Debate resumed from 3 September 2009.

Mr ALAN ASHTON (East Hills) [4.40 p.m.]: I conclude my budget speech by referring to a couple of final matters. First is the tremendously innovative and important Community Building Partnership program that was introduced by the Government this year. This program will not only benefit the constituents of my electorate but it will also benefit the other 92 electorates in the New South Wales lower House; it will benefit everybody in New South Wales. The $300,000 that has been set aside for each electorate is the equivalent of about six years worth of funding under the Capital Assistance Grants that are usually supervised by the Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister for Sport and Recreation. The two most important aspects of the Community Building Partnership are the creation of jobs, which is what all economies are about—especially in difficult economic times, although Australia and New South Wales are progressing well—and the provision of benefits to local sporting, social and cultural organisations in New South Wales.

I sent out letters to dozens of different sporting, social and cultural organisations I have come to know in my electorate. The Bankstown City Council also provided lists, together with the information provided by the State Government. Over time local members become well known to their local sporting clubs, rotary organisations and Lions clubs. I note the member for Lismore, Thomas George, is present in the Chamber. I take this opportunity to recognise the great work he did today in holding the rooftop barbecue to support the Lions NSW Eye Bank—

Mr Thomas George: The club did it.

Mr ALAN ASHTON: The club did it but you deserve credit, along with Karen Paluzzano and Shelley Hancock for their work at the barbecue.

Mr Thomas George: They were the ones.

Mr ALAN ASHTON: The barbecue was great. One may well ask what that has to do with the budget. It demonstrates the goodwill of members of Parliament who do not often receive the recognition they should. Importantly, those organisations are eligible to apply for a share of this $300,000. Many applications have gone in from my electorate, although I am not aware of all of them. Some sought advice from me and others submitted their applications straight to the relevant authority. The groups that applied will know the results in a couple of weeks. The sums will then be done. They will be supervised and checked by the Department of Premier and Cabinet to ensure the probity of the organisations and that they are what they say they are, and then jobs will begin and the money will be spent. Hopefully this will not be a one-off and something like this will be able to be done again. In a sense, this is part of the Government's own stimulus package. For example, one of the football clubs in my electorate needs concrete to make some steps, others have asked for shade shelters, a tennis club has asked for—

Mr Thomas George: We are talking about the last budget, not the next one.

Mr ALAN ASHTON: No. A lot of them have asked for fencing and the like, or for the upgrade of netball courts, and many other worthwhile purposes. The Government also has a $62.9 billion infrastructure spend over the next few years, on critical work. In every area there is record expenditure, despite the difficult economic times. I congratulate the Government on this year's budget.

Mr THOMAS GEORGE (Lismore) [4.45 p.m.]: In making my contribution to the budget debate I would like to refer to the media release, "2009 Budget is one big déjà vu: A budget of re-announcements", that I issued straight after the budget. In that release I said I was disappointed that there had been no funding allocated to the stage three redevelopment of the Lismore Base Hospital, that there was no opportunity for the Murwillumbah hospital to maintain and improve services, that 24-hour policing at Murwillumbah was not recognised, that Woodenbong to Legume Road was overlooked, and that the Isolated Patients Travel and Accommodation Assistance Scheme funding was not brought up to date.

Those of us from the northern rivers, and especially in the seat of Lismore, felt bypassed. A few announcements were made but they were already projects that were underway in the area. I would, however, like to congratulate the community on its great win with the Lismore Hospital Integrated Cancer Centre, which was announced in 2004 and is finally underway. That development will also include the completion of the cardiac catheterisation unit at Lismore Base Hospital. I will return to the health needs of the Lismore electorate shortly.

The Minister for Police and the Minister for Roads recently visited us at Lismore to discuss the New South Wales State Plan. Approximately 80 people were in attendance at that community meeting. Clearly, if the Government had been listening it would have known everything that came out of that discussion was what I have been saying in this Chamber for some time. The Government does not listen to what local members say about their communities. In the Government summary of the outcome of the community meeting, under the heading "What works well in your community?" the responses were:

1. A strong sense of community—North Coast communities work well together.

That is nothing knew to this place. The next response was:

2. Life style and environment—productive, fertile, natural environment, positive environment for families".

Any member from the North Coast could have told the Government that. The next response was:

3. The education system—primary, secondary, TAFE and university."

That has been recognised by me a number of times in this House. The next response was:

4. Creativity and capacity for innovation and entrepreneurship—creative industries and small businesses."

If the Government had listened it would have known that is representative of our community. Under the heading "What are the priorities for action in your community?" the responses were:

1. Improve transport infrastructure and public transport services across the region.

That has certainly brought to the attention of the Government on a number of occasions.

2. Land use planning—balancing development and natural resources.

Again the planning issue has been registered in this House on a number of occasions.

3. Improve access to modern technology.

4. Improve community infrastructure particularly in smaller regional communities.

But what does the Government do? It keeps taking things away from these smaller communities. In the health system, for example, services are being taken from smaller hospitals and given to Lismore where the required infrastructure is not in place. There is no regional transport to get people there and that is creating problems. The next issues were:

5. Housing affordability—the region needs more social housing opportunities for the aged and disadvantaged.

6. State Plan needs to include a stronger regional focus and regional delivery framework

The State Plan refers to transport in Sydney. It does not say anything about transport in regional New South Wales. Government members run around New South Wales talking about the State Plan, yet the Government's own document refers to transport in Sydney and nowhere else. That is typical of the State Plan: Newcastle—Sydney—Wollongong. In relation to education, I forwarded to the Minister for Education and Training a letter I received from Karen Slater, President of the Parents and Citizens Association, Kyogle Public School. Ms Slater states that the school's new hall, which is being constructed under the Building the Education Revolution program, is grossly inadequate to meet the school community's needs. The new hall will house only two-thirds of the students. What will happen to the other one-third? I am awaiting the Minister's response, although she may have responded directly to the association.

The Government often refers to the school computer laptop program. Only one-third of the laptops have been delivered and only one-third of teachers have received them. As a result of this program, schools have incurred greater costs. At one school the power bill has increased by $40,000 a year. But schools have not had an increase in their budgets. As a result of the swine flu, schools have been required to improve hygiene by installing soap dispensers in toilet blocks. But they have not been reimbursed for these costs. They have not received extra funding for changes in class sizes. There have been many examples of some schools receiving money, but other schools with priority needs missing out. I always enjoy visiting the TAFE facilities at Lismore and Murwillumbah. I recently supported TAFE teachers who held a rally in front of Parliament House. TAFE teachers should not have to give up conditions in order to receive a wage increase.

On the issue of bullying, I am one of the few members of Parliament to have issued a brochure on this matter. I ask every member of the House to participate in debate on this issue. A member who said that there was no bullying at any school, private or public, in their electorate would be telling a lie. Bullying is a major problem. Concerns have been raised with me about bullying issues at a major interchange in Lismore. It is probably the largest interchange in regional New South Wales, being used by about 2,600 to 2,800 students. There was the recent tragedy in Mullimbimby in the electorate of the member for Ballina. I have brought to the attention of the House a situation at Kadina High School and an incident at Lismore Public School where a young boy with special needs ended up in hospital. We as a community must come to grips with this issue. When I, and I am sure other members, attended school bullying occurred. Bullying is not new. But today there are so many ways to bully that we must be more proactive. The Department of Education and Training has informed me that it has policies in place. However, we must ensure that those polices are administered consistently at every school.

As the member for Clarence has often told the House, there will be 400 jobs lost from the North Coast Area Health Service. The North Coast Area Health Service is underfunded, according to the Government's own formula, by approximately $62 million a year. Although it has been underfunded, Chris Crawford has to try to balance the budget by cutting about 400 jobs. When the cuts were announced in the mini-budget last year, the Premier told the House that no front-line services would be lost. That statement has turned out to be totally incorrect. The Premier has misled the House. There are many indications of front-line services being lost. Some of the issues that have been brought to my attention include the non-replacement of staff on sick leave, long service leave and recreational leave, which places greater pressure on staff.

Further issues I have raised in the House include hospital staff being sent a threatening email prior to a rally held on 5 August; a nurse manager being forced to perform clinical duties with no management hours allowed; all management jobs being temporary contracts, causing nil job security, deterring staff from applying and impacting on leadership, mentoring and patient care and safety; and plans to replace registered nurses with enrolled nurses and assistants in nursing in critical and acute care settings. The list goes on. The fact is that the North Coast Area Health Service is losing 400 positions. The cuts are interfering with front-line services and the non-replacement of positions is placing greater pressure on staff. The only person who would be thrilled to have the same bed occupancy as the Lismore emergency unit would be the local motel owner. These issues must be addressed urgently, otherwise a major disaster will occur and someone will suffer at the hands of the system.

A mental health unit and child and adolescent beds have been opened in Lismore and an integrated cancer unit, stage 2 of the hospital development, is being built. However, stage 3 of the hospital development has dropped off the Government's plans. It does not seem to be in anyone's plans at the moment. That causes concerns not only for the Lismore community but for the whole Northern Rivers area. Patients from Kyogle, Bonalbo, Urbenville, Nimbin, Casino, Ballina and surrounding areas are sent to Lismore. The outlying hospitals are doing their best but when patients are transferred to Lismore we just do not have the infrastructure in place to be able to handle it. Until such time as we get that infrastructure in place the health system in Lismore will remain under stress. These people are working under extreme conditions and it will have ramifications somewhere in the system.

Another problem concerns the Department of Primary Industries. The livestock health and pest authorities have been revamped recently. That has had a major effect along the coast, with an increase in rates in that area. A number of landholders have contacted me and I have passed on their concerns to the Minister. That issue needs to be looked at. I must register concern also about the native vegetation laws in this State and what they mean for farming. For example, we have the Department of Climate Change telling dairy farmers in my area that they have to upgrade their systems to become more water efficient. One of the youngest dairy farmers in my electorate is doing a fantastic job; he milks about 250 cows. He decided to do what the Department of Climate Change said and upgrade his water system. But to be able to put this new and very efficient water system in he has to take about 25 trees off his property. But the native vegetation department says he cannot take those trees out. The only way he can get around this is to buy the property next door for $800,000 and plant every acre of that property down with trees so he can take the 25 trees out. [Extension of time agreed to.]

That is a problem that needs to be looked at. We have people with what should be productive farmland but it is not productive because they cannot clear it because of our native vegetation laws. Many farms are not producing as well as they should be because they cannot get a water licence. We are telling farmers they have productive land but they cannot improve their land because they cannot get a water licence. A farmer might have water on the property or going past it but that farmer cannot get a water licence because there have been embargoes back to the member for Mount Druitt's day. People have productive land but they cannot do anything with it. We are contradicting everything we tell the farmers and that is why they are up in arms. There has to be a valley-by-valley approach. When he was shadow Minister for Water the member for Ballina certainly went down that path.

I could speak about many other issues, and I know the member for Mount Druitt loves me talking about cattle ticks. I will not address that issue today, although it is still of concern. There are many issues I would like to talk about but time does not allow me. I have talked about industries but I want to talk about roads now. The road system is not fair to people in New South Wales. As most people know, I was Deputy Chairman of the Northern Co-operative Meat Company, which is owned by cattle producers. It has a pig processing plant at Booyong and a cattle processing plant at Casino and a lot of the livestock comes from Queensland. Road weight limits are a problem.

A truck can travel from Toowoomba in the north, where a lot of pigs come from, down to Booyong. They load the truck with, say, 300 pigs, they come down to the Queensland border and they have about 70 kilometres to come into New South Wales, but they cannot. Because of the difference in weight limits between the States, they would have to unload 60 pigs. The roads are the same—it is the same Pacific Highway they are travelling on down the coast—but the weight limits are different in New South Wales. It places northern New South Wales businesses in an unfair position compared with their counterparts, and we have brought this problem to the attention of the Minister for Roads.

Equally, when you load a container in New South Wales you have to load it at a third less because of the weight limit. But once it gets 80 kilometres up the road you can put the third back in it to travel the Queensland roads. The containers coming out of the Northern Co-operative Meat Company—whether meat, macadamia nuts or whatever—are being loaded lighter in northern New South Wales just to travel the 50, 60 or 70 kilometres to Queensland. Once they are in Queensland they can be topped up. But economics do not allow the producers to do that. I was very pleased to see a road summit held recently in Ballina organised by the Federal member. All the mayors and everyone else were invited but the local members were not.

However, the summit came up with a great system for heavy transport on the Pacific Highway: trucks should go from Grafton across to Casino, east of Mount Lindsay into Beaudesert and into Brisbane, which is a direct route; put a second bridge across at Grafton—and I am sure the member for Clarence could remind everyone of all the times that was promised by Bob Carr two elections back—take the road over to Casino, then on to Kyogle, east of Mount Lindsay into Beaudesert, where south-east Queensland has really opened up now, and you have a direct route for the trucks to go instead of going up the Pacific Highway. That is a great idea. But it is the same idea that The Nationals put up prior to the last election, which was booed by the Minister for Roads at that time, who said that it would not work. He did a back-of-the-envelope costing of it and said it would not work. The Federal member and all the mayors now think it is a great idea, but they did not realise that it was the same plan that we submitted prior to the last election.

The east-west connections to the Northern Rivers are a disgrace. Warwick across to Lismore, Kyogle, Casino and into the Northern Rivers is the worst road in Australia between Woodenbong and Legume—they are not my words but the words of people who have travelled that road and have provided that description of the road on the Internet. We have been working very hard for years now to try to have this road recognised. It is the only road out of Brisbane that is flood-free and can get people down the New England Highway whenever there is a flood.

Mr Phillip Costa: Isn't that a Queensland road?

Mr THOMAS GEORGE: No. Woodenbong to Legume is just in the northern part of New South Wales. It is a vital link to south-east Queensland in terms of not only tourism and industry but also safety. At the moment trucks coming from Warwick down into the Northern Rivers have to travel to Tenterfield. B-doubles cannot travel the road. B-doubles that want to travel from Warwick, where Big W has a distribution centre, have to travel from Warwick down to Glen Innes, down to Grafton, down to Woodburn and then back up into Lismore that way. We talk about problems with climate change but the extra miles that trucks are forced to travel do not help. Again, the Northern Rivers are being penalised because we are so far from Sydney no-one knows we have these problems up there.

When Ministers come to the area they do not go into the top part of the State. But this is one road that has received the support of all the councils—not only Tenterfield shire but also Kyogle shire. Richmond Valley Council, Lismore City Council and Beaudesert shire have all supported this road because it is so important, not only to the people of Lismore, Casino and Kyogle but to the people in south-east Queensland and northern New South Wales. I do not know what I have to do to convince the Government. I will talk to Minister Daley to see whether I can bring a deputation to speak to him about this issue. This is one road in New South Wales that definitely needs to be fixed because it is a vital link between south-east Queensland and the North Coast of New South Wales.

Payroll tax is just one issue on a list of 70 or 80 cross-border issues that must also be addressed. The Northern Co-operative Meat Company at Casino employs 1,000 people. If it were to move 80 kilometres away into Queensland, it would save more than $3 million annually in payroll tax and workers compensation premiums. That figure is five years old, and I do not know what it would be today. I mentioned the fire service levy in a debate earlier today. The company's fire service levy increased from $68,000 to $586,000 in one year. Queensland caps its levy at $40,000. The company's Queensland competitors take that cost advantage to the world market. Every New South Wales business faces that problem when it competes with its Queensland counterparts.

I remember telling the House about a plasterer in Lismore who showed me figures that he obtained from a competitor in Queensland. He tendered for five government contracts, including Lismore police station, the Ballina hospital and the mental health unit, but he lost out to a Queensland company. I am talking about New South Wales Government contracts. The difference in the tender price was the higher payroll tax and workers compensation premiums charged in New South Wales. This Government must realise that that is happening every day, not only in the meat industry but also in the building industry and every other industry. If the member for Tweed were here he could give further examples.

People from Queensland cross the border to work in New South Wales, but we do not have reciprocal arrangements with regard to licences. People who complete a responsible service of alcohol course in New South Wales cannot use it to obtain work in Queensland. That causes pressure in every cross-border area, but the Government does not seem to accept that there is a problem. The Government must understand that to make this State more competitive and efficient we must address these cross-border issues. If we do not, we will have a continual flow of businesses not only to Queensland but also to the Australian Capital Territory, Victoria and South Australia.

I could say much more, but one of the most urgent issues in Lismore is providing for our homeless people. All members face this problem in their electorates. We have a soup kitchen in Lismore that is enthusiastically supported by volunteers. Ridley and Mieke Bell have been great benefactors and they recently put their hands in their pockets to buy a Lismore hotel to provide accommodation for homeless people. I compliment them on their efforts and note that they are looking for support. I have spoken on their behalf to the New South Wales Minister for Housing, and the Federal Government has offered help. The council is also supporting the project. This is a dream come true for the Bell family and for the entire community. I look forward to making representations to the Minister for Housing on their behalf to find a resolution to this problem in Lismore.

Mr RICHARD AMERY (Mount Druitt) [5.15 p.m.]: I will make some brief comments—they will be much briefer now that the member for Lismore has spoken for such a long time. He raised some budget-related issues and many others concerning northern New South Wales. Members should concentrate on the 2009-10 budget in their contributions to this debate. I acknowledge that the budget was handed down a few months ago and that as a result it has lost some of its currency for debating purposes. However, the passage of time gives us an opportunity to reflect on the budget's impact and its effect on New South Wales' credit rating.

Budget debates have focused traditionally on the detail of the Government's financial program and comparisons with what the Opposition has to offer. In other words, we discuss the Opposition's alternative budget, which is presented by the Leader of the Opposition a few days after the State budget is handed down. That is what happens in the Federal Parliament—I am sure members recall the debate that took place not only in the Parliament but also in the press regarding what Malcolm Turnbull had to say about the national budget. I understand that other State Parliaments follow the same format. However, that did not happen in New South Wales.

No-one expects the Opposition to produce colourful documents like those produced by the Government when presenting and promoting the budget. Nor does anyone expect the Opposition to reveal its every policy this far out from the next State election—and no-one is suggesting that it should. However, it is not unreasonable for the community to expect a substantial statement from the Opposition setting out what it supports and does not support in the budget. It is a $40 billion or $50 billion budget and members opposite probably support most of the measures in it. However, of course they do not say that. The Opposition is expected to provide at the very least a broad direction statement on a number of general issues.

One such issue is privatisation. The Opposition has presented two or three different privatisation policies in recent months. Members opposite might also tell us what they intend to do about the size of the public service. During the last State election campaign the then Leader of the Opposition offered a couple of different versions of the number of public servants that a Coalition government would sack. The Leader of the Opposition could also have given us an idea about the Coalition's policy on private involvement in public transport, decentralisation and so on. Unfortunately, the Leader of the Opposition did not provide any general direction in his speech in reply to the budget.

The debate on the budget is a good opportunity to test the community's reaction to any major public works projects the Coalition has been considering. For example, members opposite often say that we need new dams. This debate is a good opportunity to tell the House where they should be constructed and their potential benefits, not to mention the cost of those projects. In the past members opposite have floated the motorway through the Blue Mountains policy. Does that policy still stand? How much would it cost and what does the community think about it? I recall that it was first mentioned at a National Party conference in the 1990s. Has the Coalition dropped that policy altogether? We do not know.

I sat through the Leader of the Opposition's reply to the Budget Speech in June. If members were to test me on the dot points in that speech I would recall some comments about payroll tax—it seems to be the only thing members opposite talk about—something called a "State stimulus package" and boards for every hospital. They are the three dot points about Opposition policy that I remember writing down in my very small pocket notebook. Recently I listened again to the Leader of the Opposition when he moved a motion of no confidence in the Government. This was followed by the speech of the Leader of The Nationals. In both speeches the budget and the mini-budget of late last year were mentioned.

Again, I paid them the courtesy of sitting in Parliament and listening to their contributions. Again, I listened to the alternatives put forward by the Opposition. Again, I recall mention of boards for hospital districts—not boards for individual hospitals this time but boards for hospital districts. I ask the question—rhetorically I suppose—is there a change in that policy? The Opposition should spell out its policy more clearly. In his reply to the budget the Leader of the Opposition said there would be board for every hospital and now he says it is a board for every hospital district. It is a grey area, and I would like more information.

Again, I heard the story about payroll tax, and the State stimulus package also got another run. What did we get then? There was a cobbling together of news headlines of the past year. The Leader of The Nationals very much amused me: he had his newspaper clippings laminated. That was his prop, and it was virtually the basis of his speech. The point is that my dot points on those speeches are as follows: no new policies and no new budget alternatives—absolutely nothing. So we are left to talk about one side of the argument—unlike in Canberra where we have public and parliamentary debates on the budget. Unlike those of nearly all the other States, the New South Wales budget debate is about what the Government is doing. There are no alternatives and no comparisons for the community. Basically, the Opposition has let this budget go unchallenged.

The member for Lismore, one of our most respected members, spoke about a few items that are needed for the North Coast. He talked about cross-border issues—and I do not claim that all those items have to be funded—but they were not key points in the budget. We should not leave the points he made go unchallenged. Over 14 years this Government has been working through ministerial council meetings, through the Council of Australian Governments arrangements and through mutual recognition legislation to make sure that wherever possible guidelines, laws, regulations, pricing and so on are uniform between the States. There will always be examples such as those referred to by the member for Lismore, but I hardly think it is a major point to bring to the House and raise in the context of a debate about what is good or bad in the budget.

I believe the State Government should be congratulated—some would expect a Government member to say that—on the standard of this budget. It was well presented. The Treasurer's speech made mention of the fact that no-one—certainly no government—is immune from the effects of the global recession. Malcolm Turnbull in Canberra and the Leader of the Opposition in this place seem to suggest that we are somehow quarantined from the global recession. It is not just talk; the Treasurer's speech referred to revenues that have been written down by something like $10 billion over the next four years or so. The Opposition got some one-liners in the press about a $1.3 billion deficit, but this deficit is minor when we compare the debt to asset value of this State, which is the most valuable entity in the country.

So while the Opposition talks down the State for its very small debt, it is pleasing to see that the ratings agencies have reaffirmed our triple-A credit rating—I think twice—since the State budget was brought down. In debates about budgets oppositions will say they are bad and governments will say they are good. But the good thing about ratings agencies is that they are non-biased and non-political. They have assessed the State's finances. They have assessed its debt, its capital commitments and its revenue potential and they have given us—to use the Premier's words of the other day—a big tick. In other words, they have given us a triple-A rating, and that should not be scoffed at.

The Opposition would be the first to attack the Government for being economically irresponsible if what happened in Queensland happened in New South Wales. Queensland is well run and mineral rich but of course it has been affected by the global financial situation. So the State got a double-A credit rating—no doubt in recognition of some issues that may be peculiar to Queensland. However, Labor was re-elected in Queensland while it had a double-A credit rating. New South Wales—which, according to the Opposition, supposedly has an incompetent Government—was assessed independently by Standard and Poor's, which is a non-biased, non-political organisation, and got a triple-A rating that was confirmed at least twice.

I come back to the early criticism of the Government by Opposition members who seized upon the Rudd Government's stimulus package when it was announced last year. You could hear the team in Mr O'Farrell's office saying, "Stimulus package, that sounds good; that is our position. We will call on the State Government to introduce one." That seemed to be a major component of Opposition members' comments after the State budget was brought down. The major component of the Federal scheme is infrastructure spending. Although it has not used the Federal Government's description, that is exactly what the State Government is doing. The budget papers talk of a $62.9 billion infrastructure package over the next four years. This funding will be shared by every electorate. The package is certainly at work in my electorate of Mount Druitt, and has been for a number of years now.

What I like about the budget papers and about the Premier's comments is the way in which projects are valued in terms of job opportunities. For example, the budget speech refers to projects supporting 160,000 jobs per year. It lists projects that will provide 300 jobs for the Orange Hospital and 1,250 jobs on the Pacific Highway. The Port Botany expansion will deliver 2,000 jobs, and so on. Of course, this is what the stimulus package is all about at the Federal level, and it is what the infrastructure program is about at the State level. So in answer to the Opposition's call for the State to introduce a stimulus package, the response is clear: We have already done it. It is called the State infrastructure program. If members look at the program they will see that it is a stimulus package. Some 80 per cent of the Federal stimulus package is capital expenditure around the country. As members are starting to highlight, this money is being spent in all our electorates—including that of the member for Lismore, who spoke for half an hour this afternoon. That is more big expenditure in New South Wales, including, I am pleased to say, in the electorate of Mount Druitt.

In past years I have reported that my electorate has been somewhat of a building site, with projects such as the Mount Druitt courthouse, the rail bus interchange at Mount Druitt railway station, upgrades at the Mount Druitt TAFE and a library at Rooty Hill High School, to name just a few. It gave me plenty to talk about in the press and during budget debates and it revealed the activities that flowed from the Labor Government's commitment to improve services in electorates such as mine. Now those projects are out of the way, some would say that I should not expect too many more as other electorates are competing for taxpayers' dollars. But thanks to the Rudd Government's stimulus package and the State Government's infrastructure program much more is being done, and it is being done in my electorate.

This fact has been highlighted in many press releases issued from my electorate office. For example, on 10 June 2009 I announced the calling of tenders for a food technology facility for Plumpton High School. On the same day, my press release highlighted the $22.5 million upgrade to Mount Druitt schools throughout the electorate. This work has been highlighted many times by others in the electorate. Plumpton High School will also receive a library upgrade, at a cost of $3 million. Blackett Public School will get a new hall and covered outdoor learning area as well as a library upgrade, at a cost of $2.5 million. Dawson Public School—one of the older primary schools in the area—will receive a new hall and covered outdoor learning area, also at a cost of $2.5 million. Hebersham Public School, a fantastic school that is getting great results academically, is to receive a new hall, covered outdoor learning areas and a canteen, at a cost of another $3 million. Noumea Public School is to receive $2.5 million and Hassall Grove Public School will also receive funding.

Mr Thomas George: Is that in the budget?

Mr RICHARD AMERY: I am sorry to confuse the member for Lismore—whose 30-minute speech contained about five minutes on the State budget—but I am mentioning some items that are in the budget papers. I hope this is helpful to him. Another important part of the budget is housing. The Mount Druitt area has one of the largest housing estates in the State. It has one of the older housing estates that dates back to the 1960s. With those few comments, I conclude my contribution.

Pursuant to standing orders business interrupted and set down as an order of the day for a future day.