Full Day Hansard Transcript (Legislative Assembly, 8 May 2003, Corrected Copy)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

Thursday 8 May 2003
______

Mr Speaker (The Hon. John Joseph Aquilina) took the chair at 10.00 a.m.

Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.

PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARIES

Mr SCULLY: On behalf of the Premier I inform the House of the appointment on 8 May of the following persons as Parliamentary Secretaries to the offices indicated:

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Routine of Business: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Motion by Mr Scully agreed to:

(1) 10.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m.—General Business Notices of Motions (for Bills)

(2) 11.00 a.m. to 11.30 a.m.—General Business Order of the Day (for Bills) No. 1 [Bail Amendment (Repeat Offenders) Bill]

(3) 11.30 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.—General Business Orders of the Day (General Orders) and Notices of Motions (General Notices)

TRANSPORT ADMINISTRATION AMENDMENT (PARRAMATTA RAIL LINK—PROPERTY GUARANTEE) BILL

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr HUMPHERSON (Davidson) [10.03 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

This legislation arises from the Coalition's continued commitment to ensuring that residents and property owners who are adversely affected by the Parramatta rail link, in particular the tunnel between Chatswood and Parramatta, have an opportunity to seek financial compensation for any loss resulting from its implementation. A similar bill was introduced last year but it lapsed with prorogation and the general election. Residents who live along the rail corridor in a number of electorates—Davidson, Ku-ring-gai, Ryde and Epping—have already been adversely affected by the land underneath their homes, in effect, being stolen from them without compensation, notification or proper consultation. There is evidence that people have been financially disadvantaged. Valuations of their property have shown an assessed reduction in value by as much as $50,000. The Coalition has always upheld the principle that property owners should not lose their assets because the State implements transport routes, roads or rail for the wider advantage to the community.

This bill seeks to remedy a deliberate oversight by the Government when it introduced legislation to give effect to the Parramatta-Chatswood rail link in 2000. The bill will enable residents who have their land taken from them for the construction of the Epping to Chatswood railway tunnel to seek compensation. In effect, it is a buyback scheme for adversely affected residents, to enable them to sell their property if they wish or to be compensated for the effects of the tunnel. The land taken from the residents is below the surface and some people may ask why residents should be compensated. I will explain why. I have a copy of a letter of 13 June 2002 from the then Minister for Transport to Alan Jones. The letter states:

The Minister failed to mention in his letter that the depth is measured from the floor of the tunnel and that the tunnel is seven metres in diameter. In fact, the depth of the tunnel varies from approximately 6 metres to 63 metres. I cannot imagine any home owner being too concerned about a rail tunnel 63 metres—the equivalent of 200 feet—beneath their home. However, along significant lengths in the Roseville and Terrys Creek areas the tunnel is less than 20 metres below, and in some places just 6 metres or about 20 feet beneath the surface.

The residents whose land is to be taken for the tunnel have now received advice that council records in relation to their properties will be permanently altered and that their land titles have been adversely and permanently altered to note that the development can proceed. The Government does not seem to understand the serious stigma for owners and the adverse effects of the tunnel on the market value of the properties. It is outrageous that the Government has generated the stigma yet denies responsibility to compensate residents for the consequent lowered market values of their properties. After all, those homes in many cases are the life investment of the occupants.

In the letter to Alan Jones, to which I referred earlier, the then Minister for Transport claimed that he was not responsible for legislation that denied compensation to residents whose land was taken for the tunnel, as they were denied compensation by the former Government under its Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991. However, the Minister conceded that he was responsible for the Parramatta rail link legislation in May 2000, which clarified the just terms Act by extending the meaning of "tunnels" to include "other underground rail facilities such as stations and concourses".

That is not the same story the Minister gave to Parliament in his second reading speech in support of the Parramatta rail link [PRL] legislation. In Parliament in May 2000 the Minister admitted obtaining legal advice to the effect that the just terms Act did not clearly authorise him to operate the rail tunnel without compensating affected residents. The Minister said that the PRL legislation confirmed beyond doubt that the law denying compensation to residents extended to the operation of the rail tunnel. The Minister's two-faced attitude on this issue was not limited to fine points of legislative interpretation.

I will now address the field of non-intellectual administrative action. In 1997 the Minister pushed through a proposal to construct the now-completed M5 East motorway. The project included constructing a tunnel under houses in the Kogarah district. When taking land for the tunnel, the Minister bent over backwards to act fairly towards affected residents. I have a letter from the Minister to residents in the Kogarah and Rockdale area in December 1997. Each resident whose land would be taken for construction of the tunnel or—wait for it—permanent rock anchors, and whose land beneath their home would be affected, was offered $3,000 in cash, an ex gratia contribution. Further, each resident was offered the right to require the Roads and Traffic Authority [RTA] to purchase their house at current market value as if the M5 East motorway did not exist. Residents taking up the offer would also be paid sale costs and relocation expenses, and be exempt from stamp duty payable on the acquisition of a comparably valued replacement home.

I have a copy of an offer from the Minister to the residents in the area in February 2001 extending the range of residents who could require the Government to purchase their house to include residents living within 400 metres of the M5 East motorway exhaust stack. Residents outside the 400-metres radius area would also be invited to apply for this benefit if they could demonstrate hardship. I also have a copy of an RTA press release dated 16 April 2002 advising that the closing date for operation of the M5 East resident compensation scheme had been extended to 9 June 2003. That is one month from today, but it is significant that it is not long after the recent State election.

I am not criticising the Minister's offers of compensation to residents affected by the M5 East tunnel. However, I cannot fathom why the Minister will not make the same offer to residents affected by the Chatswood to Parramatta rail tunnel. The honourable member for Epping put the same question to the Minister in Parliament on 20 May 2000. In response the Minister said that it would be too costly, with costs in the tens of millions of dollars. Ten days later the Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for Fisheries in the Legislative Council claimed that the most conservative cost estimate was $50 million. I challenge both of those estimates because if there is no adverse effect on property values, as has been asserted by the Government and by Ministers, people would have no reason to believe that they would be adversely affected; nor could they justify any claim they sought to make.

Since 20 May 2000 the Minister has extended the range of residents offered compensation in relation to the M5 East tunnel and has further extended the time for acceptance of the offer. How can the Minister continue to refuse to make the same offer to residents affected by the Chatswood to Parramatta rail tunnel? I assume that the Government still wishes lamely to hang on to its administrative cost excuse and to demonstrate that the Coalition can find answers to the hard questions that the Government is now too tired and out of touch to even consider. Currently, we are considering a variation to this bill—if necessary in Committee—in consultation with the Parramatta Rail Link Action Group, which would enable an even simpler and cheaper option to the compensation program offered for the M5 East tunnel. The alteration, if proceeded with, would be fairly simple.

Our proposal is that if a resident's property is affected by the rail tunnel and the resident purchased the property on or before 26 February 2002, which is the date of the tunnel's development approval, he or she may lodge a claim for compensation from the Minister. If at any time until one year after the tunnel commences operation the resident sells his or her property at a price which he or she believes to have been reduced because of the impact of the tunnel, he or she may lodge a claim for compensation from the Minister. On receipt of a claim, the Minister will arrange to appoint an independent valuer to determine the value of the property as if there were no tunnel existing or proposed. If that valuation exceeds the contract sale price the Minister would pay the resident compensation in an amount equal to the resident's notional loss.

This legislation entirely answers the Government's concern that a compensation scheme for residents who are affected by the Parramatta to Chatswood tunnel could involve exorbitant interest and administrative costs. The scheme we propose is far less generous than the Minister's property value guarantee to residents affected by the M5 East tunnel, because we are not necessarily offering the full reimbursement of sale costs and relocation expenses, nor relief from stamp duty on the resident's subsequent home purchase. Of course, there is no suggestion of an up-front $3,000 payment for residents. The Minister's only costs would be valuation fees and compensation for notional loss. If the tunnel enhances the value of the affected properties—according to predictions that the Government continues to repeat—then valuation fees will be the only costs incurred. There would be no notional compensation.

If the Government opposes this legislation, especially having regard to the manner in which the M5 East residential compensation scheme was implemented and subsequently extended, the people of New South Wales can only conclude that it does not, and will not, represent them all and acts only for the benefit of select, favoured interest groups. In pursuing this matter, I acknowledge the support and work of people such as Mark Morgan of the Parramatta Rail Link Action Group who have been persistent in their efforts over the past couple of years. I acknowledge that residents in the electorate of Ryde have sought to pressure the Government, certainly more recently during the State election campaign. Residents who were adversely affected sought, without result, to get the honourable member for Ryde on side. I acknowledge that councillors from the city of Ryde also took a strong interest in, and will continue to advocate for, fair and reasonable treatment of people whose properties have been or will be adversely affected.

This is a matter of fairness and equity. There is nothing wrong—indeed, it is more than appropriate—with governments developing infrastructure for the good of wider community interests, in this case to construct rail or road tunnels in parts of Sydney. When ultimately completed, this rail tunnel will be an excellent and wonderful addition to Sydney's transport and rail network. However, it is unreasonable for residents and home owners to be the prime sacrifice, to have lost in some cases a large portion of the value of their homes. When that occurs it is only fair and just that they be compensated so that they are not out of pocket financially. This matter is causing great stress to some residents. I can assure them and the community of New South Wales that we will continue to fight on their behalf. The Opposition has maintained this commitment for several years and into the recent State election campaign, and it will maintain this commitment into the future. I ask the Government to consider the matter in the fairest manner possible and to see fit to support this bill.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Newell.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT (GRAFFITI) BILL

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mrs HOPWOOD (Hornsby) [10.20 a.m.]: I move:

Issues associated with graffiti continue to arise on a regular basis, and once more I speak to endorse the tenet of the Local Government Amendment (Graffiti) Bill 2003—reintroduced from the 2002 bill known as the Local Government Further Amendment (Graffiti) Bill 2002—as presented at the beginning of the new session of the New South Wales State Parliament. The content of the bill has not altered; it continues to seek to amend the Local Government Act 1993 to enable local councils to remove graffiti from the property of a public authority or to order removal of graffiti from property owned or occupied by a public authority.

The bill also seeks to enable the local council to recover from a public authority any expenses incurred by the council for removal of graffiti from property similarly owned or occupied. To repeat, under section 67A of the Local Government Act a council may, by agreement with the owner or occupier of any private land, carry out graffiti removal work on the land. Under section 67B of the Act a council may also, without the agreement of the owner or occupier of any land, carry out at the council's expense graffiti removal work to property on the land. Further, the council may do the removal work if the graffiti is visible from a public place and the graffiti removal can be carried out from a public place.

The new bill seeks to remove the reference to "private" in relation to land in respect of which a council may enter into an agreement with the owner or occupier for graffiti removal work. The council will be able to enter into agreements with public authorities for graffiti removal work on lands that are not private land within the meaning of the Local Government Act. The bill also seeks to allow councils to recover from a public authority—that is, the owner or occupier of the property from which graffiti is removed—the cost of the graffiti removal work carried out from a public place, without the consent of the public authority. Further, the bill will enable a council to order a public authority to remove graffiti on property owned or occupied by the public authority. The council may issue this order if, first, the graffiti is visible from a public place; second, the public authority does not agree to have the graffiti removed; and, third, the graffiti removal work cannot be carried out from a public place. Additionally, the bill makes failure to comply with such an order an offence.

Councils expressed great frustration at the time taken for State Rail and other organisations, such as electricity companies, to remove graffiti from their property. Local residents have spoken to me on a number of occasions about their concerns with the amount of graffiti appearing in suburbs and also about the slowness of its removal. Many councils have embraced the need to remove graffiti as soon as possible as a major component in discouraging the person applying the graffiti. In order to ensure a uniform approach to the removal and application of the deterrent policies of council, immediate action in relation to graffiti is essential. Previous amendments dealing with graffiti have not gone far enough. This is a proactive initiative. Councils want to remove graffiti immediately and have the necessary equipment to do so. Residents dislike the graffiti and local communities associate it with other activities that compromise their safety.

The term "graffiti" is generally used as an all-encompassing label for any illegal writing or drawing on buildings, fences, stationary government objects and equipment, bridges and any number of structures. There are many different types of graffiti, the most prevalent being the practice of tagging, that is, an identifying word applied with spray paint or a wide felt-tip pen in a publicly visible place. Green substation boxes are a favourite site for such graffiti. The harm caused by graffiti to the community and to property and the fear of crime are the main concerns of governments and those matters are the focus of intervention.

A number of managers in councils are determined to improve graffiti removal. Currently there are two initiatives, one being the Graffiti Blaster program, which has been on trial in a number of areas and which has been shown to be very successful. I spoke about this last year. Under that program the graffiti is removed within 48 hours. The aim is to discourage graffiti perpetrators by removing graffiti as soon as possible. This has had success, with graffitists moving on after realising they will not be successful in maintaining their art form because of persistent removal. The second initiative is the Beat Graffiti program, which consists of a graffiti hotline and legal graffiti walls. Councils have also been encouraged to formulate a graffiti management policy and strategies inclusive of a rapid response approach to graffiti removal.
I refer now to the latest issue of the Mt Colah Neighbourhood Watch newsletter, the whole front page of which is devoted to graffiti. I am a member of this Neighbourhood Watch group and a street co-ordinator. The newsletter states in part:

That direct quotation from the latest newsletter of the Mt Colah Neighbourhood Watch group reflects general community attitude and concern. I reiterate that in my electorate Hornsby Shire Council has taken the progressive step of providing graffiti artists and others who wish to paint walls and other surfaces in the area with opportunities to express their art forms. The three locations selected in the area are Montview Oval at Hornsby Heights, Greenway Park at Cherrybrook and Ruddock Park at Westleigh. A number of schools also provide walls for students to paint their pictures. Those walls were provided in recognition that some young people need an opportunity to express themselves in this way. The strategies are designed to address the needs of young people through a mutually beneficial relationship with the wider community.

Whilst a number of responses can be made in relation to graffiti, it is important to have a consistent approach. I have noticed a spate of graffiti in the Hornsby electorate that of late has not been removed in a timely fashion, that is, as quickly as possible and preferably within 24 hours. A number of people commented to me about this during the recent election, and I sought the assistance of Hornsby Shire Council to rectify the problem. The security of many people relies on a safe environment. To community members, the appearance of graffiti signifies a dangerous area. When the graffiti is removed people begin once more to feel safe. Councils are best positioned to keep track of graffiti occurrence, as well as to remove it as soon as possible. It is well known that graffiti is a significant environmental, social and economic problem and that everyone in the community is affected by it. It is estimated that graffiti removal costs the community about $100 million each year.

The Local Government Amendment (Graffiti) Bill aims to improve the ability of councils to react quickly to graffiti on government-owned equipment, so that it can be removed almost as soon as it is placed on the surface. The proposed legislation will add to recent changes in this area: the Local Government Amendment (Graffiti) Act 2002 and the Local Government (Graffiti Removal) Act 2001. The aim of the amendment is to assist councils to control graffiti and relieve the frustration of council officers, who do a great job with the current legislation but who could make a big difference in fast graffiti removal should the bill be passed. It is essential that the Government do everything in its power to decrease graffiti. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Newell.

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS AMENDMENT (PARLIAMENTARY JOINT COMMITTEE) BILL

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr TINK (Epping) [10.31 a.m.]: I move:

The object of this bill is to amend the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986 to establish a parliamentary joint committee to be known as the Committee on the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, which will recommend annually the amount to be appropriated out of the Consolidated Fund for the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and comment generally on the budget for that office; have power of veto over the proposed appointment of a person as Director of Public Prosecutions [DPP]; monitor and review the exercise by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the director's functions under the principal Act and any other Act; and limit the term of office of future Directors of Public Prosecutions to seven years.

The monitoring and review functions of the proposed joint committee will not extend to recommending that the Director of Public Prosecutions make a decision that relates to the institution or cessation of prosecutions or proceedings in a particular case or to reconsidering any such decision. The powers and functions, other than those relating to recommendations of a budgetary nature, are similar to those of the existing joint committees under the Ombudsman Act, the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act and the Health Care Complaints Act.

Having served as the first chairman of the Committee on the Office of the Ombudsman and having also served for some time on the Committee on the Independent Commission Against Corruption [ICAC], I have great confidence in the capacity of members of this House and of the Legislative Council to be able, in a non-partisan way, to play a constructive role in oversighting the DPP's office in the same way as they have oversighted the Ombudsman's office and the ICAC for some years. I note also that the term of office of both the ICAC commissioner and the Ombudsman is a non-renewable term of seven years. I believe it is appropriate to introduce a similar term of office for future Directors of Public Prosecutions.

I do not believe it is right or appropriate in this day and age that the term of office for one of the most vital public offices in the State should be indeterminate, and that fact has been recognised by the Parliament in the case of both the Ombudsman and the ICAC commissioner. If the term is non-renewable the government of the day has no opportunity to influence the holder of the office, who may seek reappointment. By definition, reappointment is not on the agenda. The Director of Public Prosecutions is a difficult and complicated office of State government activity. It involves many professionals working under enormous pressure and public expectation, on a limited budget, in an area of vital importance, and under criticism from the media. For all those reasons it is important to have an appropriate turnover after what I believe is a reasonable period of seven years. It is not in the public interest for such an important office to be held indefinitely.

This is the third occasion on which legislation has been introduced to create such an office, and I understand that both the Law Society and the Bar Association maintain their concerns and objections to this proposal, as they have for some years. However, with respect to both bodies, some of the reasons they put forward for opposing the bill are reasons to support it. Both associations need to give more credit to members of Parliament working together on a bipartisan basis on joint committees. A press release from both associations, which goes back to 1995, states:

That is the present Government—

The press release goes on to state:

Proposed by me; this is back in 1995. The press release continues:

I agree with all those sentiments except the conclusion that parliamentary oversight would result in the politicisation of the office rather than support its independence. On the contrary, having oversight from a parliamentary committee comprising members of all parties in this House and the other House would help to underscore the independence of the DPP's office. Nobody is under any illusion that the current DPP has spoken out and will continue to speak out about matters, and to some extent it is in the public interest that he does so. It can be the basis of extraordinary controversy from time to time and, in my view, on some issues it would have been better if he had kept quiet instead of venturing into debate. On other issues it was plainly in the public interest for him to engage in such debate.

There have been some unedifying slanging matches between the current DPP and the Premier and former Attorney General, but what is missing from the current arrangements is a forum for the DPP to have his say and for members on all sides of Parliament to ask intelligent questions to test his proposals. One of the most extraordinary incidents took place a few years ago when the Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Life Sentence) Bill was before the Parliament. A committee was set up to examine that bill. That committee comprised representatives from all parliamentary parties. It is a matter of record that the Premier and the then Attorney General, the Hon. Jeff Shaw, both tried directly to pressure the DPP not to attend a hearing of the parliamentary committee. The Director of Public Prosecutions [DPP] attended, but pressure should never be applied for him not to attend. The incident reflects what is so wrong with the accountability of the DPP to the Parliament. The Bar Association and the Law Society went on to say:

So he does, but in this infamous incident the Attorney General tried to prevent the DPP from talking to a parliamentary committee, which highlights how fragile that accountability to the Parliament is and how, on that occasion, the Government attempted on a strong partisan basis to prevent the DPP from coming to the Parliament to talk about a bill before the House. That is not appropriate, proper, or working accountability of the DPP to the Parliament through the Attorney General. Rather, it is an example of the Attorney General of the day blocking the DPP from coming to the Parliament to be accountable. It is a dangerous, contradictory and nonsensical situation.

Both the Law Society and the Bar Association are wrong: they do not give credit to enough members of this Parliament to provide a level of accountability on a bipartisan basis. In 1997, following objection to the way in which the DPP's office handled a bail application for the alleged killers of policeman David Carty—although, ironically, this drew the Premier to the conclusion that perhaps a parliamentary committee might be appropriate—the Premier told the DPP in public to lift his game and that the failure of the DPP to alert police to the bail application was disgraceful. An article in the Daily Telegraph of 11 October 1997 reports:

The case for some sort of oversight is stronger than ever. Public slanging matches are better dealt with through the parliamentary committee process. One of the major concerns of the legal profession is the lack of appropriate recognition of the separation of powers in the Westminster system: mixing the role of an independent DPP with the Parliament creates difficulty for separation of powers concepts. As I have stated previously, the English DPP has regularly appeared before the House of Commons, through the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee, to answer all sorts of questions relating to the role of the office. Standing order 152 of the United Kingdom Parliament states:

Committee No. 8, the Home Affairs Committee, examines the administration and expenditure of the Crown Prosecution Service and Serious Fraud Office. The committee has been active for some years and has been the subject of a study. A report by Gavin Drewry entitled "New Select Committees: a Study of the 1979 Reforms", was published in 1985. I note the early concern about restrictions on the terms of reference. At page 200 of his publication, Mr Drewry states:

Mr Drewry stated that after the Attorney General's initial refusal to appear before the Committee and the Director of Public Prosecution's initial refusal on three occasions:

For some years the House of Commons has had a level of direct parliamentary accountability, not through the Attorney General's office, but directly with the DPP. It is so established and has become so entrenched that academic studies of the Parliament have indicated that such accountability is very positive. Some years ago Barbara Mills, the then Director of Public Prosecutions, appeared before the committee and was asked a large number of questions about a range of issues that we hear on talkback radio in Sydney every day of the week.

At any public meeting about public safety issues questions are asked about sentencing and the adequacy of procedures. Questions asked of the English DPP are along precisely those lines. What could possibly be wrong with that? The days of the DPP's office or any other group being free or removed from public debate have gone, and I do not believe the DPP thinks that he should be above public debate. On 2 August 1988 an article in the Sun-Herald quoted Mr Cowdery as saying that his independent stand on a number of issues and his fights with the Premier—and also at that time with Mr Whelan—only enhanced his status. The article stated:

It is important that in speaking out the DPP should also be accountable in a meaningful way and members of Parliament of all persuasions should be able to test his comments on behalf of the public generally. It would be best to do that through a public committee. The Home Affairs Committee last cross-examined the English DPP, Mr David Calvert-Smith; Mr Richard Foster, the chief executive; and Mr Steve Przybylski, head of the resources and performance division of the Crown Prosecution Service on 26 February 2002. Seven members of the House of Commons from all sides of politics were present for the examination. The English DPP was asked 106 questions covering a whole range of matters, such as whether the Crown Prosecution Service should have a greater role in the charging of suspects; whether he thought the Crown Prosecution Service is taking over not only part of the role of police but also of juries, and examining evidence before cases come to court and almost predetermining the outcome. This is the sort of question and answer that might come up at any public meeting that any of us go to as a member of Parliament. I will refer to question 5 and the answer at some length. It reads:

Sir Charles Pollard, Chief Constable of Thames Valley, has said publicly that "the courtroom has become … the place for legal games to be played by lawyers". Do you agree with the view that the trial system is arcane and riddled with red tape?

The English DPP said on oath in reply to a parliamentary committee, with the press present:

We have put in some responses (supportive responses, it has to be said) to two recent Law Commission papers on hearsay evidence and on a limited change to the law which prevents previous convictions being admissible in evidence. So to that extent, and to the extent that Sir Charles was thinking of hearsay and previous evidence of bad character as part of this arcane game, we do support the changes which the Law Commission has recommended and which Sir Robin Auld has hinted at. Clearly, there must be rules, which may seem to outsiders to be arcane, to prevent overly prejudicial evidence being introduced. It is one of the prices that I suspect we must pay for the continuation of jury trial. So that to a limited extent, I support Sir Charles, and the particular recommendations he made following that general remark are recommendations which we have supported.

To my mind this is a very serious and important exchange between a member of Parliament in the presence of other members of Parliament from all sides of politics where these people develop an expertise in this area of public administration. Every day on talkback radio in Sydney you are going to hear some comment on this subject. You will hear inflamed arguments racing up and down the airwaves day in and day out. Talkback radio quite rightly—I make no apology for it—is a key and vital part of our democratic system at the beginning of the twenty-first century. It is a legitimate, current part of the debate of the public affairs of this State and this country.

My proposal seeks to allow opportunities for the very sorts of questions and issues that arise daily in debate on the radio to be put directly by the representatives of the public of New South Wales to people who are in a position to be able to give informed comment to make the debate better informed. The interface between police, senior police, police commissioners—or the English equivalent in this case—and the head of the prosecution service is right at the centre of the administration of justice. Why should the interchange of these sorts of ideas be limited to slanging matches in the media when the debate has got out of control and attorneys general, premiers and the DPPs are calling each other everything under the sun in the paper and on radio?

That is completely unedifying and counterproductive. Why otherwise should debate occur solely between the DPP and the Attorney General? I exclude the current Attorney General from these comments but his predecessor had a poisonous relationship at times with the current DPP. Why should this Parliament have to rely on the Attorney General for information about what the DPP does or thinks in a formal parliamentary sense? The precedent is here for this to be done through a parliamentary committee in a direct sense, taking out the partisan politics and allowing everybody to be involved. This is very important from the point of view of both the Law Society and the Bar Association. Another question was:

Mr Calvert-Smith, are you in favour of the Government's proposals to allow the admission of previous convictions?

This is a vital policy issue. It is an issue that one way or the other we need to have a very serious look at in this current Parliament. And here is the answer by the DPP. It is not settled policy; it is not something that has actually been decided by the Government. The answer to that question was:

I am in favour, because we have put it in our response to the Law Commission, of the limited extension recommended by the Law Commission, which requires relevance and the judge to rule on relevance, rather than, as some would recommend, a blanket admission so at the beginning of the case the jury is told "This is a man of 42 with X convictions; they may or they may not be relevant."

Mr Calvert-Smith went on to talk in those terms. This statement put to Mr Calvert-Smith is another that is heard on radio every day:

There is always the temptation … for the police—and the more dreadful the case the greater the temptation—to go and round up the usual suspects.

He replied:

Yes. I entirely accept that, and it is a risk one would have to guard against. Looking ahead, Crown Prosecutors do not use in their assessment of the strength of the evidence … the failure of an accused to answer questions at interview...

What I am trying to say to the Law Society and the Bar Association in particular is: Here is the evidence. Here is the precedent on an ongoing basis, now working for many years in the United Kingdom, of an intelligent interchange between members of Parliament and the Director of Public Prosecutions about something that is not settled government policy. Does that mean that the administration of justice, that the running of cases, that the trying of cases have suddenly ground to a halt in the courts in England? No, it does not. I would say, on the contrary, that this is the type of discussion that actually enhances the reputation of the Crown prosecution. It enhances the reputation of the administration of justice.

This is fundamentally important for the public and I think more lawyers need to do this and to do it overtly and publicly. There needs to be an admission that significant mistakes are made in the administration of justice in all jurisdictions. We are much better being honest, open and up front about where the shortcomings are. We should speak about them, debate them, and have the experts in so members of Parliament and, through them, their constituents better understand them. We should have this debate about what is right and wrong with the administration of justice, what is right and wrong about prosecution policy and what is able to be done to fix it and make it better. There is, I suppose, also the more traditional issue about resources. That is a valuable interchange that, in the current climate, does not take place. I do not believe that estimates hearings are an effective way of doing this either. Another question was:

… just concentrating on London for a moment, which is obviously the largest in terms of caseload, the inspectorate has highlighted some serious problems with the performance of the [Crown Prosecution Service] in London. What are you doing to improve the situation? Have you got an action plan?

The answer was:

Certainly... I will start off by saying that the senior management team in London was criticised for failure to act as a coherent entity, which gave rise to some of the problems, and we are taking active steps to ensure that that situation is improved.

Another question was:

Are you behaving like a football manager, just shuffling the pack he has already got?

The answer was:

No. We are bringing in additional expertise to strengthen the existing team, but we are not shuffling out the existing team.

Another question was:

That suggests there is not the strategy working in London, bearing in mind all the serious cases you have to do. Is it a numbers game? Do you need more physical bodies to do the work? Is it that the numbers are okay but you need people who are more experienced? What is the strategy for the retention of those good staff and recruitment of the good staff that you need to do the job?

Just interposing there, there has been an industrial dispute going on in the DPP's office—I hope it is settled—but these are the sort of issues that are relevant, the public interest to be raised in this Chamber with the DPP. The response to the question was:

I think it is very important not to identify one single thing... For my money there are four or five key things that we need to get right … the strength and the skills of the senior management team … making sure that we have got sufficient experienced staff at all levels. The additional money I have referred to, linked to recruitment exercises that are already in train, will mean that we get a lot more experienced lawyers and caseworkers into the area... we need … more up-to-date and accurate information than we have got at the moment... we need … much better communications strategy within London...The final thing, we need well thought-through estates and IT strategy.

They are vital issues this day in the DPP's office. They are appropriate issues for members of all sides of Parliament, in a committee, to be asking the DPP. It is very much in the public interest for the Director of Public Prosecutions to be able to respond. The public should be aware of the problems the DPP is facing when he is under pressure because of a resources issue. That would be better than reading about it in the paper, better than reading about a walkout by prosecutors and better than reading about prosecutors picketing the Supreme Court, as they did a few weeks ago. That is not the way to administer justice in this State; in fact, it is the way to bring the administration of justice into absolute contempt.

I commend the bill to the House. I ask the Law Society and the Bar Association to think carefully about the independence of the DPP being best maintained not through the Attorney General of the day who is a member of a particular party—the person who is solely responsible for communicating to Parliament, despite having been in some public brawls with the DPP—but through a committee that represents all members of Parliament. As has occurred in the House of Commons for many years, such a committee would be able to ask the questions that are constantly asked on talkback radio. If such a committee were appointed we could have a meaningful, accountable and ongoing debate in regard to the administration of justice, which is of paramount importance to everybody in New South Wales.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Debus.

BAIL AMENDMENT (REPEAT OFFENDERS) BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 1 May.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment) [11.02 a.m.]: The tragic death of Patricia van Koeverden has certainly prompted the Government to accelerate its program of bail reform, which will be implemented in two stages. The first stage will be dealt with through legislation that the Government will introduce before the month of May is out. The legislation will do two things. First, it will allow suspension and an urgent review of grants of bail approved by the Local Court in cases in which an accused is charged with murder or another offence carrying a natural life sentence. An urgent review in the most serious cases will be made possible by this legislation. Second, the legislation will overhaul bail laws in cases in which an alleged offender is charged with a serious offence involving personal violence and that person has a serious criminal history of personal violence offences. The Government's bail reforms will be underpinned by the principle that the more serious the alleged offence the harder it will be to secure bail.

The legislation will target persons who are perceived to be a threat to the safety of the community. In serious cases they will be refused bail unless there are exceptional circumstances. That is a harder test to satisfy than is the presumption against bail, which is what I understand has been proposed by the honourable member for Epping. The Government will not simply throw a blanket over the whole issue of bail, as the Coalition's bill effectively does, and hope for the best. Indeed, it is my view and the view of the Government that the Opposition's proposals, as they presently stand, are blunt and essentially unworkable. They will not be supported in the form in which they have been proposed. There is no guarantee under the Coalition's proposals that bail would have been refused in circumstances such as the tragedy that eventually involved the death of Patricia van Koeverden. The Government's proposals will address that type of issue more directly by concentrating on people who have been charged with serious violence and who have a history of serious violence or have committed another offence and are believed to be likely to do so again in the future.

The community is right to expect that it will be protected but, as I said elsewhere, that has to be done in a framework that continues to observe fundamental principles, such as the presumption of innocence. It is impossible to provide a system of bail determinations that is failsafe unless one dispenses with the presumption of innocence altogether and equates any charge with guilt. I am sure that nobody who is legally trained, including the honourable member for Cronulla who has entered the Chamber, would want to do that. That type of injustice would undoubtedly produce effects that would significantly outweigh any narrow benefit. Charges are not convictions. Not everybody charged with an offence is found guilty. Some charges do not even proceed. The additional package of reforms announced by the Government will balance the tensions that are evident in any bail reform process. The Government's changes to the bail regime will ensure that this State has the most rigorous legislative framework for the administration of bail in this country. The Government will look forward to debating the legislation in due course.

Mr HARTCHER (Gosford) [11.06 a.m.]: The Attorney General's contribution to the second reading debate did not canvass the issues addressed by the Bail Amendment (Repeat Offenders) Bill, which was introduced by the shadow Attorney General, the honourable member for Epping. Instead, the Attorney stated the Government's position in relation to its proposals, which are to be introduced before the end of May. Tragically, the Government has been driven to produce its legislation because of a breakdown in the bail laws—a breakdown which it acknowledged before the recent State election and which its great little election leaflet headed "Jail Not Bail" incorrectly stated the Government had fixed. Since the State election there has been another tragic incident involving the loss of a person's life because of inadequate bail laws. The Government stands accused and is accountable for its failure to strengthen bail laws to protect the community. Bail laws are not a right-wing or left-wing issue; they are a community protection issue. The failure of the Government to address bail laws constitutes a failure to protect the community—a failure for which the Government has been rightfully and trenchantly criticised by the media.

The Bail Act is relatively recent legislation; it was introduced by the Wran Government. Until that time bail was determined by the application of the common law in this State. There was no codification of bail laws in statute. The tragic killing of a bank manager by an armed robber who was on bail for earlier offences involving armed robbery led to a review of the bail laws, and that subsequently led to the enactment of the Bail Act. In recognition of the genesis of the Bail Act in the murder of the bank manager by the armed robber, the legislation carried a presumption against bail for people who already had convictions for robbery with wounding or robbery while armed, but they were the only presumptions against bail. Since then the Bail Act has been revised. However, it is significant that most of the revisions in recent times have come about as a result of Opposition initiatives. The shadow Attorney General proposed the most recent amendment, which was accepted by the Government. He secured a change to the law so that people on bail for offences involving death would not be entitled to possession of their passports.

That amendment to the Crimes Act was a tribute to the honourable member for Epping. This bill is also a tribute to him. He has brought to the House a sensitive and coherent framework of proposals to ensure that people on bonds, people with previous convictions and people charged with serious offences should have a presumption against bail. Bail should be awarded to them only in exceptional circumstances; they should not be entitled to bail as of right, they should not have a presumption for bail, nor should it be a matter for the discretion of the judge or magistrate when there is no presumption for or against. For those offenders a clearly stated criteria should apply, and for those repeat offenders it would apply as a presumption against bail. The Government's foreshadowed legislation is an attempt to secure government ownership of the issue. It will not of itself address the issue as clearly or comprehensively as would the bill introduced by the honourable member for Epping.

The Attorney General spoke of urgent and prompt review of court decisions to grant bail in the case of murder, which is simply one offence. Of course, most offenders are not charged with murder but with a range of crimes of violence, and many are repeat offences. While isolating murder may make the headlines, it does not of itself address the problem. The other part of the Attorney's proposed solution applied to previous convictions for violent offences. In those cases there would be a process for review and a presumption against bail. Again, that does not address the time period, or the nature of the violence offered, or the nature of the relationship—be it domestic violence or violence against third persons

The Attorney's proposal does not address the consistently overwhelming problem faced by police, as identified by Dr Weatherburn, with repeat offenders who commit dozens of break and enters or dozens of car thefts and repeatedly are granted bail even though they have a large number of outstanding charges against them. That situation was highlighted by the Daily Telegraph in its series on Adam Speyer. He laughed at the legal system as he was repeatedly charged with offences involving thefts, in which he specialised, and he repeatedly received bail. It is the repeat offenders of break and enter and car theft which concern the police and it is the serious crimes of violence which concern the community. The police know the offenders; they deal with them constantly. The police constantly arrest them, charge them and then see them walk out of court. For example, Adam Speyer was accused of breaking the law 34 times in three years, yet he was still granted bail when he came before the court.

Mr Debnam: Did you say 34 times?

Mr HARTCHER: Yes, he was brought before the court on 34 separate occasions, and each time he got bail. That problem is not addressed in the legislation proposed by the Attorney, but it is addressed in the bill introduced by the honourable member for Epping. The Opposition is seeking a comprehensive framework of ensuring that the community is protected. We strongly believe in the presumption of innocence and in the entitlement of each person to a speedy and fair trial. However, we also believe in the presumption that the community is more entitled to protection than are criminals. The Attorney failed to address that issue in his contribution to the second reading debate, and his proposed legislation does not address the issue.

That is why the Opposition is insisting on this bill. We will not be put off by the honeyed words of the Attorney, nor will we be stampeded by the excited antics of the Leader of the House, who does not want this bill to come to a vote. The Leader of the House and the Government are anxious that this bill be not voted upon. The Government wants to ensure that its proposed legislation overtakes this private member's bill so that it can claim credit. The Government cannot claim credit; it has been dragged to the table as a result of the initiatives of the Opposition. Tragically, the deficiencies of the Government's laws have resulted in the deaths of innocent people.

Mr KERR (Cronulla) [11.15 a.m.]: When the Attorney General addressed the House in relation to the Bail Amendment (Repeat Offenders) Bill, which was introduced by the shadow Attorney General, the honourable member for Epping, he spoke about the Government's reforms. One would have thought it would have made these reforms years ago. There is no sudden reason for the reforms he outlined. The Bail Act was introduced by Frank Walker, the then Attorney General.

Mr Scully: Frank did it again.

Mr KERR: Yes, the Left did it again. The Leader of the House never misses an opportunity to get stuck into the Left and blame them for what happened, and he is not always wrong either.

Mr O'Farrell: He is a troglodyte, he is a Terrigal.

Mr KERR: Is he? But he keeps caving in, so he is a troglodyte. The Attorney General was right when he said that the determination of bail is not the determination of innocence or guilt. However, the public needs to be protected by strong bail laws. Before the recent election the public was told that, but through subsequent events it is clear that the public is not protected. Each event that forms the basis of the Government's bill could have been clearly foreseen.

Mr SCULLY (Smithfield—Minister for Roads, and Minister for Housing) [11.17 a.m.]: I move:

That this debate be now adjourned.

The House divided.

Ayes, 51

Ms Allan
Mr Amery
Ms Andrews
Mr Bartlett
Ms Beamer
Mr Black
Mr Brown
Ms Burney
Miss Burton
Mr Campbell
Mr Collier
Mr Corrigan
Mr Crittenden
Ms D'Amore
Mr Debus
Ms Gadiel
Mr Gaudry
Mr Greene

Ms Hay
Mr Hickey
Mr Hunter
Mr Iemma
Ms Judge
Ms Keneally
Mr Knowles
Mr Lynch
Mr McBride
Mr McLeay
Ms Meagher
Ms Megarrity
Mr Mills
Mr Morris
Mr Newell
Ms Nori
Mr Orkopoulos
Mrs Paluzzano

Mr Pearce
Mrs Perry
Mr Price
Dr Refshauge
Ms Saliba
Mr Sartor
Mr Scully
Mr Stewart
Mr Tripodi
Mr Watkins
Mr West
Mr Whan
Mr Yeadon

Tellers,
Mr Ashton
Mr Martin

Noes, 36

Mr Aplin
Mr Armstrong
Mr Barr
Ms Berejiklian
Mr Cansdell
Mr Constance
Mr Debnam
Mr Draper
Mr Fraser
Mrs Hancock
Mr Hartcher
Mr Hazzard
Ms Hodgkinson

Mrs Hopwood
Mr Humpherson
Mr Kerr
Mr McGrane
Mr Merton
Ms Moore
Mr Oakeshott
Mr O'Farrell
Mr Page
Mr Piccoli
Mr Pringle
Mr Richardson
Mr Roberts

Ms Seaton
Mrs Skinner
Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Souris
Mr Stoner
Mr Tink
Mr Torbay
Mr R. W. Turner

Tellers,
Mr George
Mr Maguire

Pair

Mr Gibson

Mr J. H. Turner

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Motion for adjournment agreed to.

BANKSTOWN AIRPORT

Debate resumed from 1 May.

Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [11.27 a.m.]: I support the motion moved by the honourable member for East Hills relating to Bankstown Airport. The first part of the motion notes the announcement on 9 April by Federal Ministers Tuckey and Minchin concerning the Sydney Basin airports which are, of course, Bankstown, Hoxton Park and Camden. One of those airports is the subject of the present motion. A number of aspects of the announcement have attracted considerable interest. In relation to Bankstown, the most obvious aspect is that the Federal Government does not now require Bankstown Airport to take any overflow capacity from Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport. The site is being sold but there are no special development obligations attaching to the sale, so the airport does not have to be developed. The change in the Federal Government's position has been put down by those Ministers to changes in the aviation environment since 11 September 2001, the collapse of Ansett and the use of larger aircraft, especially on regional routes. I quote from a media release issued by Ministers Tuckey and Minchin, which states:

Changes to the aviation environment since September 11 2001, the collapse of Ansett and the trend to using larger aircraft, particularly on regional routes, means there is no longer a need for Bankstown Airport to develop an overflow capacity to supplement Sydney Airport.

That statement has been interpreted and presented as a substantial retreat by the Federal Government. Certainly the Government had a quite insane proposal for the expansion of Bankstown Airport. It would have meant more aircraft, more regional aircraft and inevitably jets at Bankstown Airport, which would have had an unacceptably adverse impact on the amenity of the local area, not just for residents at Bankstown but also for my constituents. There were other reasons to oppose the Federal Government's plan for expansion. Most obviously, there were not adequate facilities to service such an expanded airport. Clearly, that obvious statement of fact was not accepted by the Federal Government.

When this motion was debated in the House last week the honourable members for Vaucluse and Wakehurst spent some considerable time attacking the State Government in relation to the inadequacy of infrastructure facilities. While I do not accept their arguments, they nonetheless conceded that the facilities were inadequate to service an expanded Bankstown Airport. It is a great pity that the Federal Government has not listened to the sorts of arguments advanced by the honourable member for Wakehurst and the honourable member for Vaucluse.

The original proposal for the expansion of Bankstown Airport always had a tinge of fantasy about it—it just could not be serious. Even though the notion appeared fantastic, that would not have stopped the Federal Government from pursuing the option. After all, this is the mob who gave us the bizarre proposal at Holsworthy and who abandoned Badgerys Creek. The whole process to date has been incoherent and ramshackle. In that context, the honourable member for East Hills is eminently justified in calling for an environmental impact statement [EIS]. Of course, the Federal Government steadfastly refused to conduct an EIS even for the proposed expansion of the airport. That stance was always unacceptable but it is indicative of the contempt that the Federal authorities have for the residents of south-western Sydney and others affected by the operations at Bankstown.

My constituents have generally welcomed the Commonwealth Government's retreat from its plans to expand Bankstown Airport. However, their delight has not been without qualification. Many people are bitter and angry that the proposal was made at all as it caused unnecessary concern and anguish. The proposal had no merits and the Federal Government knew, or should have known, precisely that. Another restraint on celebration is that there is, of course, nothing to stop the Federal Government resuscitating the idea at some stage in the future. I can see nothing in the Tuckey-Minchin media release that precludes a future expansion of Bankstown Airport if they choose to pursue that option.

This concern is underlined by the reasons proffered as an explanation for not proceeding with the current expansion. Those reasons do not include the fact that the site was totally inappropriate and that the decision to choose Bankstown was wrong and focus should have instead been on issues that would reduce the number of aircraft movements. As a matter of logic, if the number of aircraft movements were to be increased one would expect the Federal Government once again to propose the expansion of Bankstown Airport. The other concern that my constituents have expressed, and another reason why they are not too excited about this announcement, is that the proposal involves the privatisation of Bankstown Airport.

Privatisation disturbs a number of people. There is a genuine, legitimate and general disquiet about selling things that are owned by the people of this country, and there seems to be a perception that it is no longer an aim of government to develop this nation. There is also concern that privatising the airport will cause its operations to be dominated by the motive of private profit rather than public good—that is, the conduct of the airport's operations and its impact upon my constituents will be determined by the desire to maximise the buck rather than to work out what will benefit the public. For those reasons, there are considerable reservations about the announcement. While we are delighted that the Federal Government has walked away from this lunatic plan, we are suspicious that it might revive it and we are concerned about privatisation.

Ms JUDGE (Strathfield) [11.32 a.m.]: I support the motion moved by the honourable member for East Hills regarding the Federal Coalition Government's plan to sell Bankstown Airport. When this motion was last debated in the Chamber some Opposition members—particularly the honourable member for Wakehurst, who represents an electorate situated on the opposite side of Sydney to the airport—expressed certain anxiety. The honourable member for Wakehurst asked why the honourable member for East Hills kept bringing up the issue in this place. Rather than whingeing and moaning, the honourable member for Wakehurst should applaud and commend members such as the honourable member for East Hills and the honourable member for Bankstown, who spoke so eruditely about this issue, for raising the banner and taking up the cause of protecting their local communities. We should say, "Good on you! You are prepared to speak in this Chamber to make sure that this issue stays at the forefront of people's minds and is not put on the backburner"—where perhaps some Opposition members would like it to stay.

Following the earlier debate on this motion, I conducted some independent research and managed to get a copy of the Bankstown Airport's annual report for 2002. Let us consider the status quo. The report contains the statement "The Future Looks Good; Key Facts". However, one must ask: For whom does the future look good? It might look good for the profit margins of those who would purchase the site, but what about local residents? What about my constituents in the electorate of Strathfield or the residents of Homebush, Homebush west, Croydon, Croydon Park, Enfield, Summer Hill and Ashfield. My community already has to "share the pain". That is an unusual philosophy that involves sharing the disease—in this case noise—by spreading it around like severe acute respiratory syndrome. My constituents in Strathfield are already bombarded by the noise of long-haul jets. Many residents complained to me about aircraft noise when I was mayor of Strathfield, and even before that. So much uncertainty surrounds the Federal Government's proposal. The annual report states:

not seven hours a day—

Who else will join that list of companies? How many more planes will fly in and out of the area 24 hours a day? I feel sorry for local residents who could be bombarded by more aircraft noise. Earlier today the honourable member for Davidson referred to another development issue. He mentioned procedural matters and talked about fair and just compensation. Who will compensate the residents of Bankstown if the expansion proposal goes ahead? A big question mark is hanging over their heads. I have written a letter to Senator Minchin about this matter, which I will post today. It states:

That is the area that I have been elected to represent and to fight on behalf of. The letter continues:

this is a most important issue, which was also raised by my colleagues—

Let us not forget nature in this equation. The letter goes on:

No-one in my area has been told that local residents will have the chance to participate in the decision-making process. The letter concludes:

Mr ASHTON (East Hills) [11.37 a.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members representing the electorates of Vaucluse, Wakehurst, Bankstown, Liverpool and Strathfield for their contributions to the debate on this motion. I also thank the Opposition for agreeing to support it. The motion calls for a curfew to be introduced and specified in the sale documents, for an environmental impact study to be conducted and for the retention of the aviation museum at Bankstown. I appreciate that the honourable member for Vaucluse has stated his support for these proposals and has indicated that he, like the honourable member for Strathfield, intends to write to the Prime Minister, the Federal Minister for Transport and Regional Services and to all others involved. I thought the contribution by the honourable member for Wakehurst was typical of the—

Mr Debnam: Point of order: I must correct the record. The honourable member for East Hills is doing a good job presenting the concerns of his constituents. More power to him. I am sure that the Federal Government will take a very sympathetic approach to all community concerns.

Madam ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Andrews): Order! There is no point of order.

Mr ASHTON: That is right. If the Federal Government takes a sympathetic view of it, perhaps the Opposition will too. If it did not, it would have opposed the motion. The honourable member for Wakehurst condemned me for moving this motion and asked why we need to know about it as the information had appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald and the Daily Telegraph? We still believe in democracy and, as the honourable member for Bankstown said, we should be able to receive information. The information was supposed to be faxed to Liz Kernohan, the former member for Camden, as secret Coalition knowledge but the Government picked it up. The honourable member for Wakehurst argued that I was wasting time, but Bankstown Airport is completely within the boundaries of my electorate and impacts on hundreds of thousands of people, not only in the electorates of Bankstown, Liverpool and Strathfield but also in the electorates of Menai, Granville and Macquarie Fields. In total 700,000 to 800,000 people are probably affected.

We are pleased that the jobs at Bankstown Airport will be retained because it will not be closed down. I do not give much credit to certain groups in the Bankstown area. One group with one member, which meets in a telephone booth, wants the airport closed down and dug up because of the sand under it so a Disney World can be built there. Another group wants a curfew and an environmental impact statement. People power in our region stopped a second Sydney airport at Holsworthy, which would have absolutely destroyed the southern and south-western suburbs of Sydney. Given the spaghetti nature of flight paths it would have also destroyed the lifestyle of many people in parts of Sydney that people thought would not be affected. If Bankstown Airport were sold, the Federal Government would still have some power over it and I am sure would be asked to increase the size of the planes and the number of jet aircraft that use the airport.

I am not a capitalist, but I know that a company or property is bought to make a profit, to expand interests or to be listed on the stock exchange. For example, the NRMA was a good mutual operation for 70 or 80 years and now that it has been demutualised it is going down the drain and the shareholders are suffering. My car insurance has virtually doubled, not because I am a bad driver but because the NRMA cannot run its business any more. A couple of weeks ago AMP shares were $25 each and now they are down to $5 or $6. If Bankstown Airport is sold, and the Government does not make the expected profit, rates will be increased. Smaller operators in the country will not use it and they will try to go to Kingsford Smith airport. They will then be forced out of Kingsford Smith airport and will have to pay the higher rate to go to Bankstown Airport, and the cycle will continue. They will fly 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It will not be the name of a television show; it will be Bankstown as it is, only with bigger planes and more people. The Government still opposes an extension of Bankstown Airport. This motion is a tactic to have the matter noted in this House. I thank all speakers and the Opposition for their support of the motion.

Motion agreed to.

DROUGHT ASSISTANCE

Mr STONER (Oxley—Leader of the National Party) [11.43 a.m.]: I move:

(1) welcomes the recent rain in some areas of New South Wales.

(2) notes that many areas of New South Wales have not received rain and that follow-up rain is required across the State.

(3) notes that the impact of the drought on farming families in rural communities in New South Wales will continue for several years.

(4) calls on the New South Wales Government to provide meaningful assistance to drought-stricken farmers and rural communities.

I am sure every member of this House will join with me in welcoming the rain that has recently fallen in some areas of New South Wales. It is particularly important that rain has been recorded in some of the most drought-affected areas of the State, such as Brewarrina, Bourke and Louth, which received falls of up to 50 millimetres. However, it is essential that this House realises that many areas of the State have not received rain or are in desperate need of follow-up rain to ensure that the drought is broken. The drought conditions that still afflict more than 99 per cent of the State have caused immense damage to the economic and mental wellbeing of our farmers and rural communities, who will take several years to recover. Normally, rain falls with monotonous regularity at Comboyne, but this year it has been extremely dry.

Mr Gaudry: The rain in New South Wales falls are mainly on the coast.

Mr STONER: That is true, but many of our farmers are well and truly cash-strapped from trying to survive. The drought support workers who are the interface between government agencies and farmers have publicly stated that farmers are still suffering major financial pain, and will be for some time to come. I am pleased that there are some positive signs that the drought may be breaking and that our farmers are fighting back against the elements. Farmers in northern New South Wales are in the process of planting what may turn out to be Australia's biggest grain crop, weather permitting. On the other hand, there is not enough soil moisture in many areas in the south of the State for any planting to take place. Earlier today the honourable member for Wagga Wagga lamented the continuing dry conditions throughout his electorate. We have to constantly demonstrate in this House that rain in one part of the State does not mean an end to the drought across New South Wales.

Whilst the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics [ABARE] predicts that the area given over to grain this winter will increase by 12.5 per cent on last year to a record 20.5 million hectares, sowing may not be possible in some areas and another season will pass by in those areas without a crop. For those farmers and communities that have not benefited from recent rain another long and hard winter looms large. It is clearly incumbent upon this House to help these people and their communities through their difficult time. It is important to remind the House of some of the effects of drought, especially as no member of the Government has deemed the drought that is affecting more than 99 per cent of the State to be worthy of Government business. Figures released in March show that ABARE forecasts that the drought could slash 0.75 of a percentage point off Australia's economic growth, or $5.7 billion in value to the nation's economy in 2002-03.

The bureau expects farm sector exports to fall by 13.5 per cent in 2002-03. Drought-inflated food prices have contributed to negative household savings for the first time in 40 years, proving that the drought affects everyone in New South Wales, not just those living and working in the country. The Centre of Policy Studies at Monash University expects a contraction in regional economies, measured by gross regional product, of 15 per cent to 20 per cent. Seventy-five per cent of all farms nationwide are predicted to record a loss this financial year, with farmers in New South Wales facing the biggest losses of all Australian States with predicted farm business losses of $60,000. The year 2002-03 looks like being one of the worst years on record for grain producers, with the national winter crop harvest of 15.4 million tonnes down 24.3 million tonnes from last season, the lowest since 1982-83. New South Wales was the hardest hit State with a fall in production of 77 per cent.

These figures clearly show what we all know: this drought has been extreme and has taken a significant toll on our farmers, rural industries and communities. That is why the National Party today renews its call for the Government to provide meaningful assistance to drought-stricken farmers and communities. This issue is too important to play politics with, but nonetheless the National Party has been concerned throughout this drought that the Government has not provided meaningful assistance directly to farmers.

This concern was heightened in March, when the New South Wales Farmers Association revealed that at that point in time only $11 million in direct cash assistance had reached farmers. A further appropriations bill, debated in this House earlier this week, showed the updated figure was $12.8 million, which comes from the Treasurer's Advance. The New South Wales Farmers Association also revealed that at least one-third of the money labelled as drought assistance was swallowed up by bureaucratic salaries. The National Party is also concerned that the Government has refused to work with the Federal Government to reform the exceptional circumstances program. This is despite the best efforts of the Commonwealth, which wants to make the provisions of the assistance more generous, including cash grants of up to $60,000.

It is unacceptable that, instead of fixing the exceptional circumstances system in partnership with the Commonwealth, Labor has chosen to hypocritically criticise the exceptional circumstances program to avoid its own obligations. Exceptional circumstances funding remains extremely important even though in some parts of the State the drought has broken, at least to some extent. The exceptional circumstances provisions need to be fixed, improved and made more responsive and flexible because the impacts of the drought will continue for years. With the vagaries of the weather of this country, nothing is more certain, apart from a flood being on its way at some stage, than that we will have another drought.

I call on the House to note the benefits of recent rains, the importance of follow-up rain, and the absolute imperative for the Government to provide ongoing and meaningful assistance to farmers and rural communities. I call on the Government to work co-operatively with the Federal Government. I urge the State Government not to play politics on this issue and to direct an appropriate quantum of meaningful assistance to both farmers and their communities, including small businesses in country towns, such as produce stores and the like, which have been directly and significantly affected by the drought.

Mr CAMPBELL (Keira—Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business) [11.52 a.m.]: I move:

It was interesting that the Leader of the National Party spoke about refraining from political point-scoring, and the need for the State Government to work with the Federal Government. That was the line he ran with, all the time bagging the State Government and making political points. That is the nub of the contribution by the Leader of the National Party. The fact is that the Federal Government has insufficient strategies to deal with this issue. However, as the Leader of the National Party correctly noted, recent falls of rain have given hope to primary producers across some of the State. The useful rains on 21 February this year provided the first real sign that the drought may be weakening.

It is also pleasing to note that the New South Wales Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, the Hon. Ian Macdonald, advised today that some areas in the north of the State and on the Central Coast and North Coast have moved out of drought. Unfortunately, the February rains were not statewide, and in any case many farmers did not receive follow-up rain. Consequently, just over 92 per cent of New South Wales is still drought declared. The Leader of the National Party demonstrated that he is a bit off the pace in that regard in that he put the figure at 99 per cent. There is a glimmer of hope and some little good news in the statistic that the portion of the State that is drought affected has been reduced from 99 per cent to 92.9 per cent, as I understand it. But, while we may see a slight reduction in the drought area in coming months in some areas fortunate enough to have received follow-up rains, this is by no means certain.

On the brighter side, the widespread rainfall in February alleviated a looming disaster associated with a serious stock and domestic water shortage across the State. The follow-up rain has filled still more dams and allowed some farmers to cease hand-feeding. Small areas in the north of the State have even been fortunate enough to have had continuing rain since February. However, due to the extreme nature of the drought, even heavy rains have not significantly improved soil moisture profiles in many areas. In some other cases they have been too late to allow significant pasture growth because of the onset of cold weather.

The Leader of the National Party correctly observes in his motion that the drought will impact adversely on farming families for many years to come. In the case of producers who rely solely or mainly on cropping, 2002 winter crop yields were down by as much as 75 per cent and plantings were low to non-existent in many summer cropping areas. The net result in 2002 was the loss of 75 per cent of the wheat crop, 70 per cent of the rice crop and 60 per cent of the cotton crop. Some of these farmers have not had a reasonable harvest for two or more seasons, having lost two summer crops and one winter crop in a row. And, while reasonable falls of rain have led to reports that more than the usual level of planting of grain crops will occur in many cropping areas, there is no guarantee that these forecast plantings will occur, or be successful, unless more rain falls.

Generally speaking, from a winter crop perspective, we still have until the middle of June before further rainfall-related delays in sowing times start to have a significant impact on yields. On current indications, sowings are expected to be viable to the north and east of Dubbo, provided there is follow-up winter and spring rain. Further rain on 13 and 14 April across the north of the State, and particularly in the Coonamble and Coonabarabran area, means that there is now enough soil moisture in much of that region to plant a winter crop. West of the Newell Highway and south of Dubbo, however, conditions are much patchier and generally deteriorate, for cropper and grazier alike, the farther south one goes. Elsewhere, rainfall around Brewarrina, Milparinka, Engonia and the upper western area of the State over the weekend of 27 April came just in time to germinate pasture in that area prior to winter.

Recent falls in the far north-west corner of the State in the Tibooburra-White Cliffs area will provide reasonable winter grazing conditions. On the tablelands, however, pasture response to rain has been minimal and there has already been significant de-stocking of cattle on the Southern Tablelands in the past week or so. Even with rain, it is now doubtful whether we will get enough pasture growth in some tablelands areas before winter sets in. As a result, most stock on the tablelands will need to be hand fed from June through to September.

With fodder shortages and grain prices still high—barley at $300 a tonne and sorghum at $230 a tonne—it will indeed be a hard winter for livestock producers. And with stocking rates in some regions perhaps the lowest on record, it will be a long time before many livestock producers recover financially from this drought. In the New South Wales Western Division, for example, sheep numbers are reported to have fallen by as much as 75 per cent, from between the seven million to nine million in the region in a usual year, down to an estimated two million. This is 50 per cent lower than for the drought in 1942, when sheep numbers fell to four million. With this level of de-stocking, and the poor prospects faced by croppers in recent times, it is not surprising that the total gross value of agricultural production in New South Wales has fallen by an estimated $2.4 billion.

The current drought is generally regarded as the worst for the past century, if not longer. From the middle of 2002 it became obvious that the Federal Government's exceptional circumstances drought assistance package was failing our farmers. The failure at the Commonwealth level arose for two basic reasons: one, farmers have to be in drought for far too long before an application for Commonwealth exceptional circumstances assistance could be lodged; and, two, the Commonwealth takes too long to assess individual applications for exceptional circumstances assistance. The result was a deepening crisis among farm businesses. Recognising this, and that State governments also have a duty to help rural communities in times of need, the Carr Government acted quickly. In the space of a few months, we introduced a comprehensive drought assistance package consisting of well over 30 new measures. The problems with the Commonwealth's exceptional circumstances package stand in stark contrast to the $85 million in drought assistance the Carr Government will spend by the end of June.

It is important to note that the New South Wales Government's drought package was developed with input from farmers. The assistance measures are targeted to the specific needs of farmers and will dovetail with exceptional circumstances [EC] assistance when it is eventually forthcoming. To be fair, the Commonwealth has taken steps to reduce the processing time of EC subsidies, and turnaround times have improved dramatically when compared to the 10 weeks or so it took the Commonwealth to process the first application for the Bourke-Brewarrina region. Recently the Federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Warren Truss, gave the New South Wales Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, the Hon. Ian MacDonald, an assurance that the Commonwealth would try to turn around all EC applications within four weeks from the date of lodgement.

However, since giving that assurance the five New South Wales applications currently before the Commonwealth have not been determined within the time frame. An application for EC assistance for the South Coast and Moss Vale region was lodged with Minister Truss on 14 March, almost eight weeks ago, and has still not been approved. Two others, one for the South Western Slopes and Plains and one for stone fruit producers in Young, have been with Minister Truss for more than five weeks. The remaining two applications, one for the central and southern tablelands and one for the central western slopes and plains, have been with Minister Truss for more than seven weeks. Once a region finally becomes eligible for EC assistance the New South Wales Government and the relevant farming community pull out all stops to lodge an EC application as soon as possible.

Up to 35 or 40 people may be directly involved in the preparation of a single application. It is extremely disheartening for all concerned when an application gathers dust somewhere in a Commonwealth Government office. Currently the Commonwealth has declared less than 70 per cent of New South Wales eligible for EC assistance, even though up to 99 per cent of the State has been in drought for months. The five applications currently before the Commonwealth cover an additional 25 per cent of the State. However, according to the latest Commonwealth figures released by Minister Truss on 10 April 2003, as few as 1,457 of the State's 42,000 farmers have received only $3.5 million in full EC assistance since the drought began. The Federal Government is dragging the chain.

Mr PICCOLI (Murrumbidgee) [12.02 p.m.]: I support the motion moved by the Leader of the National Party. Everyone welcomes the recent rains in certain areas of New South Wales. A couple of months ago my electorate had up to five inches of rain with a further inch a couple of weeks later. But the rain in the south was a little early, and plenty of areas in New South Wales missed out. It is important that the media in Sydney and metropolitan-based members of Parliament realise that the drought is not over. Current rains have been very patchy and perhaps not timed as well as many farmers would have liked. The window for sowing of winter crops by dry-area farmers is closing very rapidly. South-western and southern New South Wales areas are very dry. Unfortunately it seems that for the second year in a row farmers will miss out on winter crops.

In the past three or four years country New South Wales has experienced a bit of a resurgence because of the improvement in commodity prices for wool, wheat, lambs, et cetera. It is devastating to see increases in economic activity—which allow farmers to reduce their debt and, therefore, the burden on their businesses—stop suddenly as a result of the drought. Last year in this Chamber we heard the consequences and the real impact of the drought on farmers and rural communities. Metropolitan members of Parliament, and people in Sydney, on the coast, and in areas where rain has been pouring down in recent weeks should note that west of the Blue Mountains and in certain coastal areas the drought is far from over. The consequences for individuals in those areas are severe, not just economically but also socially and psychologically.

Many farmers and members of farming families have committed suicide as a result of economic difficulties caused by the current drought, which is far from over. I fear that some of those social and personal consequences will increase. I am not surprised that the Minister for Regional Development moved an amendment to the motion to condemn the Federal Government and congratulate the New South Wales Government. I would like to see a breakdown of exactly what the New South Wales Government has contributed to the drought, not just a generic number. I think the last figure I heard was $12 million, of which $10.5 million was spent on administration. Farmers and their communities want to see money in their areas, not more people employed in the Department of Agriculture in an administrative capacity.

If the figures are appropriate I will be the first to congratulate the New South Wales Government. I would like to see the total figure spent on the drought so far and then I would like to see how it is broken down into money given directly to farmers for freight subsidies, et cetera. The Minister asked whether I was supporting his amendment. I am a constructive member of this House and I always seek to do constructive things for the people of New South Wales. I will be the first to congratulate the Government if it can give me that breakdown of figures. If they can show me that they have made a genuine attempt to assist farmers in their areas—and, with the continuing drought, that is what they need—I will be the first to congratulate them.

Mr NEWELL (Tweed) [12.07 p.m.]: There is no doubt that this drought is the worst in the past century, if not longer. I appreciate the opportunity to take part in the debate and respond to comments made by both the Leader of the National Party and the honourable member for Murrumbidgee. According to the latest Commonwealth figures released by Minister Truss on 10 April as few as 1,457 of the State's 42,000 farmers received only $3.5 million in full EC assistance since the drought began. The Opposition has steered clear of the fact that the New South Wales Government has spent some $65 million in total on a range of programs to assist farmers and other organisations to overcome the impact of the drought.

The $12 million to which the Opposition referred comes from only two or three programs, and is not the total assistance from the New South Wales Government. The Opposition seems embarrassed by the figures, as it should be. The Federal Government's EC assistance totals only $3.5 million compared to the expenditure of $65 million by the State Government, which, by the end of June, will total $85 million. The Leader of the National Party seems embarrassed by his Coalition colleagues in Canberra and their miserable contribution to the drought

I am very pleased to state that today the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, Ian Macdonald, announced that some areas in the north of the State and some areas of the North Coast are no longer categorised as affected by drought, and I am very pleased that part of the coastal area includes the eastern half of the Tweed-Lismore Rural Lands Protection Board area and the eastern portion of the Kempsey Rural Lands Protection Board area. There is no doubt that drought has had a bad impact on many of this State's primary producers and that it will take them many years to recover. Minister Truss should revise the cut-off date for assistance when considering exceptional circumstances [EC] assistance applications because by 8 June approximately 3,000 farmers stand to lose interim EC assistance.

Today Minister Macdonald announced revised statistics on drought-affected areas. Those figures show that the State is no longer 99 per cent drought affected; it is currently 92 per cent drought affected. The Minister indicated that the areas that are no longer categorised as drought affected have been placed into a new marginal category. As a result of this Government's action, farmers whose properties in the marginal category do not get any benefit from follow-up rain will not have to endure the inordinate waiting period for assistance that applied in the past. I congratulate the Minister on taking an initiative which will ensure that the State Government will be around to help farmers if they become affected by drought by reducing long waiting periods for assistance—a feature of drought relief programs in the recent past. As I indicated earlier, the drought has certainly showed up some very serious flaws in the Federal Government's exceptional circumstances drought assistance package.

The Commonwealth Government has failed farmers whose properties had to be drought- stricken for far too long before an application for Commonwealth exceptional circumstances assistance could be made. The Minister for Regional Development has pointed out strongly the significance of some of those delays and how the Commonwealth Government, despite its assurances that applications for exceptional circumstances assistance would be handled expeditiously, failed to process them quickly. I am sure that all honourable members who participate in this debate will refer to delays. Coalition members may be embarrassed about them, but that is a matter they should raise with their Federal colleagues. The Commonwealth Government is taking far too long to assess individual applications for exceptional circumstances assistance.

The New South Wales Government's assistance measures include—apart from two programs referred to by Opposition members that are worth $12 million—a 50 per cent subsidy for the cost of transporting fodder to drought-affected stock and subsidies to assist farmers to transport stock to agistment or to slaughter. The New South Wales Government has devised a range of programs to assist primary producers, including exemptions from levies, a feral pig and fox control project worth $1 million which culled 10,000 feral pigs, wild dogs and foxes in the western division, and loans to cover the cost of farmers' contributions to the national ovine Johne's disease eradication program to ensure its continuation over the next 12 months. Of equal importance is the assistance given by the New South Wales Government to small businesses through payroll tax concessions and the $1 million that has been spent by TAFE on training employees of farmers and small businesses that have been affected by drought. [Time expired.]

Mr MAGUIRE (Wagga Wagga) [12.12 p.m.]: I support the motion moved by the Leader of the National Party and the contribution that was made to this debate by the honourable member for Murrumbidgee. As we speak, drought in the southern regions of the State is becoming worse by the day. I welcomed—as I am sure did all honourable members—recent rain that fell in several parts of the State and the relief it brought. Unfortunately, no rain has fallen in irrigated primary production areas in the southern parts of the State, and that is causing great angst to my community. Honourable members who have participated in this debate have pointed the finger of blame at the Federal Government and have claimed that the Federal Government did not respond quickly enough to the plight of farmers. I invite honourable members to ask themselves what they can do to assist their constituents who are confronting drought, and to concentrate on solutions to the crises that confront many people in their electorates.

Constituents want results. They want help, and they want it now. I ask Government members in particular what they have done to help constituents to obtain benefits that will enable them to feed their cattle, water their stock and pay their bills. I represent a rural electorate. I produced a drought information booklet which has been most beneficial for farmers who are trying to obtain information on assistance. Finding a starting point to obtain information is their greatest problem. I commend this booklet to honourable members as a reference. All State and Federal agencies are listed in the booklet. Not all people have access to the Internet, and some are confused about benefits that are available to them. For the edification of honourable members, I lay the booklet on the table of the House. I suggest that if honourable members wish to assist in alleviating the terrible crises facing people in rural areas as a result of the drought, they should use the booklet as a starting point.

My electorate office was inundated with calls for assistance by people from all walks of life. While I acknowledge that some measures have been put in place to assist small business operators and farming communities, I suggest to the State Government that those measures need to be reassessed because circumstances change as a drought wears on. Unfortunately back-to-back drought is forecast for my electorate. I sincerely hope that the forecast does not become a reality, but it appears likely. Subsidies are available for transportation of water and stock, but feed has become so expensive that graziers have had to destroy their core breeding stock. As a result, one of the terrible consequences of the drought is that the genetic lines of their entire breeding program have been lost. I urge the Government to revisit its drought relief measures because whole herds are being wiped out. Moreover, small business people such as publicans are indirectly being adversely affected by the drought.

The most significant effects of the drought will be felt two years from now, after the drought has broken, when primary producers need to restock. Because farmers have had to sell their stock as a result of the drought, their bank balances would suggest that they had a bumper year; but that is not the case. Government members can point the finger of blame at the Federal Government as much as they like, and the Opposition can blame this Government, but I appeal to honourable members today to get together, sort out the problems and come up with solutions to revisit the effects of the drought in my electorate, the Murrumbidgee electorate and other rural electorates represented either by the National Party or the Labor Party. We should sort out the issues rather than conduct debates; we should take action to ensure that effective drought relief is provided. Honourable members who have participated in this debate have put forward statistics that have been the source of argument and contradiction. I challenge honourable members to put all the facts and figures on the table so that we may adopt a constructive approach to providing assistance to those who face the effects of this terrible drought. [Time expired.]

Mr TORBAY (Northern Tablelands) [12.17 p.m.]: I welcome any opportunity to discuss drought and its impact upon regional and rural communities, particularly its effect on the Northern Tablelands electorate. Comments that have been made during this debate have appropriately acknowledged the issues associated with drought. I also welcome the tone of the motion and the amendment that acknowledges the significance of recent rainfall in some areas of the State and the overall economic flow-on effects of the drought to rural communities, other parts of the State and the nation. In common with other members, my electorate office was inundated with calls for assistance.

Rural people affected by drought do not understand the types of State or Federal assistance that may be available to them, and therefore are unable to analyse which level of government is responsible for providing particular types of assistance. Unfortunately these people were subjected to an appalling public display of the politics of blame. In the early stages of the drought the rhetoric was flowing much more freely than was drought relief assistance at a time when farming communities most needed support.

Indeed, much of the support that was available did not acknowledge that farmers were trying to keep their breeding stock and that many short-term issues needed to be resolved to ensure that the fallout after the drought would not be a prolonged downward pressure on farming communities. Much of that assistance allowed for some support, but did not allow farmers to reposition quickly so that they could get back on the road to productivity. There has been much comment about the level of support provided by the State Government. I believe it could do a great deal more. The motion of the Leader of the National Party calls on the New South Wales Government to provide meaningful assistance to drought-stricken farmers and rural communities, and I believe that is appropriate. Further, he said that this matter is above politics.

Mr Stoner: Above the State Parliament.

Mr TORBAY: The Leader of the National Party interjected as I was saying that farmers are not discriminating between parliaments; they want assistance because the drought is having a serious negative impact. Exceptional circumstances cannot be excluded from this debate.

[Interruption]

On the one hand the Leader of the National Party says that we should rise above politics, but he keeps interjecting in an endeavour to keep pressure off the Commonwealth Government regarding exceptional circumstances funding. That pressure is deserved; the Commonwealth Government has acted disgracefully. The Federal Minister urged Northern Tablelands farmers to apply for exceptional circumstances funding. He said, "Please lodge your applications. Where are they?" They were rejected, that is where they were. The Commonwealth Government rejected the applications after the National Party candidate made this a New South Wales election issue. The National Party candidate scored a record 15 per cent of the primary vote in the Northern Tablelands electorate. He said that record numbers of exceptional circumstances applications should be lodged. When they were lodged, they were rejected.

If exceptional circumstances funding is to be made available to farmers, the whole process needs to be revisited, but it cannot be revisited without constructive debate. That cannot be done by saying that the New South Wales Government should do more and leaving the Commonwealth Government out of the debate, as the Leader of the National Party seeks to do today. Farming communities want better drought assistance because of the negative impacts of this very serious drought; and this is not the first drought they have experienced. It is very important to note that the criteria for exceptional circumstances—and the States agreed to this; they are not off the hook—are so restrictive that one would have to be almost dead to be eligible for financial support. It is almost impossible to access exceptional circumstances funding when it is most needed because it is impossible to meet the criteria. That is why farming communities have had such difficulty gaining the meaningful access they require during these dreadful drought conditions. Farming communities deserve better drought assistance from governments. I hope that something positive comes out of this motion.

Mr STONER (Oxley—Leader of the National Party) [12.22 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members representing the electorates of Illawarra, Murrumbidgee, Tweed and Wagga Wagga for their contributions to this debate. It is important that exceptional circumstances funding remains at the forefront of the agenda of this House. The Minister for Regional Development informed me that the latest estimate indicates that drought-declared areas are down to 92.2 per cent of the State, and that is pleasing to hear. However, the recent rain does not necessarily mean that the drought is over in many areas. Even in country areas where the drought has broken, the pain has not ended for the communities. I have raised this issue because State drought support was too little and not inclusive enough.

For example, the fodder transport subsidy is 50 per cent of the cost of the transport of fodder, not of the fodder itself. During the drought, hay and grain prices escalated steeply across the State, because the drought extended so widely across Australia. The fodder transport subsidy, which was capped at $20,000, was of little use to farmers. In my electorate some dairy farmers with large herds are paying up to $7,000 per week for feed, while milk prices have remained at the low post-deregulation price of about 30� per litre. Similarly, small businesses in country towns have suffered, and are still suffering, from the impact of the drought. This week members of the Comboyne Ex-Servicemen and Citizens Club visited Parliament House. Their club is suffering because farmers have no money to spend on eating out or having a drink at their local club. The club is in dire straits. The New South Wales Government's continual criticism of the Commonwealth Government's criteria for exceptional circumstances assistance does not quite hit the mark.

Each State works out its specific exceptional circumstances packages with the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth has indicated a willingness to work with the State Government to refine the package. However, the Sydney-centric Labor Government has not availed itself of that offer, preferring instead to complain and criticise. The Government's inane amendment will be opposed: there is no need for it. My motion calls for meaningful assistance to drought-stricken communities. Surely the Government would agree with that. Who would disagree that the State's farmers need meaningful drought assistance? The Sydney-centric Labor Party would. Instead, it wants to amend a sensible and apolitical motion in order to score cheap political points.

The Federal Government has provided $900 million in real payments to farmers across the country. It has streamlined exceptional circumstances processes and is providing meaningful income support assistance to farmers across the State, while the State Labor Party has provided a paltry $12 million in drought assistance to the State's farmers. The drought and its impacts are far from over. It is high time that the Government stopped pointing the finger and got on with the job of listening to drought-stricken farmers and communities and delivering meaningful help.

Question—That the amendment be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Ayes, 55

Ms Allan
Mr Amery
Ms Andrews
Mr Barr
Mr Bartlett
Ms Beamer
Mr Black
Mr Brown
Ms Burney
Miss Burton
Mr Campbell
Mr Collier
Mr Corrigan
Mr Crittenden
Ms D'Amore
Mr Debus
Mr Draper
Ms Gadiel
Mr Gaudry

Mr Greene
Ms Hay
Mr Hickey
Mr Hunter
Mr Iemma
Ms Judge
Ms Keneally
Mr Lynch
Mr McBride
Mr McGrane
Mr McLeay
Ms Meagher
Ms Megarrity
Mr Mills
Ms Moore
Mr Morris
Mr Newell
Mr Oakeshott
Mr Orkopoulos

Mrs Paluzzano
Mr Pearce
Mrs Perry
Mr Price
Dr Refshauge
Ms Saliba
Mr Sartor
Mr Scully
Mr Stewart
Mr Torbay
Mr Tripodi
Mr Watkins
Mr West
Mr Whan
Mr Yeadon

Tellers,
Mr Ashton
Mr Martin

Noes, 30

Mr Aplin
Mr Armstrong
Ms Berejiklian
Mr Cansdell
Mr Constance
Mr Debnam
Mr Fraser
Mrs Hancock
Mr Hartcher
Mr Hazzard
Ms Hodgkinson

Mrs Hopwood
Mr Humpherson
Mr Kerr
Mr Merton
Mr O'Farrell
Mr Page
Mr Piccoli
Mr Pringle
Mr Richardson
Mr Roberts
Ms Seaton

Mrs Skinner
Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Souris
Mr Stoner
Mr Tink
Mr R. W. Turner

Tellers,
Mr George
Mr Maguire

Pairs

Mr Gibson	Mr Brogden
Mr Knowles	Mr J. H. Turner

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment agreed to.

Motion as amended agreed to.

SCHOOL MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS

Mrs SKINNER (North Shore) [12.37 p.m.]: I move:

That this House condemns the Government for failing to renew school maintenance contracts causing delays in routine maintenance and necessary plumbing and property repairs for up to 18 months.

The failure of the Government to renew school maintenance contracts is a most serious matter. It is causing sickness and lack of wellbeing for teachers and students, let alone other visitors who may well attend our schools. This problem has arisen because the Government failed to undertake routine maintenance. Things have got so bad that we are now required to undertake urgent repairs. The Carr Government has not proceeded with the cyclical maintenance program that was introduced by the Greiner Government. No real cyclical maintenance is now being undertaken. Contracts involving contractors working in particular Department of Education and Training districts have been delayed. They were due to be renewed by the end of April, but they will not be signed until the end of October. As I understand it, many of those contractors have been told that, in the meantime, they can carry out essential urgent repairs at these schools. There is a need for essential urgent repairs because there has been no routine maintenance. If a building with a leaking roof is not maintained it will not be long before it requires essential urgent repair and a serious investment of money.

I am sure all honourable members would have read the story in last weekend's newspapers concerning North Newtown Public School. I draw attention to this school as its problems typify the sorts of difficulties that our schools are facing. The North Newtown Parents and Citizens Association has been writing to the Department of Education and Training and to the various Ministers for Education and Training since September-October 2000. It has given me copies of that correspondence and of the minutes of its meetings. I will give honourable members some idea of the problems at the school. In term one in 2001 a parent requested that her child not lie on the floor during relaxation exercises as his face had swollen from contact with the carpet. The association outlines how mould on the carpet has continued to spread. School storerooms have continually flooded necessitating the removal of cupboards and equipment, some of which was ruined. In term two of the same year the association received letters from parents requesting that their children not lie on the carpet as this was exacerbating health problems such as asthma, sinus conditions, rashes and other allergic reactions.

The parents and citizens association wrote to the local member of Parliament, the Deputy Premier—who now happens to be the Minister for Education and Training—in December 2001 and he forwarded the letter to the then Minister for Education and Training. However, I was staggered to read in a media clipping that the Deputy Premier did not visit North Newtown Public School—which is in his electorate—until he became Minister for Education and Training. I could not believe that so I asked the president of the parents and citizens association, who confirmed it. The Deputy Premier has represented this school for 16 years, yet he did not visit it until he became Minister for Education and Training. That is an absolute indictment on the Deputy Premier and his representation of his constituency. Members must visit their local schools. The Deputy Premier's behaviour is extraordinary. The list of school maintenance problems continues. My good friend and colleague the honourable member for Southern Highlands has raised with me the difficulties being experienced at Bargo School in her electorate. She visited the school recently and reported:

At Douglas Park School, which is also in the electorate of the honourable member for Southern Highlands, parents raised with her the problem of mouldy, damp classrooms—which she saw at first hand. A demountable classroom has leaked and the carpet has been soaked. The wall of the demountable has rotted through—according to the honourable member, one can stick one's finger through the rotten wood. I have also received a copy of correspondence from the parents and citizens association at Francis Greenway High School in the Hunter. The letter states:

Our major concern is the indisputable state of disrepair that our school has fallen into over many years of neglect and/or 'band-aid' repairs that continue to leave the school in the same predicament time and time again.

The School continues to flood, children have to sit in wet clothes because they are saturated simply by moving between classes and rooms are put out of action while they are attempted to be blown dry.

The letter refers to a young student who was injured when she slipped on the wet stairwell leading from the girls' toilets. The parents and citizens association believes that is unacceptable, and I agree absolutely. I have received a copy of correspondence from the parents and citizens association at Eden Public School at Bega regarding an unsafe retaining wall. The wall is constructed from slabs of concrete with soil between the layers but much of this soil has washed out. Children play on the wall so this is obviously a safety concern. A parent has written about electrical wiring at Cronulla Public School that is inadequate to cope with either heating or airconditioning.

I have met representatives of the Federation of Parents and Citizens Associations of New South Wales, who tell me that school maintenance is high on their agenda for attention. They point out, as does everyone to whom I speak about this issue, that the Minister has approved essential urgent repairs simply because the Government has been shamed into it by media attention and so on. These repairs should not be essential or urgent; they should have been done over time as part of routine school maintenance. However, the Government has taken the necessary money from the maintenance contract program and allocated it elsewhere.

The Federation of Parents and Citizens Associations told me that leaking roofs, rotten carpets, cracked walls and timber walls riddled with borers are major problems in many schools. It mentioned specifically Emerton Public School, Wisemans Ferry Public School, Wyong High School, Crystal Creek Public School, Kingswood Park Public School, Warnervale Public School and Toukley Public School—and I am sure that the federation could have added to that list if given more time to do so. It pointed to changes to cyclical school maintenance as being the root cause of the problem. The Government's decision not to continue cyclical maintenance has meant that work is not done on a needs basis. There is no public accountability about the money spent on maintenance as all contractors' arrangements are labelled "business-in-confidence". The federation is unable to find out how much money is spent on maintenance. I have questions on notice about that issue, and I expect the Government to come clean about how much money will be required to fix our schools, which are in a serious state of disrepair.

Dr REFSHAUGE (Marrickville—Deputy Premier, Minister for Education and Training, and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs) [12.47 p.m.]: It is lovely to have the honourable member for North Shore shadowing my portfolio once again. The trouble is that she has not changed: She keeps on getting it wrong. Her motion calls on the House to condemn the Government for:

… failing to renew school maintenance contracts causing delays in routine maintenance and necessary plumbing and property repairs for up to 18 months.

That is absolutely and utterly wrong. Therefore, I move:

I must say from the outset that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Is it not marvellous that in making her first statement in the House about her new shadow portfolio the honourable member for North Shore maintains her brilliant eight-year tradition of getting it wrong? She is wrong, wrong, wrong. Absolutely no school will be forced to wait 18 months for routine maintenance or necessary building repairs. The current school facilities maintenance contracts are due to expire at the end of September 2003 and the Department of Education and Training and the Department of Commerce have already begun to rework the new four-year contracts. I am advised that these new contracts will be in place by October this year.

This means that both essential and preventative maintenance in our schools will continue as usual. This work will include cleaning of roofs and gutters, servicing of thermostatic mixing valves, servicing of emergency and exit signs, servicing of fire hose reels and hydrants, servicing of smoke and fire alarm systems, servicing of gas lines and heaters, and testing and servicing of light fittings. In addition, a program of replacement works will be implemented across the State to ensure repainting and recarpeting continues. The Department of Education and Training has also ensured that a next day service will be available to schools for emergencies such as leaking taps or roofs, or faulty switches and power points.

I remind the House of the Government's demonstrated strong commitment to school maintenance since coming to office in 1995. This commitment is evidenced by the significant increase in school maintenance expenditure by the Carr Labor Government compared with what was allocated by the previous Coalition Government. During the last year of the Coalition Government, 1994-95, only $85.3 million was spent on school maintenance. This year the Carr Government will spend $179.2 million on school maintenance. The Government has dramatically increased the commitment to school maintenance. The Government introduced a new comprehensive strategy for the delivery of school maintenance in 1997-98. Under this maintenance contract system all schools receive a regular and responsive maintenance service—we did that, the Coalition did not; maintenance funds are targeted to areas of greatest need; and a consistent standard of maintenance is being applied across all schools.

Each year, all schools receive routine maintenance to ensure that the facilities are maintained to an agreed standard. This involves school principals helping to plan annual maintenance works with their local maintenance contractor through the condition-based assessment process. This comprehensive maintenance contract system has proven very effective in the past six years. I have been told it has improved the standard of maintenance in public schools. But most importantly they say it has enabled schools to focus on their core business of teaching and learning. The honourable member for North Shore has demonstrated once again that she cannot be trusted with the facts. I commend the amended motion to the House.

Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [12.51 p.m.]: The new Minister for Education and Training has not visited North Newtown Public School—he has been the local member for 16 years! The Minister for Education and Training shows a profound lack of knowledge about what is happening in schools in his electorate and in schools across the State, which indicates a fundamental problem with his being the education Minister. This morning I spoke to representatives from various schools who confirmed that maintenance in schools is appalling and a disaster. In this regard I include schools on the Northern Beaches, but it is a statewide problem. When the Coalition was in government schools had a cyclical maintenance program. That program took away the partiality of choosing which schools got what. As a result, all schools knew that they would get $X for maintenance under that program. Schools and parents and citizens were happy, and school students benefited. Then along came the Labor Government and—like so many of the partial exercises it undertakes—under the guise of improving maintenance, it instantly attacked the fundamental delivery of maintenance to our schools. The Government said it would carry out maintenance on an as-needs basis. If schools were not in the right electorate, the Labor Government thought they did not have a need.

This morning I was told about problems in schools. For example, I was told that school principals, senior staff and presidents of parents and citizens groups have literally no idea—contrary to what the Minister just told the House—what will happen after May in relation to maintenance. In the past few years, many of them have suffered huge frustrations because they have not been getting the required maintenance for their schools. Primarily, maintenance should be preventative, but when things go wrong schools should be able to get a quick response. This Government does not provide any preventative maintenance in the bulk of schools. The Government has a fix-when-fail mentality, but when something goes wrong it can take years before it is fixed. Contrary to what the Minister just told the House—I hope he was not deliberately misleading the House and that it was just his inexperience in this portfolio, although I think it was probably more than that—he should know that many schools have had major items of maintenance outstanding for years.

The problems in schools translate into an unsatisfactory and, in some cases, dangerous learning environment. It is certainly a deleterious learning environment. This morning I was told by a president of a parents and citizens group that at a particular school on the Northern Beaches children cannot go into a classroom during wet weather because water pours through the roof. The carpet is wet, rotten and stagnating. Therefore, the children have an extremely uncomfortable learning environment. A representative from another school informed me about drainage problems throughout the grounds of the school. At another school tree roots are growing up through the asphalt. I know that is a constant problem throughout the State. Under this Government, tree roots that come through the asphalt are not covered by the maintenance budget but by the schools global budget. If parents have made a decent playground or learning environment and tree roots come through the asphalt at a later date it is not considered a maintenance issue. In some cases, schools have to find enormous amounts of money to pay for the tree root removal.

It does not matter whether these problems come under a formal or informal maintenance system: there is simply no maintenance. The New South Wales Teachers Federation is appalled. Maria O'Halloran has threatened legal action in relation to revelations about the state of North Newtown Public School. She has said that on occasions the safety of students and teachers is compromised. The Coalition has said on more than one occasion—in fact, it says it every day—that students are put into an unsatisfactory learning environment. Today teachers have told me that their school is in a shocking condition, it is an unsatisfactory learning environment and when they try to get maintenance carried out it is tail chasing, time wasting, frustrating and just hopeless. They said, "It is not a good educational delivery service." Maintenance in our schools is out of control. I join with all members of the Labor Party who have kept quiet today on this subject and say to the Minister, "Come and fix our schools". [Time expired.]

Mr ASHTON (East Hills) [12.56 p.m.]: Recently the honourable member for Bankstown put an item on the business paper referring to the vast sum of $320 million that was spent in the Bankstown electorate, a large proportion of which would have been spent on schools. Recently I announced that the Government is providing funds for the erection of a security fence at Picnic Point High School, which is in my electorate. A security fence has been installed at East Hills Boys High School. Obviously, funding and other parts of contracts that need to be—

Mrs Skinner: Point of order: This motion is specifically about maintenance. Security fences are not maintenance; they are capital works. I ask you to direct the honourable member to refer to the motion.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Mills): Order! The honourable member for East Hills will address his remarks to the motion or the amendment.

Mr ASHTON: I am speaking in support of the amendment moved by the Minister for Education and Training, not the original motion. I can speak to the amendment or the motion. The Government moved an amendment. The honourable member for North Shore should read the standing orders. Clearly, the Government is to be congratulated on the amount of money it has spent on schools. Parents do not care whether this is a substantive motion, a notice of motion or a standing order; they care about whether the work is being done in their schools. Work is being done. I have had great success with the Minister's office for the people in my area in relation to maintenance matters—for example, telephone systems needing to be replaced, problems with old sewerage systems or paint allegedly falling off walls. The Opposition referred to North Newtown Public School.

The Minister for Education and Training does not have to walk into every school in his electorate every day to look at maintenance issues. What is wrong with the officers of the department looking at them or teachers complaining about them? If they go to the Opposition they miss about eight points in the hierarchy; if they go to the Government they will get the job done much more quickly. Talk to the people who will do the job. They will have a look at the scope of the work. There is no doubt that the amendment moved by the Deputy Premier is appropriate. It seeks to do exactly what it says. It acknowledges record expenditure on maintenance, such as plumbing, repairs and the painting of schools. When I was teaching at Picnic Point High School the carpet was renewed and painting was done on a regular basis. It costs a lot of money to paint a whole school, but it is important that that be done.

Pursuant to sessional orders debate interrupted.

[Mr Acting-Speaker (Mr Mills) left the chair at 1.00 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]

MINISTRY

Mr CARR: I advise the House that in the absence of the Minister for Gaming and Racing the Minister for Roads, and Minister for Housing will take questions on his behalf.

PETITIONS

Age of Consent

Petition praying that the Crimes Act be amended to provide a uniform age of consent for lawful sexual activity, irrespective of sexuality, and to remove offences that refer to male homosexuality, received from Mr Gaudry.

La Mancha Cara-park Site Redevelopment

Petition requesting that La Mancha Cara-park residents be placed at the top of the public housing priority list, received from Mrs Hopwood.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

_________

PAYROLL TAX RATE

Mr BROGDEN: My question without notice is directed to the Premier. After the loss of 36,100 full-time jobs in April, which follows the loss of 18,600 full-time jobs in March and leaves New South Wales with fewer full-time jobs than in July 2000, will he guarantee genuine payroll tax relief in next month's budget?

Mr CARR: We just had an election in New South Wales, which will not have escaped the notice of members in this Chamber.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order.

Mr CARR: In that election, only a short period away, the Opposition ruled out any promise of a payroll tax reduction. The Leader of the Opposition said, when asked about it at a press conference, that they could not afford it. I will not speculate about the budget at this stage.

Mr Brogden: Point of order.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition seeks to take a point of order at a time when the Premier has barely uttered four or five sentences. The point of order of the Leader of the Opposition had better have some substance.

[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will hear the Leader of the Opposition in silence

Mr Brogden: The question I asked the Premier related specifically to the loss of jobs in New South Wales and whether he would reduce payroll tax.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat.

Mr Brogden: He is yet to answer that question.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of The Opposition will resume his seat.

Mr CARR: It is not as though the recent election was in the dim dark past; it is not as if it were back there with the Medes and Persians. It was a short time ago. Indeed, unless my memory has scrubbed out a week, this is the second sitting week of the new Parliament after the election a few short weeks ago. In that election campaign the Leader of the Opposition specifically ruled out a reduction in payroll tax.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of Opposition to order for the second time.

Mr CARR: He said he was going to the people, not able to promise a reduction in payroll tax. If he had promised one, who would have believed him? Members of this House will recall that under the Greiner Government, the previous Coalition Government, payroll tax was jacked up to 8 per cent. The Coalition has a record when last in government of increasing payroll tax to 8 per cent. Moreover, the Coalition went into the recent election campaign specifically ruling out a reduction in payroll tax, yet on the eve of the budget it asks the Government to rule one in.

NURSE RECRUITMENT

Ms D'AMORE: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Health. What is the latest information on the nursing profession in New South Wales and related matters?

Mr IEMMA: It is good to be asked a question by such a strong advocate for nurses as the honourable member for Drummoyne. Yesterday I outlined the effect on this State's public hospitals of the Commonwealth Government's proposals that were outlined last Friday. The effect of the Commonwealth's proposals and the position I outlined yesterday are not the end of the story, nor do they mark the end of the detail that was given by the Federal Government last Friday. Regrettably, I inform the House today of the latest instalment of what was outlined. Another key proposal of the Federal Government's supposed reform of the Commonwealth-State health care agreement is a proposal to fund 457 nursing positions in general practice surgery.

On the face of it, that appears to be quite a good initiative, but the only people who do not know we have a severe shortage of nurses in this country—indeed, it is an international trend—are the Federal Government, the Federal Minister for Health and Ageing, the Prime Minister and the Federal bureaucrats who advise the Federal Minister for Health. Where does Senator Patterson believe that these nurses will come from? On Friday, when details were provided, it was obvious that Senator Patterson and the Federal Government believe that the nurses will come from the public hospital system. What will happen is this. The Commonwealth will enter into an auction with the States; it will compete with the States to get nurses to enable it to fund the supposed reform package outlined by the Prime Minister two weeks ago.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Upper Hunter to order.

Mr IEMMA: That is an auction and a competition that the country simply cannot afford. Rather than Senator Patterson sitting down in consultation with the States and with the national clinical task force to work through proposals for genuine reform of the next health care agreement, she instead will set in train a process under which all the Ministers for Health will compete with each other for scarce nursing resources. That is an incredible position for someone who continually said throughout last Friday's meeting that she was committed to reform and to working with the States. The Federal Government will work against the States, which are trying to recruit nurses and keep them in public hospitals. Last Friday the Federal Minister for Health and Ageing did not reveal what the Commonwealth Government should be doing, namely, funding extra places at universities so that the whole system can benefit from more nurses supporting the public hospital system. This is yet another example of the way in which the Commonwealth is determined to place more and more pressure on public hospitals and the nurses and doctors who work in those hospitals.

Let me provide just one example. Charles Sturt University at Bathurst illustrates the failure of the Coalition Government to live up to its responsibility to fund nursing positions. Charles Sturt University received 2,500 applications for nursing courses this year, but guess how many places were funded? Out of the 2,500 applications, only 270 places were funded—a story that is repeated across the country. There is no shortage of people who want to study and take up nursing, but the fact is that the Commonwealth Government—just as it did with doctors—simply will not accept its responsibility and fund the places that are needed to ensure that our public hospitals have an adequate supply of nurses and doctors to keep the system going.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Murrumbidgee to order.

Mr IEMMA: Instead of working with the States and helping the States to continually boost the availability of nursing positions, the Commonwealth is setting in train a process under which the States will enter into an auction for nurses. That will cut across the initiatives that the States have been taking in the past couple of years to boost nursing numbers. I will outline to the House some of those initiatives. Since January 2002 the New South Wales Government has recruited an additional 1,100 nurses. Last week John Howard said in the proposals he outlined that that is not good enough. Despite the fact that this State recruited an additional 1,100 nurses, the Prime Minister decided that he would compete with the States in an auction to get those nurses. What an incredible situation!

More than 770 nurses have come back to the New South Wales public hospital system as a result of our Nursing Re-Connect Program, which enables nurses to make the transition back into the public hospital system. That is not good enough for the Commonwealth Government, which wants to dip into that pool and take those nurses out of our hospitals to fund the harebrained scheme that was outlined last Friday. This State has recruited more than 350 experienced nurses from overseas to the public hospital system, but they too will be a target for the type of auction envisaged by the Federal Government throughout the public hospital system in this State and other States. Our advertising campaign, Nurses—The Real Thing, has received over 35,000 inquiries.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Swansea to order. I call the honourable member for Coffs Harbour to order.

Mr IEMMA: Any inquiries that are translated into nurses coming back into the public hospital system will also be subject to competition from the Federal Government, which wants to steal them from the public hospital system. Another policy that is working to bring nurses back into the public hospital system is the Nurse Practitioner Program, which was pioneered by my predecessor, the Hon. Craig Knowles.

Mrs Skinner: No, pioneered by the Coalition.

Mr IEMMA: You wish!

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for North Shore to order. The Minister will be heard in silence.

Mr IEMMA: The Nurse Practitioner Program created 151 positions, and those nurses went straight into the public hospital system. This State’s hospitals are already planning for the extra pressure that the Commonwealth Government will place on this State’s hospital system. The program will provide 151 positions to ensure that nurses are available to staff emergency departments and to assist people who turn up after discovering that bulk billing will no longer apply to them, forcing them to seek care in our public hospitals. They are the initiatives that the State Government is taking in co-operation with other States to boost the numbers of nurses who are working in our public hospital system. We have not been shown a plan and we have not had any co-operation from the Commonwealth Government. We have an outline of a harebrained scheme for an auction in competition with the States across the country to recruit nurses.

Next Monday is International Nurses Day. The Government is proud of the contribution that nurses make to our public hospital system and to health care in this State. We are proud of their dedication, the work they do, and the commitment they show to the work of emergency departments right across the public hospital system. It is time that Senator Patterson took the advice of the national President of the Australian Medical Association, Dr Kerryn Phelps, who said it is time for the Commonwealth to go back to the drawing board and come up with a proper proposal for a new health care agreement.

[Questions without notice interrupted.]

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS

Mr SPEAKER: I acknowledge the presence in the public gallery of the Chairman of the Kokoda Track Board and friends, led by the former President of the Returned Services League, Mr Rusty Priest. I also acknowledge the presence in the gallery of the former member for Heathcote, Mr Ian McManus. I welcome them to the House.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

[Questions without notice resumed.]

PUBLIC HOUSING RENT INCREASE

Mr STONER: My question is directed to the Minister for Roads, and Minister for Housing. Why did he charge the Department of Housing whistleblower who exposed an internal memorandum directing staff to delay notification of rent increases until after the State election? Why is he shooting the messenger?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Minister will be heard in silence.

Mr SCULLY: This is all about the Leader of the Opposition trying to regain his reputation after that complete stuff-up yesterday when the Coalition members showed no flexibility in their tactics. They said, "Let's ask four questions in a row. We will ask the Minister. We will make the accusation, he is guilty." Then the Leader of the National Party said, "Let's ask the Premier why the whistleblower has not been sacked." As I have previously said, there was an internal review as to the appropriateness of staff releasing a memo that had not been authorised. They should not have put it out. Quite appropriately, they were counselled.

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Mr WHAN: My question without notice is to the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, and Minister for Natural Resources. What is the latest information on natural resource management and related matters?

Mr KNOWLES: I congratulate the honourable member for Monaro on his great win in that electorate, a terrific result, and on his first question. It was good to see the former member for Monaro gatecrashing the press conferences, which did him no good at all. He is history. The first point to make is that there is now one portfolio charged with the responsibility to manage the sustainability of our natural resources to underpin future decisions about land use and development control in the State. The Department of Land and Water Conservation and Planning NSW no longer exist. To get the balance right between economic, environmental and social demands we need to involve people external to government in the decision-making process. We need to let them have a say and take their views seriously. We will incorporate their good ideas and solutions into workable public policy and practical programs.

The Government has already begun that journey in the context of native vegetation reform. Ian Sinclair, who is well known to members on the other side of the House and to me in the context of health reform over the past four years, has been incorporated into that program. He has begun working with NSW Farmers, environmentalists, scientists, and the Government, to implement the reforms outlined by the Wentworth Group and embraced by the Premier and the Government just prior to the recent election, as part of our election policy. It is a model that I am very comfortable with. It is a model that the Government incorporated in the health reform process, with Ian Sinclair being a central part in reforming and rebuilding rural health around the State. The model will be incorporated in the reform process in the new portfolio.

As with the New South Wales Health Council, Ian Sinclair's committee is about putting some commonsense and commonly agreed objectives and definitions into the debate about sustainable natural resource management. The committee will recognise the rights of farmers to continue to work the land while ensuring that our magnificent rivers and ecosystems are protected. And so the story must go with water, salinity, catchment management, and protection of our coasts—the list goes on and on—with commonsense and local solutions within an overall framework to well-recognised problems. I want the people who know and understand the issues to have a real say. I want to simplify as much of the bureaucracy as possible. I want to bring together as many of the rules and regulations—

[Interruption]

The National Party members are always negative. Why can the new Leader of the National Party not be like the big National leader, John Anderson? In an article in a recent addition of the Australian Financial Review John Anderson stated:

Why can the Leader of the National Party not be like the big politicians in Canberra and get on board with some positive reforms, instead of whingeing and whining? No wonder he is still in Opposition; no wonder the National Party vote declined. For the record, it is not the first time that the National Party vote declined. In the past four elections the Coalition's vote has declined every single time. That is a matter of historical record: four successive declines in the Coalition vote, largely because of the sorts of attitudes just displayed. Why can the Leader of the National Party not be like John Anderson and offer, as Anderson did publicly, to work with the New South Wales Government on some of these reforms? The reforms are about reducing bureaucracy and letting local people have a real say. The reforms are about bringing all those rules and regulations together to make simpler the task of operating a farm, or a rural industry or a rural business, as well as ensuring the protection of our environment. There has been growth in regulation and that is because, over time, we have perpetuated the approach of dealing with—

Mr Stoner: Your government?

Mr KNOWLES: Well, it could not be your government because you have not been there for a long time. The Leader of the National Party will not be a member of the Government for a lot longer, the way he is performing.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wakehurst to order.

Mr KNOWLES: The layer-upon-layer approach of regulation has to be reformed. There are examples of duplication, inconsistency and contradiction. The honourable member for Lachlan will appreciate this. Recently I met a Lachlan River irrigator who told me of his desire to remove 10 willow trees that were clogging the river. But two years later, after dealing with four government agencies to remove trees that are regarded as pests, the trees are still there. That is not a satisfactory result.

[Interruption]

Oh, the Opposition spotted that! Yes, we are the Government. The real Leader of the National Party, the honourable member for Lachlan, is particularly interested in this story. That result was not satisfactory and it is something I do not intend to preside over, nor do I intend to preside over the mishmash of committees. A Macquarie Valley farmer told me that he sits on 22 committees. Everyone agrees, particularly following the work of the Wentworth Group, that integrated catchment management focusing on the whole needs of the catchment is the way to go. That should be the centre of our attention. Today I flag my intention to move down that path. We have too many government representatives turning up at the water management committees and catchment management boards, up to six different government departments at any one time. Often that means 12 officials, frequently with differing views, inevitably diluting local community content.

Today I flag that the Government will quickly move towards one government representative presenting the Government's view; a view that balances all the imperatives of sustainably managing our natural resources. The onus of resolving differences between agencies should be among the agencies themselves. Local communities should not have to bear the brunt of indecision and different positions by multiple government departments. Equally, it should not matter whether a government official is from the National Parks and Wildlife Service, NSW Agriculture or the Department of Sustainable Natural Resources. The official has to speak with one voice on behalf of the Government.

Mr George: About time.

Mr KNOWLES: Yes, it is about time. We hear a bit of commonsense from the honourable member for Lismore. I advise the House that I have written to all appropriate Ministers advising them of my intention to simplify government representation on water management committees and catchment management boards. That is just for a start. On water sharing, with the 10-year plans to commence on 1 July there remains anxiety among some groups about the potential impact, particularly about how the end of a water-sharing plan creates a little uncertainty for licence holders and their need to make investment decisions.

[Interruption]

Why can the Leader of the National Party not be like John Anderson? He wants to work with us, but the Leader of the National Party in this House is sitting on the bleaches, in the peanut gallery, cackling away. He should do what John Anderson and others want to do.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of the National Party to order.

Mr KNOWLES: Whilst intending to proceed on 1 July, I will work with irrigation, farming and environmental groups and the banking community to give greater certainty and security, particularly at the cut-over period from one water-sharing plan to the next. While the details of this plan are obviously open for discussion with irrigators, my objective is to provide certainty and security. We need to maintain the joint objectives of environmental flows, viable farms and communities. The first priority under the Water Management Act is to ensure that our rivers remain healthy and flowing. That is not only in the environmentalists interests, it is also in the farmers interests, and they agree with that. To make that happen we need to ensure that water users are adequately supported during the transition. Environmental flows, keeping farmers on their farms, and structural adjustment as a residual option will underpin my approach.

In that context I also flag that the Government will work with irrigators who are, in relative terms, disproportionately affected as a result of the introduction of ground water sharing plans. Once we have the benefit of the Sinclair group's findings we will be in a position to begin the move towards integrated catchment management—models of governance that give local communities a greater say. Salinity, vegetation, water and soil are not separate issues; they are parts of the same issue—the conservation of our natural resources to underpin sustainable land-use practices. As I said earlier, these objectives were clearly mirrored by the Deputy Prime Minister at the meeting I had with him last Thursday.

[Interruption]

The great thing about being in Government is that we can do something about it. All that Opposition members can do—they have been on the Opposition benches for eight years and they have another four years in opposition—is whinge, whine, carp and criticise. It must be so depressing. All those men and women, who are getting older, will never have the chance of implementing any public policy. Whilst we are all getting a bit thinner on top, a little greyer and a little more lumpy around the middle, at least Government members can enjoy doing good things for people. The only thing that Opposition members can do is whinge and whine. It must be horrible. All they have to look forward to is another four years of nothing. They have another four years within which they can moan and groan. All their big ideas are just blown away by the wind. In contrast, Government members are getting on with implementing good public policy. In the context of the remarks I have made today, I undertake to work with the Deputy Prime Minister. We can work together. We can get results if we get that balance right.

CRIMES AMENDMENT (SEXUAL OFFENCES) LEGISLATION

Mr TINK: My question without notice is directed to the Premier. Given that this Government is treating the age of consent as a conscience issue and, given overwhelming bipartisan support in this House for tougher penalties against paedophiles, will the Premier allow the Crimes Amendment (Sexual Offences) Bill to be split to allow the issue of the age of consent to be dealt with separately from the higher penalties for paedophiles issue?

Mr CARR: The two concepts are inextricably linked. The reforms in the bill will ensure that equal penalties apply to child sexual assault offences. At present clusters of offences are scattered throughout the criminal law, which treats these offences differently. Without an equal age of consent, these anomalies cannot be rectified. The question for members of the House is clear: either they support equal treatment before the law, or they do not.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Gosford to order.

Mr CARR: Any proposal to split the bill would destroy its fundamental intention, which is to provide for the equal treatment of sexual offences against males and females. Penalty increases under the present regime would only further criminalise the actions of gay men between the ages of 16 and 18, thus worsening the current situation.

AUSTRALIAN WAR MEMORIAL IN LONDON

Mr MARTIN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Regional Development. How is a Central West company helping to create a permanent memorial to honour the service men and women of New South Wales, and related matters?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wakehurst to order for the second time.

Mr CAMPBELL: They went with songs to the battle. They were young, straight of limb, true of eye, steady and aglow. They were the one million Australians who went to war and the 100,000 who never came home. This year a special war memorial will be built to honour the Australians who served the cause of freedom from Crimea to Korea. The memorial will be built in London, the heart of the empire that so often called forth their service and for the sake of whose honour they so often died. This memorial, which is to be opened on Remembrance Day, the eighty-fifth anniversary of the end of the war to end all wars, will stand in Hyde Park corner opposite Buckingham Palace gardens. Its bush-coloured granite will be an unmistakable reminder to the bowler-hatted passer-by that those it commemorates came not from green and pleasant England but from the dusty towns and red brick suburbs of a country far away—places like Marrickville, Bendigo, Fremantle, Bundaberg, Footscray and Lithgow.

Those names will be etched into this memorial—places where the dead are long missed and long remembered. We in this land will not forget. The London memorial records a great national story, perhaps our greatest: Australians at arms. But the making of this memorial is a fine Australian story too. It is a New South Wales story. The memorial was designed by Sydney firm Tonkin Zulaikha Greer, the architects who designed the Vietnam memorial and the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Canberra. A Dee Why company, Stone Plus, will erect the memorial in London. Every member of this House will share the pride I feel knowing that this magnificent work will be crafted by stonemasons from New South Wales—in fact, from the great town of Orange.

The craftsmen come from McMurtrie and Co., stonemasons since 1870. In fact, it is the oldest business continually owned by one family in Orange. Their craftsmanship can be seen at the volunteers memorial in the Domain, which is not far from here. Owner Lee Bradbury, great-great-grandson to the founder, says that he is humbled and proud to be part of this project. Work starts next week and the company has only 2� months to complete the job. The company will operate double shifts to ensure that the work is done. It will create six new jobs to do it. McMurtrie is an excellent example of new opportunities being seized by communities in the State's Central West. Employment growth in Orange is 7 per cent—still above the State average. The town's population is growing at more than 1 per cent a year. People want to be part of it; they want to share it. Businesses continue to move in or expand.

This financial year alone the New South Wales Government has worked with businesses to help develop nine projects in the Central West worth more than $50 million. That has created 294 new full-time jobs. One would have to say that none of those enterprises is more honourable than the Australian War Memorial in London—something in which the whole community of Orange can take great pride. I urge every Australian travelling in Britain to visit the completed memorial. In the heart of old London, in the autumn mist and the sound of Big Ben, at the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them.

KING BROS BUS GROUP COLLAPSE

Mr OAKESHOTT: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, and Minister for Natural Resources, representing the Minister for Transport Services in another place. With 12 months of staff entitlements to 400 mid North Coast, North Coast and Wagga Wagga employees of the Kings Bros Bus Group currently under threat, what guarantees will the Government give to protect these workers entitlements if they are left out of pocket at the end of the process?

Mr KNOWLES: I thank the honourable member for giving me prior notice of his question. I will deal in a moment with the substance of that part of the honourable member's question that relates to security of services in the Port Macquarie community. However, it is worth placing that question on notice. I have been advised by the Minister for Transport Services that the Department of Transport has been working with Ernst and Young, the receivers of Kings buses, to ensure that local services are maintained. I am advised that the department is paying on a weekly basis for the provision of services contracted to Kings. Ernst and Young have advised the State Transit Authority that both school and town bus services will continue to run on current timetables during the sale process.

Eight of the nine Countrylink coach services previously supplied by Kings are now being provided by other operators. So, in the context of security and delivery of service to people in the Port Macquarie electorate, it is fair to say that the work of State Transit and the receiver has assured that. I can be less certain, though, about the substance of the honourable member's question. Unless the directors of Kings buses happen to be related to John Howard—like Pacific Textiles for example—those workers entitlements are not guaranteed under Federal legislation.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Murrumbidgee to order for the second time.

Mr KNOWLES: Is there a Stan Howard-type character in Port Macquarie who is secretly related, or who has some connection with Pacific Textiles? Because the Commonwealth Government's employee entitlement legislation does not guarantee 100 per cent of employees entitlements, the prospects for those individuals are not bright. The Special Minister of State in the other place has made the necessary adjustments to State legislation to require greater certainty for employees entitlements. If companies transfer liabilities to other companies, that has to be flagged. In the end, the issue of employees entitlements clearly is a Commonwealth responsibility. The failed Reith model, which was followed closely by the failed Abbott model, should be a source of shame to the Federal Government. I am confident that the honourable member for Port Macquarie and this Government will continue to press the Commonwealth Government on this issue. However, ultimately, unless there is a Stan Howard in Port Macquarie, the prospects look pretty bleak.

Mr OAKESHOTT: I ask a supplementary question. In light of the Minister's answer, what changes will he consider making to future State government contracts in order to avoid a similar debacle?

Mr KNOWLES: The primary interest of the State Government is to ensure—

Mr Humpherson: Point of order: Members who have been in this place for a long time know that a supplementary question must arise from the answer given by a Minister. The contents of the honourable member's question did not arise from the Minister's answer and therefore it was not a supplementary question.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard enough from the honourable member for Davidson. There is no point of order. The question was clearly a supplementary question.

Mr KNOWLES: I must advise the honourable member for Port Macquarie that it has been a long time since State jurisdictions had corporate affairs commissions—they were subsumed by the Commonwealth many years ago. The prime responsibility of the State Government—as is demonstrated in the case of Kings—is to ensure maintenance of service. I am pleased to report that I have been advised that that is occurring in this instance. I will certainly speak to the Minister for Commerce on behalf of the honourable member for Port Macquarie about the substance of his supplementary question.

NEW SOUTH WALES TOURISM PROMOTION

Mr BARTLETT: My question is directed to the Minister for Tourism and Sport and Recreation. How is the Government supporting domestic tourism?

Ms NORI: Before answering, I feel compelled to correct a statement made by the honourable member for North Shore, who implied that Amina Lawal would be executed on 3 June. An erroneous email is making the rounds: It is only her appeal that will be heard on 3 June.

Mr Hartcher: Point of order: There is a specific standing order that allows honourable members to correct statements made in this place. The purpose of question time is to permit questions to be asked and answers to be given. This is an important point, Mr Speaker. Ministers should not assume that they have a licence to speak about any subject they choose when giving answers during question time.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Minister may resume her response.

Ms NORI: Regardless of whether we refer to load factors on inbound flights, occupancy in five-star Sydney hotels or attendance at conventions, there is no doubt that the sector of the tourism industry with a high dependence on the inbound market is under severe challenge. The terrible events of the past 18 months have prompted the Australian Tourism Export Council [ATEC] to estimate that $2 billion will be wiped off Australia's exports as a result. The ATEC survey revealed that tourist arrivals in March were down by 11 per cent, they were down by 20 per cent in April, and by about 30 per cent in May, and arrivals for June are already trending down by about 20 per cent. Those figures are obviously having an impact on our international carrier, Qantas. We are very lucky to have a national carrier that is run as well as Qantas and that is as market savvy. If we did not, we could be in a worse position. I think Qantas deserves all the support it can get and I fully support the proposed strategic alliance between Qantas and Air New Zealand, providing regional airlines in New South Wales receive appropriate protection.

However, it is not all doom and gloom. Surprisingly, not only is domestic tourism in New South Wales, especially in regional New South Wales, holding up very well but also we have improved our tourism market share vis-�-vis the other States. That is because the Government has spent a lot of money on tourism—$15 million post September 11 and $1.3 million as a result of the bushfires over the past two summers. The figures for the December quarter from the national visitor survey prepared by the Bureau of Tourism Research are very pleasing. There has been a 2 per cent increase in holiday/leisure visitors to New South Wales over the previous year, while the number of visitors to Victoria has decreased by 4.7 per cent and Queensland has had only a slight increase of 0.8 per cent. We are obviously taking market share from our competitors, which is a good thing for this State.

The New South Wales market share of intrastate holidays and visitors was 33 per cent in 2002 compared with 31 per cent in the previous year. Our market share for total holiday/leisure visits was 35 per cent versus 25 per cent for Victoria and 23 per cent for Queensland. However, New South Wales achieved 42.5 million holiday/leisure visitor nights in 2002, which is an increase of 2.4 per cent over the previous year. That is the key indicator. In the same period Victoria's total holiday/leisure visitor nights decreased by 6.7 per cent and Queensland's decreased by 0.8 per cent. That tells me one important thing: The increase in tourism cannot be put down only to the fact that Australians generally are staying at home and travelling more within Australia. The fact that we have stolen market share from the other States tells me that our success is due also to the specific campaigns run by the State Government. We have run more campaigns than ever before. Not only have the campaigns been successful in their own right but the fact that we have consistently sent the same message has linked the various campaigns creating a potentiating effect, and we are now reaping the results.

The figures also tell me that, as we are over the worst consequences of the war in Iraq, the time is right to re-enter the domestic tourism market. Like the Australian Tourism Commission and our co-op partners, Tourism New South Wales has done the only sensible thing possible in this environment and put our international campaigns on hold until the market is able to hear our message. Yesterday the Federal Minister for Small Business and Tourism, Joe Hockey, and I announced an Australia-wide $7 million campaign linking existing New South Wales based tactical campaigns with the generic See Australia campaign. That joint announcement was somewhat historic, and I am pleased that Commonwealth-State relations have improved in terms of tourism marketing. I hope that that improvement continues.

The Commonwealth and all the States, including New South Wales, have agreed jointly that it would be best to combine our tourism efforts. The $7 million campaign kitty comprises both Federal funds and those from the individual States and co-op partners. If we extrapolate that expenditure over 12 months we can see that it is the equivalent of a $42 million national campaign. There will be a $900,000 campaign in New South Wales over the next two months involving television and print advertisements. The campaign will highlight Sydney and regional tourism destinations such as Coffs Harbour. We will re-enter international markets when those markets are ready and when our research reveals that our advertising will yield results. We have agreed on this campaign because it is the right thing to do at present. We are also seeking to inoculate ourselves against two possible future impacts: an increase in the Australian dollar and the fact that Singapore and Hong Kong will re-enter the international market as our competitors when the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome is under control.

RURAL CRIME

Mr PRICE: My question is directed to the Minister for Police. What is the latest information on the activities of police rural crime investigators and stock theft?

Mr WATKINS: The rural crime investigators that were established last year have been working hard to reduce stock theft throughout northern New South Wales. Crime that specifically targets rural communities is unacceptable at any time but it is particularly galling when there is an extended drought in certain parts of the State. That is why the Government's rural crime package was so important, and it has been effective. As part of Operation Villerville, the most recent attack on stock theft, more than 400 livestock trucks were inspected to ensure that everything was in order. Today's heavy vehicles are capable of moving stock very quickly to be sold a long distance away.

In a week-long blitz police rural crime investigators, in association with staff of NSW Agriculture, inspected 434 stock vehicles. The latest stage of the Operation Villerville campaign targeted saleyards at Maitland, Grafton, Casino and Kempsey. The major aim of the operation was to check the requirements of new transported stock statements, which must be filled in by owners and drivers before they take to the road. Today I inform the House of the results of the operation. Across Maitland, Grafton, Casino and Kempsey the overall compliance rate was 55 per cent: 240 trucks were found to be carrying the relevant transported stock statements; 32 per cent of owners and drivers had incorrect or outdated paperwork; and 13 per cent had no stock statements and, as a consequence, police issued 57 cautions to the drivers of those trucks.

While those figures show that there is clearly more work to be done, ongoing high-visibility operations will help inform rural communities of their responsibilities under the legislation and we should see compliance figures continue to rise. In that way, NSW Police and NSW Agriculture officers will have greater success in targeting stock thieves and cattle duffers. It will also enhance officers' ability to quickly identify thefts or other illegal activities. Information gathered during Operation Villerville will now be compiled and analysed and will assist in other investigations.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is far too much audible conversation in the Chamber. A number of members are interested in the Minister's response. The Minister will be heard in silence.

Mr WATKINS: This latest rural crime crackdown is part of the ongoing commitment of the Government to policing in country communities, something that is of great importance and interest to those members of this House who represent country communities. The first Villerville operations were conducted at the end of last year in Wagga Wagga, Deniliquin and Finley. They closely followed the deployment of 32 specially trained, specially tasked rural crime investigators to 25 non-metropolitan local area commands. On my initial visits to rural police stations in the north of the State I met some of the new rural crime investigators. They were approaching their task of driving down country crime with great dedication and resolve.

They also told me of the strong support they receive from livestock and farming industries. Those communities understand how debilitating rural crime can be for communities that depend on the economy of New South Wales. Our rural crime investigators have been supplied with extra vehicles and specialist equipment, including laptop computers, satellite navigation, digital cameras and wool clippers for taking samples. They are also now armed with special laws targeting trespass and illegal hunting, other issues of concern in country New South Wales. Under the Carr Government, the high-visibility rural crime focused operations will continue. They are an important proactive strike against crime, and they are helping to inform rural communities of their responsibilities to reduce crime.

The education process is clearly working. Grafton police have informed me that during their recent operation they encountered a number of drivers who corrected their documentation on their homeward journey. If country police and farming communicates continue this level of vigilance, the crackdown on stolen livestock within New South Wales and across our borders will be even more effective. The clear message to stock owners and farmers is that NSW Police is serious about targeting stock theft. I look forward to further informing the House on the results of the Government's rural crime plan and what it is delivering to rural communities. I commend the work of our rural crime investigators to this House.

Questions without notice concluded.

PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES

Establishment and Membership

Motion, as amended by leave, by Mr Scully, by leave, agreed to:

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

That, in accordance with section 54 (3) of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, the following members of the Legislative Assembly be appointed to serve on the Public Accounts Committee: Ms Berejiklian, Mr Brown, Mr McLeay, Mr Torbay, Mr J. H. Turner and Mr Whan.

LEGISLATION REVIEW COMMITTEE

(1) That, in accordance with section 5 (1) (b) of the Legislation Review Act 1987, the following members of the Legislative Assembly be appointed to serve on the Legislation Review Committee: Mr Collier, Ms Hancock, Ms Judge, Ms Saliba and Mr R. W. Turner.

(2) That a message be sent acquainting the Legislative Council of the resolution.

COMMITTEE ON THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION

(1) That, in accordance with section 65 (1) (b) of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, the following members of the Legislative Assembly be appointed to serve on the Committee on the Independent Commission Against Corruption: Ms Keneally, Mr Mills, Mr O'Farrell, Mr Pearce, Mr Price, Mr Roberts, Mr J. H. Turner and Mr Yeadon.

(2) That a message be sent acquainting the Legislative Council of the resolution.

COMMITTEE ON THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND THE POLICE INTEGRITY COMMISSION

(1) That, in accordance with section 31C (1) (b) of the Ombudsman Act 1974, the following members of the Legislative Assembly be appointed to serve on the Committee on the Office of the Ombudsman and Police Integrity Commission: Mr Corrigan, Ms Hay, Mr Kerr and Mr Lynch.

(2) That a message be sent acquainting the Legislative Council of the resolution.

COMMITTEE ON THE HEALTH CARE COMPLAINTS COMMISSION

(1) That, in accordance with section 67 (1) of the Health Care Complaints Act 1993, the following members of the Legislative Assembly be appointed to serve on the Committee on the Health Care Complaints Commission: Ms Allan, Ms Gadiel, Mr Hunter and Mr R. W. Turner.

(2) That a message be sent acquainting the Legislative Council of the resolution.

COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE

(1) That, in accordance with section 29 (1) (b) of the Commission for Children and Young People Act 1998, the following members of the Legislative Assembly be appointed to serve on the Committee on Children and Young People: Mr Bartlett, Ms Burney, Mr Cansdell, Ms Hopwood, Ms Judge and Mrs Perry.

(2) That a message be sent acquainting the Legislative Council of the resolution.

JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON ROAD SAFETY

That a Joint Standing Committee (to be known as the Staysafe Committee) be appointed to inquire into and report upon road safety in New South Wales with the following terms of reference:

(1) As an ongoing task, the committee is to—

(a) monitor, investigate and report on the road safety situation in New South Wales; and

(b) review and report on countermeasures aimed at reducing deaths, injuries, and the social and economic costs to the community arising from road accidents.

Without restricting the generality of the foregoing, the following are to be given urgent consideration—

(i) countermeasures aimed at traffic accidents associated with alcohol and other drugs;

(ii) traffic law enforcement measures and their effectiveness;

(iii) a review of human factors affecting traffic accidents, especially those relating to driver and rider licensing requirements and standards;

(iv) the social and economic impact of death and serious and debilitating injuries resulting from traffic accidents; and

(v) heavy vehicle safety.

(2) That such committee consist of seven members of the Legislative Assembly and three members of the Legislative Council and that, notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders of either House, at any meeting of the committee any five members shall constitute a quorum provided that the committee shall meet as a joint committee at all times.

(3) That Mr Barr, Mr Bartlett, Mr Gibson, Mr Hunter, Mr Maguire, Ms Saliba and Mr Souris be appointed to serve on such committee as the members of the Legislative Assembly.

(4) That the committee have leave to sit during the sittings or any adjournment of either or both Houses, to adjourn from place to place, and to make visits of inspection within the State of New South Wales and other States and Territories of Australia.

(5) That should either House stand adjourned and the committee agree to any report before the Houses resume sitting—

(a) the committee have leave to send any such report, minutes and evidence taken before it to the Clerk of the House;

(b) the documents shall be printed and published and the Clerk shall forthwith take such action as is necessary to give effect to the order of the House; and

(c) the documents shall be laid upon the Table of the House at its next sitting.

That a message be sent acquainting the Legislative Council of the resolution and requesting the Legislative Council to appoint three of its members to serve with the members of the Legislative Assembly upon such joint standing committee and to fix a time and place for the first meeting.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS

(1) As an ongoing task, the committee is to examine and report on such existing and proposed capital works projects, or matters relating to capital works projects, in the public sector, including the environmental impacts of such works, and whether alternative management practices offer lower incremental costs, as are referred to it by the Minister for Commerce, or any Minister, or by the resolution of the Legislative Assembly, or by motion of the committee.

(2) That such committee consist of seven members of the Legislative Assembly and at any meeting four members shall constitute a quorum.

(3) That Ms Andrews, Ms D'Amore, Mr Draper, Mr Greene, Ms Paluzzano, Mr Pringle and Mr Slack-Smith be appointed to serve on such committee.

(4) That the committee have power to make visits of inspection within the State of New South Wales and other States and Territories of Australia.

PUBLIC BODIES REVIEW COMMITTEE

That a standing committee be appointed to inquire and report from time to time with the following terms of reference:

(1) to examine the annual reports of all public bodies and to enquire into and report on:

(a) the adequacy and accuracy of all financial and operational information;

(b) any matter arising from the annual report concerning the efficient and effective achievement of the agency's objectives;

(c) any other matter referred to it by a Minister or the Legislative Assembly.

(2) That such committee consist of six members of the Legislative Assembly.

(3) That Mr Ashton, Mr Constance, Mr Merton, Mr Morris, Mr Oakeshott and Mr Orkopolous be appointed to serve on such committee.

(4) That the committee have power to make visits of inspection within the State of New South Wales and other States and Territories of Australia.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

(1) That a standing committee be appointed to inquire into and report from time to time on the following terms of reference:

(a) current disincentives that exist for ecologically sustainable land and water use in New South Wales;

(b) options for the removal of such disincentives and any consequences in doing so;

(c) approaches to land use management on farms which both reduce salinity and mitigate the effects of drought;

(d) ways of increasing the uptake of such land use management practices;

(e) the effectiveness of management systems for ensuring that sustainability measures for the management of natural resources in New South Wales are achieved;

(f) the impact of water management arrangements on the management of salinity in NSW.

(2) That the committee consist of Ms Allan, Mr Amery, Mr Aplin, Mr Martin, Mr McGrane and Mr Page.

(3) That the committee have power to make visits of inspection within New South Wales and other States and Territories of Australia.

STANDING ORDERS AND PROCEDURE COMMITTEE

(1) That a Standing Orders and Procedure Committee be appointed to inquire into, and if considered advisable, make recommendations to the Legislative Assembly, respecting the standing orders, rules, usages, customs, practice and procedures of the Legislative Assembly.

(2) That such committee consist of: The Speaker, Mr Ashton, Mr Fraser, Mr Maguire, Mr Martin, Mr Mills, Mr Price, Mr Scully, Mr Tink and Mr J. H. Turner.

(3) That the committee have leave to sit during the sittings of the House.

JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE INTO THE TRANSPORTATION AND STORAGE OF NUCLEAR WASTE

(1) That a joint select committee be appointed to consider and report upon proposals by the Commonwealth Government to transport nuclear waste through and potentially store nuclear waste within New South Wales, with specific reference to the following matters:

(a) logistical arrangements associated with the proposals, including sourcing, transport and storage of waste;

(b) health and safety risks associated with the transportation and storage of nuclear waste in New South Wales:

(c) extent of possible resource implications associated with the transportation and storage of nuclear waste within New South Wales; and

(d) any other relevant matter.

(2) That the committee consist of seven members as follows:

(a) three from the Government, being two members of the Legislative Assembly and one member of the Legislative Council; and
(b) two from the Opposition, being one member of the Legislative Assembly and one member of the Legislative Council; and

(c) two Independent or cross-bench members, being one member of the Legislative Assembly and one member of the Legislative Council.

(3) That the members be nominated in writing to the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly and Clerk of the Legislative Council by the relevant party leaders and the Independent and cross-bench members respectively by 28 May 2003. In the absence of any agreement concerning Legislative Council representation on the committee the matter is to be determined by that House.

(4) That at any meeting of the committee four members shall constitute a quorum provided that the committee meets as a joint committee at all times.

(5) That the committee have leave to sit during the sittings or any adjournment of either or both Houses, to adjourn from place to place, to make visits of inspection within New South Wales and have power to take evidence and send for persons, papers, records and things, and to report from time to time.

(6) (a) That should either House stand adjourned and the committee agree to any report before the House resumes sitting, the committee have leave to send any such report, minutes of proceedings and evidence taken before it to the Clerk of each House.

(b) A report presented to the Clerks is:

(i) on presentation, and for all purposes, deemed to have been laid before the House,

(ii) to be printed by authority of the Clerk,

(iii) for all purposes, deemed to be a document published by order or under the authority of the House, and

(iv) to be recorded in the official proceedings of the House.

(7) That the committee report by 5 December 2003.

WESTPAC BANK SATURDAY TRADING

Ministerial Statement

Ms MEAGHER (Cabramatta—Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Commerce) [3.15 p.m.]: In an historic step, Westpac will open its doors for the first time this Saturday. From 9.00 a.m. on Saturday, 28 Westpac branches across the State from Wagga Wagga to Tweed Heads will open their doors. In regional New South Wales other branches will open in Coffs Harbour, Dubbo, Orange and Griffith; on the Central Coast, in Tuggerah and Gosford; in the Hunter, Greenhills in Maitland; in the St George and Sutherland shires, Hurstville and Miranda; in Sydney and Sydney's west, Haymarket, Ashfield, Marrickville, Burwood, Auburn, Parramatta, Blacktown and Penrith; in Sydney's south-west, Cabramatta and Fairfield; in Sydney's north and north-west, Chatswood, Hornsby, Dee Why, North Ryde and Baulkham Hills; in Sydney's east, Pagewood; and in the Illawarra, Corrimal.

St George Bank, which was previously a building society, has been trading on Saturdays for some time, but Westpac is the first bank to get approval under our new laws. Saturday banking is a win for families and small businesses. Automatic teller machines and Internet banking have made banking more convenient. However, there is still a need for face-to-face banking and, more importantly, face-to-face banking when it is most convenient to customers. For most people, getting away from the office or home to bank a cheque or make a deposit during the week is virtually impossible. The changes will also be of great benefit to small businesses, particularly those operating on weekends.

Saturday's historic extended bank trading hours follow changes that the Carr Government made last year to the Banks and Bank Holidays Act. I know it is not often that we praise banks in this place, but I take this opportunity to acknowledge the willingness of Westpac to take up the Government's reforms to offer one-on-one customer service on Saturdays. It is now up to the other banks to follow its lead. The Carr Government supports banks responding to the needs of consumers. It makes sense to give consumers more choice. Some banks now operate late on Thursday evenings.

Families want to bank on Saturdays. Most families do their weekly grocery shopping on Saturdays so it makes sense for banks to open on Saturdays. At the end of the day it is all about convenience for the consumer. I understand Westpac received a lot of community support during its consultations prior to being granted approval for trading by the Department of Commerce. We also made sure the application was approved on the basis of improved customer service and safeguards for bank employees. In fact, Westpac's application was supported by the Finance Sector Union of Australia. I welcome Saturday bank trading and once again I urge the other major banks to follow Westpac's lead.

Ms HODGKINSON (Burrinjuck) [3.19 p.m.]: The Coalition joins with the Government in congratulating Westpac on being the first licensee able to trade on Saturday mornings. Trading begins this Saturday at 9 o'clock in 28 branches, including six country branches—Dubbo, Orange, Griffith, Wagga Wagga, South Tweed and Coffs Harbour. In fact, the honourable member for Coffs Harbour will attend the opening. Of course, building societies have been opening on Saturdays for quite a long time. It is great that banks are coming into line with building societies, which have been open to their communities on Saturday mornings. It is unfortunate that many country towns have suffered over the years because of bank branch closures. One that springs to mind is Boorowa, which suffered greatly when its local Westpac branch closed. It is a great and positive step forward that a bank will open at 9 o'clock on Saturday morning. Let us hope that many more banks fall into line with this great step forward.

CONSIDERATION OF URGENT MOTIONS

Tamworth and Nowra Grace Bros Store Closures

Mr CAMPBELL (Keira—Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business) [3.20 p.m.]: I argue that my motion is urgent because the closure of two Coles Myer stores, in Tamworth and Nowra, is imminent. The livelihoods of many families in those two regional locations are dependent upon the continued operation of the two stores. The closures would lead to considerable inconvenience for the substantial communities that the stores serve. It is important that the House note that inconvenience and the potential impact on families and sends a strong message to the Coles Myer Corporation that its action is wrong. That is why my motion should be debated today.

Crimes Amendment (Sexual Offences) Legislation

Mr TINK (Epping) [3.21 p.m.]: My motion is urgent because it involves important procedural principles. The Attorney General, when introducing the Crimes Amendment (Sexual Offences) Bill, said that Government members would be allowed a conscience vote on the bill. I did not take the Minister to mean that anybody was seeking a conscience vote on the issue of increasing penalties for those who commit sexual crimes against minors. I imagine that there would not be one dissenting voice in this House on that matter at any time. My motion is urgent because when the Attorney General, on introducing the bill, spoke about a conscience vote, he was talking—as I think every member of this Chamber took him to mean—about a conscience vote on the issue of the age of consent.

My motion is urgent because the bill as it currently stands links the issue of the age of consent with that of increased penalties for people who commit crimes of a sexual nature against minors. That will create a grave dilemma for members on both sides of the House. Honourable members who may be troubled by the change to the age of consent proposed by the Attorney General have the very real dilemma that if their conscience tells them to vote against that proposition they will also vote against an increase in the penalties for child sex offenders. It is abhorrent that members should be put in that position. As was plain from an article in the Daily Telegraph this morning, concern has been expressed by, for example, the convener of the gay and lesbian rights lobby, who said that the issue of the age of consent should not be linked in the bill to the separate issue of criminal behaviour that is dealt with in the bill.

It is urgent that the House debate my motion to split those two issues, regardless of which side of the debate honourable members come from. I know from speaking to members on both sides of the House that there is serious concern about this matter within the Government ranks, the Opposition ranks and the ranks of the Independents. I think all honourable members would accept as an important part of the processes of this House that we must confront and debate difficult issues that do not fit well with party lines. The motion is urgent because the issue to come before the House will be needlessly complicated by the Attorney General—and now, it appears, the Premier—being too tricky by half in linking these issues. This makes it not really a conscience matter for many members because the bill links a proposed reform of the criminal law to a matter of conscience. So, although this bill will be represented as a conscience issue, that is not the way in which many honourable members of this Chamber must face it. There is no reason that the issues cannot be split.

As yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald pointed out, there has not been a prosecution for a breach of the age of consent law for 20 years. It is not as if there would be a problem with a short delay in moving to increase the penalties so that the issue of conscience could be dealt with first. Then, depending on how the conscience issue is resolved—and, I might say, however it is resolved—I imagine no member of this House would disagree with increasing penalties for those who commit sexual offences against minors. That matter could be debated within a couple of weeks of the finalisation of the conscience issue. Given that there has not been a prosecution for 20 years, it seems that no harm could be done by delaying the change to the law on child sexual offences.

Many honourable members are vexed that they will be asked to take a position on what is a genuine conscience issue and be forced, in voting for that issue, to take a position adverse to that on which the House would otherwise be unanimous in its resolve, that is that there ought to be an increase in penalties for child sexual assault offences. The matters ought to be split. The Howard Government set the precedent with the embryo bill. That precedent ought to be followed in this instance. [Time expired.]

Question—That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Keira be proceeded with—put.

The House divided.

Ayes, 52

Ms Allan
Mr Amery
Ms Andrews
Mr Bartlett
Ms Beamer
Mr Black
Mr Brown
Ms Burney
Miss Burton
Mr Campbell
Mr Collier
Mr Corrigan
Mr Crittenden
Ms D'Amore
Mr Debus
Mr Draper
Ms Gadiel
Mr Gaudry

Mr Greene
Ms Hay
Mr Hickey
Mr Hunter
Mr Iemma
Ms Judge
Ms Keneally
Mr Lynch
Mr McGrane
Mr McLeay
Ms Meagher
Ms Megarrity
Mr Mills
Mr Morris
Mr Newell
Ms Nori
Mr Orkopoulos
Mrs Paluzzano

Mr Pearce
Mrs Perry
Mr Price
Dr Refshauge
Ms Saliba
Mr Sartor
Mr Scully
Mr Stewart
Mr Torbay
Mr Tripodi
Mr Watkins
Mr West
Mr Whan
Mr Yeadon

Tellers,
Mr Ashton
Mr Martin

Noes, 32

Mr Aplin
Mr Armstrong
Mr Barr
Ms Berejiklian
Mr Cansdell
Mr Constance
Mr Debnam
Mr Fraser
Mr Hartcher
Mr Hazzard
Ms Hodgkinson

Mrs Hopwood
Mr Humpherson
Mr Kerr
Mr Merton
Ms Moore
Mr Oakeshott
Mr O'Farrell
Mr Page
Mr Piccoli
Mr Pringle
Mr Richardson

Mr Roberts
Ms Seaton
Mrs Skinner
Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Souris
Mr Stoner
Mr Tink
Mr R. W. Turner
Tellers,
Mr George
Mr Maguire

Pairs

Mr Carr	Mr Brogden
Mr Gibson	Mr J. H. Turner

Question resolved in the affirmative.

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Motion by Mr Scully agreed to:

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Urgent Motion: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Motion by Mr Scully agreed to:

PRINTING OF PAPERS

Motion, by leave, by Mr Scully agreed to:

TAMWORTH AND NOWRA GRACE BROS STORE CLOSURES

Urgent Motion

Mr CAMPBELL (Keira—Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business) [3.35 p.m.]: I move:

(1) notes that Grace Bros will close its Tamworth and Nowra stores on 22 June this year;

(2) calls on Coles Myer to reverse its decision;

(3) expresses support for the workers and local businesses associated with these operations; and

(4) urges Coles Myer to immediately express its total support for other country stores in New South Wales, guaranteeing they will not close other operations.

The people of country New South Wales have once again been treated shabbily by yet another large insensitive corporation. Hard on the heels of callous indifference shown by the banks to regional communities comes the news that Grace Bros will close its Tamworth and Nowra stores. On 11 April this year the company announced that it would do away with these two stores so that it could upgrade five other stores, and refurbish others. Where are the upgrades taking place? With the exception of the Erina store, they are all planned for Sydney locations. This is a blow to regional economies that will soon feel the impact of the decision of this company, a decision that was announced in a gutless fashion in Melbourne, and not in Nowra or Tamworth. It is no wonder that the local Tamworth community has protested about this decision.

For more than 40 years loyal customers have spent their hard-earned money in the Tamworth store. The Peel Street shop services an enormous catchment area. Generations of mums and dads from as far away as Lightning Ridge and Moree in the State's Far West have made the long trek to shop in Tamworth. From Sunday 22 June they will have to travel even further because the Grace Bros Tamworth store will no longer exist. The community will have a choice: travel to Newcastle for the same product range or head over the border to Toowoomba in Queensland. Unfortunately, not everyone in Tamworth can take that option. Where will the senior citizens of Tamworth and those who are least mobile shop? Does Coles Myer care about them?

What will happen to the employees of the Tamworth store? Members of the House will be interested to know that 102 workers will lose their jobs when Coles Myer closes its Peel Street store. This decision will have an enormous impact on families in Tamworth. Without a doubt, this impact will flow on to other businesses as families tighten their belts or wait to visit Sydney for a splurge at Grace Bros. In all, 17 full-time jobs will be lost, and 85 part-time and casual workers will have to look elsewhere. I acknowledge that Coles Myer is working to place local Grace Bros employees in available positions in other company stores in the area.

The Tamworth community fears that its regional centre will be seriously weakened when the store closes and that the country music capital of Australia will lose some of its appeal as a regional service centre. The Save My Store Grace Bros Action Group put it succinctly: The people of Tamworth do not want charity; they want equity and they want to be heard by this company. It is certainly time that the company stood up and confided its intentions in the Tamworth area. It should put an end to recent speculation about the possibility of opening a subsidiary Target store. I urge Coles Myer to let the Tamworth community know what it intends to do and to put an end to damaging speculation.

On the South Coast, the local community and holidaymakers will no longer have a Grace Bros store. After more than 20 years of trading, the Nowra store will close on 22 June and up to 50 people will lose their jobs. As a result, five full-time employees, 30 part-time employees and 15 casual employees will be looking for other jobs. The company has said that it will attempt to place as many staff as possible with other Coles Myer operations, including Kmart, Target Country, LiquorLand and Coles outlets. The Nowra community fears that when the store closes people will have to travel to Warrawong, Wollongong, Miranda and Sydney to spend their money. Therefore, less money will flow through the Nowra economy. The Nowra store is one of the smallest in Australia, but that makes it no less important to its community. Plans are under way to change the face of Nowra's retail centre. The Shoalhaven City Council has received a development application to extend the existing Nowra Fair complex. The complex currently houses Kmart, Woolworths and specialty shops. The proposed extension will house 30 specialty shops, a new Big W and extra parking spaces.

Coles Myer says that Grace Bros Tamworth and Nowra simply are not up to scratch and claims that they are too small to be sustainable in the future. After careful consideration of their size, age and the amount of money needed to upgrade those two stores, Coles Myer has pulled the plug on decades of customer loyalty. I am disappointed in the company's behaviour. I am disillusioned with the company because of its callous indifference to country New South Wales. The company's decision to close the Tamworth and Nowra stores came just months after it announced an 8.2 per cent rise in its net half-year profit, which was $213 million. Coles Myer is propping up its bottom line at the expense of loyal country customers in the New England and South Coast regions.

I am angry that the company has made this decision hard on the heels of one of the most severe droughts this State has ever seen. How much more are country communities expected to take? The Carr Government does not condone that type of behaviour. The Government is working hard to support regional communities, and to encourage innovation, business development and initiative to create jobs in country New South Wales. Grace Bros's decision has the potential to destabilise entire regional communities. The people of Tamworth and Nowra deserve better treatment from Coles Myer. I urge the company to put an end to continuing speculation about the possibility of more regional stores closing.

Mr Roberts: What about cutting payroll tax?

Mr CAMPBELL: Throughout my speech there have been continuous chattering and inane interjections by the honourable member for Lane Cove about payroll tax. The honourable member is new to the House and clearly does not understand the importance of listening during question time. The Opposition asked the Premier a question about payroll tax during question time. The Premier well and truly demolished any credibility that the Opposition might have had in relation to payroll tax by pointing out that under the last Coalition Government payroll tax was 8 per cent in this State. That rate has been well and truly reduced under the administration of the Carr Labor Government. I make that point to illustrate the importance of members opposite listening during question time so they do not cause embarrassment. The honourable member for Lane Cove is causing himself embarrassment by demonstrating that he has not listened, and he is causing embarrassment to the Leader of the Opposition who, if my memory serves me correctly, asked the question which was so comprehensively answered by the Premier. The Premier's answer demonstrated clearly that the Opposition has not a feather to fly with in regard to payroll tax.

Communities in Albury, Newcastle, the Central Coast, Orange, Dubbo, Wagga Wagga, Wollongong and Bathurst should not have to face continuing speculation about further closures of Grace Bros stores or other stores of the Coles Myer brand. The closure of stores in Tamworth and Nowra will have a significant impact. Many small shareholders of Coles Myer will find the company's decision abhorrent. I am a former small shareholder in Coles Myer and, as such, I find abhorrent the decision that has led to this debate and the motion before the House. I do not support the company's decision. Although I currently do not hold shares in the company, it would not make any difference if I did: I would make exactly the same contribution to this debate if I held shares in Coles Myer because I do not agree with the approach that has been adopted. In addition, I do not agree with the approach adopted time and again by big banks—a topic that has also been the subject of debate in this place.

The last thing country communities need—communities such as Tamworth and Nowra, and potentially Albury, Newcastle, the Central Coast, Orange, Dubbo, Wagga Wagga, Wollongong and Bathurst—is another retail setback that will impact adversely on regional development, small businesses and destroy job creation opportunities. Cole Myer must give guarantees to country families that that simply will not happen. I urge all honourable members to support this urgent motion. By doing so they will put pressure on Coles Myer and demonstrate unanimous support for country centres. They will show unanimous support for decisions that maintain jobs for families who live in regional centres, and ensure that customer services and a range of goods are available to families who live in country centres and surrounding areas.

Mr STONER (Oxley—Leader of the National Party) [3.45 p.m.]: On 11 April Coles Myer announced that it would close the Grace Bros Tamworth and Nowra stores "as part of the biggest stores overhaul in many years". The stores are at the end of their leases and are considered by Coles Myer to be too small to be sustainable in the future as Grace Bros department stores. Both stores will close on 22 June, which will be a sad day for regional and rural New South Wales. Coles Myer says that the decision was taken after careful consideration of the age, size and the amount of capital needed for substantial structural upgrades to the stores. The company argued that the stores would be unable to provide the growth potential that is needed to make them viable in the long term. Sadly, this is a reflection of the fact that regional economies in New South Wales are going nowhere while the economy in Sydney is going gangbusters. The Sydney-centric Labor Government has done little or nothing to stimulate regional economies in this State. In its press release Coles Myer stated that it is working with Tamworth and Nowra staff to place them in any available positions in other Coles Myer stores or businesses in the surrounding towns and areas.

In Tamworth that decision justifiably spiked community outrage. The newly formed Save My Store Grace Bros Action Group has collated more than 8,000 responses to its survey. According to a group spokeswoman, Evelyn Parkinson, the community confirmed the importance of the store as a major economic and social anchor in the community. This grassroots uprising is symptomatic of the frustration in rural and regional New South Wales when people are confronted by remote decision making that leaves their communities poorer. But businesses need an environment in which they can prosper, and that is the role of government. This Government has been culpable in not providing such an environment in regional and rural New South Wales. On the contrary, this Government has imposed a rigid, regulatory regime over the main economic generator in country New South Wales—primary production. More than 50 pieces of legislation and regulations impact on farming in this State.

Mr Campbell: What has that got to do with Coles Myer?

Mr STONER: The Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business should go to Tamworth and examine the economy. It is all about farming—that is where the money that is spent in the town comes from. People spend their money in Grace Bros stores and in other stores in Tamworth. Primary production is where the money comes from—it is the economic generator. The Minister for Regional Development should get out there, get some dust on his boots and have a look. The Native Vegetation and Conservation Act cost the Moree Plains shire more than $20 million. That figure was confirmed by a study conducted by Professor Jack Sinden, with whom the honourable member for Northern Tablelands would be familiar. The Government's complex water reforms, its complex legislation, and its moribund bureaucrat-dominated committees are other examples of the impact of its policy upon the wealth of country areas. The Government has not made any proactive policy initiatives to ameliorate the deleterious impacts of its disastrous natural resource regime.

Mr Martin: Who wrote this?

Mr STONER: I wrote it.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Bathurst will have an opportunity to contribute to the debate at the appropriate time.

Mr STONER: What about payroll tax breaks for country employers? What about other incentives to attract businesses to country towns and to retain existing employers? No, the Government's only response, via the Minister for Regional Development today, has been to lambast Coles Myer.

Mr Brown: Point of order: The honourable member seems to be reading from a prepared speech. When the honourable member for Bathurst asked, "Who wrote it?" the Leader of the National Party admitted that he wrote it. The standing orders state that members are allowed to use notes, not prepared speeches.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! It is obvious that the Leader of the National Party is quoting from a number of sources. There is no point of order.

Mr STONER: When one scratches the surface it is patently clear that this Sydney-centric Government has not done nearly enough for the economic health of regional and rural New South Wales. The action group argued that despite the unconfirmed introduction of a large Target store into the present building housing Grace Bros in Tamworth, there is still a demand for a Grace Bros store in the region. Residents and customers are rightly angry about this store closure. The action group's spokeswoman, Evelyn Parkinson, stated:

We are now convinced the Coles Myer have grossly under-estimated the role of regional Australia in achieving Coles Myer's objective of making Grace Bros Australia's leading department store.

I call on Myer Grace Bros to reconsider its decision in relation to Tamworth and Nowra, given the importance of these businesses to the areas. I also call on the Government and the Minister for Regional Development to do more to stimulate local economies and provide an environment in which businesses, such as Grace Bros, can prosper in country towns.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Government members will restrain their enthusiasm until they are given the call.

Mr STONER: Today the Minister for Natural Resources said that he would be working towards pulling back some of the anti-farmer legislation imposed by his Labor predecessors over the past eight years. At last there seems to be some acknowledgement by the Government of its mistakes, but it comes too late for many local economies that have seen businesses fold and leave town. This whole sorry episode highlights that after eight years of Labor there has been a continuing drift of population from country towns to major cities. As a result, many country towns have suffered a significant loss of services. The regional development policies and programs implemented by Labor have done little to address the concerns of the communities most in need of assistance. Regional development has been a low priority, often the responsibility of a junior Minister or combined with other portfolios and frequently restructured to suit short-term political objectives. Conversely, regional development is a high priority for the New South Wales National Party. We are committed to opening up long-term investment opportunities to increase employment and stimulate economic activity throughout regional New South Wales.

[Interruption]

Well, the Government will probably pinch it. We hope it does. All the Minister's good ideas come from us.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Government members will cease interjecting, and the Leader of the National Party should not allow himself to be goaded by those interjections.

Mr STONER: At the recent election the National Party proposed separating the office of regional development from the office of state development to create a stand-alone agency focused on regional areas and issues, enabling it to provide a clear vision, long-term planning and a greater inclusion of local people. Another of our initiatives that would have underpinned rural and regional development was a $20 million annual rebate for country payroll tax to stimulate new investment and decentralisation in country New South Wales. A high payroll tax rate has crippled many businesses across country and coastal New South Wales. The New South Wales Coalition will continue to highlight Labor's glaring failures of the past eight years when it comes to regional and rural development and will make constructive suggestions on the way forward.

Mr BROWN (Kiama) [3.55 p.m.]: I support the motion moved by the Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business and add my voice to the condemnation of Coles Myer's actions to close the Tamworth and Nowra Grace Bros stores. We have just heard a lot of information from the Leader of the National Party. However, a lot of it was seriously flawed. He seems to forget the Carr Government's significant investment in regional New South Wales, such as moving the Department of Local Government from Sydney to Nowra and moving other departments to rural areas. He seems to have forgotten the Government's significant capital investment in the State, which generates many jobs.

If the Leader of the National Party really wants to have some influence within the National Party he should talk to his Federal colleagues who, along with the Liberal Party, abolished the Federal Department of Regional Development. The Leader of the National Party spoke about payroll tax. If the National Party was strongly in favour of reducing payroll tax why did it let the Leader of the Opposition say, "No, we won't be touching payroll tax at all"? It is obvious that the National Party has absolutely no influence in the Coalition; it is certainly not there to be supporting jobs in regional New South Wales.

The closure of the Nowra Grace Bros store will affect people who live on the coast and have an impact on thousands of tourists who visit the area. I urge the company to guarantee to families in regional New South Wales that no more country stores will be closed. Nothing is more destabilising for country communities than speculation. Media speculation, including that in the Age, before the 11 April announcement, certainly set the scene for the loss of the Tamworth and Nowra stores. The company said that it will attempt to offer alternative employment to workers from those stores, but we are still talking about the loss of 150 jobs in New South Wales. That is 150 country families whose security has been taken away because this company, which reported a tidy profit last year, believes it can do better by closing smaller stores.

On the South Coast the company's decision directly affects the security of 50 families. Local mums, dads and kids have lost the security of income tied to a pay packet from Nowra's Grace Bros. Honourable members would be interested to know that Coles Myer unveiled an 8 per cent increase in its profits, to $212.5 million, for the six months to December last year. That is good news for Sydney shareholders, but country people are also shareholders and deserve recognition for the half century of loyal support in Tamworth and more than two decades of support in Nowra.

Corporate savings should never be at the expense of regional communities who have supported stores such as Grace Bros, in this case for a total of 70 years. I urge the company to have a heart, to take care of its loyal South Coast work force and shoppers. I ask the company to make sure its Nowra employees have some hope for the future. The company should get on with its promise of placing staff in other Coles Myer stores or related businesses. The workers have been loyal to the company. Now is the time to restore the community's faith in Coles Myer. The company should make sure that workers are given all their entitlements and it should get on with the job of offering them alternative positions in its company.

Decisions such as this affect not only Nowra but also the whole region. From 22 June people from the Nowra community and surrounding towns and villages will have to travel to Wollongong for their nearest Grace Bros store. People from Gerringong, Gerroa, Berry and Shoalhaven Heads who want to shop at a Grace Bros store will have to travel for a significantly longer time than they now travel. It will be impossible for them to visit a local major department store. It will be a two-hour round trip just to shop at Grace Bros, battling traffic to get there, completing their shopping, and battling traffic to go home. What about local people who do not own a car? What about the elderly? For the people who live in Nowra, getting to a Grace Bros store has just become a whole lot harder. Once it was simple to make a trip to the local Grace Bros store on the South Coast—it was a great shopping day for locals. Grace Bros was the place where people nipped in and grabbed the item they had forgotten to bring on holidays. Nowra is a major port of call for many holidaymakers.

After 22 June people will no longer be able to do that; they will have to go to Wollongong and Sydney. Generations growing up on the South Coast have supported Grace Bros. I am sure that they share with me my great disappointment and disillusionment about the company's decision to renovate in the big smoke. City slickers will get slicker stores, but people in the New England region and the South Coast area have been given the boot. It is not good enough. The New South Wales Government continues to encourage and support regional communities. We are committed to regional businesses and investment and we are working with local communities to create jobs in regional areas. I urge Coles Myer to work with us to protect people from further closures in the State's significant regions. Where is the honourable member for South Coast when we are debating this important motion today?

Mr PICCOLI (Murrumbidgee) [4.00 p.m.]: It is with some disappointment that I speak today in debate on this motion. I am sure that every member of Parliament, particularly country members, view this matter with some regret. The closure of any business, large or small, in a major centre such as Tamworth will impact significantly on the community. The closure of Grace Bros in Tamworth, which will have a flow-on effect, will result in the loss of 100 or more jobs. So approximately 100 families and a couple of hundred kids at the local school will be affected, which will undermine confidence in the broader community. If another tenant does not take over the building in June when the Grace Bros store is proposed to be closed, people in Tamworth will drive past a large vacant building—one of the things that tends to undermines consumer confidence. When people's confidence is dashed it impacts on their decision to stay in the community. The Grace Bros store is probably being closed because of a number of events. I am sure that Grace Bros executives did not say, "We are making millions of dollars in the Tamworth and Nowra stores so those stores should be closed." Their decision to close the stores was made for different reasons.

It is hypocritical of the Government to take credit for every job that is created in New South Wales and to blame everyone else and distance itself when jobs are lost, as they will be lost on this occasion. I will not blame this loss of jobs entirely on the New South Wales Government because other factors are involved, but the Government must take some blame for what is happening in country New South Wales. Water reforms in the Namoi Valley area are having an impact on farm businesses in that region. If the pay packets of farmers are affected they will not be able to spend the sort of money that they were spending before. I am sure that that is one of the reasons why this store is being closed. I would like the Grace Bros stores in Tamworth and Nowra to remain open. Their closure is not the fault of Grace Bros; it is partly the fault of the New South Wales Government because of some policies that it has put in place. I refer to its structural adjustment policies in the Namoi Valley and in other parts of New South Wales.

These store closures are the result of this Government's water reform, native vegetation and threatened species policies, as well as other things threatening the viability of farms and farm communities. These closures are directly related to this Government's structural adjustment policies, and it is having an impact on communities in the Namoi Valley and in Tamworth. Consumer confidence and farm businesses are being adversely affected. Businesses such as Grace Bros are closing their stores for that reason. As the Leader of the National Party said, it is partly because of payroll tax and partly because of other decisions that have been taken by the State Government. The Minister for Regional Development must take some responsibility for the job losses that are occurring in country New South Wales. He should not announce with great fanfare during question time that jobs are being created in the private sector when other jobs in the private sector are being lost. The Minister, who blames everyone but himself, should take some responsibility for the loss of these jobs and do something about it.

Mr MARTIN (Bathurst) [4.05 p.m.] I am pleased to support the motion moved by the Minister for Regional Development. Coles Myer must assure families in regional areas that no more country stores will close—an issue of serious concern that is facing communities in the Central West. Our local retail stores, which are vital in these areas, are local services that we need and expect. Coles Myer should realise that it is a two-way street. Its stores are being loyally supported by country communities. According to a media release that was issued on 11 April, the company made the decision to close the Tamworth and Nowra stores on 22 June because these stores were "too small to be sustainable in the future". Coles Myer should compete with Woolworth's and expand its business rather than close its stores.
[Interruption]

The new member for Lane Cove, who continually lauds the Prime Minister, needs a few lessons. Over the next few weeks we will educate him, in particular in relation to payroll tax. The scrapping of these two regional stores comes at the expense of the refurbishment of others and the upgrading of key metropolitan centres in Burwood, Erina on the Central Coast, and in other States. I call on Coles Myer to put an end to any speculation that the Bathurst and Orange stores are next in line. I want an assurance that the Central West community is not about to lose its Grace Bros stores. I want a guarantee that no more stores will close in country New South Wales.

I urge Coles Myer to take on the role of a good corporate citizen in country and city areas. Let us be even-handed about this issue. Clearly, its recent healthy profit figures show that it is not in dire straits. From time to time I, like everyone else, enjoy a bit of retail therapy in the William Street store in Bathurst—I ensure that my wife is not too dangerous with the credit card. Coles Myer is one of our premier shopping resources, and that will not change. People have supported the Grace Bros store for generations. The last thing that they want is to lose the stores in Bathurst and in Orange.

We do not need this endless speculation. Grace Bros employees deserve better than that. Without these two stores in the Central West people wishing to shop face hours of travel to other centres. If centres of that size in Bathurst and Orange are closed other businesses will suffer. The company acted without consulting the communities in Tamworth and Nowra. It can only be assumed that, in the future, it will do the same thing. To date its track record on talking to communities and local organisations is not good. I referred earlier to an 11 April media release in which the company said that it is clearly reviewing its store portfolio. Even though it said that it would keep its staff, customers and financial markets fully briefed on its plans for any future changes, I still have grave concerns for other country stores. I am sure that those concerns are held by all honourable members. The final words on the company's media release refer to the fact that it will inform people of its "plans for any further changes". I view that statement with trepidation because of the company's track record to date. It is time that the company came clean about its future retail intentions in regional New South Wales.

The drought has left much of country New South Wales in a severely depressed state and that, in turn, has affected retail economies. However, Coles Myer, the owners of the Grace Bros stores, should be in a better position than anyone to weather that storm. The last thing we need in the Bathurst and Orange areas is the loss of dozens of retail jobs, which is what we are looking at. Coles Myer, which still has high profits, must be operating these stores fairly well. So it is pretty hollow rhetoric for it to be talking about downsizing or closing these stores because they are not big enough.

The decision has already been taken in relation to the Grace Bros stores at Nowra and Tamworth. Perhaps it is, as Coles Myer claims, irreversible. However, we must now work hard to protect the stores that remain, particularly those in Bathurst and Orange in the Central West. I call on Coles Myer to guarantee families of the Central West that it has no plans to close the stores. We want that guarantee today, not sometime in the future. Endless speculation about their future is doing no-one any good. Coles Myer should be upfront with the communities of Bathurst and Orange that have supported it for generations. It should be warned that some of its other retail outlets will feel the impact if people believe Coles Myer has been disloyal to the retail community in the Central West and elsewhere. I commend the motion to the House.

Mr DRAPER (Tamworth) [4.10 p.m.]: Coles Myer took the decision to close the Grace Bros store in Tamworth without any consultation with our community. This is much more than just a store closure: It is a matter of social equity and justice for regional communities. The Tamworth Grace Bros store serves a customer base that is derived from an area larger than Tasmania and it is the only upmarket department store in our region. Some 100 local families depend upon Grace Bros for their livelihoods and, while Coles Myer has indicated that it intends to replace it with a Target store, the employees and the community have united in an effort to save the existing store. Having a store the calibre of Grace Bros in Tamworth is beneficial not only because it attracts shoppers but because it helps to draw professional people, such as doctors and lawyers, and financial services to our city and to retain them. One lady from Wagga Wagga pointed out at the recent save Grace Bros rally that a condition of her moving to her farm after her marriage was that she would never live more than 100 miles from a Grace Bros store. As she said, her husband is now a very worried man.

The Save My Store Grace Bros Tamworth action group has been formed to try to prevent this drastic action on the part of Coles Myer. It has collected 6,000 signatures from customers who want the store to remain open. The group is extremely passionate and active and its spokesperson, Evelyn Parkinson, and her committee have devoted almost every waking moment since the announcement to trying to reverse the closure decision. Customers who have already signed the petition come from many towns apart from Tamworth—Gunnedah, Narrabri, Wee Waa, Moree, Lightning Ridge, Inverell, Bingara, Barraba, Boggabri, Armidale, Nundle, Walcha, Quirindi and Murrurundi. It is interesting to note the pulling power of Grace Bros in a country area. That shows that people will travel an awful long way when they have no alternative and there is no other department store just down the road of the quality of Grace Bros. I talked to some people from Sydney yesterday who can travel to three department stores within 15 minutes. People in my area drive for five hours to visit Grace Bros, and they are prepared to make the trip.

Coles Myer's excuse for closing the store is that it cannot justify the cost of refurbishment. I seriously doubt that. Refurbishing the building as a Target store is surely not so different from refurbishing it and retaining Grace Bros. I urge the communities of Bathurst, Orange and Dubbo to view this closure with a great deal of concern. There are strong indications that when the leases expire on the stores in those centres they will also be earmarked for closure. Coles Myer appears to be focusing very much on the coastal strip and on major metropolitan areas to the detriment of rural and regional centres. I call upon Coles Myer to consider what the acronym GRACE means to people outside the major cities. To us it means: give regional Australia consideration and equity. Our Tamworth ambassador for 2003, Tania Kernaghan, came to the rally to save Grace Bros and said:

The closure of Grace Bros is like being kicked when you're already down … it's a case of too many city people making decisions for country people … the Coles Myer executive staff need to take a leaf out of Telstra Country Wide's book and start putting money back into regional Australia instead of doing the reverse.

I fully support those comments. The profitability of the store has been questioned. However, I question the trading practices of the Tamworth store. Does it have to open on all public holidays and every Sunday? In my opinion, if Coles Myer were to reduce its trading hours the people of Tamworth and the surrounding districts would adjust their shopping habits accordingly. The people of our city and the surrounding area have indicated strongly that they are prepared to do whatever is necessary to ensure the long-term viability of local Grace Bros stores. We are asking simply for an opportunity to prove to the Coles Myer management team that our community will provide the necessary support and financial backing. We simply want our store to remain open. I urge Coles Myer to change its decision and to retain Grace Bros in our town.

Mr TORBAY (Northern Tablelands) [4.15 p.m.]: I am delighted to have this opportunity to discuss the proposed closure of the Grace Bros stores in Tamworth and Nowra. There is also speculation about the fate of other stores in the region, and this is a major concern. I congratulate the Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business on moving this motion. It is important that members who represent country electorates have a chance to discuss how private sector policy affects country people. Coles Myer is pursuing an anti-country policy. I commend the honourable member for Tamworth for showing leadership on this issue to the local community and the region: this closure will affect the entire New England region. I congratulate also the community and the Save My Store Grace Bros Tamworth action group on condemning Coles Myer enthusiastically.

The contribution by the Leader of the National Party suggested to me that he has not researched this issue thoroughly and has taken most of his advice from local press clippings. Some of his information was accurate but a great deal of it was not. The Leader of the National Party appeared almost to be protecting the big end of town by seeking to put the blame for the closure squarely on government policy. If he wants to pursue that argument, to be fair, he must share the blame with the Federal Government, which has been in office for some years. The Leader of the National Party missed the key point: the Tamworth Grace Bros store was profitable. I suspect, even though I have not seen the figures, that the other store was also profitable and that closures of profitable stores will stay on the Coles Myer agenda. Let us be clear: This is an anti-country policy.

Coles Myer is saying that it would rather shut country stores because they are too difficult to manage. It does not matter whether they are making money. The honourable member for Murrumbidgee made an excellent point when he said that this decision goes to the issue of confidence in regional areas. Hear! Hear! When a company such as Coles Myer announces its decision to close a profitable store in a major country centre we should all look out. Which regional centre will be next? It cannot justify that decision on the basis of profitability.

[Debate interrupted.]

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Private Members' Statements: Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Motion by Mr Scully agreed to:

TAMWORTH AND NOWRA GRACE BROS STORE CLOSURES

Urgent Motion

[Debate resumed.]

Mr TORBAY: Some members who have spoken in this debate have called on Coles Myer to reconsider its decision; the Leader of the National Party did so almost reluctantly. I believe we should condemn this move. In taking this decision the Coles Myer management team is saying, "We've had some corporate problems at a board level and some city stores are not profitable. What can we do to solve our problems? We will close our country stores because they are a little harder to get to and a bit out of the way and the profits they make are not big enough to justify their remaining open." Goodness help us all if corporate Australia is let off the hook on this occasion. I am happy to condemn Coles Myer for this decision. I call upon it to reconsider and to state clearly its future country policy.

This announcement sends a message to the rest of corporate Australia that country New South Wales is not an appropriate place in which to invest for the future. But it is. It is also a great place to live with tremendous opportunities presented by the many growing economies. Of course, we need to pressure governments of all persuasions at every level to continue to do more and to do better. The proposed closures virtually say that the Coles Myer board, about which competency issues have been well documented in the media, does not support country New South Wales, regardless of whether their stores are profitable or not. I will not support that. I support the comments of the honourable member for Tamworth, the Minister, the Leader of the National Party and other members who have contributed to this debate. I say, "Let us condemn the Coles Myer board, let us call on it to say clearly where it stands in relation to country New South Wales". At the moment it is standing in quicksand and I join country communities in condemning it.

Ms HODGKINSON (Burrinjuck) [4.20 p.m.]: I too join with the honourable member for Tamworth, the Minister, the Leader of National Party and the honourable member for Murrumbidgee in strongly supporting this motion. I express extreme dismay that Grace Bros is closing its doors on 22 June in the vibrant and beautiful regional areas of Tamworth and Nowra. The decision has apparently been made and the closures are imminent. It is hard for small businesses to adjust to large department stores moving into their local areas, particularly if they stock the same or similar lines to those stocked by the other small businesses. I can speak about that from experience. It is difficult but small businesses have to cope to survive. I have no doubt that when large department stores leave regional communities that impacts not only on their customers and employees but also on all the other small businesses because consumer confidence disappears.

In 1995 the Grace Bros department store at Goulburn closed its doors. It was a sad time for the community of Goulburn. For many years the store had been known as Rogers department store. Then it became J. B. Young's and then Grace Bros. My great, great grandfather, Charles Rogers, built that store in Goulburn. A huge amount of retail spending was lost as a result of the closure of the Goulburn department store. It was a tragedy. Canberra is about an hour's drive from Goulburn, so Goulburn lost a lot of its trade when people went to the Australian Capital Territory to shop. It was hard to build up that trade again. Communities and consumers suffer, but local retail traders—for example, chambers of commerce—and their employees also suffer. Employment opportunities are also affected. As consumer confidence is deflated, those businesses suffer badly.

My experience in Goulburn enables me to speak about the proposed closures of Grace Bros closing at Tamworth and Nowra. I plead with Grace Bros not to do that to those towns. The local communities would appreciate the company providing assistance if it has another department store in mind to occupy the premises. It took long years for the building in which Grace Bros was located in Goulburn to be reoccupied. It was a sad time. A beautiful architecturally inspired building became a blight on the landscape when it was left vacant. It is now the home of the great discount store, Dimmeys, where I shop frequently. As a good consumer with disposable cash, I have shopped at Grace Bros in Tamworth and Nowra. It is extraordinary that in 2003 major department stores are still pulling out of country locations.

The proposed closures remind me of what banks did several years ago. Banks in country communities claimed they did not have enough transactions, so they were closed. That happened in Yass with the ANZ bank. As I said today in response to a ministerial statement, there was a huge public outcry at Boorowa when Westpac closed. At that time the bank was conducting a large number of financial transactions. That closure and similar closures happened in good country communities, solid agricultural areas, evidently because there were not enough transactions. I think the banks have learnt their lessons about closing down branches in country communities. Department stores could take a leaf out of their book. We should constantly remind them of the effects such closures have on local communities and the consumer confidence in country areas. I call on the Minister for Regional Development to step up assistance to country communities and to add to investor confidence in country communities before it is too late.

Mr MAGUIRE (Wagga Wagga) [4.25 p.m.]: I acknowledge the contributions of honourable members on this important issue. I acknowledge also the loss of the Grace Bros stores in Tamworth and Nowra. I place on record the sentiments of the honourable member for South Coast; she is at an important meeting. The honourable member for Kiama noted her absence. The honourable member for South Coast is very concerned about the closure of the Grace Bros store in Nowra and expresses her support for the staff of the store and the community. She is working hard to get Coles Myer to overturn its decision. In fact, community members are signing her petition. What has the honourable member for Kiama done other than to speak in this Chamber? Has he started a petition?

I have 23 years experience in the retail industry. I can assure the House that during that time business fluctuated because of economic conditions, drought and the boom of the 1980s and 1990s. I am very concerned about the decision of Coles Myer. It is obvious it is trying to plug up the gaps left by terrible decisions at the board level and country communities are being made to pay. My family and I shop at Grace Bros at Wagga Wagga, which draws many customers from all over the region. I want Grace Bros to talk to me if it has a hit list of stores it intends to close or if Wagga Wagga is slated for any kind of cut or redevelopment. My door will always open to discuss any such action before a decision is made.

I know times are tough and we are suffering one of the worst droughts in recorded history. Our region is suffering, as are the Tamworth and Nowra areas. The difficult economic times affect the amount of money that people have to spend. But there are good times too, and they will return. Recently, I met with the Minister for Regional Development to discuss Burns Philp, which made decisions because of its bottom line and those decisions resulted in the loss of 30 jobs. Grace Bros in Wagga Wagga has gone through bad times before. In fact, we almost lost Grace Bros in the recession that we had to have, but the community pulled together and supported the store. Unfortunately, we did not have the same opportunity with Burns Philp because its decision was made without consultation and 30 jobs were relocated in Victoria.

Has the Minister had the opportunity to discuss the proposed closures with Coles Myer? The company has identified in its press release the cost of relocating the stores. The lease is up. The cost of refurbishment is too great. What assistance can be given? What can the Minister do to convince Coles Myer to leave its stores open in those towns, and to reassure country communities that Coles Myer or Grace Bros outlets will continue to trade and will continue to employee people from the regions, where jobs are so important?

The retail industry is a major employer, small business is a major employer, but so too is big business. A big business that leaves creates a loss in community jobs that take years and years to replace. I ask the Minister in reply to tell us what discussions he has had with Coles Myer and what avenues the Minister has available to try to convince Coles Myer that we want its stores in our towns. They are important to the towns, the retail infrastructure and the social fabric of our communities. We acknowledge the terrible times we have had with droughts, et cetera, but surely other incentives can be considered, if that is what is needed, whether they be development consents through councils or other measures. I am sure that if shoulders are put to the wheel and a genuine effort is made, solutions can be found to save these important stores in Tamworth and Nowra, thus reassuring the future of other towns. [Time expired.]

Mr CAMPBELL (Keira—Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business) [4.30 p.m.], in reply: I am grateful for the tolerance and patience of the House in extending the debate on this motion. The fact that so many members wanted to speak on the matter demonstrates the importance that the House attributes to this issue as it relates to the country communities of Tamworth and Nowra. I thank all honourable members who spoke—the Leader of the National Party, the honourable member for Murrumbidgee, the honourable member for Burrinjuck, the honourable member for Kiama, the honourable member for Bathurst, the honourable member for Tamworth and the honourable member for Northern Tablelands. In particular I acknowledge the sincerity and depth of the argument put by the honourable member for Tamworth. Clearly, he understands the impact that this proposal will have on the community that he represents. That came through in his contribution. Equally, the contribution of the honourable member for Northern Tables was quite significant.

Putting aside the attempts at point-scoring made by Opposition members, it is clear that as a whole the House supports the wording and intent of the motion I moved, as well as supporting the communities of Tamworth and Nowra. It also shares the concerns that I mentioned earlier for the communities of Albury, Newcastle, the Central Coast, Orange, Dubbo, Wagga Wagga, Wollongong and Bathurst, about the potential for similar closures to occur in their communities. Given my undertaking to speak briefly in reply, I again thank honourable members who have spoken in the debate. This will be a strong statement from this House, on behalf of the representatives of State and regional communities, to Coles Myer and other major corporations that the actions proposed for Tamworth and Nowra are inappropriate and unacceptable.

Motion agreed to.

TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES

Mr SPEAKER: In accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 22, I nominate Paul Gerard Lynch to act as a Temporary Chairman of Committees in place of Alison Patricia Megarrity, who has been appointed to the office of Parliamentary Secretary.

PRIVATE MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

_________

LUGARNO PROGRESS ASSOCIATION EIGHTY-FIRST ANNIVERSARY

ST GEORGE-HURSTVILLE LIONS CLUB SPORTSMEN’S LUNCHEON

Mr GREENE (Georges River) [4.35 p.m.]: Many honourable members take the opportunity to comment on great works done by various volunteer organisations within their electorates. Today, I take the opportunity to comment on the work of two such organisations. The first is the Lugarno Progress Association. I had the privilege and pleasure, along with my wife, Frances, of attending the eighty-first anniversary of that association, which was marked by a river cruise on the Georges River on 30 March this year. That successful function was attended by nearly 200 people from Lugarno and the surrounding community. We travelled on what was affectionately renamed the Lugarno ferry, which cruised westward along the Georges River, giving all who were on the cruise the opportunity to see the Georges River from a different perspective.

The cruise gave us an opportunity not only to socialise and share each other's company on that day, but to gain a different perspective on the river. Eventually the ferry came to the Lugarno area, where we saw the tremendous progress that has taken place on the Edith Bay project, which is significantly funded by both the Hurstville Council and the State Government. It involves boardwalk and wetlands projects on which work has been proceeding rapidly, so much so that it is almost completed.

I congratulate the Lugarno Progress Association on the 81 years that it has been a major contributor to our community through the work that its members continue to do to promote causes not only in Lugarno but throughout the Hurstville city area. I particularly congratulate the current president of the association, Rob Clarson, who has held that position for a number of years, secretary Helen Campbell and all executives on the work they do to promote the causes of the association. They did a wonderful job in organising this magnificent cruise, which I hope will remain a feature of future Lugarno Progress Association anniversary functions. I particularly note the attendance of the function by the Mayor of Hurstville, Councillor Vince Badalati, and his wife Angela. The work that the council does with the progress association has led to many benefits for the community.

Last Friday another charitable organisation that I support, St George-Hurstville Lions, organised a sportsmen's luncheon at the Hill Street venue. St George-Hurstville Lions has been around only a couple of years, but in that time it has put on a number of functions that I have had the pleasure of attending. As with last Friday's event, these are well-organised and well-presented functions. The guest speaker on Friday was well-known Sydney Morning Herald journalist and former Australian Rugby Union representative Peter FitzSimons. Those in attendance—more than 100 local businessmen and community members—were entertained by Peter's stories and comments. I appreciated the opportunity to share the luncheon with him. I congratulate Lions in general but particularly Roger Gray, the master of ceremonies at the function and a long-time friend of Peter FitzSimons. Roger not only did the introductions and kept the whole function moving along, but also organised Peter's attendance on the day.

The auction, which is traditional at such functions, was very successful. The sum raised by the general auction and the silent auction added to the day's fundraising, which I believe totalled close to $15,000. This money will be donated to the Prostate Cancer Institute, which is being set up at the St George Hospital. That is a worthwhile cause. As the great majority of those attending the function were male, they were most supportive of the event. The institute promises to do enormous work in its research. I congratulate the President of St George-Hurstville Lions, Mr John Harrison, on this effort. We look forward to attending many more functions of this Lions club and the Prostate Cancer Institute.

NORTHERN BEACHES EDUCATION FACILITIES

Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [4.40 p.m.]: I wish to address the failure of the Labor Government to provide equity and fairness to the schools, students and the families of students on the northern beaches. I extend an invitation to the new Minister for Education and Training, Andrew Refshauge, to visit some of the schools on the northern beaches generally, but particularly in the electorate of Wakehurst, to see for himself the shortcomings so that he might consider what he can do to assist us to achieve fairness and equity throughout the northern beaches. There has been a litany of shortcomings, indeed a history of neglect by State Labor when it comes to schools and educational facilities north of The Spit bridge. I will take the House on a brief road tour of Labor's northern beaches neglect.

Coming up Spit Hill, we open to the vista of the cobwebbed and closed Seaforth TAFE. Despite all the pre-election rubbishy rhetoric from David Barr and his close Labor colleague the then Minister for Education and Training, and even a visit to the site in the run-up to the election, Seaforth TAFE remains closed. Students still have to go to Meadowbank and further afield to undertake certain courses. State Labor, doubtless at the request of the honourable member for Manly, David Barr— Labor's closest and newest mate—deferred making any announcements about the future of the TAFE site until after the election. Before the dust condemns Seaforth TAFE to a future akin to that of Pompeii, I call on the new Minister for Education and Training to come clean and make a decision on Seaforth TAFE. I suggest to him that TAFE is so cramped at the Brookvale site that the Seaforth site should be reopened. I ask him to visit the TAFE site as a matter of urgency and to assess what is required on the northern beaches. I ask him to consider modernising the entire Seaforth TAFE site.

If the Minister will not agree—if he intends to continue on the path of destruction of TAFE—I ask him to rethink his views. I call on him to agree to set aside some small part of the TAFE site to be updated and available to northern beaches TAFEs, and the balance to be dedicated for community purposes. I refer him to the crying need for facilities for mental health outreach, including a new home for the Pioneer Clubhouse. An organisation called Abilities finds a way forward for people with disabilities. These and numerous community-based organisations on the northern beaches need new homes. The site would certainly be suitable for such purposes if the Government does not intend to use the Seaforth TAFE site for education. I ask him to consider those issues.

I specifically draw the Minister's attention to another organisation that needs help. Northern Beaches Radio is being thrown out of the Narrabeen High School site. I ask the new Minister to consider providing that community-based radio station with facilities at the Seaforth TAFE site if it is not to be used as a full-time TAFE facility. Despite the delays and the history, I welcome the new Freshwater senior college campus in Harbord Road, Harbord. I remind the Minister that a university campus was to be on site. That has not happened, and I encourage him, as the new Minister, to put it on the top of his agenda to proactively get the department to seek out university partnership and deliver on the promise his department made earlier.

As soon as the car park for senior students opens, each and every one of them will be at risk when they exit onto Harbord Road because the department failed to get the Roads and Traffic Authority to install traffic lights at this extremely dangerous intersection. Young P-platers constantly exit en masse onto a major busy road. Brookvale Public School, a very fine school, has existed for 116 years without a school hall. I ask the Minister to providing assistance in building a school hall for the school, which caters for students of more than 30 nationalities. Curl Curl North Public School has a vibrant school community that has raised more than $70,000 towards a school hall. When the school was measured in the 200s 10 years ago, the then Coalition Government matched funds raised by the school on a dollar-for-dollar basis, and for a song—about $20,000 of taxpayers' funds—a shelter shed was extended to provide enclosed space. Now, 10 years later, the school needs a new hall.

Wheeler Heights school, Narraweena school and Manly High School all urgently need school halls. Wheeler Heights has almost 500 students and Narraweena, an amazing school, now has more than 400 students. Each of these schools has grown enormously. A few years ago Manly High School became a selective high school. Each of these schools deserves to be treated fairly. On behalf of the parents and students of each of the schools, I ask the Minister to visit us and discuss what we need to do as partners with the new Government to get our school halls. I stress that the students at each of these schools need the halls to maximise their educational opportunities. I look forward to the new Minister visiting us and telling us what he will do for the students of the northern beaches.

EDGEWORTH PUBLIC SCHOOL UPGRADE

Mr MILLS (Wallsend) [4.45 p.m.]: I express my support for the continued upgrading of Edgeworth Public School. Tomorrow morning the parents of Edgeworth Public School will hold a protest meeting at the school to call on the Government and the Department of Education and Training to accelerate the process of upgrading the school. The parents have my support, and I congratulate them on having the courage to express publicly their strong support for the school in which their children receive a good public education, and demanding that the facilities at Edgeworth catch up with the standards that should apply at a school of this size—which has, for several years, catered for more than 500 students. Parents have also expressed to me their concerns that other smaller schools in the Hunter have jumped the queue in funding for upgrades. In October 2001 I referred in the House to fire damage to two classrooms at Edgeworth Public School. On that occasion I said:

Those representations commenced seriously in June 2000. In reply to me on that day the Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development said:

In June 2000 I said that the main ongoing issues to improve facilities at Edgeworth Public School were administration space, library space and a multipurpose hall. I followed that up in November 2001 with representations requesting that the upgrade be expedited. Parents had sent hundreds of letters to the Minister asking him to give top priority to the construction of a school hall, and added the additional deficiencies of a library, staff facilities, administrative facilities, communal facilities, learning unit, pupil facilities and site facilities including car park, games court, garden store and cleaning. The Edgeworth Public School community wants to see the acknowledgement of the desirability of upgrading facilities turned into more rapid action.

Since the fire 18 months ago action has taken place. In February 2002 a senior properties officer of the department came from Sydney to inspect the school and made various suggestions. As a result the school community urgently requested a school hall and an attached canteen, and an upgrade of the administration area. In October last year I was pleased to advise the school council president, Mrs Sue Cooper, that the Minister for Education and Training, John Watkins, had approved minor capital works in the current financial year of $120,000 for an administration upgrade and $45,000 for a preschool upgrade. I am grateful to the former Minister for making that funding available. This week the new Minister, Dr Refshauge, announced a $26,000 upgrade of the school's electrical system by the end of the current term. Before any other work could begin it was necessary to fix the old electrical system.

It was necessary for the electrical upgrade to be completed before the rebuilt classrooms could be utilised. Tenders will be called for a $234,000 school administration facility upgrade—the Minister's announcement last year has been increased to $234,000—which includes a staff study, staff kitchen, enclosed link way, new duplicating room, extra staff toilet, power upgrade, new sick bay and new secure store. In addition, the building of a school hall has been put on a priority list for consideration in future capital works programs. Security issues have been addressed at the request of the school council. This week the Minister announced that a security fence would be built by the end of this year for the protection of students. The upgrading of the school is under way. I commend the parents for strongly stating their commitment to achieving the best school facilities for their children. I will continue to work hard to help them.

BYRON SHIRE HOSPITAL PROJECT

Mr PAGE (Ballina—Deputy Leader of the National Party) [4.50 p.m.]: I bring to the attention of the House the very important issue of a new hospital for Byron shire. The need for a new hospital arose when it was revealed in the mid 1990s that Mullumbimby Hospital had an asbestos problem in the roof and, despite a temporary containment exercise several years ago, would need to close at some stage in the not too distant future. At that time Treasury advised that it would not replace the small hospital with one of a similar size. Following community consultation, which took a couple of years, the Northern Rivers Area Health Service and community consultative committees from both the north and south of the shire agreed that the best solution was to build a new, much larger central hospital of 54 beds to serve the needs of the whole shire.

This proposal will also involve having community health centres at Mullumbimby, Ocean Shores and Byron Bay. The new central hospital will offer a more comprehensive range of services than is currently provided by existing hospitals at Mullumbimby and Byron Bay. Expressions of interest were called for suitable sites, and I understand that suitable options are available. Everything was in train to have the new hospital included in the capital works program for this year. At the eleventh hour, the Northern Rivers Area Health Service moved the goalposts and decided to consider the central hospital, not just for Byron shire but also for the Ballina shire. In my opinion, that was an ill-conceived move for three reasons.

First, the Byron shire community had been working toward its central hospital proposal for over four years. Second, neither Ballina shire residents nor Byron shire residents are going to give up their existing hospitals to travel to a hospital a substantial distance away. It would be almost impossible to get agreement on a site for the Ballina-Byron hospital and would result in the project being delayed while endless debate about location ensued. Third, both Ballina shire and Byron shire are experiencing strong population growth which will continue into the foreseeable future. Demand for medical services in both shires will continue to increase, especially given the large number of retirees who are settling there. Generally, older people need more health services than do younger people.

The Coalition's policy was to stick to the original proposal of a new central hospital for Byron shire, which would include one operating theatre with provision for a second operating theatre later, should it be needed. In the meantime Ballina District Hospital would continue as it is, except for an upgraded surgery, new rehabilitation facilities and aged care facilities. The policy enjoys broad community support. During the recent election campaign a front-page story appeared in the Byron Shire Echo under the headline "Greens wring hospital promise from Labor". The essence of the article was that the Greens would give their preferences to Labor on the basis of "a commitment from the ALP to build the new Byron central hospital". The Greens candidate, Jan Barham, is quoted in the same article as saying:

The hospital commitment is crucial for this area and was pivotal for the preference flow.

The situation could not be clearer. The Carr Government obviously gave a firm commitment to build a new central hospital for Byron shire in exchange for Greens preferences, which were forthcoming. The new hospital for Byron shire therefore enjoys support from all political parties, but the problem is that the Government and the Northern Rivers Area Health Service are sitting on their hands instead of getting on with the project. The time for procrastination and new options is well and truly over. The Government must immediately get on with the business of buying the site, allocating the money and building a new central hospital for Byron shire. The time for further talking is over. Action is required. I call on the Government get on with the project without further delay. I ask the new Minister for Health to direct the Northern Rivers Area Health Service accordingly.

LIVERPOOL TO PARRAMATTA TRANSITWAY SURPLUS LAND DEVELOPMENT

Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [4.55 p.m.]: I draw to the attention of the House the entirely legitimate concerns held by constituents of mine regarding the future of land between Dale Avenue and Hoxton Park Road at Liverpool. Hoxton Park Road, between the Liverpool council chambers and Banks Road, is the route of the Liverpool to Parramatta transitway project, which I enthusiastically and wholeheartedly support. Significant property acquisition by the Roads and Traffic Authority [RTA] has been necessary along the northern side of Hoxton Park Road between the council chambers and Maxwells Creek. The RTA has acquired full housing blocks. However, it does not need all the land between the northern end of Hoxton Park Road and the rear of the properties that front onto the southern side of Dale Avenue. The strip of land that it does not need for this purpose backs onto those properties in Dale Avenue.

The issue arises over what will happen to the residue land. The RTA seems obsessed with maximising its commercial return and wants to develop this gun-barrel shaped land for medium-density housing. Having regard to the size and shape of the residue land, I regard that use as quite inappropriate. Residents in Dale Avenue and surrounding areas also hold that view, as do some of the Liverpool councillors to whom I have spoken. When I pressed the issue of why the RTA's financial interests should be the determining factor in deciding the future of the land, I was given various platitudes about maximising resources. I was also told that if the RTA did not do so, it would be criticised by the Auditor-General. That struck me as so unlikely that I wrote to the Auditor-General seeking clarification. Part of his letter in reply dated 11 February 2003 reads as follows:

That quite neatly disposes of the rather silly argument that the Auditor-General was forcing the RTA to develop this land. Of course, the RTA has not helped itself in this process. RTA representatives met with residents of Dale Avenue on 21 January this year. Their first mistake was not to notify the local State member of Parliament. The second and even more fundamental mistake was to tell residents that they had plans to develop the residue land, but at that stage could not tell the residents what those plans were. Residents were told that they would have to wait until the development application was lodged.

Moreover, that advice was inconsistent with earlier RTA advice that had been given to some residents. I guess that is a pretty good example of how not to conduct public consultation. The practice of the RTA in trying to be too clever by half continues. It recently issued a newsletter to residents concerning the transitway and proudly proclaimed that high-density development, which concerns residents, is not being pursued by the RTA and that, by inference, the residents should be very grateful to the RTA. That is fine, except that residents are actually more concerned about what the RTA actually proposes, which is medium-density development.

The RTA is obviously trying to pretend that all that worries residents is high-density development and that it has complied with their wishes. That is nonsense. Obviously there are some significant limitations to the art of spin doctoring: When officials start treating people like mugs, it usually backfires. The position of the residents has in fact been made quite clear in a petition signed by many of them. The petition, which was read in this place on 30 April, states in part:

The development of land vacated by the widening of Hoxton Park Road and suggestions that have been given to the residents by the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) that this vacated land will have medium density housing construction upon it.

The petition goes on to state:

This is unacceptable to the residents, as it will increase the traffic flow in and around Dale Avenue, which the street is too narrow to support.

Other portions of the petition make it crystal clear that whatever residents support, it is not medium-density development. The opposition of residents is much broader than just opposition to high-density development. I have to say that I regard the residents' objections as being entirely well founded.

This is simply the wrong site for a medium-density development. I hasten to add that I am not obsessively against medium-density development, as some people are. My problem is about this particular site. The site is long and narrow. It is about half a house block wide, and about 25 houses long. It is almost the ultimate in a gun-barrel development. At present its only vehicular access could be at the extremities of Memorial Avenue or Maryvale Avenue, which is absurd. I suppose the other alternative may be to buy a block in Dale Avenue to allow easier and more appropriate access. That would obviously increase development costs significantly for what I think would be only a marginal improvement in the development.

I urge the RTA not to proceed with its medium-density proposal. If it is foolish enough to do so, I urge Liverpool City Council to reject that development application. The RTA has the wrong proposal for this site. It seems to be driven by commercial imperatives in the same way as a dodgy private developer. It has thus far placed no regard upon the interests, let alone the wishes, of the residents of this area. The RTA should not proceed with this proposal.

MARSFIELD COMMUNITY FIRE UNIT

Mr TINK (Epping) [5.00 p.m.]: I place on record my thanks to the New South Wales Fire Brigades, in particular the fire brigades that are based at Eastwood and Ryde, for the role they played in getting a community fire unit up and running in Busaco Road, Marsfield. Busaco Road runs in a north-south direction into the Lane Cove River National Park. There are almost 400 medium-density dwellings stacked down into the bushland. When a fire comes down from Pennant Hills in that area of the park—as happened in 1994 and 2001, since I have been a member of Parliament—those homes are immediately affected and threatened in the worst possible way. Indeed, in the 1994 fires a number of homes in the street were lost. In the fire that occurred over the last New Year break, the sky crane Elvis saved further property losses. Nevertheless, the site remains very dangerous and difficult. I would say it is probably the most dangerous single street in the northern districts of Sydney for bushfire risk.

Late last year I attended a police open day at the Eastwood police station and I spoke generally to Bruce Covey, the head of the Eastwood Fire Brigade, about what could be done. He suggested that a community fire unit should be set up. I circulated a letter to everyone who resides in Busaco Road asking for expressions of interest for the setting up of a community fire unit. A number of people responded and Bruce Covey, Gary Nash and a number of people from the Eastwood A Platoon came to what was effectively a public meeting. They were very helpful and supportive in establishing the group. I pay tribute to Mr Terry Munsey for his support. He was formerly was with the Eastwood Fire Brigade and now runs its Community Fire Unit Program. I pay tribute to the people at the Ryde Fire Brigade, especially John Taylor, who carried out a risk assessment as part and parcel of the determination by the fire brigade to set up a community fire unit at any location.

I thank John Hawkins, a long-term resident of Busaco Road. He and I have experienced two fires through the area. He and a number of other residents in Busaco Road have worked relentlessly to get this unit up and running. It takes a bit of time to get a unit going, and to obtain final approvals from the New South Wales Fire Brigades. In the meantime, to keep up enthusiasm, a couple of initial meetings and social functions were held. We became involved in Clean Up Australia Day. Brigades came from Eastwood and Gladesville in a massive effort to clean up the area and reduce the fire risk by clearing flammable rubbish from the bushland. It was a great effort by all concerned.

The trailer unit, which has standpipes, hoses, pumps, uniforms and equipment, arrived at Ryde Fire Brigade late last week. John Hawkins and I have been to see the trailer. Seven weekly training sessions, each lasting one hour, will commence in the middle of this month. The end result will be that by late August or early September the unit will be fully operational. As the staff at Ryde Fire Brigade pointed out, once the unit is fully trained it will be available to assist in fire emergencies until the fire brigade arrives. It can also be co-ordinated to carry out preventive burning in the park.

A problem has been experienced with clearance burning because of the lack of resources, the amount of planning required and the extraordinary manpower required. The community fire units offer, among other things, trained volunteers who have the flexibility to carry out burn-offs to reduce fire risk. I pay tribute to the Busaco Road residents and the New South Wales Fire Brigades for their fantastic interaction. Sometimes that interaction is forgotten with rural fire brigades. This program is a way for fire brigades to help the community in built-up areas, as they have in my area, and for that I thank them.

LUCAS HEIGHTS NUCLEAR REACTOR WASTE TRANSPORTATION AND STORAGE

Mr BLACK (Murray-Darling) [5.05 p.m.]: I inform the House that the Government has yet again honoured an election promise: that is, to set up an inquiry into the transportation and dumping of nuclear waste in country New South Wales. That promise was made on 27 February following a statement on 10 February by the Hon. Peter McGauran, the Federal Minister for Science. The inquiry will be set up and its composition will be made known within the next few weeks. In answer to a question by Mr Peter Andren, the Independent Federal member for Calare, the Federal Minister confirmed that it was the Commonwealth's intention to move some 130 truck loads of nuclear waste from the Lucas Heights facility, near Sydney, to the repository. The Minister said that he believed the repository would be located at Woomera. He further stated that another 40 trucks would move waste stored throughout Australia.

The Minister then said that there is a need for only 170 trucks, and that they are expected to be provided by 2004. That attitude is an outrageous imposition on the communities of Dubbo, Nyngan, Cobar and Broken Hill, and all the communities in between. In the clearest possible terms the Minister has stated that transport of nuclear waste by road is the safest possible option. Following the pledge given on 27 February by the Carr Labor Government, on Saturday 1 March a rally was held in Sturt Park, Broken Hill. The rally was well attended, as rallies of this nature in Broken Hill usually are. I began the comments at the rally. Cardboard cut-outs of the Federal member, John Cobb, were placed on a fence behind the speakers. Subsequently every speaker following me, except one, referred to John Cobb as the "cardboard cut-out". John Cobb indicated that he had no objection to nuclear waste going through Broken Hill and the communities that I mentioned.

John Cobb indicated also that he regarded the transportation of that material as safe. After the rally several statements were made. Yesterday the Federal Government indicated that it would step up security around the proposed national radioactive waste dump in remote South Australia. The Federal Government proposes to use a sheep station near Woomera for the low-level repository. The Federal Government has not indicated where it intends to site the medium-level repository, but it has not ruled out the Olary block which, wrongfully, is stated to include Broken Hill. The Commonwealth is due to announce its final decision in this matter tomorrow.

Minister McGauran stated that he would like the transportation of radioactive waste to South Australia to begin within 12 months of tomorrow's announcement. The Minister said that the waste will be buried several metres underground and covered with cement. Today the South Australian Government announced that it is planning a range of legal actions to stop the Commonwealth's plans for a national low-level radioactive waste dump east of Woomera. The Premier of South Australia, Mike Rann, has vowed to put every obstacle in the way of that plan. Yesterday Premier Rann had a briefing with his Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, and people from Crown law. Premier Rann claimed that in South Australia a number of avenues are being pursued politically, both in the parliamentary sense and in the legal sense.

I repeat that the Carr Labor Government is honouring its election pledge to set up an inquiry. I give my profound commitment to the people of Broken Hill that I will oppose any proposal to locate a nuclear waste dump in the vicinity of Broken Hill. I will do whatever I can to ensure that this material is not carted through the western areas. Little consideration has been given to alternative methodologies of transport. At the end of the day, if John Cobb is correct in his claims about the safety of the material, surely the material can stay at Lucas Heights where most of it is generated. I commend the decision of the inquiry to the House and look forward to its deliberations.

HORNSBY SHIRE RELAY FOR LIFE

Mrs HOPWOOD (Hornsby) [5.10 p.m.]: A very positive event is about to take place in my electorate: the Hornsby Shire Relay for Life. This 24-hour fundraiser for the Cancer Council, the leading cancer charity in New South Wales, will take place on Saturday 10 May and Sunday 11 May in Rofe Park, Hornsby Heights. The opening ceremony starts at 10.00 a.m. on Saturday and the relay will run until 10.00 a.m. the next day. The Relay for Life is a fun, outdoor and overnight fundraising event in which teams of 10 to 15 people take turns to walk or run around their local oval. The event honours the lives of people touched by cancer. It consists of teams—we have 28 teams in our relay—and for 24 hours individual team members will take turns to walk or run around the oval. It is a relay for everyone, it is not a race, and it is open to young and old. It is a celebration of cancer survival and cancer survivors, and their carers are the guests of honour.

The first lap of the relay celebrates these people's victory over cancer. The relay is certainly an important fundraiser for the Cancer Council. My father died three years ago of lung cancer. For that reason, and because I am a nurse and I have looked after many people battling varying stages of cancer, I wanted to do more for cancer research. My daughter, Ashleigh, is team leader of the Grandpa team. I am one of the members. As I said earlier, 27 other teams are participating in the relay. I am master of ceremonies of the committee that is overseeing the relay. I am also responsible for working with the media.

I pay tribute to the members of the hard-working and committed group that comprise the committee. They include Les Howard, the chairman, and his wife, Marg. They have spent many hours supporting other members in their roles, as well as putting the event together. Katrina Bulmer, the team's co-ordinator, has done a fantastic job inspiring teams to join. Katie Clarke, who assists Katrina, has written many letters to schools and other places. Ian Clarke, Katie's husband, is in charge of athlete services. Don McNicol of 2HHH, our local community radio station, has put together sound, stage and music. He has many other types of entertainment, including an Elvis impersonator. Steve Head is helping Don to provide that entertainment. Grahame Hall is responsible for sponsorship.

We have many sponsors, including a number of local Rotary clubs, such as the clubs at Hornsby and Berowra. Hornsby Shire Council provided Rofe Park as the venue, at no charge to us. Westfield and Nature Nature are two other sponsors. Nature Nature, a two-man band, performs at all our citizenship ceremonies. The significance of Nature Nature is that one of the band members, an Aboriginal man, plays a didgeridoo. Other committee members include Cindy Yip, the secretary, and Gary and Mandy Kirkby. Gary Kirkby is the venue manager and Mandy has helped me with media and marketing. Jim Marsh and Greg Timewell are in charge of catering.

The St John Ambulance representative, Malcolm Knight, will be in charge of first aid. Very able staff from the Cancer Council include Steve Ray and Martin Paul, who have assisted us throughout the organisation of this wonderful event. Many other people are coming to create music and activities over this 24-hour period. Mick Gallagher and his bush band will be there. The Rovers, under the guidance of Kim Close, will be providing children and others with entertainment during this period. A couple of months ago we had a successful launch at the Cancer Council shop in Hornsby.

During the 24-hour period we will conduct two important ceremonies. The first is the opening ceremony at which a number of important people will speak, including the mayor. On the same day we will have a candlelight ceremony which will honour those people who have died as a result of cancer. Some brave people have come forward to relate their stories to the community: Sandy, a woman who has been fighting breast cancer for 10 years; Katrina, who had cervical cancer at the age of 18 and again at 21; Nella, the oldest person participating, who is walking and then taking a wheelchair around for her daughter who fought breast cancer; and Jessie, a four-year-old girl who has survived retinoblastoma—a disease that was diagnosed when she was only 10 months old. We are aiming to raise as much money as possible. I thank the local media, including the Hornsby & Upper North Shore Advocate, its editor and staff, who have been fantastic in supporting the relay and in publishing weekly stories. Local people will make this relay a success and I am looking forward to the challenge.

INDEPENDENT ORDER OF ODDFELLOWS HOMES AT ETTALONG BEACH

Ms ANDREWS (Peats) [5.15 p.m.]: I bring to the attention of honourable members the anxiety and anguish to which a number of senior citizens in my electorate have been subjected. These constituents are residents of the Independent Order of Oddfellows [IOOF] homes at Ettalong Beach. For the record, the IOOF is a fraternal benevolent order, which was probably founded in England early in the eighteenth century—the records do not disclose the precise year. The IOOF is based on the principles of friendship, love, truth, faith and charity—although honourable members will not think so as this story unfolds. The organisation is based on non-profit and mutual self-help. Since its earliest days the IOOF has provided sickness and funeral benefits, together with other socially necessary welfare benefits and investment services as they have become relevant to Australians for more than 120 years.

The Oddfellows Lodge is an international network of lodges extending around the world. As a matter of fact, my maternal grandfather, Richard Bingham, was a prominent member of this august order. The IOOF homes at Ettalong Beach, which were established after World War II, provide accommodation for married and single senior citizens. The complex consists of a number of stand-alone brick dwellings and oblong-shaped brick blocks containing a number of single units. Also on site is a community hall which, in recent times, has been the venue for a number of meetings attended by residents, officers from the New South Wales Department of Fair Trading and me.

Until 2001 residents lived at this idyllic location in relative peace and harmony—that is, until the board of the IOOF announced the planned sale of 10 stand-alone cottages and 15 single units. Quite understandably, that announcement instilled a deep sense of fear in residents about the security of their tenure at the homes. The Department of Housing in Gosford was called upon to assist residents to find alternative accommodation. I place on record my appreciation to former Department of Housing team leader Jeff Beehag for the sensitive manner in which he processed housing applications from residents.

A number of residents who were eligible for priority housing under Department of Housing guidelines readily accepted the alternative accommodation. Their main reason for doing so was that they could no longer stand the stress and uncertainty being placed upon them by the IOOF management. I sought the assistance of the then Minister for Fair Trading, the Hon. John Watkins, in determining that the IOOF homes were covered by the Retirement Villages Act—another great initiative of the Carr Government. This Act contains a number of important rights for residents in the event of a retirement village being sold, and it also covers a number of other entitlements.

At a meeting of residents held at the IOOF homes on 28 August 2001 an announcement was made by me and by Ms Dinah Traurig, who was representing the Department of Fair Trading, that the IOOF homes centre board had accepted that the homes at Ettalong Beach were covered by the Retirement Villages Act 1999. A compliance inspection of the village was later carried out by an officer of the Department of Fair Trading. However, residents still remained apprehensive about their security of tenure. In early 2002 the chief executive officer of the IOOF in Sydney, Mr Quelch, advised residents that there were no formal plans, as yet, for the sale of the homes. In April 2002 a development application was submitted to Gosford City Council by the IOOF board. The plans included two-storey buildings, which did not appear to be compatible with retirement-style homes. The board advised us that residents were not being asked to leave the centre. As residents' fears were again aroused, I sought assistance in the matter from the then Minister for Fair Trading, the Hon. John Aquilina.

In August 2002 I received advice from the then Minister to the effect that the Department of Fair Trading had issued a formal caution to IOOF management in relation to non-compliance under the Retirement Villages Act 1999. Even so, in February 2003, residents received individual letters from the IOOF advising them that the centre was no longer subject to the Retirement Villages Act 1999 as it was not predominantly occupied by retired persons. That letter contravened the requirements of the Act in a number of ways. In March 2003 this prolonged and inhumane issue received a great deal of coverage in both the Central Coast Express Advocate and the Central Coast Herald. I again hosted a meeting between residents and officers of the Department of Fair Trading. Eventually the issue became the subject of Ray Martin's A Current Affair. The Minister for Fair Trading, who is in the chair, appeared on that program and said that residents could now sleep easily at night knowing that they had security of tenure under the provisions of the Retirement Villages Act.

Ms MEAGHER (Cabramatta—Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Commerce) [5.20 p.m.]: I take this opportunity to congratulate the honourable member for Peats on her hard work in representing residents of the Independent Order of Oddfellows [IOOF] retirement village and bringing their plight to the attention of the Department of Fair Trading and the Government. This Government is well aware that any talk about the closure of a retirement village can be quite traumatic for elderly residents who have lived in the same village for many years. I assure residents of retirement villages in New South Wales that they are protected by laws that prevent retirement village operators from closing villages on a whim and evicting elderly residents.

Under the retirement villages laws, residents must be given at least 12 months written notice of an operator's intention to apply to have their contracts terminated. After the period of notice expires, the village operator must then apply to the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal—the only body that can approve a termination order. Before the tribunal makes a decision it will listen to the concerns of residents and it may consider such factors as their health, age and whether the site has been approved for redevelopment by the local council.

Closure will not be permitted when the village operator wishes to sell the site to another operator with vacant possession or wants residents to vacate simply to allow higher fee paying residents to move in. If worst comes to the worst and contracts are to be terminated, operators must help residents to find alternative accommodation of a similar standard elsewhere and compensate them for such things as removal and utility connection expenses. The Government recently produced a fact sheet for residents that sets out the rules involved in retirement village closures and contains sound advice for residents who find themselves in this unfortunate situation. I have written to the operator of the IOOF retirement village at Ettalong, reminding him of his obligations under the Retirement Villages Act. I congratulate the honourable member for Peats on working hard to alleviate residents' concerns.

COUNTRY SHOWGROUND GRANDSTANDS

Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan) [5.22 p.m.]: Yesterday a motion was passed to support country show societies. My contribution this afternoon is pursuant to that motion and concerns facilities on showgrounds across New South Wales, particularly those that are held in trust on behalf of the Government—as the majority of showgrounds are. In most cases showgrounds, which often incorporate racetracks, dog tracks or harness racing tracks, were constructed from the turn of the century until the 1920s and 1930s as venues for agricultural exhibitions and social and cultural interaction. Grandstands are a feature of these showgrounds. Some magnificent grandstands were constructed in the first part of the last century, in many cases as a result of the generosity of the local community—sometimes bequests were made from estates on behalf of local residents or perhaps citizens of considerable wealth made generous donations. The construction of the grandstands was a combined effort involving primarily the community and, to a small extent, the government of the day.

Several showgrounds in my electorate have magnificent old grandstands. Cootamundra is a classic example. The grandstand at the Cootamundra showground and racecourse is probably one of the most significant in New South Wales. It is a heritage-listed period piece. From a layman's perspective, it is in reasonable order, with the exception of the flooring and the seating facing the eastern side of the ground. As was often the custom, underneath the grandstand there are rooms that were used for functions and by the secretary and the stewards. That grandstand has been closed for the past 12 months. I have made some inquiries in government circles and discovered that only about $10,000 from an annual heritage program is available to be spent on its restoration. Perhaps a one-off grant of $20,000 might be allocated in exceptional circumstances.

I remind honourable members that this grandstand is the property of the New South Wales Government because it is on State land. It is only one of several grandstands that are in a similar state. The grandstand at West Wyalong showground has been closed for five or six years. The much-used grandstand at Young—which is an active harness racing area; harness races are being run today—has had a chequered safety history in recent years. The grandstand at Harden-Murrumburrah has been closed for a considerable time. In my home town of Cowra there is a beautiful, big grandstand but the catering facilities under it have been closed for six or seven years. The honourable member for Orange has tried diligently to remedy the situation but the grandstand is now closed to the public on safety grounds.

I ask honourable members to recognise the historical significance and architectural beauty of grandstands across the State. They are good examples of the architecture of the period in which they were built. These recreational facilities are part of the State's character and history and most are architecturally unique. We will lose part of our history if we allow these grandstands simply to rot away. At present we are simply putting a ring around them and saying, "Stay away, only the pigeons are allowed to use them." I ask the Government to address this important issue and to recognise the contribution by country people to the State's sporting and cultural history.

This matter also has ramifications for tourism. Probably about half the Cabinet portfolios have responsibilities in this area. Restoration of the State's grandstands would be a one-off investment in our future. Action on this matter could reap rewards for a government that is prepared to bite the bullet and look after its own backyard. The Government expects shopkeepers and private citizens to maintain their property and we expect the same of the Government. These grandstands have served us well for the past 100 years and, with some proper funding, they will continue to do so for another 100 years. I urge the Government to recognise the historical buildings of this great State.

SURVIVE THE DRIVE PROGRAM

Mr COLLIER (Miranda) [5.27 p.m.]: I draw honourable members' attention to a proactive road safety program for young drivers called Survive the Drive that is currently being trialled at the Sutherland Police and Community Youth Club [PCYC]. This well-organised, professionally run program aims to prevent deaths of, and injuries to, young drivers by giving them an opportunity to better understand their responsibilities, the risks involved in driving and the very real consequences of irresponsible driver behaviour for them, their families and the community. It is no secret that young drivers aged between 16 and 25 years have a greater chance of being involved in a road accident or of being charged with a traffic offence than drivers in any other age group. Survive the Drive promotes driver awareness and responsible driving behaviour among young men and women from the word go rather than waiting until some accident, fatality or a police charge forces them to rethink their attitudes, re-examine their driving skills or relive a road tragedy.

Survive the Drive grew out of the evaluation of the Traffic Offenders Program, which is also conducted at Sutherland PCYC. Those participants charged with traffic offences who are doing the course while awaiting the outcome of their court cases consistently claim that they would not have committed traffic offences if they had completed a course such as Survive the Drive when they were trying to get their licences. Those completing the offenders program were wise after the event, often stating that courses such as Survive the Drive should be compulsory before being granted a licence. There is much merit in that argument. As a PCYC patron who has been involved with both programs, as a lawyer who constantly saw at Sutherland Local Court and in the higher courts the consequences of irresponsible driving behaviour, and as a person who lost his only brother, Allan, in a road accident when he was aged 23, I cannot but agree with their conclusion.

The third Survive the Drive program commenced last night. For six weeks each Wednesday night a different presenter will speak to a group of about 20 young drivers, each of whom attends the course accompanied by a supporting experienced driver—usually a parent. The participants, male and female, range in age from 16 to 21 years and have varying levels of driving experience: some are on their Ls, some have their Ps and others are yet to gain their licence. The presenters include Senior Sergeant Peter Jenkins from the NSW Police Accident Investigation Unit; Wayne Teagle, who is a victim of spinal cord injury; Jacky Dalton, who is from Trent Driving School; Graham Patterson, a mechanic from APPS Automotive, who discusses vehicle maintenance and safety; Bruce Tindale, who is an officer with the Ambulance Service of New South Wales; Matt Brabant, a youth counsellor, who speaks about drivers who use drugs and alcohol; and Roger Snaith, from the group Enough is Enough, who lost his only daughter in a car accident and who represents victims' families.

As patron, I have attended the final two sessions of the first and second courses that were presented by Bruce Tindale, a local ambulance officer who attends accident scenes. I could not help but be impressed by his presentation, which included graphic video footage of young road accident victims lying dead and injured. I presented to participants certificates signifying satisfactory completion of the program and took the opportunity to tell of the impact of my brother's sudden death on the road upon my parents and me. By relating that experience I hoped that young people would get the message that we are all vulnerable to road trauma and that the effects of road accidents are felt by the families and friends of victims for many years.

Survive the Drive is an outstanding program about which the participants and their parents to whom I spoke had nothing but praise. Each had no doubt about the positive way in which Survive the Drive had not only opened their eyes but helped to shape and promote responsible attitudes and safer driving behaviour. The parents consistently said that they only wished that they had had a program like Survive the Drive when they learned to drive. I must admit that I do too. I quote from one of the many evaluation sheets from the course. Seventeen-year-old Christina said:

Road deaths in this State have more than halved since my brother died on the road in 1978. Many initiatives have been put in place—rule changes, traffic calming devices, speed cameras and so on—to try to reduce the number of road deaths. It seems to me that the best way to cut the road toll further is to change driver behaviour and attitudes. To bring about a long-term change we must start with young drivers and instil in them an appropriate understanding of the risks, and develop attitudes and acceptance of the need to drive in a responsible manner at all times. This can be done through programs such as Survive the Drive. I commend Sutherland PCYC program co-ordinator Senior Constable Michelle Druery, volunteer Wayne Mudge, program co-ordinator Lee Paloff-Giblin and each of the presenters on this wonderful initiative. I ask the Minister for Roads to evaluate programs such as Survive the Drive, with a view to making the successful completion of such programs a compulsory part of getting a licence in New South Wales. I agree with my constituents that this should be done. [Time expired.]

CHATSWOOD POLICE STATION

Ms BEREJIKLIAN (Willoughby) [5.32 p.m.]: In my first private member's statement I raise an important issue in my electorate: the Chatswood police station, which for many years has been in a deplorable condition. I have raised this issue with the Minister for Police and I hope he will reply to the issues I will mention today. I place on record my absolute respect for police at the station; they do a fantastic job for the community under difficult circumstances. On numerous occasions I have met with and spoken to them. I am proud that I have police of that calibre in my electorate. However, the conditions under which they work can be described only as akin to the Dark Ages.

My constituents need to feel confident that our police have adequate services to do the best job they can. Regrettably, that is not the case at the moment. In particular, Chatswood is one of the largest central business districts in Sydney. I acknowledge that the Minister for Police has entered the Chamber and I thank him for taking the time to listen to my private member's statement. Chatswood is a burgeoning retail area with small, medium and large firms. It has high-density living. Chatswood train station, one of the busiest on the northern line, has the associated safety and security problems. In more recent times, gang violence has cropped up as a major issue. Parents have raised concerns about children in the central business district, in particular, after dark.

Clearly, the need for additional facilities at Chatswood police station is critical. I also place on record some specific problems of the current site that have been documented and are on the public record. The conditions at the current station are so deplorable that for the past couple of years it has not been deemed fit for the public to visit on police open days. That situation cannot continue in Sydney's fourth-largest central business district. I have been at the station and observed the roof leak that occurs when it rains. It has inadequate interview facilities. I have heard anecdotally through constituents that both victims and perpetrators can hear each other's statements because the walls are so thin. At the moment detectives and other officers are accommodated separately because the station is not large enough. The Government put out to tender private development of the site, where a lease-back arrangement would ensure that the station would be built. Regrettably, the tender process failed twice when the bids fell short of what was required.

Prior to the last State election the then shadow Minister for Police, Andrew Tink, and the Leader of the Opposition, John Brogden, came to my electorate and announced that the Coalition would fund the $1.5 million shortfall. Regrettably, the Government has failed to make that commitment. However, on 28 April Willoughby City Council approved, in principle, the development application of a site for temporary accommodation diagonally across from the current site. However, I ask for a firm commitment from the Government that it will either put in place a separate new tender process or ensure that a new station is built.

At the moment no funds have been committed. I want a commitment from the Government that it will ensure a new station is built. I want to ensure that it does not take ages for the new station to be built. I want a commitment as to the timeframe in which development will take place. During the election campaign I raised this critical issue on a number of occasions. I also mentioned it in my inaugural speech. I have placed questions on notice in this regard to the Minister for Police. Essentially, I demand that the Government take the Chatswood police station out of the Dark Ages, commit to building a new station and commit to a firm timeframe.

Mr WATKINS (Ryde—Minister for Police) [5.37 p.m.]: The Government has allocated a total of $8.3 million for a new police station at Chatswood. This allocation will result in a functional, highly visible police station that is easily accessible to the community. I am advised that high-standard modern accommodation will be located within the central business district and will include excellent public interface facilities—such as disabled access to a public area, a waiting room and amenities—office accommodation for police and support staff, interview rooms, conference room facilities, a communications room, intelligence gathering facilities, charging facilities, a van dock and prisoner management facilities, secure parking for police vehicles and staff recreation amenities. Importantly, the new police station will also allow for the co-location of all police at Chatswood. I have asked for a full update on progress at this station.

SWANSEA ELECTORATE COASTAL LANDS PROTECTION

Mr ORKOPOULOS (Swansea) [5.38 p.m.]: I raise a matter of interest to the communities of east Lake Macquarie in the electorates of Swansea and Charlestown: the future of coastal lands between Redhead in the north and Belmont in the south, which is now in public ownership. This prime piece of environmentally sensitive coastal land—comprising 506 hectares, and boasting beautiful interlocking sets of coastal wetlands and dunal systems—was previously owned by BHP for sandmining and future housing estate development. The site has suffered from the impacts of human development, most markedly in the twentieth century and, in particular, from the 1940s to the present day.

In my first term in this House I raised the concerns of many in the community that BHP had only one plan for the site: housing development. The environmental values of the site demanded that it become a coastal reserve or park. Thus began the long fight by the community, led by the Coastal and Wetlands Alliance, an umbrella group of conservation-minded citizens to save the land from further environmental degradation and for BHP to give it to the people. I am proud to say that this dream was realised when Premier Carr announced that an agreement between BHP and the Government had been reached for the handover of this and other significant parcels of land into public ownership. Yet another piece of our precious coastline has been saved from development.

I will briefly touch on the history of the area. Eight thousand years of Aboriginal history is assumed on that site. While many Aboriginal sites are lost, their location—for example, the Aboriginal ceremonial island in the Jewells wetlands—may be interpreted from anecdotal evidence. Oral stories recalling the past have been sought and recorded. The site also has a rich mining and wartime history, which needs recording and interpreting. Indeed, part of the site was used to prevent the Japanese from landing tanks.

Among the issues we must confront is the curbing of existing pressures. The list of ongoing pressures on the system is daunting, and includes continued development encroachment on remnant natural areas; development zone creep, with inadequate siltation trapping or deliberate encroachment on infilling of natural areas, especially along wetland margins; production of flood-soak potential of the system and disturbances of its natural hydrological flow patterns by various means, including consolidating wetlands margins as property "door steps" rubbish tips; channelisation, destroying natural flow and distribution patterns; and, following on from extensive post-sand mining areas, sand extraction plants continuing to remove substantial deposits from the now much-lowered protective dune system in front of the wetlands. I am pleased to be able to say to the House that the last of commercial sandmining extraction operations will cease by the end of this year.

All of the problems that I have mentioned and further problems that I could refer to are now with a community consultative committee, which wrote to the Premier requesting the appointment of a broadly-based community consultative committee to advise the New South Wales Government on how best to manage the former BHP lands. The Premier agreed, by letter of 4 February, to the formation of a community consultation committee consisting of myself, the Hon. Peter Morris as chair; a representative of Lake Macquarie City Council, Ian Andrews; Councillor John Jenkins; Mr Greg Hopper, representing both tourism and the business community; and Ms Dianna Mannigal and Bill Steenson from the Wetlands Alliance. Mr Greg Wright will be co-opted from the Belmont Lagoon Committee to provide us with expert advice. I believe we have the best opportunity to provide a first-class coastal park for the communities of East Lake Macquarie.

EVANS RIVER SAND BAR

Mr CANSDELL (Clarence) [5.43 p.m.]: I would like to bring to the attention of the House the dangers associated with crossing the Evans River bar. On a number of occasions in recent weeks vessels have run aground whilst attempting to cross the Evans River bar in an effort to proceed to sea. On one recent occasion a professional fishing vessel escaped capsizing only because it was resting on sand at the river mouth. Another vessel that was following behind was lucky to be able to retreat back into the river. It is difficult enough for the professional fishermen who have experience on their side with respect to boat handling skills. The amateur fishermen who come down to the sea from inland regions do not have the skills or the knowledge to negotiate the bar. Often they do not recognise the dangers that confront them and proceed to cross the bar in extremely dangerous conditions.

A number of reasons have been put forward to explain the build-up of sand at the river mouth. The most often mentioned is attempts at flood mitigation where a fabri-dam has been placed across the upper reaches of the river at Woodburn to retard the flow of fresh water into the Evans River and, indeed, of saltwater back into the Richmond River. This has met with a measure of success with respect to water oxygenation and the resultant fish kills. However, the restrictions upon water flow have seen a decrease in the river's capacity to shift sand from the upper reaches. This decrease in sand movement has created problems downstream, with the channel having moved from the north side to the south side of the river.

Previous attempts have been made to straighten the river, with large numbers of trees being cleared from along the banks. This clearing has allowed the banks to erode, with larger volumes of sand entering the stream through bank collapse. The restricted flow of water cannot cope with this greater movement of sand. Basically, the river has lost its ability, due to human intervention, to flush itself naturally. The oyster beds that were evident upstream adjacent to the Iron Gates area in years gone by no longer exist. The river depths in that region will no longer support their existence. Further, the tuna fleet that operated out of Evans Head has relocated as they can no longer be assured of safe passage over the bar or, indeed, along the channels into the boat harbour.

The local slipway approaches have silted up, and vessels can no longer access the slip for periodic maintenance and repairs. The fishing vessels cannot rely on there being enough water under the keel to allow safe manoeuvring. This has resulted in them seeking slippage elsewhere. The Evans River fishing fleet has been in existence since the mid twentieth century. It has been a major employer in the town for that entire period. How much longer this will last is unknown. With the current situation regarding the "river mouth bar" it will not be long, however, before they are compelled to seek a safer harbour from which to work. The prawn trawlers that operate overnight have been forced to cross the bar in the early afternoon, then sit at anchor because the bar would be too shallow to let them cross later in the day. As night falls they then move off to the fishing grounds. Next morning they can be seen once again swinging at anchor, awaiting the rise of the tide to ensure enough water under the keel to get across the bar. The Evans Head Chamber of Commerce, in a letter to the former member for Clarence, said:

They should not be placed in danger when there is a remedy available to the Government to alleviate the situation. The river is in desperate need of dredging to maintain a safe channel for the passage of commercial and recreational fishing craft to and from the boat harbour and adjacent slipways. The river is the lifeblood of Evans Head. It provides access to the sea for the commercial fishing fleet and recreational fishermen. The recreational fishermen come from the inland regions, and once they have reached the river they are loath to pack up and seek a safer passage to different fishing grounds.

A number of local businesses are directly affected by the visit of recreational fishermen. In particular, accommodation venues, fuel supply outlets, bait and tackle shops and a number of food outlets in the town would be disadvantaged should the river become unnavigable. Over the Christmas holiday period the town population swells by as many at 8,000 to 10,000 people. To date, only luck has prevented a serious mishap, and unless some positive preventative action occurs soon there will be a tragedy on the Evans River bar. I call on the Premier to fast-track the Government's election promise of $250,000 to dredge the bar and channels of the Evans River. I put the Premier on notice that if there is loss of life because of procrastination in fulfilling its election commitment, the New South Wales Labor Government will be held accountable.

TRIBUTE TO MONARO ELECTORATE BUSH FIRE FIGHTERS

Mr WHAN (Monaro) [5.48 p.m.]: I would like to place on record today the gratitude that the Monaro community feels for the people who fought bushfires in our region in January and February this year. The fires saw thousands of people volunteer to fight fires or provide support. Our community owes all those people a great debt of gratitude, and today I want in a small way to place on record our thanks. Before I talk specifically about New South Wales I want to express deepest sympathy for the hundreds of Canberra families who lost their homes and, in some tragic cases, loved ones. Duffy, one of the hardest hit Canberra suburbs, was a suburb I grew up in. I feel sad about the tragedy but also pride in the way that my former neighbours handled the challenge they faced. The fact that in Monaro we saw no homes burnt down and no lives lost is a great tribute to the efforts of the firefighters

As all of us who represent regional and rural electorates know, our volunteer firefighters are a modest lot. I know many of them would deny it, but the rest of the community knows they are heroes. You only had to be in our region during January and February to see that. As the firefighters drove through our towns, residents honked their horns in support, or stopped on the side of the road to wave to them as they went by. On the outskirts of Cooma a resident put up a sign thanking the volunteers for their help. I will mention some of those local Rural Fire Service volunteers shortly.

First, I need to mention some of the other important groups who fought the fires. National Parks and Wildlife Service employees also spent many weeks at the fire fronts putting their lives on the line. Every single one of those employees deserves the community's thanks for their efforts. They certainly did not deserve to have the National Party attack them during the fires because, whatever view you hold of longer term management issues, they still deserve thanks for and support in their firefighting efforts. Dave Darlington from the National Parks and Wildlife Service and his team in Jindabyne worked tirelessly on the fires and also on keeping local communities informed. State Forests firefighters did a great job in many areas and their skill was invaluable. State Forests played a particularly big role in the Bombala area, and I know that community was grateful.

Our professional firefighters also put in many long hours in the area. Backing it all up were groups like the police, State Emergency Services and local service clubs like Lions and Rotary. The Department of Community Services also was outstanding. I would also like to acknowledge the hundreds of local businesses in the region that willingly provided their services to the firefighting effort. It is hard to single out names, but I want to put on record a number of the leaders of the Rural Fire Service in Monaro in the knowledge that by doing that all those who work with them and volunteer their time and effort will know that they too are appreciated.

In the Cooma Monaro area I acknowledge Ewan Charlton, Rein Peet, Francis Goodwin, Terry Myers, Ross Sherlock and Michael White, and brigade captains Allan Lehapuu, Will Goggin, Michael White, Ross Sherlock, Bill Stephens, Richard Blyton, Terry Myers, Ray Barron and Peter Luton. In the Bombala area I acknowledge Langdon Gould, Reg Nelson, Danny Barker, Grant Stevenson, Clive Cottrell, Warren Bruce, John Reed, Cris Cherry, James Garnock, Max Caldwell, Jim Hamilton, John Mording, Warren Kimber, Doug Platts, Mark Reed and Mark Tiernan. In the Tallaganda area I acknowledge Doug Willcoxson, John Mullins, Michael Welford, Mark Hart, James O’Connell, Terry Hancock and Jamie Ramm. In the Snowy River area I acknowledge David Glasson, Philip Reid, David Jardine, Ross Walters, Peter Bottom, Darvall Dixon, Ross Miners, David Scarlett, Dunbar Wilkinson, Steve Mackay, Bill Peterie, Milton Golby, Ray Climpson, Anthony Pelz, Bruce McMillan, David Fletcher and Richard Boys.

In the Yarrowlumla-Queanbeyan area I acknowledge Bruce Arthur, Julie Crawford, Jim Lomas, Danny King, Geoff Andrew, Chris Powell, John Cameron, Mark Ryan, Syd McRoy, David Hubbard, Neil Donaghoe, Fred Woods, Peter Smith, Bob Munday, Jim Finch, Chris Quinn, Tim Webb, Rick Magnus, Richard Stone, Bruce Roffe, Glenn Sparkes, David Loft, Rod Simpson, Trevor D'Arx, Bernie Broers, Ged Morrison, Steve Forbes and Barry McRoberts. The impact of these fires on the local community and the economy is still a long way from being overcome. The Government responded quickly with a $2.6 million recovery package, but we still need to work to ensure that the tourism industry is able to pick up again in the next summer season. Local farmers found the fires another huge blow on top of the drought. Of course, many farmers are also Rural Fire Service volunteers, and many sacrificed their own farming business to fight the fires.

Farmers in my area are still waiting for the Federal Government to grant them exceptional circumstances assistance. While I have not mentioned individual brigade members, there is one person I want to mention. We are glad still to have Peter Filmer with the Williamsdale brigade. Peter was in the driver's seat of a truck that had its cab crushed by a fire-damaged tree. The photos I have seen show that his escape was nothing short of amazing. As well as being a valued and skilled firefighter from a family of dedicated volunteers, Peter is also a valued artist. Indeed, one of his works, a beautiful wooden hat, is now sitting in a glass box in the entrance to the Speaker's dining room. We are pleased that he is still with us. Once again I put on the record my thanks to all those people: your community is grateful for your efforts.

GOULBURN AND YASS TOWN WATER SUPPLIES

Ms HODGKINSON (Burrinjuck) [5.53 p.m.]: Honourable members will recall that in November last year I raised in this Chamber the serious threat to town water supplies in my electorate due to the continuing drought. I highlighted the need for the State Government to commit to urgent action to alleviate the immediate effects of the drought. I also called for the Government to put in place a proactive whole-of-State approach to the provision of safe drought-resistant drinking water supplies in all rural towns. Since I spoke the position in many towns in the elecotorate of Burrinjuck has worsened significantly. Water supplies in Yass and Goulburn are of particular concern. Yass derives its water supply from a weir on the Yass River, which is located downstream of the township. The catchment area for the Yass River weir covers about 159,000 hectares, stretches from the top of the Lake George escarpment and passes through three local government areas—Yarrowlumla, Gunning and Yass. Unlike Canberra, which at 50 per cent storage capacity still has some four years of water stored, the Yass weir can only store a maximum of eight months to nine months of water at normal rates of consumption.

This is particularly alarming as in the past five years the Yass River has stopped flowing during each summer. I digress and commend the residents of Yass for the magnificent way they have responded to the severe water restrictions that have been placed on them, out of necessity, by the council. Yass residents are on the toughest and most stringent water restrictions that have ever been put in place in the town. They can shower, wash their clothes and drink the water but little else. No town water is allowed to be used for watering gardens except for recycled grey water from baths and washing machines. It is heartbreaking to see the ravages being inflicted by the drought on the many magnificent gardens in the town. The restrictions are being adhered to and Yass has significantly reduced its water consumption. Still, even with the reduced consumption Yass will run out of water by October if no significant rain falls.

We have had a bit of rain but not enough to make any difference to the water level in the Yass weir. Council expects to begin drilling for bores for an emergency water supply within the next two weeks, and is also working towards recommending a series of measures to address the long-term water storage problems. Some of these solutions include raising the wall height of the Yass weir, desilting the weir to increase storage capacity, connecting the Yass water supply to larger storage areas such as Cotter Dam or Burrinjuck Dam, or constructing a new dam. While this list of options is not exhaustive, it indicates the breadth of council's investigations. Once council has made a decision I will strongly present its case to the State Government to provide appropriate funding for the best solution. Goulburn, the city of roses, was forced to go to level four restrictions and banned the use of town water on lawns and gardens and for other non-essential uses, such as washing cars, from 1 March. The drought has also directly affected employment in Goulburn. In March Southern Meats was forced to lay off 180 workers from the abattoirs when it had to reduce its operation to one shift because of the lack of stock available for slaughter.

Like Yass, Goulburn residents have responded magnificently to the necessary water restrictions. Goulburn City Council is also looking earnestly at both long-term and short-term solutions to the problem of water storage. It has issued only six infringement notices to residents since the stage four restrictions began. Based on current storage capacity and water usage, Goulburn has enough water to last for another 16 months. I want to highlight the efforts of one company in Goulburn to massively reduce its water consumption. The Goulburn Wool Scour has installed a close-circuit rinse water recovery system which allows the company to recycle 75 per cent of the water used in the wool scouring process. This has allowed the facility to cut its water consumption in half—a magnificent achievement during this terrible drought. I congratulate the manager of the wool scour, Howard Kneebone, and the environmental manager, Tom Parker, on their great work. Two of the most likely solutions to Goulburn's water supply problems are to connect to the Sydney Water supply and to construct a 12-kilometre pipeline between Pejar Dam and Mount Wayo Creek.

Construction of the Pejar Dam pipeline would cost about $4.5 million and increase the useable water supply by about 120 days because of reductions in water lost to evaporation and seepage. Connection to the Sydney Water supply would be much more expensive—it would cost between $20 million and $30 million—but would provide a better long-term solution for Goulburn's water supply problem. Honourable members should remember that this is a constantly growing area now only 1� hours from Campbelltown down the freeway. Both Yass and Goulburn need significant financial assistance from the State Government to bring these solutions to fruition. I strongly urge the Government to provide urgent financial and planning assistance to alleviate the significant problems with these water supplies.

INNER SYDNEY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

Ms MOORE (Bligh) [5.58 p.m.]: Recently, inner-city residents have been blamed unjustly for the commercial decision by Carlton and United Brewery at Broadway and Weston's Biscuits at Camperdown to relocate from inner Sydney. The Labor Council proposal for legislation to reduce the amenity rights of residents in areas zoned residential particularly concern me. The Labor Council reportedly believes that banning complaints about noise, lights and truck movements will help to prevent factory closures. Although I am concerned about industry leaving the city, I believe that the claim of complaints by residents has been used to cash in on the escalating real estate values resulting from urban consolidation and booming inner-city development. Since the Carlton and United Brewery site came into the Bligh electorate at the 1999 election, my office has received one complaint about the industrial impacts of the brewery. Although other impacts have occurred, by far the greater concern for local residents has been the potential impact of future development on the site.

If State and local government are serious about maintaining jobs in the city, they could refuse to rezone industrial sites for residential/retail and apply appropriate development controls on the parameters of industrial sites to address potential conflicts and ensure compatible land uses. People living in areas that have been zoned residential have a right to residential amenity, whether they are high or low income. Too often the underlying cause of conflict is inadequate planning or authorities bowing to pressure from the development industry. I regularly mediate between residents and businesses to help resolve conflicts, and I believe that both industry and residents can be protected through good management and proper planning.

When I met with the management of Carlton and United Brewery in 1999 they were very conscious of their increasing residential borders. The brewery had implemented procedures to limit impacts, and has been vigilant about protesting development too close to the most noisy parts of their operations. Brewery management made a submission to council, which resulted in a design change for a new apartment block to address the known noise and visual impacts. The continued impacts on residents surrounding the former showground and Moore Park sporting stadia highlight the long-term consequences of poor planning. Although the densely populated inner city needs more open space, parkland continues to be used for car parking. The precinct needs an effective mass transit system to reclaim parkland and overcome the gridlock that accompanies special events.

The Kings Cross area exhibits an apparent lack of infrastructure planning, despite massive ongoing residential development in an area that already has Australia's highest population density. The local community and new residents will pay for increased pressure on existing services and facilities, traffic and parking impacts, and the lack of open space and recreational opportunities. Many residents are concerned that the Government is reaping huge stamp duties, and local councils are accumulating developer contributions and collecting rates from massive apartment blocks without ensuring that they and developers provide appropriate infrastructure for the quality of life of residents. Recently, a Woolloomooloo resident raised concern about the lack of space for a large retail outlet in the Kings Cross area while expensive convenience stores proliferate and residents have to travel to Bondi Junction, Edgecliff, Broadway or further for shopping. Effective long-term planning is needed to achieve this vital community infrastructure.

With the fate of the brewery at Chippendale decided and the suburb unified in one council area the Council of the City of Sydney must begin urgent planning for the long-term infrastructure needs of the Chippendale precinct. Redevelopment of the massive 5.4-hectare site could triple the population of the suburb. Under the current city fringes zoning a developer could gain approval for towers up to 12 storeys, although Chippendale consists of a relatively uniform streetscape of two to four-storey buildings. Redevelopment has the potential to reinforce the character of Chippendale, increase open space, improve amenities and facilities, and create safe pedestrian links across busy roads. But poor planning would escalate traffic congestion, reduce safety and increase conflicts.

When the Resch's Brewery site at Redfern was redeveloped and I was on council I battled to gain developer contribution for the pedestrian footbridge over South Dowling Street, public open space in the centre of the development the size of an oval, retention of historic buildings and a child care centre. Residents of the development and the broader local community now extensively use and benefit from these facilities—real social capital. The Council of the City of Sydney must ensure that residents are part of the planning and development process for the Carlton and United Brewery site. Chippendale needs a cohesive precinct plan as envisaged in the Government's PlanFirst strategy, with sympathetic and enforceable planning and development controls. These decisions must not be left up to commercial developers interested primarily in their financial bottom line rather than the public interest. The urban consolidation policy of the Government imposes responsibilities to ensure an acceptable and sustainable living environment.

Private members' statements noted.

The House adjourned at 6.03 p.m. until
Friday 9 May 2003 at 10.00 a.m.

Last modified 30/09/2008 11:06:53 : Update this page