Legislative Council

The Hon. Jan Burnswoods
The Hon. Beryl Evans
The Hon. Dr Marlene Goldsmith
The Hon. R. S. L. Jones
The Hon. S. B. Mutch
The Hon. Elaine Nile

Legislative Assembly

Mr A. R. G. Fraser
Mr J. H. Murray
Mr S. M. O'Doherty
Mr P. A. Rogan
Mr D. J. Shedden
Mrs J. G. Skinner
Mr J. R. Small

The Hon. E. P. Pickering, Minister for Energy, and Minister for Local Government and Co-operatives

Office of Energy
Mr N. Watson, Director
Mr G. Johnstone, Chief Administrative Officer

Department of Local Government and Co-operatives
Mr G. Payne, Director General
Mr T. Rogers, Deputy Director General
Ms L. Callaghan, Manager, Corporate Services
Ms S. Karan, Assistant Manager, Corporate Services (Accounts/Administration)

FINCOM
Mr N. McLeod, Head of Policy

Page 4354

CHAIRMAN: It being two o'clock, I declare open the Estimates Committee to examine the proposed expenditure from the Consolidated Fund for the Office of Energy and the Department of Local Government and Co-operatives. The Hon. J. W. Shaw is ill and is unable to attend.

Mr JONES: I refer to page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, and to the line item Energy research and development. You are undoubtedly aware of the great breakthrough on solar energy made by Martin Green at the University of New South Wales. Is it not a fact that this latest breakthrough will mean that when it becomes commercially relevant it will be cheaper to produce energy from the sun than from burning coal? Exactly how much of the $2.774 million in this year's budget will go to Martin Green and his team?

Mr PICKERING: I was involved in launching that project at the University of New South Wales this week. We are not able to say at this stage that solar energy will definitely economically beat the generation of power from coal-fired power stations. One would certainly hope that that will occur, but research is also going on in the world that will improve the efficiency of coal-fired power stations, which at the moment are about 35 per cent efficient. In the past couple of weeks scientists at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation have told me of new developments that will improve that efficiency to about 45 per cent or 50 per cent, which will obviously change the economics.

You will have also seen reports that existing power stations are becoming much more efficient. The price of power, announced by the Pricing Tribunal today, will continue to fall. It has been falling for seven years and will continue to fall, on a projected report from the Pricing Tribunal today, to the year 2000. From the solar energy point of view we keep changing the goalposts. We are making it more and more difficult because of the efficiencies that are being brought about. But one would certainly hope that your dream of a solar energy world will come to fruition. It would be a world that would not have the problems of greenhouse gases. The Government is certainly very much in favour of that.

I turn to the specifics of your question. The total amount of expenditure for State Energy Research and Development Fund research is $421,661. Three specific areas are associated with the issue you are talking about: application of plasma processing to solar cell production at the University of New South Wales, $13,414; facility for thermal performance evaluation of building components, $45,232; and support from Pacific Power. I do not have that figure, but we can get it for you.

Mrs NILE: In Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, page 365, subprogram 34.1.1, I note that line item Pensioner electricity subsidy has increased from $4.096 million to $4.416 million. I am sure that pensioners will appreciate the subsidy. How will the average pensioner benefit from this increase and is the subsidy adequate in 1994 terms?

Mr PICKERING: The Electricity Act of 1945 provides that the Energy Corporation may, with the approval of the Minister, grant subsidies to rural electricity distributors to assist them in the provision of pensioner rebates on electricity bills. The minimum amount is set down in the determination of the Government Pricing Tribunal, but the distributors are able to offer more, if they so desire. The subsidy to the distributors is approximately 45 per cent of the total amount paid in pensioner rebates. The reason for the increase in the 1994-95 estimates is to allow for an increase of approximately 8 per cent in the number of pensioners in the State. This increase has resulted from changes to the Commonwealth definition of pensioners and also from natural growth. This estimate was made to allow the maintenance of the subsidy at 45 per cent to 50 per cent. Presumably it will remain appropriate as a result.

Ms BURNSWOODS: In relation to local government, which is found at page 370 of Budget Paper No. 3, are you aware of a reference to the Anti-Discrimination Board by Councillor Maureen Lane of Ballina Council relating to that council's policy of holding daytime meetings, which discriminate against many people who might want to attend or to stand for local government? Do you agree that daytime meetings are a thing of the past and that talented people will be discouraged from standing for local government?

CHAIRMAN: I would like the honourable member to draw a line item as to what estimate she is referring to.

Mr MURRAY: It says:

To promote an effective, efficient, responsive and accountable system of local government in New South Wales . . .

It lists the number of staff employed to undertake that work in line item Management audit and investigations as well as line item Executive control and administrative support.

CHAIRMAN: That refers to the head office of the Department of Local Government, but the member is talking about a council in Ballina, which is not included in that estimate.

Ms BURNSWOODS: I am actually asking the Minister to give his opinion on certain things and to do certain things.

CHAIRMAN: That is out of order. We are here to examine the estimates, not to take opinions.

Ms BURNSWOODS: If I am to continue with my question, I am then going to ask him to do certain things. I repeat what Mr Murray said: if the program objective is to promote, amongst other things, a responsive and accountable system of local government, and if a particular councillor is taking the issue of daytime versus night-time meetings to the Anti-Discrimination Board, surely that has to do with the promotion of a responsive and accountable system of local government.

Page 4355

CHAIRMAN: Under the Local Government Act it would be up to the local council, not the Minister or the department, to determine when it had its meetings. The Minister has indicated that he may wish to answer the question.

Mr PICKERING: I am happy to indicate that I am unaware -

Ms BURNSWOODS: Would it help if I actually finished my question? I very much appreciate your willingness to answer it -

CHAIRMAN: Would the Hon. Jan Burnswoods like to finish the question? I am not satisfied, on what I have heard, that it actually refers to the budget and to the estimates, but please feel free to ask it.

Ms BURNSWOODS: I was in the middle of asking the Minister whether he agreed that daytime meetings were a thing of the past and that talented people would be discouraged from standing for local government under these circumstances. Finally, the part that I had not started on: will the Minister support Councillor Lane at the anti-discrimination hearing?

CHAIRMAN: I rule the question out of order. It does not relate to the estimates. It calls for an opinion from the Minister, which specifically is not part of the estimates debate.

Ms BURNSWOODS: If I could ask -

CHAIRMAN: I have ruled on the question.

Ms BURNSWOODS: If I am asking him whether he will support a councillor -

CHAIRMAN: Are you now going to challenge the Chair?

Mr Murray: Yes. On a point of order -

CHAIRMAN: No. I have made a ruling. It is now non-government questions -

Mr Murray: I am allowed to take a point of order.

CHAIRMAN: You cannot take a point of order on the decision I have already made. I have made the decision.

Mr Murray: But I did not say that I am taking a point of order on that decision.

CHAIRMAN: No, you did not.

Mr Murray: On a point of order: I need some direction from the Chair in relation to the estimates. If money is to be expended, is it in order for a member to seek an opinion as to whether that money is to be expended correctly?

CHAIRMAN: The Clerk has confirmed what I said before: not if it is hypothetical and not if it seeks a straight out opinion.

Mr Murray: My point of order relates to the estimates and to the expenditure of the money. Can one ask a question that relates to an opinion on how that money is to be expended?

CHAIRMAN: Questions must directly apply to the estimates. You and I have had these discussions at previous estimates committees hearings that I have chaired. There must be a direct nexus between the question and the item in the budget.

Mr Murray: That was not the question.

CHAIRMAN: Any further non-Government questions?

Mr ROGAN: My question relates to page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3, where under program 34.1, $3.5 million is allocated for the line item Remote area power assistance scheme. Are you aware that since I first raised in the Parliament some rorting of the scheme, your predecessor directed the Office of Energy to prepare new eligibility guidelines for solar and grid connection customers? Are you further aware that these new guidelines will prevent many people from applying for funding from this scheme? Will you establish, as was promised, an advisory committee to work with the solar industry and your department to iron out the red tape, the paper nightmare as it has been described, in the eligibility criteria, which it is alleged is preventing persons from applying for grants?

Mr PICKERING: I am certainly aware that the previous Minister suspended the previous scheme. I have recently reinstituted the scheme based upon advice from my department which, I understand, addressed the earlier problems. It is axiomatic that the new scheme will provide a more restricted access than was previously available, because the broader access previously allowed what you described as some rorting. I am advised that the new scheme was the result of significant consultation with the industry. I am not aware of any further representations made from industry-associated persons to my department since the announcement of the new scheme, but if there is a continuing concern, my door is always open and I will certainly be prepared to consider any representations made to me on the matter.

Mr ROGAN: Further to my question, $3.5 million has been allocated this year, which is roughly the same as last year. That is good and I am pleased the money is there, but with these new eligibility criteria it is suggested you may not reach that expenditure given that many people will now be ineligible either to be connected to the grid or to put in stand-alone power systems.

Mr PICKERING: We will obviously monitor it. As I said, if there are any representations to be made about the scheme, my door is open.

Mr SHEDDEN: I refer to page 373 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1. Is it a fact that $52 million in subsidies will be given to a needy section of the community, that is, pensioners? Why have you differentiated between them and another needy group, that is, the drought affected rural sector?

Mr PICKERING: I find the question remarkable. The honourable member would understand that we have a very serious and continuing
Page 4356
drought. The honourable member would also understand that the Federal Government has recently drawn some cruel lines on the map to define drought affected areas in this State. Those defined areas are nothing less than outrageous. The State is 93 per cent drought declared. If a map were available I would demonstrate that the areas for which the Federal Government accepts some responsibility would be lucky if they covered 20 per cent of the State - and that would be generous. With that regime being recently announced by the Federal Government, the New South Wales Cabinet met for many hours in what could be described only as a crisis session to evaluate what we could do as a government to assist the drought affected community. I refer not only to farmers but also to people who live in rural towns. I was particularly proud to be able to approach my department and find, through Pacific Power, a sum of $10 million which we have announced will be available for relief from electricity rates for those people who simply cannot pay their rates but still require electricity to run the home, the farm or the shop. I do not resile from that. I would have preferred that a Government member asked that sort of dear dorothy dix question.

Mr SHEDDEN: I never asked you to discuss the differences between State and Federal assistance for drought relief. Basically I am reflecting on the $52 million that local government provides as subsidies for pensioners. My question is: will that same assistance be given to people affected by the drought?

Mr PICKERING: I have indicated that we have announced in the last few days that $10 million is available through Pacific Power for drought relief in addition to millions of dollars made available generally through the Government.

Mr SHEDDEN: I am talking about local government, not energy.

Mr PICKERING: You referred to page 373.

Mr SHEDDEN: That is right.

Mr PICKERING: I am sorry, I misunderstood you. In addition to the $10 million that has been made available through my administration, we have also given access to local government entities to borrow funds which can be used to offset the inability of any local people to pay their rates. The services provided by local government in those drought affected areas will not diminish as a result of the inability of people to pay rates. And obviously it will not result in councils selling up people's properties from underneath their feet in order to pay for the rates, which is a process that is available eventually to local government. Again we have stepped in to assist, though on this occasion we have deliberately not used the local government organisations as a welfare distribution organisation within the State. That was not considered an appropriate course of action.

Mr MURRAY: My question relates to page 373 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1. The Minister alluded to the $30 million drought relief package that will allow local government organisations to increase their loan borrowing. What would be the estimated interest bill payable by local government on this $30 million loan? What has the Government provided in that regard?

Mr PICKERING: I have made it clear that the Government has provided the facility through the Loan Council borrowing program for local government to borrow the money. Presumably it will be borrowed at normal rates - you can work out the interest bill as well as I can. It is a move designed to ensure that local government can maintain its services to the community in drought affected areas. It is designed to enable local government to eventually recoup the costs involved when the community gets back on its financial feet. I have indicated to local government that when we come to rate capping - introduced by your Government - as Minister I will be well aware of the need for local government to slightly increase its rates in order to recoup its interest charges.

Mr MURRAY: Would it be fair to say that for a 10-year loan the amount would work out at $30 million? In other words, you have allowed local government to raise $30 million and the interest component would be a further $30 million.

Mr PICKERING: I am not in a position to do the calculations for you today. I would not expect we would be talking about 10-year loans.

Mr O'DOHERTY: I refer the Minister to Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, page 370, Department of Local Government and Co-operatives. I notice the department's staffing level has increased in local government programs for 1994-95. Could the Minister explain the reasons for that?

Mr PICKERING: The increases that have occurred are for the following reason: mainly due to the employment for a full year of staff involved in the Pecuniary Interest Tribunal, which was established under the new Local Government Act to improve the efficacy of local government in New South Wales. Up to two additional legal staff have been employed to present the department's case in hearings before the tribunal. A further two investigations officers are to be employed to assist with the anticipated additional case load generated from pecuniary interest complaints. An executive officer and clerical support staff member will be employed to provide administrative assistance to the tribunal and the department in the management of pecuniary interest complaints and hearings. The staffing levels of local government are remarkably lean. Less than one person is employed in the Department of Local Government and Co-operatives for each council in New South Wales. Given the services provided by local government to councils, that could only be described as lean, but certainly not mean.

Mr FRASER: I refer also to Budget Paper No. 3, page 370 and page 374. Could the Minister advise the Committee what staffing level the department has maintained for senior executive service officers.

Page 4357

Mr PICKERING: The department has maintained five SES positions as shown, with three anticipated positions to be filled on a substantive basis for the entire 1994-95 financial year. Those positions are Director General; Deputy Director General; Director of Policy; Director, Operations; and Director, Co-operatives. To ensure effective implementation of the Local Government Act a level 1 SES officer has been seconded to the department from the Department of Consumer Affairs. The officer has the title Assistant Director, Local Government Act Implementation and is held against the position of Director, Operations level 2. In addition, the position of Director, Co-operatives has been filled on a temporary basis at SES level 1.

Mrs EVANS: I refer the Minister to Budget Paper No. 3, pages 368-369, and to Budget Paper No. 2, page 5-71. Can the Minister advise what strategies are planned for 1994-95 for the continuing implementation of the Act?

Mr PICKERING: Given that the Local Government Act was completely rewritten -

Mr Murray: On a point of order: the question is seeking an opinion, Mr Chairman, and you have already ruled -

Mr PICKERING: No. The question is: what strategies are planned.

Mr Murray: That is an opinion.

Mr PICKERING: No. It is planning. There is no opinion about a plan.

Mr Murray: I am using the same logic that the Chairman used to rule the Hon. Jan Burnswoods out of order when she asked a question and then sought an opinion. It is exactly the same rationale that the Hon. Beryl Evans has used in this question.

Dr Goldsmith: On the point of order: if the honourable member for Drummoyne looks at the budget papers he will notice that strategic policy is a frequently recurring line item. For example, he could look at page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1.

CHAIRMAN: Order! There is no point of order. The question clearly refers to a strategy. The Hon. Jan Burnswoods in an earlier question asked for an opinion.

Ms BURNSWOODS: I did not, really. You keep saying that is what I asked for.

CHAIRMAN: Order! The Hon. Jan Burnswoods clearly and unequivocally asked for the Minister's opinion.

Ms BURNSWOODS: I asked him what action he was going to take. I kept trying to make the point that I did not ask for his opinion at all.

CHAIRMAN: Order! The member is now seeking to challenge the Chair again.

Ms BURNSWOODS: I am not challenging you. I am just correcting you.

CHAIRMAN: Order! The Hon. Jan Burnswoods has besmirched the Chair by saying she was correcting me. I ask her to withdraw the remark.

Ms BURNSWOODS: If you are upset by being corrected, I certainly withdraw it.

Mr PICKERING: Given that the Act was completely rewritten, I am advised that its implementation has gone remarkably well. The local government bodies involved and the department are certainly to be congratulated. However, in terms of continuing strategies, I am advised that further practice notes, guidelines and the director general's circulars will be issued to meet the continued information needs of councils. Depending upon individual council requirements, further training programs are planned. In addition, videos on local government for people of non-English speaking backgrounds have been produced in four languages and are to be shown free on SBS television from July to November. Departmental staff and the Minister will continue to address forums and seminars on specific topics at the request of local government bodies. The implementation of the Act has been successful and we will continue to ensure that that continues.

Dr GOLDSMITH: I draw the Minister's attention to page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3 which indicates that the estimate for employee related operating expenses in 1993-94 was $6.05 million, actual expenditure was $6.248 million and the allocation for 1994-95 is $6.741 million. Could the Minister explain the reasons for the variation in estimate and expenditure in 1993-94 and the basis of the 1994-95 allocation for the Office of Energy?

Mr PICKERING: The employee related operating costs are made up of two major elements. The first is direct wages and salary components, including overtime; the second is salary on-costs such as provision for long service leave and so on. In 1993-94 the higher than budgeted variation resulted principally from the need to make higher than expected provision for long service leave of $166,000-odd and higher than budgeted employer superannuation contributions of almost $33,000. These were not the result of extra staff numbers, but rather the extraneous influence normally encountered with changing staff profiles, recognition of emerging leave entitlements in accordance with prescribed policies, and employee superannuation options.

Two major factors underlined the basis for the 1994-95 employee related operating expense allocation of $6.741 million. They are, first, during 1993-94 the Office of Energy operated with a staffing level below budgeted levels, as indicated on page 365 of Volume 2 of Budget Paper No. 3. It is anticipated that staff vacancies will be filled and budget levels maintained during this financial year. This aspect will account for an overall rise in the average full-time staffing equivalent of eight during this financial year. Second, the effect of recent public service award increases and the timing of their staggered introduction has led to significant increases in
Page 4358
employee related expenses in 1994-95. The initial 4 per cent award increase was introduced from the first pay period in January 1994 and it will be compounded by a further 3 per cent increase effective from November 1994.

Mrs SKINNER: My question also relates to the Office of Energy. Page 363 of Volume 2 of Budget Paper No. 3 indicates that actual expenditure for other operating expenses was less than estimated in 1993-94 and will increase in 1994-95. Will you explain the reason for the variation in estimate and expenditure in 1993-94 and the basis of the 1994-95 allocation?

Mr PICKERING: Again there were two major reasons for the reduction in expenditure below the estimates for 1993-94. The first has to do with rent. The rent review for premises occupied by the Office of Energy was scheduled for January 1994 and provision was made in the estimates for an increase in rent. However, in view of the amount of office accommodation available for lease and the average price for accommodation in the St Leonards area, no increase was imposed by the owner. In addition, the office was able to sublease a small area of accommodation in the city until June 1994. The savings from the subleasing and the absence of an increase in rent at St Leonards account for a difference of just on $100,000.

There is also a factor related to special projects. Each year it is necessary for the office to budget for a number of special projects associated with energy industries. In particular, in past years there have been inquiries and studies undertaken associated with the electricity supply industry. In 1993-94 there was not the usual number of studies and a saving of $240,000 occurred as a result. In another special project, $500,000 was allowed for electricity reform studies, as it was envisaged there would be some major consultancy work required. This did not eventuate and the studies actually undertaken totalled only $100,000. There are other minor reasons, but I think they are the major reasons.

Mr MUTCH: I refer to page 363 of Volume 1 of Budget Paper No. 3. Will the Minister advise the Committee of the reason for the significant increase in user charges revenue when comparing the 1993-94 actual receipts of $1.952 million with the estimate of $1.235 million?

Mr PICKERING: These fees are made up of four factors. They are pipeline fees; the electrolysis committee, recoupment of expenses; electrical appliance testing; and minor user charges. Turning to each of those, with regard to pipeline fee variations, apart from the negotiated fees there has been a 2 per cent increase in conveyancing fees in 1994-95 in respect of pipeline searches. There have been no other increases in pipeline or metre testing charges in 1994-95. The recoupment of expenses from the electrolysis committee represents the recoupment of expenses initially borne by the Office of Energy for staff involved in testing electrolysis corrosion caused by stray electrical currents and for the committee's costs. These expenses are recouped from members of the New South Wales electrolysis committee. The net result of these actions is that future years' recoupments, including the amount shown for 1994-95, will be accurately reflected in the accounts on a consistent and correct accrual accounting basis.

With regard to electrical appliance testing, the increased income resulted from a new fee structure introduced in December 1993 and an increased demand from clients satisfied with the timeliness and value of the activity, especially when compared to the service delivered from most competitors. Minor user charges also increased in 1993-94. This was the first full year when the Office of Energy was required to prepare a budget as an inner budget agency. Previously most, if not all, of the Treasury defined minor user charges had been treated differently by the Office of Energy, as an outer budget agency, as offsets to various operating expenses. The 1993-94 estimates inadvertently omitted several minor user charges. This issue was clarified with Treasury only after estimates had been submitted and finalised.

Mr SMALL: It is noted under the heading Capital Program on page 364 of Volume 1 of Budget Paper No. 3, and again on page 367, that the estimated and actual expenditure for 1993-94 are $13.279 million and $11.631 million respectively and the 1994-95 estimate is $9.884 million. Looking at a broader perspective and from a reading of the budget papers, my understanding is that these amounts relate to the far west electrification scheme. Will you please elaborate on the details of the capital program amounts, in particular in relation to the far west electrification scheme?

Mr PICKERING: This is an important matter that I might devote some time to. For several years land-holder representatives from the far west of the State lobbied successive State governments to expand the grid electricity system into their area. Minister Pickard investigated the feasibility of this and, following the report of the Thomas inquiry on extending the grid into the far west, established a Darling electricity construction agency. The far west electrification scheme will bring grid electricity to as many as 200 rural properties and residents of townships in the area, significantly enhancing standards of living, agricultural production and tourism potential. The scheme will involve the construction of two major 33 kV lines from Wilcannia to White Cliffs and from Broken Hill to Tibooburra. Numerous single lines will then connect rural properties from these lines and from Namoi Valley Electricity's network at Wanaaring.

At this stage approximately 50 per cent of the 33 kV line and 40 per cent of the single line rural connections have been completed at a cost of approximately $19 million. The current approved budget for the project is $32.2 million. Current estimates indicate that some of the supplementary funding may be needed to complete the project. A submission to Treasury is in preparation by the Office of Energy. It is anticipated that the project will be completed by July 1995. The Government is strongly
Page 4359
of the view that all residents of New South Wales should be entitled to basic services such as electricity. Graziers in the far west expressed a strong preference for grid supply rather than stand-alone units because of grid electricity's favourable impact upon property values, its much lower operating cost to graziers and the fact that an electricity authority takes responsibility for the reliability of supply. It was a decision made to assist the far west to achieve a quality of life in keeping with all the other rural areas of the State, all of which are subsidised in effect in the provision of essential services.

Mr O'DOHERTY: I refer to the part of the operating statement on page 374 of Volume 1 of Budget Paper No. 3 dealing with the grants and subsidies for the cooperatives program. Can the Minister tell the Committee what grants were provided for cooperatives development?

Mr PICKERING: Grants under this item are provided on the basis of applications received from new or existing cooperatives on a dollar-for-dollar basis for feasibility studies, particularly projects dealing with strategic planning; new market development - that is local and export; imports substitution; and value adding programs. For 1993-94 the following major projects worth $244,090 were approved: implementation of the Cooperatives 2000 strategy, $35,000; Ausgro Co-operative Limited, a business plan and overseas development trip, $75,650; Australian White Cyprus Sawmillers Co-op Ltd, involving a diagnostic report and business plan, $13,000; Tress Cocks and Maddox, the drafting of interstate legislative trading division, $19,840; and the International Co-operative Alliance and Registry of Co-operatives Project to facilitate trade development between cooperatives based in New South Wales and overseas, $100,000.

Mr FRASER: I refer to page 371, Volume 1 of Budget Paper No. 3. Will the Minister advise the Committee why no allocation has been made for the home and community care program for 1994-95?

Mr PICKERING: Following discussions between the then Minister for Local Government and Co-operatives, the Hon. Garry West, and the Minister for Community Services, the Hon. Jim Longley, the home and community care program was transferred to the Department of Community Services on 1 July 1994. Home and Community Care administered the HACC capital facilities subprogram with the main program running out of the Department of Community Services. It was agreed that the transfer would assist the Department of Community Services to provide the overall coordination, integration and local planning of services for frail aged persons and younger people with disabilities. During 1993-94 21 home and community care projects were completed and grants paid out during the period totalled $2.5 million.

Mr JONES: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, page 365, Energy Utilisation and Management, specifically electricity distribution. Is the Minister aware of the controversy surrounding the proposed 330,000 volt powerline between Boonoo Boonoo National Park and Bald Rock National Park? Is it not a fact that the western option would affect less properties and be less environmentally damaging? What can the Minister do to ensure that the western option is accepted and adopted?

Mr PICKERING: I am fairly confident that the capital development referred to is not covered by a line item in this budget. I think you will find it is a Pacific Power matter.

CHAIRMAN: Order! I remind members that the Minister can only answer questions related to budget items. Matters relating to Pacific Power are off budget.

Mrs NILE: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, page 370, subprogram 35.1.1, assistance to local government. Staff in that area increased to 18 and the estimated expenditure for 1994-95 is $12.308 million. What assistance have you given Manly Council to prevent nude bathing at Reef Beach, in support of Manly ratepayers? What assistance have you given to Warringah Council in the area of legal costs in 1993? What was the purpose of the payment of $825,000 to Warringah Council?

Mr PICKERING: It is correct that local government does not provide any assistance to Manly Council with regard to nude bathing at Reef Beach, so the answer to that part of the question is none. The answer to the second part of the question is that a special one-off grant of $825,000 was made to Warringah Council to cover the its legal costs arising from the formation of Pittwater Council, which broke away from Warringah Council. It had been hoped that that separation might have been undertaken without legal proceedings, but unfortunately that was not the case, and it really was not Warringah's fault.

Mrs NILE: Therefore, the funds for financial assistance to councils would not cover anything like the requirements of Manly Council, is that so?

Mr PICKERING: You have misunderstood the impact of that third line. A number of people, 18 people as shown, are employed within the department to assist councils in financial control.

Mrs NILE: Not outside?

Mr PICKERING: But not in terms of money paid directly to council, no.

Ms BURNSWOODS: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, page 370, relating to management, audit and investigations. There is reference to a staff this year of 15. Have you received from the residents of Macquarie Park a call for you to institute an inquiry into Ryde Council's handling of an application for four eight-storey towers in that area? If so, has an inspector from the department been appointed to investigate complaints? If an inquiry is instituted - for instance, into Ryde Council's handling of this entire matter - given current staffing levels, what sort of delays would be expected before a local government inspector or similar person were available to conduct an inquiry?

Page 4360

Dr Goldsmith: On a point of order: is that an item?

CHAIRMAN: I will allow the question but I think it is drawing a very longbow.

Mr PICKERING: I am personally unaware of an application, and I have to indicate that the director general is unaware of the application. We will look into the matter, take the question on notice and provide an answer in due course.

Ms BURNSWOODS: Could I perhaps help the Minister?

CHAIRMAN: No, the Minister has indicated he will answer the question on notice. If you have another question, by all means ask it.

Ms BURNSWOODS: I was just going to point out that his spokesman quoted in this morning's paper -

CHAIRMAN: It is not a matter of pointing out; it is a matter of asking the Minister questions.

Mr ROGAN: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, page 365 and to the Geological and Mining Museum Trust. Why was a special $3.5 million allocation which was not provided for in this budget given to the Geological and Mining Museum Trust, given that there was also a $4.7 million overbudget expenditure by the Department of Mineral Resources? Given that this expenditure means that there was some $10 million spent last year and that the Office of Energy also provided in excess of $0.5 million to the Energy Advisory Centre, which is part of that museum, what is your explanation for this special expenditure?

Mr PICKERING: The reason for this item appearing under the grants and subsidies expenditure in 1993-94 is as follows. In the 1989-90 financial year the energy portfolio was under the then minerals and energy ministry. During that financial year two repayable grants totalling $3.542 million were made for the redevelopment of the mining museum, now referred to as the Earth Exchange. In consultation with the Geological and Mining Museum Trust and Treasury the obligation of the Earth Exchange to repay these moneys was waived by the previous Minister on 20 March 1994 and converted to a straight grant. It is emphasised that this transaction has, in terms of government funding and accountability, no cash flow nor Consolidated Fund appropriation impact. From the perspective of the budget of the Office of Energy it represents an abnormal item.

Mr SHEDDEN: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, page 370, relating to local government management, audit and investigations. Has an inspector from the Department of Local Government and Co-operatives been seconded to the Independent Commission Against Corruption to investigate matters relating to Port Stephens Council? As the inquiry relates to land dealings dating back to 1982 I ask what was the cost to the department last year of the secondment? What will be the cost next year, and is the secondment likely to continue into the next financial year?

Mr PICKERING: The answer to that is yes. However, the costs are clearly salary costs. I should indicate there has been an exchange effected with the ICAC so that we have one of their staff on exchange for that officer. Therefore, I suspect the net impact would be negligible.

Mr SHEDDEN: How long will it go on for?

Mr PICKERING: About six months I am advised. We have seconded an officer to the ICAC and the commission has seconded an officer back to us.

Mr SHEDDEN: What does he do?

Mr PICKERING: He is in that management and audit section. It relates, at that aspect, to job training and experience.

Mr SHEDDEN: Surely if he came from the ICAC he would not be looking for job experience?

Mr PICKERING: I do not think because someone is employed at the ICAC it means they know everything in this world.

Mr SHEDDEN: Possibly not, Minister, and you may be aware of that, but my point is that investigation-wise, coming from the ICAC to local government, I could not see -

Mr PICKERING: We are talking of a junior officer working in the ICAC who has come across to the Department of Local Government and Co-operatives, gaining experience in that department. I would have thought it was a good idea.

Mr MURRAY: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, page 370, relating to administration, framework, policy development and legal services. In 1991 Ballina Council took G. J. Coles to court for selling adulterated food in the form of a cheese and bacon roll which contained pieces of aluminium. The court decided on appeal some three years later that there was no offence as the existence of aluminium in the roll was an honest and reasonable mistake. Does this judgment throw into doubt the ability of local government to properly inspect and check local food outlets for adulterated food? Has any member of the 52 staff members in the policy development area been given the job to overcome this problem which is now facing local government?

Mr PICKERING: I will take that question on notice.

Mr JONES: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, page 370, referring to management, audit and investigation. What is the budgeted estimation for this year for investigations? Which councils are currently being investigated? Are Port Stephens Shire Council and Kempsey Shire Council included among those being investigated? What is your policy in regard to dismissing councils and appointing administrators? Under what circumstances would you take such action?

Page 4361

Mr O'Doherty: On a point of order: the question clearly asks for a policy statement by the Minister and that is outside the purpose of estimates committees, and that is to investigate items of appropriation in the Consolidated Fund.

CHAIRMAN: I rule the question in order. It does refer to policy options.

Mr PICKERING: Frankly I am reluctant to make public the names of councils that might be under investigation. That hardly seems to be fair.

Mr JONES: It is public knowledge?

Mr PICKERING: You may simply be talking of a preliminary investigation that reveals absolutely nothing wrong but by publicly exposing such an investigation one succeeds in putting the councillors concerned, who may be perfectly decent people, under a false cloud.

CHAIRMAN: The Hon. Richard Jones will please listen to the answer.

Mr PICKERING: You might just as well ask the Minister for Police when he fronts up here to identify every person in New South Wales who is under investigation by the police. That would be just as silly. I do not intend to answer that, unless I am ordered to, and if I am ordered to I will have to take it on notice. So far as the amount of money allocated to investigation is concerned, the figure is $1.457 million for this financial year.

Mrs NILE: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, page 373, subprogram 35.1.2 regarding rate rebates for pensioners. How many pensioners will benefit from this rate rebate? As rates have increased from $1,000 to $1,500 in many coastal regions, will you increase the maximum rebate of $212.50, which represented 50 per cent 10 years ago but only 20 per cent in 1994?

Mr PICKERING: The number of people affected by this scheme is not available to the Department of Local Government and Co-operatives in that local government organisations apply for bulk funding and the department does not, in effect, have the numbers that are then paid that money. For many years the Government has met half the cost of pensioner rebates applicable to council rates. Until the 1992-93 budget the amount was approximately $43 million. Two changes were made in 1993: councils moved to a July-June financial year; and the entitlement to rate rebates was extended by the Commonwealth to a wider group of pensioners. As a result of the changes in council financial year, councils levied a transition rate during January 1994 which was equal to half a normal year's rates, and received half the rebate. In 1994-95 pensioner rebates will go back to a full year and the full cost of the program. This explains the variation from $43 million in 1992 to $3.5 million in 1993-94 and $52 million in 1994-95. There is no move to change that ratio.

Ms BURNSWOODS: I refer to page 370 under the line relating to ministerial staff in local government. I refer you to the comments made by a spokesman for yourself in this morning's Northern Herald. Am I correct in assuming that your spokesman would be included in that item as one of the 10 ministerial staff?

Mr PICKERING: I would assume so.

Ms BURNSWOODS: That being the case, would you agree that given that your spokesman ended up saying that the row over the development in Ryde was probably a sign of a good healthy democratic process, the insensitivity displayed might suggest you need a new spokesperson?

Mrs Skinner: On a point of order: I query whether this has any relevance to the budget estimates.

Dr Goldsmith: On the point of order: this particular line item has to do with average staffing.

Mr O'Doherty: On the point of order: the honourable member has already asked a question about this matter and the Minister has already agreed to answer it in another forum. I would not have thought it was in order for the member to ask the same question twice.

CHAIRMAN: I do not uphold the point of order but I remind all members that the purpose of this Committee is to explore the budget and the estimates contained therein, not for members, for reasons of their own, to seek to establish tenuous links.

Mr ROGAN: I refer to the investing statement on page 367 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1. My question has been answered in part by an answer to an earlier question, but I am concerned about having to follow the paper trail of outflows and inflows of quite considerable sums of money. Can you identify the purposes of the advances repaid by other organisations - and I refer to the $79 million figure for last year and the amount of only $750,000 this year - and amounts paid to other organisations under outflows, and that is nil this year but $47 million last year? Are some of these funds being paid into the Electricity Development Fund, and what is the current status of this fund?

Mr PICKERING: I shall attempt to give a logical answer to the honourable member's question. For 1993-94, the estimate was $114.55 million for advances repaid to other organisations. That figure had two components. The first was $113.3 million as the net current value, calculated by Treasury, of loans to Illawarra, Prospect and Shortland Electricity and Western Power, to be refinanced by Treasury Corp. That figure represented an estimate of the amount that could only be determined accurately on the date of finalisation - that is, when the refinancing is effected. The second was $1.25 million to be paid by Northern Rivers Electricity and remitted to Sydney Electricity. The actual figure of $79.721 million in 1993-94 had three components. The first was $76.583 million,
Page 4362
which was the net current value as calculated by Treasury as at 9 December 1993 - that being the date on which refinancing was effected - of loans to Illawarra, Prospect and Shortland Electricity and Western Power, refinanced by the Treasury Corporation.

It is to be noted that the total repayments by the various distributors to the Office of Energy appear in the cash inflow section of the same investing statement, under the line item Advances repaid by other organisations. The other two components were $1.25 million paid by Northern Rivers Electricity and remitted to Sydney Electricity, and $1.88 million, which was the repayment to Treasury of interest in respect of the period 1 January 1993 to 30 June 1993 on the Electricity Development Fund. For 1994-95 the estimate of $1.49 million -

CHAIRMAN: The time for non-Government questions has concluded.

Mrs EVANS: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, page 371, program 35.1.1, and to the line item Payments for guarantee and credit rating fees in the 1994-95 estimates for local government. Can you advise what these are for?

Mr PICKERING: Where a council is required under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act to acquire open space reserved under a local environmental plan, and the Treasurer decides it appropriate to extend a guaranteed loan to cover a shortfall until section 94 payments are forthcoming, the Government covers payments of the guarantee fee. Baulkham Hills Shire Council meets the above criteria, and the $45,000 will cover the cost to council of obtaining a credit rating from a credit rating agency.

Dr GOLDSMITH: My question concerns the Office of Energy, and I draw the Minister's attention to page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, which indicates that in 1993-94 expenditure on the remote area power assistance scheme was considerably more than the estimate, and that expenditure will increase again in 1994-95. Further to the question asked earlier by the honourable member for East Hills, would you please describe what the scheme is, and indicate the reasons for the increases?

Mr PICKERING: The remote area power assistance scheme is designed to assist eligible residents who live in remote areas in New South Wales with the provision of an adequate domestic electricity power supply, either through connection to the electricity grid or by the purchase of a stand-alone power system. As I said earlier, the scheme was suspended but reinstated under my administration, and several changes were made to it. Those key changes were: non-price dependent, flat rate grants for eligible applicants which will remove the possibility of price manipulation; a designer accreditation scheme administered by the Solar Energy Industries Association of Australia, which will ensure proper technical and ethical standards for suppliers; mandatory post-installation inspection to ensure that the equipment is not only installed, but is still there; and linking equipment to properties for a period of five years, which will ensure that equipment cannot be subsequently sold off during that period. The allocation for 1994-95 of $3.517 million is the same as the supplemented allocation for 1993-94.

Mrs SKINNER: On page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, expenditure for 1993-94 for cooperative research centres was $225,000, but for 1994-95 the allocation is nil. Could you explain to the Committee the background to this particular grant or subsidy, and the basis for the nil allocation of funds for 1994-95?

Mr PICKERING: The project funding to the Australian Petroleum Co-operative Research Centre, or APCRC, has now been successfully completed within budget, and no further funding allocations have been sought. Total approved funding of $835,000 was provided to the APCRC over three years from Treasury in line with the New South Wales Government's program to support New South Wales based cooperative research centres, which was established under a Commonwealth program. This project funding was administered by the Office of Energy. The purpose of the funding was to support the activities of that organisation, related to the development and understanding of methane drainage of coal seams in New South Wales. Such methane represents not only a hazard to deep coal mining, but, conversely, represents a potentially substantial local gas resource and there are clear economic and environmental benefits for New South Wales if we are ever able to recover it. I understand that the project's final report is expected shortly and will be made public following review by the Office of Energy and Office of Economic Development.

Mr MUTCH: Minister, I note from page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, that $578,000 was expended on the Energy Information Centre in 1993-94, and that estimated expenditure for 1994-95 is $595,000. Could the Minister provide details of this facility, and in particular what benefits were derived from it in 1993-94 and the basis for the allocation for 1994-95?

Mr PICKERING: Honourable members will recall that the honourable member for East Hills raised allied matters a moment ago. The Energy Information Centre is located in the Earth Exchange in The Rocks area of Sydney and provides a comprehensive education, information and advisory service to the public on all aspects of energy and its use in New South Wales. It is staffed by a manager and three information officers, and operates from refurbished premises with an associated temporary exhibition area on level 1 of the museum. Expenditure in 1993-94 was $577,898 and in this period Energy Information Centre staff provided an extensive range of advisory services and programs. Staff responded to more than 12,900 telephone and mail inquiries during the year, up from 10,000 in 1992-93. A new series of workshops was developed and introduced to train local government building
Page 4363
inspectors and energy advisers from electricity distribution authorities to undertake assessments under the five star design rating scheme for energy efficient housing.

Staff were involved in radio and television interviews with an estimated audience of 100,000 people, and 14 newspaper and magazine articles were published. In 1993-94, total visitation to the temporary exhibition on level 1 of the museum was 32,000 people. The centre also participated in eight outside exhibitions, including the Commonwealth Bank Home Show; the Energy Information Centre Home Expo display visited 16 major shopping centres and Sydney's Royal Easter Show; and more than 1,700 information packages were distributed. Under the 1994-95 allocation, these services will be provided by the Earth Exchange Museum Trust under contract to the Office of Energy, and arrangements are currently being reviewed in consultation with the Earth Exchange to ensure continuation of an efficient and effective public energy information program. Estimated expenditure for 1994-95 is $595,000.

Mr SMALL: My question moves away from energy to cooperatives and relates to page 374 of Budget Paper No. 3. Can the Minister advise whether any commitments have been made for cooperatives development projects for 1994-95?

Mr PICKERING: I am pleased to say that commitments have been made to the tune of $85,000 for three projects: first, the implementation of a cooperative 2000 strategy of up to $50,000; New South Wales Canning Fruit Growers Association, $15,000; and Tress Cocks and Maddox, who are to report on consideration of interface fundraising issues between corporation law and cooperative legislation, $20,000.

Mr O'DOHERTY: My question relates to local government. I refer to the line item Other operating expenses on page 370 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1. Why has that allocation been reduced for 1994-95?

Mr PICKERING: The reductions have come about for two reasons: first of all, because of a reduction in enhancement funding as a result of the Local Government Act implementation, from $25,000 in 1993-94 to $150,000 in 1994-95 - and, of course, the logic of that is obvious. Also, the actual expenditure for 1993-94 includes notional expenditure of $174,000 to reconcile the accounts for a prior year adjustment.

Mr FRASER: I refer to Budget Paper No. 3, page 370. Can the Minister advise the Committee as to how the department's staffing resources relate to local government and cooperative sectors, which it oversights.

Mr PICKERING: The Office of Local Government has a staff estimate of 135 for 1994-95. They regulate 177 councils and 18 county councils, which employ in excess of 43,000 staff. As previously mentioned, this equates to an average of two-thirds of a person to each local council in the State, which is very good. The Registry of Co-operatives has 36 staff estimated for 1994-95, and they oversight 585 trading cooperatives and 245 community advancement cooperatives, expected to be operational in 1994-95. The estimated turnover of trading cooperatives for 1994-95 is of the order of $2.3 billion. At the other end of the scale, the Minister's office has a staff of 10.

Mrs EVANS: I direct the Minister's attention to Budget Paper No. 3, pages 370, 373 and 374. Given the size of the department, compared with its client groups, how is it ensured that staff priorities and work quality are directed towards achievement of corporate goals?

Mr PICKERING: Performance agreements systems are in place for all senior executive service officers, and we scrutinise them with great diligence. In July 1993, a performance management system was introduced to cover all staff below SES level. Both systems are designed to assist staff and managers to link and direct work towards achievement of corporate goals, with the director-general's performance agreement and outcomes published in the annual report of the department. Discussions about enterprise agreements have commenced with staff representatives and the unions. It is the aim of negotiations to develop an industrial instrument specific to the needs of the department that increases productivity outputs through changes to work practices and conditions while providing staff with benefits through more flexible working arrangements and career development opportunities. Issues addressed in the draft enterprise agreement include the development of a departmental grading structure, the career break scheme, working from home arrangements, the provision of financial studies assistance, family and emergency leave, and the improved utilisation of technology.

Dr GOLDSMITH: I refer specifically to Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, at pages 370 and 371. In the local government sector, does the department undertake any specific initiatives to bring about improvements for Aboriginal people?

Mr MURRAY: Could you tell me the line item that you are dealing with?

Dr GOLDSMITH: The line item is 35.1.1.

Mr MURRAY: But the line item?

Dr GOLDSMITH: I am asking whether there is in the department any specific item relating to Aboriginal affairs. I have noted in my question that this is not mentioned specifically. If provision does occur, it occurs in this section. That is what the line item is - not the line, the line item. There is a distinction between lines and line items, and I draw that to the attention of the honourable member for Drummoyne.

Mr PICKERING: I am advised that a number of initiatives cover the matters raised by my colleague the Hon. Dr Marlene Goldsmith. The department has identified the position of an Aboriginal policy officer,
Page 4364
who is located in the policy division of the department. The position of an Aboriginal project officer has been identified and was funded by the Department of Industrial Relations, Employment, Training and Further Education in 1993-94. The department has been involved in Aboriginal employment strategies in which 19 councils participated through the employment of 33 trainees. The department's involvement in projects concluded in 1993-94 and the position was transferred to the Department of Industrial Relations, Employment, Training and Further Education.

The Aboriginal advisory committee program has been coordinated. The program aims to encourage councils to establish formal committees with Aboriginal communities. So far 16 committees have been established. Other initiatives include a local government Aboriginal network, a forum for Aboriginal elected members and liaison officers to discuss issues relevant to Aboriginal communities. Three meetings are held each year. A review is being undertaken of legislative, regulatory and administrative arrangements concerning the rating of Aboriginal land in New South Wales. A draft report is nearing completion in this regard. An information paper from the Aboriginal community in New South Wales about the role of local government has been widely distributed to Aboriginal communities.

Mrs SKINNER: I refer the Minister to Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, at page 365. It is indicated that the appropriation for special assistance to electricity county councils for 1993-94 was $1.4 million, the actual expenditure for 1993-94 was $1.549 million and the allocation for 1994-95 is $1.449 million. Could the Minister explain the reason for the variation in estimate and expenditure in 1993-94 and the basis of the 1994-95 estimate?

Mr PICKERING: In 1993-94 special assistance was provided to two distributors on the basis of their individual financial positions and special circumstances that applied within their supply areas. Recommendations as to which distributors should be granted special assistance in 1993-94 were made by the Electricity Council of New South Wales. In 1993-94 it was determined that special assistance of $1 million be granted to Namoi Valley Electricity and that special assistance of $400,000 be granted to Northern Riverina Electricity. The remaining $149,000 included in the special assistance to electricity distributors category is made up of two parts. First, the balance of funds remaining in the traffic route lighting subsidy scheme amounted to $49,000. Those funds were returned to the Roads and Traffic Authority when the scheme was taken over by the RTA.

Second, in September 1989, prior to the formation of the Office of Energy, the then Minister for Minerals and Energy requested that assistance be provided to ensure a proposal by Australian Magnet Technology Proprietary Limited, AMT, to establish a neodymium magnet plant, and this accounts for the balance of $100,000. A business and consumer affairs incentive package totalling $280,000 was arranged to establish the plant at Newcastle. As a result, a commitment was made to underwrite any shortfall up to $100,000. AMT claimed the full amount of $100,000 from the Energy Corporation. In 1994-95 a similar provision of $1.4 million has been made for special assistance. At this stage the financial positions of any disadvantaged distributors are still under review and a final decision is yet to be made as to how those funds will be apportioned.

Mr MUTCH: I refer the Minister to Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, at page 365. The appropriation for energy research and development grants and subsidies in 1993-94 was $2.982 million, yet expenditure amounted to only $2.417 million. The appropriation for 1994-95 is $2.774 million. Would the Minister please explain the reason for the 1993-94 expenditure and say whether he expects the 1994-95 allocation to be fully expended?

Mr PICKERING: The purpose of the State Energy Research and Development Fund, SERDF, is to foster the development, demonstration and commercialisation of new energy technologies, manufacturing processes and related services likely to benefit New South Wales. Pacific Power also funds research in electricity generation and transmission technologies. In 1993-94 an amount of $2.42 million was provided from SERDF to private companies, universities, research organisations and others for research and development projects in areas of renewal energy, gas, electricity, coal, transport and alternative fuels and energy efficiency. The total value of SERDF contributions to current energy research and development projects that typically extend over one to three years is some $5.9 million. In 1994-95 an allocation of $2.77 million has been made for SERDF funded projects. The SERDF program gives priority to projects that aim to: reduce energy costs to consumers; enhance the security, reliability and safety of energy supply; promote employment growth in the industry; and reduce the environmental impacts of energy production, distribution and use.

[Short adjournment]

Mr SHEDDEN: I refer to page 370 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, relating to local government. I refer you to the proposal by the Victorian Liberal Government to scrap 18 councils in the east of the State and to replace them with six councils. Is this as well as the axing of 41 other councils in Victoria? Will your policies relating to the number of local government amalgamations be similar to those of your Victorian Liberal counterpart?

Mr PICKERING: I am delighted to get that dorothy dixer to liven up proceedings. I recall that a previous Labor Government under the Hon. Neville Wran delighted in the forced amalgamation of councils. Today, as Minister for Local Government, I am constantly approached by those councils begging to be unamalgamated. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink: you cannot put councils together that do not want to be put together.

Page 4365

Mr MURRAY: It cost you $800,000 to take them apart at Warringah.

CHAIRMAN: Order!

Mr PICKERING: I can assure my honourable friend that as Minister for Local Government and Co-operatives I have said publicly on a number of occasions that I do not intend to force the amalgamation of any local government areas under any circumstances. However, if local government bodies and their communities wish to approach my office to seek to be amalgamated, and if that amalgamation is obviously in the public interest and supported by the public concerned -

Mr JONES: And by referendum?

Mr PICKERING: It would probably require a referendum to assess public support. In those circumstances I would be delighted to facilitate the process. I have no doubt that there would be local government areas in the State where that process would be to the benefit of the community, but that should be a community initiative rather than be imposed from above.

Mr SHEDDEN: What you are saying is that you will not be pursuing any amalgamations?

Mr PICKERING: I thought that is what I said.

Mr SHEDDEN: I am seeking reassurance.

Mr PICKERING: You have my assurance. I said forced amalgamations, that is, forced by me.

Mr MURRAY: Budget Paper No. 2, at page 5-71, refers to the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal. Is the Minister aware of the dissatisfaction of local government with the recent decision of the tribunal, especially in relation to mayoral allowances? What steps are you taking to overcome this problem?

Dr Goldsmith: On a point of clarification: what is the line item?

Mr MURRAY: I told you the line: 5-71.

Dr Goldsmith: That is the page number.

CHAIRMAN: The question is in order.

Mr PICKERING: It is a good question. I am aware of some dissatisfaction with regard to the interim decision of the tribunal. It is fair to say that some councillors throughout New South Wales strongly believe they ought not be paid at all, and there are those councillors who feel they ought to be remunerated in a fashion not dissimilar to a member of the State Parliament. My view is that generally councillors in this State are not properly remunerated, and I have said so publicly. I have taken the trouble to meet with the tribunal to express my view that there ought to be greater recognition of the remuneration level of councillors in a general sense, but it is fair to suggest -

Mr MURRAY: That is an increase of the $5,000?

Mr PICKERING: It is fair to suggest that the workload of individual councillors varies between one involved in a very small council area in a country area of New South Wales and one running the Sydney City Council. There are different workloads and different responsibilities and that ought to be reflected in different levels of remuneration. I am satisfied that by and large your comments are correct: there generally is a level of dissatisfaction, but I point out that there are those who would argue that they ought not get paid at all. I am satisfied, after my discussions with the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal, that it has a task in front of it that would certainly daunt Solomon. However, because of the incredible amount of work that has been put into the task, I am also satisfied that it will bring down an acceptable decision.

Mr MURRAY: Are you actually saying that there should be a differential in the payment to mayors, rather than the single figure of $5,000, which was the interim decision?

Mr PICKERING: I am saying that I will rely upon an independent remuneration tribunal to bring down an answer. I would be very surprised if that answer did not provide for differential payments to councillors - very surprised.

Mr JONES: I refer you to page 370 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, and to the line item Management audit and investigations. Can you advise what proportion of the 1993-94 investigations budget was expended on the ongoing problem of councillor Mick Allan and his illegal development at Twofold Bay, complete with destruction of the dunes? Rather than expend more taxpayers money trying to bring Councillor Mick Allan to heel, will you cancel his caravan park licence?

CHAIRMAN: I have some difficulty with the last part of that question. The question was in order until you began canvassing whether the Minister would take certain action concerning a caravan park licence. I do not believe that is appropriate for the estimates, but the balance of the question is in order.

Mr PICKERING: It would come as no surprise that the department does not maintain a financial analysis of the amount of money allocated to each investigation. I cannot provide that specific information. I understand the investigation in question has concluded. I also understand that the matter has resulted in a court order, and we await for the order to be enforced.

Mrs NILE: This is a very simple question. I refer to page 366 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, and to line item Electrical appliance testing, for which $434,000 was spent in 1993-94 and for which $465,000 has been allocated for 1994-95. Could you explain what that involves? Does it relate to ordinary commercial electrical appliances?

Page 4366

Mr PICKERING: It is a very simple matter. Individuals or companies selling an electrical appliance in New South Wales require a certificate of safety approval from the Office of Energy. In other words, it is a mechanism to provide public safety in relation to electrical appliances sold to the community, for which the private sector pays a fee.

Mrs NILE: Are you finding that Australian appliances are safer than imported appliances? Are there any comparisons?

Mr PICKERING: In order to be sold and given a certificate, they have to comply with our standards. Your question really is whether we knock out more overseas products than Australian products?

Mrs NILE: Yes.

Mr PICKERING: I cannot answer that question off the cuff. We will look into it.

Mrs NILE: Last year a brand of electrical fans was withdrawn. Would there be any other similar major appliances that have not been withdrawn?

Dr GOLDSMITH: That was from some years ago. It was withdrawn last year.

Mrs NILE: Yes, it was, but are there any other products that are causing concern or have caused concern? The electrical fans were on sale.

Mr PICKERING: Any regulatory system can fail, and there have been some rare examples of equipment that has received certification and subsequently, while it has been in use, problems have been identified in the same way that a car can be used for years and suddenly there is a recall notice to say that in the light of experience a particular part has been found to be defective. It happened to my car recently and I have had it for seven years. The same thing can happen to electrical appliances, with age.

Ms BURNSWOODS: I refer to page 370 of Budget Paper No. 3, dealing with financial assistance and administration policy development for local government. You would be aware that an expert inquiry to investigate alternative arrangements for the administration of the Blue Mountains has been recommended in a report by Professor Colin Hughes, commissioned by the city of the Blue Mountains. Do you agree with his findings that the city of the Blue Mountains is in a unique situation because of its location and special set of circumstances? Will you provide financial assistance for the proposed inquiry? As the proposal will not impose additional financial burdens on ratepayers, do you agree that the proposal has merit for the long-term advantage of the Blue Mountains and its citizens?

Mr PICKERING: I really suspect that the question does not fall within the provisions of a line item. I have signed off a letter today to the council canvassing the findings of that report. With respect to the specific item you raised, the formation of a new department of administration, I propose not to take any action.

Mr ROGAN: I refer to your earlier answer to one of the Government members relating to the special $10 million allocation to rural electricity consumers. I take it from your answer that this money has been allocated from, or will be contributed by, Pacific Power. What are the eligibility criteria for the funding and the means of distribution? Will it include small business persons who in many cases are as equally affected as farmers in rural communities?

Mr PICKERING: The program applies to all drought-declared areas of New South Wales. We have identified three separate organisations that will provide the interface between the community and the Government to facilitate payments: the Smith Family, 27 financial counsellors within the Department of Agriculture, and seven rural support workers who have been specially placed in the community in recognition of the impact of the drought. The program is designed to be available not only to farmers but to local shopkeepers et cetera. I have designed it to run parallel with the existing program, which is always available to people in necessitous circumstances who are not able to pay their electricity accounts. The St Vincent de Paul Society and the Smith Family, as well as other organisations, are able to administer the scheme and to provide payment by way of $30 vouchers.

On this occasion the scheme has been expanded in relation to the amount of money available. The ordinary scheme cost $3.6 million a year and we have added another $10 million in recognition of the drought. It will come down to appraising people who cannot afford to pay their electricity bills. We will assist them by providing vouchers that they will be able to offset against their electricity accounts. It is true that we have sought funds from Pacific Power. The funding will come through the conventional arrangements associated with the scheme that is already in place and has been in place for some years.

Mr SHEDDEN: I refer to Budget Paper No. 2, page 5-71, dealing with the Department of Local Government and Co-operatives. What are the operation and procedures for the Local Government Pecuniary Interest Tribunal?

Mr PICKERING: This is a new facility about which there is little case law. The concept is that a member of the public or the departmental head can lay a complaint before this independent tribunal asserting, obviously, that a councillor has been improperly involved with a pecuniary interest. The tribunal can suspend councillors for up to three months or disqualify them for five years. The powers of the tribunal are very much like an ombudsman's powers: to investigate matters and make a decision.

Mr SHEDDEN: Nothing is established in that area, is that right?

Mr PICKERING: I am pleased to report at this stage that there have been no hearings.

Mr SHEDDEN: The budget papers refer to remuneration but not to pecuniary interest.

Page 4367

Mr PICKERING: It says, "During 1993-94, both the Local Government Pecuniary Interest Tribunal and Local Government Remuneration Tribunal were established".

Mr SHEDDEN: But you do not have any details?

Mr MURRAY: What do the tribunals do?

Mr PICKERING: The remuneration tribunal has travelled extensively across the State taking evidence -

Mr MURRAY: What about the other tribunal?

Mr PICKERING: The pecuniary interest tribunal is a standing tribunal to which complaints may be laid about councillors acting improperly with regard to their pecuniary interests. At this stage there has been no need for the pecuniary interest tribunal to operate as there has not been a complaint.

Mr SHEDDEN: Is it established and operational?

Mr PICKERING: Yes.

Mr MURRAY: In Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, at page 371, there is an item amount close to $3 million arising from a protracted court case as a consequence of your predecessor's decision to hive off Pittwater Council to Warringah. That was paid out by your department. Are you anticipating any further legal costs as a result of the current disputed proposals for boundary changes between the City of Sydney and South Sydney councils?

Mr PICKERING: The matter between those two councils has been drawn to my attention. I have taken the conventional step of referring the dispute to the boundaries commission. I await its advice, which, under the law, I can accept or reject. When I receive that advice I will be in a position to make a decision. Ultimately I have the power under the Act to resolve the matter. Therefore, one would see the need for legal expenses. Councils can appeal my decision, but that would be up to them.

Motion by Mr Fraser, seconded by Mr Rogan, agreed to:

That the remaining 20 minutes be apportioned to extend non-Government questions by 10 minutes and Government questions by 10 minutes thereafter.

Mr JONES: Minister, I refer you to Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, page 365, and specifically to the line items Energy information centre and Energy research and development. Are you aware of a 1990 industry science and technology committee inquiry which shows how, with a $26,000 investment, one Melbourne high-rise building saved a massive $48,000 in electricity costs and $12,000 in gas charges? What is the Energy Information Centre doing to propagate and encourage the private and business sectors to take simple and reasonably inexpensive measures to save energy and money?

Mr PICKERING: The question of the Hon. R. S. L. Jones is very pertinent to today's world. He is obviously concerned, quite properly, about the impact of greenhouse gas emissions as a function of power generation. He has very sensibly identified that the most important thing the nation can do to obviate that problem is to encourage people not to waste electricity or gas. The Government is very much aware of the potential for improving greenhouse gas emissions through that aspect of our operations, which we call demand management. We are undertaking a considerable amount of action to proceed in that direction. The Federal and State governments have looked at the greenhouse gas emissions issue with a view to implementing a program known as "No regrets". The advantage of demand management is that at the end of the day you get an advantageous result from greenhouse gas emissions and significant savings in operating costs for the way that people usefully use electricity. It is a matter the Government intends to pursue with some vigour in the future, as it has done in the past.

Mr ROGAN: I refer to page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3, and to the line item Energy research and development. How much of the budget is directed specifically to addressing greenhouse issues? Do you have specific programs to meet the commitment to reduce greenhouse gases?

Mr PICKERING: That is an important question which will take a little time to flesh out. I would like to take the question on notice so that a responsible answer can be provided.

Mr MURRAY: My question relates to page 370 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1. In a leading article in a recent edition of the Grafton Daily Examiner the new Local Government Act was slammed, particularly with regard to the cost to ratepayers of millions of dollars for staff redundancy payments, for example, the $100,000 payout to the former Great Lakes Council chief health and building inspector. The new let the managers manage scheme has councillors attending meetings as seat warmers simply to hear reports on decisions already made, but the underlying theme to change the Act was to make local government more accountable. Does the Minister believe this assessment is correct?

Mr PICKERING: No, I do not. It is an important matter. One of the major thrusts of the new Local Government Act is to encourage councillors, the elected officials, to be, in effect, the policy makers for their local area, to view general managers in charge of councils as people responsible for administering and managing the councils, and to operate under policy direction. It is true that many councillors have been used to the old days of being general managers and having hands-on management of the organisation, but find it difficult in this new regime to be hands-off management and to simply work out what their community wants. As a result, the feelings expressed in the article you have read have emerged in some council areas.

Page 4368

On the other hand, many other council areas have warmed to the legislation, having accepted the very sensible approach that it enunciates. They have got on with the job and clearly understand the different roles between the manager and the policy maker. It is the same sort of dichotomy that arises with the State Government, where the Government is the policy maker, department heads are responsible for implementing the policy, and Ministers do not run departments. It is difficult for some councillors to comprehend that concept. It is obvious that some managers have not been up to the task. It is inevitable that some managers will fall off the system and, no doubt, will be paid out. But the end result for the community is that we will end up with competent professional managers doing a first-class job.

Mr JONES: I refer the Minister to page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3, Volume 1, and to the line item Energy research and development. Does your department have any liaison with the United States Department of Energy? Are you or your office aware of the three-year $1.8 million project at Argonne National Laboratory in conjunction with Advanced Research Development Incorporated to develop wafer thin plastic film which is capable of providing electricity at a cost of one cent per watt? As we are uniquely placed to take advantage of solar energy, will the Minister make sure that we do not fall behind in the global race for cheap solar energy?

Mr PICKERING: I am advised that we are certainly keeping in contact with the agency mentioned. The Hon. R. S. L. Jones would well understand that the scientific world is extremely good at communicating the latest developments around the world. The head of research at the University of New South Wales and the vice-chancellor have informed me in the past few weeks that research at that university on solar energy cells, photovoltaic cells, is at the threshold of world research. We are at the leading edge.

Mr JONES: At the moment.

Mr PICKERING: That can obviously change, but at the moment we are at the leading edge, as I am advised by those two eminent persons, and I have no reason to disbelieve their view. I certainly will follow up the point made by the Hon. R. S. L. Jones, but I suspect he will find we are doing very well.

Mr ROGAN: My question refers to an earlier question and answer. Page 365 of Budget Paper No. 3 shows under the line item Fuel supply and electrolysis a 1993-94 staff allocation of 15, which would approximate to a cost of about $500,000. However, I notice on page 366 that the line item Electrolysis Committee - Recoupment of expenses is expected to return only $201,000. Does that mean the cost of providing this service to the industry is not recouped?

Mr PICKERING: We recoup our costs for electrolysis activities but not for fuel supplies. Fuel supply is regarded as a community service. The honourable member would be well aware that many government departments do not operate at a profit.

Motion by Mrs Evans agreed to:

That this session now conclude.

The Committee proceeded to deliberate on the recommendation of the vote.


Page 4369