Rural Communities Impacts Bill 2007

Debate resumed from 27 September 2007.

Mr THOMAS GEORGE (Lismore) [10.30 a.m.]: I support the Rural Communities Impacts Bill 2007. I take this opportunity to congratulate the Leader of The Nationals on bringing the plight of country people again before the Parliament and on behalf of rural communities I thank him for introducing this bill. The object of the bill is to require Ministers to consider the likely impact of certain legislation and other Government proposals on rural communities. That is very, very important to people. Clause 3 of part 1 of the preliminary section of the bill sets out the scope of the proposed Act by defining "rural community" as being part of the State that is outside Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong. I have never seen that put in writing but there it is. I do not know what part of the State the rest of us are in.

Mr Gerard Martin: You're about 20 years behind, Thomas.

Mr THOMAS GEORGE: Yes, I know that. But it is good to see that finally we are trying to do something for country people. Over the past three or four sessions of this Parliament much has been said to highlight the concerns country and regional people face following everyday decisions made by this Government. Unfortunately, I do not have 24 hours to speak on these issues, although I could go on forever. The Government closed the Casino to Murwillumbah rail link, which took away the independence of many people who needed transport along that rail link. Buses have replaced the train services, but the change has had an impact on older people. They have to climb aboard a bus, unload their own luggage when they get to Casino and put it on the train. It is obvious what people think of that service now: patronage has dropped right off because the changes have created problems for many people, who now make alternative travel arrangements.

Also, the North Coast Area Health Service decided to close the rehabilitation unit at Lismore. A few beds were left in Lismore but the unit was shifted to Ballina. The rehabilitation unit at Lismore was servicing about 67 per cent of people, who were closer to the unit at Lismore than Ballina. It does not sound like such a big move to go from Lismore to Ballina—20 minutes away—but there are many people who depend on the rehabilitation unit who live west of Lismore. It is not just about the 20 or 30 minutes it takes people to get from Lismore to Ballina; it is also about the hour or hour and a half that people have to travel from Woodenbong, Urbenville, Bonalbo, Drake, Tabulam—and two and a half hours from Tenterfield—to get to Lismore, and then another half an hour to get to Ballina. That is the sort of inconvenience caused to the community at large by shifting the rehabilitation unit from Lismore to Ballina.

I know that a number of people do not have access to public transport to get to Ballina and they cannot get to the unit to see their loved ones, their family or their friends. Visits from family and friends are a very important part of rehabilitation. This issue is very close to my heart because I have had family members go through the rehabilitation unit. I commend the people who work at those rehabilitation units for doing such a fantastic job. To create extra anxiety for families in this situation is a disgrace. The impact the change has had on rural communities leaves much to be desired.

Back in 2005 this Government asked a former member of this House, the Hon Garry West, to head up an inquiry into tick fever in the cattle industry. Here we are at the end of 2007 and we still have not had an inquiry. Yes, the Government has started to act—it has disbanded the board—but what has it replaced it with? The cattle industry is suffering as a result of the inaction of this Government in relation to tick fever outbreaks. Also, communities have been hamstrung: people cannot take their horses from one paddock to another because of equine influenza. It is a very important time of the year in the cattle industry because the cows are calving, yet some producers cannot take their horse up the road to another paddock. We have a problem at this time of the year with dog tick and we are losing calves. As well, heifers are calving but they have no-one checking them.

Someone suggested that farmers should use motorbikes to check the cattle. Anyone who has been involved with the cattle industry knows that if someone takes a motorbike into a paddock of cattle that have never been mustered by motorbike and that are only used to seeing horses and dogs it certainly creates chaos. Again, the Government is not rushing to solve these problems, and the impact on our rural communities just goes on and on.

Coming back to health, country towns such as Bonalbo, Urbenville, Kyogle and Nimbin, have had hospital services transferred to Lismore. At Tweed there is the threat of services being transferred to Murwillumbah. Services are being transferred to major hospitals that cannot meet current needs. To top it off the Government is attacking older drivers and seeking to restrict them to driving a distance of only 10 kilometres. A 10-kilometre trip would not get some of my constituents out of their front gate! It is assumed that all my constituents live in the city of Lismore, but some of them must drive for 2½ hours to visit their doctor or three hours to see a specialist—and the Lismore electorate is perceived to be coastal. If older people cannot drive more than 10 kilometres they will be unable to visit their friends in hospital or see their doctor, let alone do their shopping. The Government continues to make decisions on the run without considering their impact on rural communities. I congratulate the Leader of The Nationals on introducing this important bill, which I support fully.

Mr GREG APLIN (Albury) [10.41 a.m.]: I also support the Rural Communities Impacts Bill. I supported the very same legislation in the previous Parliament and was disappointed when it was voted down. I represent a rural constituency and I know only too well that decisions made in Parliament based in Macquarie Street can often overlook the needs of residents in regional and rural areas. Such decisions often have perhaps unintended adverse effects and must be reversed. This could be avoided if the Government took more care when drafting legislation by identifying the needs of rural residents and considering the likely impact of its decisions upon them.

The object of the bill is to require Ministers to consider the likely impact of certain legislation and other government proposals on rural communities. It is interesting to note that the bill clearly defines the rural community as being that part of the State outside Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong metropolitan areas. That is significant because for too long country residents have always considered the abbreviation "NSW" as standing for those major cities and the conurbation that extends north and south from Sydney. The population of the State is 6.5 million and 4.1 million people reside in the greater Sydney area. However, when making decisions in this place the Government must consider the needs of the remainder, who live in areas that are the breadbasket and the powerhouse of New South Wales. The bill provides:

that a Minister or Government Member who intends to introduce a Bill into Parliament must ensure, before that Bill is considered by the Cabinet, that a rural communities impact statement has been prepared which provides information about the likely impact of the proposed Act on the rural community and that the Minister or Member has given consideration to that likely impact.

In my brief contribution today I will highlight some recent examples that prove that the Government has yet to appreciate why this bill should be passed. The Premier referred recently to introducing family-friendly sitting hours in this place and made the point that it would allow members to return more easily to their families and constituents in the evenings. I have news for the Premier. It is a six-hour drive to the city of Albury, which is located on the Murray River, and it would take my colleague the member for Lismore even longer to return to his electorate. There are of course no flights late at night. That statement indicates clearly that the Premier has no idea about the importance of this bill.

Parliament recently passed legislation extending the period of daylight saving. Was there any consultation about that change? There was certainly none in my electorate of Albury. During the Henty Machinery Field Days—which are an institution in our part of the world—people described to me how the extension of daylight saving would impact adversely on their lives. They explained how they would have to rise in the dark every morning—it is darker later as Albury is west of the Great Divide—and children spend an hour on buses in the early morning darkness and then endure the heat late into the afternoon and evening. I appreciate that we require uniformity in legislation but this Government does not consult with, or consider the needs of, all New South Wales residents. That is why this bill is so necessary.

I will give another example. In the past the water tank rebate was available only to those in the cities that I mentioned earlier—Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong—because of the drought affecting Sydney, the Hunter and the Illawarra. The Government took no account of the desperate need to retain water in rural areas. By introducing that rebate for city areas—where, incidentally, rainfall is higher than in inland New South Wales—the Government failed to recognise the needs of country residents. Of course all residents of New South Wales should benefit from that rebate.

Other strange anomalies could be avoided if this bill were passed. The Government made much of its introduction of the salt interception scheme in my region. The scheme worked and the money was spent wisely. But the Government then discovered that the funding had run out so the scheme ended. That decision impacted on farmers downstream who had come to rely on clean, desalinated water. The Government's failure to prepare rural communities impact statements is impacting adversely on people in rural areas. I ask the House to support the Rural Communities Impacts Bill for the benefit of the more than two million people in rural and regional New South Wales.

Mr ANDREW STONER (Oxley—Leader of The Nationals) [10.47 a.m.], in reply: I reinforce the need to pass the Rural Communities Impacts Bill. In 1996 the then Premier Bob Carr promised the people of New South Wales, particularly country New South Wales, that rural communities impact statements would be prepared before the Cabinet and Government took important decisions that had consequences for country communities. Since then the Carr and Iemma Labor governments have taken numerous decisions that have had a devastating impact on country New South Wales. I will mention just a few of them. The first is the conversion of productive forestry land into national parks. I instance the Brigalow Belt South Bioregion, the purchase of Yanga Station and the conversion of many State forest areas on the north and south coasts—the hardwood forests—and red gum forests in the State's south into national parks. These were sustainable forestry areas, where environmental and economic considerations coexisted. However, the Government, in pursuit of Green preferences, closed virtually entire timber communities across the State.

The Government has closed 4 of the 15 grain rail lines in country New South Wales. This decision has had major consequences. The price of grain freight has increased, the volume of traffic on roads has increased and the cost for local councils has increased also. The Government's closure of the Casino to Murwillumbah passenger line, which the member for Lismore mentioned, has had massive consequences for a community that already has too few public transport options. The Department of Agriculture has been attacked: it will be rolled into the Department of Primary Industries. The closure of agriculture research stations and the cuts to the department's budget have had a massive impact on support for farming in this State and therefore on local economies. The Productivity Commission has demonstrated that the Native Vegetation Act has had a massive impact on farmers' incomes and the value of their properties.

The Threatened Species Conservation Act has had a similar impact. In addition, this Government has closed 32 of the State's 67 small maternity wards in rural areas. Expectant mothers are forced to travel long distances—for up to three hours in some instances—to have their babies, and tragedies have occurred as a result. The Government has also dramatically cut the area health service regime. As a result, agencies such as the Greater Western Area Health Service now cater to areas larger than Germany, which, again, has a negative impact. People in the Hunter-New England area have been denied access to health service management because it is now located in Newcastle.

More recent decisions made by this Government demonstrate that rural communities impact statements have not been prepared. TAFE fees have increased by 9 per cent—which is 6.5 per cent greater than the CPI increase—which has had a massive impact on country communities. Many residents of country communities do not have access to universities or other forms of higher education, so TAFE is crucial to them. The member for Lismore mentioned older drivers and the nonsensical 10-kilometre driving limit. On many properties in the far west the front gate or the neighbour's property is much more than 10 kilometres away. That proposal is yet another demonstration that this Government is not considering rural communities.

The member for Albury mentioned the extension of daylight saving. There has been no consultation about that proposal, and the impact on western communities—the communities at the margin—would be considerable. The scandal being played out about public health in New South Wales has revealed that this Government has closed accommodation provided for patients and their families travelling from country areas to Royal North Shore Hospital or Royal Prince Alfred Hospital. Those people must now jump on a bus and go down the road to a motel. When did this Government consider the impact on country people who are forced to travel away from home and family because of illness requiring attendance at a major Sydney hospital? Being virtually cast to the wind and having to make their own accommodation arrangements is causing more problems for these already stressed people. This Government's reputation as the most Sydney-centric government in the history of New South Wales is well deserved on the back of that raft of anti-country decisions.

A couple of weeks ago the Premier and the Minister for Roads announced that $7 billion would be spent on more road works in Sydney. That is in addition to the work on the Lane Cove Tunnel, the Cross City Tunnel, the M7, the western Sydney orbital and so on. There are plenty of road works in Sydney, but this Government is dragging the chain on the Pacific Highway and people are being killed. Banora Point and Sextons Hill—which are in the electorate of the member for Tweed—are the most dangerous spots on any road in New South Wales but this Government still has not repaired them. The Bells Line Expressway has been proposed to provide a decent, safe route to the food bowl of the Central West, but this Government refuses to fund it. Despite the fact that it is a State road, the Commonwealth Government has stepped in to fund the studies required for the project to be undertaken. The Princes Highway to the South Coast is another case in point.

This Government has only one Cabinet member who genuinely hails from outside its version of "NSW"—Newcastle, Sydney and Wollongong. I refer to the Hon. Tony Kelly, who is from Wellington. He is not a bad fellow, but his colleagues are going to bump him out of the Parliament next year and bring in the Premier's chief of staff, disgraced former Queensland member of Parliament Mike Kaiser. He will hardly go in to bat for country communities. This is a Sydney-centric Government and it needs help to consider the impact of its decisions on country New South Wales. Although "NSW" might stand for Newcastle, Sydney and Wollongong for the Labor Party; for The Nationals it stands for North Coast, South Coast and west of the Divide. That is what this bill is all about.

Most country-based members have made a contribution to this debate. I thank the members for Hawkesbury, Burrinjuck, Monaro, Bega, Port Stephens, Tamworth, Dubbo, Murray-Darling, Barwon, Bathurst, Ballina, Lismore and Albury. They offered almost unanimous support for the bill. I say "almost" because two of them have let the side down and effectively betrayed country people and the people they represent. I refer to the member for Bathurst and the member for Monaro.

Mr Thomas George: Country Labor!

Mr ANDREW STONER: They are the two so-called country members in this place. Two Country Labor members departed at the last election because this Government continues to ignore country people. The two remaining will soon be heading in the same direction if they do not support this bill. I know that they risk disendorsement if they cross the floor, but is it not more important to be able to look at themselves in the mirror or to sleep well at night? I suggest that the members for Bathurst and Monaro buck the system and the Labor Party and support their country brethren—the Independents, The Nationals and the Liberals. After all, this bill is simply a codification of Bob Carr's 1996 promise. It is necessary to force State governments of either persuasion to consider the interests of country New South Wales. The concept of the bill is simple: it will ensure that impact statements are prepared. It represents democracy in action and it will also ensure that State governments govern for the entire State. I commend the bill to the House.

Question—That this bill be now agreed to in principle—put.

The House divided.


Question resolved in the negative.

Motion negatived.

Bill not agreed to in principle.