1. Home
  2. Hansard & Papers
  3. Legislative Assembly
  4. 25 February 2004
Contact Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

Consideration of Urgent Motions

Printing Tips | Print selected text | Full Day Hansard Transcript         « Prior Item | Item 23 of 41 | Next Item »

About this Item
Subjects -  Banks; Wheat and Grain; Railways; Freight
Speakers - Martin Mr Gerard; Speaker; Stoner Mr Andrew
Business - Consideration of Urgent Motion, Division
Commentary - Procedural Debate to Determine Precedence


    CONSIDERATION OF URGENT MOTIONS
Page: 6585


    Rural Automatic Teller Machine Fees

    Mr GERARD MARTIN (Bathurst) [3.23 p.m.]: The matter I have raised—

    Mr Andrew Stoner: Point of order: The point of order relates to section 164 of the standing orders, which provides that the same question is not to be put again. The honourable member for Bathurst introduced a motion last Thursday addressing the same issue he seeks to address today. There has been only a minor change in today's motion; it is essentially the same motion and should not be debated again.

    Mr GERARD MARTIN: To the point of order: I have a copy of last week's motion, which was terminated because of time constraints, and I also have today's motion. Although it deals generally with the issue of rural fees, it is substantially different in wording.

    Mr Andrew Stoner: It is the same motion.

    Mr GERARD MARTIN: It is not the same motion. We are talking about a development. This issue is even more urgent because we now have information that the Australian Bankers Association [ABA] is drafting a submission to the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Corporations and Financial Services inquiry. Circumstances have changed and there are significant differences between the two motions. What the Leader of The Nationals is saying is rubbish.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard enough. Although I agree with the honourable member for Bathurst that the motion is different to the motion he moved last Thursday, that is immaterial to the matter to be determined in the point of order. The motion moved last week by the honourable member for Bathurst lapsed. No determination was made by the House, and he is therefore at liberty to move the motion of which he has given notice today, should the House determine that it should have priority. Indeed, if he wanted to do so he would be at liberty to move the same motion he moved last Thursday.

    Mr GERARD MARTIN: The Leader of The Nationals should read the standing orders again.

    Mr Andrew Stoner: Point of order: The point of order relates to section 71 of the standing orders, which states:

    71. In the House a Member may only speak once to a question, except:

    (1) The Member in charge of the Order of the Day when the order is read.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Leader of The Nationals would do himself a favour if he studied the standing orders. He should be aware that Standing Order 71 relates to a member speaking only once during the same debate.

    Mr GERARD MARTIN: The Leader of The Nationals says he does not want to hear this again. This is about looking after people in rural areas. He thinks there will be some implied criticism of the Federal Government. The New South Wales Government is looking for bipartisan support. This motion is urgent because the submission is on the table and the parliamentary committee is making a recommendation that, if it were passed and the ABA and all the other banking organisations agreed with it, could have a severe impact on people in rural areas. Honourable members opposite should support the Government on this issue. The honourable member for Willoughby is a classic—whenever she hears implied criticism of the banks she is on her feet.

    The honourable member for Epping was in a time warp and took us back to 1989. The honourable member for Lachlan and other honourable members opposite stood up one after another and apologised to the banks for the Farm Debt Mediation Bill and said that the legislation should not be passed because it would hurt bank profits. Honourable members opposite have a history in this area and we will expose the honourable member for Willoughby if she enters this debate. This motion is urgent because the submission is on the table now. This Parliament should make a strong statement. Country Labor will not let this issue die. I ask honourable members opposite to support the Government rather than sit doing nothing. They can do whatever they like.

    Grain Infrastructure Advisory Committee Report

    Mr ANDREW STONER (Oxley—Leader of The Nationals) [3.28 p.m.]: My motion is urgent because country New South Wales is facing a crisis in relation to grain rail lines. That crisis is severely impacting not only on farmers but also on their communities, road users and local government ratepayers. The motion is urgent because the public has had just over one month to comment on Labor's Grain Infrastructure Advisory Committee report. The report has recommended the closure of three lines: Gwabegar to Binnaway; Burcher to West Wyalong; and Willbriggie to Yanco. Lines that have their fate in the balance in the report are: Weemelah to Camurra; Warren to Nevertire; Lake Cargelligo to Ungarie; Rankins Springs to Barmedman; Hillston to Griffith; Boree Creek to The Rock; and Greenethorpe to Koorawatha. That is, at least 10 grain rail lines across New South Wales face closure under this Labor Government.

    Mr Alan Ashton: Point of order: The Leader of The Nationals has been a member of this place for long enough to know that he is not simply arguing the case for urgency. He is presuming that the Opposition has won the debate on urgency and he is proceeding to debate the subject matter of the motion. I ask you to direct him to state why his motion is more urgent than the motion of the honourable member for Bathurst.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of The Nationals has been a member of this House long enough to understand the standing orders.

    Mr ANDREW STONER: My motion is urgent because industry has shown strong support for rail and believes it should be the preferred option. It is urgent because the rail-road task force green paper of the New South Wales Farmers Association estimated that an additional 79,000 trucks a year, loaded with grain, would use country roads if adequate maintenance were not conducted on restricted and branch lines. The poor state of these small grain lines contributes to increased freight costs, and it therefore acts as a disincentive for growers to transport grain on them.

    The motion is urgent because restricted lines alone account for 40 per cent of total production and 67 per cent of grain destined for export. The Grain Infrastructure and Advisory Committee [GIAC] report highlights Labor's appalling failure over the past nine years to invest in grain rail lines across New South Wales. The report provides further confirmation that the high cost of maintaining restricted lines has been caused by Labor's fix-when-fail maintenance policy, which is estimated to cost only $8 million a year.

    Mr Alan Ashton: Point of order: The Leader of The Nationals is again presuming that his motion will succeed. Only when I took the previous point of order did the honourable member mention the word "urgent". I ask you to direct him to state why his motion is more urgent than that of the honourable member for Bathurst.

    Mr SPEAKER: Order! I heard the Leader of The Nationals say that the motion is urgent. He has the call.

    Mr ANDREW STONER: The report states that for the lines to remain in service they must be restored by way of more intensive works and the implementation of a periodic, preventive maintenance regime.

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

    Mr ANDREW STONER: The motion is urgent because years of neglect of our rail lines has resulted in a crumbling system that mirrors much of the infrastructure in country and coastal New South Wales for which the New South Wales Labor Government is responsible. Freight trains on some restricted and branch lines are limited to speeds of only 15 to 20 kilometres per hour, with speed limits down to 8 kilometres per hour across some bridges. The use of some lines is possible only at night.

    My motion is urgent because the methodology used in the report to reach the road costing figures is highly questionable. The GIAC report also costs just one road in each area as the future grain route for all heavy vehicles if a rail line is closed. This seems absurd, given that trucks will take whatever path is necessary in country regions. The motion is urgent because there is absolute confusion over Labor's position on its Broadacre project. On the one hand, Labor's chief rail bureaucrat, Vince Graham, is saying that the money for the project would be better diverted to other areas. It is interesting to contrast that point of view with Minister Scully's statement to this House in 2002 that "I am happy to defend Project Broadacre."

    My motion is urgent because there are so many questions to be answered in relation to the funding of rural rail infrastructure. We need this information to have an informed public debate. Following the privatisation of FreightCorp, Labor allocated money to upgrade and maintain the country rail network, but not a cent of this money was to be spent on restricted lines. In fact, it is almost impossible to ascertain where this promised money is going, or indeed whether it is being spent. The motion is urgent because an agreement has been struck for the Australian Rail Track Corporation to manage the country branch rail network in New South Wales as part of a broader rail agreement between the Federal and State governments. This matter is extremely urgent for country and coastal New South Wales. It is an opportunity for the Country Labor faction to cross the floor and support The Nationals in securing a better deal for country New South Wales. [Time expired.]

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

    The House divided.
    Ayes, 49
    Ms Allan
    Mr Amery
    Ms Andrews
    Ms Beamer
    Mr Black
    Mr Brown
    Ms Burney
    Miss Burton
    Mr Campbell
    Mr Collier
    Mr Corrigan
    Mr Crittenden
    Ms D'Amore
    Mr Debus
    Ms Gadiel
    Mr Gaudry
    Mr Gibson
    Mr Greene
    Ms Hay
    Mr Hickey
    Mr Hunter
    Ms Judge
    Ms Keneally
    Mr Knowles
    Mr Lynch
    Mr McBride
    Mr McLeay
    Ms Meagher
    Ms Megarrity
    Mr Mills
    Mr Morris
    Mr Newell
    Ms Nori
    Mr Orkopoulos
    Mrs Paluzzano
    Mr Pearce
    Mrs Perry
    Mr Price
    Dr Refshauge
    Mr Sartor
    Mr Scully
    Mr Shearan
    Mr Stewart
    Mr Tripodi
    Mr Watkins
    Mr Whan
    Mr Yeadon
      Tellers,
      Mr Ashton
      Mr Martin

      Noes, 36
      Mr Aplin
      Mr Armstrong
      Mr Barr
      Ms Berejiklian
      Mr Cansdell
      Mr Constance
      Mr Debnam
      Mr Draper
      Mr Fraser
      Mrs Hancock
      Mr Hazzard
      Ms Hodgkinson
      Mrs Hopwood
      Mr Humpherson
      Mr Kerr
      Mr McGrane
      Mr Merton
      Ms Moore
      Mr O'Farrell
      Mr Oakeshott
      Mr Page
      Mr Piccoli
      Mr Pringle
      Mr Richardson
      Mr Roberts
      Ms Seaton
      Mrs Skinner
      Mr Slack-Smith
      Mr Souris
      Mr Stoner
      Mr Tink
      Mr Torbay
      Mr J. H. Turner
      Mr R. W. Turner
        Tellers,
        Mr George
        Mr Maguire

        Pairs
        Mr BartlettMr Brogden
        Ms Saliba Mr Hartcher

        Question resolved in the affirmative.

        Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Newcastle to order. I call the honourable member for Lake Macquarie to order.


      Last modified 05/12/2007 16:33:10   :   Update this page