the minister how many she has been out to visit. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: We will. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN: She can tell us about how everything is fine. What is the expression that she uses? They have thrown some money at it. What are they throwing money at? There has been a problem for some years with the volume of work, which is overwhelming vehicle licensing centres. I have raised this on a number of occasions. On 17 October 2006, I raised it in the house with a statement in which I pointed out the delays at the East Perth licensing centre. The centre lacked a simple appointment booking system, toilet facilities if people needed to use them and a system for people to hold their place in the queue while they waited there for hours. I suggested in that statement that the government engage the non-government sector in vehicle licensing inspections. I also sought a response from the government to the matters I had raised. However, there was no overt government response. Again, that is typical of this government. When we raise matters in this house, the government never gives us the courtesy of providing a reply. That is the case particularly when it relates to the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. What happened in this case was that the then Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure - I say the then minister, because the government changes ministers regularly - set about trying to fix this public relations disaster behind the scenes by looking at some of my suggestions.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3595

On 23 November, Hon Norman Moore put to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure the following question on my behalf - (1) Will the government introduce a system for bookings and appointments . . .? (2) Will the government provide toilet facilities for members of the public . . . ? (3) Will the government implement the suggestion for authorised inspection centres to be staffed by qualified mechanics . . . ? I did not receive an answer to that question on that day. I finally received an answer on 7 December - the day the house rose for the year - when the parliamentary secretary, Hon Kate Doust, advised that the minister had provided a response today, and sought leave to table the response and have it incorporated in Hansard. The answer referred to an announcement that had been made by the minister on 29 November. In other words, the government forgot about answering the question that I had asked. It just wanted to give the public its spin. The government’s spin was that a trial of a booking system for appointments for vehicle inspections would commence on 1 March, staff toilets would be made available for public access, and the Department for Planning and Infrastructure was reviewing its vehicle inspection service and was examining a range of options, including the expansion of the approved inspection station scheme. In April this year, when I visited the Welshpool vehicle inspection premises, it became obvious that the government was not delivering any of its promised improvements. After some commentary in the public arena, the government ultimately came up with a $73 million plan to try to fix the problem. It is interesting that even after the government has taken the time and spent the money, it still has not been able to fix the problems that exist. On 28 May, the Motor Trade Association of Western Australia called for a meeting with a senior representative of the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. It called for that meeting because it had become aware that the government was intending to introduce a regime for approved inspection stations. That regime was not the one I had suggested, which was also the one that was in operation in other states. No. The Carpenter Labor government wanted to implement its own version of that regime. However, that seems destined to fail. The MTA had heard a rumour, which was rife in the industry at the time, that only RAC-owned, as opposed to RAC- approved, outlets would be appointed to conduct the trial. On 30 May, Hon Anthony Fels asked the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure the following question - (1) Is the government considering a trial to subcontract the government’s motor vehicle inspection services . . . ? (2) If yes, will this be advertised for public tender to more than one service provider . . .? The response from the minister was as follows - (1)-(2) The Department for Planning and Infrastructure is holding discussions with providers for a metropolitan area trial . . . DPI had sought and obtained approval to be exempt from undertaking a public tender process for the duration of the trial. Should the arrangements extend beyond the trial, they will be subject to an open tender process. The minister’s response then went on with a diatribe, which was straight out of a press release, about all the things the government was doing. On 5 June, I asked the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure - (1) Has RAC WA already been chosen to be the service provider for the trial? (2) Has the minister required that there be a general call for expressions of interest from other potential service providers; and, if not, why not? The response from the minister was as follows - (1) No, although we have had discussions with RAC. (2) Certainly, other providers will be considered. As I have said, there has been some toing and froing by the government on this matter. At face value, this would seem to address the concern that had been raised with me that one company was being given a free run on this matter, and that other service providers - of which there are several that are arguably better equipped than the RAC to provide those services - were not being considered. We got that response from the minister just a little while ago - in this very month.

3596 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Next, on 20 June members of the Motor Trade Association received a notice from the MTA about expressions of interest for motor vehicle inspections. The notice states - The MTA has been in negotiations with Government about entering into private partnership arrangements with the industry to carry out some of the vehicle pit inspections that are currently undertaken by staff of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. An initial trial is to be conducted where a limited number of outlets will be selected to undertake inspections. If successful the number of outlets that will be approved as inspection stations will be increased in the metropolitan area. Expressions of interest for businesses seeking to be appointed for the trial period will appear in The West Australian this coming Friday the 22nd June and in the Sunday Times on 24th June. Automotive repair outlets that are interested in undertaking these inspections should apply under the conditions outlined in the Expressions of Interest advertisement. There we are: we are finally getting some progress. Lo and behold, on 24 June, the day before yesterday, there is story in the press that vehicle inspections will be done by the RAC. I mention in passing that I do not have a problem with the RAC or its seeking to do these jobs. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: You do not think they are a reputable organisation. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN: I said something to the contrary. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: That is what you said. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN: Will the minister belt up for a minute? I am clearly trying to address the Chair. I am on limited time and the minister will get the time to flap her gums in a moment. The story in The Sunday Times, which is lifted almost verbatim from the minister’s press release, although with some of the detail and quotes around the wrong way, tells us that the RAC will be starting these services from Monday, 2 July. So much for those who took some comfort from the MTA’s notice, the body that had been dealing with the government and which referred its members to the advertisement in the very same paper calling for expressions of interest from service providers. The minister promised in this house that they would be able to express an interest and, maybe, participate in the trial. Have no doubt about it, this potential for an outsourced inspection service is worth millions and millions of dollars, and the industry is concerned that the government is not giving everybody a level playing field to compete on, but is giving one group - and again I have no problem with the RAC as an organisation - Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: You obviously do. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN: The minister is an idiot. The RAC as an organisation is not the issue. Withdrawal of Remark Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I ask that the comment be withdrawn. It is inflammatory and certainly not pleasant. The PRESIDENT: I understand the point the minister is making. It is not the sort of comment that need be withdrawn, even though it is not one we like to hear in this chamber. I leave it in the hands of Hon Simon O’Brien. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN: I will happily withdraw the comment I made, so let us have no fuss about that. As for inflammatory and unpleasant, I will not go there either. Debate Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN: There are some important observations that need to be made, even though the minister does not want them to be made. The lion’s share of the inspection services trial is going to one group, and one only, and the other service providers - willing, potential service providers - are being shut out and are concerned about the impact that will have on any future tenders that go to the public and how the process is being promoted in the public eye. It also raises questions about how, behind closed doors, this government went about the process of picking its one service provider without tender and why it had to indicate that it had an open mind about it. Why cannot the government play a straight bat? I am running short of time, but the final element that I have time to raise today is that further confusion has been sown. The Motor Trade Association, my office and the offices of other members are receiving calls from people in the industry who are concerned about the lack of process, the chaotic nature of the government’s approach and the confusion that is being caused. To cap it all off - the minister will be interested in this - according to the MTA, just today one of its members contacted the Department for Planning and Infrastructure in good faith and in response to the advertisement that appeared in the paper to get the information package referred to in the

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3597 advertisement. It cannot be accessed, because it cannot be printed yet, and it will not be printed before the time for applications closes. HON MURRAY CRIDDLE (Agricultural) [4.01 pm]: I assure the minister that there is concern about this issue. A very good inspection service was in place, but the number of vehicles has increased enormously since this government has been in power. As the minister outlined the other day, the growth rate is something like 10 per cent a year. Over six years, that is an enormous increase in the number of vehicles. As the minister would know, I know some of the people in the inspection service, and there has been great concern in this area for the three or four years of which I am aware. The inconvenience to the public is not acceptable. There is a way through all this, by utilising some of the skills available in the community to inspect the vehicles. I have some questions for the minister about the way the inspection service is being run. What is the situation with new vehicles? How many inspection services are there in the metropolitan area, and what is their capacity to service the people requiring inspections? What will happen in the country? These are the sorts of questions I am being asked. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: We already have licensed inspection agents who are MTA members right throughout regional and rural Western Australia, but keep going. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: The minister is saying that to me, but the problem in the general community is that changes are being made, and statements are being made about the opportunities for people to tender on processes and so forth, that are creating confusion. All I am asking the minister to do is to put on the record the situation as it is now so that people in the community can understand what is going on. I asked a question the other day about drivers’ licences, and the minister gave me some answers that will probably cause some confusion, because there is a six-month period and then we will change to a situation in which Department for Planning and Infrastructure staff will carry out licensing requirements. That has created a lot of confusion in country areas because of the requirement for people to go to a regional centre to go through the process of obtaining their licences. The minister must understand that this is also related to the accreditation of heavy vehicles, which is in a mess because it is not a standard situation. The heavy vehicle operators, if they are big companies, will tick all the squares without inspecting the vehicles themselves, creating a situation in which some heavy vehicles are on the road in dangerous conditions. If the bushes on the third trailer of a road train are not well maintained, the sway can be quite considerable - up to a metre. It is a dangerous situation. Everybody needs to be treated equally, and the only way to do that is to have vehicles go through an inspection every year or two. We also need an inspection service that is available to people, and that people can reasonably access. If they can telephone and book an appointment to go through the process without too many downsides, people can understand the situation and rely on it. They will then not lose money, not be late for work when the job is not done and not have to sit in a queue for 24 hours. These are the sorts of things that we want fixed up. I want to refer also to the public tender issue. When a major company wins a tender that has been called for, will that company be allowed to subcontract the tender, which means other people can do it? Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: No. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: It has happened with other agencies whereby a company was the main tenderer but subcontractors have done the work. We want an assurance that that will not happen with this tender because it will only jack up the cost for the major tenderer, who will hand it onto somebody else to do the job for a lot less. I know for certain that that has happened with other agencies and we do not want that to happen with this agency. I want to ask a number of questions, including a question about staff. Does the Department for Planning and Infrastructure have more staff available to run the inspection services and have the staff been maintained to the required degree? I mentioned a few inspection services. What will the $73 million from the budget go on? Perhaps the Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure could outline to Western Australian taxpayers what that will be spent on. I want the minister to outline what the vision is for the inspection service: firstly, for vehicles in the metropolitan area and, secondly, for vehicles in country areas. Although a lot of the Budget Statements are definitely related to the metropolitan area, people need a clear view of what is happening in the regions. They want the comfort of knowing that they will not need to travel excessive distances to get their vehicles inspected. Finally, can I have an understanding of what the government’s policy is with regard to new vehicles? Do they have to go through an inspection or is there an agreement? There was talk about an agreement between major customers and the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. Will the minister outline what the situation will be for licensing new vehicles? HON LJILJANNA RAVLICH (East Metropolitan - Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure) [4.07 pm]: I am very happy to provide a response. First, I will put matters into context. This government inherited from the Court government a system that had been neglected for many years.

3598 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Hon Murray Criddle: That’s rubbish, and you know it. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I do not know it. In fact, during that period many licensing facilities and inspection stations were closed. Several members interjected. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Whether or not members like it, that is a fact. Due to the negligent treatment by the Court government, infrastructure was run down, facilities were closed and staff morale was low. Several members interjected. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: The opposition may not like it, but those are facts; certainly my visits to the licensing centres have demonstrated this. Since becoming minister, I have visited Midland, Joondalup, Warwick, East Perth, O’Connor, Rockingham, Welshpool and Kalgoorlie licensing centres. Which ones has Hon Simon O’Brien visited? Hon Simon O’Brien: I haven’t visited that many; that’s for sure. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Hon Simon O’Brien stood and told me that I did not know what I was talking about. Hon Simon O’Brien: I don’t reckon you do, though! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I tell Hon Simon O’Brien that I did not advise those licensing centres when I was going to visit them. I went to those facilities and stood in a queue, and I walked up to the people sitting in their cars waiting in the queue and talked to them. I got, Mr President - Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! I am having a difficulty because I cannot hear what the minister is saying and therefore the Hansard reporter must be having a difficulty. I therefore ask members to desist from making so much noise. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Thank you, Mr President. Not only did I watch the licensing systems at work, not only did I observe the clientele and not only did I observe the workings of the front counters after I made myself known to the managers who were running the operations, but also I had a formal meeting with some of them. That gave me an excellent opportunity to observe on the ground exactly what was happening across the state in a number of areas. There is no doubt that we have experienced significant growth in the vehicle fleet, as Hon Murray Criddle has already indicated. The national average growth in government vehicle fleets has been 12 per cent, and Western Australia is currently leading the nation. It is estimated that the volume of business now handled by the licensing business unit, which looks after this area, has grown in the order of 15 per cent. Western Australia has the highest rate of vehicles per 1 000 resident population in Australia at 784 vehicles, compared with the Australian average of 699. Currently we have nearly 1.6 million vehicles on the road for a population of two million people. Hon Simon O’Brien: You weren’t being completely truthful with me on 15 June, were you? That’s the point. The PRESIDENT: Members! There are too many interjections. One of the interjections, which I only partially heard, was not the sort of comment that should be made in this house. I think I only partially heard it. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: There seems to be quite a bit of it of late. The announcement I made on Sunday relates to a new trial to provide low-risk vehicle inspections by private sector providers. High-risk inspections will not be handled by private sector providers. Hon Simon O’Brien made the point that the Motor Trade Association of Western Australia is very unhappy. I can tell the member that John Taylor of the Motor Trade Association - Peter Fitzpatrick is out of the state - said that the MTA welcomed the initiative and hoped that it would make significant progress towards reducing queues and delays at licensing centres. Hon Simon O’Brien: What are you quoting from? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I am quoting from the press release that I issued on 24 June 2007. Authorised inspection stations have been a feature of the provision of vehicle inspection services in regional and rural landscapes for many years now. They are all MTA members. Hon Bruce Donaldson interjected. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: The member can ask me that later but I will finish putting my case. This trial will focus on providing inspections for low-risk light and low-risk heavy vehicles in the metropolitan area. We will provide customers with a choice of where their vehicles will be examined. This initiative is largely driven by dealing with the current backlog and trying to reduce the waiting times for businesses and individuals who have their vehicles inspected. Members opposite think it is funny that we are experiencing growth and are having to deal with the pressures as a result of that growth. Frankly, one of the objectives of this initiative is to

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3599 ensure that we cater for the projected long-term growth. If members opposite are saying to me that the government should be building vehicle inspection stations at the expense of building roads, rail and schools - Hon Simon O’Brien: No, we are not saying that. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: That is exactly what the member is saying. Hon Simon O’Brien: This is ridiculous. You are a joke! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: I am telling members opposite that the priority of this government is to clean up the mess - Hon Simon O’Brien: I am saying to you specifically that I am not saying that. The PRESIDENT: Order, Hon Simon O’Brien! Interjections are appropriate on occasions when they facilitate the debate, but when more than one member is interjecting and the minister has made it clear that she does not want to take interjections, they are inappropriate. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: The partners recognised under this trial program will have to meet stringent criteria before being authorised. They will be subject to random auditing by licensing services to ensure that vehicle safety and identity standards are maintained. Obviously, members opposite do not think that the Royal Automobile Club is a reputable party to be involved in a trial. What we are talking about is a trial. All too often, members opposite come into this place very ill- informed; they do not know what is going on and they pretend that they are experts. Several members interjected. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Let me put this on record: under the trial inspections of light vehicles will be carried out by RAC auto services by appointment at Balcatta, Bentley and Joondalup from 2 July; at Myaree and Northbridge from 6 August; at Osborne Park from September; and Morley from November. Expressions of interest - Hon Simon O’Brien: We know all this! Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: No, members opposite do not know any of it - unfortunately. Expressions of interest are currently being sought for additional private sector partners - hence the advertisement in the newspaper - to carry out light vehicle examinations in Midland and Joondalup and to provide heavy vehicle inspections for up to two sites in the metropolitan area. The proposition that, in some way, the government is just simply doing this without recognising the importance of all providers throughout the metropolitan area and, indeed, the implication that the RAC has been awarded a long-term contract is simply wrong. Hon Simon O’Brien interjected. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: That is exactly what the member is saying; he is alleging that we have entered into a contract. The member disputes the reputation of the RAC, which has been around for many decades. It is highly recognised; it is a quality control organisation. The Western Australian public has great confidence in it. That is not to suggest that there are not other providers who can also provide a high level of service for motor vehicle inspection services. Clearly, the Motor Trade Association is supportive of this program, otherwise John Taylor, who has put his name - Hon Simon O’Brien: Have you spoken to John Taylor? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: No, I have not but other people have. Hon Simon O’Brien: I have; I spoke to him yesterday and the day before. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: Very good for the member! This is a trial. Members opposite would have us believe that to do nothing is the most appropriate way to go. The simple fact is that this government will not do nothing; this government will act. We will address the issue, which is long overdue. We intend to do it in the best interests of the people of Western Australia. We intend to do it because we believe it is not acceptable to have queues of people - whether they are business people or private citizens - for hours on end trying to get a vehicle inspected. We have promised that there will be no job losses. HON ANTHONY FELS (Agricultural) [4.18 pm]: I support this urgency motion from Hon Simon O’Brien. I was put onto this issue about a month ago by a number of players in the industry who wished to be able to provide the service to the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. They heard whispers that a decision had already been made to give it to the RAC to provide the service. On 30 May I asked a question of the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, which stated -

3600 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(1) Is the government considering a trial to subcontract the government’s motor vehicle inspection services, or any part of that process, to the private sector? (2) If yes, will this be advertised for public tender to more than one service provider; and, if not why not? I was given a very brief response, which was basically that the government was talking to a number of parties. I have been talking to a number of parties who are able to provide that service. It is their belief that they were never in the running to provide the service. It is their opinion that the RAC had already been chosen to provide the service. It will be established initially as a trial; therefore, I guess the RAC will have a foot in the door, and that will give it the best opportunity to provide that service on an ongoing basis. I have no problem with the RAC itself. However, the RAC is more than a just a mutual organisation these days. It provides a lot of services in competition with the private sector, and that is a good thing. However, if an opportunity is being offered to an organisation to help out a government agency because the agency is having difficulty providing a timely service, the matter should have gone to public tender, especially given the RAC is competing openly in the private sector. The system of vehicle licensing in this state is chaotic. It has always been a problem for businesses and individuals who need to license their vehicles, trailers or boats or for people who want to renew their driver’s licence or apply for a truck driver’s licence in relation to their employment. A business might want to employ a new person who is required to have a heavy-duty vehicle licence. Everyone knows the difficulties with the shortage of staff in Western Australia. A new employee who requires, for example, a truck driver’s licence must wait I do not know how long, but it will be months rather than days or weeks, to undertake training, which should not take too long. That person must first obtain a learner’s permit and then make a booking for a driving test. That is something the government should be addressing as much as the delays in vehicle licensing. When an economy is running as hot as it is in Western Australia, particularly in the farming and mining sectors, people who do not already have the qualifications need to obtain them as soon as possible. One business in my region in the mid-west that is running about 40 trucks from Morawa to Geraldton is having great difficulty attracting enough drivers to maintain its operation in the longer term. It is competing with the mining sector up north which also wants truck drivers. It has advertised in the Geraldton Guardian and even in The West Australian for staff. The company is prepared to train people to enable them to get their truck driver’s licence so that they can drive heavy vehicles. If the staff are not available, it is imperative that the government create opportunities so that people can sit and pass their driving test as soon as possible. They should not be burdened with that extra drag of waiting four or five weeks before they can get into a licensing centre and sit their test. Young people who want to make bookings to sit their tests for their learner’s permits or their P plates are facing similar delays. I acknowledge that they should not rush in to do these things. I have been into the licensing centres in Welshpool and CityWest in West Perth and seen people waiting over an hour from the time they receive their ticket until they are served. They might be only renewing their vehicle registration or applying to book a date for their driving test. My daughter has recently turned 17 and is scheduled to sit her driving test tomorrow. When I went into the licensing centre a couple of weeks ago, I had to wait almost an hour just to book her in for a test. I felt like turning up there the next day and handing out a letter to everyone in the queue telling them that when they vote in a Liberal government, they will not have to wait so long. That might have got the message across more than an urgency motion. Those sorts of long queues are not acceptable to anyone. I remember what it has been like when I have wanted to register vehicles or renew my licence. It is not always a simple process in light of the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Regulations 1994 when employees incur parking or speeding fines or anything irregular occurs surrounding a licence or an outstanding fee, especially if a business has dozens of vehicles. The Department of the Premier and Cabinet probably owns thousands of vehicles. If one of those vehicles has a problem, it can affect the registrations of all the others. That can be sorted out quickly. It has to be sorted out quickly under that regime. If someone has to go down to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure to try to sort it out, they will find that it is just chaotic. The staff are more than helpful; I have always found them to be very good. They are frustrated at times when they have gone to look for something and there is a problem within the system. Earlier this year the minister announced that funding of $73.8 million would be allocated to this department, specifically to be spent on licensing centres to increase efficiency, provide better facilities and to change business practices in order to improve them and make them speedier. I do not know whether the sole aim of that funding was to appoint the RAC to do its inspections. I do not know what else it has done with that money. I have recently visited a licensing centre, and it has certainly been chaotic. I welcome the announcement concerning the RAC; I think we should open these things up to more businesses in the private sector. I have an issue with the fact that the work has gone to the RAC without it having been put out to public tender. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: It’s only a trial. Hon ANTHONY FELS: I know that it is a trial. That is the crux of the whole issue. The reason the government has set up a trial is because it can be started next week without going to public tender. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: But you don’t have to go to a public tender for a trial.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3601

Hon ANTHONY FELS: I understand that. The whole reason the government is going to a trial rather than - Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: Why would we go into it without working out where some of the issues are? Hon ANTHONY FELS: When the minister announced in April that $73 million was available for this project, she could have said that it would be implemented in July. It could have been put out to public tender in April or May this year, a decision could have been made in June and the whole thing started in July. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: Yes, but we want to know what the issues are that the trial will throw up. We don’t want to go in there and then experience the issues after the event. Hon ANTHONY FELS: The program could have started in July. It could have gone out to public tender and the RAC, UltraTune or any of these other businesses, be they MTA accredited businesses or basically any accredited mechanic, could have applied to do these inspections. It could have been started and then expanded down the track. The reason the government has jumped to a trial, after making the announcement on Sunday that it starts next week, is because the situation is so urgent, chaotic and far behind where it should be that it had no other option, if it was not to go through a normal public tender process, than to start it on a trial basis and expand it from there. HON SIMON O’BRIEN (South Metropolitan) [4.28 pm]: I wish to make a brief reply. I will not introduce any new material. In my opening remarks I mentioned that in my view the government could not do a number of things, including some basic functions. I also indicated that I thought the government had an inability to recognise problems, thereby a consequent problem to recognise solutions and, perhaps even worse, an inability to understand that it has that problem that it cannot recognise when it has a problem, and the people of Western Australia end up paying the price. The issues that I raised that were totally ignored by the minister - they remain unanswered - included the following. Maybe I will get an answer at some stage. If this trial at a number of service provider centres starts this coming Monday, I am entitled to ask whether the minister knew that on 5 June when I asked her. I raised that during my initial remarks. However, the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure refused to respond to that question. I am disappointed by that, because it leaves the conclusion that the minister has not been candid when responding to these questions. If the minister wanted to say on 5 June, as she could have said, that there was no need for a tender process, that someone would be appointed and that the government was in the process of doing that, why not say that? The minister did not say that. Rather, she said that no decision had been made and that the providers at large would be given a role in participating, which is what they expected. They were not given that role. They fear duplicity on the part of the government. Given the responses we have heard so far, we cannot be blamed for suspecting an unwillingness to say frankly and candidly what is happening. This proves the contention of my motion that the government’s approach to this matter has been chaotic and that its mixed messages have left the motor trade industry and the public confused. The point has been made; however, the minister does not get it. That gives me no confidence that the trial will go well and that there has been 100 per cent propriety in the process. Given the actions of many of her ministerial colleagues, we can all be forgiven for doubting whether the minister has followed proper procedures, particularly given the nonsense spin we have heard today, which does not address any of the matters of concern that I have raised in the house. That is particularly disappointing. Members of the public can rest assured that we will continue to pursue the government over the issues for which it is failing to be accountable. I conclude by making two observations that I have made during the debate. I do not want those observations to be misrepresented by the Minister for Local Government, which is what she sought to do on several occasions while I was on my feet. I said on several occasions during my earlier remarks that I do not have any problem at all with the Royal Automobile Club as an organisation or a service provider. I stand by that remark. It was wrong of the minister to interject and say that I do and to repeat that claim in her remarks. I had better not hear that said outside this house, because that would be an absolute falsehood. That is one thing that I want to make clear. I also want to make it clear that I have been talking with the Motor Trade Association and its members about this matter. Perhaps the minister ought to as well. Motion lapsed, pursuant to standing orders. SELECT COMMITTEE ON MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN BALGA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL AND MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY TRAINING SERVICES PTY LTD Establishment - Motion Resumed from 20 June on the following motion moved by Hon Peter Collier - That - (1) A select committee of three members is appointed, any two of whom constitute a quorum. (2) The committee is to inquire into and report on - (a) the circumstances surrounding the signing of the memorandum of understanding between Balga Senior High School and Manufacturing

3602 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Industry Training Services Pty Ltd on 14 February 2005 for the establishment of the Balga Works program; (b) the knowledge and involvement of government ministers, officers of the Department of Education and Training and officers of all other government and ministerial offices in the circumstances surrounding the signing of the memorandum of understanding as referred to in (a); (c) the circumstances surrounding the replacement of Manufacturing Industry Training Services Pty Ltd with Hurson Pty Ltd as the operators of the Balga Works program in 2005; (d) the knowledge and involvement of government ministers, officers of the Department of Education and Training and officers of all other government ministerial offices in the circumstances surrounding the operation of the Balga Works program in 2004-07; (e) the circumstances surrounding the payment and nonpayment of former employees of the Balga Works program; (f) the circumstances surrounding the funding of accommodation for young people provided under the Balga Works program at Nottingham Street, Joondalup, by the Department for Community Development in 2004-07; and (g) such other relevant matters as the committee considers appropriate. (3) The committee has the power to send for persons, papers and records and the power to travel. (4) The committee may present interim reports without a requirement for leave. (5) The committee is to report to the house no later than Thursday, 6 December 2007. HON LJILJANNA RAVLICH (East Metropolitan - Minister for Local Government) [4.34 pm]: The point at which I left off when I last spoke to this motion was that no-one intended for the Balga Works program to be surrounded by controversy. My reading of the history of what has occurred indicates that there was enormous community support for the Balga Works program. Merv Hammond, who was the principal at Balga Senior High School, was known for his innovation and for taking on challenges associated with high-risk students. In fact, I understand that many of these students were difficult students within not only a school context, but also a life context. Many of them had come from broken homes and from disadvantaged backgrounds. Many of them had already interfaced with the legal system. Many of them did not seem to have particularly good prospects for the future. Certainly, there was a good intent by the people involved in this program. However, it has become apparent that the way this issue was dealt with may not have been the best way to handle it. It is a matter for the house to decide whether we should set up an inquiry into this issue. The Department of Education and Training is a big organisation. It has many, many challenges, and it is fair to say that sometimes mistakes may be made on the way through. Certainly, on the issue of public credibility at the onset of this project, it is very clear from my reading about the early parts of the evolution of this initiative that there was strong support from key people within the community. The local parents and citizens association was very supportive of it. Some judges seemed to be very supportive of it. The police were very supportive of it. Social workers were very supportive of it, because it represented in some cases a last chance to give some students an opportunity that they otherwise would not have had. From that point of view, the people who made the decision to move into an arrangement with Hurson Pty Ltd did so with the best intent. It is unfortunate that the program evolved in such a way that high-risk students had some high-risk difficulties at the other end. During 2005 the school arranged for a private provider, Hurson Pty Ltd, to deliver the in-school component of the program, keeping in mind that that was what the Department of Education and Training’s involvement related to. At that stage, Hurson also was responsible for the out-of-school component, with interagency involvement. Early in 2006 the Department of Education and Training sought and was given permission from the State Supply Commission to continue with Hurson Pty Ltd as the provider of the program while a tender was prepared. The Balga Works tender evaluation panel of the department assessed three tenderers for delivery of the program in July 2006 but rejected all on the basis of price. Concerns about the financial and contractual management of the program were first raised in October 2005. Advice was sought from the Corruption and Crime Commission that indicated that the Department of Education and Training should undertake an investigation. Therefore, that action was taken, and this was carried out under the direction of a reference group. Further financial concerns relating in particular to cash reserves at Balga Senior High School were raised in April 2006. These indicated that the school was operating outside the budget of the 2006 program plan and financial management guidelines. Mr Hammond and Hurson Pty Ltd reported that the overexpenditure occurred

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3603 because they were confident that interagency resources from both state and commonwealth sources would be forthcoming and sufficient to meet the shortfall. The in-school component of the program at Balga Senior High School ceased on 13 October 2006, and the department implemented processes to ensure that the educational needs of the students formally enrolled in the program were in fact met. During 2006, the Swan District Education Office received several calls from employees of the Balga Works program, complaining that they had not been paid. These concerns were forwarded to Mr Hammond, as the principal of the school with responsibility for the program management of the company concerned. In June 2006, several members of Parliament made representations to the Minister for Education and Training on behalf of their constituents, alleging that about 20 to 25 people were owed money in unpaid salary for work undertaken by Hurson Pty Ltd in relation to the Balga Works program. There were also concerns relating to non-payment of tax and superannuation for the workers. Certainly, Hurson Pty Ltd was responsible also for the 24-hour care of up to 20 Balga Works students at any one time under the direction of, and with funding from, the Department for Community Development. Out-of-school accommodation for these students was sourced by Hurson Pty Ltd and located in Joondalup. The Department for Community Development provided funding to Hurson for this care through the Balga Senior High School Parents and Citizens Association. In relation to the proposal by Hon Peter Collier to establish a select committee to inquire into and report on the memorandum of understanding between Balga Senior High School and Manufacturing Industry Training Services Pty Ltd, Hon Mark McGowan, who is now the Minister for Education and Training, recommends that a parliamentary inquiry regarding the memorandum of understanding between Balga Senior High School and Manufacturing Industry Training Services Pty Ltd not proceed at this time. The reason for this recommendation is that currently a police investigation is in progress regarding this MOU and other issues involving the Balga Works program, and an inquiry would jeopardise that investigation. I also must say that many of the documents that the inquiry may want to sight are currently in the possession of the police. The minister reports that as soon as the Department of Education and Training became aware of the existence of the MOU, it acted to establish the legality and authority of the document and its implications for the school. Executive officers of the department advised the Corruption and Crime Commission as soon as they became aware of possible breaches of public sector standards. Of course, the CCC referred this issue to the Public Sector Investigation Unit, which is a unit within the WA Police, and the issue is currently being investigated by that unit. The department monitored the Balga Works program when it became aware of the issues and control-related expenditure. The department ceased the operation of the program after assessing its viability, and fulfilled its moral duty to the students by finding alternative programs for them. As noted, this issue was referred to the CCC, and the CCC referred it to the Public Sector Investigation Unit of the WA Police. Debate interrupted, pursuant to standing orders. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Order of Business HON KIM CHANCE (Agricultural - Leader of the House) [4.45 pm] - without notice: I move - That orders of the day 403, 438, 439, 436 and 437 be taken in that order, before order of the day 395. The PRESIDENT: The Leader of the House has moved that orders of the day 403, 438 and 439 be taken in that order before order of the day 335 - is that correct? I do not have a copy. Hon KIM CHANCE: I am sorry, Mr President; you were right until order of the day 439. I also moved that orders 436 and 437 be taken before order of the day 395. The PRESIDENT: The Leader of the House has moved that orders of the day 403, 438, 439, 436 and 437 be taken before order of the day 395. Point of Order Hon NORMAN MOORE: Mr President, this motion seeks to engage the house in debate on a number of orders of the day ahead of a disallowance motion that is due to be resolved at today’s sitting. It has crossed my mind that if we were to deal with all the orders of the day that the Leader of the House suggests should come before order of the day 395, there will be no time to deal with order of the day 395. I would appreciate it if the Leader of the House would explain how he proposes to deal with order of the day 395. The PRESIDENT: The Leader of the House has moved a procedural motion, which is not a matter that is subject to debate. If the motion is carried, the question on order of the day 395 will be put at this day’s sitting, even though the various orders of the day that the Leader of the House has referred to in his motion may not

3604 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] have been dealt with at that time. However, although we are not debating the matter, the Leader of the House is indicating that he wishes to make an observation so that he can be of assistance to the house. Hon KIM CHANCE: Hon Giz Watson has indicated to me that she thought that if we began the debate on order of the day 395 at about 9.15 pm - Hon Norman Moore: Come off the grass! Why didn’t you talk to the opposition about it? Hon KIM CHANCE: Because it is a motion on the notice paper from Hon Giz Watson. Hon Norman Moore: So we just don’t exist as far as you’re concerned? Hon KIM CHANCE: She indicated that if - Hon Norman Moore: She might want 45 minutes, but what about other people who want to speak on it? Hon KIM CHANCE: I am not sure what she wants, but the indications are that the matter can be dealt with if we begin at 9.15 pm. The fact is that there are important matters on the notice paper with regard to the revenue bills, including stamp duty relief for first home owners. It is a question of how the house allocates its priorities. I am suggesting to the house that we can deal with this. The PRESIDENT: This is a procedural motion. I am concerned to maintain the order of the house and to have the business of the house proceed in a smooth way. The Leader of the Opposition wishes to make a short observation to assist the house in its deliberations, but we are not debating the motion before the house. Debate Resumed HON NORMAN MOORE (Mining and Pastoral - Leader of the Opposition) [4.50 pm] - by leave: I will be very brief. This order of the day is a significant matter and it has been sitting on the notice paper for a very long time. Today is the last day it can be dealt with; that is the way the standing orders work. To bring it on at 9.15 pm for a 45-minute debate on a matter of this substance is treating this house with total contempt and treating this issue with gross flippancy - Hon Ken Travers: You obviously treated this house with total contempt on many occasions when you were Leader of the House. Hon NORMAN MOORE: I beg your pardon, log! Hon Kim Chance: You used to bring them on in the last five minutes. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! The house has given the Leader of the Opposition leave to make observations in response to the observations of the Leader of the House, who was not debating the motion, and neither is the Leader of the Opposition. I think we can get on with the other business of the house more speedily if the Leader of the Opposition is allowed to make his observations, which he indicated would be brief. Hon NORMAN MOORE: This is a very serious matter and there are members on this side of the house who would like to make a comment on it. The Leader of the House is proposing to provide 45 minutes for this debate, which I might add is the maximum time one person can speak. In fact, the mover of the motion can speak for as long as he or she likes, and if 45 minutes is all Hon Giz Watson wants, that is fine by her. However, it is not enough for the opposition. While the Leader of the House is perfectly entitled to run the house the way he wishes, I am perfectly entitled to raise an objection. I say to the Leader of the House that perhaps on these occasions, when these sorts of matters arise, he might actually talk to the opposition, because we also have a significant interest in this matter and we would like to be consulted on the odd occasion when these things arise. The PRESIDENT: The question is that the motion be agreed to. Point of Order Hon RAY HALLIGAN: Mr President - The PRESIDENT: This is not a debatable motion, Hon Ray Halligan. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: I understand, but I seek your indulgence, Mr President. I need to ask whether, in view of the fact that I have four disallowance motions that I wish to withdraw, the Leader of the House took that into consideration. Motion Resumed Question put and passed. ESTIMATES OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE Consideration of Tabled Paper Resumed from 20 June on the following motion moved by Hon Kate Doust (Parliamentary Secretary) - That pursuant to standing order 49(1)(c), the Legislative Council take note of tabled paper 2699A-H (2007-08 budget papers), laid upon the table of the house on 10 May 2007.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3605

HON BARBARA SCOTT (South Metropolitan) [4.53 pm]: I take this opportunity to note the budget papers for this year. I want to cover matters that concern my portfolio responsibilities of children, culture and the arts. In the time allocated, of course, it is not possible to cover all the issues, but I will just pick up one or two that I feel need to be raised this evening. The first issue is my disappointment in the budget and with this government in respect of the mandatory reporting of child abuse. The government has finally made a decision to bring a bill before the house - when, we do not know - to bring in mandatory reporting of sexual abuse only. I want to remind the house of the strong stand the Liberal opposition has taken on protecting children in our community and the moves that have been made to put in place a strong legislative framework that would protect children. For five years the opposition has been calling for a debate on the mandatory reporting of child abuse. In fact, I have in my papers a media release that I put out on 16 August 2002 as shadow Minister for Children, Culture and the Arts. In that media release, I called on the government - to immediately put mandatory reporting of suspected child abuse cases into legislation. I went on to say - “It is clear from the Gordon inquiry that Western Australia desperately needs to join all the other states in Australia by introducing such reporting. Without the data which will become available from this reporting, it is not possible to put preventative programs and appropriate support in place” . . . “I cannot believe that the Government will not move to protect Western Australian children from such abuse. It is time we placed the interests of the child at the top of our agenda. The findings of the Gordon Inquiry are a clear indication that Western Australia needs to move rapidly to establish a Commissioner for Children who has the power to take a view from outside Government agencies, and to recommended inter-agency cooperation.” From August 2002, the opposition has been saying that Western Australia should move to protect children by introducing legislation for the mandatory reporting of child abuse. The Liberal Party went to the 2005 election campaign with a comprehensive policy commitment to introduce such legislation. In writing our position paper on that policy, a lot of work was done by members of our team, not just in one portfolio, but across a range of portfolios, because we wanted to ensure that our commitment to mandatory reporting was shared by all the areas that would be required to deal with this matter, from the Attorney General, to child care, to education and other areas of importance. In addition to making that commitment, the Liberal Party also prepared a comprehensive estimate of what it would cost the government to introduce mandatory reporting. That estimate, which was done in 2005, was based on the number of children in Western Australia, and the number of children in Queensland - in which there is mandatory reporting of child abuse - and it compared the number of reported incidents of child abuse in each of those jurisdictions. As we now know, Western Australia has the lowest rate of reported incidents of child abuse in the nation, because there is no mandatory reporting in this state. That cost was estimated at that time to be a minimum of $65 million over four years. That cost was for putting in place the legislative framework, and for training the professionals in education, child care, health and so on, so that they would be well prepared to detect suspected sexual or physical abuse, or neglect, of children. It was also for putting in place a proper reporting mechanism so that those professionals would be able to report child abuse in a manner that would not compromise their jobs and their position in the community. One issue that has been raised by doctors is the huge amount of paperwork that is required when reporting suspected sexual or physical abuse, or neglect, of children. The training and preparation of professionals is very important. We then made a commitment that, if necessary, we would introduce a private member’s bill to deal with this matter. Of course, the Liberal Party did not win the 2005 election. However, it proceeded with its commitment to children and its undertaking to provide for the Parliament a private member’s bill on mandatory reporting, which it did in August 2006. That bill was drafted after considering in detail the legislative frameworks that existed in the states in which mandatory reporting of child abuse was in place. It was not something that was done off the top of our heads. The government refused to debate that bill and to accept that it needed to act. Debate interrupted, pursuant to standing orders. [Continued on page 3617.] QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE MINISTER FOR HEALTH - EMAILS BETWEEN BRIAN BURKE AND NEALE FONG 481. Hon NORMAN MOORE to the minister representing the Minister for Health: (1) When did the Minister for Health become aware of the freedom of information application from the office of the Leader of the Opposition seeking emails between Brian Burke and Neale Fong?

3606 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(2) When did the minister become aware of the results of the internal review relating to the freedom of information application from the office of the Leader of the Opposition seeking emails between Brian Burke and Neale Fong? (3) Were any of the minister’s staff aware of the FOI application or results of that application and internal review prior to the minister’s statement in Parliament last Thursday morning; and, if so - (a) who knew; (b) when did they receive this information; and (c) from whom did they get this information? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) 21 June 2007. (2) 21 June 2007. The minister was aware of the exchange of nine emails between Dr Fong and Mr Brian Burke in the previous week, but not how the information came to light. (3) (a) The Minister for Health’s chief of staff, Danny Cloghan; (b) 12 June 2007; (c) Manager, Director General, Support, in the Department of Health, Linda Adnyana. MINISTER FOR HEALTH - EMAILS BETWEEN BRIAN BURKE AND NEALE FONG 482. Hon NORMAN MOORE to the minister representing the Minister for Health: (1) Who gave the Minister for Health the details of the emails between Brian Burke and Neale Fong, as mentioned in the minister’s ministerial statement last Thursday morning? (2) At what time and date was the minister provided with the information that there were emails between Brian Burke and Neale Fong? (3) When and how did the minister confront Dr Fong regarding the emails? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) The minister’s chief of staff, Danny Cloghan. (2) On 12 June 2007, the Minister for Health’s chief of staff, Danny Cloghan, advised him that there were nine emails between Dr Fong and Mr Burke, contrary to an answer given to the member for Dawesville during estimates on 23 May 2007. The minister’s chief of staff did not at that time have any further information to give the minister other than that there had been nine exchanges of emails. On 12 June 2007, the minister requested that the full text of the emails be provided for inclusion in a statement to Parliament correcting the answer given to the member for Dawesville on 23 May 2007. On 15 June 2007, the attached schedule, without modifications, was forwarded by the chief of staff to the minister, who read it over the weekend of 16-17 June 2007. On 18 June 2007, the Minister for Health, through the chief of staff, sought further clarification on why the full retrieval of emails was not possible. On 19 June 2007, the minister, through the chief of staff, requested independent verification from the Director General of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet on the inability to retrieve the full text of emails from the Department of Health’s IT system. On 20 June 2007, the DPC confirmed that the Department of Health’s IT system was unable to retrieve the full text of the emails. On 21 June 2007, the ministerial statement correcting the record was made. (3) The Minister for Health requested his chief of staff to meet with Dr Fong on 19 June and advise him that the minister was aware of the emails and would make a statement in Parliament before the end of the week to correct the inaccurate answer given to the member for Dawesville on 23 May 2007. The schedule read as follows -

Date Time Recipient Size Number Subject Sender (GMT) (bytes) of Reci- pients 21/02/2006 0:10:17 brianburke@ 611 1 Brian can [email protected] GMT meet 11 weds 12/04/2006 0:38:41 [email protected] 12333 1 Appointment brianburke@ GMT

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3607

12/04/2006 12:25:52 brianburke@ 14154 1 RE: [email protected] GMT Appointment 20/04/2006 8:31:36 [email protected] 13970 1 Assistance brianburke@ GMT 20/04/2006 13:38:47 brianburke@ 3338 1 Re: [email protected] GMT Assistance 25/05/2006 11:47:8 [email protected] 9988 1 RE: (name brianburke@ GMT A) 29/05/2006 6:47:12 brianburke@ 3126 1 Perugino’s [email protected] GMT 29/05/2006 9:51:52 brianburke@ 2086 1 Re: [email protected] GMT Perugino’s 6/06/2006 7:59:29 [email protected] 29907 1 (Name B) brianburke@ GMT

WITTENOOM - DEGAZETTAL 483. Hon NORMAN MOORE to the Minister for Regional Development: (1) What process was involved in the degazettal of the Wittenoom townsite? (2) When was the Wittenoom townsite officially degazetted? (3) Does degazettal have any effect on the integrity of freehold title; and, if so, what effect? Hon JON FORD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The process to abolish the town site status of Wittenoom, under section 26(2) of the Land Administration Act 1997, was undertaken by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure following consultation with the Shire of Ashburton, the Department of Industry and Resources and the Department of Local Government and Regional Development. (2) The documents for the abolition of Wittenoom’s town site status were lodged by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure on 15 March 2007. (3) No. NEW METRORAIL - TEMPORARY SHUTDOWN OF RAIL NETWORK 484. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: I refer to the proposed temporary shutdown of sections of the metropolitan passenger rail network to enable necessary works related to the connection of the southern suburbs railway to the network. (1) When will the shutdowns take place, and which parts of the network will be affected? (2) What alternative arrangements will be set in place to continue the movement of regular passengers? (3) What provision will be made to compensate small businesses located in affected train stations for loss of trade? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. Unfortunately, I do not have an answer for the honourable member, and I ask that he ask the question again. ADOPTION - CHOICE OF ADOPTIVE PARENTS 485. Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY to the Minister for Child Protection: (1) Will the minister confirm that 43 couples are on the waiting list to adopt a baby in Western Australia? (2) In answer to my question asked on 19 June about how many files on prospective parents the mother was given to look at when her baby was adopted by two men, the answer was four. What is the reason behind giving a relinquishing mother only four couples to choose from when 43 were available? (3) What questions are asked of any relinquishing mother so that these four couples can be chosen for her to look at; and, if they are set questions and guidelines, will the minister table them? (4) If they are not set questions, does the minister agree that someone else other than the mother is really doing the choosing, because not all options are given?

3608 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) At present there are 43 joint, or couple, approved applicants who have expressed an interest in adopting a locally born child. (2) The question makes certain assumptions about the sex of the couple, and I will not make any comment about anything that would identify any person involved in the process. The answer to the remainder of the question is as follows. The profiles given were the best match to the criteria that the relinquishing birth parent identified for the potential parents to adopt the child. All files of approved applicants were considered in the selection of the profiles that were presented to the birth parent. The selected profiles were in accordance with the stated preferences of the birth parent. (3) Two pro forma documents are used with the birth parents to assist them in specifying their preferences for the prospective adoptive parents. It is an information-gathering process that involves several meetings. Extended family members may be involved in the process. The documents I am tabling now for the member’s information are entitled “Birth Parent’s Wishes Regarding the Adoption Plan” and “Your Wishes Regarding an Adoptive Family”. (4) Not applicable. [See paper 2842.] URANIUM MINING BAN - LEGISLATION 486. Hon GIZ WATSON to the Leader of the House representing the Premier: I refer to the answer to question without notice 423 of 7 June 2007. (1) Does the Premier believe that the mining companies would have a basis to claim compensation if the Mining Act 1978 were amended to ban uranium mining on mining leases granted after 22 June 2002? (2) If no to (1), why will the Premier not honour the commitment given to Parliament by Hon Clive Brown, MLA, and support such legislation? (3) If yes to (1), when did the government receive legal advice to this effect? The PRESIDENT: That question seeks a legal opinion. Hon Giz Watson: It does not seek an opinion. The PRESIDENT: Hon Giz Watson, I have just said that the question seeks a legal opinion. PORT GREGORY - LANDCORP RELEASE 487. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: (1) When was the last release of crown land or any other land for the subdivision at Port Gregory by LandCorp? (2) Have there been any further proposals for the release of more crown land for subdivision at Port Gregory and; if so, when will it be released? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No crown land or other land has been issued by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure to LandCorp for subdivision at Port Gregory. (2) The subdivision of land at Port Gregory is being investigated, with any release dependent on the viability of providing potable water and other services to the town. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING - PROVISION OF EXTERNAL PROVIDERS 488. Hon PETER COLLIER to the minister representing the Minister for Education and Training: I appreciate that the minister is away again this week and unavailable, but I put this question last week. (1) How many cases investigated by the complaints management unit in 2004, 2005 and 2006 were outsourced to external providers? (2) What was the total cost to the Department of Education and Training for the provision of external providers in 2004, 2005 and 2006?

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3609

(3) For the duration of the current year, has the standards and integrity directorate outsourced any cases under investigation to external providers? (4) If yes to (3), how many cases and what is the total cost to date? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The division is not currently in a position to provide this information. A large volume of records would need to be searched and back checking conducted to establish this information. This would require existing staff to be removed from the management of investigations and cases and taken offline to conduct the task. Given that the full contingent of staffing for the division is still coming on board, this is not considered a reasonable action to implement. (3) Yes. (4) Forty-eight cases for a sum of $94 018. SELF-HARM RISK ASSESSMENT 489. Hon HELEN MORTON to the minister representing the Minister for Health: (1) What amount of extra funding was specifically allocated in the 2007-08 budget to pilot the deliberate self-harm risk assessment tool? (2) Have specific guidelines governing the reception and assessment of people presenting with self-harm been developed and implemented throughout emergency departments in Western Australia’s public hospitals? (3) If yes to (2), has a training package been undertaken in each ED to implement the package? (4) What percentage of deliberate self-harm patients attending EDs received post-discharge follow-up in the community within the timeframe recommended? (5) Has a working group developed and promulgated policies and best-practice guidelines to aid discharge planning and follow-up for consumers of public mental health services? (6) Has the program established by the Ministerial Council for Suicide Prevention to monitor management of deliberate self-harm in metropolitan hospitals now been extended to all public hospitals in Western Australia? (7) Over the past three years, what level of funding has been allocated to the Ministerial Council for Suicide Prevention from each of the following: state government, federal government, private, and other funding? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. It is quite a lengthy answer, so I table it and seek leave to have it incorporated into Hansard. Leave granted. [See paper 2843.] The following material was incorporated - I thank the Hon. Member for some notice of this question. 1. Additional funding of $90,000 has been allocated to pilot the Deliberate Self-Harm Risk Assessment Tool. 2. A working group, chaired by Dr Stephen Addis, Clinical Director, Adult Mental Health Program, Fremantle Hospital, is currently establishing specific guidelines that will govern the reception and assessment of people presenting with self-harm throughout emergency departments in Western Australia’s public hospitals. 3. Not applicable. 4. All patients who are admitted to public hospitals following episodes of deliberate self-harm are offered follow up services as part of discharge planning. In 2006, 80% of emergency department admissions to public hospitals of patients with a deliberate ‘self- inflicted’ injury were seen by staff in public community mental health clinics following discharge. Of these, 63% were seen within one and seven days of discharge. Notes: (i) The Guidelines do not recommend a specific timeframe for follow up in the community. The time period of seven days is currently used by the Department of Health as a basis for measurement, which is consistent with the national performance indicator for Australian mental health services. (ii) As a person can have more than one admission; admissions are counted rather than patients. (iii) Reasons for non-follow up include: patients may have been referred back to their private health professional following discharge; patients may also decline the offer for follow-up.

3610 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

5. The Clinical Risk Assessment and Management Policy (CRAM) for Western Australian Mental Health Services contains clear criteria governing discharge planning. This includes the provision of discharge summaries to community teams, and/or general practitioners and for follow up appointments. A training package is to be developed so that CRAM policy is implemented consistently across public mental health services. In addition, a working group of the Mental Health Network Coordinating Group and Management Implementation Committee will develop specific policies to aid discharge planning and follow up. This will complement the discharge planning criteria identified in the CRAM policy. 6. One of the elements of the program was the pilot Self-Harm ED Data-base, developed by the Ministerial Council for Suicide Prevention (MCSP) to monitor management of deliberate self-harm. It was trialled at Sir Charles Gairdner, Royal Perth and Fremantle Hospitals. The Department of Health has adopted the following elements from the MCSP program to monitor management of deliberate self-harm in public hospitals. These are: i. Across the majority of Western Australian public hospital emergency departments: о enhanced after-hours consultation liaison psychiatry service provided in the emergency departments о comprehensive assessment by either emergency department psychiatric registrars, medical officers or psychiatric nurses for all patients admitted to emergency departments with an episode of self-harm. ii. Selected site-specific elements: о the assessment by specialist consultation liaison psychiatry or youth self-harm social workers for young people aged up to 25 years at Royal Perth and Princess Margaret Hospitals о the South West Mental Health Service has implemented a localised Psychosocial Risk Screening Tool of People with Deliberate Self-harm or Emotional Distress that is integrated into the Southwest 24-hour emergency telephone support and counselling service. Note: Many of the above strategies are operating as a direct result of the $173 million Mental Health Strategy 2004-2007 Key Initiative 1 - Mental Health Emergency Services. This includes increasing the number of specialist mental health nurses within hospital emergency departments, increasing the number of on-duty psychiatric registrars for after hours cover and the establishment of emergency department observation beds. 7. Level of funding allocated to the Ministerial Council for Suicide Prevention from 2004-2007: • State Government (Department of Health): $732,628.00 • State Government (Department of Education and Training): $151,413.00 • State Government (Department of Corrective Services): $ 68,000.00 • State Government (Office for Children and Youth): $ 29,000.00 • Commonwealth Government (Department of Health and Ageing): $493,292.00 • Private funding (Corporate sponsorship): $119,704.00 • Other funding (Workshop fees, donations, book sales): $ 95,304.00 Notes: 1. This information has been provided by the Ministerial Council for Suicide Prevention (MCSP), as the Department of Health holds financial information relating primarily to the funds provided by the DOH to the MCSP. 2. Figures pertaining to 2006-07 are estimates given the 2006-07 financial year is not complete. RESERVES 46963 AND 18325 490. Hon GEORGE CASH to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: (1) Will the minister table a plan showing the dimensions and area of reserve 46963 and reserve 18325? (2) Who is the owner of the land and in whom is the land vested? (3) What is the maximum period of time that the entity in which the land is vested can lease the land to another organisation? (4) Will the minister table a copy of the relevant vesting orders? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes, I will table three documents. The first document is in relation to reserve 46963 lot 14219 on deposited plan 27296. The second document is in relation to reserve 18325, which comprises lot 14046 on deposited plan 27296, and lot 14684 on deposited plan 34335. The third document is a SmartPlan showing reserve 46963 and reserve 18325. (2) The state of Western Australia is the owner of the land with a management order vested in the City of Stirling. (3) Reserve 46963, 21 years; reserve 18325, 50 years. (4) Yes, I table management orders to deal with this question. [See paper 2844.]

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3611

WEST BUSSELTON DENTAL THERAPY CLINIC 491. Hon BARRY HOUSE to the minister representing the Minister for Health: I refer to question without notice 428 asked on 7 June, the answer to which advised that one full-time equivalent dental therapist was employed at West Busselton dental therapy clinic. (1) Is the minister aware that as of 23 July 2007, the clinic will be operated only three days a week, as the current dental therapist has reduced her working hours? (2) Is there any intention to hire a second dental therapist to work the other two days? (3) If no to (2), what other plans are being made to ensure a full-time service? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question. (1) Yes. The dental therapist has reduced her working days to enable her to undertake further study. (2) Yes. The West Busselton dental therapy centre requires 1.5 FTE dental therapists, and advertising for a full-time dental therapist is being undertaken. (3) In addition to the short-term strategies outlined above, 11 trainee school dental therapists will graduate at the end of 2007, and one will be placed at West Busselton at the beginning of 2008. GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS - COMPLIANCE WITH STATE RECORDS ACT 492. Hon BARBARA SCOTT to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Culture and the Arts: This question is in relation to the State Records Commission of Western Australia. Section 60(1)(b) of the State Records Act 2000 requires the State Records Commission to monitor compliance by government organisations with their record-keeping plans. State Records Commission standard 2, principle 6 requires government organisations to include an appropriate section in their annual report regarding a number of things, such as the efficiency and effectiveness of their record keeping, the nature and extent of record keeping, the training program and the assurance that an organisation’s induction program addresses employee roles and responsibilities in regard to their compliance with the organisation’s record-keeping plan. (1) Which government organisations have not complied with this requirement in their latest annual report? (2) How many breaches or possible breaches of section 60(1)(c) of the act have been reported to the commission in 2006-07? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. Unfortunately, I do not have an answer. ROCK LOBSTER FISHERMEN - WETLINE LICENCES 493. Hon BRUCE DONALDSON to the Minister for Fisheries: I refer to the decision to remove wetline licences from the majority of rock lobster fishermen. (1) Will the minister consider reducing the licence fee charged to all licensed fishing vessels, given the reduction of management and service delivery needed to be carried out by the Department of Fisheries resulting from the changes made? (2) If not, will the minister review this fee for service to provide a sliding scale for different fishing sectors with reduced fishing capability? Hon JON FORD replied: I thank Hon Bruce Donaldson for the question. (1)-(2) I have given a commitment to industry as a whole that at the conclusion of the wetline review implementation, we will carry out a review of the Cole-House agreement for funding. In fact we have put that in place now and we are starting towards the first stage of the review, which will review all the contributions that industry pays with regard to my budget. ORD STAGE 2 - EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST PROCESS 494. Hon KEN BASTON to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for State Development: I refer to the state government’s announcement on 14 June 2007 that the selection process for the Ord stage 2 M2 development area north of Kununurra will be extended and modified.

3612 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(1) In what ways were the expressions of interest incompatible with the issues that had emerged at the national level since the selection process began? (2) Were the 10 expressions of interest compared with the criteria set when they were called? (3) What criteria were they compared with before the decision was made that they were incompatible? (4) How many of the expressions of interest included infrastructure proposals? (5) Were any of the proponents given an opportunity to discuss their proposals with the Department of Industry and Resources prior to the announcement being made? (6) On what date and by what means were the 10 proponents contacted and informed that the proposals were incompatible? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) During discussions with the commonwealth government it became clear that the commonwealth would consider only a large irrigation project that included the Northern Territory. (2) Yes. (3) The assessment process considered performance criteria, which is found on page 21 of the expression of interest invitation, and the extent that the expressions of interest could meet the state’s objectives for the project, which are found on page 8 of the expression of interest invitation. (4) The expression of interest invitation sought the proponents’ views on infrastructure requirements, and the proponents responded to varying degrees. (5) No. (6) Proponents were verbally advised of the government’s decision to extend the expression of interest process on 14 June 2007. MURCHISON METALS - INFRASTRUCTURE 495. Hon ANTHONY FELS to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: In reference to Mitsubishi’s recent investment in Murchison Metals Ltd, will the government support Murchison Metals’ proposal to deliver vital infrastructure to the mid-west region by constructing a railway and a port? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The minister responds in the following terms - The question is confused. Murchison Metals Ltd is not asking the state to construct a railway and a port. It is proposing to do this itself with a joint venture partner. The member must clarify whether he wants the government to indicate which of the rival proposals from mining companies it is supporting. BURKE-FONG EMAIL INQUIRY - TERMS OF REFERENCE 496. Hon NORMAN MOORE to the minister representing the Minister for Health: (1) What are the terms of reference for the Burke-Fong email inquiry being conducted by Mr Pettit? (2) Under what legislation has the inquiry been established? (3) Does the inquiry have the power to investigate the actions of the minister; and, if not, why not? (4) What powers will the inquiry have to forensically access the computers and records of the Department of Health and also the computers from the office of the Minister for Health? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: (1)-(4) On behalf of the Minister for Health, I table the attached document, which is self-explanatory. [See paper 2845.] AVON VALLEY NATIONAL PARK - BURNING MASTER PLAN 497. Hon NIGEL HALLETT to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for the Environment: (1) Will the minister please detail the burning master plan for the Avon Valley National Park? (2) If not, why not?

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3613

Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: I thank Hon Nigel Hallett for some notice of the question. The Minister for the Environment has provided the following response - (1) The Department of Environment and Conservation indicative prescribed burn program for the period from spring 2007 to autumn 2009 contains five prescribed burns within and adjoining the Avon Valley National Park, covering 6 078 hectares. Provided that all the burns on the indicative programs are achieved by autumn 2009, more than half of the 4 666-hectare Avon Valley National Park will have been subject to prescribed burning between spring 2004 and autumn 2009. Details of the department’s three-year indicative prescribed burn program, including maps, can be found on the NatureBase website at www.naturebase.net. (2) Not applicable. PERTH DRUG COURT 498. Hon DONNA FARAGHER to the minister representing the Attorney General: I refer to the Perth Drug Court. (1) How many court assessment and treatment service officers are currently employed to support the court? (2) How many officers were employed in the years 2001-02 to 2005-06? (3) What is the court’s current waiting list? (4) What was the waiting list in the years referred to in question (2)? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The court assessment and treatment service - CATS - team are officers employed by the Department of Corrective Services. It comprises five senior community corrections CATS officers directly providing case management support, one psychologist, one youth support officer, one team leader, one administrative assistant and one clerical officer. (2) (a) Five senior community corrections officers - CATS officers. (b) Five senior community corrections officers - CATS officers. (c) Five senior community corrections officers - CATS officers. (d) Five senior community corrections officers - CATS officers. (e) Five senior community corrections officers - CATS officers. The team leader, administrative assistant and clerical officer positions were in place within CATS for all the above periods. (3) As at 25 June 2007, there are 13 defendants on the waiting list for the Drug Court. (4) The records of the Drug Court waiting lists are not retained. The list was developed and is utilised within the Drug Court as an internal management tool. It is reviewed and updated within the Drug Court on a weekly basis. DEATH IN CUSTODY - MR CARL WOODS 499. Hon GIZ WATSON to the minister representing the Minister for Police and Emergency Services: I refer to the death in custody of Mr Carl Woods on 11 April 2006. (1) When will the coronial inquiry be held into his death? (2) What changes, if any, have been made to policies and procedures to prevent injury to and the death of people in the custody of WA Police and other custodial services since Mr Wood’s death? Hon JON FORD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Please refer to the Department of the Attorney General. (2) The investigation into the death of Mr Woods has not resulted in any changes to police policies and procedures. WA Police continue to monitor the policies and procedures in respect of the apprehension, detention and duty of care of detainees to assist in minimising the possibility of self-harm and death of persons coming into contact with police or in police custodial care. The information requested in relation to other custodial services will need to be directed to the Minister for Corrective Services.

3614 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

PERTH CONVENTION AND EXHIBITION CENTRE - CONTRACT 500. Hon NORMAN MOORE to the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: I refer the minister to a question on notice asked of the Minister for Housing and Works on 1 May 2007 requesting the tabling of the final Perth Convention and Exhibition Centre contract signed in 2001 by the Labor government, which was transferred to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. (1) Will the minister explain when and why responsibility for the Perth Convention and Exhibition Centre has been transferred to the planning and infrastructure portfolio as it was dealt with in 2001 by the then Minister for Housing and Works? (2) Will the minister explain why it will take until 15 August for the contract to be tabled? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) The Minister for Housing and Works was responsible for matters relating to the construction of the Perth Convention and Exhibition Centre. Follow construction, the minister for lands - the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure - as the lessor became responsible for ongoing matters relating to the lease and associated planning issues. (2) I table a copy of the Perth Convention and Exhibition Centre Project Agreement Centre and Car Parks between the state of Western Australia acting through the Minister for Housing and Works and the minister for lands, PCEC Centre Pty Ltd, Wyllie PCEC Pty Ltd, Perth CEC Pty Ltd and Multiplex Constructions Pty Ltd dated 12 November 2001. A subsequent variation to it dated 30 June 2004 is not tabled, as that document includes other parties to it and their consent to the tabling of the variation was not able to be obtained prior to tabling. [See paper 2847.] VEHICLE LICENSING - SYSTEM UNDER PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT 501. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE to the Minister for Local Government: Given the minister’s claim in Parliament this afternoon that the vehicle licensing system was in disarray under the previous government, what evidence does she have of that? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: In short, I have visited and spoken to managers and workers at the following licensing centres: Midland, Joondalup, Warwick, East Perth, O’Connor, Rockingham, Welshpool and Kalgoorlie. It has become very apparent that the licensing part of what is now the Department for Planning and Infrastructure has been in a decline for quite some time. Hon Murray Criddle: Six years. Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH: No, not six years. It was previously a function that was performed by Western Australia Police. There was a view that it had probably not been appropriately funded while under the authority of the police because it was not seen to be front-line servicing and, consequently, was not given the attention it required. The people I spoke to indicated that, during the term of the Court government, a number of licensing inspection stations were in fact sold. That reduction in the available capacity over a number of years, combined with the increased pressure caused by population growth, has caused the government to take the action it has taken. I was asked how many centres there are in the metropolitan area. There are nine metropolitan licensing centres and six metropolitan vehicle inspection centres. For many years, approved inspection stations have operated in rural and regional areas, of which there are currently 240. In relation to the question of expressions of interest, the weekend’s advertisement attracted 74 inquiries and, as of today, 74 packages have been posted. GRAFFITI - RESIDENTIAL AREAS 502. Hon GEORGE CASH to the minister representing the Minister for Community Safety: (1) Is there any prohibition on a householder installing and operating a security camera to record activities within his own residential land boundaries and the outer wall of the residential premises in an effort to combat graffiti and other acts of vandalism? (2) If so, what is the act or regulation that prohibits this householder action? (3) To which department or agency should a householder report acts of graffiti, and does the government operate a scheme to remove graffiti from the outer walls of a residence?

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3615

Hon JON FORD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(3) The minister has supplied a lengthy answer, so I seek leave to table the answer and have it incorporated into Hansard. Leave granted. [See paper 2846.] The following material was incorporated - I thank the Hon. Member for some notice of this question. The Surveillance Devices Act 1998 does not prevent the use of overt optical surveillance devices. Graffiti should be reported to both the WA police and to the asset owner. In the case of witnessing an act, Police attendance should be sought by calling 131444. Damage should also be reported to police by calling CrimeStoppers, as this information can be used for intelligence gathering. In addition to reporting graffiti as a criminal offence, reporting acts for rapid removal is seen as ‘best practice’. It is the responsibility of the asset owner to repair damage caused however in many areas, local Government provides this service to private asset owners. State instrumentalities are responsible for removing graffiti from their assets. The Office of Crime Prevention operates the Goodbye Graffiti website (www.goodbyegraffiti.wa.gov.au) to ensure the appropriate asset owners are informed of reported graffiti. Members of the public are encouraged to report graffiti to this site. FINES ENFORCEMENT REGISTRY - OUTSTANDING FINES 503. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN to the minister representing the Attorney General: (1) How many unpaid fines or infringement notices have been referred to the Fines Enforcement Registry in each of the past three years and the current year to date? (2) What is the total number of these referrals awaiting finalisation? (3) What is the approximate number of individuals to whom these fines and infringements have been issued? (4) What is the total penalty value of these fines and infringements? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The answer is in tabular form, so I seek leave to table it and have it incorporated into Hansard. Leave granted. [See paper 2848.] The following material was incorporated - I thank the Hon. Member for some notice of this question. 1. 2003/04 259,900; 2004/05 259,898; 2005/06 318,215; and 2006/07 (YTD) 253,024 2. 2003/04 64,010; 2004/05 88,924; 2005/06 142,558; and 2006/07 (YTD) 171,224 3. This information is not able to be gathered in the time available. 4. $272,325,766.42. The total penalty value is made up of the registered value and any subsequent fees. PAPERS TABLED Questions on Notice Papers relating to answers to questions on notice were tabled by Hon Kim Chance (Leader of the House), Hon Jon Ford (Minister for Regional Development) and Hon Sally Talbot (Parliamentary Secretary). QUESTION ON NOTICE 4835 Answer Advice HON KIM CHANCE (Agricultural - Leader of the House) [5.34 pm]: Pursuant to standing order 138(d), I advise the house that the answer to question on notice 4835, asked by Hon Helen Morton on 9 May of me representing the Minister for Energy, will be provided on 28 June 2007.

3616 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

QUESTION ON NOTICE 4833 Answer Advice HON LJILJANNA RAVLICH (East Metropolitan - Minister for Local Government) [5.35 pm]: Pursuant to standing order 138(d), I wish to advise the house that the answer to question on notice 4833 asked by Hon Helen Morton on 9 May 2007 of the Minister for Local Government representing the Minister for Education and Training will be provided on 14 August 2007. QUESTION ON NOTICE 4784 Answer Advice HON ADELE FARINA (South West - Parliamentary Secretary) [5.36 pm]: Pursuant to standing order 138(d), I wish to inform the house that the answer to question on notice 4784 asked by Hon Paul Llewellyn on Wednesday, 9 May 2007 of me, the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, will be provided on 14 August 2007. QUESTION ON NOTICE 4828 Answer Advice HON ADELE FARINA (South West - Parliamentary Secretary) [5.36 pm]: Pursuant to standing order 138(d), I wish to advise the house that the answer to question on notice 4828 asked by Hon Helen Morton on 9 May 2007 of me, the parliamentary secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, will be provided on 14 August 2007. QUESTIONS ADDRESSED TO THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE Statement by Leader of the House HON KIM CHANCE (Agricultural - Leader of the House) [5.37 pm] - by leave: After a question time last week the Leader of the Opposition invited me to communicate to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure his view that on a number of occasions questions that had been asked of that minister had resulted in advice to members of the house that an answer would not be available on that day. I raised that matter with the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and she advised in the following terms - Eight questions were asked of my portfolio on Tuesday. Quite obviously, it is very difficult to allocate resources to answer eight questions in four hours. It is also unreasonable to expect answers to eight questions on one day when there is no prospect of eight questions being asked in any one day. Hon Norman Moore: There is in this house. Hon KIM CHANCE: I think she meant of the one minister. Of the six questions to which answers were provided by Wednesday, only two were asked. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure suggests that the opposition might consider prioritising its questions to better align it with the intention and the ability to ask those questions. We as a government take the issue of question time very seriously. Any statistical analysis of the answers that we provide would compare favourably with that of any previous government. Indeed, I think this government would be shown to be better in that regard than its predecessors. That is my feeling; indeed, I have no statistical evidence to back that up. However, I think a statistical analysis would show that very clearly. Having said that, there are occasions on which a range of questions, sometimes quite large questions, are asked. We recently dealt with a question on notice that contained 30 parts. It covered virtually everything; it literally asked what I do on weekends. I am not pulling members’ legs. Obviously, a question like that takes time to answer and one wonders about its relevance. In the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure’s case, eight questions on notice of which some notice was given were asked in one day. It is almost certain that her office did not have the capacity to deal with each of those questions on that day. Certainly, I have never known an occasion on which eight questions were asked of a minister or minister representing a minister in one day. Clearly, if we want to get answers to questions, we must be reasonable about the workload we impose on ministers’ staff, otherwise nothing will get done. We try very hard to provide good answers to questions, because this government considers question time to be an important accountability measure. Our performance has been very good. To ask eight questions in one day of one minister is unreasonable. HON NORMAN MOORE (Mining and Pastoral - Leader of the Opposition) [5.42 pm]: I seek leave to respond to the provocative comments of the Leader of the House. Leave granted. Hon NORMAN MOORE: I thank the house. I have a tear in my eye having heard the comments of the Leader of the House. To suggest that somehow or other the matter that I raised with the Leader of the House last week related to one day reflects badly on me, because I would not have raised the matter if it was a one-day occurrence. I raised the matter because this issue has been going on for a long time. It has reached a point at

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3617 which my colleagues are asking me what we can do about the situation. Two ministers regularly do not answer questions for days and weeks on end. Some ministers ask that a question be put on notice if it will take a long time to obtain an answer. That is better than simply getting a handwritten note before question time advising the member who asked the question that the minister’s staff have not received an answer from his or her office, the suggestion being that members should not ask that question because they will not receive an answer. That hides the fact that many questions are not being answered. Had this been a one-off occurrence, I would accept the admonition of the Leader of the House that it is unfair to expect a minister to answer eight questions in one day. However, it depends on the questions. A lot of questions that do not get answered are simple questions that could be answered off the top of a minister’s head in 30 seconds because they are not complicated and difficult questions. If questions are complicated and difficult, I do not have a problem if opposition members are asked to put them on notice. I do have a problem when they are asked to put questions on notice because ministers want to avoid answering them. That annoys me. However, that is part of the political process. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and the other major contributor to this problem, the Minister for Education and Training, have a significant workforce not only in their offices, but also in the departments and agencies for which they are responsible. Given the magnitude of the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure’s office and all those bureaucrats who work for her in the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the other agencies that report to her, if they cannot answer eight questions in one day, I do not know what they are doing. I suspect that they are having a nice lazy day. I do not know how many thousands of people work in the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure’s agencies. There must be tens of thousands. There are 30 000 people in the Minister for Education and Training’s agencies, so I would have thought that we could get a couple of answers to some questions. The reason we have raised the matter is that we are entitled to get answers to questions in this place, and that is what Parliament is about. I will keep raising this matter, Mr Leader of the House, if a situation should develop, as has developed in recent times, in which some ministers clearly give us the impression that they are not prepared to answer questions, not because they cannot, but because they will not. The Leader of the House should advise the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, who was at one time a member of this chamber, that eight questions in one day in this chamber is not the same as eight questions in one day in the Assembly. In the Assembly, about six long speeches are given by ministers and there are no answers to any questions. In this place, 10, 20 and sometimes 25 questions are asked and answered in one day, and that is one of the reasons that this chamber is able to provide good information to members, because answers generally are provided. Some government ministers answer questions on the spot every time. Today I asked three questions of the Minister for Health and the answers came back. Some of the questions were ignored, and the minister representing the Minister for Health might like to check that out. One of the questions I asked was why the Minister for Health was not part of the inquiry. That question was not answered for obvious reasons, but at least he provided answers to the three questions that I asked. I acknowledge and accept that as the way the place should operate. We are not trying to be unfair and unreasonable. We will raise these matters when the circumstances arise. In due course, my colleague Hon Peter Collier will give a long litany of fobbing off that he has been subjected to from the Minister for Education and Training over a long period to the point at which, from his explanation to me, what he is not getting is totally unacceptable. We will deal with that in due course. Consideration of the ministerial statement made an order of the day for the next sitting, on motion by Hon Bruce Donaldson. ESTIMATES OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE Consideration of Tabled Paper Resumed from an earlier stage of the sitting. HON BARBARA SCOTT (South Metropolitan) [5.47 pm]: Prior to question time, I was speaking about the amendment bill that the Liberal opposition presented to Parliament to bring in mandatory reporting of child abuse. The government refused to debate the bill. The Liberal Party has taken the view - I think it is a view that is shared by many in Australia today - that child abuse is indeed a crime and should be reported and punished and that perpetrators should be removed from the situation. Only when this government was confronted with more and more revelations of serious child abuse and neglect, and with the embarrassing situation of three ministers being sacked, did it do a backflip on the mandatory reporting of child abuse and decide to bring in a bill to report just sexual abuse. That was in March 2007. I have a newspaper report from the Weekend Courier, which covers part of my electorate, of 16 March 2007. There are two articles on this page, one of which is headed “Backflip queried”. It is a letter from Marie Harries and states - “CONFUSING: is how child protection expert and University of WA lecturer Marie Harries describes . . . Alan Carpenter’s decision to make reporting of child sexual abuse mandatory.

3618 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

The Premier made the policy reversal on Wednesday, despite repeated assertions of the futility of mandatory reporting echoed by former community development ministers. “Sexual abuse is a criminal act and a criminal act should always be reported, so I have never understood why we need ‘mandatory reporting’ for any professionals who have evidence,” Dr Harries said. “The question has never really been whether to report child sexual abuse but instead how you can encourage people to report it and I would be very interested in what evidence they have that shows this will ensure people do so. It goes on. The other article in the Weekend Courier is headed “New child sexual abuse law overdue”. I will not read it all, but it states in part - The State Government’s decision to reverse its opposition to mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse was the silver lining to a dark cloud. That cloud was the damning report into the Department for Community Development released by Premier Alan Carpenter last week. The report was commissioned by the Carpenter Government last year in response to revelations surrounding the death of toddler Wade Scale, who died while in the care of a convicted child-basher, despite repeated warnings to the department that he was at risk. It goes on further - However, the problem remains that there was evidence years ago that mandatory reporting was necessary. Commissioning a report that did not even recommend mandatory reporting - rather, 70 other recommendations - should not have been what it took to make the State Government perform a backflip on its earlier decision. Excuses by senior politicians - including former community development ministers Sheila McHale and David Templeman - that they did not support mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse because it would overload the system, and that there was no proof that mandatory reporting protected children, are deplorable. In February 2006 Mr Carpenter said mandatory reporting created more problems than it resolved. However, sexual abuse of children in WA cannot be ignored or put in the “too-hard basket” any more. According to the National Association for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, the known level of child abuse has steadily increased over the past seven years. NAPCAN suggests it is likely that 10 to 20 per cent of Australian children - upwards of 550,000 - are being abused or neglected every year. What is this government responding to? It is responding to those major reports and the crisis in child abuse in this state and suggesting that we need to report only child sexual abuse. I want to read into the parliamentary record a letter that I received earlier this year. This followed a letter in The West Australian of Monday, 11 December 2006, from Dr John Boulton from Derby. He wrote a letter headed “Mixed messages on child abuse”, and I want to table that letter. I wrote to Dr John Boulton after he had that letter published in The West Australian. He responded to my letter in February this year and said - Dear Ms Scott Thanks you for your letter of 13 Dec concerning my effort to get public discussion over the problem of the lack of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in WA. I appreciated you sending me the copies of the Bill and notes. That refers to the Liberal Party private member’s bill and the notes. It continues - I apologize for this late response. I had hoped to have got some national support for this through our Special Interest Group in Child Protection of the Chapter of Community Child Health of the Division of Paediatrics of the Royal Australasian College of Physician. However that discussion hasn’t happened yet, so I thought I’d send you a slightly edited version of the discussion memo that I am proposing to send out to my colleagues. He did that. Included with that letter from Dr John Boulton to me were some comments that he made about reporting of child abuse. I will read into Hansard those comments of Dr John Boulton from the Kimberley health unit. Dr John Boulton said - Child protection is a human rights issue: Indigenous children in the tropical north of WA suffer neglect leading to endemic malnutrition; gross lack of basic hygiene so that skin infections result in endemic nephritis and rheumatic fever; fetal alcohol spectrum disorder so common that it has an impact on the civic function of certain communities; and endemic child sexual abuse.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3619

I propose that mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect should be adopted by every state legislature. The reason for this is that the identification of child abuse and neglect is a human rights issue, and that the notification of such abuse to the relevant statutory authority is the first essential step in the formal identification and intervention of abuse and neglect. I submit that child protection is not a party political issue and that medical professionals have a moral responsibility to advocate for legislative changes which will contribute to the improvement of children’s safety. The background to the this request is that I find myself in an anomalous position in working in WA where the reporting of child abuse and neglect is discretionary, and in the Kimberley Region in the far north west, which has probably the nation’s highest incidence of growth failure from malnutrition as a consequence of neglect, and also of child sexual abuse. My letters recently published by The Australian (11 Nov) and the West Australian (11 Dec) newspapers, and the newspaper article published on Friday 15th Dec concerning my advocacy of mandatory reporting, came from my position as a paediatrician for the Kimberley Health Region being an advocate of children’s human rights. In my letters I made three points: 1. That WA is unique in being the only jurisdiction in the nation without mandatory reporting of child abuse. 2. That the absence of mandatory reporting leads to health workers having to make a decision whether or not to report abuse. This decision should be outside their boundary of professional responsibility because they are inevitably placed in the position of being a moral gatekeeper, which they are not trained for. The result is that a high proportion of cases of abuse on remote communities are not reported because of misplaced concerns by the health worker. The discretionary nature of reporting results in medical and nursing staff in regional centres, remote townships such as Fitzroy Crossing and Halls Creek, and in the most remote indigenous communities in Australia, being put in the position in which they have to make a decision as to the likely benefit of informing the Department of Community Development (DCD). The consequence is that they inadvertently collude in the barriers to equity of delivery of care and child protection for indigenous people. These barriers include the decision not to report because of the fear of intimidatory violence being perpetrated on a relative of the victim, or on themselves e.g nurses being told that they will be assaulted if they report to DCD; or because of a misguided belief that Aboriginal people have suffered enough intrusion from “Welfare” so that they should not be exposed to more. 3. That the evidence for lack of an adequate response by the welfare agency which has authority for child protection is no reason not to report child abuse. This argument is based on the false premise that health workers can by their own actions (in being selective in which cases to report), in some way increase the likelihood of DCD in WA responding in a more efficacious way. My point is that the inadequacies of the response of DCD is a different issue, and one which needs a separate response. We are still yet to see any government legislation and we are told that it will deal only with mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse. I ask the Parliament and my colleagues to consider what Dr John Bolton has said and say why we should not include neglect that leads to malnutrition and physical abuse. There is no difference from domestic violence in my view. Do we not investigate domestic violence because we are too busy chasing car thieves? To suggest agencies would be inundated with reports of child abuse and neglect is not a reason not to introduce mandatory reporting of child abuse. This budget does not provide funding for mandatory reporting of child abuse to be put in place. As I say, we are yet to see the legislation. The second issue I want to raise in relation to children that I believe is of significance and importance, and I want to scrutinise what the state government has done about it, is child obesity. Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.30 pm Hon BARBARA SCOTT: Before the dinner suspension I had been talking about the need for the state government to introduce a comprehensive regime for the mandatory reporting of child abuse in Western Australia. I conclude my remarks on the issue of child abuse by commending the federal government, and John Howard in particular, for the action - I repeat, the action - that is about to take place to confront the appalling issue of child abuse in Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. That action has long been awaited by many people who are concerned about the abuse of young children. Some people will oppose that initiative. However, no state government Premiers would be able to hold their heads high and without shame if they did not agree that this initiative is a long time coming, and absolutely necessary.

3620 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

The second issue of concern that I want to speak about tonight is childhood obesity. I again commend the federal government for the $22 million that it has given to Western Australia for its highly successful after- school-activity program to help combat childhood obesity. I had hoped that the state government would finally be shamed into at least matching that amount, because health is, after all, a state government responsibility. Unfortunately, this state government says a lot, but it does very little. The budget makes the following comment about childhood obesity - • The transfer of the Premier’s Physical Activity Taskforce from the Department of the Premier and Cabinet has been completed. An updated four year strategic plan for the Taskforce, overseeing the whole-of-government response on physical inactivity, has been finalised. . . . • Implement a series of major physical activity initiatives through the Physical Activity Taskforce. I am keen to see what action will come out of that strategic move by this government. When I asked the previous Minister for Education and Training, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, what contribution the state government had made to state schools towards the Physical Activity Taskforce programs that have been funded by the federal government’s $22 million contribution towards the after-school program, very little was forthcoming. Yes, I was told that it happened at school sites, but that was about the end of the contribution. The contribution from the state education department towards this program that has been set in place by the federal government was disappointing. This budget that we are addressing tonight does not include a line item indicating what this government has or will give the task force to do these things. That illustrates how seriously this government takes this problem. Stopping the obesity epidemic will require a genuine and concerted effort by both the state and federal governments. The federal government is taking the matter seriously. However, alas, the state government is just bandying around words. A comprehensive approach to the problem should be based on the lessons that have been learnt from the tobacco lobby and should include physical activity programs for children, environmental and other support for adults, public education - that is, properly run, well-funded long-term public education programs - and traffic light indicator labelling on foods in supermarkets. Some members of this chamber might not be aware that some weeks ago I held a major forum on child obesity. Prior to Children’s Week last year, I put out a public discussion paper that was widely circulated and which generated many submissions. The traffic light indicator on the labelling of food came up as one of the very good initiatives. It would enable mums and dads to go into the supermarket and instead of reading the copious amount of stuff on each cereal product or whatever, each product will have either a red, green or orange sticker on it. The traffic light indicator on the products will indicate whether the specific product is good, bad or not so good for children and families. That is one simple way of getting around the misleading advertising with which we are confronted daily in the supermarkets. It will also get around the difficulty of parents with little kids going into the supermarket and seeing on a packet of cereal or the wrapper of a fruit and nut bar that the product is low in fat, when the fine print shows, for example, a high level of sugar. This traffic light indicator will make it simple. We will struggle against the food industry to get this system in place, but it should be implemented. Legislation should be introduced to control food promotion. In addition, we should be looking at banning the advertising of junk food. Junk food should be taxed to provide funds for corrective programs. We should also be supporting, or even subsidising, healthy foods and regulating such products. The August 2006 edition of The Medical Journal of Australia included an article titled, “The unstoppable obesity and diabetes juggernaut. What Should Politicians Do?” The authors categorically state - We could arrest the development of obesity in children and adolescents within a year of introducing a coherent program. The Premier’s obesity task force, which, by the way, was established by the previous Liberal Premier, Richard Court, could produce such a program if only this government would accept its responsibilities and give it the funds to do so. Thirdly, in the area of children’s issues I will touch briefly on the issue of the Commissioner for Children and Young People for Western Australia. Legislation passed through the Parliament last year, but we are yet to see a commissioner for children appointed. During the estimates hearing last week I asked the Minister for Child Protection when the appointment was likely to be made and was told perhaps by the end of July. I notice that there was a reference to this delay in one of the weekend papers, and I was quoted in that article. The government seems to delight in suggesting that the opposition delayed the debate, which is a common cry from the Labor government. In truth, the government was well aware that some of the major amendments proposed for the bill had the agreement of the Liberal opposition and the Greens (WA), and the government was therefore not prepared to bring the bill to the floor of the Parliament. It tried for months to negotiate behind closed doors

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3621 to reach agreement. It is unacceptable and inappropriate for the government to blame the opposition. I will be one of the very first to celebrate when a children’s commissioner is appointed in Western Australia because I have long supported the concept. However, I urge the government, in this budget debate, to look again at the amount that has been allocated for the Commissioner for Children and Young People. The allocation of $1.5 million is nowhere near enough for a commissioner to do the job properly. That will perhaps enable the commissioner to appoint 10 staff. Although it is a start, we need to see ongoing action from the commissioner as an advocate for children’s issues in this state, with a strong voice, scrutinising government departments without fear or favour for the sake of our children. A commissioner should give our children a voice. There are many issues on children I would like to touch on, but I do not have the time. The last issue I will raise is the Kids Help Line. It has been in place for quite some time. It is managed by BoysTown, but it is grossly underfunded. I refer to a report in The West Australian on 6 June 2007, headlined “Remote WA kids call for more counselling”. There is no doubt that the remote regions in this state are calling for more resources in the children’s sector. It is evident from the calls that have been made to the Kids Help Line that children in remote and regional areas are suffering and use this service to get help. The article states - Young people in WA’s remote and regional areas made more than half the State’s phone calls to a national counselling service last year. It is great that they are able to have that access and that they know the service is there, but this government makes a very poor contribution to the Kids Help Line. The article further states - The main concerns for young people in WA were family relationships, peer pressure, emotional behaviour, partners and bullying. Mental health issues came third nationally but sixth in WA. Philippa Hawke is a senior researcher for BoysTown. The article continues - While Ms Hawke said the WA figures on mental health and emotional and behavioural issue were slightly lower than the national rating, calls from “older” young people about serious issues were generally increasing nationally. These issues included self-harming, suicidal thoughts and child abuse issues. So here again are issues of child abuse coming out in the revelations heard on Kids Help Line. For those members of the chamber who are not aware of the evidence of self-harm, particularly in pre-teenagers and teenagers in years 8, 9 and 10, it includes cutting wrists with scissors and that sort of thing for notice. It is not necessarily an attempt at suicide. My daughter was in charge of a number of girls at a boarding school two years ago and she shared with me her distress and alarm at the number of girls who were self-harming. I do not know why it is girls particularly, although boys also self-harm. Hon Peter Collier: Esteem. Hon BARBARA SCOTT: Yes. Esteem problems, peer pressure and family concerns, I would say, are the issues. However, the evidence from Kids Help Line is that self-harm, suicidal thoughts and child abuse were the issues that were raised. I plead with this state government to make an extra allocation to Kids Help Line. Because I have limited time, I will move on to my other area of portfolio interest; that is, arts and culture. I will begin firstly with the parlous state of the State Library of Western Australia, and more importantly the issue of state records that has been raised in the press in the past couple of days. The 2007-08 budget for the State Library shows a reduced allocation, down from $27.5 million to $26.5 million, and a forecast staff reduction. In a time of unprecedented prosperity, why has the State Library’s budget been cut, and where will the cut be made? Will it be in the acquisitions budget? Will there be a further cut next year? I should point out that the prosperity this state is currently enjoying is despite, not because of, this government. The State Library’s “Strategic Directions 2006-2008”, which is available on its website, states - Our new strategic direction represents a significant shift in focus for the State Library and the approach by which we will deliver our services . . . I wonder, prior to that strategic direction and before implementing this significant change, what formal processes might have taken place or did take place with the stakeholders: the Royal Western Australian Historical Society, the staff of the State Library, Friends of the Battye Library, government and tertiary libraries and the public generally. Apart from the Western Australian collections, the shift will change the State Library from the large, comprehensive information source it has been for generations to one catering for a few niche interests. Where are the plans that support this significant change? Where, for example, is a staff development plan and a new collection policy, which would set out what the State Library is now collecting, as opposed to what it used to collect? On what basis is taxpayers’ money being spent if there is no plan? If specific collection targets are not open and transparent, how will the library be held accountable? The most significant change has been the disbanding of the specialist teams and the nurtured staff with in-depth knowledge of their areas of responsibility. We all know that the Battye Library of WA History is where histories are kept - it should now be called the Battye collection - and it covers Western Australian information. It has 60 staff members, with librarians and

3622 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] support staff assigned to look after the photographic collection, the maps collection, the state film collection etc along with specialist catalogues. Why have these specialisations been dispensed with? Are those collections no longer important? We know from other areas of service delivery in government that once specialised staff are dispensed with, the specialised knowledge disappears. A cynic might suggest that, like all incompetent administrations, this government does not want its records kept. We know that the last Western Australian Labor administration was proven to be corrupt. It gave away taxpayers’ funds to its business mates. Is that one of the reasons the government does not want a library of significance to record what governments do? The former State Reference Library had specialist teams for science and technology, arts and literature, social sciences, business management and music. These teams managed their collections and were able to help the public find information about very complex areas such as law, standards, patents and maps. People who want that type of specialised help at a library expect people with specialised knowledge to give it to them. The new structure has some new specialised positions, although they comprise only about a dozen of the 80 librarians who will be employed at the State Library of Western Australia. The State Library needs more specialists than that. It is the backup for all the complex inquiries that cannot be answered by the public libraries. The State Library has acquired very significant and expensive collections that can be maintained only by specialist staff. Also, many very important areas such as law are no longer covered by any specialists, and areas without a specialist will no longer be developed. What will happen to our records of history, sociology, poetry, art, design, religion, philosophy, science, technology and maps etc? The previous published collection development policy was comprehensive and detailed in its description of what the library collected and had in its collection. In the budget papers this year, one of the library’s major initiatives in 2007-08 is to refresh policies to drive the acquisition of quality materials for public and state library collections, with a strong focus on Western Australian material. The library has no current written policy that describes what it is buying other than for Western Australian materials. Given that the library has undergone a significant shift in focus, why did the library not develop its new collecting policy and put it out for public consultation before it embarked on this new direction? Having no policy means that not much thought has gone into it. What analysis has been done on the impact of producing and collecting items in the many areas that have been downgraded under the library’s new strategic direction? What will be the cost to the community of not maintaining the only first-class publicly available collection of legal materials and of not maintaining the staff who have the knowledge to help people use it? A lot was said in the “Strategic Directions 2006-08” document about outcomes, goals, priorities and resources, but there was no mention of staff. It said nothing about how specialist skills are to be developed or about career structures for specialist staff. The staff who worked in the State Library because they enjoyed the challenge of dealing with the most complex inquiries have been mainstreamed, without adequate preparation, into answering questions on everything. Most of them have lost the role of selecting materials for the collection; they no longer work in the area for which they have qualifications and years of experience; and they have lost interest in their jobs. The organisation has been dumbed down. In the future, the community will discover that it has lost an important resource. The State Library is not the only library under attack by this government. The attack is far and wide. I have a couple of emails that I will read that I received from Curtin University. Before I do that, I make commendation of the library facilities we have in Parliament House. Most members of this chamber would recognise that the specialist people we have working in the Parliamentary Library deal with specialist issues to do with politics. They are absolutely wonderful. We would not want generalists put into the library without some specific knowledge of what they need to do for members of Parliament. The first email, which I received from Curtin University, states - It is with sadness that we have to announce that of tomorrow, the 1st June 2007, there will be a suspension of access to the Department of Water (DoW) library collection. The duration of the hiatus is unknown at this point. Since the DoW became a separate organisation in 2005, the Department of Environment and Conservation library team has continued to provide them with library service, but due to downsizing and other factors we have been forced to discontinue that. The DoW’s resources will be packed up and sent off-site soon, and access to them will presumably be resumed if/ when a librarian is appointed. The second email I have concerns the Department for Community Development library, and states - It was correctly posted . . . a couple of weeks ago that the Dept for Community Development Library would be closing. On our last day of service we received a last minute reprieve. So many of the Department staff protested the closure that the decision to close the library service is now being reviewed. In the meantime, it is business as usual. I do not know when the next decision on our future will be made. It is very gratifying for the library staff . . . to know the service is valued by the staff.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3623

Just to add to the confusion, the Dept for Community Development is dividing into two (Department for Child Protection and Department for Communities). Very soon, this library, if we are still around, will be the Dept for Child Protection Library. . . . In relation to the library, I just want to touch on the issue of state records, which has become an item of interest in the media in the past few days concerning what state records obligations are. I asked some questions last year on 31 May about the State Records Office annual report of 2004, which stated that the State Records Office had been unable to receive archival records since July 2002. I asked - (1) Is the minister aware that over the past five years this has left an estimated 31 kilometres of records scattered in departments? I used the word “scattered” because they are in different departments. I also asked - (2) Did the business case submitted to the Department of Treasury and Finance in February 2005 make a strong argument for a new repository? (3) Will the minister table a copy of the business case; and, if not, why not? (4) Given that the annual report also shows that the WA State Records Office stores less material than any other state, is the only state that does not have spare storage space and has a storage shortfall several times its actual storage space, when will the new state records repository be funded and when will construction be commenced and completed? The Minister for Culture and the Arts answered - (1) I am aware that agencies are responsible for the proper storage and retention of their records. This government expects these records to be stored appropriately and not scattered in departments. (2)-(4) The government recognises the pressure of storing departmental records and is working with the State Records Office on an appropriate response. . . . I will not go into the rest of the answer. I later put out a media statement to the effect that there is now a 10-year wait for centralised records and that the state has four times the number of records outside the records office than inside it. I looked through the Budget Statements this year to see whether funds had been allocated for a new repository for state records. Obviously, some departments are having difficulty keeping their records. Many have not even put in place a plan for keeping records. I notice that at page 887 of the Budget Statements - which deals with culture and the arts - there is no money at all in this year’s budget for the major initiative of a new repository for the State Records Office. That is shameful. Of course, the events of the past couple of days that have involved the Minister for Health and the search for emails relates to the State Records Office. It particularly concerns the compliance monitoring of record-keeping plans by the State Records Commission. I asked a question in Parliament today but conveniently - or inconveniently for me - it was unable to be answered, and I needed it for this speech tonight. I asked a question about the State Records Commission. The State Records Act 2000 requires the State Records Commission to monitor compliance by government organisations of their record- keeping plans. Every department and every organisation is meant to have a plan in place, as does this department. The question to which I did not receive an answer and to which, hopefully, I will get an answer tomorrow was about which government agencies have not complied with this requirement in their latest annual report. Every department, whether it be the health department or the education department, is required by the State Records Act to include in their annual reports whether they have complied with their record-keeping plan. I note that according to the 2004-05 annual report of the State Records Commission, some breaches of the act had occurred. I therefore asked how many breaches or possible breaches of section 60(1)(c) of the act had been reported to the commission. I might receive an answer to that question tomorrow. However, in light of the emails involving the health CEO that the state Minister for Health failed to produce today, perhaps the health department has not complied with the State Records Commission and is, therefore, noncompliant with the provisions of the act. I do not see why my question could not be answered. The third issue I want to deal with concerning the arts and culture is that of the rock art on the Burrup Peninsula. Its decimation of our heritage is typical of this government’s actions. I would like to know why the state government has not been prepared to recognise the importance of the Burrup rock art. Chris Mayhew wrote to The Herald, one of my local papers, and said the following about the Burrup rock art - Corrupt ministers of state are to be expected in a society that values the dollar above all else. Rotten as it is, the Carpenter government’s place in infamy will owe less to the revealed disloyalty and deceit of its ministers than to its appalling decision to approve the destruction of the Burrup petroglyphs by allowing Woodside Petroleum to further develop the site. This decision is surely the most extreme act of vandalism ever.

3624 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

He goes on, but I do not have time to read the whole article. He was making the point that many people are concerned about the prehistoric value of the rock art on the Burrup and that more should be done to recognise and value it. The next issue I want to touch on very briefly is the Centenary Galleries. The old courthouse building was restored by the previous Liberal government to house the Western Australian Art Gallery’s heritage collection. It was opened on 2 July 1995, the gallery’s centenary year, hence the name Centenary Galleries. Currently, the Centenary Galleries building is closed because it is practically falling down due to lack of maintenance under this Labor government. When asked when Centenary Galleries would be opened, the best response that I could get was, “We’re not sure, but definitely not before October.” In the budget papers, the first dot point under “Major Initiatives For 2007-08” states - A refurbishment of the upper level and Centenary galleries will be taking place. The State Art Collection will be re-presented and promoted to the public as innovative and integrated displays. It will be supported by comprehensive visitor information, collection publications, merchandising, audio- visual and literary material, activity trails and online information. This seems to be a most commendable objective, or they are simply cover words for lack of maintenance. However, the really interesting thing is that there is no significant increase in the Art Gallery of Western Australia’s budget to cover this major refurbishment. The next issue I want to raise is that of the Australian Opera Studio in Midland. I think this is an absolutely shameful example of a “can’t do” or “won’t do” government in encouraging our young people to develop their talents. When I was first preparing my speech for tonight, I took an article out of The West Australian of Wednesday, 29 November 2006, that was headed “Asia beckons opera school low on funds”. There was an indication then that Asia may be interested in taking our opera school from Midland. The article states - A world-renowned opera school tucked away in an old Midland primary school is swamped by thousands of international applicants each year but cannot secure a single cent of government funding. The article states that the opera school was founded in 2002 as the world’s only performance-based finishing school for elite singers. It goes on to say - The studio attracted 12,000 applicants from China last year, is being copied by opera schools in Europe and is being tempted to relocate to Singapore. Japanese arts philanthropist Haruhisa Handa contributes $1 million of the studio’s $1.5 million annual budget, with the rest coming from other private sponsors. The AOS limits itself to 12 students for its two-year course, with each scholarship valued at $125,000 a year. It does not charge fees. But the studio would shut down if Mr Handa fell under a bus tomorrow . . . The studio would have to close. However, last week, on 24 June, there was a newspaper article headed “Top opera school to face final curtain”. There is great sadness in the community of Midland because of the loss of this vibrant, successful opera studio. A media statement last Friday, the subject of which is “Midland Opera School to Close”, reads - A world-renowned opera school in Midland will shut its doors next year because it cannot get taxpayer funding to offset spiralling costs. Without any support from the State and Federal governments, the Australian Opera Studio will not accept any more students and will close at the end of 2008. This is a tragedy. I spoke with some people at the opera school late last week when this matter came to public knowledge. The loss to Midland, and the revitalisation of Midland, will be significant. All the opera studio is looking for is a guarantee of $2 million a year. It gets $1 million from Mr Handa. However, the state government will not put its hand in its pocket to help out this opera studio. I will make this comment: similar to the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts, students from all over Australia and the surrounding region want to go to the opera school. Some of the students who have come out of the opera school are now performing at the royal academy in London and in Cardiff. The Australia Opera Studio has been influencing opera training here and it has already lost a couple of its senior staff to WAAPA. I want to conclude my comments by expressing my disappointment that the Western Australia government is yet to fund a new museum. Two sites have been nominated for the new museum but funds are absent, according to an article in The West Australian on Thursday, 26 April 2007. It said the short list of sites for the new museum for WA had been whittled down to two but the state government was still to commit any funds to the project. That is a great disappointment. I am sure I will have an opportunity at some other time to devote more time to the issue of the importance of a museum in Western Australia that will house our archaeological specimens and

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3625 give our anthropologists places to work. The two sites that have been nominated are East Perth power station and the Northbridge link. That is an important issue. The final issue I want to raise is the disgraceful behaviour of the Western Australian Museum in wanting to bring back from Shark Bay the artefacts from the Zuytdorp. Shark Bay council has spent almost $8 million on a special museum to house these significant objects that were taken from the Zuytdorp and they are now being demanded back by the Western Australian Museum. HON RAY HALLIGAN (North Metropolitan) [8.12 pm]: I also wish to contribute to the debate on the estimates of revenue and expenditure, consolidated fund estimates 2007-08, and talk a little about the northern suburbs and the North Metropolitan Region, and also make some general comment on issues that affect the people of Western Australia generally. First I would like to refer to something that Hon Peter Collier has already brought to the attention of the house - Balga Senior High School, the previous principal, Merv Hammond, and the Balga Works program, as it is known. I have not known Merv Hammond for a great length of time but I admire the work he was doing at Balga Senior High School. It would appear that Merv Hammond was given enormous latitude to be innovative. I have no problem with a person being given such enormous latitude, provided the person is informed of the constraints under which he is required to work. Merv has been very good, as has his colleague at Girrawheen Senior High School, in working in what is known as a difficult socioeconomic area. For some considerable time, people outside of government have been given free rein in the work that they do. That situation has existed under governments of all political persuasions. As I have said, I have no concern about that, provided the persons know the parameters and the boundaries to which they can go. I will leave it to my colleague Hon Peter Collier to go into the details about the Balga Works program. However, it is obvious that in the case of the Balga Works program, the checks and balances were not put in place, and the constraints, whether verbalised or communicated in some other form, were not audited. That program probably started out with good intentions. However, it ended up causing enormous problems for a great number of people, not the least of which are the young people whom it was hoped it would assist. That is most unfortunate. It is also most unfortunate that people in government will be loath to allow people to go down this path in the future. We need within our education system people who are somewhat entrepreneurial. When I say “somewhat entrepreneurial”, I emphasise that they need to be made aware of the boundaries that they cannot go beyond. We can only hope that the facts of this case are brought to light in the near future, that the mistakes that were made are identified, and that checks and balances are put in place to ensure that those same mistakes are not made again. The retirement of Merv Hammond has been a great loss for not only Balga Senior High School, but also the area generally and all the people whom he has been able to assist over the years. Not only today, but on many other occasions, ministers in this place - and also parliamentary secretaries, for that matter - have made mention of the fact that the ills of Western Australia at this point in time in 2007 are directly related to the previous Court Liberal government. The Labor government has now been in office for six years. I would dearly love for the Leader of the House to place on the record when this government will be prepared to take responsibility for its actions and/or inactions in a number of key areas. Some of those key areas are education, health, the police, drug abuse and disability services. On a more topical note, I should also add child abuse to that list. I am not expecting the Leader of the House to interject now. However, this government has said repeatedly that it is open and accountable. Therefore, it is particularly important to know when this government - which communicates with the people of Western Australia through this chamber - will be prepared take responsibility for its actions and/or inactions. It is all too easy to point the finger at someone else and say that things are not as we would have liked, or things are not as they should have been or could have been. I accept part of that argument. However, there has to come a time when a reasonable person could say, “The time has now come: it is your responsibility.” I am sure members on the other side of the chamber who have children have on occasion reached that point and said, “You are now responsible for your actions.” I would suggest the same principle has to apply to this Labor government. It is particularly important that we on this side of the chamber and the people of Western Australia, generally, are made aware of when this is likely to occur. The Leader of the House mentioned that question time is particularly important. All members are in agreement with that. I believe it is important. I recall that the coalition government was in office for the first four years that I was in this place. I remember some of the ministers who were in this place at that time, Peter Foss in particular and even Max Evans - although on occasions it was difficult to understand what he was saying. I sat behind the leader and I used to watch the ministers and I noted how quickly they tried to answer the questions. They did not filibuster - they might have on occasions, but not all that frequently that I can recall - and they tried to answer as many questions as possible. Hon Ken Travers: You are not suggesting that Peter Foss gave short answers, are you? Hon RAY HALLIGAN: It depended on the question. I suggest that Hon Peter Foss was a little like this Leader of the House on occasion because he would adopt a certain stance when he believed others needed to be educated.

3626 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Hon Ken Travers: That is a diplomatic way of putting it. Hon Kim Chance: Peter Foss remains a very good friend of mine. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: I admit that they did not look at their watches. Hon Ken Travers: The great educators of the Parliament. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: There is no doubt that those ministers provided a lot of information. Some of it might not have been appropriate for the time and, being question time, the time in which to ask questions was limited. I admit that the time probably would have been better used with shorter answers. There may be some ministers who have used that period to make a ministerial statement. Hon Ken Travers: The only difference between the great educator Peter Foss and the great educator the current Leader of the House is that when this Leader of the House educates the house he clearly allows question time to run longer so that more questions can be asked. Peter Foss was not allowed to let question time go beyond five o’clock. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: Do we have evidence of that? I am glad Hon Ken Travers remembers because I cannot remember every occasion. Hon Ken Travers: I remember because I would be the member who missed out on asking the question at the end. It was always a race as to whether I would ask my question or the clock ticked over to five o’clock and the Leader of the House would be on his feet. I note that the new Leader of the House has educated the house by allowing more time for question time. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: I suggest it is also the Presiding Officer, as well as the Leader of the House, who virtually insists on that. They are both well aware that when a minister goes beyond the pale in answering a question it reduces the number of questions that can be asked. Hon Ken Travers: It is ultimately up to the Leader of the House to move to resume the business of the house. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: I am aware of that. However, there needs to be give and take. Hon Ken Travers: There is a lot of give. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: There is a fair bit of taking. Some analysis is required before we can reach a conclusion on that issue. Hon Ken Travers: How many questions do you get in question time compared with the number we got when you were in government? Hon RAY HALLIGAN: That is the reason I suggest that some research be undertaken. The member should show me evidence of this rather than relying on his memory. If I were to rely on the memory of that member and other members opposite, I would have to believe that we were the worst government that was ever in place and it will take 50 years for this state to recover from anything that we put in place. Hon Ken Travers: I can assure you, looking at Hon George Cash in the chair tonight reminds me of watching the clock, the Leader of the House and the President. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Hon George Cash): Order! The reason I am looking at the clock is that I know Hon Ray Halligan will seek an extension of time because of the interjections, and I am trying to encourage members to get on with the debate. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: Thank you, Mr Deputy President. You are absolutely correct; I should not accept these interjections. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: I must say that they add to your speech. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich can assist, and she has done so, by uttering a few words. I have written down on my notes “OBE” and I was not sure what to do with it. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: Order of the British Empire - I am still waiting. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: The minister would dearly love those letters to stand for that, so we will not bother to go down that path! I will talk now about transport in the northern suburbs. Some things need doing in that area. I am fully aware, because we have been told repeatedly, about how this government looks after the area of rail. A previous Labor government built the northern suburbs railway, and the present government is now building a line to Mandurah. However, certain things are not being done in the northern suburbs that should be done. One of those is an east- west bus service. The idea has been around for some time. The member for Kingsley held a forum a couple of weeks ago, and people there were complaining about the lack of an east-west bus service. I admit that the

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3627 previous government did not introduce such a service, even though it was being talked about at that time. Now, after six years of the present government, something still needs to be done. Hon Ken Travers: What bus service are you talking about? Hon RAY HALLIGAN: An east-west service - Mirrabooka to Warwick, and places like that. Something needs to be done about it. I went to that forum and the officer present from Main Roads was talking about viability. Of course money is a factor, but he was talking about viability, and the fact that a service would have to run at least eight kilometres before his agency would consider it, as though every service had to make money. We know that the majority of public transport services, whether bus or rail, do not make money. We know that the bus services to Yanchep and the like are privately run and assisted by government. Even when we were in government we were doing the same thing. They are subsidised, and there is nothing wrong with that. It is the way it must be done if the service is to be provided for the people. I am not knocking that as such, but I am concerned and a little upset about the fact that Main Roads said, firstly, that there was no money, and it could not provide the service because the figures do not add up; it will not make a profit. Hon Ken Travers: Are you talking about Main Roads or the Public Transport Authority? Hon RAY HALLIGAN: Sorry, I meant the Public Transport Authority. It seems that not all that long ago they were all one entity. Hon Ken Travers: Not that part. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: It all comes under planning and infrastructure, does it not? Hon Ken Travers: PTA is separate from planning and infrastructure, but that’s all right. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: On the issue of additional train services, it is interesting that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure spoke on 2 May this year about the fact that more car parking areas would be made available at Greenwood, Whitfords, Stirling and Edgewater stations on the northern line. I am sure Hon Ken Travers will tell me if I am wrong, but I believe that, apart from Perth, there are nine stations on the northern suburbs line. That will get us up to Currambine. I will go through them. They are Leederville, Glendalough, Stirling, Warwick, Greenwood, Whitfords, Edgewater, Joondalup and Currambine. Hon Ken Travers: And Clarkson; ten. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: Okay, I missed one. Therefore, only four out of those 10 stations will receive car parking bays. This was mentioned to the people at the forum the other week. When the number of additional bays was mentioned to them, they suggested that even that would not be sufficient. Of course, these additional bays will not be made available, according to the press statement, for a number of years. The press statement states - “Planning and approvals processes for the new parking bays will begin immediately, with construction starting in 2008-09 and new bays coming on-stream over the following three years,” . . . I mention that because people who live in streets close to these stations are complaining about commuters parking their cars on their front lawns. Residents are becoming a little browned off and certainly a little peeved about what is happening. If they must wait up to three years for a few more bays that even today they can foresee will be insufficient, some of them may well have to put up with that for some considerable time. Another interesting part about the press statement dated 2 May 2007 is that it was issued by both the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and the Premier. In The West Australian on 20 September last year certain remarks were attributed to the Premier. It appears that he may have had a change of heart, as when he was talking about commuters and new trains, he said - “You can’t just snap your fingers and have them delivered,” . . . “They have to be built and that is the reality.” It does not take a Rhodes scholar to know that, but it also takes planning, and I am not sure whether a great deal of planning had taken place. The West Australian goes on - The Government is also under pressure to provide additional car park spaces at stations, particularly on the Joondalup line, but Mr Carpenter said the solution was a better integrated bus service. That has yet to come to fruition. We still need to see that so-called integrated bus service, whatever that might mean. Mr Carpenter went on - “We don’t intend to be building massive carparks, or increasing the size of carparks at every train station, it would be counter-productive,” . . . There now appears to be a recognition that additional car parking bays will be made available for at least four out of the 10 stations.

3628 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Hon Ken Travers: But he said we are not going to do it at every station. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: That is what I read out. Hon Ken Travers: So we’re doing it at four out of 10. What’s your point? RAY HALLIGAN: The point is that it is still a change of heart. Hon Ken Travers: No, because he said we wouldn’t do it at every station so we’ve done it at four. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: I have already said that a number of residents in some instances around some of these stations - they do not include those four - are complaining about the lack of car parking spaces for commuters and that these people are parking their cars outside their homes on their front lawns, and it appears that nothing is being done about it. It is all very well and good to say, “But we’re doing something.” It is like the health system and many other things that this government is putting more money into from which it is not getting a return. It is one thing to be active; it is also something else to produce the goods that the people expect. The people who went to this forum, who are residents living near any number of these stations, said that the additional number of car bays being provided will not be sufficient. They have seen the bays fill up very quickly. The residents are saying it; I am just repeating what they have said. It is all right for the government to have spent $15 million or $18 million on this, but it appears that that might not be enough. There is nothing in the government’s press statement to suggest that it will be sufficient - nothing at all. The people have been told that they have been provided with more parking bays and that they should be happy with it. Hon Ken Travers: As a member for the North Metropolitan Region, I know that the people are very happy with that announcement because my lower house colleagues and I worked long and hard to get it. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: It may not be sufficient. Hon Ken Travers: It may not be, but it is better than nothing, which is what used to happen when you lot were in government. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: Here we go again! Hon Ken Travers: Well, it’s true. If it’s still not enough, we’ll find other solutions. Hon RAY HALLIGAN: In another 10 years’ time. We have already been told it could take up to three years for this to happen. Problems associated with the Reid Highway-Mitchell Freeway overpass require some urgent attention. It could be put down to bad planning initially, although it may well have something to do with the other roads around the area, but the overpass becomes extremely congested. I do not know what the solution is. It will cost millions of dollars to provide a solution, but something must be done. It is no good looking to the opposition to fix it; it requires those who are holding the purse strings to fix it; that is, the current government. I could talk about the problems we are experiencing and have experienced with housing for a while, and about the lack of planning. Admittedly, on the news tonight mention was made that some of the housing prices are decreasing because people cannot afford to buy a home at present. Obviously some people can afford it but I am talking about those who more often than not cannot look after themselves. Those who are moving into their third or fourth homes often know their way around the system and can obtain the finance and move into a home. Today the Housing Industry Association released a media statement headed “New Home Sales Drop in May”. They have dropped for a couple of months. The document states that the cost of building a new house in Australia - not just Western Australia - is - . . . extremely competitive on the world stage, however, taxes and charges on new house and land packages together with the cost of red tape and the planning maze adds unnecessarily to the cost of a new house. That has been said for a considerable time, but it has not necessarily been recognised by the government, which is unfortunate. I am concerned about the people who have borrowed up to the hilt. They have borrowed 100 per cent of the cost of a home and are finding themselves owing more than they own because of the decreasing value of the home. Over the years there has been a dramatic change in the difference in cost between the land itself and the house that is built on it. The Real Estate Institute of WA has provided me with a document. I would like to read some of the figures because they are most important. The median house price in June 2002 was $189 000. In June 2003 it was $225 000; in June 2004 it was $258 000; in June 2005 it was $295 000; in June 2006 it was $405 000; and in September 2006 it was $430 000. I heard tonight on the news that it is currently around $460 000. The very big difference here is the median land price. The figures I have just quoted refer to a total land and house package. The median land price in June 2002 was $84 000, or 44 per cent of the total cost. In June 2003 it had gone up to $99 000, or 44 per cent; in June 2004 it had gone up to $125 000, or 48 per cent; in June 2005 it was $145 000, or 49 per cent; in June 2006 it was $215 000, or 53 per cent; and in September 2006 it was $265 000, or 62 per cent. There has been an increase in monetary value - which is not all that meaningful because of inflation - in the cost of land from $84 000 to $265 000. More importantly, the

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3629 percentage of land that makes up the total house and land package has increased from 44 per cent in June 2002 to 62 per cent. The Housing Industry Association has published other figures, which I do not have with me at present, that show that the cost of building a home has not increased anywhere near as much as the price a person has to pay for the land on which to build a house. They are similar figures to these: the cost of land is the larger component of a house and land package. This is part of the argument being put forward about planning, the lack of available land and - as is mentioned in the document - the red tape, taxes and charges that others would say unnecessarily add to the cost of land. Any number of years ago the headworks on a development were often borne by the local government authority and the cost of the headworks recouped over 20 or 25 years. Currently, all the headworks are placed on the shoulders of the developer. That has happened with not only this government, but also previous governments. The developer, of course, is not a banker and should not be expected to be, so it must pass that cost immediately on to the land purchaser. I have been down this path on previous occasions but I do not think people necessarily agree with me. People must pay for all the infrastructure - the roads, kerbing, guttering, electricity, water, sewerage, parks and playgrounds. Those amenities all look very well and good but there is an enormous cost involved and that cost is passed on to those who are purchasing. First home buyers in particular are finding it extremely difficult to purchase. They are compelled to take on something that they may very well be prepared to wait five or 10 years for. By that I mean all the grassed areas with lakes, fountains and playgrounds. Everyone is now insisting that they accept those amenities and that they pay for them. I hope that, at some stage, this issue is revisited and that some first home buyers are asked what they are prepared to accept. It might be what I term a lesser package without all the additional headworks, and that would enable them to purchase a piece of land and build a modest home. The trimmings could be added at a later stage when they are in a position to contribute towards them. I understand that first home buyers are still having problems and, probably more importantly, they are having difficulty renting homes for exactly the same reason: The price of a house and land package is so high that people buying homes for investment and renting them out must recoup at least what they are paying out unless they want to negatively gear. I imagine that not too many people can afford to do that. Therefore, rents are increasing dramatically and making it all the more difficult for our younger people in particular, and first home buyers generally, to become homeowners. While talking about homes generally I want to talk a little about Homeswest. Members of this place will have heard me speak on numerous occasions about the Homeswest waiting list and the lack of stock. That also has been the situation for a number of years. Part of that was to do with the previous Court government’s policies - I will get in early. However, we have been enjoying boom times for a number of years and it has been said that they will continue for a few more years. If there is a time when the government should invest in more public housing, I suggest that now is that time. However, that does not appear to be happening. Again, more and more people in the community cannot afford their own home, nor can they afford to rent. They are therefore looking at public housing but having to wait, in some instances, for an enormous amount of time for that public housing. I believe something must be done and I would like to hear from the government at some stage about what strategies it intends to implement to increase housing stocks to make it easier for people who need - I am talking about need; a very important word - to go into those homes. They need that housing. There is one issue which I will talk about and which I will make an issue, because I am not aware of anything that is being done in this area. I am wondering whether there is a key performance indicator that the Department of Housing and Works uses that would assist - I will use the word “assist” because I think it is important - some tenants of public housing to move out. I am fully aware of this issue, because any number of constituents have come to me with concerns that on occasions they have received a letter that says, “You have now reached a particular point. Your income is now over the threshold - not nearing it, but over it - and so you have three months to get out.” Often, these letters come out of the blue. The difficulty, which is why I use the word “assist”, is that the information being provided to Homeswest should be sufficient, so that over a period the tenants are made aware of when they are likely to reach the threshold. I know that it is not always as clear cut as that, but if someone’s income is gradually increasing, and assumptions are made that within 12 months that person is likely to be near the threshold, I believe it is important that that person is advised as soon as possible, so that some arrangements might be put in place whereby that person can move out and into accommodation that is possibly more suitable, if it is available, and, therefore, some public housing would then be available for someone else who actually needs it. I am wondering whether there is a key performance indicator that encourages the Homeswest staff to even look at this type of situation, so that they can ascertain the number of people who are placed in that position and advise them within an appropriate time; and I am not trying to tell anyone what that appropriate time might be. However, I think something needs to be done in this area. I can recall a few years ago seeing photographs in the newspaper of a relatively recent model Mercedes Benz parked in the driveway of a Homeswest home and it being said that the income of the tenants was far in excess of what it should be. That was a one-off situation, and these things will happen. However, there may be many more. Often, the people who have come to me complaining about those letters that they have received are in fact reaching that threshold, but they say that three months is not enough time for them to find alternative

3630 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] accommodation, because they have been in public accommodation for a long time. Therefore, I think that some assistance and some mentoring are required for those people, and it may well be that Homeswest can rationalise the number of tenants that it currently has and reduce the problems that exist. However, unless the situation is looked at and analysed, nothing will happen, and I am not sure that anything is happening at present. I will quickly talk about one set of volunteers at the Araluen Botanic Park, which is well outside the North Metropolitan Region, I must admit. The volunteers there have been working in the park for quite a number of years. I am well aware that the government is now going to place the park in different hands. The unfortunate part about this is that the government has not actually told these volunteers exactly what will happen with them; that is, whether they will in fact have a position or what that position might be, or exactly what will happen with the park and whether there will be additional costs associated with the running of it. We do not know whether a cost-benefit analysis has been undertaken. Everyone knows that we have a very large number of volunteers in this state. I do not know how the percentage compares with other states in Australia, but we have a large number - I understand it is well in excess of 400 000 - and they do an absolutely marvellous job. No government of any persuasion could possibly provide the services our volunteers provide if they had to be paid. I think it is important we try to keep them onside, to the extent that if they want to work, we should provide the work. Let us not take it away from them. I believe that is an area that needs to be looked at by the government and we hope it will be able to provide for the volunteers’ needs as well as those of the general community of Western Australia and therefore reduce the costs. On the question of costs, I would like to mention the fact that the government, as did previous governments, has gone down the path of user pays, and we have had cost recovery throughout any number of regulations that go through this place. One of the difficulties has been that some of the agencies - I am not blaming government for this - are continually looking at ways and means of extracting moneys over and above cost recovery. Certain areas have been brought to the attention of the Auditor General, and when the Joint Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation sees charges in excess of what everyone believes is a reasonable cost recovery, it has no option but to consider it to be a tax. That is the argument we provide to the department, and it then provides its side of the story as to why it should be considered just a charge. I do not see why we have to have arguments in this area. To me it is relatively clear-cut that the government should be instructing its agencies to look only to recovering the figure they have paid out for the service provided. There needs to be some insistence in this area. The Premier’s circular goes out to all agencies setting out the different documentation that has to be presented to the committee and what has to be included in a lot of that documentation. I am aware that the Department of Treasury and Finance has some guidelines associated with cost recovery, but there have been, as far as I am aware and as far as I am concerned, many problems associated with cost recovery. The matter still needs to be resolved. I have been talking about it for any number of years and something still needs to be done about it so that there is a recognition that if the charge is a legitimate cost recovery, it goes through as part of the regulation. However, if the charge goes beyond cost recovery, it is then considered a tax, and it should go through the primary legislation and, therefore, through this chamber. I now want to get back to the northern suburbs and talk about power blackouts. Fortunately, power blackouts are not something that people in the northern suburbs have to put up with very often, but many areas of the state do often have to put up with power blackouts. The power supply in this state is indeed a fragile thread. Between 21 February and 6 March this year, Perth experienced significant heatwave conditions. I asked a series of questions about this matter when Parliament resumed this year. The answers to those questions make interesting reading. There were 742 blackouts throughout the state over that 14-day period. That was an average of 53 a day. Those blackouts affected a total of 208 293 customers. If we work on an average of two people per household, that means that more than 400 000 people were affected. The causes listed in the answer ranged from lightning and pole-top fires, to accidents and vandalism. I suspect that the most significant cause was the words “blown fuses”, because the government has admitted that blown fuses can occur because of high loads during heatwave conditions. On the figures supplied, blackouts affected 225 suburbs in the metropolitan area. Of those suburbs, 163 were affected more than once. Outside the metropolitan area, 272 separate areas were affected, ranging from Northampton, to Kalgoorlie, to Albany, and just about every point in between. Of these, 216 areas were hit more than once. On the government’s own figures, the peak load reached during the period was 3 576 megawatts. That translates to more than 94 per cent of the system’s maximum load. In March, the government patted itself on the back because the system had not collapsed during a heatwave. The government even had the temerity to refer to small pockets of power interruption. When there are more than 700 blackouts in 14 days, a reference to “small pockets” is being a little too generous with the terminology. Then, little more a month later, came the big announcement that the government will be spending $3.5 billion over four years to upgrade and extend the state’s main electricity network. I am sure we would all express hope that this expenditure will strengthen that fragile thread to which I referred at the outset, and that the people of Western Australia will be able to enjoy the benefits of an improved electricity system, with blackouts reduced to a minimum. It is difficult to expect people to put up with blackouts of this magnitude at a time when this state is experiencing an economic boom.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3631

One other matter that needs to be placed on the record relates to the Corruption and Crime Commission, and, more importantly, the Parliamentary Inspector of the Corruption and Crime Commission. Members will be aware that this state has one parliamentary inspector by the name of Malcolm McCusker and he has an assistant by the name of Graeme Scott. The stage has now been reached at which a problem exists. It is something that could not be foreseen; therefore, I am not blaming the government for it, far from it. One would hope that everybody recognises that a problem exists and something will be done about it. I believe there is a need for an office of parliamentary inspector for which someone of the ilk of Malcolm McCusker, QC would take the responsible role and he would have at least two people under him to undertake the majority of the day-to-day work. It would be Malcolm’s ultimate responsibility to sign off on any reports. This office would need to be resourced. It has become apparent that there are any number of issues in the public domain that individual constituents believe the parliamentary inspector should be investigating. More and more work is being placed on his shoulders, and when one considers that Malcolm is an eminent QC who runs his own business as a barrister and that time must be certainly precious to him, there is a need for the government, with the support of the opposition, to make resources available to ensure that the role of the parliamentary inspector can be undertaken and completed in the manner in which the Parliament first expected. The things that have occurred could not be foreseen. I am not necessarily referring to matters that are coming out of the Corruption and Crime Commission, but to other extraneous matters that require the attention of the parliamentary inspector. Currently those issues are becoming so numerous that something will have to be done very quickly. I understand that some assistance, other than just Graeme Scott, will be provided to the parliamentary inspector, but I also understand that will not be until September. Having previously been a public servant, I understand that the wheels of government can turn quite slowly. We need to try to accelerate it somewhat to make it easier for not only the parliamentary inspector but also Parliament to believe, understand and accept that the work through the CCC act is undertaken and completed in a timely, efficient and effective manner. At this point I am not sure that that is the case. I am not reflecting on individuals; however, the demands that are being placed on them are greater than anyone initially expected. That being the case, it is incumbent upon Parliament, through the government, to provide the resources that the inspector would require. I have just about completed the issues I wanted to raise on this occasion; however, I would like to repeat some of the things I have said previously about the committee system. It works particularly well, but it needs to be bipartisan. I am fully aware that select committees can be very political, but that is where the politics should remain. Standing committees should not be political. Judgements should be made on the issues and consensus found so that we can move forward knowing full well that if we have created a precedent, it is something we can all be comfortable with. I have been involved with committees for 10 years, and the great majority I have been involved with, and the members I have been involved with from all sides of politics, have been particularly good. They have all worked well, and the outcomes from the committees have been extremely good. Both the Parliament and the people of Western Australia can be comfortable with the work those committees do and the outcomes they provide. I feel passionate about the committee system and periodically I will speak as I do now, but if ever I believe that something is going wrong with any of the committees of which I am part, I have every intention of bringing that to the attention of the house. It is a very important part of the parliamentary process. It is an important aspect of work for members, particularly those on the back bench, to become involved in. They can learn a great deal from it, and members of this chamber can feel comfortable, when a report is tabled, that the due diligence had been undertaken to the extent that they can be comfortable with the recommendations provided in that report. Debate adjourned, on motion by Hon Bruce Donaldson. METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME AMENDMENT 1027/33 - WHITEMAN PARK AND ENVIRONS - DISALLOWANCE Motion Pursuant to standing order 152(b), the following motion by Hon Giz Watson was moved pro forma on 8 May - That metropolitan region scheme amendment 1027/33, Whiteman Park and Environs, published in the Government Gazette on 30 March 2007 and tabled in the Legislative Council on 4 April 2007 under the Planning and Development Act 2005, be and is hereby disallowed. HON GIZ WATSON (North Metropolitan) [9.13 pm]: We are dealing tonight with a disallowance motion in relation to Whiteman Park and environs. As members will know, metropolitan region scheme amendments usually include a number of specific proposals. This amendment deals with five proposals, and I intend to talk about the second proposal in some detail. This proposal has drawn opposition from a significant number of people contributing to the planning process. Of a total of 35 submissions received, 24 were opposed to the second proposal, to transfer 249 hectares of park and recreation reservation from the southern portion of Whiteman Park, referred to as the Marshall Road precinct, and 82 hectares of adjoining rural zoned land to the

3632 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] urban zone. It is unfortunate that when dealing with metropolitan region scheme amendment, the house has no option other than to disallow the whole amendment. It is worth noting that the first proposal in the amendment had broad support. That proposal was to transfer 1 081 hectares of rural zone land adjoining the western boundary of Whiteman Park to the parks and recreation reservation. I will talk a little more about that in a minute. That proposal seemed to have received almost universal support. It is therefore unfortunate in this process of moving a disallowance motion that that proposal will also be affected. The rezoning of this part of the area designated as part of Whiteman Park is, in my view, a breach of the trust and understanding of the original owners who agreed to sell the land that they owned back in the early 1970s. Many who arguably are in the best position to be informed say that the payments received were reduced due to the vendor’s philanthropy. That particular argument is debateable, but it certainly is clear that there was a mutual understanding that the land they were selling was to be owned and used by the community in perpetuity. Some of the land also was bought using a federal-state scheme. The purchase of at least some of this land in this southern portion of Whiteman Park was purchased under the commonwealth-state scheme whereby land purchases for specific purposes were funded two-thirds by the commonwealth and one-third by the state. Certainly, some of the land in this area that is now proposed to be rezoned urban was bought under that scheme. I will refer specifically to it. The Whittlesea Pastoral Company sold 200 acres, or 81 hectares, of land in this particular way. I must acknowledge the hard work of some of the people who have a long-term interest in and relationship with Whiteman Park. They have done quite a lot of work to look at the history of the conditions and the processes that were undertaken when the land was originally sold to the state. It is clear that part of this agreement was this portion of the land that was bought under this federal-state agreement. Some correspondence dates back to the 1970s and refers to this agreement. For example, I have a letter with me from the then Acting Premier of Western Australia, back in June 1988, addressed to the then Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, indicating that the government was reconsidering the use of this land and was wanting to be released from the requirement that if it used the land for something other than the non-urban purposes for which it was originally purchased, it would have to repay the commonwealth money. That was certainly the state government’s understanding, and the then Acting Premier was seeking an assurance from the then Prime Minister that the state could be relieved of that requirement. The letter states - Land in the Santa Maria - Mussell Pool area of the Perth Metropolitan Region was purchased during the late 1970’s by the Urban Lands Council of Western Australia with Commonwealth grant assistance under programmes approved pursuant to the Urban and Regional Development (Financial Assistance) Act, 1974. It goes on to say - The purpose of the programmes was to acquire land for essentially non-urban purposes and the provisions of the agreements were and have been complied with. It is therefore very clear from the outset that the intention was that this land was for non-urban purposes and, indeed, early in the 1970s it was firmly zoned parks and recreation. It was taken from its rural zoning into parks and recreation. The letter concludes on the urgency of the matter - that is, state cabinet wanted to look at the potential for the land to be used for residential purposes. It states - In view of the urgency of this matter I am approaching you direct - It is lousy English, but I will let him get away with that - to request your assistance in varying the terms of the original agreements with the Commonwealth. Further correspondence took place. I have not been able to trace anything that indicated that that agreement was formally relinquished. I have spoken with the minister and the parliamentary secretary, and the advice indicates that there is more recent correspondence between the state government and the commonwealth government again seeking reassurance from the commonwealth government that the state government would not be required to pay back any money. The letter to which I referred is a letter from the then Premier Gallop to the Prime Minister, John Howard, seeking that assurance. There was no correspondence back to the then Premier to say that that has been ticked off on. The argument is that because the commonwealth government has not written back to the state government, the commonwealth government is not fussed about it. I still think a question arises. That is one aspect of this proposal. The proposed rezoning is seen by many to be profiteering from what was clearly understood to be a public asset. As I have pointed out, in 1975 it was indicated that the area was to be rezoned from rural to parks and recreation. In June 1975, it was announced in the Government Gazette that the Minister for Urban Development and Town Planning had given preliminary approval to the amendments to the metropolitan region town planning scheme 1959-1974 relating to the land in the Shire of Swan currently zoned rural to be reserved for parks and recreation. That process was finally completed in 1977. It is clear that this land has been earmarked for parks and recreation since that time. The current move by the government to rezone the land urban raises a question about the

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3633 government keeping faith with the commitment given to the original vendors. I have met a number of the descendents of the original owners of the land, who showed me around the site. It is clear that they understood that the purchase was agreed to on the condition that the land would be used for public purposes. As I understand it, if this rezoning goes ahead and the land is used for urban purposes, the government stands to gain about $90 million, which is the estimated value of the land in the current market. Part of this package provides that in exchange for the proposed removal of the southern portion of Whiteman Park, an additional portion of land is to be added to the western side of Whiteman Park. That is good. That is proposal 1, which everybody seems to be happy with. However, it has been suggested to the public that that is a trade-off. There are two issues to do with the land that is currently zoned rural that adjoins the western boundary of the park. This has been on the books of the improvement plan since the 1970s. It is also interesting to note that in the report the vegetation is described as being of variable quality, although it must be acknowledged that 500 hectares of it has been identified in as a Bush Forever site and it therefore has regional significance. That is what a Bush Forever site is. Significantly, it is also under the priority 1 ground pollution control area. Page 4 of the Western Australian Planning Commission’s document on submissions on this MRS amendment with regard to proposal 1 states - The 1081 ha area contains native vegetation of varying quality and is a ‘Priority One’ Underground Water Pollution Control Area . . . ‘Priority One’ indicates that the highest level of protection is necessary for the area. The only land uses compatible with ‘Priority One’ areas are national parks and nature reserves. All other land uses are deemed restricted or incompatible. I would argue that there is no other purpose that the land could legitimately be designated for other than to be co- joined with Whiteman Park. It is logical. It is the only land use designation that it should ultimately have. As much as it is a welcome asset as an addition to the park, it should not be seen as a trade-off for the loss of the southern portion. The other thing is that, having Beechboro Road running through the middle of it, its value is compromised for the rest of Whiteman Park because that major road will separate the area to be added in from the existing park. That is a bit of a reduction of its value. Although the portion of the park proposed to be rezoned is semi-cleared and subject to grazing, it is important to note that one of the reasons the area was subject to grazing was that, back in the 1970s and 1980s, the best and cheapest means of reducing any fire risk to the rest of the park was to keep it grazed and keep the grass down. Of course, that had an ongoing impact in reducing the biological value of the remnant bushland in the southern portion. The southern portion has a fence that separates the rest of Whiteman Park from the bit that is now grazed. The fact that it has been grazed does not mean that the area has no biological value. I will quote briefly from a submission from the Urban Bushland Council concerning the environmental values because it is very easy to simply say that it is a degraded area and has no environmental value. In the council’s submission to the scheme amendment it made the following points - We do not support the rezoning of this land to ‘Urban’ because a) parts retain significant areas of bushland and damplands; b) the balance is open space which while degraded provides many environmental, social and economic benefits, and c) selling of natural assets to provide funds for development and management elsewhere in the park is totally unacceptable. It goes on to state - With regard to a) we are aware of the research that has been undertaken by the North East Catchment Committee, largely through flora survey work of the Bennett Brook and surrounding catchments. As well as Whiteman Park one survey site is the area to the west of the bottom of Whiteman Park, north of Marshall Road. Here there are significant bushland and wetland remnants. The group has so far identified 164 native flora taxa, including some species of interest, with many more expected to be found. As much as I acknowledge that the government is drawing on the fact that the Environmental Protection Authority has declined to give any formal assessment, I indicate that when there are community groups who have the time, energy and expertise to go out and work on the ground, we will often find that such areas do not meet the standard of being listed for Bush Forever - which has to be bushland of regional significance - but they still have significant value in terms of local conservation attributes. We know that these areas can be rehabilitated. Indeed, one of the outcomes we envisage is that the southern area could be a proper buffer between the true park and the high-quality bush and the cleared area to the south. I will just touch on water issues. We are aware that the area was originally listed as a priority one water area and that there has been a redrawing of boundaries. It is interesting to see that the boundary now exactly matches a

3634 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] cadastral line on the map. I raise some question marks about that because, although I am not a groundwater expert, straight lines are not all that common in natural systems such as groundwater systems. It is also worth noting that in the Water Corporation’s submission to the amendment it had some concerns. It stated that it would like to continue to use the existing bores in the area. That is rather fascinating to me, given that it is not supposed to be a priority 1 water area, and on the other hand the Water Corporation is saying water is there that it wants to continue to pump. It seems to me that that needs further investigation because those two things seem to contradict each other. I am aware that we have been given a very short time to debate this so I will wind up pretty quickly. I argue also that there is no urgent need for this land for urban purposes. Numerous subdivisions are being progressed in the area. I am aware of three that will come on stream in the next five years; namely, Albion Town, West Swan Estate and the Caversham airstrip. I understand also that the Ellenbrook development has not been fully taken up; therefore, the argument that this land is desperately needed at this time for urban development is difficult to mount. Suggestions have been made that the money raised by the sale of the land would be used for the park itself. I acknowledge that the minister has suggested various concessions and made suggestions to me, and perhaps other members, that might make this proposition more palatable. Unfortunately, we need a bit more reassurance than that before we give our support to this proposal. The government should be congratulated also for the submissions and community input on the Network City discussions and consulting the community on the planning in the way it did because that was a good process. One of the clear indications from that was that people did not want to sell off their parks and recreation reserves and their bushland to fund the rest of the bushland. People were very clear that they did not want any more of it to be lost. I acknowledge that the minister has also suggested that this area should properly become an A-class reserve and its tenure secured, and that it should be brought in under the auspices of the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority. Those are the sorts of outcomes that would be acceptable to the community and to the Parliament. However, I am not willing to trade off the southern portion for an area that has been put aside for parks and recreation to achieve that. We want to see a positive outcome from this area and the southern portion of that park’s conservation values enhanced. That would be the best way of ensuring there is no further deterioration of the Bennett Brook catchment. Those are the reasons the Greens (WA) are pursuing this disallowance. I will now sit down and let other members speak. HON SIMON O’BRIEN (South Metropolitan) [9.32 pm]: I am not the opposition spokesman on planning, but I am responsible for planning matters in the upper house on behalf of the opposition. The Liberal Party has formulated its position on this matter after a great deal of consultation and discussion in the internal forums of the party. In the very limited time that is now available, because the government needs and certainly wants the opportunity to put its position, I will faithfully convey the opposition’s position to the house as succinctly as I can, having regard for the fact that the mover of the motion has already advanced a great deal of the case and the relevant facts that touch upon this matter. Amendment 1027/33, Whiteman Park and Environs, contains a number of proposals. The opposition looked with interest at the nature of these proposals, which cover some five distinct propositions. We looked at the report on submissions, and we discovered that the only proposal of the five to attract any real opposition, or, on balance, a majority of opposition from those who did make submissions, was proposal 2, which received three submissions in support and 24 against. Members will also be aware from correspondence that has reached them in their electorate offices and by other means that there is also a great deal of community interest, not only from people in the immediate vicinity of Whiteman Park, but also from other people further abroad. All the interest and representations that I have received, I think, are about proposal 2. Before I turn substantially to proposal 2, I will canvass the amendment in its entirety and note the following: in respect of proposal 1, I do not know that anyone is particularly offended - certainly, not from our point of view - by the proposal to transfer 1 081 hectares of rural zoned land adjoining the western boundary of Whiteman Park into that reservation, and we would not object to the government doing it. In relation to proposal 3, again we do not have a difficulty with the transferral of 16 hectares of primary regional roads reservation for Tonkin Highway north of Marshall Road to Hepburn Avenue and a two-hectare area of rural zoned land to the other regional roads reservation. We can see merit in what the government is seeking to do. In relation to proposal 4, again we have no objection to the transferring of the area of the Tonkin Highway primary regional roads reservation north of Hepburn Avenue to Woollcott Avenue, an area of 17 hectares, to the rural zone. Finally, we do not have overwhelming concerns with proposal 5, which deals with transferring certain portions of lots 96, 100 and 101 from the rural zone to the public purposes reservations and the relevant zoning, noting that they are reservations for Western Power and Water Corporation requirements and for a future transit link. That leaves us with proposal 2, which I have already indicated in my opening remarks is that part of this metropolitan region scheme amendment that is causing the controversy, the public representation and the balance of opposition, which is noticeable, in contrast with the general acceptance of the other four proposals.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3635

Proposal 2 relates to the transferring of 249 hectares of parks and recreation reservation from the southern portion of Whiteman Park, referred to as the Marshall Road precinct, and 82 hectares of adjoining rural zoned land to the urban zone. The problem within proposal 2 is about the excision of a large chunk of parks and recreation reserve from the southern portion of Whiteman Park. This is a conundrum that has confronted the house, as the mover of the motion would acknowledge, on a number of occasions over the years, because what we end up with is an amendment to the metropolitan region scheme that, like the curate’s egg, is good in parts. I am about to come out with another cliché soon, and members all know what it is, so they can keep score if they want to; they know it is coming. Hon Sue Ellery: You’ve ruined the fun of it now. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN: I will try to recapture some of the joy of it for the minister, so if she just sits there and hugs herself in delicious anticipation, we will get there quickly, so that I can allow the other members who may wish to make a brief contribution to do so. Hon Sue Ellery: I’ll shut up then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN: The day has not been a complete loss! I do not know what I did, but if I could retrieve it and bottle it, I would do so, and use it on other occasions. However, this is a serious matter, and I know that a lot of people in the community are very concerned about the outcome of this MRS amendment. The problem that arises is: what do we do when we have an omnibus amendment - this is not an omnibus amendment by definition - or when we have an amendment that deals with a number of distinct parts or elements and we find that one element offends? How do we weigh the relative merits of the argument? We are left with the problem, and the house has explored this on a number of occasions over the years, whereby it is not possible for a member to move for a partial disallowance of an MRS amendment, as I think there would be a mood to do among members generally on this occasion. That is my reading of it. Proposal 2 is the part that contains the concerns and there is even another part of proposal 2 that probably does not excite those same concerns. I say to the Minister for Child Protection it is a case of do we throw the baby out with the bathwater? That is the situation that confronts us now and has confronted us in the past. This is a difficult question for this opposition and, I am sure, any opposition of the day. Does the presence in the proposed amendment of measures that are progressive and acceptable outweigh the proposal that offends? In this case, are all the acceptable and progressive proposals I have mentioned on balance so valuable that we dare not reject the proposal that is causing so much consternation, which is to excise 249 hectares out of parks and recreation from a part of Whiteman Park? Hon Giz Watson reminded the house of the history of the site and I do not propose to revisit that. That is the conundrum that faces us now and we have to weigh up as an opposition, as the house must do ultimately, whether a certain number of worthy proposals outweigh one that is not, or whether we accept the view that where we have an established resource, with its history over the past 30 years of being put there for particular public purposes, it should not be taken away from public purposes for some commercial or residential development. Is that something we should endorse? The view that has been formed in the forums of the Liberal Party on this occasion is the basic reality that if we just excise bits of land from parks and recreation reserves because it is convenient to do so in this decade, that is wrong, wrong, wrong! No amount of other convenience makes it right. This is a view that has been put forward very strongly by our local members on behalf of their constituents. I refer to Hon Donna Faragher and Hon Helen Morton, and I am sure the community would thank them for their interest and their advocacy. I think it is a pity that the government, knowing about the concerns over this part of proposal 2, did not take it upon itself to divide this MRS amendment and have that proposal as part of a second amendment and simply allow the rest of it to go through unencumbered. I am sure the government will find some reason to blame us for mucking up its amendment if this amendment is ultimately defeated with the support of the opposition. Nonetheless, we have arrived at the position that we will support this disallowance. We support the retention of parks and recreation reserves that have been established for decades, for good public purposes, whether it be Kings Park, the Majestic Hotel site that the previous Labor government sold off, Wireless Hill, or, in this case, Whiteman Park. I have briefly outlined our position on this rather complex matter. Although it gives us no pleasure to throw out the baby with the bath water, on this occasion we will be voting to uphold the disallowance. I do not know if any of my colleagues want to make a further contribution to the debate. I am aware that the government needs a good 10 or 12 minutes to respond to this motion. That is our position. HON HELEN MORTON (East Metropolitan) [9.46 pm]: I support the comments that have been made by both the mover of the motion and Hon Simon O’Brien. I have had an enormous amount of contact with people on this matter. Many families, people who use the park for recreation, and people who are involved in the conservation movement, are very unhappy about proposal 2 of the amendment. Not one person has made contact with me in support of the amendment. The only people who have made contact with me are people who do want proposal 2 to go through. Actually, the people who are against proposal 2 are very much in favour of

3636 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] the other four parts of the amendment going ahead. However, as Hon Simon O’Brien has said, their feeling about wanting to disallow proposal 2 is so strong that they are prepared to disallow the whole of this major amendment if that is what is required. I, along with others, sought advice about whether we could go down the track of a partial disallowance. However, I was advised that that was not possible. Therefore, I certainly support the disallowance of the whole amendment. I will not go over the information that has been already put, because I do not have the time to do that. However, I would like to mention a couple of concerns about the impact of this amendment on the environment. Although the environmental report has suggested otherwise, many people are concerned that this land is right on the boundary of, and forms a buffer to, the Gnangara mound water reserve. Another concern is that this amendment is being proposed at a time when this state is facing a major water crisis. People are concerned about the proposal to build housing in wetlands in which the groundwater levels are close to the surface. People are also concerned that because that housing will be placed on very poor Bassendean sand, any fertilisers that are put onto that soil will go straight into the groundwater. Another concern is that because this area is bisected by drainage tributaries from the Bennett Brook area, the urbanisation of the area may result in nutrients entering the Swan River, via Bennett Brook, which will be the detriment of that river. Another concern is that drainage from the site will need to be treated with nutrient stripping ponds and basins before it enters into the Emu Swamp area and the main drains of Marshall Road. I will not go over the history of Whiteman Park, because that has been discussed by other members, but I would like to mention the deceptive way in which this amendment has been marketed to the community. The government has suggested that the inclusion of some land on the eastern side of Whiteman Park will somehow make up the difference for the land that is proposed to be transferred by this amendment. Nothing can make up for taking this part of the park away from the community. This is the only area in which people can develop parklands and recreation grounds etc. I have statements that suggest the minister is not at all concerned about the availability of urban land. The minister has on a few occasions stated that she does not believe there is a problem because with the number of lots that are available to the community it is possible to buy land at a reasonable price in the outlying suburbs, and because the development industry considers there are plenty of lots available; therefore, it will continue to develop them. I am getting a big wind-up call. I will not have the chance to say half the things I wanted to. I support this disallowance motion. HON ADELE FARINA (South West - Parliamentary Secretary) [9.50 pm]: I have only five minutes to put the government’s position, but a few statements that have been made need to be corrected. Members have said that the land that is the subject of proposal 2 in the southern portion of improvement plan 8 forms part of Whiteman Park. It does not; it is south of Whiteman Park. It has also been said that improvement plan 8 identifies land for parks and recreation and future government uses. The land that forms part of proposal 2 is identified under improvement plan 8 for future government uses; not parks and recreation. It is not, and never has been, part of Whiteman Park. It is very important that I correct that statement. It is also important to note that the area in question is not within the priority 1 water catchment area. It has been suggested that it falls within that area; it does not. It is very important to get that right. This proposal has not been dreamed up overnight. It is the result of detailed community consultation and consideration at a planning level and is the result of a 30-year strategic plan that was developed for Whiteman Park in 1999 by the previous government. The proposal to excise this land from improvement plan 8 and rezone it from rural to urban was identified and endorsed by the previous government in 1999. It is important for members to accept that that is the case. It is not something new that has been proposed by this government or has not been given detailed planning consideration. The other issue I will address refers to the comments made by Hon Giz Watson about this state’s agreement with the federal government. The state government wrote to the Prime Minister on 15 September 2003 informing the federal government of the government’s proposal to rezone the land. My understanding is that the state government did not receive a response - there was certainly no objection - from the federal government. Four years have passed since that letter was written by former Premier Geoff Gallop to the Prime Minister, in which time the federal government has had ample opportunity to raise its objection to this proposal. It is also important to understand that allowing urban development within the southern area that has been identified in improvement plan 8 and through the metropolitan region scheme amendment will enable the government to provide social infrastructure in that residential portion of land north of the Reid Highway. Currently, there is not enough mass to provide the social infrastructure that is required in that area, and this urban development will help achieve that. It will also help to fulfil the effect that has been identified by government in the Network City strategy. Hon Giz Watson raised concerns about the conservation values of that portion of land. It is important for members to remember that the metropolitan region scheme process is a broadbrush planning instrument. It will identify broadly the zoning for that parcel. We are then required to go through a

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3637 town planning scheme amendment, which will also involve extensive community consultation. It will require environmental assessment and a structure plan to be prepared before any development of that land. The conservation concerns that Hon Giz Watson has raised can be adequately addressed and are more appropriately addressed through those processes. Just because the land has been zoned as urban does not mean that all of it will be available for urban development. It may be that, through the town planning scheme amendments, the development of a structure plan and the environmental assessments for urban development, portions of that land will not be committed to urban development. All those assessments are yet to be undertaken, and occur subsequent to the MRS amendment. The MRS amendment is the first step that needs to be taken. In relation to the Water Corporation’s concerns about its current production bore fields, members will note from the report on submissions that the Western Australian Planning Commission has indicated that those issues can be addressed as part of the detailed structure planning and that there is no implication that Water Corporation access arrangements will change as a result of the amendment. There is no issue on that point at all. Again, I emphasise that this whole MRS amendment doubles the size of Whiteman Park and provides important social infrastructure opportunities for the residential development wedged between the Reid Highway and Whiteman Park. This whole proposal is part of a 30-year strategic plan for Whiteman Park that was endorsed by the previous government in 1999. The intention to excise this land from the rural zoning and change it to urban was also endorsed by the previous government. No objection has been raised by the federal government. I believe that this amendment will provide a very good outcome for not only the long-term future and the protection of Whiteman Park but also providing some much-needed land for urban development to consolidate that residential cell. I ask members to oppose the disallowance motion. Question put and a division taken with the following result - Ayes (14)

Hon George Cash Hon Anthony Fels Hon Robyn McSweeney Hon Giz Watson Hon Peter Collier Hon Ray Halligan Hon Norman Moore Hon Bruce Donaldson (Teller) Hon Murray Criddle Hon Barry House Hon Helen Morton Hon Donna Faragher Hon Paul Llewellyn Hon Simon O’Brien

Noes (12)

Hon Shelley Archer Hon Kate Doust Hon Graham Giffard Hon Sally Talbot Hon Matt Benson-Lidholm Hon Sue Ellery Hon Louise Pratt Hon Ken Travers Hon Kim Chance Hon Adele Farina Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich Hon Ed Dermer (Teller)

Pairs

Hon Ken Baston Hon Vincent Catania Hon Barbara Scott Hon Jon Ford Hon Nigel Hallett Hon Sheila Mills Question thus passed. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE HON KIM CHANCE (Agricultural - Leader of the House) [10.01 pm]: I move - That the house do now adjourn. Whitby Falls and Member for Bassendean - Adjournment Debate HON KIM CHANCE: In so moving, I want to raise a matter that was raised in an adjournment motion last week by Hon Helen Morton. Last week Hon Helen Morton made a scathing attack on the member for Bassendean, Martin Whitely, on the way he handled the position of the residents of Whitby Falls. In particular, Hon Helen Morton said that none of that abuse was more devastating than that dished out to them by the Labor Party, and in particular by Mr Martin Whitely, then Minister Bob Kucera, and to a lesser degree the current Minister for Health, Jim McGinty. It happens that I have some knowledge of the leading role that Mr Whitely had in supporting those residents, and I was taken aback by the comments that were made. Hon Helen Morton went on to allege that Martin Whitely did not disclose that he was a Labor candidate, that he suggested he was a member of the Seamen’s Union of Australasia, and that he secretly attended meetings and destabilised the process that was taking place; that is, the process that the coalition government had in place to move the residents from Whitby Falls. If I was surprised at this bizarre allegation, then Martin Whitely was more than a little bemused by it, and he has asked me to correct the record, which I am more than happy to do. Let me just say from the start that from my own knowledge of those events, perhaps our government should have acted faster than it did; however, our government did act to rehouse the residents. It was Martin Whitely who

3638 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] displayed great courage and commitment to those men, and it was he who held the government to account for the time it took the government to get to that point of resolution. Martin Whitely actually took on the government in this matter to the extent that he threatened to divorce himself from the government. He put his job on the line even though he was no longer even the member for Roleystone; by then he was the member for Bassendean. There was absolutely nothing for Martin Whitely to gain by putting his neck on the line in the way that he did, except his complete commitment to those people whom he undertook to represent. To be abused for that by anyone is grossly unfair and demonstrably wrong. However, it is obscene for the member to be abused by Hon Helen Morton, given her role in this matter. I refer to a letter provided to me by a lady called Linda Nolan, which states - . . . my brother Ken Hockridge now deceased lived at Whitby Falls Hostel for over 30 years. Ken was born a deaf mute with many other mental health problems. Whitby Falls Hostel in Mundijong was a wonderful fully operational farm and home, not an old asylum as Helen Morton describes it. In April 2000 the residents and their families were told by Helen Morton of plans to move the men to more suitable accomodation in the suburbs. As Whitby had been their home for most of their lives the families of the men believed their loved ones could not cope in the metro area. The residents and families first met Martin Whitely at the April 2000 meeting, he told us all who he was - He did not pretend to be anything but a Labor candidate. The letter continues - and said he was prepared to help us in our endeavour to save the men from being shifted from Whitby Falls Hostel as he could see that non of the residents or their families were happy with the idea of the men having to leave their home. So SAVE WHITBY FALLS PSYCHIATRIC HOSTEL ACTION GROUP was formed by all the families and Martin Whitely. . . . In 2000 I listened in with permission, on a phone conversation Helen Morton had with my father Robert Hockridge, and in this conversation Helen Morton repeatedly assured my father that Whitby would never be closed and the men would not be moved. Geoff Gallop became Premier in 2001 and promised his party would keep Whitby open, he failed to keep that promise, But Martin Whitely still worked tirelessly with the families to try to forfill that promise or to find a suitable alturnative. Is that the action of a person who was supposed to have abused those people? He took on Geoff Gallop. The letter further states - When Helen Morton and her party were involved with Whitby Falls Hostel they wanted to close the only home those residents had known for most of their lives. The farm style life was healthy and most of all in my brothers case he was not locked away in a city institution. The men also could work on the farm and that gave them a sense of purpose in their lives. The video my husband filmed in 2000 at a rally in Mundijong to try to save Whitby was sent to the media, this was suggested and encouraged by - Guess who? Martin Whitely. The man Hon Helen Morton says abused those people. The letter also states - I am very happy that five men from Whitby have a loverly new home, but I along with the rest of the families would have been even happier if the other 20 or more men had been allowed to live out their days at a fully upgraded Whitby, instead of being shifted off to old nursing homes. The state and future people with mental health problems have lost a very unique and alturnative life style in Whitby. In my opinion both government parties let everyone down hopelessly . . . That is a criticism of the government. What it is specifically is an endorsement of what Martin Whitely did. The letter from Ms Nolan closes by stating - . . . but thank you Martin Whitely for continuing to still help the families. There have been a number of occasions when Hon Helen Morton has come into this place specifically unable to tell the truth and has made the most absurd allegations against people she knows are not guilty of what she alleges. She has come into this place and alleged that I and other ministers have broken not only state laws, but also federal laws. She does not have a shred of evidence and refuses to clarify the matter when invited. She has come into this place and abused the man who went out on a limb and took on his own Premier and colleagues; specifically, the Minister for Health. I know this because I saw it happen. The role Hon Helen Morton played in this matter makes her the last person in the world who should ever raise the question of who abused the men at Whitby Falls.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3639

Prime Minister’s Plan to Tackle Abuse in Aboriginal Communities - Adjournment Debate HON ROBYN McSWEENEY (South West) [10.11 pm]: I put on record my disgust at the Premier’s attitude to John Howard’s plan to tackle abuse in Aboriginal communities, which has come out of the report “Little Children are Sacred”. The headlines in tonight’s news state “All, except WA, to send police to NT”. Even Tasmania has said that it will send two police officers to the Northern Territory. We have something like 5 000 police officers. Why cannot we send some police to the Northern Territory? Why cannot we send two, three, four or five? Hon Shelley Archer interjected. Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY: The member has problems in her community all right! We are the only state - Hon Shelley Archer interjected. Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY: I expect that from the member. Queensland is also sending police to the Northern Territory. The Premier has said that this is a manufactured crisis. It is not a manufactured crisis. I have a quote - Generations of young people are being lost, families are being destroyed, and whole communities are being torn apart. There are no excuses, we have to make a stand. The very future of our aboriginal communities is at stake. Do members know who wrote that? Geoff Gallop wrote that. He was right. He wrote that in the Gordon report, the cover of which has the subtitle “Putting the picture together”. That was back in 2001. Sue Gordon does not think that it is a manufactured crisis. In fact, she is going to be on the Prime Minister’s task force. She is a wonderful person. I am pleased that she is doing that. I thought that the Premier was better than this and that he would do all he could to help. There are problems in remote areas. There are 807 notifications of children with a sexually transmitted disease, which equates to 600 children. A total of 81 to 86 per cent are Aboriginal. From last December to April, 60 of those children, 52 of whom were Aboriginal, were under the age of 14 years. When I looked at The Kimberley Echo tonight I read of a terrible sexual assault in Halls Creek. It continues. I know that we do not have enough police. Why are there not enough police? Someone put it to me tonight that if we did send some police to the Northern Territory, they could learn. They could then come back here. What is wrong with doing that? I refer to the words “this manufactured crisis”. Let me read out what was said on the Howard Sattler program. It is very blunt but it is from a remote area nurse who says - I ask the politically enlightened to give a 5-year-old boy painful penicillin injections for his anal sores caused by syphilis. Why don’t they come and change the colostomy bag on a 6-year-old girl so mutilated by her rape that her genitalia had to be reconstructed? Or let them help us convince an 11-year-old that her rape wasn’t her fault (whilst we are giving her antibiotics for the gonorrhoea she acquired). That’s what those at the coalface deal with on a distressingly regular basis. That person worked at the coalface. It does not say whether she was in the Northern Territory. The health nurse just says she was a remote area nurse. This report “Little Children are Sacred” contains all sorts of stories, just as the Gordon report does. The Gordon report was not implemented in a responsible way; its implementation was very tardy, and the Auditor General’s report indicated that. I am not sure whether all the recommendations have been followed through. I think 197 recommendations were made and there are 97 recommendations in the “Little Children are Sacred” report. The reports are very similar. Many of the recommendations mirror each other. I suggest that what the Prime Minister is trying to do is a good thing. Someone suggested yesterday that his action was a circuit breaker. If it is a circuit breaker let us get behind it. Self-determination has not worked; nothing has worked. I am standing here and criticising the Premier because, even though I am Liberal, I believe he is my Premier. He is everyone’s Premier in Western Australia, and he is making Western Australia look bad, and that is not a good thing. Even Peter Beattie, whose state is experiencing appalling problems with Aboriginal children, is cooperating with the federal government. I think in one community in Queensland every child under eight had a sexually transmitted disease, or many children under eight were suffering. From tonight the Prime Minister is sending police if we can believe what came off the computer tonight from Australian Associated Press. We are looking bad. That is not good; we have our own problems, so we know about the poverty and alcohol and the associated problems. Hon Kim Chance: Why are 12 Western Australian cops the issue when, as of 1 July, Mr Howard will put 1 800 community development employment program - CDEP - workers out of a job? Why is that not the problem? Despite these wonderful words he said, he will put 1 800 people out of gainful employment. I do not get it. Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY: Yes. We debated an issue in this place and it is not as black and white as the Leader of the House is suggesting. This is about child abuse and about doing something for children.

3640 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Hon Shelley Archer interjected The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Hon Ken Travers): Order! I know Hon Shelley Archer is seeking the call. Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY: Hon Shelley Archer is mouthing off. I have read about five-year-old boys having syphilis and I could take her through plenty more things that happened up north in our Aboriginal communities to our Aboriginal children. This is a circuit breaker. Hon Shelley Archer: Rubbish! Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY: Does Hon Shelley Archer want to sit in the gallery in 30 years’ time listening to someone say that we should have done something. I am sick of it. Hon Shelley Archer: It is a political game by Howard, and you know it. Hon ROBYN McSWEENEY: It is not a political game. How dare Hon Shelley Archer say it is a political game when goodwill has been shown by all the other states except this one. I am ashamed to have a Premier such as the Premier of WA. Just on this issue, I am ashamed. This government needs to jump on board and stop politicising a problem about which, perhaps with good will, we can do something. Whitby Falls and Member for Bassendean - Adjournment Debate HON HELEN MORTON (East Metropolitan) [10.18 pm]: I wanted to talk about another thing today but I cannot let the comments of the Leader of the House go by without responding to them. The leader is grossly ill informed on this matter. There is absolutely no way in the world, judging by what he said to me, that he has accurate information. I know those men very well; I met with them every week for nearly three years. I was working on that program day in and day out. Hon Kim Chance: So they said. They know you well too. Hon HELEN MORTON: At absolutely no time did I say to them that they would be able to stay in that hostel. I never ever said so. It was the most disgusting, terrible place that people could ever be asked to live in. However, the one thing I did say was that if any of those men did not want to move off that farm, we would build them new houses to live in there on the farm, and that was in the process of being done when Martin Whitely became involved. What he did - I was there when he did it - Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: You were just political point scoring, and you know it. Hon HELEN MORTON: The minister should just be quiet for a minute. Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich: Don’t tell me to be quiet. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Hon Ken Travers): The Minister for Local Government will allow Hon Helen Morton to be heard. Hon HELEN MORTON: We had meetings with families on weekends and at other times of the week that suited those people. Two blokes came along in duffel coats, purporting to me - I was running the meeting - to be members of a union supporting an old seafarer who lived in the facility. At no time did they say to me who Martin Whitely was. He looked exactly like the other bloke who was with him, and I assumed and was quite happy that the chap who lived in the facility had some people from the union supporting him. At no time was I concerned about that, except - Hon Kim Chance: Why did Ms Nolan say that everybody knew who he was? Hon HELEN MORTON: Because they did after a while, as he outed himself at the meeting and destabilised everything. He basically said to the family and the residents, “Don’t believe what she’s saying. It’s all a load of hogwash. All she’s trying to do is get you off this place so that the mineral sands mining group can come in here and take it over”, scaring that entire family and all the people concerned for no good reason, other than to create some sort of political mileage. The next thing he did, along with Geoff Gallop, was have a community rally of 300 people. He had whipped up the local community for no good reason at all. What happened was that for 18 months the progress of those men was put on hold while that stupid man went about the process of trying to get political mileage out of those men and their families. What happened after that? Eighteen months had already been lost. The election had been won. What happened? Nothing. I was a member of this Parliament - members can ask Hon Sue Ellery about this, because she advised me, as a new member of Parliament, after this issue, and very rightly so - and I put an urgency motion on the notice paper, but because I did not understand how I had to elbow my way in here to get an urgency motion up-front, my motion was not discussed. However, that night Martin Whitely made a statement to the Legislative Assembly. That night, three years later, Martin Whitely took on the government. Why did he do that? He had abandoned those blokes for three years. He was not the member for that area anymore. He had left them. However, he suddenly took on the government, because he knew that I was going to show him up if he did not. Several members interjected.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3641

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order, Minister for Local Government! Hon HELEN MORTON: I had asked a series of questions. I had visited the facility. I knew those men were being abused. I knew the police had been called in. I knew those men were being neglected. I knew about the bad treatment they were receiving, and it was because - Hon Kim Chance: Of course you knew. You were the CEO of the health service. Hon HELEN MORTON: I was not. I was a bloody member of Parliament by then. I had been out of there - Hon Kim Chance: It was on your watch. Hon HELEN MORTON: It was not. I was in this place by then. Several members interjected. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order, members! I realise that this debate will stir up emotions, but I urge members to just calm down a bit and allow Hon Helen Morton to be heard in silence. Hon HELEN MORTON: The Leader of the House has his timing all wrong. Hon Graham Giffard: Throw her out. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Hon Graham Giffard, someone may be thrown out, but it will not be the member who has the call. Hon HELEN MORTON: I left that place in 2002, unfortunately. My five-year contract had ceased. The thing that really bothered me about leaving - not that the Armadale redevelopment was fantastically successful, along with all the other things that had happened - was that homes for those men had not been provided for them. I made it my business to start asking questions every month. I put notices on the notice paper, made statements in the house and did whatever I could to make sure that, from a fairly disempowered position as an opposition member of Parliament, I would be able to push the government along on this issue. What happened? Not long after I had been out there those men were moved surreptitiously into other facilities. The Leader of the House referred to a video that was mentioned in The West Australian - I brought copies of that in here last time I raised this issue, but I did not refer to any of it. At that time the men were sent back because Geoff Gallop had to stand by his promise to them. Martin Whitely had not done anything until that time. He had completely abandoned these people. Bob Kucera had abandoned them. To be fair to McGinty, he hardly knew anything about this; that is why I say he was involved to a lesser degree. He did not actually get involved. Martin Whitely was their local member of Parliament for three or four years before he changed electorates. He did nothing for the men in that time. It was not until 2005 when I raised this issue in Parliament that Martin Whitely started acting. He knew I had enough information at that stage to start making life a bit unpleasant for him. I do not care about that. That was what I was going to do and the fact is that it happened the way it happened. Seven years later those men have now got their houses and that is fantastic. The Leader of the House should not even begin to imagine he knows half as much about this as I do. Hon Kim Chance interjected. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Hon Ken Travers): Order! Hon Shelley Archer has the call. Prime Minister’s Plan to Tackle Abuse in Aboriginal Communities - Adjournment Debate HON SHELLEY ARCHER (Mining and Pastoral) [10.26 pm]: I rise to support our Premier in his stand against John Howard for politicising what is considered to be an incredibly serious issue. John Howard talks about how he is going to walk into Aboriginal communities and ban alcohol. That is a great idea, but what programs does he have in place to assist those people who are addicted to alcohol? Alcoholism is an illness. There is absolutely no program in place to provide those people with rehabilitation or any resources from the drug and alcohol services to address those sorts of issues. What will happen to those Indigenous people? They will move to towns where they can get alcohol freely. If we implemented the plan in Western Australia and stopped alcohol being available in communities, those people would move to Broome. What sorts of problems would we have in Broome? There would be overcrowding in houses, continued drinking, and continuing problems with itinerants - “long grassers” as we call them - who live on the street. This would create more domestic violence, more sexual abuse and all those other sorts of antisocial behaviours in the streets that are the result of drinking. That is what will happen in the Northern Territory if we implement a program to ban alcohol in Aboriginal communities. Those people will leave the communities and go to towns so they can get a drink, because they are addicted to alcohol. John Howard has nothing in place. The other program proposes to give every single woman and child a medical examination. The federal government is going to force women and children to undergo a medical examination. They will have to be vaginal and anal examinations because John Howard is talking about sexual abuse of these people. Young children will be abused in a different sense. Members can imagine a five-year-old being dragged in and told,

3642 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

“You have to have a medical examination; pop up on the table and we will have a look at you.” Think of the stress that that child will go through. Okay, if we do all that - ban the alcohol, do the medical examinations and clean up the community - what programs has John Howard got in place following that? Absolutely none. Then we come to Western Australia and the community development employment program. Howard has ripped the heart out of and closed down the CDEP in Western Australia. In the towns of Broome and Port Hedland in my electorate we have night patrols, women’s refuges, youth services and sobering-up shelters. They will all close. There will be nothing for these people. What will happen? There will be more domestic violence because there will be no-one there to pick up these children and take them home or to a safe place. There will be no-one to assist women who have been violated by drunken men, and in some cases by drunken women. Absolutely nothing will be in place after 1 July, because John Howard has decided to rip the heart out of the community development employment program, which was supporting Indigenous people. How serious is he? He is not serious at all! This is just about politicising Indigenous people and Indigenous problems. It is not about solving the problems of Indigenous people. It is not about working with Indigenous people. It is just about making John Howard look good. It is just about making John Howard look like a white knight in shining armour, going out to save the world! However, he will not save the world. He will destroy it. John Howard has destroyed Aboriginal communities. He has done nothing in 11 years to help Aboriginal communities. All of a sudden, he has found Indigenous issues! Fantastic, is it not! Hon Robyn McSweeney: What are you going to do? Hon SHELLEY ARCHER: I have done more with regard to the CDEP than the federal government has ever done. For the past two years, I have been writing to the federal government, requesting that it keep the CDEP running in these communities. Did I get a response? Hon Robyn McSweeney interjected. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Hon Ken Travers): Order! In case Hon Robyn McSweeney has not noticed, Hon Shelley Archer is not taking her interjections. For Hon Robyn McSweeney to keep up this running commentary is not assisting Hansard, or anyone else, to follow this debate. I therefore ask the member to listen to Hon Shelley Archer in silence. Hon SHELLEY ARCHER: One of the things this government is doing is establishing multipurpose centres. A multipurpose centre was put into Kalumburu. The work that the Indigenous people, the police and the Department for Community Development have done in that community has enabled some of these people to come forward and talk about the abuse that they have suffered. That is the work that the Western Australian government is doing to try to assist these communities with the abuse that is taking place. The government is also running alcohol and drug programs in the community to assist people with their alcohol and drug addictions. The government has also set up a number of teams that are going around these communities and explaining to women the dangers of foetal alcohol syndrome. A plethora of programs have been set up by this state government. I have written to the federal government a dozen times about its failure to look at implications of the changes to the CDEP. I have not received one response - not from the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, not from the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, and not from the Prime Minister! Not one of those persons has responded to my requests for information about what will happen to the CDEP. The only response that I have been provided with is, “We cannot provide you with that information”! Therefore, we have no idea about what will happen with the CDEP in Western Australia in the next 12 months, 18 months or two years if this federal government is, unfortunately, re-elected. I can only hope that Kevin Rudd will win the election and will implement a program that will ease the closure of the CDEP, instead of just coming along and slamming it shut. Question put and passed. House adjourned at 10.32 pm ______

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3643

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

Questions and answers are as supplied to Hansard.

BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4789. Hon Helen Morton to the Minister for Agriculture and Food (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants. (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) Agricultural Produce Commission Agricultural Protection Board Chicken Meat Industry Committee Grain Licensing Authority Natural Resource Management Council Perth Market Authority Potato Marketing Corporation Rural Business Development Corporation State Planning Group for FarmBis Veterinary Surgeons Board WA Meat Industry Authority (2), (3) & (4) No public servants received remuneration for sitting on a board or committee so question 5 is not applicable. [See paper 2849.] BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4791. Hon Helen Morton to the Minister for the Mid West and Wheatbelt (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment?

3644 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Hon KIM CHANCE replied: Wheatbelt Development Commission (1)-(5) Wheatbelt Development Commission Board Board Member 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 Colin Adams $140.00 $6,563.00 $3,331.00 Helen Bennett $819.00 $4,508.00 $3,639.00 Ian Landsmeer $4,976.00 $5,140.00 $5,336.00 Wendy Newman $13,165.00 $22,484.00 $15,964.00 Philip Nolan $6,194.00 $3,682.00 $1,330.00 Darren West $7,985.00 $13,446.00 $10,171.00 Wendy Williams $3,276.00 $4,345.00 Steve Woods $3,171.00 $4,291.00 $4,390.00 Tracy Meredith $5,982.00 $5,313.00 $7,252.00 Michael Bates $8,571.00 David Singe $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 (Public Servant) Total $51,003.00 $68,703.00 $55,758.00 Mid West Development Commission (1)-(3) Mid West Development Commission Board Member 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 Ashplant, Ronald $819 - - Brindal, David $5,525 $5,525 $3,647 Broad, Simon $924 $5,067 $1,330 Brooker, Anthony $8,281 $3,018 $2,562 Cheong, Geoffrey $924 $1,540 $1,781 Collins, Garry $1,435 $2,593 $7,028 Graham, Lawrence $11,958 $12,639 $15,148 O'Grady, Graeme $1,566 - - Parsons, Robyn $924 $2,288 $3,052 Pendlebury, Mark $616 - - Pepper, Kenneth $1,127 $1,232 $1,127 Forrester, Pauline - $1,355 $2,731 (Public Servant) Baesjou, Graeme - - - (Public Servant) Douglas, Steve - - - (Public Servant) TOTAL $34,099 $35,257 $38,406 (4) Yes - Pauline Forrester (5) Pauline Forrester is employed by the Department of Education and Training (DET) as a part time Teacher Assistant at Yuna Primary School. Ms Forrester works on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of each week. As Board meetings fall on a Friday, Ms Forrester is paid a sitting fee because she is not collecting wages from DET. Three times a year Board meetings are held outside the Commission's Geraldton office and require some travel on the day prior to a Board meeting (Thursday). If Ms Forrester is required to take time off work on a Thursday (usually only a maximum of one hour) to join the Board members, that time is either deducted from her wages from DET or the time is made up the following week. BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4796. Hon Helen Morton to the Minister for Government Enterprises (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3645

(3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: Gold Corporation of Western Australia (1) Gold Corporation of WA (2) and (3) : (a) 2003 - 2004: Board Fees Public Servant Peter Unsworth $50,000 pa (incl super) No Don Mackay-Coghill $35,000 pa (incl super) No Martine Pop $35,000 pa (incl super) No Valerie Davies $35,000 pa (incl super) No Peter Lalor $35,000 pa (incl super) No John Langoulant-Ex officio $0 Yes Ed Harbuz $0 No

(b) 2004-2005: Board Fees Public Servant Peter Unsworth $50,000 + 9% superannuation pa No Don Mackay-Coghill $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No Martine Pop $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No Sue Boyd $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No Ron Edwards $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No David Smith-Ex Officio $0 Yes Chris Wharton $25,277 + 9% superannuation pa No (started October 2004) Ed Harbuz $0 No Richard Hayes $0 No

(c) 2005-2006: Board Fees Public Servant Peter Unsworth $50,000 + 9% superannuation pa No Don Mackay-Coghill $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No Martine Pop $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No Sue Boyd $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No Ron Edwards $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No David Smith-Ex Officio $0 Yes Chris Wharton $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No John Langoulant $35,000 + 9% superannuation pa No Ed Harbuz $0 No Richard Hayes $0 No (4) No Please note that these figures exclude any board fees payable to directors who are also board members of AGR Matthey and exclude salaries of executive directors. Government Employees Superannuation Board (GESB) 1. Government Employees Superannuation Board 2. Phillip Harvey Not a Public Service Officer Harvey Collins Public Service Officer from Feb 2004 to Jul 2004

3646 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Kevin Farrell Not a Public Service Officer Cheryl Robertson Not a Public Service Officer Derek Spray Public Service Officer for entire period Robert Lewtas Not a Public Service Officer Michele Dolin Public Service Officer for entire period 3. Board Fees, Including Superannuation, are as follows: 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 Phillip Harvey $68,642 $68,659 $70,480 Harvey Collins $18,593 $25,026 $42,646 Kevin Farrell $26,412 $27,468 $28,258 Cheryl Robertson $27,468 $27,468 $28,258 Derek Spray Nil Nil Nil Robert Lewtas Nil Nil Nil Michele Dolin Nil Nil Nil NOTE: Robert Lewtas commenced 15th August 2006 4. No 5. Not applicable Insurance Commission of Western Australia (1) Board of Commissioners of the Insurance Commission of Western Australia Board of Directors of the State Government Insurance Corporation (2) and (3): (a) Insurance Commission of Western Australia Board of Commissioners (2003-2004): Commissioner Remuneration received ($) Mr Michael Wright (Chairman) 100,001 - 110,000 Mr Peter Eastwood (Deputy Chairman) 40,001 - 50,000 Ms Denyse Phillips 30,001 - 40,000 Ms Sharon Brown 30,001 - 40,000 Ms Annemie McAuliffe 30,001 - 40,000 Mr Doug Pascoe 30,001 - 40,000 Mr Vic Evans (Managing Director N/A and ex-officio Commissioner) State Government Insurance Corporation Board of Directors (2003-2004): Director Mr Vic Evans (Chairman) Mr Michael Wright (Deputy Chairman) Mr Peter Eastwood Ms Sharon Brown Ms Denyse Phillips (b) Insurance Commission of Western Australia Board of Commissioners (2004-2005): Commissioner Remuneration received ($) Mr Michael Wright (Chairman) 100,001 - 110,000 Mr Peter Eastwood (Deputy Chairman) 40,001 - 50,000 Ms Denyse Phillips 10,001 - 20,000 Ms Sharon Brown 30,001 - 40,000 Ms Annemie McAuliffe 0 Mr Doug Pascoe 30,001 - 40,000 Ms Judy McGowan 10,001 - 20,000 Mr Vic Evans (Managing Director N/A and ex-officio Commissioner) State Government Insurance Corporation Board of Directors (2004-2005): Director Mr Vic Evans (Chairman) Mr Michael Wright (Deputy Chairman)

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3647

Mr Peter Eastwood Ms Sharon Brown Ms Annemie McAuliffe (c) Insurance Commission of Western Australia Board of Commissioners (2005-2006) Commissioner Remuneration received ($) Mr Michael Wright (Chairman) 120,001 - 130,000 Mr Peter Eastwood (Deputy Chairman) 40,001 - 50,000 Ms Sharon Brown 30,001 - 40,000 Ms Annemie McAuliffe 10,001 - 20,000 Mr Doug Pascoe 30,001 - 40,000 Ms Judy McGowan 30,001 - 40,000 Mr Vic Evans (Managing Director N/A and ex-officio Commissioner) State Government Insurance Corporation Board of Directors (2005-2006): Director Mr Vic Evans (Chairman) Mr Michael Wright (Deputy Chairman) Mr Peter Eastwood Ms Sharon Brown Ms Annemie McAuliffe (3) Note: State Government Insurance Corporation - Remuneration is not provided. (4) No. (5) Not applicable. Lotterywest (1) Lotterywest Board (2) (a) 2003 - 2004 - Mrs Corin Lamont Mrs Anne Conti Mrs Patricia Tassell Mr Peter Holland Mr Roger Lewis Mr Clyde Bevan Mr Kevin Campbell (b) 2004 - 2005 - Mrs Anne Conti Mrs Patricia Tassell Mrs Freda Crucitti Mr Peter Holland Mr Roger Lewis Mr Clyde Bevan (c) 2005 - 2006 - Mrs Anne Conti Mrs Patricia Tassell Mrs Freda Crucitti Mr Peter Holland Mr Roger Lewis Mr Clyde Bevan None were Public Servants (3) Salary Super (a) 2003 - 2004 - Mrs Corin Lamont - $6600.15 $594 Mrs Anne Conti - $8800.20 $792 Mrs Patricia Tassell - $8800.20 $792 Mr Peter Holland - $8800.20 $792 Mr Roger Lewis - $8800.20 $792 Mr Clyde Bevan - $5375.10 $483.75 Mr Kevin Campbell - $16,125.30 $1451.25 Mrs Freda Crucitti - $2200.05 $198

3648 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(b) 2004 - 2005 - Mrs Anne Conti - $8800.20 $792 Mrs Patricia Tassell - $8800.20 $792 Mrs Freda Crucitti - $8800.20 $792 Mr Peter Holland - $8800.20 $792 Mr Roger Lewis - $8800.20 $792 Mr Clyde Bevan - $21,500.40 $1935 (c) 2005 - 2006 - Mrs Anne Conti - $14,000.40 $1260 Mrs Patricia Tassell - $14,000.40 $1260 Mrs Freda Crucitti - $14,000.40 $1260 Mr Peter Holland - $14,000.40 $1260 Mr Roger Lewis - $14,000.40 $1260 Mr Clyde Bevan - $31,000.18 $2790 (4) No (5) Not applicable BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4802. Hon Helen Morton to the Minister for the Kimberley, Pilbara and Gascoyne (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon JON FORD replied: For the Gascoyne Development Commission please be advised as follows: (1) The Gascoyne Development Commission Board and the Aboriginal Heritage Cultural Centre Interim Board of Management, which did not commence meeting until September 2006. (2)-(3) [See paper 2850.] Explanatory Notes - regarding parts (2) and (3) Board Members’ tenure is not based upon financial years. Members of the Board during all or part of the financial years are quoted. The total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the financial years is quoted. (4) No public servants received remuneration whilst serving on the Board. (5) Not Applicable. For the Kimberley Development Commission please be advised as follows: (1) The Kimberley Development Commission Board (2)-(3) [See paper 2850.] Explanatory Notes - regarding parts (2) and (3) Board Members’ tenure is not based upon financial years. Members of the Board during all or part of the financial years are quoted. The total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the financial years is quoted. (4) Yes

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3649

(5) No, remuneration is paid to the part-time public servant Board member, in accordance with the policy outlined in Premier's Circular 2003/03 For the Pilbara Development Commission please be advised as follows: (1) The Pilbara Development Commission Board (2)-(3) [See paper 2850.] Explanatory Notes - regarding parts (2) and (3) Board Members’ tenure is not based upon financial years. Members of the Board during all or part of the financial years are quoted. The total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the financial years is quoted. (4) No public servants received remuneration whilst serving on the Board. (5) Not Applicable. BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4803. Hon Helen Morton to the Minister for Child Protection (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: (1) The term "boards of management" has been interpreted to include advisory committees and councils where members receive sitting fees. The following advisory committees and councils operate under the Minister's portfolio: Adoption Act Legislative Review Committee (established July 2006) Adoption Applications Committee Advisory Council on the Prevention of Deaths of Children and Young People Care for Children and Young People Advisory Committee (established February 2006) Case Review Panel (established March 2006) Child Death Review Committee Ministerial Advisory Council on Child Protection Supported Accommodation Assistance Program State Advisory Committee (2)-(3) It should be noted that the amount of sitting fees paid in each financial year vary due to timing differences in the receipt and payment of sitting fee invoices. [See paper 2851.] (4) One community representative of the Advisory Council for the Prevention of Deaths of Children and Young People is a public servant but sits on the Council in a private capacity. She was on extended unpaid leave from her employer at the time she received sitting fees in 2003-04 and has not received sitting fees since resuming employment. (5) No. The Cabinet Handbook provides the following information in relation to payment of sitting fees to public servants: "It is important to note that full-time Government Officers do not receive payment for sitting on boards. On 18 February 2003 Cabinet endorsed the payment of fees (Refer to Premier's Circular 2003/03), in accordance with the level determined for the board or committee, for:

3650 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(a) academics; and (b) part-time Government Officers sitting on boards and committees which have functions unrelated to the officer's employment. However the total remuneration (salary and board fees) paid to the officer cannot exceed the full-time salary for that officer's part-time position.

BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4804. Hon Helen Morton to the Minister for Communities (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: (1) The term "boards of management" has been interpreted to include advisory committees and councils where members receive sitting fees. The Family and Domestic Violence Consumer Advisory Committee, Child Care Advisory Committee and the Child care Regulations Consultative Committee operate under the Minister's portfolio. (2) Family and Domestic Violence Consumer Advisory Committee - The committee consists of six community members, one part time public servant and one full time public servant. As the members of this committee are survivors of domestic violence, there is a need to maintain confidentiality, so identifying details are not given. Members of the Child Care Regulations Consultative Committee and Child Care Advisory Committee are listed in 3. (3) Family and Domestic Violence Consumer Advisory Committee - The Committee was established in December 2006 and therefore no sitting fees were paid in 2003-04, 2004-05 or 2005-06. The Child Care Regulations Consultative Committee was established in February 2007 and no sitting fees have been paid to date.

MEMBERS PUBLIC SITTING FEE SITTING FEE SITTING FEE SERVANT 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 Hon Kate Doust MLC No - - - Maureen Allert No - - - Josique Lynch No - - - Christine Cross No - - - Pamela Ellis Kane No - - - Bernadette Giambazi No - - - Gayle Heron No - - - Tim Muirhead No - - - Eddie Powell No - - - Bev Sunkar No - - - Deborah Clune No - - - Pauline Bagdonavicius Yes - - - Lynette Wong Yes - - -

The Child Care Advisory Committee was established in the latter part of 2003-04 and no sitting fees were paid that financial year.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3651

2004-05 MEMBERS PUBLIC SITTING FEE SITTING FEE SERVANT 2004-05 2005-06 Elizabeth Davy No $2190 Pamela Ellis-Kane No $840 Gayle Heron No $880 Graeme Winters No $1330 Tim Muirhead (Chair) No $3710 Odette Haley Yes $0 Christine l'Anson No $880 Kathleen Pinkerton No $660 Teresa Hutchins No $880 Cora-Ann Wilson Yes $0 Sue Ozich Yes $0 Jean Rice Yes $0 Jann Marshall Yes $0 2005-06 MEMBERS PUBLIC SITTING FEE SITTING FEE SERVANT 2004-05 2005-06 Elizabeth Davy No $0 Pamela Ellis-Kane No $890 Gayle Heron No $550 Graeme Winters No $1040 Tim Muirhead (Chair) No $9020 Odette Haley Yes $0 Christine l'Anson No $1275 Kathleen Pinkerton No $590 Teresa Hutchins No $660 Cora-Ann Wilson Yes $0 Sue Hudd Yes $0 Sue Ozich Yes $0 Dr Judith Straton Yes $0 Lynn Christie Yes $0 Jacqueline Murray No $0 (4) No (5) Not applicable

BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4805. Hon Helen Morton to the Minister for Women’s Interests (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: (1) The term "boards of management" has been interpreted to include advisory committees and councils where members receive sitting fees as at 20 June 2007. The Indigenous Women's Congress operates under the Minister's portfolio. The Women's Advisory Network of Western Australia announced in March this year also comes under the Minister's Women's Interests portfolio, however, as this board is not yet in operation, no sitting fees have been paid to date.

3652 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(2) and (3) Indigenous Women's Congress MEMBERS PUBLIC SERVANT SITTING FEE SITTING FEE SITTING FEE 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 June Oscar No - $1170 $1700 Helen McNeair No $1420 $6190 $6100 Doris Eaton No $850 $1910 $2980 Maisie Weston No $1380 $420 - Nancy Gordon No $1170 $3620 $1700 Pat Kopusar No $1538 $2654 $1858 Helen Corbett No $1380 $2540 $2980 Oriel Green No $640 $3290 $1910 Shirley Hayward No $1170 $480 $1810 Shirley Bennell No $470 $4270 - Dianne Gray No $640 $210 $420 Vashti Sambo No $640 $210 - Audrey Knight Yes Nil Nil Nil Barbara Oreo Yes Nil Nil Nil Margaret Morrison Yes Nil Nil Nil Shirley Hansen Yes Nil Nil Nil Kerry Stack Yes Nil Nil Nil Kathleen Drummond Yes Nil Nil Nil (4) No (5) Not applicable BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4806. Hon Helen Morton to the Minister for Seniors and Volunteering (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: (1) The term "boards of management" has been interpreted to include current advisory committee and councils where members receive sitting fees as at 20 June 2007. - The Carers Advisory Council is the only board currently operating under the Minister's portfolio of Seniors and Volunteering. (2) The Carers Advisory Council only commenced operations in 2005-2006. Membership details for 2005-2006: Lois Gatley (Chair) Ellen Walker (Deputy Chairperson) Caitlin Ambrose Allan Golledge Patrica Bushby Clare Masolin Diedre Timms Bruce Langoulant Tatiana Borisow No members were public servants during their tenure. (3) Gatley, Lois = $5910 Walker, Ellen M = $1370 Ambrose, Caitlin A = $1296 Borisow, Tatiana = $1424

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3653

Bushby, Patrica M = $970 Langoulant, Bruce L = $1328 Masolin, Claire C = $1522 Golledge, Allan D = $1328 Timms, Diedre J = $940 (4) Nil (5) N/A BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4813. Hon Helen Morton to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Deputy Premier (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Deputy Premier’s portfolio? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon KATE DOUST replied: Department of Industry and Resources (1) Nil (2)-(5) N/A. Department of Treasury and Finance (1) Nil. (2)-(5) N/A Economic Regulation Authority (1) The Economic Regulation Authority Act 2003 provides for a governing body which consists of one chairman and such other members as the Governor considers necessary for the proper performance of the Authority's functions. (2) The Authority currently has a Chairman and one part time member. The Economic Regulation Authority Act 2003 does not allow for a person to be appointed or hold office as a member if the person is a public sector employee. (3) The remuneration received by each Board Member: Remuneration Band ($) 05/06 04/05 03/04 0-10,000 1 30,001-40,000 1 50,001-60,000 1 60,001-70,000 1 70,001-80,000 1 1 120,001-130,000 1 130,001-140,000 1 340,001-350,000 1 1 (4)-(5) N/A Office of Native Title (1) Nil

3654 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(2)-(3) (a)-(c) N/A (4)-(5) N/A Office of the Auditor General (1) There are no Boards of Management operating within our agency (2)-(5) N/A State Supply Commission (1) State Supply Commission Board (2)-(4): Remuneration Board Member Public Servant 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 (Yes/No) $ $ $ Mr Michael Anderson No 1,116 1,674 1,920 Ms Jennifer Ballantyne No 9,968 10,352 18,600 Mr Clyde Bevan No 558 930 1,920 Mr Jim Coles No 930 1,116 960 Ms Julie Faulkner No 1,116 1,674 1,920 Mr John (Jock) Ferguson No Nil 1,488 640 Ms Cheryl Gwilliam Yes Nil Nil Nil Ms Vickie Petersen No 558 1,302 1,920 Mr David Robinson No 372 Nil 2,314 Ms Lyn Sherwood No 930 1,674 1,280 Mr John Warren No 744 930 1,786 Mr Gary Stokes Yes Nil Nil Mr Phill Turner Yes Nil (5) N/A WA Treasury Corporation (1) Western Australian Treasury Corporation Board of Directors. (2) The current members of the Board of Directors of Western Australian Treasury Corporation are shown below. Name Title Public Servant (Y/N) 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 T.M.Marney* Chairperson Y Y Y M.A.Barnes ** Deputy Chairperson NA NA Y M.J.Webb*** Chief Executive Officer NA NA NA G.L.Joyce**** Director Y YN N G.M.McMath Director N N N C.A.Nance Director N N N * Appointed 5 October 2003 ** Appointed 5 July 2005 *** Appointed 1 March 2007 **** Retired from public service and became eligible to receive directors fees from 28 January 2005. (3) Total remuneration received by directors (including 9% superannuation) from Western Australian Treasury Corporation as directors fees is shown below. Name Title 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 T.M.Marney* Chairperson Nil Nil Nil M.A.Barnes ** Deputy Chairperson NA NA Nil M.J.Webb*** Chief Executive Officer NA NA NA G.L.Joyce**** Director Nil $14,166 $36,596 G.M.McMath Director $33,790 $35,089 $36,596 C.A.Nance Director $33,790 $35,089 $42,045 * Appointed 5 October 2003 ** Appointed 5 July 2005 *** Appointed 1 March 2007 **** Retired from public service and became eligible to receive directors fees from 28 January 2005.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3655

(4) No director of Western Australian Treasury Corporation received remuneration for being a director when they were public servants. (5) N/A BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4814. Hon Helen Morton to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Treasurer (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Treasurer’s portfolio? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon KATE DOUST replied: Please see answer to question 4813. BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4815. Hon Helen Morton to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for State Development (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon KATE DOUST replied: Please see answer to question 4813. BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4838. Hon Helen Morton to the Minister for Regional Development representing the Minister for Corrective Services (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006.

3656 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon JON FORD replied: Department of Corrective Services (1) Nil. The Department of Corrective Services does not have any statutory Boards of Management. (2) N/A (3) N/A (4) N/A (5) N/A Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services (1) Nil. The Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services does not have any statutory Boards of Management. (2) N/A (3) N/A (4) N/A (5) N/A BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4841. Hon Helen Morton to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: Zoological Parks Authority; Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority; Swan River Trust (1) Zoological Parks Authority Board Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority Board of Management. Swan River Trust Board (2)-(3) [See paper 2852.] (4) None (5) Not Applicable

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3657

Department of Environment and Conservation (1) There are no Boards of Management in respect of the operations of the Department of Environment and Conservation which is the principal agency in the Environment; Climate Change portfolio. However, the key statutory authorities under legislation administered by the Department are: Conservation Commission of Western Australia Marine Parks and Reserves Authority Environmental Protection Authority Keep Australia Beautiful Council (2)-(3) [See paper 2852.] (4) None (5) Not applicable BOARDS OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING UNDER MINISTERS’ PORTFOLIOS 4842. Hon Helen Morton to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Climate Change (1) Please list the Boards of Management which operate under the Minister’s portfolios? (2) Please list the members of each board and state if those members were public servants during their tenure as Board Members for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (3) Please indicate the total remuneration received by each Board Member for each of the following years - (a) 2003 - 2004; (b) 2004 - 2005; and (c) 2005 - 2006. (4) Please indicate if any Board Member has received remuneration when they were public servants? (5) If yes to (4), does this contradict Government policy, whereby Board Members that are public service officers are not entitled to payment? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: Refer to question on notice 4841. ELECTRICITY SUPPLY TO 73 FINNERTY STREET, KARRINYUP 4848. Hon Robyn McSweeney to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Energy I refer to the premises at 73 Finnerty Street, Karrinyup, and I ask - (1) What was the status of the occupiers account for the supply of electricity with Western Power or its successors during 2006 and 2007? (2) Did Western Power or its successors take any action to deny or reduce the electricity supply to this property as a consequence of the outstanding account? (3) If yes to (2), - (a) will the Minister provide the relevant details; and (b) what action was taken and on what dates? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: Synergy has provided the Minister for Energy with the following response Synergy has advised responding to this question would require Synergy to disclose personal information. That disclosure is not permitted under the legislation to which Synergy is subject. Synergy has, however, provided information to the Western Australian Police for a coronial inquiry following a tragedy at these premises. DISCHARGE OF FORMATION WATER AT GAS FIELDS 4849. Hon Giz Watson to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment With regard to the discharge of formation water at various platforms/fields, I ask -

3658 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(1) Will the Minister provide the quantities of formation water annually discharged as totals and as a percentage to the gas and condensate from Rankin A? (2) Will the Minister provide the quantities of formation water annually discharged as totals and as a percentage to the gas and condensate from Goodwin? (3) Will the Minister provide an estimate of the quantities of formation water annually discharged as totals and as a percentage to the gas and condensate from the Gorgon field? (4) Will the Minister provide and estimate of the quantities of formation water annually discharged as totals and as a percentage to the gas and condensate from the Jansz field? (5) Will the Minister also provide the date, as to the litres per hour formation water discharged from the above sites? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: (1) Quantities of produced formation water discharged from the Rankin A platform are not required to be reported to the Department of Environment and Conservation. The Rankin A platform is not located within State waters. (2) Quantities of produced formation water discharged from the Goodwin platform are not required to be reported to the Department of Environment and Conservation. The Goodwin platform is not located within State waters. (3) It is proposed that produced formation water from the Gorgon gas field will be treated and injected into a formation beneath Barrow Island. The estimated quantity of produced formation water from the Gorgon gas field is unknown at this time. (4) It is proposed that produced formation water from the Jansz gas field will be treated and injected into a formation beneath Barrow Island. The estimated quantity of produced formation water from the Jansz gas field is unknown at this time. (5) Not applicable. DAMPIER ARCHIPELAGO-CAPE PRESTON MARINE CONSERVATION RESERVE 4853. Hon Giz Watson to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment With regard to the Dampier Archipelago-Cape Preston Marine Conservation Reserve Proposal - (1) When did the planning process for a marine conservation reserve in the area commence? (2) Was a community-based advisory committee established and on what date? (3) Who were the members of this committee during its life and does the committee still meet? (4) What bodies or departments did the members of this committee represent? (5) Was a draft indicative management plan created? (6) If yes to (5), on what date? (7) Was this draft indicative management plan reviewed by the Marine Parks and Reserves Authority (MPRA) and was advice tendered to the Minister? (8) If yes to (7), when did the review occur and when was the advice received by the Minister? (9) Will the Minister table the draft indicative management plan and the advice the Minister received from the MPRA? (10) Was further consultation on the zoning scheme undertaken with stakeholders subsequent to the advice provided to the Minister by the MPRA? (11) If yes to (10), who were the stakeholders or their representatives involved? (12) Did these consultations result in amendments to the proposed zoning scheme? (13) If yes to (12), what were those amendments? (14) Who were the members of the MPRA during the time this plan was being considered by them? (15) On 11 January 2005, the Minister released the indicative management plan for public comment until 10 May 2005, can the Minister identify when this plan will be completed? (16) Has the Department received comment on the proposed plan? (17) If yes to (16), from whom?

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3659

Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: (1) 1998. (2) Yes, June 2000. (3) Members of the advisory committee were Mr Trevor Ruland, (Chair), Mr Simon Bennison, Mr Dennis Bryan-Smith, Mr Kent Buddle, Dr Andrew Heyward, Mr John Kraus, Mr John Lally, Dr Stephen van Leeuwen, Mr Nicholas Miller, Mr Greg Oliver, Mr Noel Parkin, Ms Irene Stainton and Mr Len Vertigan. The committee no longer meets. (4) Members of the advisory committee were non-representative. They were selected based on their knowledge of the area and expertise. (5) Yes. (6) The draft indicative management plan was developed by the advisory committee, with assistance from the then Department of Conservation and Land Management, between August 2000 and February 2003. (7) Yes. (8) The Marine Parks and Reserves Authority reviewed the draft indicative management plan on 19 August 2003 and provided their advice to the Minister for the Environment, as required under section 14(6)(a) of the Conservation and Land Management Act 1984, on 29 August 2003. (9) Yes. [See paper 2853.] (10) Yes. A package of information was mailed to stakeholders in November 2003, at the direction of the Minister for the Environment, seeking additional comment on the draft indicative management plan. (11) Approximately 30 individuals were sent the package outlining the current proposal and seeking responses. Individual names have not been included for privacy reasons. Groups or organisations consulted in November 2003 for additional comment on the Draft Indicative Management plan for the proposed Dampier Archipelago Marine Park and Cape Preston Marine Management Area are as follows: Department of Indigenous Affairs Western Australian Museum Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee Central Agricultural and Pastoral Aboriginal Association Regional Commission of Elders Yamatji Land and Sea Council Ngarluma/Yinjibarndi Native Title Claim Kurama Native Title Claim Yaburarr/Marduthunera Native Title Claim Wong-goo-tt-oo Native Title Claim Department of Fisheries Aquaculture Council of Western Australia Pearl Producers Association Cossack Pearls Dampier pearling Company Southern Cross Pearls Maxima Pearls Indian Ocean Pearls Australia Western Australian Fishing Industry Council Nickol Bay Professional Fisherman's Association Onslow Professional Fisherman's Association Oceanarium Live Marine Supplies Jenko Fishing Westmore Seafoods Redland Bay Tasmanian Seafoods Conservation Council of Western Australia Australian Conservation Foundation Australian Marine Conservation Society Birds Australia Business and Professional Women Pilbara Dampier Archipelago Preservation Association

3660 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Greenpeace Marine and Coastal Community Network National Parks Association Nickol Bay Naturalists' Club Soroptimists International of Karratha and Districts Wilderness Society World Wildlife Fund Department of Industry and Resources Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association Dampier Port Authority Dampier Salt Hamersley Iron Woodside Energy Ltd Mermaid Marine Australia Tap Oil Chevron Australia Strike Oil Santos Ltd Chamber of Minerals and Energy of WA Inc Shire of Roebourne Member for Burrup Western Australian Maritime Museum King Bay Game Fishing Club Nickol Bay Sports Fishing Club Recreational Fishing Advisory Committee Nor-West Game Fishing Club Recfishwest Department for Planning and Infrastructure Department of Sport and Recreation Dampier Community Association Dampier Archipelago Recreational Dwellers Association Hampton Harbour Boat and Sailing Club Port Walcott Yacht Club Dampier Dive Club Reddog 4WD Club National Outdoor Leadership School Samson Community Association Port Walcott Diving Club Western Australian Tourism Commission Karratha and Districts Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc. Karratha Tourist Bureau Pilbara Charter Boat Owners Association Shire of Roebourne Karratha Tourism Committee Pilbara Development Commission Pilbara Tourism Association Get-a-Way Charters Norkat Snappy Gum Safaris Sail-a-Way Deck'Em Dampier House Boat Hire Big Day Out True North Pro-Zack Fly Fishing Adventures Point Samson Charter Company Dampier House Boat hire Dampier Island Tours (12) No. The MPRA did not alter its advice to the Minister for the Environment. (13) Not applicable.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3661

(14) Members of the MPRA when the draft indicative management plan was considered were Dr Barry Wilson (Chair), Mr Eric Streitberg, Prof. Diana Walker, Ms Edwina Davies Ward, Mr Kim Colero, Mr Tony van Merwyk and Mr Angus Horwood. (15) The Government intends to release the final management plan following creation of the marine conservation reserves in the latter part of 2007. (16) Yes. (17) Submitters to the Indicative Management Plan for the proposed Dampier Archipelago Marine Park and Cape Preston Marine Management Area: 24 individual submissions received Dampier Port Authority Department of Environment Department of Fisheries Department of Indigenous Affairs Department of Industry and Resources Department for Planning and Infrastructure Department of Sport and Recreation Pilbara Development Commission Tourism Western Australia, Chief Executive Officer Tourism Western Australia, Executive Director, Industry Development and Visitor Servicing Western Australian Museum (Aquatic Zoology Department) CSIRO Marine Research Pilbara Native Title Service Australian Coral Reef Society Australian Marine Sciences Association (WA Branch) Conservation Council of Western Australia Inc. The Wilderness Society WA Inc. World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) Aquarium Specimen Collectors Association of WA Inc. Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association Ltd Nickol Bay Professional Fishers Association Pearl Producers Association Pilbara Regional Recreational Fishing Advisory Committee Recfishwest The Western Australian Game Fishing Association Western Australian Professional Shell Fishermen's Association Inc. Western Australian Fishing Industry Council Coral Plantations Dampier Salt Ltd Erskine Pets Karratha Outdoors and Dive Centre Mineralogy Pty Ltd National Outdoor Leadership School Newtown Aquarium Oceanarium Perth Aquarium and Display Centre Pilbara Iron Pty Ltd Pisces Aquariums Point Samson Resort Redland Bay Scott Szulc (Moonlight Pearls) Tasmanian Seafoods Pty Ltd Veba's Tropical and Marine Aquarium Supply Wayne McKenzie-Brown (aquarium collector) William Harvey (commercial specimen shell collector) Woodside Energy Ltd Wormborough Aquatics Dampier Archipelago Preservation Association King Bay Game Fishing Club

3662 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Petitions: Petition for the Dampier Archipelago/Cape Preston marine conservation proposal Signed by 87 individuals Delambre Island sanctuary zone proforma Signed by 40 individuals BIOMASS POWER GENERATION PLANT, BRIDGETOWN - EMISSIONS 4858. Hon Robyn McSweeney to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment I refer to the proposed Biomass Power Generation Plant at Bridgetown, and I ask - (1) Will the emissions from the plant which plans to use 380 000 tons of plantation waste, with a combination of 40 percent eucalyptus globulos (bluegum) and 60 percent pinus radiate (pine), be likely to put toxins into the air? (2) If yes to (1), what are the toxins that are burning these trees through a proven and efficient combustion system and latest emissions control technology, would be likely to produce? (3) What is the proven and efficient combustion system that this plant will use? (4) What is the latest emission control technology that this plant will use? (5) Where is another plant located around the world that uses the same technology as this plant intends to use? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: (1)-(2) The proponent's draft Environmental Protection Statement (EPS) for the project indicates that potential emissions include nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, sulphur dioxide, volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, lead, dioxin and furans and other trace elements. (3) The proposal described in the draft EPS is a conventional steam cycle plant. (4) The proponent has proposed a multi-cyclone and electrostatic precipitator to control particulate emissions, and overfires air-enhancing combustion to reduce nitrogen oxides emissions. The Environmental Protection Authority will consider the adequacy of these control measures during its assessment of the proposal, and in formulating its advice and recommendations to the Minister for the Environment on whether the project should be allowed to proceed. (5) The Environmental Protection Authority has asked the proponent to provide information about the application of this combination of technologies in equivalent plants is being sought from the proponent. CHILD CARE ADVISORY COMMITTEE 4861. Hon Robyn McSweeney to the Minister for Child Protection I refer to the Child Care Advisory Committee, and ask - (1) Is this Committee still active? (2) If yes to (1), - (a) name the members of the committee; and (b) please detail the experience of the members? (3) What is the function and terms of reference for this Committee? (4) Please detail what they have been working on and what they have achieved? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: (1) Yes. (2) (a-b) Independent Chairperson: Mr Tim Muirhead - Independent Chairperson. Mr Muirhead has a long history of community involvement, including involvement with community based children's services, and has been a member and Chair of a management committee of one of these services. Community Representatives: Ms Jackie Murray - Secretary, Wheatbelt Organisation for Children's Services. Mrs Murray has worked in a number of rural and remote child care services throughout the state and has extensive experience in

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3663

the management of small child care centres and the development of policy and procedures to facilitate quality service provision. Mrs Pamela Ellis-Kane - Children's Services Manager, Communicare Inc. Mrs Ellis-Kane has many years experience working in the children's services sector and has managed outside school hours care services, vacation care programs, a child care centre, a family day care scheme and an Inclusion Support team. Ms Odette Haley - Lecturer Community Services, Pilbara TAFE. Ms Haley has worked in a range of early childhood settings including playgroups, child care centres, kindergartens and pre-primaries, family centres and crèches. She has close links with Aboriginal and culturally diverse communities in the Pilbara. Mrs Gayle Heron - Children's Services Organiser, Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers' Union. Mrs Heron has had a career as a child care worker and has raised the profile of child care workforce issues since she commenced with the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union. Ms Christine I'Anson - Multicultural Children's Services Project Coordinator, Gowrie Community Services. Ms I'Anson has worked in a range of early childhood education and care settings over many years and has a strong background in training. She maintains close contact with a broad range of culturally and linguistically diverse communities. Mrs Kathleen Pinkerton - Executive Officer, Yorganop Child Care Aboriginal Corporation. Mrs Pinkerton has managed a small business and recently managed the delivery of Certificate III in childcare in Aboriginal Communities throughout the State. She has the knowledge, skills and networks and represents the interests of Indigenous communities. Rory Vassallo - Vice President, Childcare Association of WA. Mr Vassallo has worked within the Children's Services Industry for the past 4 years as an owner operator of 4 child care centres located in both metro and rural areas. Academic Representative: Ms Teresa Hutchins - Edith Cowan University. Ms Hutchins has worked in the childcare field as practitioner and lecturer and has broad experience working with children 0 - 13 years in a range of service types. She has published on issues relating to the provision of high quality care for infants and toddlers, the work experience of young childcare workers and related industrial issues and quality care and education for children from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Government Representatives: Ms Sue Hudd Director, Individual and Family Support Department for Child Protection Ms Debra Clements Acting Director Child Protection Department for Child Protection Dr Judy Straton Director, State Wide Policy and Planning, Child and Adolescent Community Health Division, Child and Adolescent Health Service Department of Health Ms Lynn Christie Principal Curriculum Officer Early Childhood Department of Education and Training (3) The Child Care Advisory Committee provides advice to the Minister for Child Protection; Communities on issues relating to child care for children aged 0-12 years. The Committee's terms of reference are: • Monitors local, state, national and international trends and issues impacting on child care and makes recommendations in relation to licensing and quality assurance to improve outcomes for children • Promotes and advocates for the interests of children and parents in government decision making, policy, planning and practice related to child care • Advises on and promotes good quality child care services as an integrated early years support and development strategy available to all children in Western Australia.

3664 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(4) Since the Committee's establishment in 2004, the Committee has worked on and achieved the following: • Development of a process to assist in the progression of a Child Care Strategy for Western Australia. • Monitoring and advising on appropriate consultation of the Child Care Regulation Review. • Commissioned a research paper relating to child/staff ratios, qualifications and group sizes with the document submitted to the Child Care Regulations Consultative Committee. • Provided advice on child care issues in remote and rural communities, including that specific regulations and other matters are appropriate to rural areas. • Consideration of appropriate service delivery models for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and rural and remote communities. • Examining child care workforce issues, such as the use of traineeships in the child care industry and improving the status of child care workers within the community. • Providing input into State and Local government planning processes as they relate to child care facilities. • Monitoring the impact of the Child Care Support Program on the Western Australian child care industry MINISTERIAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ON CHILD PROTECTION 4862. Hon Robyn McSweeney to the Minister for Child Protection I refer to the Ministerial Advisory Council on Child Protection, and I ask - (1) Is this Council still active? (2) If yes to (1), - (a) name the members of the Council; and (b) please detail the experience of the members (3) What are the terms of reference for the Council? (4) If the Council is not active, please give reasons as to why it is not in operation? (5) How often did this Council meet and what was achieved? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: 1. Yes. 2. The Council's members are: Independent Chairperson: The Hon Hal Jackson Mr Jackson is a retired District Court Judge and was the first President of the Children's Court (1989 - 1994). He has served on various government and non-government sector boards and committees relating to children's and youth affairs. Deputy Chairperson: Mr Darrell Henry Mr Henry is a clinical psychologist with experience in the areas of Aboriginal counselling services, family counselling and addiction therapies. Mr Henry has previously worked at Yorgum Aboriginal Counselling Services and Palmerston Farm, and is a former member of the Gordon Inquiry (2002) and the Child Death Review Committee. Community Representatives: Mr Francis Lynch Mr Lynch is the General Manager, Family and Community Services, MercyCare Family Services, however he has recently been appointed as the Chief Executive Officer of Ruah Community Services. Ms Anita Tan-Quigley Su Neo Ms Tan-Quigley Su-Neo is currently employed in the corrective services system as a psychologist. Her areas of interest include personality psychology, social and abnormal psychology and cultural policies. She is a member of the Ethnic Communities Council (Women's Committee).

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3665

Ms Susan Ash Ms Ash is the Chief Executive of CareOptions Inc and is a former Executive Director of Wanslea Family Services (1997 - 2004). Ms Ash has previously held positions at Curtin University and Edith Cowan University, as well as government positions in the Australian Capital Territory in the areas of children, youth and family support. She has been a member of a wide range of community associations and boards, including ACOSS, the Child and Family Welfare Agencies of Australia and Families Australia. She has a social work background. Ms Sandra Spadanuda Ms Spadanuda represents rural and remote and youth representative. She has held a range of community service positions, such as family and youth worker support officer, child protection worker and a youth suicide prevention training officer. Ms Spadanuda is currently a Youth Services Coordinator at the Palyalatju Maparnpa Health Service in the Balgo Community. Ms Ruth Sims Ms Sims has previously worked with the Association for Services to Torture and Trauma Survivors as a Community Bi-Cultural Support Leader. Ms Sims is a member of the Ethnic Communities Council of WA (Women's Committee and Management Committee), the African Community Management Committee and the African Communities Family Support and Domestic Violence Planning Group. Her previous experience has been predominantly in education. Government Representatives: Ms Pauline Bagdonavicius, Acting Executive Director, Policy and Planning, Department for Child Protection Ms Lesley McComish, Manager, Legislation and Reform, Court Services, Department of the Attorney General Det. Supt. Shayne Maines, Sex Crimes Division, Western Australia Police Ms Mary Cowley, Principal Indigenous Advisor, Department of Indigenous Affairs Ms Kerry Usher, Director, Inclusive Education Standards, Department of Education and Training Dr Peter Winterton, Medical Director, Child Protection Unit, Princess Margaret Hospital, Metropolitan Health Services 3. The Council's terms of reference are: • To provide the Government of Western Australian through the Minister for Community Development (now Minister for Child Protection; Communities) with timely and expert advice on protective systems for children and young people, and support for the families. • To facilitate the coordination and exchange of expertise and information between government and non government agencies on matters relating to child protection. • To identify research priorities that will assist in improving child protection outcomes for children and their families. • To facilitate community awareness on matters relating to child protection. • To advise on and facilitate interagency training needs on matters relating to child protection. • To undertake projects and other tasks as requested by the Minister. 4. Not applicable. 5. The Council has 11 full Council meetings per annum as well as convening working party meetings and representing the Council in a range of forums including membership of the Minister's Community Advisory Committee for the Implementation of the Ford Review; the Gordon Inquiry into the Response by Government Agencies to Complaints of Family Violence and Child Abuse in Aboriginal Communities in 2002 evaluation reference group; the interagency reference group for the Shaken Baby Syndrome Prevention Campaign and co-sponsoring professional development forums with a range of partners including UWA Centre for Vulnerable Children and Their Families; Curtin University of Technology; WA Association for Mental Health. Council reports include: • 2000 Child Death Review Model • 2001 Best Practice Frameworks for Child Protection • 2001 Child Protection Training in WA

3666 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

• 2002 Handbook to Guide Child Protection Practices for Children and Families in WA • 2002 Mandatory Reporting of Child Abuse: Evidence and Options • 2004 Caring Well - Protecting Well: Investing in systemic responses to protect children in WA • 2005 Child Protection Training • 2005 Myths & Realities: Sharing Information between agencies to enhance the safety of children and young people • 2006 A Plan for Improving the Protection of Children and Children's Wellbeing in W A Some of these reports are published on the Council's website at www.childprotectioncouncil.com.au MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4865. Hon Peter Collier to the Minister for Agriculture and Food I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: (1) With respect to the Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, the Agriculture Protection Board, the Agricultural Produce Commission and the Rural Business Development Corporation; a) Mr Hodge was not employed. b) Mr Hodge was not appointed. c) Mr Hodge did not receive any consultancy work. (2) Not applicable. (3) Not applicable. (4) Not applicable. (5) Not applicable. MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4866. Hon Peter Collier to the Minister for Forestry I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not?

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3667

(4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: Forest Products Commission 1. a)-c) Gary Hodge has not been employed in any area; has not been appointed to any board, taskforce or employed in any advisory capacity; and has not received any consultancy work in any area of this portfolio. 2-5. Not applicable MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4867. Hon Peter Collier to the Minister for the Mid West and Wheatbelt I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: Mid West Development Commission 1. a)- c) Gary Hodge has not been employed in any area; has not been appointed to any board, taskforce or employed in any advisory capacity; and has not received any consultancy work in any area of this portfolio. 2-5. Not applicable Wheatbelt Development Commission 1. a)-c) Gary Hodge has not been employed in any area; has not been appointed to any board, taskforce or employed in any advisory capacity; and has not received any consultancy work in any area of this portfolio. 2-5. Not applicable MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4892. Hon Peter Collier to the Minister for Regional Development representing the Minister for Police and Emergency Services I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not?

3668 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon JON FORD replied: WA Police (1) (a)-(c) No (2)-(5) Not applicable. Fire and Emergency Services Authority (1) (a)-(c) No (2)-(5) Not applicable Fire and Emergency Services Superannuation Fund (1) (a)-(c) No (2)-(5) Not applicable. MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4893. Hon Peter Collier to the Minister for Regional Development representing the Minister for Community Safety I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon JON FORD replied: Office of Road Safety (1) (a)-(c) No (2)-(5) Not applicable Office of Crime Prevention (1) (a) No (b) Mr Hodge was appointed as the Chair of the Western Australian Community Safety and Crime Prevention Council on 1 December 2003 and held that position until his resignation on 1 May 2006. (c) No (2) Yes - see (1)(b) above (3) Not applicable (4) Mr Hodge was paid fortnightly at an annual rate of $20,000 (as recommended by the Government Board and Committee Remuneration Officer within the Department of the Premier and Cabinet) for the period 1 December 2003 to 1 May 2006. (5) Not applicable

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3669

MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4896. Hon Peter Collier to the Minister for Child Protection representing the Attorney General I refer the Attorney General to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Attorney General advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Attorney General’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Attorney General’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Attorney General’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Attorney General provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Attorney General provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION LAW REFORM COMMISSION LEGAL AID WA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER SOLICITOR GENERAL STATE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE (1) No. (2)-(5) Not applicable. MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4897. Hon Peter Collier to the Minister for Child Protection representing the Minister for Health I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH OFFICE OF HEALTH REVIEW (1) No. (2)-(5) Not applicable.

3670 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4898. Hon Peter Collier to the Minister for Child Protection representing the Minister for Electoral Affairs I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon SUE ELLERY replied: W.A. ELECTORAL COMMISSION (1) No. (2)-(5) Not applicable.

MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4904. Hon Peter Collier to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon ADELE FARINA replied: Mr Hodge was employed by the Director General of Transport from 1.1.2002 - 1.06.2002 and was answerable to the then Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure. So while Mr Hodge was not strictly employed in the portfolio of the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, the answer to part (4) is: (4) Ordinary Salary - $76,947.27 gross Leave paid out on retirement (Long Service Leave & Annual Leave) - $28,028.54 gross Management Initiated Retirement Payout - $191,141.00 gross Accounts Payable: Recoup - $103.10 Travel - $534.98

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3671

MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4909. Hon Peter Collier to the Minister for Local Government representing the Minister for Education and Training I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: Curriculum Council; Department of Education Services (1) (a)-(c) No (2)-(5) Not applicable Department of Education and Training (1)-(5) Mr Gary Hodge Consultancy was paid $22 000 (inc GST) on 27 May 2004 for consultancy work relating to Indigenous Participation and Achievement. MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4911. Hon Peter Collier to the Leader of the House representing the Minister for Energy I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: Horizon (1) (a)-(c) No. (2)-(5) Not applicable Independent Market Organisation (1) (a)-(c) No. (2)-(5) Not applicable

3672 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

Office of Energy (1) (a)-(c) No. (2)-(5) Not applicable Synergy (1) (a)-(c) No. (2)-(5) Not applicable Verve Energy (1) (a)-(c) No. (2)-(5) Not applicable Western Power (1) (a)-(c) No. (2)-(5) Not applicable MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4917. Hon Peter Collier to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: Department of Environment and Conservation (1) (a)-(b) Mr Hodge was appointed by the Minister for Environment in the role of Chairperson of the Environmental Education Advisory Committee for a period of 12 months following approval by Cabinet on 22 November 2004. (c) Mr Hodge was engaged as a consultant in late November 2005 to review the delivery of Community Education within the then Department of Environment, following normal tendering processes. (2) The details of Mr Hodge's work are contained in the final report entitled "A Review of Education for Behaviour Change within the Department of Environment (DoE)". [See paper 2854.] (3) Not applicable. (4) Mr Hodge was paid $20,000 as Chairperson of the Environmental Education Advisory Committee and $43,000 for his consultancy work. (5) Not applicable. Swan River Trust; Zoological Parks Authority; Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority (1) (a) No. (b) No. (c) No. (2)-(5) Not Applicable.

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3673

MR GARY HODGE, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR GENERAL OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS 4918. Hon Peter Collier to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Climate Change I refer the Minister to Mr Gary Hodge, former Acting Director General of the Department of Transport, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister advise if, since 1 January 2002, Mr Hodge has - (a) been employed in any area/areas of the Minister’s portfolio; (b) been appointed to any Boards, Committees, Taskforces or in any other advisory capacity in any areas of the Minister’s portfolio; and (c) received any consultancy work in any of the areas of the Minister’s portfolio? (2) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide full details of Mr Hodge’s employment or appointments? (3) If no to (2), why not? (4) If yes to (1), will the Minister provide the full details of the salary, fees or other financial reimbursement for such employment or appointment? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: Refer to question on notice 4917. CONTAMINATED SITES - REPORTING OF KNOWN OR SUSPECTED SITES INCLUDING FARM LIVESTOCK DIPPING FACILITIES 4920. Hon Anthony Fels to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment (1) By what date do contaminated sites need to be notified to the Department of the Environment under amendments passed in the Contaminated Sites Amendment Bill 2005? (2) How many farm livestock dipping facilities have since been notified to the Department? (3) What procedures will be followed on those properties where dips are notified? (4) Will the farmer or pastoralist be required to conduct the soil tests? (5) What is the estimated cost of such tests per site? (6) If found to be contaminated, what will be the owners responsibility? (7) If soil must be removed, where can it be deposited? (8) What is the estimated cost of contaminated soil removal and who is responsible for the cost? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: (1) The Contaminated Sites Act 2003 provided a six month 'period of grace' after commencement for reporting known or suspected contaminated sites to the Department of Environment and Conservation, which expired on 31 May 2007. Following the expiry of the period of grace, under section 11(3) of the Act, persons who caused contamination and owners and occupiers of sites must report known contaminated sites within 21 days of when they first knew the site was contaminated, and suspected contaminated sites as soon as practicable. (2) Since the Act commenced on 1 December 2006, the total number of new known or suspected contaminated sites reported to the Department is around 1,000 with most of these reports being received in the last week of May 2007. The Department is still processing these reports, and therefore cannot provide accurate figures on the total number of sites or the number of farm livestock dipping facilities reported at this stage. However, the Department estimates that around 30 of the approximately 1,000 sites reported are farm livestock dipping facilities. (3) After receiving a report of a known or suspected contaminated site, the Department considers the information contained in the report, and may contact the person who reported the site or the site owner or occupier for further information or clarification. Based on the available information, the Department then classifies the site, in consultation with the Department of Health, according to the risk the site poses to people's health and the environment. There are seven possible classifications listed in Schedule 1 of the Act. (4) The classification assigned to a site will determine whether further action, such as investigation or remediation, is required. To date, only one livestock dipping site has been classified under the Act and this site was classified 'report not substantiated', with no further action required.

3674 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(5) Each site reported is assessed based on site-specific information and at this early stage in implementation of the Act, it is not possible to provide average costs applicable to farm livestock dipping facilities. (6) Clean-up of contamination is only required where there is a risk to human health or the environment. A site that requires clean-up is classified 'contaminated - remediation required' and the Act sets out a hierarchy of responsibility for cleaning up such sites. In summary, the first person responsible is the person who caused or contributed to the contamination. If the causer of contamination cannot be identified, found, or made to pay, responsibility would generally fall to the current landowner. However, the Act provides some protection to innocent landowners, that is, landowners who unknowingly and unsuspectingly purchased already contaminated land prior to 1 December 2006 and have not contributed to the contamination. Landowners can submit a disclosure statement before 1 December 2008, requesting exemption from responsibility for remediation. If it is determined that the landowner meets certain criteria, the landowner will be issued with an exemption certificate exempting him or her from responsibility for remediation. In cases in which an exemption certificate has been issued to the landowner and the person who caused the contamination cannot be identified, found or made to pay, it is likely that the State will bear the cost of cleaning up the site. (7) The term 'remediation' has a broad definition under the Act and covers a spectrum of activities from restriction of access to a contaminant (such as by burying on site) to excavation and removal off-site. Where a site requires remediation, site-specific circumstances would determine the appropriate course of action. If excavation and off-site disposal of soil is chosen as the appropriate remedial strategy for a site, the level of contaminants in the soil will determine where the soil can be deposited. (8) See the answer to (5). KALGOORLIE CONSOLIDATED GOLD MINES PTY LTD - PENALTY FOR BREACHING SULFUR DIOXIDE LIMIT 4921. Hon Giz Watson to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment Regarding the recent issuing of a modified penalty of $25 000 to Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd (KCGM), the management company for Barrick Gold and Newmont Mining, for breaching sulphur dioxide limits in May 2005 around the Kalgoorlie - Coolgardie area, I ask - (1) Has KCGM paid the full modified penalty? (2) If no to (1), why not? (3) If yes to (1), on what specific date did KCGM pay the penalty? (4) Can the Minister explain the rationale as to how a figure of $25 000 was determined and calculated as being appropriate based on KCGM’s history of over 17 years breaching ministerial and licence conditions? (5) If no to (4), why not? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) 8 May 2007. (4) The Modified Penalty Notice issued to KCGM for $25,000 comprised 20 percent of the maximum fine for the contravention of a licence condition, under Section 58(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986, after the requirements of Section 99A of the Act were determined to have been met. The Modified Penalty Notice was issued in accordance with DEC's Prosecution and Enforcement Policy after a thorough investigation had been conducted which included consideration of the previous history of the offender. Section 99B(2) of the Act sets the amount of the modified penalty at 10 percent of the maximum fine that could be imposed by the courts for a first offence and 20 percent of the maximum sum if the alleged offender has been previously convicted. Accordingly due to the existence of a previous conviction registered against the company, the amount was set at $25,000. (5) Not applicable. MINING - KALTAILS TAILINGS DAM - CONTAINMENT OF SEEPAGE 4923. Hon Giz Watson to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment Regarding the Kaltails Toxic Tailings Dam, the lakeside conservation reserve for the preservation of sandalwood and the Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd (KCGM) environmental scoping document dated, 20 January 2006 titled Fimiston Gold Mine operations extension (stage three) and mine closure planning, I ask -

[COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007] 3675

(1) Is it correct that the KCGM environmental scoping document dated 20 January 2006 in part states: ‘A loss of vegetation on this reserve was attributed to seepage from the Kaltails facility. Initial measures to reduce the impacts were implemented and included the construction of interception trenches along the basement of the TSF embankments. In 1992, the construction and operation of dewatering bores successfully controlled the seepage and groundwater level. In 1995 part of the original reserve was excised following the vegetation loss to the south of the TSF’? (2) If no to (1), will the Minister quote, in full, the scoping document dated 20 January 2006? (3) Is it correct that the operator of the Kaltails facility was issued a works approval to construct the tailings dam with a condition that stated that ‘all matter containing saline, alkaline, or cyanide constituents shall be retained within impervious holding facilities such that there is no discernible impairment of surface or underground waters’? (4) If no to (3), will the Minister quote the full text of the works approval condition? (5) Can the Minister state how did the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) carry out and satisfy itself that all the requirements of the works approval and conditions were met for the Kaltails tailings dam, when it was first constructed? (6) If no to (5), why not? (7) Did the DEC require a compliance certificate from the works approval holder at the completion of works stating that the works had been completed in accordance with approval conditions? (8) If yes to (7), will the Minister quote the full text of this document and table a copy? (9) If no to (7), why not? (10) Will the Minister table a copy of the works approval issued for the Kaltails tailings dam when it was first constructed? (11) If no to (10), why not? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: (1) The quote from KCGM's environmental scoping document dated 20 January 2006 is correct except that the word "basement" should read "base". (2) Not applicable. (3)-(11) The Kaltails tailings facility has not been actively deposited to for some years. The Kaltails operation started in 1989 and was decommissioned in 1999 and the records associated with its activity are in archive. I do not support the use of the resources of the Department of Environment and Conservation to locate and retrieve these files, particularly when there is no evidence to suggest that there are any current environmental impacts as a result of this facility, and as a result there are no active investigations with respect to seepage or impacts relating to the facility. FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN 2004-2013 - COMPLIANCE MONITORING 4926. Hon Paul Llewellyn to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for the Environment In relation to ministerial statement No. 641 which sets out the legally binding conditions on the Forest Management Plan 2004-2013, I ask - (1) Has compliance with these conditions by the Department of Conservation (DEC) and Land Management, and now the Department of Environment and Conservation and by the Forest Products Commission, been monitored by the compliance monitoring branch of the DEC or its predecessor? (2) If not to (1), why not? (3) If yes to (1), will the Minister please table the compliance monitoring reports? (4) If no to (3), why not? Hon SALLY TALBOT replied: (1) No. (2) The monitoring of compliance with conditions in Ministerial Statements by the Department of Environment and Conservation is based on reviewing documented self assessments submitted by the proponent of the proposal. Ministerial Statement 641 does not require the proponent, in this case the Conservation Commission of WA, to submit the first self assessment of the status of implementation of the Forest Management Plan 2004-2013 and compliance with conditions in the Ministerial Statement to the Environmental Protection Authority until 31 December 2008.

3676 [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 26 June 2007]

(3) Not Applicable. (4) Not Applicable. POLICE - SYSTEM FOR RECORDING DRUG SEIZURES 4933. Hon Donna Faragher to the Minister for Regional Development representing the Minister for Police and Emergency Services I refer to the Australian Crime Commission Illicit Drug Data Report 2005-06 which stated, ‘Western Australia Police introduced a new incident recording system in 2002-03, which changed the method for recording drug seizures (p. 84)’, and I ask - (1) Will the Minister provide details of these changes and how they are different from the previous recording system? (2) If no to (1), why not? Hon JON FORD replied: (1) Prior to the introduction of the current Frontline Incident Management System (IMS) in 2002-03 there were two systems used to record drug seizures; the Offence Information System (OIS) which was primarily an investigation system and Property Tracking System (PTS) which was used to manage physical property items. The Australian Crime Commission (ACC) required data to be reported according to the appropriate drug offences. PTS was unable to be used as a source as there were no links between the drug item and the corresponding offence/incident on this system. Prior to 2002-03, OIS was not able to link seized drugs to specific offences within an incident, resulting in some over-counts when the same drug seizure was reported against multiple offence categories to the ACC. Additionally, the flexibility offered by OIS for investigative purposes allowed the units of measure for the weight of seized drugs to be entered in a wide variety of formats. This resulted in some under-counts of seized drug weights due to inaccurate or incompatible mappings to standard weight measures. The current Frontline Incident Management System (IMS) has combined the functions of OIS and PTS and is both an investigative tool and a property management system. This has resulted in improved recording of accurate drug weights, as well as allowing improved reporting procedures to avoid double- counting of individual seizures. Consequently the quality of drug seizure information supplied to the ACC since the introduction of Frontline IMS in 2002-03 has improved significantly over the data provided in previous years. (2) Not applicable ______