1. Home
  2. Hansard & Papers
  3. Legislative Assembly
  4. 1 May 2003
Contact Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

Condemnation of the Government

Printing Tips | Print selected text | Full Day Hansard Transcript         « Prior Item | Item 4 of 44 | Next Item »

About this Item
Subjects -  Railways; Railway Safety; Bridges; Hospital Waiting Lists; Prisons and Prisoners
Speakers - Brogden Mr John; Scully Mr Carl; Speaker; Debnam Mr Peter; Debus Mr Bob; Seaton Ms Peta; Deputy-Speaker; West Mr Graham
Business - Motion


    CONDEMNATION OF THE GOVERNMENT
Page: 165


    Mr BROGDEN (Pittwater—Leader of the Opposition) [10.30 a.m.]: I move:

    That this House condemns the Government for misleading the people of New South Wales by covering up before the election:

    (1) independent advice from a respected rail safety expert to close Menangle bridge, thereby putting lives at risk.

    (2) detailed and ongoing operational and safety issues on the Millennium trains and refusing to withdraw the trains until April.

    (3) the true state of elective surgery budgets in country New South Wales, ensuring that in April funding for procedures had disappeared.

    (4) the tragic circumstances surrounding the death of a prisoner in January 2003 and the failure of the Minister for Corrective Services to immediately inform the deceased's family and the public of the bungled release date.

    It is significant to note, when debating this motion, that Minister Sartor is not a member of the former Government. The former Minister for Transport, who was so keen to have this motion debated, is not in the Chamber. The former Minister for Transport is this Government's chief architect in its program of covering up and lies. In the run-up to the 2003 election time and again this Government systematically covered up serious matters from the people of New South Wales. I said before the election that this Labor Government would do anything to get re-elected. That has proven to be the case. The most significant of those breaches of public faith was with respect to this Government's failure to heed the recommendations in an independent report to close Menangle bridge.

    On 5 March 2003 the Rail Infrastructure Corporation received a report from Professor West who conducted an initial review. His report states in part that a sudden catastrophic structural collapse could take place on that bridge. Professor West also said, "It is my urgent assessment that Menangle bridge must be closed." That report was prepared by an independent rail expert on 5 March 2003—a former engineer with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration who was employed by the University of Wollongong. That gentleman recommended clearly and directly to the Rail Infrastructure Corporation that Menangle bridge should be closed. But the Rail Infrastructure Corporation and the Government took no action. They monstered Professor West to make him change his report. For the next 22 days Menangle bridge remained open despite the fact that an independent expert required its closure. For 22 days communities in New South Wales used rail services and heavy loads were carried over a bridge that was clearly unsafe.

    After the Waterfall accident in January this Government was so concerned about the politics of yet another rail problem that it was willing to cover up a matter of such importance and put the lives of the people of New South Wales at risk—real people that I have met. The honourable member for Southern Highlands has advocated on behalf of those people—people in her electorate who use that train on a daily basis to get to work. Once the Government finally closed the bridge one teacher in Western Sydney was unable to continue to use his normal method of transport. His wife and young children were distressed and said, "Daddy could have been killed because this Government did not close the bridge." This Government put the lives of people at risk for nothing more than cheap political gain. The former Minister for Transport, the Hon. Carl Scully, is not in the Chamber today. He is probably too embarrassed. If he had any spine or self-respect he would be ashamed.

    The former Minister for Transport was sacked by this Government and shunted off into the Housing portfolio. I say to the thousands of tenants in public housing in this State: If the Minister treats them in the same manner as he treated rail commuters, God help them. The former Minister for Transport has no respect for the people of New South Wales. Government is simply an achievement for him. This cover-up, which is simply appalling, goes deeper. There are real ramifications as a result of it. On 8 April the Opposition wrote directly to the Commissioner of Police, Mr Moroney, bringing this matter to his attention and seeking an investigation under section 212 of the Crimes Act, which states:

    A person who by an unlawful act or a negligent omission endangers the safety of any person who is on or who is being conveyed on a railway is liable to imprisonment for three years.

    The former Minister for Transport deserves three years in gaol.

    Mr Scully: You just got four.

    Mr BROGDEN: I note the interjection of the former Minister for Transport, who is now present and who thinks that this matter is funny. He, as the former Minister for Transport, really has only one of two ways out of this dilemma. He can say, "I was not advised" or "I was advised and I did nothing." Let us deal with the first option. If he was not advised, why was he not advised? He was the Minister for Transport. Why was he not concerned about what happened within his transport network? Why did he not know that on 5 March Professor West ordered that that bridge be closed? The former Minister for Transport did not want to know. Honourable members would remember the television show Hogan's Heroes and the bumbling Sergeant Schultz who used to say, "I know nothing."

    The former Minister for Transport cannot get away with a performance like that today. Lives were put at risk as a result of his negligence, his arrogance and his willingness to cover up to try to save his own skin. He might still be a Minister in this Labor Government, but he is washed up in politics in New South Wales. That might be good for people in this Chamber but it is of no comfort to those whose lives were put at risk as a result of the Minister's cover-up. Honourable members might recall the former Minister for Transport and the Premier visiting Central station last year and trumpeting the arrival of the new Millennium trains. Let me quote from what the former Minister for Transport had to say:

    The Millennium train will be very well received by Sydney's train community.

    I regard it as by far the best train in Australia. It is modern, comfortable, futuristic and with a number of appointments that are absent from other trains around the world.

    We have subsequently discovered that those appointments include doors that do not open and drivers who cannot get out of their cabins. Those are some of the appointments that this great Millennium train has. It was forced onto the rails as another election stunt. Immediately after the election, when the cover-up was exposed as a result of another report, it was taken off the rails. Drivers were being locked in their compartments because of electrical faults, trackside emergency systems were inadvertently activated and trains were running over or passing rail platforms. On 1 July 2002 the Premier said that the Millennium trains were the world's best. We now know that on 10 April an urgent report completed by the Co-ordinator-General of Rail, Vince Graham, found that the Millennium trains had repeatedly locked signals in the red position since September 2002.

    Is the former Minister for Transport going to tell us that from September 2002 until March 2003 he knew nothing about Millennium trains running over rail platforms, locking signals in the red position, doors not opening and trains overshooting rail platforms? Before the 22 March election the former Minister was willing, as part of an election stunt, to force the introduction of these new trains. On many occasions the honourable member for Vaucluse has reminded the people of New South Wales that the Premier said the Millennium trains were two years late. For a while we were not sure which Millennium train he meant—the twenty-first or twenty-second millennium. When the trains arrived they were pushed out early when clearly they were not ready to take people safely on the tracks. However, another cover-up exposed that problem.

    There have been two other cover-ups. One cover-up, which has been exposed by doctors, relates to hospital budgets for elective surgery in northern New South Wales. The former Minister for Health put pressure on surgeons to do more elective surgery before the election. As a result, hospital budgets were run down and there is now no more money for elective surgery in parts of country New South Wales. Clearly the most shameful case was the death of an Aboriginal prisoner on 22 January in a New South Wales prison. He suicided on 22 January but he was supposed to be released on 4 January—he should not have been in gaol on 22January. But his release date was bungled and he was kept in prison. [Time expired.]

    Mr SCULLY (Smithfield—Minister for Roads, and Minister for Housing) [10.40 a.m.]: What an extraordinary amount of absolute claptrap from the Opposition!

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition was heard in silence. The Minister will be heard in silence also.

    Mr SCULLY: The Leader of the Opposition obviously has nothing serious to say about elective surgery budgets or about the last matter he raised, upon which he spent roughly 40 seconds. I will deal at length with the notion of an alleged cover-up. The Opposition has debased the currency of its allegations. Every five minutes over the past six months Opposition members have thrown out allegations of a cover-up like confetti at a wedding. I am sorry to disappoint ladies and gentlemen opposite, but it does not measure up.

    Mr Brogden: What did you know?

    Mr SCULLY: I will go through the facts if Opposition members want to hear them. They are already well aware of them. Mr Brogden, you have been lying your head off, and you know it. The Leader of the Opposition knows that he has been telling untruths; he has been economical with the facts.

    Mr Kerr: Point of order: Pursuant to your earlier ruling, I ask that you direct the Minister to withdraw his accusation that the Leader of the Opposition lied.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! I remind honourable members of my specific ruling about references to members having lied. The Chair objects to the statement that a member is telling lies or has told a lie. There is no point of order.

    Mr SCULLY: I have released to the media the briefing note that I received from the Rail Infrastructure Corporation [RIC] on 11 March 2003.

    Mr Kerr: Further to the point of order: The Minister said to the Leader of the Opposition, "You have been lying your head off." In doing so, the Minister has transgressed both of your rulings.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have already ruled on this matter. To say that somebody is lying his head off is not quite the same as saying that the Leader of the Opposition is telling lies to this Chamber and to the public.

    Mr SCULLY: On 11 March I received a briefing note from the Rail Infrastructure Corporation that Labor members will be interested to hear about. That briefing note was explicit: it advised me that Professor West was happy for the bridge to remain open. The advice from RIC at that time was that, provided speed restrictions were placed on the rail line, the bridge could remain open while further assessments were made in consultation with Professor West. Professor West's interim report was not provided as part of that briefing. The Rail Infrastructure Corporation did not advise me that the report recommended the closure of the bridge. On the contrary, the written advice stated:

    As a result of these actions, Professor West confirmed that the bridge could be operational while the issues he raised were being addressed.

    There was absolutely nothing in the briefing note to indicate that Professor West recommended immediate closure of the bridge. It is up to the Independent Commission Against Corruption [ICAC] to decide whether the advice given to me by RIC was accurate. I received advice to the effect that Professor West had issued a report and that we were dealing with the matter by imposing a 20-kilometre speed restriction, which Professor West said was okay. That is the advice that I received. I was given a briefing note on 11 March that said everything was fine, and I accepted that advice. On 24 March my office was contacted by Mr Coulthart from the Sunday program. He informed my office that Professor West had advised RIC that the bridge should be closed immediately. On that same day I sought a copy of Professor West's report, which I read. I immediately contacted the Director-General of Transport NSW and said, "I have read a copy of Professor West's report."

    Mr Brogden: You are a disgrace.

    Mr SCULLY: These are the facts—although they may not suit the Leader of the Opposition's attempts at cheap political point scoring. I asked immediately for the information to be conveyed to the Rail Safety Regulator so that he could conduct an urgent investigation, inspect the bridge and, if possible, interview Professor West and decide as soon as possible whether the bridge should remain open. That was 24 March, and three days later the bridge was closed. I acted as any Minister would have acted in the circumstances: there was advice that the bridge should be closed and it was closed.

    The characters opposite refuse to recall that on 9 May 2002 I raised the issue of Cooks River Bridge. Labor members may know that some concrete deterioration was detected in the bridge, which raised a safety risk as to whether heavy vehicles crossing the bridge could cause some sort of collapse. The bridge was subsequently closed to trucks. In the face of advice that a bridge should be closed for safety reasons, any member with the relevant responsibility—be it Bruce Baird, the honourable member for Vaucluse, Carl Scully or Michael Costa—would act. Those opposite must be kidding to claim that a Minister would say, "Wow, this is not good for the election; we'll just sit on this information." That is bizarre; it is offensive and ridiculous. Any Minister from any government of any political persuasion would have done exactly as I did. I received advice that said, "Professor West provided a report about Menangle bridge and we are acting in accordance with his concerns and his advice that a 20-kilometre per hour restriction is appropriate." I believe I acted appropriately and any suggestion—

    Mr Brogden: You should have asked questions.

    Mr SCULLY: I have nothing to be concerned about with regard to an ICAC inquiry. I welcome it. Opposition members can send as much as they have—

    Mr Brogden: How arrogant!

    Mr SCULLY: The Leader of the Opposition is the arrogant one. This is cheap political point scoring. Opposition members throw out cover-up allegations like confetti at a wedding—I think that is the best analogy. They have cheapened and debased their own allegations. They are not worth a pinch of salt. There is nothing in them. The Leader of the Opposition made yet another allegation about the Millennium trains. I am supposed to have received a secret report that the Millennium trains were not safe. The Opposition claims—shock, horror—that I kept the trains operating in the rail system and sat on the information as long as I could until the election, with its pressure-cooker atmosphere, was over. It was terrible! What a great yarn, but it is complete garbage. What about the Tangaras? Let us get out the Bruce Baird press clippings.

    The Millennium trains have confronted exactly the same issues as the Tangaras confronted, mostly during the previous Coalition administration from 1988 to 1995. Yes, there were problems with the Tangaras' doors, engines and motors and how the trains worked in the system. Shock, horror! Exactly the same things happened with the Millennium trains. I have been transparent and open about everything that has occurred. All the glitches that one would expect to be associated with the introduction of a new piece of major technical infrastructure were addressed in an open and accountable manner. In fact, everything that the Minister for Transport Services has said is consistent with my comments following the introduction of the Millennium trains when problems occurred from time to time.

    I direct honourable members to the Stateline interview in which the honourable member for Vaucluse made a complete fool of himself. He said, "Quentin, this bloke Scully is covering up. Look at all these reports that show a cover-up on the rail system." I responded by saying, "Hang on, Quentin, that assertion is contrary to his claims. If he says that the Government has released 14 reports on the condition of the rail network, how can he then claim that there has been a cover-up?" Quentin said, "Yes, that's a good point. I will have to use that part of the interview." The honourable member for Vaucluse was waving all of the reports released by the Government. He is a goose. On the contrary, we are open and accountable.

    If members opposite have concerns—the Government has concerns from time to time—about rail agencies that need to be addressed, that is a legitimate discussion. I do not mind that. If members opposite have concerns about whether my administration was effective, let us discuss that. But do not dare come into this Chamber and suggest things occurred that did not occur. Do not reflect on my integrity! I am not having it. Do not suggest that there was a cover-up when there was no cover-up. The Leader of the Opposition should stop engaging in cheap political point scoring when he knows that he has no basis for making any of those claims. See you in four years time!

    Mr DEBNAM (Vaucluse) [10.50 a.m.]: I will not use the word to which the Minister for Energy and Utilities objects. The Minister for Roads, and Minister for Housing should stay here and listen to the debate. He used the words "transparent" and "open". He said, "I have been a transparent and open Minister." That is simply not the truth. It has not been the truth since the Minister took the oath of office in the Carr Government. I well remember the first piece of legislation moved by the Carr Government in this House; the Minister who spoke on it was the Minister for Roads. On that day back in April 1995 the Minister made the point that this was all about reintroducing ministerial accountability—that sense, that concept that he thought had disappeared.

    For eight years we have seen exactly the opposite, and the Minister for Roads has been the worst offender. If we look at recent history in the Transport portfolio, all the problems that have arisen in recent years, and how the Minister handled them, we see again that he is the Minister for cover-ups. He has proved that time and again. In relation to the Glenbrook accident back in December 1999, Justice McInerney, on page 3 of his final report, expressed absolute frustration with the cover-up of information on behalf of the State rail entities. Why do honourable members think they were covering it up? They were not co-operating with Justice McInerney, because that is the culture led by the Premier and instigated in public transport in New South Wales by the Minister for Roads.

    In May and June of last year there was a major problem with cracked rail heads across the State. At first the Minister's people simply denied it. The Minister came in here and downplayed the issue. It was such an issue at that time—there was great concern across the State—that the Opposition moved a motion of no confidence in the Minister on the last sitting day in June last year before Parliament adjourned for the winter recess. The Minister again denied and covered up the safety problem. He said that there was no problem. A series of major rail accidents then occurred during the second half of last year. After each accident—Hexham, Bargo, Matakana, Galong and Cockle Creek—the Minister downplayed the accident and every safety issue. He said that it was not a safety concern, that people should not be concerned about the rail system. It was all a cover-up.

    When I took over the shadow Transport portfolio in April last year one message came through to me time and again from everyone, both outside and inside the Carr Government, to whom I spoke. They were waiting for the big one. I said, "What do you mean, the big one?" They said they were waiting for the big rail accident that would kill people. That rail accident happened on 31 January this year. Minister Scully has been the Minister for Transport since December 1997. He has presided over a culture of intimidation and a culture of cover-up. We are seeing it again today as Justice McInerney screams at witnesses appearing before him during the current Waterfall inquiry. He does not understand why people will not co-operate with him to find out the facts of the case.

    These people will not co-operate because the Minister spent six years perfecting a culture of cover-up, a culture of intimidation, a culture of saying to anyone who pushes a safety issue, "You will lose your job." We have heard that time and again from members of the public sector, members of State Rail and train drivers. We have aired the issue in the media. After the Waterfall accident the Minister spent two months trying to blame the driver instead of acknowledging that the particular train that crashed had a history of acceleration or engine surging. Indeed, within half an hour of the Leader of the Opposition and I releasing that information on 13 February the union agreed with what we were saying.

    However, the Minister still denied that there was engine surging. He called it power loss, power failure. That was a lie. It was a lie to the people of New South Wales, it was a lie to the inquiry, and it was a lie to the Parliament of New South Wales. The Minister for Roads has perfected that culture over the past seven years. He has escaped from the Chamber this morning. Although he made his 10-minute contribution, he treats this home of democracy in New South Wales with contempt. He will not sit through the rest of the debate. [Time expired.]

    Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment) [10.55 a.m.]: The Leader of the Opposition has made certain allegations in relation to the death of an inmate in custody at the John Moroney Correctional Centre. At the outset I should say that it is vital for all members of this House to remember that this case is in the hands of the Coroner at present. Any death in custody is made the subject of a detailed investigation. At the subsequent inquest, the Coroner will hear the evidence, in public hearings, and make findings and recommendations which are widely publicised.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! Members of the Opposition will cease interjecting.

    Mr DEBUS: To rush ahead of the Coroner's findings, to purport to make conclusions about what did or did not occur in this tragic case, would be grossly improper. In advance of the Coroner's findings, my colleague the Minister for Justice has taken some firm and decisive action.

    Mr Brogden: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The Attorney General needs to advise the House on only one issue, and that is whether this individual should have been in gaol when he died. Is it yes or no? It is as simple as that.

    Mr DEBUS: Obviously there is no point of order.

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

    Mr DEBUS: The Minister for Justice directed that the following changes to procedure should be implemented immediately from 10 April this year: That all dates of release of sentenced inmates calculated as a result of a Parole Board decision be supervised by a judicial member of the Parole Board; a new process established that requires calculations to be referred to the department's Sentence Administration Branch, which is trained to calculate complicated sentences and release dates; and the Director of Sentence Administration to then sign off those calculations before resubmission to a judicial member. Once this death was known, the Minister for Justice also arranged immediately for Mr Vernon Dalton to conduct a review of the Parole Board's operations to address issues arising from the procedures in this case. That is an inquiry independent of government.

    Mr Humpherson: Point of order: In addressing the House on this matter, the Minister has an obligation not only to be fulsome in his comments but also to explain why the family of the dead inmate was not contacted and advised of the full circumstances of the death.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! What is your point of order?

    Mr Humpherson: Also, why was a woman murdered earlier this week because of the Minister's inaction? Because of his deliberate inaction, a woman is also dead. The Minister should answers those questions.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order.

    Mr DEBUS: I believe that the terms of reference for the Dalton review are known to the Parliament and can easily be identified if they are not. The Minister has taken the decision to take to Cabinet a new measure of appointing an additional judicial member to the Parole Board to ensure that a judicial member is always available for final oversight of the sentence calculation. As a consequence of these events several staff members of the Parole Board Secretariat have been stood aside pending the conclusion of the preliminary inquiry being conducted by the former Assistant Commissioner of Police, Mr Dennis Gilligan.

    The report of Mr Dalton will be forwarded to the Coroner, together with all other documentation from the department to assist him in whatever manner is necessary for the conclusion of the inquiry. There has been no cover-up in this matter. Rather, there continues to be an open process. Instead of making political points out of this tragedy, or taking absurd points of order in this House, our thoughts should be with the family of the person who is deceased. I suggest that honourable members await the findings of the Coroner before they rush to judgment. In no way has this been a cover-up. The Government is dealing with this tragedy in an open and transparent way—through an inquiry by an independent authority.

    Ms SEATON (Southern Highlands) [11.00 a.m.]: Between 9 March and 24 March, during an election campaign, thousands of commuters—residents of my area—crossed the Menangle bridge every day, trusting that the Government would have told them if it was not safe. But we now discover that for every one of those days the Government had in its possession the West report. The Government covered up vital information that compromised the lives, safety and wellbeing of thousands of people in southern New South Wales. In a disgraceful performance here this morning the former Minister for Transport tried to accuse the Opposition of lies. The only liar on this occasion on this subject is the former Minister for Transport. He called me a troublemaker when I raised rail safety issues on ABC Illawarra before the election. He was then forced to admit that the issue I had raised, which was about a derailment at Moss Vale on 24 January, was in fact true, but he had no idea. He had no interest in what was going on in his portfolio. The West report states:

    Prof. West discovered a fatigue crack approximately 35 mm in length … on 8 March 2003 … Such a gap indicates a serious and potentially dangerous change in the load distribution in the deck structure of the bridge.

    The report continues:

    The overloading is especially dangerous, and can result in unexpected, sudden failure and structural collapse . . .

    There is a strong possibility of structural fatigue failure in Menangle Bridge …

    This, in turn, would certainly lead to violent impact loads on the deck, followed by sudden catastrophic structural collapse.

    The report could not have stated the facts more clearly. On 5 March Professor West concluded in his report:
    In conclusion, it is my urgent assessment that Menangle Bridge must be closed immediately to avoid any catastrophic events.

    I seek leave to table the West report.

    Leave not granted.

    This is a cover-up. This is more evidence of a Carr Government cover-up. It does not want to know what is in the West report. It does not want to see the truth, admit it had the report and did not tell people in the Southern Highlands and in New South Wales that the bridge was dangerous. Were it not for the report being leaked to Ross Coulthart from the Channel 9 Sunday program, the bridge would still be in use in its current state. One wonders how many more reports of a similar nature are buried in other government departments. I have demanded reports from the Government about the condition of other bridges on the southern line. I want to know whether there are any more reports like this about other rail bridges in my area. Every member with railway services in their area would seek the same information. I have received nothing from the Government in response to my requests on behalf of the constituents of the Southern Highlands—no reports, information or answers.

    The bridge has been reopened with a 20 kilometre an hour speed limit. This is an admission that it is unsafe for normal operating requirements. In addition, the conclusion drawn yesterday that a new bridge is necessary reinforces the fact that the bridge is unsafe. The people of the Southern Highlands want proof that it is safe to resume operations on that bridge with the reduced axle weight and speed limit. On numerous occasions I have asked the Minister for Transport or the Government to release publicly all engineering reports, the names of engineers who endorsed the decision and the documentation on which those engineers signed-off on their safety recommendation. We have not seen any such engineering reports. It is claimed that Professor West has also endorsed the decision. We want the Government to release all documentation and proof of the so-called claimed endorsements for their decision to reopen the bridge. The people of the Southern Highlands and the travellers in this State deserve nothing less than the truth. They are not getting it from this Government.

    Mr WEST (Campbelltown) [11.05 a.m.]: Let me be clear that there has been no withdrawal of funding from orthopaedic surgery in Lismore hospital. Lismore hospital is a key provider of quality medical care in the Northern Rivers Area Health Service. The number of surgical procedures across the Northern Rivers Area Health Service has increased by 294 in the 12 months to 30 March 2003. In Lismore hospital, in the past two years the budget for orthopaedic joint surgery alone has doubled from $1 million to $2 million. The result is almost a 50 per cent increase in the number of patients to benefit from joint surgery this financial year—up from 149 in 2000-01 to 221 procedures scheduled to be completed by the end of this financial year. The Opposition conveniently left out these figures when it spoke about Lismore hospital.

    The record shows that the Northern Rivers Area Health Service was allocated $1.5 million in December last year as part of the $7.5 million rural health plan. That is a targeted five-year funding plan to reduce orthopaedic waiting lists in areas where they are needed most. The Northern Rivers Area Health Service will receive recurrent funding of just over $1 million for the remainder of that plan. We are seeing the results one would expect. Most importantly, there has been a significant reduction in the long-wait patient numbers for the entire Northern Rivers Area Health Service. These are patients who have remained on waiting lists for more than 12 months. The figure in March 2001 was 917 patients. As of March this year that figure has been reduced to 156 patients.

    There have been claims that some people in Lismore will have to wait up to four years for an operation. I am assured that this is not the case and the figures I have just presented help to back that up. I am told that in the most extreme cases the wait may be up to 15 months. However, the average waiting time for booked orthopaedic surgery in Lismore hospital is 5.3 months. I am told the claim of a four-year wait is sometimes made by a handful of orthopaedic surgeons to try to heighten their priority for theatre time. Once again I can assure the House that there has been no withdrawal of funding.

    Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! Members of the Opposition will refrain from interjecting.

    Mr WEST: It is quite normal for hospitals to schedule lower levels of elective surgery during the two-week Easter school holidays. The same applies for the Christmas period. Many health care professionals and patients choose to spend the time with family, and who would deny them that opportunity? A number of hospitals take the opportunity to complete necessary, scheduled theatre maintenance and upgrades, which are important tasks for all hospitals. I am also advised that the four orthopaedic surgeons who tendered their resignations have at no point stopped working. They continue to complete scheduled orthopaedic procedures.

    Mr Richardson: Point of order: The former Speaker ruled that members could read their speeches provided they could verify that they had prepared the material themselves. Will the honourable member for Campbelltown verify that he has prepared this speech himself about a hospital very remote from his electorate?

    Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Campbelltown is making passing reference to notes.

    Mr WEST: The Opposition wanted information and I am trying to provide the facts. Members opposite are trying to cover them up with points of order. On 16 April a meeting took place between orthopaedic surgeons from Lismore hospital and the Northern Rivers Area Health Service. The tone of the meeting was positive and constructive. The parties have agreed to examine a number of options proposed and to reconvene this month. Meanwhile, the Minister has made it clear to all area health services that consultation with health professionals is vital. The Minister has asked that area health services and individual hospitals involve doctors more closely in planning health services to avoid the types of frustrations expressed by the four surgeons at Lismore hospital.

    The doctors are key stakeholders in the provision of health care and we must ensure that they can contribute to the planning process to minimise fluctuations in health activity, particularly surgery, in the future. There has been no scandal at Lismore hospital. No money has been taken away. It has been used to provide the best-resourced orthopaedic care that the people at Lismore and the Northern Rivers Area Health Service have ever seen.

    Mr BROGDEN (Pittwater—Leader of the Opposition) [11.10 a.m.], in reply: Direct from Baghdad—the speech of the honourable member for Campbelltown is worthy of an Iraqi information Minister. As I said earlier, those sorts of performances will guarantee the honourable member a spot in Cabinet. If the honourable member for Cessnock can get in, anyone can. The former Minister for Transport made an amazing contribution. He is now absent from this Chamber and will not listen to the genuine concerns of the Opposition on this matter. Are we to believe that he knew nothing about the technical failures of the Millennium train? Are we to believe that he knew nothing about the real crisis at Menangle? Are we to trust this man?

    The Opposition does not trust the former transport Minister, nor do the people of New South Wales. More importantly, neither does the Premier. He sacked him from the transport role before we found out about Menangle and the Millennium trains. He was history and covered up during the election campaign. This culture of cover-up, which has been outlined by the Opposition today, is a demonstration of the venal behaviour of the Australian Labor Party. Its members are more than willing to put at risk the lives of people in this State in order to be re-elected. They will stop at nothing. They revel in the title of the Graham Richardson book Whatever It Takes. How can it be justified in the political life of New South Wales that whatever it takes includes endangering the lives of the people of New South Wales?

    Ms Judge: Point of order: This has nothing to do with the substance of the motion.

    Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I am sure the Leader of the Opposition will return to the substance of the motion.

    Mr BROGDEN: That was a stunning contribution; even the Minister for Gaming and Racing is laughing. In his own defence, the Minister for Roads said he relied on the briefing note. The briefing note was his get-out-of-gaol-free card. The briefing note, released by the Government, stated:

    On 5 March 2003, after a desk-top review, Professor West raised concerns with RIC that the bridge appeared to be deteriorating and was in urgent need of repair or replacement.

    Why did the former Minister not ask questions? Why did he not say that he was uncomfortable with a 20-kilometre speed limit, that people's lives could be at risk? Why did he not say that an independent expert, Professor West, had found that the bridge was in urgent need of repair or replacement? If we can believe the former Minister—and we cannot—he based his judgment on the briefing note and, later in the month, after the election, pretended to respond to media inquiries on the Sunday program on Channel 9. The Opposition does not believe the Government. The chairman of the Rail Infrastructure Corporation is Rod Simms, a former staff member of Bob Hawke—a Labor mate—who continues to chair the newly announced and restructured rail agencies of infrastructure and transport services in Sydney.

    The former Minister has a Labor mate chairing the Rail Infrastructure Corporation, an organisation that his successor, the Minister for Transport Services, has now described as corrupt—indeed, so corrupt that its management practices have now been referred to the Independent Commission Against Corruption by, in a remarkable set of circumstances, both the Opposition and the Government. Members of the Government have just been re-elected and they are wandering around New South Wales saying, "It wasn't my fault." The Minister for Health blames the former Minister and the Minister for Transport Services blames the former transport Minister. This is a continuing government, a continuing administration. We do not believe the cover-ups. There have been several cover-ups and no doubt there will be more. This Government's banality has been exercised on this occasion and the people of New South Wales will continue to be badly served by this Government. [Time expired.]

    Question—That the motion be agreed to—put.

    The House divided.
    Ayes, 31

    Mr Aplin
    Mr Armstrong
    Mr Barr
    Ms Berejiklian
    Mr Brogden
    Mr Cansdell
    Mr Constance
    Mr Debnam
    Mr Draper
    Mr Fraser
    Mrs Hancock    		Mr Hartcher
    Mr Hazzard
    Mrs Hopwood
    Mr Humpherson
    Mr Kerr
    Mr O'Farrell
    Mr Page
    Mr Piccoli
    Mr Pringle
    Mr Richardson
    Mr Roberts    		Ms Seaton
    Mrs Skinner
    Mr Slack-Smith
    Mr Souris
    Mr Tink
    Mr J. H. Turner
    Mr R. W. Turner
      Tellers,
      Mr George
      Mr Maguire
      Noes, 51

      Ms Allan
      Mr Amery
      Ms Andrews
      Mr Bartlett
      Ms Beamer
      Mr Black
      Mr Brown
      Ms Burney
      Miss Burton
      Mr Campbell
      Mr Collier
      Mr Corrigan
      Mr Crittenden
      Ms D'Amore
      Mr Debus
      Ms Gadiel
      Mr Gibson
      Mr Greene      		Ms Hay
      Mr Hickey
      Mr Hunter
      Mr Iemma
      Ms Judge
      Ms Keneally
      Mr Lynch
      Mr McBride
      Mr McLeay
      Ms Meagher
      Ms Megarrity
      Mr Mills
      Ms Moore
      Mr Morris
      Mr Newell
      Ms Nori
      Mr Orkopoulos
      Mrs Paluzzano      		Mr Pearce
      Mrs Perry
      Mr Price
      Dr Refshauge
      Ms Saliba
      Mr Sartor
      Mr Scully
      Mr Stewart
      Mr Tripodi
      Mr Watkins
      Mr West
      Mr Whan
      Mr Yeadon

      Tellers,
      Mr Ashton
      Mr Martin
      Pairs
      Mr Merton Mr Gaudry
      Mr Stoner Mr Knowles

      Question resolved in the negative.

      Motion negatived.


    Last modified 05/12/2007 16:42:47   :   Update this page