LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
Tuesday, 15th September, 1992
______
Mr Speaker (The Hon. Kevin Richard Rozzoli) took the chair at 2.15 p.m.
Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.
MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Mr Speaker advised the House that he had received from the honourable member for Drummoyne notice of a matter of public importance, which would be set down for debate at the conclusion of formal business.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ______
HOSPITALS PRIVATISATION
Mr CARR: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Health. What is the Minister's timetable for his proposed privatisation of the Prince Henry Hospital and Prince of Wales Hospital? When will the Minister release timetables for privatisation of other hospitals on his hit list?
Mr PHILLIPS: The Opposition does not like good news. Some months ago in this House the Government clearly showed its hand as to the number of projects it was unable to fund over the remainder of this decade because of shortfalls in funding from the Federal Government and inability of governments these days to fund more and more projects continually. This Government inherited a $2 billion backlog of capital works and has injected record levels of capital investment in health. More than $300 million a year has been spent in that area, compared to the lack of capital investment by the former Labor Government. At present several major hospital projects are in progress at hospitals at Liverpool, Nepean, St George and on the North Coast. The projects include a $300 million children's hospital in the western part of Sydney and the upgrading of Liverpool Hospital to a teaching hospital.
This Government is seeking to build more hospitals for the people and that is what it will successfully achieve in Port Macquarie. Some years ago my colleague the then Minister for Health, the Hon. Peter Collins, upgraded the Prince of Wales Hospital, a major teaching hospital in this State, to ensure that top-rate health care could be delivered to people in the future. Funding is not available to carry out the enormously costly projects required. This Government is a long way from funding any particular proposal but it honestly says to the people, "We are going to try to work out a proposal so we can tackle a specific problem". No particular date has been set. When we have a proposal to put forward we will do as we did on this one: bring it forward and develop it, and the Opposition can walk all over that contract too. They can find out in terms of service agreements et cetera about the types of arrangements we are putting together. The likelihood is that the arrangement out at Prince of Wales Hospital, when it happens, will be closer to a joint venture between the Government and others, as it is a major teaching hospital and will obviously need a major public commitment. I cannot give any dates on Prince of Wales Hospital but when we have some more good news for the health system we will inform everyone.
Page 5668
GOVERNMENT INACTION ON EMPLOYMENT
Mr DOWNY: My question without notice is directed to the Premier, and Treasurer. Is he aware of claims by the Leader of the Opposition that Government inaction has caused jobs and billions of dollars worth of projects to be lost to New South Wales?
Mr FAHEY: Over the weekend the Leader of the Opposition played yet another cruel hoax.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Oxley to order.
Mr FAHEY: This time it was under the title of Labor's jobs versus strategy. The only matter that was not propaganda was what has been taken from coalition policies, implemented over a number of years now since the coalition has been in government. It shows that the Opposition is totally bereft of ideas. To suggest that $2.5 billion worth of projects have been stalled in New South Wales because of inaction from this Government, and to suggest that 8,000 jobs have not been created, clearly reveals just how much the Opposition is out of touch with reality. Let us have a look at some of the projects the Leader of the Opposition referred to. He said that New South Wales or the Government has failed to win major investment opportunities for New South Wales, such as the frigates project. Every worker in Newcastle knows that their city did not get the frigates project - or for that matter the submarine project when Labor was in government in this State - simply because the Opposition's Federal Labor Party mates have discriminated against the workers in this State. Newcastle did not fail to win the projects on its merits, as the Leader of the Opposition claimed. The city failed because of the political decisions taken in Canberra to support Victoria and South Australia - the basket case States - to try to bail them out of their difficulties.
The hide of the Leader of the Opposition to talk about New South Wales and the Government failing in Newcastle! We set up a bipartisan committee which comprised Mr MacBean, when he was the head of the Labor Council, followed by Mr Easson, together with Mr Unsworth and then Mr Carr - all people involved in the Labor movement in Newcastle - and a concerted approach was taken to sell the benefits of the frigates work going to Newcastle. Notwithstanding that bipartisan approach, the political decision was made in the end. The same decision was made in the end in relation to the multifunction polis - it was given to South Australia. One wonders just what chances South Australia has of delivering on the multifunction polis after $3 billion had to be expended by the Government of that State to bail out the State Bank as a result of its ineptitude in management. The best of the lot is the Walsh Bay redevelopment in Sydney - yet another lie. To quote the Leader of the Opposition on the Walsh Bay project -
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order.
Mr FAHEY: He said that the $700 million redevelopment of Walsh Bay has been bungled, that thousands of jobs have been lost, and he blamed the Leader of the National Party. We notice every time the Leader of the Opposition gets into some difficulty he blames the National Party - one of the ministers, the members, the leader or someone else. He always blames the National Party.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Ashfield to order.
Page 5669
Mr FAHEY: At this time the only thing he has not blamed on the National Party is the drought. I presume that is coming.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time.
Mr FAHEY: In the near future I presume the Opposition will blame the National Party for the drought. Let us have a look at the truth of the Walsh Bay project.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Deputy Premier to order. I call the member for Ashfield to order for the second time.
Mr FAHEY: If anybody can be singled out for the failure of the Walsh Bay project to go ahead, it is the Leader of the Opposition. He claimed that the tendering process was corrupt and the matter was referred to the Independent Commission Against Corruption. He was proved wrong. However, after that time lapse, the events that occurred and the difficulties that he created for the individuals involved and the company that had correctly tendered, as the ICAC found, on that particular project, the opportunity was lost.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the Leader of the Opposition wishes to conduct a conversation he should do so outside the Chamber.
Mr FAHEY: He then turned to the State Office Block. Three years ago it was the Leader of the Opposition who screamed when there was a suggestion that the State Office Block might be disposed of or sold. He argued that this was another fire sale, an attempt to bring in some money without any regard to maintaining the assets of the State. The sale did not go ahead. The responsible approach by this Government ensured that there was no fire sale; the price was not right, and as a result it was not sold. Today the Port Macquarie hospital was the subject of the first question. The construction of the Port Macquarie hospital will create 300 jobs. On its completion 160 jobs will be available, yet the Opposition has continued to oppose that project. The vision shown by the Leader of the Opposition in that statement is a suggestion that this State can achieve recovery based on plastics. "There is an opportunity", said the Leader of the Opposition, "to have a look at plastics and to ensure that if we can secure the real investment opportunities offering, there is a possibility of 5,800 new jobs". The big if - if we can secure the investment opportunities.
The Opposition has no jobs strategy. When it was in government it demonstrated, time and time again, that jobs were what it wanted down in Sussex Street - hold on, featherbed, keep the numbers up as best you can, do not upset those from this House to whom you owe favours, that is, members of the unions. But the other insight gained from this statement was that at long last the Leader of the Opposition suggested that the Government should have the power to dismiss senior executive service officers who do not perform. Ever since the senior executive service was created this Government has demonstrated that that ought to be the case and in fact that has been the case. He is now in favour of voluntary redundancy, which is something about which he has been criticising this Government. He has attempted to snow those in the union movement time and time again by saying, "Your jobs are protected. Under no circumstances, even when you want to put up your hand, can you afford to take voluntary redundancy on the basis that the job you have is secure for life".
Page 5670
I welcome this opportunity to say a few words about jobs, in advance of the Budget to be delivered this afternoon. When I foreshadowed my intention to have a one year moratorium on job cuts in the public sector I made the following points which many, including the Opposition, seem to have either forgotten or chosen to ignore. The aim is to bring a period of calm and peace so that people may plan their lives with a degree of certainty. I specifically said that public sector redundancies, announced in July last year, would not be covered by the moratorium. Since then I have specifically said many times that voluntary redundancy, natural attrition, non-replacement and redeployment - linked with training - would continue to be used to improve efficiency in the public sector and that no branches of government would be closed in either the inner or outer budget.
In finalising details of the Budget over the past two weeks I decided not to exempt government trading enterprises from this policy. Government trading enterprises are required by the Government to operate like private companies. If government trading enterprises continue to operate inefficiently and do not operate in a commercial fashion, no funds will be available for the social priorities of government - health, education and community services - which are all in the inner budget sector. If the Government had not moved on government trading enterprises, the budget deficit - which is to be announced later - would have been twice the size. This Government will continue to ensure that government trading enterprises operate efficiently and operate like private companies. We will then channel the money received into hospitals and schools, and we will be able to police the real jobs of government. This is a far cry from the Opposition's policy which, as I have indicated, basically is to keep public servants on the payroll, no matter what. A Labor government would never have a policy for jobs.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Ermington to order. I call the honourable member for Hurstville to order. I call the honourable member for Ermington to order for the second time.
Mr FAHEY: A Labor government would simply follow the orders of the people in Sussex Street who determine policy for the Labor Party.
BROKEN HILL LEAD POLLUTION
Mr BECKROGE: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for the Environment. Will funding for the program of identification of lead pollution in Broken Hill be oversighted by the Environment Protection Authority? If so, will the Minister assure me that those funds will be disbursed in accordance with the wishes of the steering committee in Broken Hill?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Smithfield to order.
Mr HARTCHER: Honourable members who saw the Australian Broadcasting Corporation program "Four Corners" last night about lead poisoning in Australia would be aware that lead poisoning is a significant issue in certain communities throughout the State, and especially at Broken Hill. In the south area of that town, in Boolaroo in the electorate of the honourable member for Wallsend, and in Balmain in the electorate of the honourable member for Port Jackson, a number of houses are affected. The State Government is conscious of this and is in the process of preparing a paper on lead which it can take to a Commonwealth conference that is to be held soon, so that a policy on lead can be developed for the benefit of the people of New South Wales.
Page 5671
To answer the specific question asked by the honourable member for Broken Hill, at the end of July I went to Broken Hill as a result of a request by people conducting a pilot study for funding for further research into lead poisoning problems. That study had been costed at about $217,000. On a further costing it was discovered that would not be enough to carry out the work that was considered necessary in Broken Hill. That work involved a number of projects: an environmental assessment of about 225 homes; a lead isotope sampling program to identify sources and types of lead; and a repeat sampling by the Department of Health to monitor changes in blood lead levels in children. This was costed at around $400,000. With the consent of the Treasurer - and I thank the Premier, and Treasurer for his interest and approval - I was pleased to announce that $400,000 would be made available, through the Environment Protection Authority, to the people of Broken Hill.
The honourable member for Broken Hill asked specifically what would be the role of the Broken Hill steering committee. I gave an undertaking that we would consult with that committee, and I repeat that undertaking now. I am not sure in what way that committee will oversight the process - that will be a matter for the participants in the study- - but the study will be conducted under the auspices of the Environment Protection Authority. I assure members of that committee that they are the people most involved and they are the people whose interests this Government has at heart. Accordingly, the Government will ensure that they play a part in the program and that they are consulted in the course of the program. I thank the honourable member for Broken Hill for his question and for his interest in this matter. I thank also the honourable member for Wallsend, who I notice made a statement in the Lake Macquarie News. Considering this is a difficult question which could cause embarrassment to the individuals affected, I thought he made quite a responsible statement. I urge all honourable members to continue to adopt a responsible attitude to a difficult problem.
NORTH COAST COFFEE INDUSTRY
Mr D. L. PAGE: Has the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs received advice about whether the recent slump in the world price of coffee will affect the livelihood of coffee growers on the North Coast of New South Wales? If so, what assistance can the State Government give the industry at this time?
Mr ARMSTRONG: I thank the honourable member for Ballina not only for his timely question but also for the effort he has put into supporting this new and emerging industry on the North Coast. He has amassed a mountain of information, and is no doubt a leading expert on this industry. The development of the coffee industry on the North Coast is in an embryonic stage. Commercial interest in growing coffee in New South Wales began in the early 1980s. The first person to try to grow coffee was Mr Downs who came from New Guinea. Australia imports nearly all of its coffee - about $150 million worth a year - as green bean or raw product prior to roasting. The value-added component of the roasted product is up to 200 per cent higher. New South Wales coffee is an important new product which has the potential to replace imports, introduce another facet of productivity on the North Coast, and create jobs - a very important item on this Government's program.
During the past two weeks there has been a dramatic slump in the world price of coffee. Though this has affected the profitability of international coffee producers, fortunately it has had little impact on our domestic industry. The New South Wales coffee industry is sheltered from the international market as it is still developing and supplies a small, specialised local market. At present New South Wales coffee retails for
Page 5672
about $8.15 a kilo, though the world price is between $US1 and $US2. Until the New South Wales industry expands into a fully fledged industry it will be unaffected by the fluctuations of the international market. Only limited supplies of coffee have been produced on the North Coast, and at present New South Wales is serving what can be best described as a boutique or specialist market. Some delicatessens and restaurants are making a feature of serving New South Wales domestically produced coffee. Twelve different varieties are being tested for their suitability to the North Coast environment. However, initial results are most encouraging.
The potential coffee growing area on the North Coast is about 2,000 hectares. This could produce about 5,000 tonnes of green bean annually, which is about 14 per cent of the total volume currently being imported into Australia. We can expect this industry to develop into a valuable import replacement industry. The viability and development of this new industry are very much dependent on cost-efficient harvesting. Hand harvesting of coffee beans costs between $5 and $7 per kilo. Efficiency in the coffee industry is possible only with machine harvesting, which can reduce that cost to about 60c a kilo. That is a dramatic improvement. Access to a mechanical harvester will be the trigger which will lead to the survival of the New South Wales industry. A new prototype harvester for Australian conditions has been developed in Queensland. This machine had its initial trials in Hawaii and outperformed all other machines operating in that large, commercial coffee industry. The honourable member for Ballina has constantly brought to the attention of the Parliament the progress of New South Wales coffee growers. As a result of his hard work and persistence the State Government has been able to assist industry, both financially and with technical support, through New South Wales Agriculture.
Two months ago the State Government announced a grant of $11,500 to the emerging coffee industry. Those funds have enabled the hire of the prototype harvester from Queensland for our New South Wales harvest. The harvester is currently being trialed on properties in the area to see if it is suitable to the gradients of the land on the coast. Initial trials show that it can successfully harvest about 20 tonnes of coffee cherries a day, at a tenth of the cost of hand harvesting. With the help of specialist engineering support from the Queensland Department of Primary Industry, two tonnes of beans an hour are being processed in the Alstonville processing facility. The local industry is looking at ways of upgrading the processing infrastructure to incorporate the most efficient technology, and fortunately much of this technology, like the harvester, is actually being developed in Australia.
New South Wales Agriculture at Murwillumbah has been processing coffee for growers on a fee-for-service basis and that money goes back into coffee research. The coffee is both sun dried and artificially dried and there have been exciting results from the new processes. New South Wales Agriculture organised field days for interested growers to see the machine in action and to inspect the processing facilities. More than 150 interested people attended those field days, which were supported by a number of manufacturing industries interested in the development of high-tech equipment for use both in the field and in the processing area, as well as a quite sophisticated distribution system for coffee in Australia. I think we are looking forward to some rather exciting times for a new and emerging industry on the North Coast. The North Coast is one of the most valuable agricultural intensive production areas in the State; it is one where a considerable amount of expertise has been amassed in recent years, particularly by New South Wales Agriculture. Once again I pay tribute to the honourable member for Ballina and I look forward to being able to report further developments in the coffee industry in New South Wales.
Page 5673
ROAD FUNDING FOR THE PENRITH ELECTORATE
Mrs LO PO': My question without notice is to the Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works, and Minister for Roads. Why has the Government not announced any major road funding in the Penrith electorate since 1989? Has the Government's construction of tollways forced more traffic on to local roads? When will funds be provided?
Mr W. T. J. MURRAY: The honourable member for Penrith is a little premature; I suggest that she listen to the Budget details later today.
UNAUTHORISED ADVERTISING SCAMS
Mr FRASER: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Consumer Affairs, and Assistant Minister for Education. Is the Minister aware of recent media reports about complaints relating to bogus demands made on businesses across the State for payment for unauthorised advertisements? If so, what action does the Minister propose to take on this matter?
Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: I thank the honourable member for raising this important matter. I am indeed aware of complaints, particularly those relating to the activities of William Hayes. Mr Hayes is well known to the Department of Consumer Affairs. His conduct initially came to the attention of the department during 1989 by way of two companies, Gaellic Newspapers Pty Limited and Eschauch Holdings Pty Limited, which were prosecuted by the department in 1990 for demanding payment from businesses in relation to the alleged publication of unauthorised advertisements. The companies were found guilty of offences under the Fair Trading Act and incurred fines and costs amounting to a total of $46,760. The money was not recovered, because the company went broke. Numerous complaints have been received by the department concerning the receipt of bogus invoices which demand payment for advertisements which have not been authorised. This is a scam which begins with a telephone call to the targeted business. The purpose of the call is to obtain the name of the person responsible for business advertising. The information gives support to subsequent claims for payment.
Businesses are usually approached as a result of their advertisements which have been legitimately published in genuine publications. The person operating the scheme copies the advertisement, claims it has been published in accordance with prior instructions, and demands payment. The invoice, usually for several hundred dollars, is often processed by unsuspecting businesses. During late 1991 Hayes apparently recommenced his activities and once again came to the department's attention. Investigations revealed that Hayes was indeed associated with a number of publications. Also involved were his wife Jenny Chooi Guat Hayes and a company, Nicholls Holdings Pty Limited. During the course of the investigation a large number of small businesses have been interviewed to provide evidence, and the Crown Solicitor's office briefed a barrister in the matter in May 1992. I am pleased to inform the House that on 8th September the department filed applications in the Supreme Court seeking to restrain Hayes and his colleagues from conducting business in breach of the provisions of the Fair Trading Act. Within the last few hours summonses have been served on Hayes, his wife and the company.
Although my department will continue to take all possible steps to stop such illegal practices, businesses can and should take steps to protect themselves. Systems should be introduced to ensure that a set procedure is followed in the ordering and
Page 5674
authorising of advertisements. Specific staff should be designated to the task, and an order number should always be quoted to facilitate checking. This is the most effective way of stopping this sort of rort. The need for continued vigilance in relation to this type of scam is demonstrated by a matter referred to my department today, involving a particularly brazen promoter who falsely claimed that the Department of Local Government had authorised a publication called The Local Government (NSW) Gazette. The department is urgently investigating this matter. I invite any business which has received an invoice for unauthorised advertising to seek advice from the nearest Department of Consumer Affairs office.
NARROMINE FEEDLOT DEVELOPMENT
Mr CLOUGH: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs. What assistance did you offer your National Party colleague Mr Frank Wollstonehome in gaining approval for a controversial feedlot at Narromine? Did the Government underwrite his court costs? How much taxpayers' money did the Government spend on this case? Will the feedlot be subject to flooding? Will this flooding affect nearby townships' water supplies?
Mr ARMSTRONG: As the honourable member for Bathurst has posed five questions in all, four of which call for a considerable amount of detail, I suggest that he place them on notice. As for his question about the feedlot development at Narromine, that development passed all departmental development program requirements earlier this year, but was then blocked by the Narromine Shire Council. New South Wales Agriculture, through the Attorney General's Department, co-joined the developers to test the project in the Land and Environment Court, which they were quite entitled to do. The Land and Environment Court fully upheld the application by the developers and New South Wales Agriculture. This has resulted in significant renewed interest in this type of industry in New South Wales. Whilst that cloud was over feedlots and those types of industries in New South Wales, some potential development from domestic and overseas investors stopped.
As a result of this Land and Environment Court decision there is now renewed interest in these types of projects, particularly value-adding projects such as tanneries, wool scourers, small smallgoods plants and other abattoirs, all of which represent major productivity for export income into this State and, most importantly, jobs. The honourable member for Bathurst should be conscious of the necessity for jobs within this State because he was a member of the previous Labor Government in this State which saw a winding down of industry and a complete drying up of investment in value-adding industries for agriculture in this State. The Government of which he was a member did nothing except discourage investors in this type of enterprise. I look forward to the support of the honourable member for Bathurst, as a country member of the House, for these types of developments in the future, provided they conform with proper planning proposals that pass the necessary requirements laid down by the respective government departments.
NARROMINE FEEDLOT DEVELOPMENT
Mr CLOUGH: I ask a supplementary question of the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs. What was the role of the Attorney General's Department in the court case and what financial assistance did the Minister offer Mr Wollstonehome?
Page 5675
Mr ARMSTRONG: If the honourable member for Bathurst had listened instead of talking he would have heard what I said. The bottom line is that the Attorney General's Department represents departments such as New South Wales Agriculture in these matters. No financial assistance was given to Mr Wollstonehome or anyone else.
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Mr MORRIS: I address my question without notice -
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Excessive interjection is making it extremely difficult for the Chair or anyone else to hear what is being said. The honourable member for Blue Mountains has the call.
Mr MORRIS: My question is addressed to the Minister for the Environment.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Smithfield to order for the second time.
Mr MORRIS: Will the Minister advise the House what action the Government is taking to raise the level of community involvement in protection of the environment? In particular, what funds are being provided to assist local communities concerned about environmental degradation?
Mr HARTCHER: I thank the honourable member for Blue Mountains for his question and commend him for his continuing interest in environmental matters, which is understandable when one has regard to the magnificent environmental heritage of his electorate. Community involvement in environment protection and enhancement is vital if any project is to succeed. The State Government recognises its role not only in setting environmental direction and parameters, but also in encouraging the community to play its role. Many communities have made a determined commitment to the environment, as has been evidenced by the recent council recycling rebate scheme figures that I released recently. The residents of Manly - and I congratulate the honourable member for Manly as an active citizen in that regard - have demonstrated their commitment to the environment by recycling almost 100 kilograms of material per person per year. That figure is not matched in Labor councils or Labor held electorates; but more about that at a later stage. I am sure the honourable member for Blacktown will ask me a question about it. Environmental protection can take many forms, and the efforts of individuals to devise their own strategies have been strongly supported by the Government, this year to the tune of almost $2.5 million through the environmental trusts. Those trusts were established by the coalition Government, especially by my predecessor in this portfolio, the Hon. Tim Moore, the former member for Gordon, to provide funding for the type of community based projects that seldom attract mainstream funding. This year more than 720 applications for funding of various projects were received; that is 146 more than last year, the first year in which grants were made. Obviously the concept is being warmly welcomed in the community.
The funding will make a substantial difference to the environment of certain areas through its project specific orientation. Projects to rehabilitate bushland, restore wetlands and encourage recycling are among the major recipients of the restoration and rehabilitation trust grants. Many of the projects are in western and southwestern areas of Sydney. Also, specialist grants are available for education and research through the respective trusts, looking at timely issues such as ways to tackle stormwater pollution - obviously of great interest to members on both sides of the House whose electorates fall
Page 5676
within the catchment area of Sydney Harbour or the Hawkesbury-Nepean river system. It is unfortunate that the entire 700-odd applications could not have been funded, but the trusts as statutory authorities have done an admirable job in allocating the $2.4 million in grants for 1992 to the projects that will have the most benefit to the community. Funding for the scheme comes from charges levied on industries that discharge pollutants into the Water Board sewers. Those charges are paid into the trust account and the interest earned is used for these grants.
I fully expect to have even more funds available next year. I expect that work on the majority of projects will begin well before the end of the year and that the environmental benefits will be obvious soon afterwards. Apart from the obvious environmental benefits of the trust, jobs will be created through several of the projects as a direct result of the trust grants, consistent with the theme of this Government, which is job creation and environmental protection at all levels. Many of the problems of environmental degradation were created by the community at times when we were less aware of the potential damage our actions can cause. The present problems with the Hawkesbury-Nepean river system are a case in point. Several of this year's grants have gone towards developing strategies to address the impact of urban development on the Hawkesbury and its tributaries. I commend all community groups and local councils that have recognised their role in ensuring that the environment we pass on to our children is better than the one we have inherited.
PACIFIC POWER ELECTRICITY CHARGES
Mr NAGLE: I ask the Minister for Conservation and Land Management, and Minister for Energy a question without notice. Has Elcom increased electricity charges to county councils in New South Wales by more than the consumer price index? Will county councils be forced to recover additional costs of $14.5 million by increasing charges to consumers? What action does the Minister propose to address these charge increases?
Mr WEST: Mr Speaker -
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Auburn to order.
Mr WEST: A number of discussions have been held between the Electricity Council and various county councils in regard to the new charging system. Following upon those discussions an indication has been given that a full review of bulk tariff charges will be carried out. There has been no indication that councils will have to charge consumers additional amounts as a result of that decision. The connection that the honourable member for Auburn is trying to draw is totally irrelevant.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE COMPARISONS
Mr RIXON: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Local Government, and Minister for Cooperatives. What action has the Government taken to improve the understanding of ratepayers about the comparative performance of local councils?
Mr PEACOCKE: The honourable member for Lismore has shown a continuing interest in local government matters. I note that he was a long-serving member of a shire council. In August 1991 I released for public discussion a major discussion paper on the reform of local government. One of the aims of the discussion paper and of the reform
Page 5677
process is to make the operations of councils far more transparent to ratepayers and residents and to make councils more accountable for their operations. As most honourable members will be aware, soon I will be introducing the new local government bill. That bill contains the major aspects associated with the reform process. However, apart from legislation, other things are included as part of the package of reforms which have already been introduced. One of those is the publication of comparative performance data for all councils in New South Wales. The first publication of the 1990 data was released by me in December 1991 and was widely reported in the press. The publication, which contained 33 different kinds of information on individual councils, was also made available free of charge to the public. The publication was widely sought by members of the public and councils and was generally accepted by the councils. That is not to say that there was not some dissent about the content of that document, because it was raw data and referred many people back to their own councils to see why the performance of their councils appeared to be less than that of adjoining or equivalent councils. In November this year I intend to release a similar publication containing the 1991 information. That publication once again will be made available free of charge to councils and the public, to ensure that it is available to a wide cross-section of the community.
The Government recognises that tools such as performance indicators need to be refined and improved continually. Last year's publication was the first of such publications. It is with that in mind that my department has joined with the Local Government and Shires Association and the Institute of Municipal Management to commission a review of available performance indicators and to suggest new indicators, where appropriate. It is expected that a report will detail those findings later this year. Once the findings are reviewed critically by my department, appropriate amendments will be made to the annual publication of comparative performance information. Honourable members will note that the Government, apart from introducing ways in which the performance of councils can be assessed by the general public, has recognised that this information is subject to refinement and improvement, where necessary. It will be obvious to most honourable members who have an interest in local government that this publication is an extremely valuable tool for aldermen and councillors.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Continued interjection will prolong the Minister's answer.
Mr PEACOCKE: The fact is that this document enables councillors, that is, elected council personnel, to compare their performance in certain areas with the performance of equivalent councils throughout the State. If a council found that its performance did not measure up to the performance of an adjoining council, obviously it would contact the neighbouring council in an effort to improve performance. This has been done with great gusto by a number of councils. I am pleased to advise the House that several councils have been able to improve performance through consultation with other councils. Furthermore, this process has led to councils considering another aspect of local government - I am sure this would receive the bipartisan support of all honourable members - and I refer to resource sharing between councils. If a council is able to perform a function, such as the collection of garbage, at a cheaper rate than its neighbouring council, there is scope for sharing that resource with the adjoining council. I am delighted that so many honourable members appear pleased to hear of this initiative of the department and of the Government and I am sure they will read the report with interest.______
Page 5678
BILLS UNPROCLAIMED
Mr Speaker, pursuant to sessional order, laid upon the table a list detailing all legislation unproclaimed as at 15th September.
PUBLIC FINANCE AND AUDIT ACT 1983
The Clerk, pursuant to section 8(5) of the Act, announced receipt of determinations under section 8(3) of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983 for the months of June and July 1992.
PETITIONS
Tobacco Smoking Restrictions
Petition praying that Murwillumbah citizens be allowed to accommodate the needs of smokers in the town, that existing facilities not be diminished and that the civil rights of all tobacco smokers be respected, received from Mr Beck.
Eastern Distributor
Petition praying that the House, because of the impending opening of the Sydney Harbour Tunnel, implement stages 2 and 3 of the Eastern Distributor, received from Ms Moore.
Wyong Railway Station
Petition praying that the House and the Minister for Transport ensure that all XPT services passing through Wyong Railway Station stop at that station, received from Mr Crittenden.
State Rail Authority Heritage Buildings
Petition praying that heritage buildings in the Newcastle region be allowed to be used by arts and crafts people and that Newcastle Contemporary Artists Incorporated be given approval to occupy a building on the Honeysuckle land for use as a gallery of contemporary art and cultural workshop, received from Mr Gaudry.
Wollongong School Bus Services
Petition praying that the House take urgent steps to require private bus companies in Wollongong to co-ordinate school arrival and departure times and ensure services are not overcrowded, received from Mr Sullivan.
Central Coast Bus Timetables
Petition praying that the House and the Minister for Transport intervene in the matter of new timetables put into effect by Busways Central Coast, received from Mr Crittenden.
Fassifern Railway Station
Petition praying that the House support the restoration of train services on the Newcastle-Central Coast line and provide easy access to platform No. 3 at Fassifern railway station by installing ramps to the existing overhead walkway bridge, received from Mr Hunter.
Page 5679Benedict College Student Transport
Petition praying that the House and the Minister for Transport will support the provision of a bus to transport students from Benedict Senior College to and from their homes to allow them safe passage to and from school each day, received from Mr Nagle.
Endangered Fauna (Interim Protection) Act
Petition praying that the Parliament rescind the Endangered Fauna (Interim Protection) Act, received from Mr Jeffery.
Pornographic Publications
Petitions praying that the House ban crime-inciting, demeaning or degrading publications, prohibit the possession of material depicting all forms of child pornography and paedophilia, and prevent the usurping of State censorship rights, received from Mr Armstrong, Mr Beck, Mr Causley, Mr Cochran, Mr Schultz and Mr Smith.
Brothels
Petitions praying that the Government will take no steps to legalise brothels and will close all existing brothels by enforcing the Disorderly Houses Act, received from Mr Harrison, Mr Kerr and Mr McManus.
Lidcombe Hospital
Petition praying that because of dissatisfaction with the rationalisation of health services the House prevent the downgrading and possible closure of services at Lidcombe Hospital, received from Mr Shedden.
Area Health Services Act
Petition praying that the House support amendment of the Area Health Services Act to prevent an area health service closing hospitals or restricting the range of health care or treatment provided by any hospital or health care service, received from Dr Refshauge.
Aged Health Care
Petition praying that the House ensure that admission to public hospitals is based on medical need, that hospitals are located conveniently for elderly people, that community health services needed by elderly people living at home are expanded, that a moratorium is placed on the closure of hospitals, and that the privatisation of hospital and other health services is stopped, received from Ms Moore.
Rachel Forster Hospital
Petition praying that the House direct the Central Sydney Area Health Service to maintain the services and facilities of the Rachel Forster Hospital in their present form and location, received from Ms Moore.
Central Coast Area Health Service
Petition praying that the House reject any proposal to amalgamate the Central Coast Area Health Service with any other area health service, received from Mr Crittenden.
Page 5680
Wyong Hospital
Petition praying that the Government provide sufficient funds for stage 2 of Wyong Hospital to open on time and with all promised health services, received from Mr Crittenden.
JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE UPON THE PROCESS AND FUNDING OF THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM
Report
Mr JEFFERY (Oxley) [3.10]: I desire to lay upon the table of the House the second report of the Joint Select Committee upon the Process and Funding of the Electoral System, together with the minutes of evidence taken before the committee and associated documents.
Ordered to be printed.
Mr JEFFERY, by leave: I wish to make a statement regarding this report. Prior to discussing this report it would be remiss of me, as the newly elected Chairman, not to acknowledge the work undertaken by two previous chairmen, in particular the Hon. Chris Hartcher, Minister for the Environment. John Booth, a former member of this Parliament, was chairman of the committee from May 1990 to May 1991. He concentrated primarily on issues addressed by the first report of the committee: eligibility to receive election funding, advanced payments and prepayments of election funding, the eligibility of parties to receive election funding for by-elections and the audit provisions in relation to declaration of political contributions and electoral expenditure. The Hon. Chris Hartcher, as the most recent chairman, concentrated on the complicated question as to how political donations might best be declared and reported. He also focused on pertinent points raised by the Independent Commission Against Corruption in its report on North Coast land development, which made a number of recommendations as to how best the Election Funding Act could be amended. Those recommendations by the ICAC did not do the job of this committee, despite media comments to the contrary. The ICAC report of 1990, at page 531, stated that provisions which required attention relate to first, what donations are to be disclosed; second, who is to be named as donor; third, when disclosure is to be made; fourth, offences and fifth, enforcement. The report stated also that the ICAC is not the vehicle for formulation of draft legislation and continued by discussing each of the above recommendations in turn. However, our committee was aiming to address how the law could be amended in these areas so that future breaches and loopholes are minimised.
Further, the committee was concerned that what might appear at first blush to be a simple amendment may in fact cause extensive problems later. Overseas experience in campaign finance reforms illustrates the truth of this assumption. I refer to an interesting anecdote from Texas which illustrates this point. This was commonly referred to as Chickengate. In 1989 a chicken magnate commenced handing out $10,000 cheques during debate on the floor of the Texas State Senate according to votes cast by the politicians. Though the behaviour was legal, it sparked an uproar over influence peddling, which resulted in a ban on receiving cash contributions. According to the Texans the solution was a ban on cash contributions within the confines of Parliament. This resulted in money still being handed out, but the difference was that politicians and donors stood outside the Legislature while this was being transacted. That law had unintended consequences. That is exactly what our committee is trying to avoid, by careful consideration of all the issues confronting campaign finance reform in New South Wales.
Page 5681
The report addresses questions relating to the true disclosure of donations and makes recommendations as to the best means of declaring donations. It details 32 recommendations to improve the present system of election finance. The report is the result of extensive research and testimony received from expert witnesses, including academics, lawyers, journalists, heads of political parties and representatives from State departments, authorities and commissions. The report contains an extensive list of reference material, books, journal articles and theses from all over the world. It was compiled by the secretariat following the re-appointment of the committee after the May 1992 election. The committee believes this list will be invaluable to academics and practitioners and will become a world reference resource. In addition, the report contains original transcripts of interviews conducted with overseas experts in the field. I take this opportunity to thank the committee secretariat for its hard work. I thank Amanda Olsson who provided the committee with research and policy advice; Ronda Miller and Merv Sheather for procedural advice and Peita Burgess and Kendy McLean, who provided administrative support.
CONVEYANCERS LICENSING BILL
Bill read a third time.
COMMITTEE UPON THE DRAFT LOCAL GOVERNMENT BILL AND COGNATE BILLS
Report
Mr Speaker, pursuant to sessional order, laid upon the table the second report of the Committee upon the Draft Local Government Bill and Cognate Bills, dated 4th September, 1992.
COMMITTEE ON THE GOVERNMENT PUBLICITY CONTROL BILL
Discussion Paper
Mr Speaker, pursuant to sessional order, laid upon the table the discussion paper issued by the Committee on the Government Publicity Control Bill dated September 1992.
SELECT COMMITTEE UPON PORT MACQUARIE BASE HOSPITAL PROJECT
Motion, by leave, by Mr West agreed to:
That Elizabeth Anne Kernohan be appointed to serve on the Select Committee upon the Port Macquarie Base Hospital Project.
CANCELLATION OF BOXING DAY PUBLIC HOLIDAY
Matter of Public Importance
Mr J. H. MURRAY (Drummoyne) [3.19]: I move:
That this House notes as a matter of public importance the State Government's decision to cancel the Boxing Day public holiday without entering into full dialogue.
Page 5682
The Boxing Day public holiday has been part and parcel of the Australian Christmas tradition since responsible government in 1856. This irresponsible Fahey Government has seen fit to reverse this fine tradition, and for what reason? Perhaps it is because of economic considerations, pressure from big business or some ideological hang-up. My preference leans towards the Premier's ideological stance of eroding the work conditions of the average family in New South Wales. If I were a betting man I would lay a bet that even though the Premier and his Ministers are of the view that everyone will turn up for work, that day will be the least productive day in the past 12 months. The New South Wales Government is ideologically hell-bent on kicking the workers and taking benefits from them that they have accrued through the courts and through tradition over a period of time. Every other State in Australia confers these benefits on their workers. I thought there may be some symbolism in this decision, so I went to the Parliamentary Library and my research showed that 28th December is the Feast of the Holy Innocents, a day that has the full privileges of the Martyrs Day. That is very significant, and I do not think it is coincidental. It is certainly a martyrs' day for the workers of New South Wales. The following is an extract relating to 28th December:
The Feast of the Holy Innocents, commemorating the children massacred in Bethlehem by King Herod; observed on this day since the 6th century; Innocents' Day in BCP; known also as Childermas (Day), and long considered to be the unluckiest day of the year.
The 28th December is the unluckiest day for all workers in New South Wales because through the actions of the Fahey Government the workers have lost that day as a holiday. The Premier presents himself as a fair player, somebody who has been knocking around and who wants to look after working people and their families, but by his actions he does the complete opposite. He has an agenda to withdraw privileges, working conditions, and salaries from the working-class. I bet pounds to peanuts that the ministerial cadres will not be working on 28th December. They might profess to be working, but I have been in this establishment long enough to know that on Boxing Day, 28th December, not a Minister will be sitting in his or her ministerial office. They might have conned some of the press.
[Interruption]
If I can have any say in it my staff will not be working on that day. I believe they should have the same sorts of conditions that workers throughout Australia have and the same conditions that workers in this State have had since 1856. This action is only the thin end of the wedge because the Minister said he will warn workers they can expect to enjoy only one extra public holiday when Christmas Day and New Year's Day fall on the weekend in 1993. This is only the start of it. Next year Christmas Day and Boxing Day both fall on a weekend, and the Premier says workers are only going to get two of the three days as public holidays. He is going to reinvent this in 1993. This decision is outrageous. All it does is underscore the Government's disregard for working men and working women in this State. The only result will be to create more battlers in New South Wales. I refer Minister Collins to legislation that will affect him and his electorate staff, who are on the payroll of the Parliament. A memorandum from the President and the Speaker states:
The Industrial Commission ratified a Memorandum of Agreement between the presiding officers, the Public Service Association and the Australian Journalists Association . . . One of the offsets to that Agreement was the alteration of Bank Holiday from the traditional first Monday in August to one of the working days between Christmas Day and New Years Day.
Page 5683
The staff will now be forced to take three days recreation leave. The staff cannot elect to go on holidays. Under that agreement they have to take two of their recreational days during that period. Now they are being forced to take another day's leave, that is, the Monday. Under this proposal they will have to take a third day's leave. This agreement is binding also on the Government's staff, Independent members' staff, and other members' staff. It is obvious the Premier has no concern for his personal staff otherwise he would have foreseen this. Another memorandum reads:
Parliament House, Members' electorate offices and Committee offices away from Parliament House will be closed during the Christmas/New Year period.
This is the killer:
If recently employed staff have not yet accrued two days recreation leave, it will be necessary for them to take leave without pay -
[Interruption]
Some Government members employ approximately 30 staff a year but they cannot look after them; they will not work for them. There are many instances of newly appointed staff working out of the offices of members of Parliament. Workers must work for a period of time to get one day off and therefore the effect of this action becomes cumulative. Under this arrangement the workers will now be subject to a double jeopardy penalty. Many of us employ a young school-leaver over that Christmas period. I know most Labor members look to help the youth of the community. School-leavers will probably have to work without pay for nearly a week, a period when they need money to pay for Christmas presents and other things. New South Wales is the only State in Australia to declare Monday 28th December a normal working day. That decision impacts on the staff, who give their time and effort to look after us. Whilst we are attending the House today they are slaving for us, covering for us out in the constituency. Minister Collins' comrade in the upper House and the Premier have given no recognition to the work our staff do for us. Workers from all other States are to enjoy a four-day long weekend during the Christmas break. How will employers in an industry doing business interstate expect their workers to turn up on that Monday when they are fully aware that no person will be working in other States? This is a shambles. The Premier says his decision will save New South Wales $300 million. It will not save $300 million, because the Premier has overlooked one ingredient.
Mr Zammit: It is $500 million.
Mr J. H. MURRAY: I am only quoting what the Premier said. We understand the Premier often changes his statements but the statement I read on the 11th referred to $300 million. Once again the Premier has backtracked; it is now $500 million. He did not take into account that many people will not go on holidays now, and the largest industry in this State, which is the tourist industry, will suffer dramatically because Christmas time is the period when high rates apply. That is the period when businesses receive the cream from bookings. However, a great mass of people will not be going on holidays because under this legislation they will be forced to work on that Monday.
I was interested to read that Garry Brack, the head of the Employers Federation said, "It is unreasonable for State workers to expect an extra holiday in the middle of a recession". To hell with tradition! He is not interested in tradition. This is the same Garry Brack who, when talking about the Australian flag, talks tradition day and night. This is the same Garry Brack who believes in the English dominance of the Australian
Page 5684
economy. But when it suits him - to make extra money out of it - tradition is blown out the window. So much for Garry Brack: when it suits him, tradition does not count. But, more importantly, I believe this is a backdoor method of reducing the workers' holidays. When Australian workers finish for the Christmas period it is traditional that families go away; in January factories close down for two or three weeks and the workers go away with their families in the period straight after Christmas. The gazetting of this particular legislation will thwart that tradition and create a monster for the tourist industry.
When the Premier was the Minister for Industrial Relations, in charge of the Government's supply division, he issued the New South Wales calendar for 1992. Lo and behold, 28th December has a red square around it, and the legend "public holiday". That calendar has been issued to every member of this Parliament and to all government departments throughout the State. If you go to the office of New South Wales Agriculture at Orange you will see it; if you go to any New South Wales Fisheries office or to the Minister's office you will see it. Recently I passed the Minister's office and I am certain I saw there a calendar very similar to that issued by the Premier, with a red square around 28th December, because -
Mr Collins: Wrong office.
Mr J. H. MURRAY: I am sorry, that is where he used to be. I am sure that the Minister will not be at his desk on 28th December. This is not merely my view that I am putting, it is not merely what the Opposition believes; it is what the majority of the people of New South Wales believe. On 11th September the Daily Telegraph Mirror conducted a survey. Of those who responded, 26 per cent said that Monday 28th December should be a normal working day. The Government is supposed to represent the people of this State, yet more than 70 per cent of the people polled said that the holiday should be retained. The Minister, his Government and the Premier are out of step with community needs and community thoughts. The Government now represents the view of only 26 per cent of the electorate on this matter - that is 26 per cent of the business community. The other 70 per cent believe that the decision is irrational, that it is a decision made by a Premier who is out of step with community needs, and one that certainly needs revision. [Time expired.]
Mr COLLINS (Willoughby - Minister for State Development, and Minister for Arts) [3.34]: After that spirited performance by the honourable member for Drummoyne it is quite obvious that the patron saint about whom he should have been speaking was Saint Jude, the patron saint of the impossible and lost causes. This afternoon the honourable member has been flogging a dead horse. It is absurd for him to suggest that the tourist industry will be at risk, that everybody will be chained to his desk on 28th December. It is quite obvious that during the Christmas period most people in this State, including most people in this House, will take their Christmas vacations with their families. The only difference is that the public holiday which would normally fall if Boxing Day were to fall on other than a weekend has been removed. That is the proposal. It is something that this State - in the middle of the worst recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s, the recession that the honourable member for Drummoyne's mentor, Prime Minister Paul Keating, said we had to have - has to do. It has to pull itself up by its own bootstraps, take decisive action, and show the lead for the rest of Australia, rather than travel in the wake of events.
It is quite clear that the people of New South Wales understand that; everybody understands that. People in a Commonwealth Employment Service queue, people who have a job in the public service or in the private sector, members of Parliament -
Page 5685
everybody knows that we have to work that bit harder. At this stage the cost to the State and the cost to the private sector of a lost working day is something that we can ill-afford. That is why the Premier has made this decision. This year Boxing Day falls on a weekend, and there will not be an additional holiday for Boxing Day. That is quite clearly the intention of the Government. To suggest it will be the end of the world as we know it is, quite simply, ludicrous. In New South Wales, public holidays are declared under the provisions of the Banks and Bank Holidays Act 1912. The Act provides, under part 1 of the fourth schedule of the Act that the following days should be public holidays: 1st January, New Years Day; 26th January, Australia Day; Good Friday; the day after Good Friday, that is Easter Saturday; Easter Monday; 25th April, Anzac Day; 25th December, Christmas Day; and normally 26th December, Boxing Day. A further two public holidays are proclaimed in the Government Gazette as general public holidays throughout New South Wales. Those additional days are the Queen's Birthday, celebrated on the second Monday in June, and Labour Day, celebrated on the first Monday in October.
The Act provides that when the first day of January - like 26th January, 25th April, Christmas Day or 26th December - falls on a Sunday, the following Monday will be a public holiday. The Act further provides that when 26th December falls on a Monday, the day following will be a public holiday. The observance of lengthy public holidays in Australia can be traced to the Premiers Conference of 1923, where it was resolved, some time before the Great Depression, that fourteen days should be the maximum number of public holidays each year. It was also agreed in 1923 that the Commonwealth and State governments may observe the same ten days provided in the New South Wales Banks and Bank Holidays Act, with a further four days being at the discretion of the respective governments to provide for local observances. That is something of the history of public holidays in New South Wales and around Australia. The Australian States and Territories observe the following number of public holidays: New South Wales, 10 days; Victoria, 10 days; Queensland, 10 days; South Australia, 11 days, including the public holiday for the Adelaide Cup; Western Australia, 10 days; Tasmania, 10 days, Northern Territory, 11 days; and the Australian Capital Territory, 11 days, including the public holiday for the Canberra Cup. Given that our system of public holidays follows very much the traditions which we borrowed from the United Kingdom, it is interesting to note that only eight public holidays are celebrated in the United Kingdom, from where we borrowed this structure for public holidays.
Mr Harrison: So what?
Mr COLLINS: "So what?", I am asked. The difference is that this century our standard of living has slipped from being equal first in the world. At the beginning of this century Australia's standard of living was ranked equal first with Argentina's. We had a top standard of living. But where are we today? We are so far down the tree that we would be lucky now to be ranked among the first 30 countries. If we have another few years of the Keating Government we will not even be in the first 30. Troglodytes like the honourable members opposite are saying that they want more and more holidays, but they are turning their backs on economic reality and on the rest of the world. It is up to them if they want to stick their heads in their sand, but they should not try to do that for the six million people in New South Wales who want to see our economy pull out of the doldrums, who want to see jobs created, and who want to see a bit more enterprise in this State. and who want to see an end to the recession that the Federal colleagues of honourable members opposite said we had to have. That is my answer to "So what?" The motion states:
Page 5686
That this House notes as a matter of public importance the State Government's decision to cancel the Boxing Day public holiday without entering into full dialogue.
I state on behalf of the Minister in another place that the Government has not cancelled the 1992 Boxing Day public holiday. In 1992, 26th December falls on a Saturday. The Act makes no provision for an additional public holiday on Monday, 28th December. It is the Government's view that the severe economic conditions in Australia and in this State today do not lend themselves to the granting of additional holidays that industry cannot afford. This view has been strongly supported by major employer bodies such as the New South Wales Employers Federation and the Retail Traders Association. These organisations recognise the damage that is being done to the economy by the Federal Government's disastrous economic policies. They are looking, as are the people of New South Wales, to the State Government to lead the way. Under the present Federal Government, industry is being placed under enormous and unprecedented pressure. The Federal Government's training guarantee, superannuation guarantee and a host of other initiatives, which are anti-business and anti-growth strategies, are placing a burden on industries which makes it impossible for them to compete with other economies in our region. The last thing that the New South Wales Government wishes to do and the last thing that the people of this State would wish us to do is to place in jeopardy our recovery from this recession. The imposition of an additional public holiday would be enough to push some of our smaller employers out the door, and their employees onto the dole queues.
Mr Harrison: Rubbish!
Mr COLLINS: Honourable members opposite disagree again. Look at the results. Go to any Commonwealth Employment Service and look at the statistics that are published every month. Look at the growing dole queues that 10 years of Federal Government has created. The Federal Government has generated an unemployment rate well in excess of 10 per cent. Fortunately, this State has the lowest unemployment rate in the country, well below the national average and well below the basket case Labor States around the country. Ten years of Keating economics has brought Australia to its knees. The people in this country realise that we simply cannot afford to remain there. We cannot afford the indulgences that we started to take for granted 20 years ago under the Whitlam Labor Government. Even Clyde Cameron has had to repent and recant on the 17.5 per cent holiday loading which he introduced in the early 1970s. Labor politicians can come clean in retirement and say they have made a few mistakes with the economy which have well and truly crippled things for business, enterprise and initiative in this country - the kind of economic growth that Australians came to expect until the election of the last two Labor Governments.
The imposition of an additional public holiday on some sectors of industry would certainly push them out the door. This Government will not be part of that. It does not wish to frustrate any move out of the recession and into a period of growth. This State will hit the front first simply because Mr Goss in Queensland has not had a chance to spend all the money accumulated by the National Party during the 19 years it was in government in that State. The New South Wales Government has attempted to show leadership by saying that it wants to keep people in jobs. It wants to encourage employers to employ additional employees. This Government will show that leadership. The New South Wales economic experience, compared with that of States like Victoria and South Australia, clearly demonstrates that this State is without doubt the leader when it comes to taking hard decisions and showing a national lead. New South Wales is not in the position of South Australia and Victoria, because this Government has taken the
Page 5687
decisions necessary to maintain this State's economy. The Government believes that, in deciding what public holidays should be celebrated, account should be taken of prevailing economic circumstances. Today Australia is part of a global and interlocked economy. We are not able to isolate ourselves from the rest of the world as some honourable members opposite would have us do today, even after 10 years of Keating economics.
The Government's decision has not been some kind of secret kept behind closed doors. The department has been informing the community, through the services it offers, that there will be no additional public holidays this year. It was not until the Building Workers Industrial Union telephoned to inquire about this matter that it became a political issue. Shortly after the Building Workers Industrial Union became involved, the Labor Council decided it should seek some publicity, and the result is that today the honourable member for Drummoyne has moved this matter of public importance. But the New South Wales Government remains committed to ensuring the prosperity of this State and its people. I am sure that honourable members will agree that the only decision the Government can make in 1992 is the one that it has made. I was asked by the Premier to point out that next year, when both Christmas Day and Boxing Day fall on a weekend, a holiday will not be lost. Next year the Monday after Christmas Day will be celebrated as a holiday. The loss of production to New South Wales as the result of an additional public holiday is said to be in the vicinity of $300 million. I am sure that figure says it all.
At this time, in the middle of a recession, this State cannot afford to lose $300 million. Everyone knows that, other than honourable members opposite. The people who vote for honourable members opposite know that. Members of trade unions who have been debating this matter with the Labor Council know that. They know that we cannot afford to throw $300 million out the window. Most of them will be on holiday at that time, enjoying a Christmas and New Year break with their families, as will most members of Parliament, ministerial staff and parliamentary staff. Most people celebrate that holiday with their families, and so they should. We all understand that we cannot afford to lose $300 million. Despite the good-humoured comments of the honourable member for Drummoyne when he introduced this matter of public importance, the Government most vigorously opposes the proposition. We will vote against the motion.
Mr YEADON (Granville) [3.48]: I join with Opposition members in bringing this matter of public importance to the attention of the people of New South Wales. This motion has been moved because of the Government's decision to cancel the Boxing Day holiday on 28th December. That decision clearly shows how grubby, small-minded and petty this Government really is. The Minister for State Development, and Minister for Arts, in his usual ideological diatribe, referred to our being in the middle of a recession and in the middle of hard times, and said that the State cannot afford to have these little luxuries. These little luxuries have been in place in this State and in this country from time immemorial. It is amusing how these types of concessions are always extracted from the hide of the worker. We are told that we should not worry that in the late 1980s significant sections of the business community were running around destroying the economic fabric of this country. That is all right: they can get away with that and go on their merry way. They can move to Spain or fall into the back closets of the Liberal Party. Nothing is taken from them. But when the crunch comes and the economy is down, the worker has to take the brunt of it and has to hand up all of his or her conditions and benefits that have been strenuously fought for over a long period. Of course, the old line, "We have to give it up now that we are in recession" is the thin end of the wedge. Does any member think Boxing Day will be restored as a public holiday when the recession is over? Not on your life! This proposal, if put in place, will be
Page 5688
permanent. Apart from the fact that we are in recession, what would this proposal achieve for the economy? Absolutely nothing, in my opinion, because this Government, along with the conservative small-minded employers that back it, really has no idea what the whole debate concerning boosting the Australian economy is about; honourable members opposite have no idea of what this debate is about.
If we are to improve the economy of this State and nation we need to work smarter, in a way that will increase productivity. Of course, the trade union movement in this country, in conjunction with the Federal Labor Government, has been working for some 10 years under the prices and incomes accord in order to achieve that end. It has embraced such things as award restructuring, second tier productivity increases, and efficiency in work practices. These types of initiatives, put on the board by progressive employers, have been put in place. Those sorts of measures have assisted the economies of this State and country. Although our economy is suffering from the effects of a world recession, statistics in relation to manufacturing and exports show that a strong segment within the economy of this country is doing very well indeed from working smarter, which means doing such things as implementing total quality control and the best practices in work, as well as reorganising work in a way that will increase productivity. They are the sorts of things we should be looking for.
The attitude that is displayed by this Government is the same attitude that was displayed by small-minded employers when the initiatives that I have mentioned were implemented by the trade union movement and the Federal Government. As proposals to improve manufacturing and improve work, all the Government wants to do is take away the microwave, take away the coffee machine, and take away the worker's five-minute smoko break. The proposal the subject of the motion falls into the same category - petty, small minded and, in the long run, doing nothing for the economy. The Minister indicated that perhaps we should be following the tradition of Great Britain, which has only eight holidays. What that has to do with anything is beyond me. Of course, if the Minister wanted to cast his eye a little bit wider and look at the efficient countries with good economies, he would see that they do not indulge in these petty practices. Look to Germany, which had one of the strongest economies in the world prior to unification. It has more public holidays than Australia or New South Wales. That country has more generous annual leave and higher wages, yet it is extraordinarily successful. Why? Because it is working smarter, working to best practice, and working to be productive. It is not penny pinching or being petty. That is the bottom line of this debate. This Government is simply reducing the conditions of the workers in this State. [Time expired.]
Mr ZAMMIT (Strathfield) [3.53]: The Minister for State Development, and Minister for Arts spoke about Australia and New South Wales being part of a global economy. Nothing brought that home to me as much as when I visited China about 10 months ago with the former Premier. When we visited a very large factory the first question I was going to ask the factory manager was what he paid his staff, but instead I asked him , "Do you give your staff holidays?" He replied, "Holidays, yes, every Sunday." This is part of the working world and the global economy against which we have to compete if we are going to raise our standard of living and ensure that unemployment is reduced. The honourable member for Drummoyne made fun of the fact that some $300 million would be saved by industry in New South Wales through this measure. I read the local papers as much as he does and I learn that he is complaining repeatedly about lack of housing, lack of transport facilities, lack of job opportunities. The fact is that it is one thing to say that you need more and you want more; it is another thing to provide that. We must be reasonable in the way that we attack the whole
Page 5689
unemployment issue. If we say we need more holidays without having the framework and the profit to allow that to occur, then we are headed down a very rocky road. There are three basic reasons for a public holiday in Australia. One is civic pride, another is national significance. I do not think Boxing Day falls into that category. Perhaps the honourable member for Drummoyne thinks it comes under the third category, which is religious significance. I have a definition by Rabbi Brasch of how Boxing Day began. He says:
The custom originated with the Romans and their feast of Saturn, during which they gave each other presents as an expression of the merry spirit of the celebration of the winter solstice.
I remind honourable members that winter - that is the northern winter - does not apply in Australia. Nonetheless, it was this association with the practice of paganism that led the church to denounce it and call on the faithful to discard it. We are not saying Boxing Day should be discarded; the Minister made that very clear in his response. The definition of Boxing Day in The All-Australian Calendar Book says:
Boxing Day probably takes its name from the fact that on the day after Christmas in Britain, the alms boxes which had been placed in the churches over the Christmas period were opened. The contents were distributed to the poor. On the same day, apprentices and servants broke open small earthenware boxes in which their masters had deposited small sums of money. In large households, the family may have used this day to distribute Christmas boxes to their staff.
It is apparent that Boxing Day has no religious significance so it does not qualify as a public holiday on all three counts. The honourable member for Drummoyne said, "This is eroding working conditions for workers". The fact is that business is in such great difficulty that having an additional day off would mean less profit. Less profit means fewer jobs, so I do not know how this is going to erode working conditions for workers. One of the great problems we have in Australia is giving a feeling of security to workers, so that they know tomorrow and next week they will have a job, enabling them to plan ahead and organise their lives with that knowledge. The honourable member goes on to say that Boxing Day, as a working day, will be the least productive of any of the working days in a period of twelve months. I think that is an indictment by the honourable member for Drummoyne of the workers of New South Wales. They will work hard because they know that if their employers succeed then they have jobs. That is more important to them than having days off. He goes on to say that this proposal will affect tourism in New South Wales. One of the biggest problems with tourism in New South Wales is - [Time expired.]
Mr HARRISON (Kiama) [3.58]: I am pleased to join my colleagues from the Opposition side of the House in opposing this penny pinching and miserable attempt to deprive workers in this State of a condition they have enjoyed for a long time. I am talking about the Boxing Day holiday. Christmas time is a time when families traditionally gather together to celebrate the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ, wishing one another wellbeing, and expressing feelings of peace on earth and good will to men. There is no good will involved in this Government seeking to deprive working members of a family of a holiday which they have enjoyed over a period of many years. The sheer size of Australia makes it necessary to spend a fair amount of time in travel at that time of year, in many circumstances to attend family get togethers, but this year those unfortunate enough not to be on annual leave at Christmas time will be deprived of one extra day in the company of their families. As usual, there has been a blurb of lies appearing in the media accompanying the announcements that the Boxing Day holiday is to be lost. I refer honourable members to the Sydney Morning Herald of 11th September:
Page 5690
The Minister for State Development and Arts, Mr Collins -
And I am pleased that the Minister is at the table listening to this debate because I want him to hear what I have to say:
- is on an annual leave now so that he can be on duty on December 28. "He never takes the day off," a staff member said.
That does not fit in with the facts. I refer honourable members to this extract from the Illawarra Daily Mercury written by Karen Breakey:
Illawarra Region of Council's Chairman, Neville Fredericks -
Another good Liberal, incidentally -
- requested the meeting with the Premier after Health Minister, Peter Collins, declined to see the group until he returns from holidays at the end of January.
The article gave an account of what happened when the Illawarra region lost its rescue and medical retrieval helicopter service. It was not possible to get to see the Minister, not even for the State lottery first prize. He was not out of the district, but was just on holidays. He broke that holiday to come back and announce a bit of good news, when the Government backtracked on its decision to scrub the child flight rescue helicopter service. But we were not able to flush him out over this matter, even up until the time he relinquished the health portfolio. We never got a chance to talk to him about it; he was on holidays. It was good enough for him to be on holidays, but what about the workers?
Mr Collins: On a point of order. The honourable member for Kiama has been speaking on matters that seem to have nothing to do with the matter of public importance being debated by the House, the question of public holidays. He seems to have an obsession with the helicopter service. I ask that he be drawn him back to the subject of debate.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask the honourable member for Kiama to return to the subject of the debate.
Mr HARRISON: I was making only passing reference to that matter, but obviously it got up the Minister's nose.
Mr Collins: You get up my nose.
Mr HARRISON: Yes, and I will get right up it any time you like. The Minister has one set of rules for himself and another set for the workers in this State. He will not be anywhere to be found on Boxing Day.
Mr Collins: The honourable member will not be anywhere to be found either.
Mr HARRISON: No, I will not, and neither will the Minister, as he has just admitted. I wonder whether consideration has been given to workers who live in the electorate I represent, many of whom work in depressed circumstances, in harsh steel mills. Some of them have to work three shifts and go to work at 12 midnight or 11.20 p.m. Those who have Christmas Day off will need to sleep all afternoon instead
Page 5691
of having Christmas Day with their families, and be ready to hit the bundy clock again at 11.20 on Christmas night, because they have been robbed of that extra day's leave. It is a sad indictment of this Government that it should stoop to such measures. It is a sad indictment of the Premier that without consultation he is prepared to rob workers of a day's pay. I do not care how he dresses it up, the workers will get one day's pay less. That is unacceptable. I suggest that the Premier should prepare a Christmas card to be sent to all workers in this State who will be affected by this decision. He should include on it this message:
A Christmas wish from Premier Fahey:
Have a productive Boxing Day.
This is not the season to mourn your loss.
Just extract the digit and serve the boss.
Mr J. H. MURRAY (Drummoyne) [4.2], in reply: This debate seems to have focused on biblical quotations. It was interesting to hear the Minister for State Development, and Minister for Arts say that St Jude is the patron saint of lost causes. Having been to the Library, I discovered that the Minister was incorrect: St Jude is the patron saint of desperate causes. The Opposition is desperate to give the workers of this State their rights. It is obvious that the Minister has a completely different outlook on what is right and what is wrong. I keep telling him that more than 70 per cent of the people of New South Wales believe that his decision is wrong. The Premier has dealt a crummy deal to the workers of this State. He has given them a king hit. Night after night on television he has said that he is the workers' friend. But already the Minister for State Development, and Minister for Arts has told us that next year, when Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Year's Day fall on weekends, he will give the working people of New South Wales a public holiday on two of those days but not the third. Once this proposal is put into practice by the Government what will happen to Anzac Day, Queen's Birthday, Labour Day and Good Friday? If the Government can take this action in respect of Boxing Day, it can do exactly the same thing in respect of all public holidays.
Members will recall that when the present Premier was Minister for Industrial Relations he tried, but failed, to abolish the half-day holiday for public servants on Easter Thursday. That proposal was lost in the Industrial Commission. The Premier's track record when it comes to looking after the people of New South Wales is abysmal. I hope he has the same result with this proposal, because I understand it too is likely to go before the Industrial Commission. What will be next? Will it be the 17.5 per cent loading for the holiday period? Will it be flexi time? I warn honourable members that the answer is that it will be one of those things. It would have been much more acceptable to the people of New South Wales if the Premier had given them a decent period within which to make alternative arrangements. If this decision had been made nine months ago - and the coalition was in office nine months ago - it may have been that the people would have copped it better than they can now. This decision has been made only 13 weeks before Christmas. It is extremely difficult to make alternative arrangements if one is going on holidays over the Christmas period. Last weekend I rang and tried to book accommodation over the Christmas period. People who have been caught out in the past have booked their holidays six months in advance of Christmas in order to get a decent caravan site or motel accommodation in the right place. One must do that. People now have to re-arrange their Christmas vacation periods because they have been told only 13 weeks in advance of the change in this tradition. As Peter Sams, the assistant secretary of the Labour Council of New South Wales, said:
Page 5692
The next thing this Government will do is abolish Christmas. It demonstrates we really don't have a Premier in New South Wales - we have an Uncle Scrooge.
I refer honourable members to one further quotation. I was particularly moved by Chris Murphy's column in the Sun-Herald last weekend. Chris Murphy probably has more money than all of us put together but when one reads his column one realises that he is a fair dinkum bloke. He has his finger on the pulse. What he says has a lot of credence in terms of political nous and what is good for the community. This is what he wrote:
Wealthy people can take holidays when they like, but often don't, and work instead because they enjoy making bucks. But for most, Christmas is not a time for the god of money. It's a time to put aside the economic calculators and create the memories that last children a life time. It's a time for workers to down tools and enjoy the continued celebration of the yuletide with their families on Boxing Day.
That is contrary to what the Minister said the people wanted. I do not think Chris Murphy is a saint; he has more money than all of us but he knows what the community wants. He is very perceptive, and this is the key. He said:
If Fahey doesn't fix it Santa Claus will. He will arrive next State election day and give the holiday back.
That is what this is all about. Contrary to what the Minister said about ours being an international society with an international economy - and the polls showed that he was wrong - we trade with 76 other countries, all of which offer that day as a holiday. We have to be more competitive and deal with the Germans, Russians and others, but they grant their workers that holiday. If they can be successful, I assure honourable members that if we are smart in the way we work in this country, we can be successful also. The House should accept this motion.
Question - That the motion be agreed to - put.
The House divided.
Ayes, 50
Ms Allan
Mr Amery
Mr Anderson
Mr A. S. Aquilina
Mr J. J. Aquilina
Mr Bowman
Mr Carr
Mr Clough
Mr Crittenden
Mr Doyle
Mr Face
Mr Gaudry
Mr Gibson
Mrs Grusovin
Mr Harrison
Mr Hatton
Mr Hunter
Mr Iemma
Mr Irwin
Mr Knight
Mr Knowles
Mr Langton
Mrs Lo Po'
Mr McBride
Dr Macdonald
Mr McManus
Mr Markham
Mr Martin
Mr Mills
Ms Moore
Mr Moss
Mr J. H. Murray
Mr Nagle
Mr Neilly
Mr Newman
Ms Nori
Mr E. T. Page
Mr Price
Dr Refshauge
Mr Rogan
Mr Rumble
Mr Scully
Mr Shedden
Mr Sullivan
Mr Thompson
Mr Whelan
Mr Yeadon
Mr Ziolkowski
Tellers,
Mr Beckroge
Mr Davoren
Page 5693
Noes, 48
Mr Armstrong
Mr Baird
Mr Blackmore
Mr Causley
Mr Chappell
Mrs Chikarovski
Mr Cochran
Mrs Cohen
Mr Collins
Mr Cruickshank
Mr Fahey
Mr Fraser
Mr Glachan
Mr Griffiths
Mr Hartcher
Mr Hazzard
Mr Humpherson
Mr Jeffery
Dr Kernohan
Mr Kerr
Mr Kinross
Mr Longley
Ms Machin
Mr Merton
Mr Morris
Mr W. T. J. Murray
Mr O'Doherty
Mr Packard
Mr D. L. Page
Mr Peacocke
Mr Petch
Mr Phillips
Mr Photios
Mr Rixon
Mr Schipp
Mr Schultz
Mr Small
Mr Smiles
Mr Smith
Mr Souris
Mr Tink
Mr Turner
Mr West
Mr Windsor
Mr Yabsley
Mr Zammit
Tellers,
Mr Beck
Mr Downy
Question so resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
APPROPRIATION BILL
BUSINESS FRANCHISE LICENCES (PETROLEUM PRODUCTS) AMENDMENT BILL
MOTOR VEHICLES TAXATION (AMENDMENT) BILL
ROAD IMPROVEMENT (SPECIAL FUNDING) AMENDMENT BILL
Suspension of certain standing orders agreed to.
Bills introduced and read a first time.
Second Reading
Mr FAHEY (Southern Highlands - Premier, and Treasurer) [4.21]: I move:
That these bills be now read a second time.
1. INTRODUCTION
Over the last couple of years, economic hardship has become a sad fact of life for too many people in New South Wales.
The national recession has taken a disastrous toll. Families have suffered falling living standards, bread winners have faced unemployment, school leavers have had to learn about being out of a job, before enjoying the benefits of having one.
The State Government is also under economic pressure. At this time when members of the public need most support, the State Government is itself under enormous financial strain.
Page 5694
The increased community need and the shrinking revenue base are the crushing pressures my Government faced in formulating a Budget for these difficult times.
In my first Budget as Premier and Treasurer I have endeavoured to balance the needs of the present with a commitment to building a future.
It is a Budget that will create real jobs for the unemployed, improve services to the community, and rekindle optimism in difficult times.
The first priority of this year's Budget strategy is to create genuine employment.
The central pillar of this year's Budget is a one-time boost to our already record capital program which will create jobs, provide services and flow-on to stimulate the State's whole economy.
In 1992-93 the State's total capital program will be boosted by $540 million in real terms to $5,894 million.
This represents a real increase after inflation of 10.1 per cent from last year.
This very substantial real growth in the capital program represents the biggest boost to capital works undertaken by any New South Wales Government since the mid 1980's.
It will greatly stimulate economic activity and lay the groundwork for New South Wales to emerge from the recession in better shape than any other State.
This boost to the State's capital program is estimated by Treasury to add over $1.7 billion to New South Wales Gross State Product and increase employment by 18,000 jobs once the direct and indirect multiplier effects are taken into account.
However, this kind of employment boost from capital works can only be achieved if we continue a tight rein on current spending .. .. that is the day-to-day costs of government.
I will not shrink from the tight management of the Government's day-to-day spending because to do so would undermine the very foundations we are building to guarantee our future economic security.
The alternative is to go further into debt and leave the next generation to pick-up the tab.
We must pay our own way.
The Government's second Budget priority is to continue the long term strategy of reducing the deficit and containing debt.
As a new Premier, without a majority in the Parliament, it would have been easy to abandon our long term strategy of financial responsibility, by artificially boosting employment for short term political gain.
But employment and wealth will only be created in the long run by our continued commitment to developing a strong, competitive State economy.
If the Government starts padding the public service, and clinging on to jobs that are better done by the private sector, then we will throw away our chance to develop an economically secure future for our children.
Page 5695
The third key objective of our Budget strategy is to provide better, more responsive services for the people of this State.
This commitment was outlined in the Guarantee of Service announced in March this year.
We are not talking about increased spending - increased spending is no guarantee of an increase in the quality of service or in results.
What we are talking about is a cultural change in the public sector.
Customers of Government businesses and agencies have the right to expect the same level of service they receive from the best private companies. Much more needs to be done.
Customer Councils have been established in our service agencies so that clients can give feedback on the services they are receiving.
This feedback will be gauged against service quality standards which will be published in order to have a benchmark for gauging performance.
In addition, where necessary, Government agencies will be expected to stay open longer.
Government employees dealing with the public will be required to wear name tags and to give their name clearly on the telephone.
Complaints handling mechanisms are being established in all service agencies to ensure that the public has a means of drawing to attention inadequate delivery of service or poor treatment.
We want to end the concept of the captive customer, while ensuring agencies monitor complaints so that they can pinpoint their weaknesses and remedy them.
Mr Speaker,
Before I turn to details of the Budget I would like to say a few words about Budget presentation.
As in 1991-92, the Budget aggregates are being presented broadly on a Government Finance Statistics or GFS basis.
That is, they are presented in accordance with the principles and concepts used by the Australian Bureau of Statistics for presenting statistics on outlays, receipts and financing transactions.
All Governments agreed at the May 1991 Special Premiers' Conference to publish their Budget aggregates on this basis for the "general government" sector, a wider coverage than the New South Wales Budget Sector.
Using the same format for the Budget Sector is fully consistent with, and a logical extension of, that agreement.
The New South Wales Government has decided to amend the Public Finance and Audit Act to require the Budget to be presented on a basis consistent with GFS principles, with any deviations highlighted in the Budget Papers.
Page 5696
This legislative change will be part of a major rewrite of the Public Finance and Audit Act that will occur in 1993.
This demonstrates the Government's commitment to "truth in budgeting".
It will also ensure that any future Government could only depart from that practice in a transparent way.
Such departures may at times be warranted for good accounting reasons, but they should always be fully documented and available to public scrutiny.
We earned our reputation for financial responsibility by being a reformist Government before the recession forced other Governments to follow suit.
New South Wales has been rewarded with the highest level of consumer and business confidence, and the lowest level of unemployment.
New South Wales has retained its economic leadership, and must now lead Australia out of the recession.
2. PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
This economic leadership, of which we are rightly proud, has not come without cost.
My Government is very conscious of the subdued nature of the economy as a result of Prime Minister Keating's recession, and the desire of the community to be reassured and see greater certainty and sensitivity in Government policies.
Nowhere is there more community sensitivity than with employment.
Today's Budget is a confirmation of that commitment to employment in both the public and private sectors.
It is a commitment to the development of a climate of confidence and security for the New South Wales community at large.
Two months ago I foreshadowed a 12 month moratorium on retrenchments in the Government. I now affirm that policy.
As I said at the time, the moratorium will not apply to the program of reductions announced by the government in July last year.
Core government agencies will continue to pursue efficiencies through voluntary redundancy, and natural attrition and using redeployment linked with retraining.
At the same time, the core agencies of government will pursue the provision of high quality service to the community in a competitive manner.
While the moratorium is in effect, and that is until the Budget next year, public sector managers must and will maintain the basic prerogative of exercising managerial responsibilities.
The moratorium will not prevent dismissal of employees on the grounds of non-performance or for disciplinary reasons.
Page 5697
The policy will not apply to Government Trading Enterprises which, by their very nature, are being required to perform like private companies paying taxes, proper dividends to their owners .. .. the taxpayers, and commercial services to their customers .. .. the public.
Within these parameters, the Government will continue to encourage contracting-out of services to the private sector. But it will not be a budget driven strategy.
The responsibility for contracting-out will rest with individual agencies which will retain 100 percent of the savings to further improve service to the community.
My Government's policy on public sector employment recognises the need to improve services while still pursuing fundamental reform.
We are committed to:
ensuring services are of a high standard;
increasing competition in the market and promoting freedom of choice for consumers by removing government monopolies;
ensuring taxpayers receive value for money from the public sector; and
being a responsible and understanding employer.
It has never been this Government's intention to "freeze jobs". This conflicts with one of our key objectives of improving competition and service delivery while lowering costs.
I am strongly committed to the reform of Government Trading Enterprises such as electricity, water, public transport and freight.
By improving their efficiency the community will benefit directly by the Government tapping their surpluses to fund schools, hospitals, policing and community support services .. .. in education, health, law enforcement and community services.
3. 1991-92 BUDGET AND CAPITAL PROGRAM OUTCOME
The 1991-92 Budget result was a deficit of $1,280 million.
This is $191 million higher than originally projected but $220 million lower than the revised estimate of $1,500 million at the start of the year which reflected the deteriorating national economy.
Due to our stringent control on spending New South Wales was able to contain the Budget blow-out far more successfully than other Governments.
It is an excellent achievement when you consider that Budget revenues fell $560 million short of last year's Budget projections.
The collapse in revenues was entirely beyond our control and was the result of the Federal Labor Government's high interest rate policy and the resulting recession being much deeper than expected.
The recession has been marked by a severe down-turn in the property market, especially offices and other commercial property.
Page 5698
This has had a devastating impact on stamp duty receipts.
Other receipts directly related to the level of economic activity have also been affected, including payroll tax, financial institutions duty and insurance duty.
4. 1992-93 BUDGET
Budget Pressures
The State Government continues to face a steady collapse in revenue as a result of the national recession.
New South Wales share of Commonwealth general purpose funding has been cut in real terms by over $800 million since 1987-88.
The size of the pool of general funds provided by the Commonwealth has been cut, and on top of that, New South Wales share of that pool has also been cut.
The decline in share of funds reflects the continued shift of financial assistance grants from New South Wales to the smaller States and Territories.
This transfer from New South Wales is now of the order of $1.4 billion per year!
That is to say, the New South Wales public are being taxed an extra $1.4 billion by the Federal Government which is being distributed to the small States to help their Budgets!
We accept that some degree of financial assistance needs to be made to the smaller States.
But we reject the excessive level of this subsidy, its accelerating trend against New South Wales and the complex and distortionary way in which it is currently assessed.
The conclusion is inescapable. New South Wales is, in effect, being punished for managing the State economy better.
We will not continue to be a financial milking cow for the smaller and mismanaged States.
New South Wales and Victoria are undertaking a major joint review of this redistribution.
The results will be circulated to the community at large and form the basis of a public awareness campaign leading up to the 1993 Premiers' Conference.
We hope all sides of politics, in both New South Wales and Victoria, will join with us in attempting to correct this financial injustice.
The second area of the State's financial hardship flows directly from the Commonwealth's policy induced recession.
As I said, the recession has led to the collapse of the State Government's own revenue base.
In particular, property based revenue has declined in real terms by $840 million compared with the peak year of 1988-89.
Page 5699
In 1992-93 and the forward years, land tax revenue will decline by nearly $220 million in real terms. In the 1993 Land Tax year, land tax receipts will be only seventy per cent of what they were in 1992.
For most landlords, the fall in tax will average thirty per cent.
In real terms, total land tax assessments in 1993 will be no greater than they were in 1988, before the property boom impacted on land tax assessments.
The recession has also affected other State revenues including financial institutions duty, payroll tax and stamp duty on motor vehicles. This is estimated to have fallen by over $700 million in real terms since 1987-88.
Despite the squeeze on our revenues, we have been able to adhere to our financial strategy.
In part, this has been achieved by substantial productivity improvements in our Government Trading Enterprises which has enabled us to absorb broadly $2 billion per annum in real revenue cuts while maintaining services and avoiding taking on additional debt.
Mr Speaker, this is an achievement of which we can be rightly proud.
Strategies and Targets
Our key Budget target is to contain the Budget Sector debt to a level where there is no real growth.
We will be aiming for a Budget result in 1994-95 which will not add to the Budget Sector debt in real terms.
This result will be supplemented by the selective sale of Government assets with the proceeds going directly to debt reduction.
The need to contain debt is paramount.
Australians have witnessed the `bank card boom' of the 1980's when business and government spent money they simply did not have.
The economic boom which resulted was destined to collapse as soon as the bills had to be paid.
With this Budget, New South Wales is paying its way.
Thanks to the public sale of the GIO we will not need to borrow to pay for this year's Budget deficit.
In addition, we will be retiring $430 million of Commonwealth debt raised on behalf of the State.
Taken together this represents a total debt containment initiative in 1992-93 of over $1.6 billion.
I have already written to the Federal Treasurer informing him of this as our contribution to stabilising the Australian dollar and thereby holding down interest rates.
Page 5700
By contrast, the Commonwealth Government will be notching up new borrowings of almost $15 billion while other States also continue their increased borrowing spree.
We have adopted five strategies to achieve our debt target.
First, the restraint on current spending will continue.
Over the three years to 1994-95 current outlays will decline 1.8 per cent per annum in real terms, through the achievement of greater efficiencies in the way we provide services.
This will not require Budget cuts above those already announced. The real decline in current outlays will be achieved by:
continuing the 1.5 per cent productivity dividends, subject to exemptions in the key areas of health, police and teaching;
implementing the program of portfolio savings set out in last year's Budget which were to be phased in over a multi-year period; and
encouraging agencies to contract-out both corporate support and core services and allowing them to keep all the savings they generate. Savings from down-sizing corporate head offices may also be kept where they exceed portfolio savings already earmarked.
The Minister for Finance and Assistant Treasurer will chair a high level Steering Group drawn from key agencies to monitor and encourage the process of contracting out in the Budget Sector.
Second, this year's one-off boost to capital works spending and job creation will be contained in the following years to reflect a `no growth' strategy.
This will ensure that we get the benefits of job creation at this time when we need it most without increasing our requirement for further borrowings in future years.
Third, there has been selective recourse to taxes to finance the Budget in the face of collapsing revenue.
The tax increases announced following the disappointing June 1992 Premiers' Conference have been targeted to avoid increased costs for the business sector which would jeopardise jobs.
Fourth, we will continue to move to a commercial approach to the dividend and taxation payments by our Government Trading Enterprises.
In the period 1987-88 to 1992-93, contributions from the Non Budget Sector will increase from $129 million to $980 million.
This has been achieved while keeping overall Government charges below the estimated inflation rate over this period.
Between 1987-88 and 1992-93 it is estimated that Government charges will in fact have declined by 0.8 per cent in real terms.
Page 5701
This process has been consolidated in 1992-93 by the adoption of a formal distribution policy between the Government and its trading enterprises for determining dividends, tax equivalent payments and debt guarantee fees on a basis akin to that which applies to private enterprise.
New South Wales leads Australia and the States on this major policy reform, the results of which so significantly underpin the Budget.
The objective of the policy is to improve the economic efficiency of Government Trading Enterprises by subjecting them to commercial disciplines similar to those faced in the private sector.
Only by moving towards normal investment returns on the Government's commercial assets can we avoid putting up taxes or going into debt to fund essential community services such as education, welfare, health and police.
The Government's businesses should help underpin the Government's social responsibilities, not be a drain on them.
The policy will establish for each GTE an appropriate mix of debt and equity, a target return on total assets and owner's equity, and a minimum distribution from profits of dividends and tax equivalent payments to the Government.
The policy will be implemented by way of a Statement of Financial Performance executed annually between the Shareholding Ministers and the Boards of the Government Trading Enterprises.
Proper recognition will be given to community service obligations of GTEs.
Community Service Obligations will be properly costed and, over time, transparently funded from the Budget so that they are exposed to full scrutiny by the public and Parliament.
Such a level of public accountability for Community Service Obligations has never existed before.
We intend to maintain a highly responsible and commercial approach to our Government Trading Enterprises.
At the same time we will recognise and separately fund the desirable elements of their non-commercial services through explicit and enforceable Community Service Obligations contracts.
This will give protection and a surety of service to disadvantaged clients in a way which does not exist at present.
Fifth, it is intended to continue to reduce net Budget Sector debt and contingent liabilities by undertaking privatisation where appropriate and applying the proceeds of sale to reduce debt.
Only this way can we reduce the Budget Sector's interest bill which will exceed $1.9 billion in 1992-93 .. .. over 12 per cent of total current outlays.
Our approach to privatisation is not budget driven as it is in some States.
Page 5702
Rather, it is based on achieving improved economic efficiencies, encouraging competition, reducing the State's financial exposure and focusing our efforts on the core role of Government.
The privatisation of the State Bank is provisionally planned for the second half of 1993-94.
However, prior to a commitment to this course of action a full commercial assessment of the Bank, its financial position and the approach to sale will be undertaken.
Containing financial debt is not sufficient in itself.
It is also necessary to contain the growth of other liabilities, particularly public service superannuation.
To this end, we recently announced the closure of the State Authorities Superannuation Scheme.
This was forced on us by the Commonwealth's new superannuation legislation which makes it compulsory for employers to provide a universal superannuation scheme for all employees.
If we had extended SASS to cover all State employees, the additional cost to the State would have been unbearable and the only alternative would have been sweeping job cuts across the public sector.
Instead, we decided to comply with the Commonwealth legislation and meet its requirements fully .. .. no more no less.
At the same time we have preserved existing defined retirement benefits for existing members of SASS and previous schemes.
The net result is that those public servants in the existing schemes will be no worse off.
The new scheme, the First State Super Scheme which will cover all employees not already in Government schemes, will be a fully funded accumulation scheme so as to avoid adding further to the State's huge superannuation liability.
Had no changes been made, the Commonwealth's action would have increased this liability by an additional $2.4 billion by the year 2002.
Complementary to the specific Budget strategies, we are also committed to more fundamental reform of intergovernmental financial relations.
We continue to be committed to addressing the imbalance between the tax capacity and expenditure responsibilities of the States and the Commonwealth.
My Government supports the proposal of all States for a national personal income tax sharing scheme as an alternative to the continued "beggar status" we currently suffer with the Commonwealth.
In the meantime, until this fundamental reform can be addressed, we will pursue second best reform of the existing system of intergovernmental grants.
Page 5703
This includes a longer term commitment by the Commonwealth to the level and method of paying general revenue funds, and a switch from tied to untied financial assistance.
As already mentioned, we are also committed to reform of the current system of fiscal equalisation to address the inordinate financial burden borne by New South Wales and Victoria.
There is an overall economic cost and injustice inflicted on the nation by the current system of cross-subsidising less populated States and Territories.
1992-93 Budget Result
The projected Budget result for 1992-93 is a deficit of $1,225 million, responsibly lower in a recession than the deficit in 1991-92.
This consists of a current surplus of $1,067 million and a capital deficit of $2,292 million.
The overall deficit is 0.9 per cent of Gross State Product.
This compares with a deficit of 1.1 per cent in 1986-87 the last time the economy was in recession, albeit a much milder one than at present.
After account is taken of the sale of the GIO the Budget result is a surplus of $465 million.
However, in order to avoid distorting the Budget result this is shown as an extraordinary item.
The Budget is based on a three year rolling forward strategy so the 1992-93 result should be seen in the context of the following two years.
The Budget deficit is projected to decline significantly in each of those years to 1994-95 reaching $782 million by 1994-95.
Budget Sector net debt is projected to decrease by $100 million in real terms by June 1995, relative to June 1992, despite an additional $945 million funding for the Third Party Common Law scheme, which will substantially meet all outstanding claims. Excluding this factor, Budget Sector net debt will decline by over $900 million in real terms over this period.
Beyond 1994-95, the Budget deficit will be at a level that will sustain a real decline in debt.
This will be a remarkable outcome but will only be possible if we maintain strict financial discipline.
Current Outlays
Current outlays are projected to increase by only 2.0 per cent in 1992-93 and decline by 1.8 per cent per annum in real terms over the three years to 1994-95.
Despite the overall restraint on current outlays, the Budget contains a number of initiatives to improve service quality in priority areas and to address the social cost of the current recession.
Page 5704
Some of these initiatives are funded by additional Budget support but many reflect the reallocation of priorities and resources to meet emerging needs.
I now turn to the key Budget initiatives on the outlays side.
Health
Health current payments will increase 0.9 per cent in real terms in 1992-93 while capital payments will increase by a significant 17.6 per cent in real terms.
There have been two consistent themes in the health area in recent years which will be continued in 1992-93.
First, it is essential to continue to reallocate resources from areas of static and declining needs, such as the older and more established Sydney suburbs, to areas of growing needs, including the West, South-West and North Coast.
Second, it is important that we achieve high and improving quality of services but in more efficient and effective ways.
Everyone is familiar with the trends of a growing population, ageing of the population, technological change and the shift out of private insurance that have placed increased pressures on our public hospital system.
Offsetting these trends is a reduced length of stay and a much greater use of day only facilities.
Overall, these trends do not indicate the need for more hospital beds.
Indeed, the clear evidence from the National Health review and other studies is that Australia has an over-supply of hospital beds.
It is not an issue of beds .. .. it is about providing hospital services.
What is required is a more balanced use of existing public and private hospital facilities so that admission delays can be minimised.
This will also require more effective use of health facilities, better quality and better located hospitals.
Services can also be significantly improved through better management of the linkage at all levels of care, from acute hospital care through to community nursing and support.
This is precisely the thrust of the Government's health strategy.
In order to assist in addressing the transitional costs in implementing the health reform strategy, the Budget provides a special additional funding of $20 million in 1992-93.
In addition, the health budget is being increased by over $30 million to offset the department's fall-off in revenue as patients opt out of private health insurance.
It is regrettable that the Federal Government continues to encourage patients to abandon private health insurance as this increases the burden on the State taxpayer adding significant pressure to the public hospital system.
Page 5705
Employment and Training
In 1992-93, Employment and Training Programs will have an allocation of $47 million which will be directed at providing the opportunity for longer term unemployed to upgrade their skills and, hence, enhance the opportunity for employment.
It is particularly important that school leavers are provided with the opportunity to enter the work force.
The First Chance Program, introduced last December, is aimed at providing school leavers with training that assists their employment prospects.
The scheme will be continued in 1992-93 to the extent of $5 million in funding and will be reviewed at the end of this period.
New South Wales will continue to co-operate with the Commonwealth Government on the implementation of the Australian National Training Authority which will co-ordinate at a national level the provision of vocational educational training services.
Community Services
Family Support Package
A major initiative of the Budget is a $10 million Family Support Package to assist people and families particularly hard hit by the recession.
The package includes:
family support initiatives;
rental and mortgage relief;
financial counselling and training of financial counsellors;
rural counselling services; and
enhancements of the Community Services Grants Program to continue last year's initiative.
The package is aimed at helping people through what we hope is the last year of this disastrous national recession. It will be co-ordinated by the Department of Community Services, but will involve several other Departments and major non-government and charity organisations which have provided valuable guidance in developing this package.
Rural Welfare Assistance
The rural sector has been hit hard by the recession, depressed markets and drought.
In such difficult circumstances, the Government is committed to assisting the rural community.
In 1992-93, $5 million will be provided for drought relief in order to help meet the cost of transport subsidies for the movement of livestock, fodder and water.
Page 5706
This will bring the total cost of such relief since the drought started early last year to $23 million.
An additional $5 million has been made available as the State's contribution towards the cost of providing assistance under Part "B" of the Rural Adjustment Scheme to primary producers affected by the drought and or rural crisis.
Total payments under the Rural Adjustment Scheme are expected to be $50 million.
The Commonwealth is also proposing to amend the existing Scheme which will involve a revised funding basis between the Commonwealth and the States.
Other significant initiatives included in the 1992-93 Budget include:
the Legal Aid Commission has been allocated an additional $1.8 million to meet the increased demand as Courts address the backlog of cases;
funding of $1.6 million for the Casino Control Authority to ensure the integrity of future casino operations in this State; and
a $500,000 grant for the establishment of a Film/TV Production Investment Fund for strategic production investment in the local film industry which, because of Sydney's climatic advantages, has enormous job potential.
Capital Outlays
As I mentioned earlier, Budget Sector capital outlays will receive a once-off boost as a means of stimulating the economy and boosting employment.
Let me emphasise, the jobs created will be real jobs.
We are not inventing short-term positions which take people off the dole and put them back on three or six months later.
These jobs will boost proper training, apprenticeships and hopefully secure employment in the future.
As the economy improves, the Budget Sector's capital program will be capped in real terms so that the deficit can be reduced further.
Nevertheless, capital spending overall will remain high since Non Budget Sector capital works are expected to grow strongly after 1992-93, especially in water and sewerage and commercial rail services.
In addition to providing jobs, these capital projects will provide badly needed services to the community.
Roads
Expenditure on roads construction and maintenance throughout New South Wales, the largest spending area under the State's capital program, will amount to a record $1,499 million this year, an increase of more than $285 million or nearly 21 per cent in real terms.
Page 5707
This will fund a large number of road improvements and maintenance projects spread across the State. It includes major works to eliminate some of our worst traffic _black spots' at Rydalmere and Smithfield, and the continued upgrading of Sydney's ring-road system. Funding allocations for the extended 3x3 Roads Program will include $8.8 million for the Bangalow Road by-pass on the Pacific Highway, $4.7 million for continuation of work on the Newcastle by-pass, and $11 million for upgrading the Princes Highway. An allocation of $14 million is also being provided within the total program to enhance the Great Western Highway between Lithgow and Bathurst.
Public Transport
Public transport has been allocated capital funding of $785 million in 1992-93, also a record sum, roundly $215 million extra on last year, a real increase of 35 per cent.
This growth is centred on rail transport and is aimed at continuing improvements in safety and reliability in CityRail and CountryLink and the efficiency of commercial rail freight services.
Hospitals
Public hospitals and other health services will receive $322 million in 1992-93 for capital projects, an increase of $54 million on last year or 17.5 per cent in real terms.
Major new projects include a new hospital at Albury, the Sydney Hospital and Sydney Eye Hospital redevelopment, and Bateman's Bay and Moruya hospitals upgrading.
Sport
Construction of the new athletics stadium and aquatic centre at Homebush Bay will cost $85 million in 1992-93 compared with expenditure of $28 million last year.
These much needed major sporting facilities, which have an end-cost of $300 million and will be completed by 1994, are the central focus of Sydney's bid to host the Olympic Games in the year 2000.
Water Board
Water and sewerage services have been allocated $724 million this year, an increase of $33 million or 2.5 per cent in real terms.
This expenditure will continue State-wide improvements in environmental protection, water quality and system reliability
Revenues
Turning now to revenues.
Following yet another disappointing Premiers' Conference earlier this year, the New South Wales Government was forced to increase a range of taxes.
These measures will raise nearly $240 million for this year's Budget.
The measures we selected will have a minimal impact on business so that the costs of employment are not increased, and, hence, jobs are not jeopardised.
Page 5708
Overall, the revenue position in 1992-93 and the forward years remains very subdued, despite the previously announced tax increases.
In this Budget, total revenues this year will total $17.7 billion, up $940 million on last year.
As already mentioned, the one major area of growth in revenue has been contributions from the Non Budget Sector.
This growth reflects the increased productivity of Government Trading Enterprises which have been able to reduce costs and increase profits.
The major contributor to Government Trading Enterprises payments is Pacific Power.
Pacific Power's total unit costs and debt levels have fallen whilst at the same time dividends paid to the Government have been steadily rising. Pacific Power paid a dividend of $305 million, in respect of its financial results for the year ended June 1991.
From 1 July 1992, Pacific Power entered the Government's notional tax regime and began paying the equivalent of Commonwealth income tax to the State Government.
Dividend payments in respect of trading performance for the year ended June 1992 will be $256 million with tax equivalent payments of $220 million.
All of this has been achieved with falling real prices, improved staff productivity and achievement of world class performance of our power stations.
In essence, Pacific Power has been internally restructured and placed on a full commercial footing to enable it to compete as electricity markets within eastern and southern Australia are developed on competitive lines.
This gives the opportunity for improving the competitiveness of electricity production and distribution in New South Wales to the benefit of taxpayers, industry, and consumers more generally.
Another area of focus for the New South Wales Government is the promotion of Sydney as an international financial centre.
We are currently examining ways of furthering this goal.
In order to boost employment in the finance sector, we are examining tax concessions for offshore transactions by approved Offshore Banking Units as well as tax concessions for treasury products.
An announcement will be made on these concessions at the Asia Pacific Business and Investment Congress to be held in Sydney next month.
Land tax has been an issue to which the Government has devoted careful consideration.
Last year a White Paper was completed and issued.
I am pleased to announce that most of the recommendations contained in the White Paper will be implemented for the 1993 Land Tax year.
Page 5709
The most significant reform is the abolition of the equalisation factor system introduced by the Labor Government.
From 1993, all taxable properties will be revalued each year, and there will be a reduction in the time lag between the date of valuations and the tax year, from 18 months to six months.
As a result, landowners will be able to object against unrealistic valuations each and every year.
The reforms together with the slump in the property market mean that there will be an average 30 per cent reduction in land tax in 1993.
This will mean a fall in revenue from $759 million in the 1992 land tax year to $528 million in 1993.
In many suburbs where land taxpayers have suffered the brunt of excessive values, falls will be even higher ranging between 30 per cent and 60 per cent.
In addition, more than 3,000 small taxpayers will cease to be liable for tax because the value of their landholdings would fall below the $160,000 threshold at which tax becomes payable.
While we cannot afford tax concessions in this Budget, when our revenues significantly improve the Government will undertake a staged expansion of land tax concessions to other forms of low income rental accommodation, besides boarding homes.
Of course, it would be desirable to abolish land tax on all rental dwellings so that they are put on par with owner occupied housing.
However, this is not financially possible as long as we have such a narrow tax base.
5. CONCLUSION
This Budget will achieve two things - a boost to jobs by a temporary expansion to the capital program and a containment of the deficit and debt by bearing down on current spending, particularly in non essential areas.
The New South Wales Government's financial strategy has been proven to be the right one for this State.
The zig-zag financial adventures of other States have led to troubled, demoralised economies.
Our strategy is the only way of reducing debt, maintaining the confidence of the people, businesses, investors and the independent credit rating agencies who have given New South Wales its triple A status for our financial management.
Our policies are right for the long term financial and economic security of the people of New South Wales.
It requires an on-going commitment to financial integrity, public accountability and discipline; not short-sighted and politically motivated spending sprees which provide no lasting improvement.
Page 5710
The short term focus of Governments and businesses is one reason this country is in trouble.
Sticking to our long range goals will provide the only permanent solution to this nation's problems.
The credibility of Governments will be increasingly judged by lasting achievements, not empty promises or quick fixes.
It is the only way of creating real jobs for the people of New South Wales and ensuring a secure future for the next generation.
As I said at the outset, we have three priorities in this Budget:
to help revive the New South Wales economy with a one time boost to necessary capital works;
to bear down on State debt and superannuation liabilities so as not to get sucked into the economic quagmire of our southern and western neighbours; and finally
to make the New South Wales public sector a model of excellence which truly serves the public.
Mr Speaker,
You do not have to be an economic or financial expert to understand these goals.
They are simply commonsense, if we want to get this nation back on its feet and help those most in need, the unemployed.
For unless the largest State shows the lead, the rest of the nation may falter.
I thank the Minister for Finance for his assistance and the officers of Treasury for their dedication and professional approach over the past few weeks. I commend this Budget to the House as well as the cognate bills, the Business Franchise Licences (Petroleum Products) Amendment Bill 1992, the Motor Vehicles Taxation (Amendment) Bill 1992 and the Road Improvement (Special Funding) Amendment Bill 1992 which involve the indexing of tax rates for the movement in the consumer price index and which are an integral part of this year's Budget.
Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Whelan.
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Copies of the Budget Speech, Budget Information, Budget Estimates, State Capital Projects, Appropriation Bill and Government Finance Statistics Estimates tabled and ordered to be printed.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Private Members' Statements: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders
Motion, by leave, by Mr West agreed to:
Page 5711
That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would preclude the consideration of Government Business Orders of the Day Nos 12, 9 and 11 before proceeding to take Private Members' Statements.
TOTALIZATOR LEGISLATION (AMENDMENT) BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 3rd September.
Mr FACE (Charlestown) [5.12]: I lead for the Opposition in this debate and inform the House that the Opposition supports the proposed legislation and does not propose to move amendments to it. During the recent special sitting of the Parliament the State Revenue Legislation (Amendment) Act was enacted by the Government for the alleged purpose of generating additional revenue to compensate for the reduction in the State's share of Commonwealth taxation. Included among the measures contained in the Act was a provision to increase the rate of commission from win, place and quinella totalisators from 14 per cent to 15 per cent. Though the initiative has generated significant additional revenue for the State, there has been a downturn in the level of investments through on-course and off-course totalisators, with the result that there has been a negative effect on the finances of the racing industry. Following expressions of concern by the Opposition and industry representatives over the possible impact on the viability of the industry, the Premier expressed the view that so long as government revenue could be maintained, he would be receptive to the introduction of alternative proposals for the generation of that revenue.
The Government's proposals are outlined in the bill. I say simply that on the weekend Queensland newspapers expressed some speculation that the Minister might take on board. It was suggested that Victoria, which may have a change of government, may move to reduce to 14 per cent the rate of commission deducted from investments. I do not know whether there is any truth in the suggestion, but obviously the Minister will be aware of it. The Minister will be aware also of the damage done to the industry in the period since the rate of commission was increased. The State could have done without that. When the rate of commission was 14 per cent, this State was doing about 6 per cent per head of population better than other States in terms of revenue from the racing industry. If one thing has been learned from this exercise, it is that the role of the Treasury was appalling. There should have been consultation. At the time the legislation to increase the commission was introduced I said that if advice had been sought from departmental officers, for whom I have the greatest admiration, the present bill may not have been necessary. Racing is a large industry and could well have done without the imposition of the increase in the percentage of commission. Had there been proper consultation, I am sure the Minister would not have proceeded down that track. However, sometimes a little bit of good can be gained from something that is bad.
A range of things can be done to assist the industry in the long term. In the future I hope that the Minister and I can confer constructively with the industry. Unquestionably the industry has problems that must be examined. The Minister's department might consider taxation incentives for the industry. It would be a worthwhile exercise to determine whether the evidence of what occurred in various States in America - where a reduction in the percentage of commission from on-course totalisators resulted in a larger turnover - could bring increased revenue to New South Wales and at the same time stabilise some of the smaller racing clubs. One of the most important tasks for the racing industry is to attract more people to attend race meetings. A number of
Page 5712
things can be done. I am sure that the starting price bookmakers profited from the increase in totalisator commission. I hope they will not be reinvigorated by this measure. Punters are a group in the community who enjoy betting on various forms of racing. They are not likely to buy lottery tickets or play poker machines as an alternative to betting on race meetings. For those who regularly engage in betting it is a way of life. If they do not get value for their money, they will not bet on-course. That encourages starting price betting, with all its sinister overtones.
I commend the new Chairman of the Australian Jockey Club, Bob Charley. Recently he has made a number of comments about the possible rationalisation of the industry. I hope the Government will tackle that task. The Opposition, in a spirit of co-operation, will give whatever assistance it can. Everyone realises that eventually rationalisation must occur. The only matter of concern to me is that any proposed rationalisation should not occur until the people involved - owners, trainers and all involved in the industry - become accustomed to the idea and understand what they must acclimatise to. Perhaps it will be necessary for training facilities to be provided at racecourses that formerly held a small number of meetings each year. The increase in the rate of commission to be deducted should never have occurred. However, one learns from mistakes. To the Government's credit, it has responded to the criticism that was made. Therefore, the Opposition supports the bill.
Mr SCHIPP (Wagga Wagga - Minister for Sport, Recreation and Racing) [5.17], in reply: I thank the honourable member for Charlestown, who led for the Opposition, for his support of the legislation and for his constructive contribution. The Government acknowledges that a problem was created by the increase in the rate of commission payable on win, place and quinella totalisators. This legislation has been introduced to rectify the problem caused by that change in the tax regime. The proposals contained in the bill have been discussed with the industry. That led to this legislative package which, as the honourable member said, is not the end of these issues. There must be ongoing consultation and discussion with the industry. I accept the honourable member's offer to be involved in that process, and will welcome his opinion on what must be done to put the industry on a firmer footing in the longer term. That is an obligation I have as the relatively new Minister for Sport, Recreation and Racing. I thank the Opposition for its support.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.
LOTTO (AMENDMENT) BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 30th June.
Mr FACE (Charlestown) [5.20]: I lead for the Opposition, which will not oppose any of the measures contained in the bill. My contribution to the debate would have been shorter were it not for an issue that has emerged since last Wednesday concerning my integrity. I am not happy about it. I will come to that matter in a moment. My comments on it will be short and sweet, but I believe that after serving this place for 20 years I have a right to say what I believe is happening to me, and I hope the Minister will respond accordingly and attempt to have the matter cleared up. The object of this bill is to amend the Lotto Act 1979 to provide for further controls. It will enable
Page 5713
the Minister to withdraw the Minister's approval of an agent of a licensee. That will go a long way to clearing up an undesirable situation. Another object of the bill is to prohibit credit betting. I congratulate the Minister on her review of this matter. I believe the media today carried a report about a person's betting causing alarm to the person's family. I believe the Minister and I are of like mind in supporting organisations such as Gamblers Anonymous and the posting of signs at betting venues warning against the dangers of gambling, because it is invariably the families that lose out when gambling becomes a problem.
I hope the Minister will give an assurance that the provisions relating to the prohibition of credit betting will not extend to a person who merely wishes to obtain an advance or to cash a cheque. I raised a similar concern when the House was debating the registered clubs legislation. The spirit of the bill the House is debating is to prohibit a person from obtaining a cash advance or cashing a cheque in order to engage in gambling. I pay tribute to the Minister for that provision. The bill also will enable regulations to be made providing for the disposal of money in a licensee's prize fund when the licence is no longer in force. It will provide for the confidentiality of information obtained in connection with functions under the Act. In fact, the purpose of the bill is to clear up many of the loose ends. In one respect it does this by providing a secure framework for all aspects of keno.
I have been contacted by the Registered Clubs Association and by Club Keno Holdings. Those organisations agree with the proposed amendments to supplement the present controls of the game. While on the subject of keno I should like to put the record straight. The Minister has referred to the success of keno. There are in the Registered Clubs Association some people who believe there has been criticism by the Labor Party and by me about the introduction of keno. It seems to me that anyone who says something that is not wildly enthusiastic about keno, such as that it is the best possible game and the answer to all the problem of the club industry, is taken to be unsupportive of the game. Let me briefly state the situation so far as the Labor Party is concerned. The late Ken Booth, who was at one time the Minister who presided over issues such as the possible introduction of keno, had some reservations about it. I have read some of the reports of his comments, and I believe they expressed concerns, not criticisms. The reports were based on advice given to Mr Booth. Further down the track, after the introduction of keno, many of the concerns he expressed proved to be well founded. That does not mean that keno is a flop. In the early days keno was welcomed as being the salvation of small clubs.
I do not propose to become embroiled in a rumpus tonight about the rights and wrongs of keno, except to say that it certainly has not been the salvation of small clubs - unless I am very much mistaken. Prior to the 1988 election the coalition parties were committed to the introduction of keno and the Labor Party supported that commitment. When the coalition parties came to office, Labor continued that support through its spokesman, the Hon. Michael Cleary. I am sad to say that at present we appear to be going through an era of McCarthyism in this State. We have reached the stage that every time I make an observation about the game of keno I am pilloried. Though keno was introduced to this State with the support of the Opposition, I believe there is a great difference of opinion in the community as to how successful it has been, the impact it has had on clubs, and the returns the clubs receive compared with those received by the manufacturer or the holding company. Surely the Minister and her departmental officers, and those involved with the Registered Clubs Association, are not suggesting that my rights and privileges as a member of Parliament are to be eroded.
Page 5714
I have never at any time said anything untoward about keno, nor do I hope for its destruction, as suggested by one of the Minister's senior officers. While I am on the subject of privileges, are members of Parliament who place questions on notice to have their privileges eroded, to be questioned as to their motives, or sent to the Independent Commission Against Corruption to justify their actions? If that is so, it is an attack on the very fabric of the parliamentary system. The questions raised about my attitude to keno are a form of recrimination and character assassination against me. They attack my integrity. I want to state quite plainly that I and the Labor Opposition have every right to be concerned when a person working for a keno franchise was involved in the selection of the manufacturer and is now working for Club Keno Holdings. The Opposition said that was a case of applying double standards, and I believe we had the right to say that. I see this senior officer's criticisms and pillorying of me as a gross abuse of my parliamentary privilege. I repeat: do we have a situation in this State where I cannot ask questions on notice or without notice in this House? Surely not. I have nothing against the person concerned. Quite frankly, I do not know that person. To put the record straight, I met her for the first time last Sunday night. Not one of the four people who advises and assists me from time to time has raised the matter of that person's appointment. The expressions of concern came from within the industry.
The second issue that seems to be at the root of the animosity against me and Mr Phil Bennett results from a process of McCarthyism. An anonymous letter was sent not to me but to the Leader of the Opposition and, I suspect, to others. It resulted in a referral to the Independent Commission Against Corruption and to my being questioned. The referral certainly did not come from me. It certainly did not come from anyone on my committee, so far as I know. If the department is involved in some sort of war, I will not be the scapegoat for someone's bitter and twisted mind and I will not have my integrity impugned. What I am doing here today is something I have never done in the 20 years I have been in this Parliament. No doubt some of the criticism is levelled against the Labor Party, which has said that should it win office it would do certain things with the Chief Secretary's Department. One can expect that those affected by Labor's policy will seek to denigrate the policy. Have we reached the stage in this Parliament that an Opposition is unable to make policy statements about what it would do were it in office? I believe that is wrong and therein lies part of the problem.
An attack on the Labor Party and on me is audacious. The Chief Secretary's Department falls within my shadow responsibilities. Since last Thursday I have received several telephone calls from people I admire, from those involved in the club and hotel industries. I have been told that I will come under investigation at the behest of the Secretary of the Chief Secretary's Department, Mr Bob McGregor, because of my relationship with someone who undertook voluntary work in my office. There has been a war going on and, quite obviously, I knew nothing about it. I know the issue is keno. Am I to be summoned before some tribunal to prove that if this person was paid to work for me and has committed some crime then so have I? The statement that they will fit us both is ludicrous, to say the least. Apparently there is a suggestion that he worked for me and received payment in his own right and has committed a crime as a result of that. If he has worked for the Labor Party and been paid for that under his company name, he is said to be guilty of some other offence. I am putting it on the public record that Mr Phil Bennett, against whom these claims are made, has never received any payment from me, from the Labor Party, the Opposition or the Legislature. He has done nothing more and nothing less than four other people have done, that is, from time to time given me some assistance in regard to technical matters because I have no such resources. I agree that the Labor Party when it was in office did not do the right thing in providing those resources to the then Opposition.
Page 5715
Are members of the Opposition not allowed to have people assisting them? That has continued since time immemorial. I wish there were a parliamentary privileges committee of this House. I have not done anything wrong. I will be taking this matter to the Independent Commission Against Corruption for that to be established. Mr Bennett has not done anything wrong in my company. He has merely provided me with technical advice on the present bill and drafted preliminary notes for the Parliamentary Counsel. This is guilt by association and perhaps an attempt to attack Mr Bennett, through me, because of ongoing fights. I must say, not in his defence but as a statement, that he has never said anything untoward to me about any person at the Chief Secretary's Department. The people who brought this matter to my notice are greatly disturbed by these attacks on my integrity. I have done nothing wrong and I deprecate this Mccarthyism attack on my parliamentary privileges. For 20 years I have carried out my duties with integrity. The matter should finish there but, unfortunately, it will not. This measure tidies up many loose ends and refers to key employees, as in the casino legislation. However, perhaps in future legislation we should consider whether we are going too far. But that is a matter to be debated on another occasion. I believe this is a step in the right direction. I am not an emotional person but my family and I have suffered during the past week. These wars taking place within the industry are affecting me personally, though I have not done anything wrong. I will refer this matter to the ICAC of my own volition so that the matter may be cleared up. I thank the House for its tolerance and leniency.
Mrs COHEN (Badgerys Creek - Chief Secretary, and Minister for Administrative Services) [5.32], in reply: The honourable member for Charlestown spoke first on the subject of credit betting. I believe this measure is warranted and I thank the honourable member for his support. I assure him that the amendments to the Act will not prevent people cashing cheques. Just as the Registered Clubs (Amendment) Act 1990 and Liquor Act (Amendment) 1990 also prohibit credit betting, these amendments will achieve a similar result. Their purpose is clearly understood. The Crown Solicitor provided advice that the amendment to keno gaming would not prevent the cashing of cheques; nor will the measure stop the normal provision of creditor services such as food and accommodation. Credit can be applied to services but certainly not to credit betting. The matters about which the honourable member spoke are before the Independent Commission Against Corruption. Obviously we both feel equally impugned and I would rather leave the matter for investigation by the ICAC. My department and I probably share the same feelings as the honourable member for Charlestown. I thank the honourable member for his support of these amendments, which are important to the security of gaming in this State.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.
STATUTE LAW (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL (No. 2)
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 3rd September.
Mr WHELAN (Ashfield) [5.34]: As honourable members are aware, the Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill (No. 2) follows a series of bills introduced by the former Government to tidy up existing legislation and repeal various bills. A perusal of the present bill reveals that the explanatory notes on various amendments are
Page 5716
of great assistance. That is not to say that the bill is not of great importance. However, the explanatory notes succinctly outline where the various Acts of Parliament are to be amended. They also provide that certain outdated Acts of Parliament are to be repealed. The Opposition raises no objection to these minor amendments. However, with a bill of almost 100 pages dealing with what is described as minor amendments, one fears that something may slip through the net. Honourable members of the Opposition endeavour to ensure that does not occur, however, if it does, the bill may be brought back and dealt with.
Mr NAGLE (Auburn) [5.35]: I refer to page 10 of the bill. I am pleased that the jurisdiction of the District Court is to be raised from $100,000 to $250,000. That will ease pressure on the Supreme Court by allowing matters to be heard in the District Court. This will take effect from 1st July, 1993 - and not before time. Unfortunately, some defendants use cases which plaintiffs' legal representatives believe are worth more than $100,000 as a delaying tactic by forcing the matter into the Supreme Court and not agreeing to extended jurisdiction of the District Court. As a result of this bill, many cases involving amounts of more than $100,000 but less than $250,000 will remain in the District Court. This will save plaintiffs great expense, time and effort. Unfortunately, this legislation will not come into effect for another nine months.
Mr WEST (Orange - Minister for Conservation and Land Management, and Minister for Energy) [5.36], in reply: I thank members of the Opposition for their support of this measure. As has been pointed out by the honourable member for Ashfield, extensive explanatory notes have been provided. I stated during my second reading speech that honourable members with concerns should consult officers from the relevant departments. They have not availed themselves of that opportunity, so clearly the measure has the support of honourable members. The honourable member for Ashfield states that something may slip through the net. It is in the interests of government to ensure that that does not occur with legislation dealing with machinery amendments. The failure of that procedure clearly impacts not only on the government of today but governments in the future. It is in the interests of all honourable members to ensure that this legislation maintains its integrity for a considerable number of years.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.
PRIVATE MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
______
LIDCOMBE HOSPITAL CLOSURE
Mr NAGLE (Auburn) [5.38]: I bring to the attention of the House an advertisement that appeared in the Review Pictorial, which circulates in my electorate, dated Wednesday, 9th September, 1992. On 6th September a protest meeting was held at Coleman Park concerning the Lidcombe Hospital. The advertisement was purported to be placed by Ken Brown, Chief Executive Officer, South Western Sydney Area Health Service and states:
There has been recent speculation about the future of Lidcombe Hospital and this is causing unnecessary worry and concern to staff, local residents, patients and their families.
Page 5717
It further states there has been a merger of Bankstown and Lidcombe hospitals as one entity permitting positive changes to be made to improve patient care, and that no decision has been made by the State Government to "Close the Lidcombe campus of the Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital". It is not a campus - nor will it be a campus; it is a hospital. The advertisement continues:
The Hon. R. Phillips, Minister for Health, has indicated a community wide discussion document would be issued on options which could be implemented to have a sensible rearrangement of existing hospitals -
If Concord Repatriation Hospital comes on stream. The advertisement continues:
No decisions would be made by the State Government until the public has the opportunity to comment upon those options.
That is fine for Mr Ken Brown but it is not the Minister saying this because we know what happened in the area in regard to St Joseph's Hospital. I received a telephone call in Brisbane informing me that the matter had been taken over completely and St Joseph's Hospital acute care section was closed. The advertisement states that the Minister for Health was doing this to improve hospital services in the Bankstown-Lidcombe area. Lidcombe Hospital currently has cardiac and stroke rehabilitation services, physiotherapist, speech therapist and occupational therapist, head injuries unit for young people, a respite care service for up to 50 patients - part of which has already been closed - a nuclear medicine unit, and it trains 73 Sydney University medical students.
Last year the hospital suffered losses of the following personnel: the head neurologist, senior staff surgeon, a nuclear physician, three intensive care specialists, several anaesthetists, a senior neuropsychologist, a community physician and an amputee rehabilitation physician. When there are no staff and no resources left the Government will say the hospital is no longer needed. Closure of this hospital will cause a great deal of concern to the 75 people, for example, who need renal dialysis services. They cannot be placed at Concord, therefore they have an uncertain future. The closure of the hospital would result in the 2,229 people on waiting lists waiting longer. The Government at present is tending to create an atmosphere of support for the Olympic Games to be held in Sydney. The Olympic Games would create employment opportunities but should not cause health care destruction in my electorate of the western area of Sydney. The Minister for State Development, and Minister for Arts - a former Minister for Health - once said to me that a hospital would not close so long as he was Minister for Health. He is quite right, it did not close; but as soon as he ceased to be Minister for Health and became the Attorney General the hospital closed. I want the present Minister for Health to tell this Chamber that the Government will no longer close services at Lidcombe Hospital, that it will increase funding and services and reinstate the services it has already closed. In 1990 the Government cut $2 million from the hospital's budget.
I want the Government to give another $2 million - plus $2 million more - in 1992, $4 million in 1993, and $5 million in 1994 for the retention of Lidcombe Hospital. I want the Minister to state that anything that eventuates as a result of changes to Concord Repatriation Hospital will not affect Lidcombe Hospital. Until such time as the Minister gives those guarantees I will oppose the Olympic Games in my electorate. Once a guarantee is given the Government will have my support for the games. Also, I should like the Minister to speak to a delegation from the Auburn Municipal Council and the Save Lidcombe Hospital Group and the Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital Action Group. These are groups which are very concerned about the future. The advertisement should
Page 5718
have been placed by the Minister for Health and should have been a statement of government policy, not an advertisement from an employee. The people in the electorates of Auburn, Bankstown, Granville, Parramatta and Lakemba want to know the truth. This hospital caters also for people in Hornsby, Sutherland and other areas, including that of the honourable member for North Shore - [Time expired.]
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs) [5.43]: In response to the honourable member for Auburn I will ensure his comments are passed on, in particular to the Minister for Health. I particularly note his threat regarding the Olympic Games, bearing in mind that the Homebush Bay redevelopment is in his electorate. I hope the Leader of the Opposition is aware of this breakaway faction against the stated party support for the Olympic Games. That indeed indicates the Opposition has broken a trust and its word again. I am quite sure the people of Sydney are entitled to appreciate this.
RESIDENTIAL TENANCY TRIBUNAL AND Mr GEMES
Mr SMILES (North Shore) [5.44]: I wish to raise a number of issues associated with the Residential Tenancies Tribunal. I am grateful the Attorney General attends this House representing the Hon. Robert Webster in another place. While I am aware the Residential Tenancies Tribunal has an independent adjudicative function - and in that status has some distance from the Department of Housing, which it normally comes under - nevertheless I believe this tribunal may be in need of review. These concerns follow detailed discussions with a constituent, Mr Gemes. It is not for me to canvass his case before the tribunal but it is my concern to canvass or outline issues, both specific and general, which would have arisen during the course of his dealings with the tribunal. These issues deserve serious consideration. The specific issues include the following: the tribunal recently accepted a personal cheque in the sum of $5,000 from a tenant known to be a bankrupt; that cheque bounced and as a result Mr Gemes is forced to seek court action beyond the tribunal in an effort to recover his money.
Given that 90 per cent of the cheques received by the tribunal are personal, and given the nature of the tribunal, with landlord and tenant often in direct conflict, it is my view that the department and the Minister should consider an approach similar to that of the Office of State Revenue with regard to personal cheques. Had Mr Gemes' cheque been accepted, met the bank requirements and been passed, he would have had to wait at least three weeks because of administrative processes before such a relatively large amount of money was available for his use. The tribunal has no ability to enforce payment of moneys ordered payable to a tenant or a landlord, and the tenant or landlord must seek redress before a magistrate - a further legal action entailing both cost and distress to either party. In the case of Mr Gemes, the tenant without appropriate receipts or other documentation was able to claim successfully before the tribunal $2,000 or more for work allegedly carried out on the property of Mr Gemes. On the other hand, when Mr Gemes sought recompense for $40-odd for cleaning, again without receipt or documentation, that was not allowed. Finally, when Mr Gemes applied for an adjournment because of illness, he had to pay the costs. On another occasion when the tenant did not bother to attend, there was neither penalty nor costs awarded against the tenant.
I deal now with matters of general concern and general issues arising from the case of Mr Gemes associated with the tribunal. First, the tenant should have paid two weeks before a particular hearing; the tenant did not and the hearing proceeded. One has to ask why a tribunal can continue to hear a matter when one of the parties has already
Page 5719
breached an order. Second, there appear to be difficulties in getting cross-claims where one party is owed money and another party claims it is owed money - a cross-claim for maintenance for instance can be discounted against rent or the like. Third, there is a problem with the tribunal in its acceptance of letters from the Department of Housing tenancy services. In the case of Mr Gemes, because the tribunal ruled the signatory was unknown, that important letter was not accepted. Fourth, the jurisdiction of the tribunal is limited to $5,000. That may have been appropriate in 1987; it is certainly not appropriate now and I believe it to be too inhibiting. Fifth, the knowledge of licence requirements for tradesmen seems to be somewhat deficient. In Mr Gemes' case the tribunal ruled against a claim because someone was not licensed while the Building Services Corporation said that person did not have to be licensed. [Time expired.]
Mr COLLINS (Willoughby - Minister for State Development, and Minister for Arts) [5.49]: I thank the honourable member for North Shore for his compliment. But, for the accuracy of the parliamentary record, I merely represent the Attorney General in another place and I also represent the Minister for Planning, and Minister for Housing in another place. It is in that capacity I shall provide some answer to the honourable member. I have been advised by the Minister in another place that he is aware of the matters raised by the honourable member for North Shore. Without being briefed to go into the specifics of this particular case, I have noted that it has been a particularly troublesome and, at times, acrimonious proceeding that has been brought to the attention of the House by the honourable member. I am further advised that the Residential Tenancies Tribunal has informed the Minister in another place that although it has previously investigated the concerns raised, it will now make fresh contact with the honourable member for North Shore to further discuss this matter and see what other steps can be taken.
FOSTER CARE OF NAOMI SUMNER
Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle) [5.50]: I speak on behalf of my constituent, Mrs P. Sumner of 32 Fowler Street, Hamilton South. Her son and daughter-in-law are the natural parents of Naomi Sumner. The Minister for Community Services gave permission for Naomi Sumner to leave Australia on 27th August to go to New Zealand with her foster parents. This has caused my constituent and her son and daughter-in-law great distress. It will preclude the parents having access to their natural child. The parents fear that the foster parents, who are now living in New Zealand, may be able to claim permanent adoption. They are concerned that their rights may have been overridden and they are not sure of the jurisdiction retained by New South Wales over the foster parents.
From the time her granddaughter was made a State ward in 1984 my constituent has faced difficulties attempting to maintain loving and caring access to her granddaughter. This case reflects the difficulties of several natural parents in my electorate and their attempts either to retain access by visiting rights or perhaps recover access and, in several cases, recover the parenting role of their children who have been given out under foster care. My constituent has advised me that over a period of time her access rights to her granddaughter, as well as the access rights of her son to his daughter, were gradually withdrawn. Initially she had weekly visits; in 1985 those visits were reduced to two-monthly and at that stage the foster parents were attempting an open adoption. My constituent's son, the natural parent, refused an open adoption, wishing to continue his rights of access and rights of a relationship with his natural daughter.
Page 5720
I am concerned at the way in which the final decision was taken. My constituent advises me that the Department of Community Services informed her son and his wife that the foster parents, who are in fact New Zealanders, wish to live there permanently and had requested the permission of the Minister to take Naomi to New Zealand with them. The son was advised by the department that he could appeal against the Minister's decision. He was given the appropriate forms but later found those forms to be useless in putting his claim. On 19th August the son was notified that the Minister had given permission for Naomi to go to New Zealand, although no date of her departure was advised. Subsequently Mrs Sumner ascertained that the date was 1st September. Her son applied for a rescind care motion at Worimi Children's Court, but the application was refused. He was given to understand that he could apply for a rescission motion on the Minister's decision for access, even though he had not applied for it. From that time my constituent and her son, by letters to the Minister and legal redress, attempted to prevent the removal of Naomi to New Zealand. He was told by the Department of Community Services that on 28th August he could have a visit with his daughter. On that date he attended Sydney to apply for legal aid in his attempt to take out an injunction in the Supreme Court against Naomi's move to New Zealand. Legal aid was refused. On his return to Newcastle on 28th August he was advised that his daughter had left Australia the previous evening, despite the fact that he had been given permission by the Department of Community Services for a visit on 28th August. [Time expired.]
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs) [5.55]: I note the statement by the honourable member for Newcastle and shall ensure that the Minister for Community Services, and Assistant Minister for Health is made aware of the member's concerns.
WORLD PEACE DAY
Mr SMALL (Murray) [5.56]: Today is a very special day, World Peace Day, and my wish for the world is that it should always be at peace. In the past Australia has assisted its allies around the world, and has been extremely fortunate that it has never fought a major war on its own shores, although some of those wars have reached its perimeter. Australia, with her allies, has fought in two major world wars, the Vietnam war, the South Korean war and, in the early part of last year, the Gulf war. World Peace Day is a very proud day for Cowra and the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs. Today the Governor will establish a world peace bell at Cowra in recognition of the town's dedication to peace and international understanding. Any person who has ever visited the Japanese war gardens and the memorial at Cowra will understand the significance of the world peace bell having regard to the Japanese prisoners of war interned at Cowra and their outbreak from the camp with subsequent loss of life. Australia and Japan are now at peace and are very much united in trade relations. Many Japanese tourists visit the site at Cowra to commemorate the lost loved ones from their country, as Australians would do if they returned to the shores where they lost loved ones, particularly Anzac Cove.
The Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the honourable member for Lachlan, recognises the significance of the world-class Japanese gardens and the war cemetery at Cowra. The Minister has given this program much support. The war peace bell has been erected at Cowra, within the electorate of the Minister. The erection of this bell is a first - a factor that has been recognised by societies throughout the world. Cowra, a town of significance, was chosen as the site for the erection of this bell. Normally, peace bells are erected in major cities to commemorate World Peace Day. My electorate is not far from the Lachlan electorate. My wife Judy and I visited this area
Page 5721
with the Minister and his wife Jenny. As a result we have great respect for that area. The world has recognised Cowra as a place of resting for those who lost their lives during the war. The erection of this bell is to be commended, and I congratulate the Minister, the honourable member for Lachlan.
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs) [6.1]: I thank the honourable member for Murray for his statement concerning World Peace Day and for his reference to Cowra being the recipient of Australia's first peace bell. The peace bell was struck from the original bell in Japan. I understand that there are only six bells throughout the world, so this is a significant occasion for Australia, for Cowra and for New South Wales. I am delighted that the State Government was able to provide financial support, through a $10,000 grant, to assist with the housing and maintenance of the bell. This has been much appreciated by the local Cowra community and by many Japanese people who have visited Cowra in both an official and a civil capacity. I congratulate Councillor Rod Blume, President of Cowra shire, who is also the Australian President of the World Peace Bell Association. It was mainly through his initiatives that this bell was erected in Cowra. At this moment the Governor, the Hon. Peter Sinclair, is unveiling the bell and conducting the official dedication. The erection of this bell is a recognition of the role New South Wales has played in trying to maintain peace and dignity throughout the world. The township of Cowra - with a population of eight and a half thousand - has as its motto "The Centre of World Friendship". I think this typifies the genuineness of Cowra. Honourable members would be aware that in 1988 the Tokyo Metropolitan Government honoured Cowra by providing 1,988 cherry trees which form a beautiful avenue from the Japanese war cemetery to the historical Japanese gardens.
ILLAWARRA HEALTH SERVICES
Mr SULLIVAN (Wollongong) [6.3]: I was stirred into action by comments made in the Illawarra on WIN television last Thursday by the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Illawarra Area Health Service, Brian Lewis. Basically, his comments were that the Illawarra Area Health Service had not reduced any of its services and that services were being maintained at current levels. He said also that the Illawarra Area Health Service had not received any complaints. Records in my office show that health complaints rank second only to Department of Housing complaints. I have checked with other members representing Illawarra electorates, and some of them have said that the highest number of complaints that they receive relate to health. I will run through a few examples from my electorate. The daughter of a male pensioner living at Windang told me that her father had paid more than $7,000 for hip replacement surgery because he could no longer bear the pain and could not wait for surgery. In December 1991 an 80-year-old resident of Coniston came to see me in December 1991 and told me that the Port Kembla campus of the Illawarra Regional Hospital dental clinic could not give him treatment for his aching teeth until January 1992. Towards the middle of the year he received treatment and was told that delays of 18 months were "normally the case now".
The husband of a woman in her thirties living at Mangerton told me that she had been admitted to the Shellharbour hospital psychiatric unit and, when staff discovered that the family had private health insurance, he was asked to remove her and place her in a private psychiatric clinic in Sydney, as there were none in Wollongong. Staff at that hospital claimed that they needed the bed for an uninsured patient. Initially, the husband refused, but he took his wife home when he was told she was going to be forcibly ejected from the unit. She had to be taken to a psychiatric clinic in Sydney that night. A married man at Berkeley who needed knee surgery was left on the waiting list for more
Page 5722
than 12 months. He told me that the Department of Social Security was questioning the validity of his sickness benefit claim. This man, who was incapacitated and unable to work, had been receiving benefits, but the Department of Social Security was questioning the delay in receiving treatment. He eventually had surgery.
I have been approached by people from the Friends of the Wollongong Natural Birthing Centre, which is located at the Wollongong campus of the Illawarra regional hospital. They have complained to me about staff cutbacks, continual threats of closure or downgrading of that service, and that there has been no information or publicity about this service. They believe the aim is to reduce the usage of that centre, which will facilitate its closure. On conducted tours of the maternity unit the natural birthing centre is never included, and no mention of it is made at ante-natal classes. Recently, a resident of South Wollongong, while in the process of giving birth, was admitted to the maternity unit at Wollongong campus of the Illawarra Regional Hospital. The birthing process slowed, and she was asked to go home, wait there and come back when contractions increased. She came back within three hours and gave birth in a lift on the way to the maternity unit. It should be remembered that this was her first birth. She was subsequently placed in a ward which was being painted, and the fumes from the wet paint affected her.
It is important to note that current services are not meeting the demands of the Illawarra community. It is clear from the comments of the acting chief executive officer that he and the board are not particularly concerned about pursuing this matter. In 1991 and 1992 I have placed questions on notice seeking answers to this simple question: how many times since March 1988 has the Illawarra Area Health Service made representations to the State Government for additional funds? I have received two replies, the first one to the effect that it makes approaches by way of the monthly financial reporting mechanism. In April this year I asked: what does that reveal? And I listed every month from April 1988 to March 1992. This time the Minister's response was to ignore the monthly financial reporting mechanism. I still do not know how many times, if any, the Illawarra Area Health Service has made requests for additional funds during the past four years. It is a damning indictment of the Government and the Minister that such a situation should arise and should be allowed to continue. I wonder about the validity of placing questions on notice when members of Parliament receive such trite answers. [Time expired.]
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs) [6.8]: I note the comments of the honourable member for Wollongong, which will be passed on to the Minister for Health. Suffice to say that in today's Budget Speech, health was one area that received a massive increase in funding. Since 1988 this Government has done more for health than the previous Government did in 12 years. There is no doubt that the problems about which the honourable member has talked arose during the days of the Wran and Unsworth Labor Governments. This State has had to bear a legacy of mismanagement as a result, and that has created difficulties for many people. In recent years the Federal Labor Government has continually cut New South Wales funding by in excess of $250 million each year. Honourable members opposite cannot have it both ways: they allowed the health system to run down, so they cannot request that it be fixed overnight. They had an opportunity to fix the system and they will not make appropriate demands of the Federal Government, which has responsibility for national health funding. I invite the honourable member for Wollongong to give appropriate support to the Government in its endeavours to obtain proper Federal funding for health services in this State. This Government is extremely proud of its budget figures, which will result in a significant and dramatic improvement in the quality of health services in this State.
Page 5723
CHARITABLE DEPOSITS WITH CREDIT UNIONS
Ms MACHIN (Port Macquarie) [6.10]: I draw to the attention of the House - and, in her absence, to the attention of the Chief Secretary, and Minister for Administrative Services through the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs - an issue raised with me by the Hastings Credit Union. This matter has also been raised by the Association of New South Wales Credit Unions. I understand it is with the Minister's department and I hope she is giving it serious consideration. It relates to the capacity, or lack of capacity at the present time, for credit unions to hold funds for charitable organisations. If a charity raises money and wants to put it in a fund or a trust until it can be applied to a project, it cannot, at the present time, under the Act, deposit that money with a credit union; it must place it with a bank. This is a spin-off of the Charitable Fundraising Act, 1991, which went through all stages in December last year, and whose regulations are still being considered. Perhaps there should be an opportunity, if there is merit in this argument - and I think there is - to allow credit unions to hold charitable funds. The relevant measure is section 21(1), which states:
Money received in the course of a fundraising appeal which is not immediately required to be applied to the purposes or objects of the appeal may be invested only in a manner for the time being authorised by the law for the investment of trust funds.
Credit unions are excluded under the present Act. Credit unions, I think most of us would agree, are playing an increasingly important role in the financial life of local communities, as well as in their social activities. The Hastings Credit Union in Port Macquarie covers an area much larger than just the Hastings; it has branches in Wingham, Gloucester, and elsewhere throughout the Hastings - Wauchope, Port Macquarie, Laurieton. It holds something like $60 million in assets on behalf of local members and, although off the top of my head I am not sure how many members it has, the number is considerable. The Hastings Credit Union has generated a lot of community support and has certainly worked very hard at achieving a very good corporate identity.
Credit unions statewide are member-owned co-operatives, as most honourable members would know. They have more than 1.2 million members in New South Wales. Obviously amongst a membership like that a lot of people are involved in charitable fund raising work and it is not unreasonable - given that often the money has been raised locally as a result of a lot of hard work by people at the local level - that these people want to invest their money for the time being with their local credit union. I ask the Chief Secretary to reconsider the proposal put to her by the Association of New South Wales Credit Unions on behalf of all their members and to look at the regulations and see if there is scope to make the necessary changes to allow for an exemption. Strictly speaking, it would have to be an exemption to the present Act to enable credit unions to be a part of the fund raising scheme. I think it is a fair request. More and more credit unions are playing an important role in the financial welfare of their communities. A lot of people choose to have their accounts with credit unions because of the service they offer. Credit unions are big business. I am not talking now about little localised bodies that only hold a few funds; I am talking about very big business. I think this is a reasonable request and I hope the Chief Secretary and her department will be able to accede to this request.
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs) [6.14]: This statement is yet another example of the dedication and expertise of the honourable member for Port Macquarie in representing her electorate, which she does so well. She has drawn attention to what I think most honourable members might well
Page 5724
agree as a matter of principle is an anomaly. There are very narrow guidelines for the investment of charity funds under the trust fund regulations. It would seem a reasonable proposition that the Chief Secretary might give full consideration to acceding to the request of the honourable member for Port Macquarie this afternoon that credit unions be allowed to hold those funds. It is important that we acknowledge that there should be provision for moneys that are raised by local communities to be managed at the local level with the same efficiency and dedication with which they are raised; that there be the opportunity for that money to earn the maximum interest in an appropriate way, with complete security. Speaking on behalf of the Chief - I will take a little licence here - I thank the honourable member for Port Macquarie and I am sure that the Minister will respond to her at the first available opportunity.
SYDNEY TO BATHURST TRANSPORT SERVICES
Mr CLOUGH (Bathurst) [6.15]: Before I commence my speech tonight I should like to refer to the comment earlier by the honourable member for Murray that the people of Cowra are a friendly lot. Well, they were not too friendly last Sunday: they had all three teams in the local rugby league grand final, and they beat our team 16-6 in the first grade and won the second grade, but we cleaned them up in the under-eighteens. So much for the friendliness of the city of Cowra. I refer tonight to the difficulties experienced by my constituents travelling between Sydney and Bathurst - generally of an evening but more particularly of a Sunday. I would like the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs to draw to the attention of the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Tourism the intense dissatisfaction that my constituents have with the transport services from Sydney to the city of Bathurst, and the confusion and, in many instances, the lack of initiative that occurs at Lithgow railway station when passengers are transshipped from a train to a bus. There appears to be a considerable amount of confusion about the fact that people who have not booked a seat on the bus cannot travel on the bus, even when there are vacant seats. It is absolutely ridiculous that vacant seats on a bus are not filled, whether people have booked them or not. I will enlarge on some of the instances that have occurred.
On Sunday there are only two train services to Bathurst. It might interest the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs to learn that there are also only two train services to Cowra. The first Bathurst service is the XPT service operating out of Sydney at 7.12 a.m. It goes to Dubbo and provides a connecting link to other stations further west. The next available service from Sydney to Bathurst and points further west does not leave until 5.32 p.m., and arrives at Lithgow at 8.11 p.m, with passengers continuing on to Bathurst by bus. Another bus from Katoomba arrives at Lithgow at 8.12 p.m. These buses arrive in Bathurst at 9.17 p.m. and 9.18 p.m. respectively. One of the buses goes on to Dubbo and the other goes on to Parkes. I have received complaints recently that passengers arriving in Lithgow at 8.11 p.m. and 8.12 p.m. have found there is no provision for them to join the buses travelling on to Bathurst. Candidly, I would not have believed some of the tales that have been told to me about the difficulties experienced by some people, except that I know some of these people well, and the stories have been confirmed to me by the drivers of taxis that meet the buses in Bathurst. They continue to tell me a tale of woe.
On some occasions people have had to stay overnight in Lithgow because they could not make a connection going further west. I find this incredible. There has to be some mechanism in the State Rail Authority to acknowledge that there must be some allowance for initiative, there should be planning, once in a blue moon, to allow someone to do something different; someone has got to be able to say that if there is an excess of
Page 5725
passengers travelling from Lithgow to Bathurst, as a means of providing the service that the passengers have paid for, they have the authority to put them in a taxi and send them off to Bathurst. On a number of occasions people arrive at Lithgow in time to connect with the 9.17 p.m. bus to Dubbo, or the 9.18 p.m. bus to Parkes, find that they cannot get a seat on either of those buses, and have to wait for the next bus, which, having connected with the 6 p.m. train from Sydney, leaves Lithgow at 10.06 p.m. and arrives in Cowra at 11.53 p.m. People who seek to catch the first bus may be able to get a seat on the second bus and may get to Bathurst after 10 o'clock - or they may not. An attempt should be made to impress upon staff at Lithgow railway station that the name of the game is to get people to their destinations, regardless of the arrangements that have to be made. The prospect of people having to stay overnight in Lithgow is unacceptable with any form of public transport. People should not be put in the position of having to do that. I call upon the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs to take up with the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Tourism the present unsatisfactory conditions that apply at Lithgow railway station.
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs) [6.20]: I thank the honourable member for Bathurst for raising this matter regarding public transport at Lithgow, Bathurst and the Central West. I am sure that the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Tourism is apprised of the honourable member's comments. It is important that the procedure of private members' statements be used responsibly, as the honourable member for Bathurst has done tonight. I am sure the Minister will respond accordingly. I should tell the honourable member that the 16 to 6 win by the Cowra rugby league team over Bathurst last Sunday was much appreciated by the people of Cowra. It was a top game, as I am sure the honourable member will accept.
STRATHFIELD TREE PRESERVATION ORDER BREACHES
Mr ZAMMIT (Strathfield) [6.21]: I ask the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs to bring to the attention of the Minister for Local Government, and Minister for Cooperatives concerns expressed to me by the Strathfield Council about its dissatisfaction with inconsistent treatment of legal matters in the Local Court. I do not want to comment directly on individual cases, for they are matters for the judiciary. However, the council has raised matters that are sufficiently important for me to bring to the attention of the House. I shall read briefly from a letter of 11th June from the council to me:
Council has presented several cases to the Local Court for breaches of its Tree Preservation Order, pursuant to the provisions of Clause 40 of the Strathfield Planning Scheme Ordinance. The rulings of Magistrates in these instances have been inconsistent effectively limiting Council's efforts to administer the Order.
The letter proceeded to say that a particular person, whose name I shall not mention, appeared represented by his solicitor. The letter continued:
A plea of guilty was entered and an explanation to the Court was submitted. Upon hearing the evidence the Magistrate commented that it was apparent the trees were not that large and were obviously causing damage to the pool area. His Worship was referring to photographs that were tendered to the Court by both parties which showed cracking of the concrete around the tree area . . . he felt it was appropriate to dismiss the information pursuant to the Provisions of Section 556A of the Crimes Act conditional upon the Defendant entering into a good behaviour bond . . .
The council's letter proceeded:
Council seeks your assistance in defending its legal obligation to enforce Ordinance where and when necessary.
Page 5726
In other words, Strathfield Municipal Council is in a real bind. It wants to know whether it should take individuals to court over an apparent breach of the tree preservation order, knowing full well that the probability is that those people will be let off. What is the point of having the ordinances and spending ratepayers' money to take individuals to court when the court treats individuals in a way the council perceives to be inappropriate? The council is seeking to have a standard set that will save taxpayers money in cases in which the council believes the courts will not uphold its actions. I understand that at present the Local Government Act is under review and that a bill has been placed on the table for discussion. That proposed legislation has been widely circulated, but my understanding is that it does not delineate for councils the lines of demarcation to enable them to determine whether court actions should be undertaken. I ask the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs to draw this matter to the attention of the Minister for Local Government, and Minister for Cooperatives, especially as the guidelines are being considered by his department. This issue affects all councils, which will need to have guidance as to whether they should proceed in these matters, perhaps by way of on-the-spot fines so that persons charged with these breaches will have to defend them.
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs) [6.25]: I thank the honourable member for Strathfield for raising this matter. I will ensure that it is noted by the Minister for Local Government, and Minister for Cooperatives. The honourable member is alway succinct in the presentation of his statements and is resolute in pursuing issues of concern to his constituents. I am sure that the Minister will respond to his concerns.
BIRKLEY COTTAGE CLOSURE
Dr MACDONALD (Manly) [6.26]: I raise an issue about adolescent health and welfare in my electorate. I ask that the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs bring the matter to the attention of the Minister for Health. In the Manly-Warringah area is a facility known as Birkley Cottage. That establishment is a residential home for adolescent youth between the ages of 15 and 19. It provides medium-term supportive accommodation. The cottage has six beds and has been opened for eight years. It will be of particular interest to you, Mr Acting-Speaker, as a member representing an electorate adjoining mine, that Birkley Cottage services three shires with a population of 215,000 people. My concern is that Birkley Cottage is about to close, a decision made by the Northern Sydney Area Health Service. Funding is to be redirected away from Birkley Cottage, a facility with an important therapeutic role. Though the northern beaches area is regarded as a well-off region with few social problems, I assure honourable members that it has many social problems. It has a high incidence of homeless youth. Birkley Cottage provides a service to those youth, many of whom have behavioural and emotional problems; many of them are street kids. There is a waiting list for accommodation at Birkley Cottage. The home provides accommodation and 24-hour support for young people and, having a therapeutic role, comes under the administration of the Department of Health. It has clinical backup and counselling facilities.
Homeless children are likely to be thrown on to the streets as a result of the decision to close Birkley Cottage. I am not overdramatising the issue. Funding of more than $175,000 is at present allocated by the Northern Sydney Area Health Service for this adolescent program. Though that funding will remain, it will be redirected to another form of adolescent servicing through what is called an outreach program. This is simply an endeavour by the Department of Health and the Northern Sydney Area Health Service to capture that funding, probably because of the productivity cuts of which so much has
Page 5727
been heard recently, and ultimately to downsize the allocation of funding for adolescent health. Youth workers in the region regard this cottage as a vital service which, in a sense, links crisis centres where homeless youth are first taken and halfway houses, where they end up. This is part of that chain. It is known as a comprehensive youth accommodation strategy. Manly-Warringah has such a facility, which will be removed if Birkley Cottage is closed. It has been argued by the professionals, particularly by the Association of Manly Warringah Youth Services, that the outreach program is not as effective or not called upon as much as an accommodation facility is. If we are to have the proposed outreach program, to where does one refer homeless children that one comes across in the community? There is nowhere to refer them. They will be forced out of the area.
A population of 200,000 is being serviced by Birkley Cottage. Those children will be pushed back on to the streets and out of the area if that accommodation closes. They will have to be found accommodation elsewhere, losing their family ties and the opportunity for reconciliation with their families. I have with me an extract from the local newspaper, the Manly Daily. The article is a profile of a boy named Jason Brady. He tells a story of how he was picked up from the streets and was rehabilitated through Birkley Cottage. Jason had problems. He left home at the age of 11 and lived on the streets for seven years. He now plays a useful role in society. His story is an example of how useful this Birkley Cottage facility is. I have directed some of my efforts to the Commonwealth Government, asking it to provide extra funding. I have pointed out that the closing of the facility will be a disaster for the local area.
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs) [6.31]: I take note of the comments made by the honourable member for Manly about the future of Birkley Cottage and I will ensure that his remarks are referred to the Minister for Health. I noted the honourable member's comment that his local area has problems with youth. I think it is fair to say that in this day and age, unfortunately, every area suffers from some degree of problems with young people. That is where many of the problems in society start. I am sure that all honourable members support a proper, constructive attitude towards trying to address the social problems occurring in our communities. I will speak with the Minister for Health about the honourable member's concerns.
AUSTRALIAN MADE SOUVENIRS
Mr DOWNY (Sutherland) [6.32]: I wish to bring to the attention of the House a matter that was raised with me a couple of months ago by a constituent, Len Carter of Menai. It may not seem to be an important matter but it is certainly important to Mr Carter and I was concerned by what he told me. He telephoned me to say that recently he had been to a number of souvenir shops in the central business district of Sydney and had seen goods that were labelled as Australian goods but had been mixed with imported goods and presented as goods manufactured in Australia. The goods were mainly small toys - koalas, kangaroos and swagman dolls. The labels were of printed cloth, looped and sewn into seams of the dolls or toys. The labels bore the Australian specification and the importer's name on one face, and the country of origin on the other. In most souvenir shops the items appeared to have been cut in such a way that the country of manufacture had been eliminated from the label and, therefore, the dolls were sold as if they had been manufactured in Australia.
My constituent contacted Australian Customs and was advised by that organisation that it was aware of the problem but that he should contact the New South Wales Department of Consumer Affairs. When Mr Carter rang the department he was
Page 5728
advised that he would have to write as an informant, including all details, and legal action would be taken. He was also informed that though the department has inspectors who could investigate the matter, it was not the department's responsibility to establish fraud as that was a police matter. Mr Carter was concerned that he received the runaround from that department. He made his complaint by telephone but was advised that he would have to write, including all details. He gained the impression that the department was not enthusiastic about investigating the complaint, and I agree with Mr Carter on that point. Obviously this is a valid complaint because the Department of Consumer Affairs and Australian Customs knew about the matter. When a person makes a valid complaint, I believe the Department of Consumer Affairs has an obligation to follow it up. In this case it is obvious that it was not willing to do so. We have all heard stories about Australian flags being made in Thailand, toy koalas being made in China, and so on. Here we have a case where a retailer is trying to make out that goods are manufactured in Australia. I find that pathetic. I ask the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs to pass on my comments to the Minister for Consumer Affairs, and Assistant Minister for Education, who I hope will have her department undertake appropriate investigations into these souvenir shops in Sydney.
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs) [6.35]: I thank the honourable member for Sutherland for raising this matter this evening. I assure him that his remarks will be made known to the Minister for Consumer Affairs, and Assistant Minister for Education. It is galling to genuine Australians to find that souvenirs depicting our native animals are made outside this country. We now find that some of the old family favourites, such as Vegemite, are no longer produced by Australian owned companies. Australia is a proud nation but sometimes I think we have lost the plot and lost sight of the fact that it is one thing to be proud but it is another to enforce that pride in practical ways. The comments made by the honourable member for Sutherland will no doubt strike a chord with most honourable members. I hope the Minister is able to assist the honourable member.
Private members' statements noted.
House adjourned at 6.36 p.m.