Full Day Hansard Transcript (Legislative Assembly, 14 May 1997, Corrected Copy)

Mr Speaker (The Hon. John Henry Murray) took the chair at 10.00 a.m.

Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr WHELAN (Ashfield - Minister for Police), on behalf of Mr Knight [10.00 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The primary purpose of this bill is to add new provisions to the Unclaimed Money Act 1995 to regulate unclaimed money held by superannuation funds and approved deposit funds. The legislation is complementary to that of the Commonwealth and similar to that introduced or proposed by other States and Territories. It is designed to enable the superannuation industry to adopt a common procedure in its dealings with the various jurisdictions and thereby facilitate their compliance with legislation in each jurisdiction. The bill will require trustees that are companies registered under the New South Wales Corporations Law and trustees who are natural persons and who carry on business primarily within New South Wales to pay unclaimed superannuation benefits to New South Wales rather than to the Australian Taxation Office.

Most other States and Territories will introduce similar legislation, with similar nexus provisions, so that a particular fund will be required to return unclaimed benefits to only one jurisdiction. In those jurisdictions which do not have complementary legislation containing provisions specified in the Commonwealth’s Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act, unclaimed benefits will have to be paid to the Australian Taxation Office. The Commonwealth Act defines when a superannuation benefit becomes unclaimed and, for consistency, this definition is applied by the amendments in this bill. Under the Commonwealth Act, an amount becomes an unclaimed superannuation benefit when the member reaches the eligibility age for an age pension and, under the governing rules of the fund, the benefit is immediately payable to the member, but the member has not applied to the trustee to have the money paid or the trustee is unable to locate the member.

The amendments require superannuation funds and approved deposit funds to pay to the Chief Commissioner of State Revenue any unclaimed benefits which become unclaimed during each six-month period ending on 30 June and 31 December of each year, with payment required by the following 31 October and 30 April respectively. The first return will be due on or before 31 October 1997. New South Wales will maintain an unclaimed money register for the purpose of processing claims from beneficiaries for the repayment of benefits. The bill includes provisions requiring details of unclaimed amounts of more than $50 to be published in the Government Gazette. In view of the limited circulation of the gazette, arrangements will also be made to ensure that publicity is provided through the press so that potential claimants are aware of how they can determine whether they are entitled to any unclaimed superannuation benefits. This will ensure that beneficiaries are given every opportunity to reclaim benefits to which they are entitled.

The Chief Commissioner of State Revenue is also the Chief Commissioner of Unclaimed Money and is therefore responsible for the administration of the Unclaimed Money Act. The bill removes an element of duplication by abolishing the Office of Chief Commissioner of Unclaimed Money and giving responsibility for administration of the Act directly to the Office of Chief Commissioner of State Revenue. The amendments also apply relevant provisions of the Taxation Administration Act, which already applies or will shortly apply to all the Acts administered by the Chief Commissioner of State Revenue. The application of the relevant provisions of the Taxation Administration Act will minimise administration and compliance costs for holders of unclaimed money, including both superannuation funds and other enterprises which are currently subject to the Unclaimed Money Act. As New South Wales taxpayers both groups will be familiar with the requirements of the Taxation Administration Act.

Page 8569

The application of the interest and penalty provisions of the Tax Administration Act means that trustees and enterprises that fail to lodge returns by the due date or lodge incorrect returns will be liable to pay interest and penalties. In order to ensure that the actions of a trustee or an enterprise do not impact adversely on the amount of superannuation benefits or other unclaimed money payable to beneficiaries, the bill provides that a trustee or an enterprise may not deduct interest or penalties from an amount payable to a beneficiary and, in the case of a trustee, may not recover such amounts from administration or management fees - that is, the trustee or enterprise will be required to bear such costs from its own resources. I commend the bill to the House and table a summary of its provisions.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Phillips.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr WHELAN (Ashfield - Minister for Police) [10.07 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

This bill contains a package of reforms directed towards the procedure by which trials on indictment are conducted in the District Court and the Supreme Court. Some of them are in the nature of fine-tuning procedures that have shown themselves to be troublesome in the past; others are substantial changes to the way in which trials are conducted. All of them are valuable, and all of them maintain the proper balancing of the rights of the parties in serious criminal matters. In summary, the bill makes the procedure when accused persons plead guilty during a trial less cumbersome, introduces a means of clarifying at an early stage the real issues to be placed before the jury, permits the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to better manage the business of that court, permits criminal trials to be conducted more efficiently by way of resolution of legal issues before the empanelling of the jury and removes a restriction on the rules committee of the District Court.

By way of background, may I say that trial procedure in New South Wales has some very ancient sources, stretching back many hundreds of years. Given this weight of history, changing the system should be done in a careful and considered way. On the other hand, that does not mean that the way in which we conduct trials must be seen as something immutable and written in stone. This bill is a reflection of the approach of the Government - reform that is careful, constructive and beneficial. I turn now to a detailed analysis of the provisions of this bill. Schedule 1, item [1], inserts section 399A into the Crimes Act 1900. It amends a somewhat formal procedure. Currently, once the accused is placed in the charge of the jury, only the jury may bring down a verdict and thereby end the trial.

Accordingly, if the accused changes his or her plea from not guilty to guilty during the course of the trial, the accused must be rearraigned and plead guilty before the jury. The judge thereupon directs the jury to bring down a verdict of guilty. This procedure is rather time-wasting and, no doubt, sometimes a little confusing for jurors. The amendment vests a power in the judge to accept a plea of guilty in the course of the proceedings without the involvement of the jury. The judge can discharge the jury from giving a verdict and find the accused guilty. It is important to note that the finding of the judge will have the same effect as if it were the verdict of the jury. It should also be noted that the bill is wide enough to permit a plea to be taken on a charge by way of the new procedure even though the accused was not originally arraigned on that charge. It is not uncommon for an accused to plead guilty to an alternative charge in the course of a trial, and the bill is intended to apply this procedure to such an event.

The next aspect of the bill constitutes a very significant step forward in trial procedure. The accused is given, by schedule 1[3] of the bill, which amends section 402 of the Crimes Act and inserts a new section 405, the option of making an early opening address on trial issues. Counsel for the accused - or the accused if unrepresented - may exercise that option immediately after the opening of the Crown case by the prosecutor. The address of the accused is to be limited generally to all or any of the matters disclosed in the prosecutor’s opening address that are or are not in dispute and to the matters to be raised by the defence. The idea is to give the accused the option of identifying, right at the start of the trial, the real issues in the trial. That will be of value to all concerned, not least the jury, who will be able to observe all of the evidence from the very beginning, with the real issues of dispute firmly in mind.

It is important to grasp that it is entirely at the accused’s discretion whether or not to make the new address, just as it is currently entirely at his or her discretion to decide whether or not to open his or her case if calling evidence, and whether or not to
Page 8570
address the jury at the end of the trial. Furthermore, the making of the new address does not preclude the accused from opening his or her case if calling evidence for the defence. That is appropriate for two reasons. First, the two addresses are rather different in their general natures, though there may be some overlap in practice. One foreshadows the issues in the whole trial; the other foreshadows the evidence to be called by the accused. Second, the exercise of the option of making the new address, bearing in mind that it will be to the benefit of all, should be encouraged, rather than made into something that would only be done by the accused after a tactical cost-benefit analysis.

The opportunity has also been taken to simplify the layout of the provisions in the Crimes Act relating to addresses by the accused. An opening address by the accused on trial issues will help to crystallise which issues are in dispute. It will enable the jury to be in a better position to appreciate the significance of the evidence as it is given throughout the trial, and particularly in the prosecution case. Furthermore, it will allow the prosecution and judge to focus upon those matters which are genuinely in dispute. I hope that honourable members will agree that this measure is a valuable and worthwhile reform to the criminal justice system from the point of view of all concerned.

Schedule 2[1] introduces an administrative reform by way of inserting section 16A into the Criminal Procedure Act 1986. It allows the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to issue a practice note directing that indictments of a particular class are to be presented in the District Court rather than the Supreme Court, unless the Chief Justice approves of a particular indictment of that class being presented in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court may reject an indictment that is presented in the Supreme Court in contravention of such a practice note. This amendment will ensure that only those matters which, by their nature, should be heard before the Supreme Court are so heard, and that all other cases are dealt with by the District Court. It will give the Chief Justice greater control over which criminal matters are heard in the Supreme Court.

The bill inserts new section 19 into the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, which gives both the Supreme Court and the District Court clear authority to conduct trial proceedings after presentation of the indictment and the arraignment of the accused, and before the jury is empanelled. It is vital to grasp, with regard to this aspect of the bill, that it does not introduce some separate regime of pre-trial hearings. The point is that the trial itself commences, and all the rights and obligations vested in the parties and the trial judge apply at that stage just as much as they do after the jury is empanelled. The reform allows for the presentation of the indictment before the jury is empanelled, in order to allow for those matters in the trial that are not for the jury to be dealt with at that stage. There are many kinds of matters that could be appropriately dealt with in this way. An example is a voir dire examination held to determine whether evidence has been obtained illegally and, if so, whether the discretion of the judge should be exercised to include it.

The accused is to be arraigned again when the jury is empanelled for the purpose of continuing the trial. This reform may not seem like much at first blush, but it will have very substantial benefits in practice. It is not uncommon for a criminal trial to start by way of the empanelling of a jury of 12 citizens, only to have them sent away for a period of hours, days or even weeks so that legal issues may be determined. This reform does away with the need for any such procedure. It has the potential to save a lot of time, money and inconvenience. It should be noted that this reform is not intended to affect the procedure in the District Court whereby an arraignment hearing is held shortly after committal to that court. This reform is directed to trials themselves. I stress that this reform does not establish some cumbersome system of pre-trial hearings. It achieves the same aim of resolving issues before the involvement of a jury by a better method.

Finally, schedule 3 amends section 171 of the District Court Act 1973. The amendment removes the requirement that certain procedural rules made by the rules committee of the District Court must be approved in writing by the Attorney General. A comparable provision does not exist regarding the Supreme Court. It is appropriate to empower the rules committee of the District Court without the oversight of the Attorney General. In conclusion, may I say that these procedural reforms are by no means nibbles at the edges of the criminal justice system, nor are they the half-baked, publicity-seeking exercises that the Opposition engages in every so often by way of its ill-thought-through private members’ bills about criminal law. On the contrary, this bill contains some detailed, workable, commonsense changes to criminal procedure. They have the potential to assist very much in the administration of justice. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Kerr.

Page 8571

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr WHELAN (Ashfield - Minister for Police) [10.16 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The main purpose of the bill is to introduce a statutory scheme which will empower the Supreme Court to make an order to recover the costs of a criminal trial which has been aborted because of a contemptuous publication. Let me paint in a little of the background so that honourable members will understand why the scheme is important.

Mr Debnam: Who’s writing your speeches, Paul?

Mr WHELAN: Do you like them?

Mr Debnam: There was a "blush" in the previous speech and now you’re painting a picture. This is a new Whelan.

Mr WHELAN: I am trying to use simple terms so that Opposition members can understand me. I am using words of no more than five letters. A criminal trial may be aborted, that is, stopped midstream if the trial judge is of the view that comments by the media have prejudiced the fair trial of the accused. Consequently a second criminal trial may be restarted at a later time. Our legal system regards the actions of the contemner so seriously that he or she will be brought to account in a criminal prosecution for the contempt. The term "contemner" refers to the person who is, or who is alleged to be, guilty of contempt. A contemner may have a variety of roles in a publication, perhaps as the broadcaster, writer, editor or publisher of the offending media material.

At present the purpose of the criminal contempt prosecution is to punish the contemner for his or her interference with the administration of justice. In New South Wales these proceedings are usually commenced by the Attorney General, and that procedure is not altered by the bill. What the bill proposes is to make the media contemner who is ultimately responsible for a publication - that is the organisation - pay for the costs of the aborted trial. The Australian Law Reform Commission supports the type of scheme proposed by the bill, as do a number of judges. In the absence of such a scheme it is very unclear how those involved in the original trial could recover their losses from the contemner. The losses I am speaking about are the costs of running a criminal trial: legal fees, and salaries and expenses of the private legal profession, of the Legal Aid Commission, of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the police, of the accused and of the State itself, which must provide the court and its staff.

Why should the community have to bear the economic losses which have been caused by the contemptuous actions of the media? The introduction of a scheme to recover costs from contemners will make it easier for innocent parties to recoup their losses and - by sending a message to the hip pocket of potential media contemners - hopefully encourage more responsible media reporting. I intend to speak now about the key features of the proposed scheme. First, the Supreme Court may make an order for repayment of the costs of the original trial only if the contemner has been prosecuted for the contempt and the contempt has been found proven. Second, the court will have a complete discretion to determine whether or not an order should be made and, if so, the amount to be paid to each party which suffered a loss as a result of the contempt. Third, when determining the amount of the costs order, the court may award an amount up to that applied for in a certificate of costs signed by the Attorney General. The Attorney General will prepare his or her certificate according to a schedule of costs set by regulation.

Fourth, if there are a number of contemners, the court may apportion the costs order. Fifth, only the Attorney will be permitted to seek costs on behalf of those who have suffered a monetary loss. Once an order has been made and moneys have been paid by the contemner, the Attorney will distribute the moneys for the benefit of those who have suffered a loss. Sixth, the Attorney’s certificate is conclusive evidence of the parties’ costs. Seventh, the proposed costs scheme will be civil in nature, although the prosecution will remain criminal in nature. Thus the Supreme Court’s order will be enforceable as a civil debt, should the contemner decline to pay, and breach of the order will not result in a criminal sanction, such as a gaol term.

Eighth, if the original accused has been paid a sum of money under the Suitors’ Fund Act 1951, the Supreme Court can order the contemner to repay that sum of money direct to the fund. If the original accused has received money from the Suitors’ Fund and via a Supreme Court costs order, the Attorney General is entitled to recover the Suitors’ Fund moneys from the original accused. The need for
Page 8572
such a scheme has been highlighted in a number of high profile trials which have been aborted by media publications. As a result of the media’s actions, individuals and the community have suffered an economic loss; the resolution of the matter is delayed; the witnesses must go through the process yet again at the retrial; and the time and effort of the legal profession, the police and the court have been wasted. The scheme proposed by the bill will let those economic losses lie with those responsible: the media contemners. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Kerr.

Debate resumed from 13 May.

Mr R. W. TURNER (Orange) [10.23 a.m.]: I wish to speak about the effects of the budget on my electorate. Yesterday the Minister for Agriculture promised that the initiatives of the Carr Government would be welcomed, but I assure honourable members that the budget was lacklustre, with no great initiatives for regional development and rural New South Wales. Some rural concessions were made but they were increases, not decreases, such as the increases in stamp duty, health insurance, car insurance and land tax. The list goes on. Positive answers were not given about the transferral of government departments beyond an airy-fairy promise that up to 400 positions could be transferred to the bush at some time. No detail was given, however, of the location to which the positions might be transferred or when that might occur.

It was intimated that the transfer might relate to the Department of Land and Water Conservation. If and when that occurs, I will commend the Government. The department should have been decentralised a long time ago, as should the Department of Bush Fire Services. I expressed my interest in that regard, but as soon as I initiated debate on the issue the Commissioner for Bush Fire Services, Mr Koperberg, quickly took out a further five-year lease on the building at Rosehill and quashed any plans. That shows the Government’s lack of commitment to regional development by transferring government departments to rural areas. Staff, family and services could easily be transferred to the bush. Last year the Government routed the Department of Agriculture, resulting in the spending of an amazing $200 million on redundancy packages. However, the department panicked when it realised that it had made too many positions redundant and tried to rehire inexperienced staff.

Imagine what could have been done with that $200 million had it been distributed to rural areas for worthwhile projects rather than being used for a restructuring exercise that went amok. Though that is in the past, the budget does not redress the problems in rural areas. The bed tax to be imposed under the budget has also caused much discussion. Yesterday the Minister for the Environment and her colleagues were obsessed with the view that only tourists use hotels in the central business district. They are wrong. They have no concept of the many people from rural New South Wales and interstate who spend one or two days in hotels in Sydney's central business district on business trips or to attend medical facilities that are not available in the bush. Others visit Sydney to attend court as witnesses or as participants in court cases that affect them personally. As well, the Country Women’s Association, the New South Wales Farmers Association and other smaller organisations for convenience sake hold their conferences in the CBD.

The Labor Party is also under the illusion that only the rich can afford to stay in luxury hotels in the CBD and that it does not matter to them if the price increases from $200 to $210 or from $300 to $330. People from the bush come to the city for various reasons and can no more afford the cost of those hotel beds than anyone else. However, they are being forced to stay in expensive hotels because of the facilities they offer. The Government has forgotten that not only luxury hotels are located in the CBD but also many two-star hotels and places such as the Young Women’s Christian Association and backpackers hostels. Their facilities will also be affected.

Mr Langton: Backpackers and youth hostels are exempted.

Mr R. W. TURNER: That is good. I congratulate the Government on that initiative for
Page 8573
this year. We will see what happens next year and how far the net is broadened.

Mr Langton: Orange is safe.

Mr R. W. TURNER: Orange is safe for the time being. We will see. I refer now to the $50 payment for every child who attends school. Orange has received considerable media coverage and conducted the usual opinion polls around the town. The published results of the polls show that although families were of the view that it would be of benefit to them, they doubted the motives behind the scheme. It would have been preferable for that money to be directed into school infrastructure, which would benefit parents paying school fees. Few people do not pay a fee of some sort to the local school and generally those fees are aimed at supplying infrastructure. One high school in Orange is in the process of constructing a gymnasium and sporting and wet weather areas. The parents and citizens association has decided that the facilities could be virtually doubled at an additional cost of $140,000. However, the Government was not prepared to allocate extra funding so the parents and citizens association has decided to raise that funding itself.

Over the next two or three years all the efforts of that association will go towards raising money for that hall rather than the usual little things that can be purchased through canteen profits, such as a sun shelter, a few more computers or improvements to gymnasium facilities. All of those little things will be missing for the next two or three years. Some of the estimated $55 million cost from these payments to parents could be put into real infrastructure for that school. Another high school at Orange has waited more than 20 years to get a permanent library to replace the demountable classroom now used as its library. Infrastructure of that type would last for generations.

Of course, some needy people will benefit from the $50 payment for each child of the family that attends school, but its intended use will be offset by many families putting that $50 into their pockets and misusing it. The general feeling of the Orange community and its outlying areas is that the $50 payment, or the $55 million total cost, could have been put to far better use. In my electorate the general opinion is that each year, but particularly in 1999, it will be handed out to catch votes. A constituent rang me to discuss the unique circumstances of Canowindra High School. The school is set in 35 to 40 acres but, because it does not have more than 500 students, funds are provided to employ a gardener for only 2½ days a week.

A gardener cannot look after 35 acres of lawns and intensive areas around the school in 2½ days. The school has desperately applied for an exemption to this limitation of funds in an attempt to have the gardener employed full time. Rather than frittering away $50 for each child attending that school, it would be an added benefit for the Government to allocate extra funding for that gardener. Whilst some people in the area welcomed this $50 payment, the majority considered it a waste and said that the funds should have been diverted to far more efficient ways to benefit local schools.

The electricity levy mentioned in the budget is expected to raise $100 million. I was a former board member of Ophir Electricity before it amalgamated with four other councils to form Advance Electricity. Just prior to the merger, funds were allocated to enable electricity prices to our rural consumers to be dropped by approximately 5 per cent. However, as soon as the Government came to office it quashed that plan, disallowed the discount and merged the councils. I agree with the broad principles of that decision; things have worked well and there have been genuine cost savings. The coalition probably would have come to the same decision. However, after the amalgamation the Government started taking dividends.

In the first 12 months the dividend amounted to some $30 million. The new levy is another form of dividend to allow the Government to extract a further $100 million. If the budget had not required the payment of that dividend one would assume that the extra savings could have been passed on as lower electricity tariffs. Instead the Government introduced this other tax. People in rural areas will again be disadvantaged because of the cost of installing electricity wires over long distances. Customers in cities like Orange and in the main metropolitan areas of Sydney will be able to obtain individual electricity supplies and negotiate tariffs with various authorities, but consumers in rural areas generally will not have that same facility. Again they will be disadvantaged.

Another disappointing aspect of the budget is the lack of commitment to New South Wales roads. I shall refer later to the Great Western Highway, but noticeably the Government once again did not allocate funds for the Orange bypass. Funding for the construction of the Orange bypass was a Labor Party election promise in a previous election campaign, but when Labor came to government it pulled out of that promise. The budget makes no provision for the bypass and I am sure the next budget will not provide for it. The construction of the Orange bypass has faded into the distance.

Page 8574

Mr Langton: You will have to wait and see.

Mr R. W. TURNER: I will wait and see, but I will not hold my breath. Another interesting aspect of the budget relates to Cargo Road, which is where my home is situated. One particular section of the road is approximately 35 years old and is in a disgraceful state. Though the previous Government finished sealing the road beyond that section, its condition has been aggravated because double the number of cars and triple the number of heavy vehicles are now using it. Timber trucks also use it to cart timber from the maturing forests in the area. The road is absolutely dangerous. I commend the council for spending a couple of hundred thousand dollars this year from grants to install bus bays on that road. Two school buses use that road but at most stops the buses cannot pull off to the side of the road to pick up or set down passengers.

Timber trucks carrying full loads hurtle around a corner and are confronted with a school bus parked on the road because there is no facility for it to pull off to the side. The council has constructed two or three bus bays on the most dangerous section of the road, but it does not have $1,000 to complete the bays by sealing them. This only exacerbates the lack of funding because the council has to continually regrade the bays. This road is one of the main vital routes between Orange and Canberra, yet the Government has not given its commitment to upgrade it for the safety of the children and others who use it. Over the last few years the volume of traffic has increased considerably.

It appears that no-one seems to have a commitment to improve the Great Western Highway. This major highway is being upgraded bit by bit to four lanes. Anyone who has travelled that road in the last few years will have noticed some improvements to sections of it passing through towns and villages. At the present progress rate it will be 20 or 30 years before it is finally upgraded. It is a sad indictment on all governments, past and present, that the Great Western Highway still passes within a few metres of a tree marked by Blaxland, Lawson and Wentworth when they crossed the Blue Mountains in 1813. That tree is only metres from the highway. [Extension of time agreed to.]

This Government must give a commitment to upgrade and improve the Great Western Highway. This budget certainly has made no provision for such capital works. One can only hope that we might get that commitment next year. It is important that a bypass around those towns and villages is constructed for the benefit of those who use the highway as a freight corridor and all residents of the affected towns and villages. At the moment the highway is the national route between Sydney, western New South Wales and Perth, as well as a village road for people going shopping and travelling to schools and local activities in the mountains. That road is not doing either job, it is sadly lacking, and we need a genuine commitment to construct a new road. Until there is a true bypass over the mountains there will be a barrier between the coast and the inland.

Another issue affecting my area is the lack of medical facilities and the crisis faced by hospitals. Some increase in hospital funding has been provided but I do not believe it is enough; it is only a patch-up affair to barely enable the hospitals to pay their accounts, let alone provide an improvement in services. I know of four hospitals in my area that now, in early May, are just beginning to pay January accounts from local tradespeople. That is a disgrace and an embarrassment to the people running the hospitals. They have to keep making excuses about why they cannot pay small accounts for commodities such as milk, meat, fruit and vegetables. The local tradespeople cannot afford to carry for three or four months institutions such as government hospitals. That is a sad indictment of hospital funding. There are no details as yet as to how the increased funding will be allocated to local hospitals.

I am also concerned about the effect of the lack of funding for home and community care, even though there is a slight increase in that area. Keeping older people in their homes for another 12 months or two years provides an enormous saving to the system. It is far better for people to be in their own homes than in institutions, and it saves the Government and the taxpayers money. The provision of little things such as a shower rail or a ramp at the back door or someone to mow the lawn or tend the garden is all that is required in some cases. People may have lived in their house and looked after their garden with pride for up to 50 years, but eventually they will be no longer able to do so. Every week the assistance provided by the service is being cut by a quarter of an hour or 10 minutes - to the stage that people providing the service do not even turn up because the assistance they can provide in the time allotted is of little use.

It would be a shame not to keep people in their homes as long as possible in later life in an atmosphere in which they are comfortable. Another issue concerning me is workers compensation premiums. A small company with a staff of four will have to pay $1,200 a year more in WorkCover premiums. The Government will collect another
Page 8575
$600 million per annum through the increase. That is a disgrace. One of the most serious complaints made to my office is that small business people are getting to the stage of not being able to afford workers compensation premiums. The escalation in premiums is -

Mr Debnam: Outrageous.

Mr R. W. TURNER: They certainly are outrageous. The premiums have become a major component of the expenses of small business, to the stage that proprietors are thinking of closing down. The whole system should be looked at. Premiums should not be increased without consideration of why the increases are necessary. There have also been increases in green slip insurance, car registration, water rates, motor vehicle stamp duty and the cost of disposing of waste. Each increase may be small but together they make it just that little more difficult for rural people to live and decrease their quality of life.

What does the budget give people of the bush to look forward to? In my electorate there has been no announcement about what was recently known as the Mount Canobolas Park Trust area. Because the board was in disarray it was disbanded by the Minister. There was a lot of talk about the area being declared as a national park. In the meantime the area has had a caretaker. It is not really being looked after and is slowly being overtaken by weeds and blackberries. There is not adequate maintenance of the bush trails. There is no indication in the budget as to whether it will become a national park. We should get on with the job of looking after that most beautiful area. Mount Canobolas is the highest area between the Blue Mountains and the coast of Western Australia. It is a very significant area and it is deteriorating because at this stage no-one knows what to do with it and no-one in authority is terribly interested in what happens to it.

As I said, the Government has provided no initiatives for regional development, to encourage businesses to transfer from Sydney to the bush. I have referred to the highway across the Blue Mountains, and another factor disadvantaging the area is that B-doubles can travel to Sydney from the north and south of New South Wales but cannot travel over the mountains from western New South Wales. This imposes a cost impediment on people who have to bring goods over the mountains. The road is too dangerous for B-doubles, which as I say can travel in all other areas of the State.

The budget provides no better medical facilities, no increase in road funding and no allowance for an increase in police numbers. A major police restructuring is occurring at the moment, and I have nothing against some aspects of it. However, I am very much against the downgrading of the Orange patrol to grade 3 status while the Dubbo and Bathurst patrols are grade 2. Orange, a major city of some 35,000 people, has been put into the same category as Parkes, Forbes and Cowra. I cannot see the reason for that. I have been given an assurance that it will not mean any lowering of standards or facilities in Orange, but if that is the case one must assume that the facilities in Dubbo and Bathurst have been upgraded - again, at the expense of the people of Orange and its police officers. I have heard from police officers that while Orange is grade 3 and Dubbo and Bathurst are grade 2 any officer trying to climb the ladder will naturally apply to go to a grade 2 posting rather than a grade 3 posting. So the grading is a slight to the people of Orange and the officers manning the Orange police station.

The budget contains no announcement on the parental responsibility legislation. I commend the Premier for standing firm against recommendations not to proceed with the legislation but there has been no announcement when the legislation will be introduced; we are in limbo at the moment. The police at Orange are still implementing the thrust of the proposed legislation but many towns throughout New South Wales are desperately awaiting introduction of the legislation and no indication has been given of when the legislation will be introduced. I commend the Government for its initiative in allocating $4.7 million in funding for the upgrade of Orange courthouse, something that had been desperately needed. Whilst it is a beautiful building, it is totally inadequate in this day and age. In inclement weather in winter and hot weather in summer people have to sit or stand on the steps of the courthouse. The previous Government made a commitment to that upgrade, but lost office and was not able to carry it out. I look forward to that being another building to be finished by the year 2000.

Generally people in the bush feel that all the money is being spent in Sydney for the Olympics. They do not like to complain and whinge about all the money spent in Sydney because they are genuinely proud that the Games will be held in Australia. However, that spending is to the detriment of facilities in the bush; as reflected in the matters I have mentioned this morning. People from the bush will attend whatever Olympic events they can afford and have time to see, but they are genuinely concerned that the Olympic Games and the beautification of Sydney are being funded at the expense of country people. Between now and the
Page 8576
Games I would like the Government to dispel those fears. If it does not, country people will validly feel that the Games are being held at their expense. Despite that, they will attend the Games, and I am sure they will enjoy them. I hope that after the Games there will be some redress of the imbalance of money being spent and that people in the bush will be thought of as highly as they deserve. [Time expired.]

Debate adjourned on motion by Ms Andrews.

Suspension of standing orders agreed to.

Mr KNOWLES (Moorebank - Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, and Minister for Housing) [10.53 a.m.]: Last week I used this Chamber to send a message to Newcastle City Council concerning its performance in assessing a proposal to build a hotel on the Newcastle foreshore. Honourable members will recall that I expressed my concern at the delays and equivocation by Newcastle City Council in dealing with a $40 million investment project that would generate nearly a thousand jobs - jobs that at this point in Newcastle’s history are desperately needed to redress the savage cuts by BHP. Last week I sent a clear message to Newcastle City Council: I told them in simple terms to stop mucking about, stop putting at risk $40 million worth of investment, nearly a thousand jobs, and opportunities for kids, and to get on with the assessment of this legitimate and well-anticipated proposal and allow it to proceed.

In simple terms I told the council to stop talking and start approving the proposal and allow investment dollars and jobs to flow. I told the council that if it did not, I would. I report that at its meeting last night Newcastle City Council again refused to progress this project. By a decision of seven votes to six, Newcastle City Council quashed the proposed $43 million waterfront hotel on the Merewether Street wharf by its rescission of the rezoning and planning approvals for the Honeysuckle land. Frankly, I find that decision to be extraordinary. As everyone knows, in excess of $100 million has been invested in Newcastle through the Honeysuckle Development Corporation and the Building Better Cities Program.

The master planning for Honeysuckle was completed and agreed to by all stakeholders including Newcastle City Council as long ago as 1991. The record will show that ever since then all players in the development of Honeysuckle understood that development would take place on the foreshore and that in the specific case of the hotel not only was it an appropriate use but it was a much-needed investment for a city seeking to diversify its economic base and redevelop and revitalise the central business district and harbour waterfront. As recently as March 1997 the council resolved to approve the rezoning to allow development to proceed.

However, following that decision to proceed, a rescission motion has plunged not only this proposal but the entire future of the Honeysuckle project into doubt. What confidence can there be in a council that, after having signed off on the strategic plan, fails to proceed to allow the investment opportunities to flow? Every time I have visited Newcastle since I have been the Minister I have been told by local officials that Honeysuckle will be of value to their city only when the dividends from private sector investment begin to flow. I have been told that whilst a $100 million public sector investment is valued, the real growth, the real investment, the real jobs, the real diversification of the region’s economic base will come about only when the private sector begins to take up the opportunities afforded by the Government’s actions.

The council’s decision last night sends an appalling message to those businesses that seek to invest in the city of Newcastle. Even without the horrible backdrop of BHP’s gutting of the town last week, Newcastle City Council’s refusal of a $40 million investment on a site that has been earmarked for a hotel for many years rates as high farce. But when the BHP decision to close down an industry that is the backbone of the region - to throw 2,500 workers onto the scrap heap - is included, the council’s decision represents a gross dereliction of civic leadership and a failure to consider the real and genuine needs of the citizens of Newcastle.

As a consequence of the council’s inaction I have decided to take control of the issue. The Government has a major interest in, and commitment to, the generation of economic activity, employment, growth and wealth in the Hunter. The Honeysuckle urban renewal site is an important element in achieving the Government’s objectives. If the Newcastle City Council will not provide leadership, I will. I will today issue a section 101 direction under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act making me the determining authority for the development for the proposed hotel site.

Page 8577

A development application submitted for the hotel can then be considered pursuant to the provisions of section 100A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, enabling consent to be granted. I will also request the Director-General of Urban Affairs and Planning to prepare a regional environmental plan to ensure that appropriate zoning provisions are put in place to facilitate the urban renewal of this important area. It will be my intention to immediately institute a commission of inquiry to allow any and all concerns to be properly assessed on receipt of the development application. Only one issue is involved here - and that is the issue of jobs: jobs for a city facing the closure of its main industry; jobs for kids; and jobs to allow families to maintain their lifestyle and their security in a city that needs all the support it can get.

This decision comes on the back of, and is consistent with, the Government’s actions to secure jobs at the Bengalla mine, the Kooragang coal loader, the oil seed processing plant and, of course, the Premier’s $10 million Hunter Advantage Fund. All honourable members know that these jobs will be valued by the ordinary men and women of Newcastle, who want nothing more than security and certainty in their lives. My decision today adds to that certainty and sends a clear message to all Novocastrians that the State Government will continue to do its best even when other levels of Government fail them.

Mr PHILLIPS (Miranda - Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [10.59 a.m.]: I would be the last person to argue against the rights of the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning to make a decision calling in a project under section 101 that is considered of regional significance and necessary for the provision of jobs. However, I have some significant concern about the action the Minister has taken, as it relates to a conflict of interest that the Minister and the Government have. The Minister should try to address that conflict. The Minister has not made an impartial decision at arm’s length about an area of land owned by a private company or individual. The Honeysuckle Development Corporation is directly responsible for the land. The corporation reports to the Minister and it must fulfil requirements under the Act, which is under the Minister’s control. So the Minister is the developer. I understand that the corporation has run up a debt or deficit of approximately $20 million and it obviously needs to progress the development in question.

This type of development is obviously important to Newcastle, but perhaps the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning should not be responsible for the Act so that he can clearly be seen to be making an impartial decision at arm’s length. The Minister has a vested interest in the hotel development proceeding. In a press release last week, the Minister said that Newcastle City Council had the responsibility of making the decision on behalf of the community of Newcastle. The Minister acknowledged that the council understood the BHP issue and the importance of the Honeysuckle Creek development. He then said that the choice for the council was clear: to either deal with the development application in a positive sense or he would consider his options and alternatives to take a greater degree of control over the proposal.

Basically the Minister was saying that he did not care that the councillors are the elected representatives of the people of Newcastle and that they had a tough decision to make. He was saying that he owns the land, he is the developer, and he wanted the council to make a positive decision. That was a dangerous move for a Minister to make when he has a vested interest in a site. It was also dangerous because the Minister is not acting at arm’s length from this issue. The Honeysuckle hotel development is in competition with another proposed hotel development in the same area. I give the Minister due credit for trying to bring the warring parties together over the past couple of weeks to resolve the issue. However, one of the parties believed that the mediation process was not getting anywhere and walked away from it. The Minister is now exercising his power to give the government-owned Honeysuckle Development Corporation an edge over a private developer.

I hope the Minister applies the same degree of fairness to other developers as he believes he has applied to the Honeysuckle hotel development, because that is an important element in this deal. I do not doubt that the Minister intends to try to do the right thing by the people of Newcastle in what is a tough time for them by providing jobs and pushing ahead with this development. But I hope the Minister realises that he has a significant conflict of interest on this issue. He should look at the way in which the Honeysuckle Development Corporation is structured under his control. A decision made in this way does not look good for any government, regardless of its political persuasion. The Opposition will watch carefully the Minister’s approach to this development and the degree of fairness that he applies to the Honeysuckle development and to private developers in that area.

Page 8578

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Ms ANDREWS (Peats) [11.04 a.m.]: The 1997-98 budget reflects what the Australian Labor Party’s philosophy is all about: social equity, redistribution of wealth, and assistance for those people in our society who need and deserve a helping hand. The budget will particularly benefit senior citizens, parents, school students and those with disabilities. In fact, it will benefit the vast majority of the citizens of New South Wales in a wide variety of ways. It is important to note that the budget provides significant increases in funding in health, education, child care, disability and aged care services, public transport and roads. The health budget alone totals $5,591 million, a massive increase of $452 million on last year’s allocation. Since occupying the Treasury benches in 1995, the Carr Government has increased expenditure in the all-important area of health by $972 million. An extra $370 million in recurrent funding for health has been provided in the 1997-98 budget. That additional funding will deliver much-needed health services in under-resourced areas, including the central coast.

I am sure members from both sides of the House would all agree that the provision of a first-class, quality health care service is of the utmost importance. That can only be achieved by committing funds to rebuild the public health system. The Carr Government is certainly delivering on that commitment. Of a total of $471 million allocated in the capital works budget for health, $258 million will go towards building major new hospital projects in densely populated parts of the outer Sydney metropolitan area. The budget also provides for the upgrading of State-owned nursing homes at an estimated total cost of $75 million. Children’s health and welfare, including the enhancement of child protection services, will receive funding of $11.7 million in the health budget. Regional and rural areas have been earmarked in the health budget for special attention. Those areas include the central coast region, which is one of the most rapidly developing areas of New South Wales.

The Government has a proud record in the delivery of an education system which is the envy of the rest of the world. New South Wales has surpassed the United States of America, supposedly the most developed nation in the world, in providing the latest technology in our schools. While President Bill Clinton is proud of his election promise to have every school in his country connected to the Internet by the year 2000, New South Wales has well and truly beaten the United States to the post. Labor’s pre-election promise to connect every school in the State to the Internet has now been accomplished. In the coming financial year $5,435 million will be spent on education and training alone. The Government is addressing the need to improve the literacy and numeracy skills of school students, both at primary and secondary levels. Funding has been allocated for an extra 250 training positions, which means that by the end of the financial year an extra 776 teaching positions will have been provided since Labor took over the Treasury benches in March 1995.

Technical and further education has also received special attention in the budget. I am pleased to report that Gosford TAFE will be able to complete major works as a result of the injection of $94.4 million into the TAFE New South Wales capital works program. Courses in carpentry and joinery and hairdressing will soon be provided at Gosford TAFE. That will relieve many young students of the necessity to travel long distances to undertake courses in those subjects; it will be a real benefit for many young people residing in the Peats electorate. Community services were sadly neglected under the previous Government. A 5.2 per cent increase in the budget for aged, disability and community services will mean that an extra $63.2 million will be spent on improving those three vital services. Once again, the Government has kept its promise to pay greater attention to community services than the former coalition Government by increasing spending by $362.8 million, or 36.6 per cent, since the March 1995 election. That is a massive increase in the budget for that portfolio.

The Government is serious about addressing the massive challenge it is facing to protect the children of this State from abuse and neglect. It is certainly not simply paying lip service to that serious challenge. Unlike the previous Government,
Page 8579
which to its eternal shame closed a number of Department of Community Services offices throughout the State and downsized the number of child protection officers, the Government will in this financial year alone spend $65 million to ensure that children receive the protection to which they are so justly entitled. Further, the joint investigation on child abuse now being conducted by the Department of Community Services, the Police Service and the Department of Health has been allocated funding of $6.4 million. As the member for the electorate of Peats, which has the fourth-largest number of senior citizens in the State, I am delighted that the budget provides a $12.3 million boost to help the frail aged and people with disabilities to remain in their homes. Increased funding for home and community care will mean increased services for the frail aged and people with disabilities in home help and personal care, meals on wheels, community respite care, community nursing, home maintenance, and education, information and coordination services. There is a huge need for these vital services in the electorate of Peats and the boost to funding will certainly be welcomed by many residents of the electorate.

I am pleased that the Minister for Agriculture, the Hon. Richard Amery, has announced that an additional $1 million has been allocated in the agriculture budget for the control of noxious weeds. That additional allocation will enable noxious aquatic weeds and coastal weeds, such as the dreaded bitou bush, to be given additional attention. The Carr Government is making the hard decisions and addressing problems, such as the control of noxious weeds, which were sadly neglected by the previous Government. It is also pleasing to note that 80 per cent of the total budget of New South Wales Agriculture of $244.5 million will be utilised to develop sustainable agricultural strategies and practices to ensure the preservation of both agriculture and the environment. That is of particular importance to the Peats electorate, which still has large tracts of agricultural land.

I am sure that targeting such huge expenditure in that direction will result in the agricultural industry in the Peats electorate in particular being revitalised. It will certainly restore confidence to an industry that is currently feeling threatened, particularly on the central coast, because of the proposal by the Federal Government to allow the importation of cooked chicken meat into Australia. If that proposal proceeds the ramifications will have a devastating effect on the chicken-growing industry and the processing industry on the central coast. I express my delight at the attention given in the budget to the State’s national parks. A large proportion of the boundaries of my electorate is in national parks, and I am pleased to note that those areas have been provided for in the budget.

One of the highlights of the budget was the provision of a $50 allowance to help in the outfitting of each schoolchild in the State at the commencement of the school year. That allowance will make a tremendous difference to a large number of my constituents, many of whom have had great difficulty in the past in providing clothing and equipment for their school-age children. I commend the Government for that initiative. Each working day thousands of central coast residents commute to and from their places of employment in the Sydney metropolitan area. Even if the F3 were widened in the future there is no way that it could ever cope with such a vast number of commuters. Therefore, a good rail transport system is an absolute must for the region. For that reason, I am very pleased that the Government is continuing to build upon and improve its ongoing commitment to provide a good rail system.

The State’s rail entities have received total funding of $1,272.2 million, an increase of $267.5 million on last year’s allocation. Funding for rail capital works has been increased by 36.6 per cent. It is significant that the increase has been achieved without closing down lines, discarding projects, or increasing fares beyond the consumer price index. The upgrading of Woy Woy railway station and the provision of a new rail-bus interchange and associated new roadworks in the vicinity have again been funded in the budget. Woy Woy is one of the busiest stations in the entire CityRail network. Additions to the undercover car park were completed last year, and the new bus-rail interchange and kiss-and-ride facility are all to be completed in the very near future. An amount of $300,000 has been allocated in the budget for work to be finalised on the interchange.

The upgrading of the railway station is expected to commence shortly, and funding of $1,800,000 has been allocated in the budget to provide for the installation of lifts, one from street level and one on the platform of the station. That will be a great asset and will enable a large number of senior citizens, disabled persons, and persons with young children in their care to access the railway station. When all the work has been completed the Woy Woy peninsula will have a facility of which local residents can justifiably feel proud. The residents of the Peats electorate deserve a world-class facility, which the railway station will be when it is completed. They have waited patiently for something to be done in their electorate, while the
Page 8580
State electorate to the north was definitely regarded as receiving the bulk of State funding under the previous Government.

The 1995 election changed all that. It is now the peninsula’s turn. The Government is keeping a pre-election promise by ensuring the completion of this project. The roads around the railway station were in an absolutely deplorable condition, and they are undergoing a massive upgrade. Over the years those roads have carried record volumes of traffic, and $900,000 has been allocated for the continuation of the upgrading of roads in the area around the Woy Woy railway station. In addition, a further $900,000 has been allocated to carry out improvements to the Brisbane Water Drive access to the railway station, and $500,000 will go towards the rehabilitation of the Woy Woy to Patonga road, which will greatly benefit the residents of both Pearl Beach and Patonga, as well as the many visitors to the area.

Approximately $7 million has been set aside for maintenance work on State roads within the Peats electorate, including the continuation of the F3 rehabilitation, which includes rock stabilisation, resurfacing and periodic and routine maintenance work. In the media of late there has been a great deal of hoopla about the need for the provision of electronic warning devices on the F3. I was delighted to read in the budget papers that $2,500,000 has been allocated for a drive-aid system on the stretch of the F3 from Hawkesbury to Calga. Undoubtedly, that will include signs warning of a hold-up ahead on the F3. I am absolutely delighted that the Government is addressing that problem. Traffic management within the electorate will receive funding of $686,450, and $86,500 has been set aside for improvements to lighting at interchanges on the F3.

A new 120-bed juvenile justice centre will be built at Kariong at a total cost of $25 million, and in this budget $7 million has been set aside for the project. I am sure that will make a great difference to the area. Kariong will also receive a new fire station - and it is appropriate that the Minister for Emergency Services is at the table - which will cost in the vicinity of $1.2 million, $900,000 of which has been allocated in the budget. That is another welcome facility for the Peats electorate, particularly for Kariong and the surrounding areas. In all, an estimated $21.5 million will be spent on hospitals, schools, roads and other capital works in the electorate of Peats in the coming financial year. That translates into many thousands of jobs for local residents. Job creation on the central coast generally is of the upmost importance.

The fact that the Government has been able to deliver in the core budget sectors of health, education, aged care, community services and transport in the face of savage cuts by the Federal Government to the State’s funding in all key areas speaks volumes for the fiscal management of this State. It is with great sadness that I note that last night’s Federal Budget will mean that funding for public hospitals in this State will suffer a cut of $34 million. That figure relates only to public hospitals; I have not mentioned all the other services the State Government is obliged to deliver. I congratulate the Treasurer on bringing down a budget in which all Labor members of this House can take great pride. It reflects what Labor’s principles and policies are all about: helping those in our society who are the most vulnerable. It is with great pleasure that I commend the Appropriation Bill and cognate bills to the House.

Ms SEATON (Southern Highlands) [11.20 a.m.]: The 1997-98 budget will go down as the budget that taxes the battlers, the budget in which Bob Carr sold out on his remaining promises and in which he dishonestly seeks to cloak massive tax increases and increased user charges across the board as a tax on the rich. However, the so-called rich people the Premier claims to be taxing are none other than the hard-working people of Goulburn, Marulan, Tarago, Mittagong, Moss Vale, Hill Top, Colo Vale, Bowral, Bundanoon and all the other towns and villages in my electorate. No-one in New South Wales will escape the Carr Government’s budget taxes, especially the unemployed and those who seek to become employers.

The budget has very little in it for the Southern Highlands and Goulburn. For the third year in a row Government Ministers have raised expectations in the people in the Southern Highlands in a cynical attempt to quieten the protests. But the delivery of the budget last week pulled the rug out from under them. The budget is a high-taxing budget, a $2.3 billion taxing budget. Through this budget the Government is trying to pay for its extravagances. It is trying to save the skin of the Minister for Health, who is in danger because of his waiting-list promise. It is trying to manage a broken promise on tollways that are used by many residents in my electorate. It is trying to manage the paying out of high-fliers like Dr Mal Hemmerling, who not only apparently resigned voluntarily but took with him half a million dollars to ease the pain of that voluntary resignation.

The Southern Highlands electorate will not benefit from any of the ill-gotten gains from these increased taxes and broken promises. Let us look
Page 8581
carefully at the evidence. First, taxes in every household will increase by roughly $1,000 as a result of this budget. Only a small share, 2 per cent of the entire budget, will be spent west of the Great Divide. That area encompasses about 70 per cent of the land mass of New South Wales and it accommodates about 16 per cent of its population. So roughly 2 per cent of the entire budget will be spread around 70 per cent of the land mass of New South Wales.

Mr Slack-Smith: That is not fair!

Ms SEATON: It is not fair. It is not fair on families who have to find an additional $1,000 each year to pay for the Premier’s taxes. Education is one of the hardest hit services in my electorate. Let us look at what the Government has done to education. It tried to take advantage, in the most cynical way, of the normal pressure on family budgets - the balancing act through which every family goes at the end of every fortnight or every month - to magically produce that one-off $50 child cheque which will blatantly arrive before the next State election. Many perceptive people in my electorate have called this a bribe. I will be generous and call it a gimmick. Where will this magic $55 million windfall come from? It will come from increased taxes on tourism and electricity and the additional $1,000 in extra taxes being paid by each family in New South Wales. While families are paying that additional $1,000 a year, or roughly $20 a week, the magic $50 handout will hardly put a dent in the additional tax burden they face.

How does that $50 compare with the additional $1,000 a year that families will have to find? If families had a choice between paying an additional $1,000 a year in tax or having that $50 in January, I am sure they would choose not to have the additional tax burden of $1,000. What funding is provided in the budget for education in the Southern Highlands area? There has been a cut of roughly 16 per cent across the board in capital works funding. Of the remaining $90 million or thereabouts that has been allocated to education capital works in the budget, the Minister could not squeeze out enough money for a permanent library at Mittagong primary school. He could not squeeze out enough to allocate funding for planning an additional primary school in the Bowral area that will need to be constructed in the next few years. He could not squeeze out enough money to fund the construction of one or two of the permanent buildings that are part of the overall plan at Hill Top and Colo Vale primary schools to replace the sea of demountables at both schools.

The Minister could not even find enough money to provide shade and weather cover at Moss Vale, Berrima and Tarana primary schools. The Minister could not see his way clear to replace lost teachers at Mittagong, Tallong and Tarago primary schools. As a result of a reduction in the number of students by only one or two, one of two or three teachers has been lost. The losses have had an enormous impact on those schools. In addition to losing teachers those schools have lost clerical staff. The Government has made no additional resources available for education in the Southern Highlands area. It has not provided resources for additional literacy teaching. Many children in my electorate suffer real reading problems and could do with a few additional teachers. The $50 gimmick could have provided a number of facilities for schools in the Southern Highlands.

Approximately 100 new school halls could have been built across the State, and Mittagong permanent library could have been one of them. New buildings could have been constructed at Hill Top and Colo Vale primary schools. Wet weather covers could have been erected at Berrima, Moss Vale and Tarana schools. Additional teachers could have been employed and about $25,000 could have been given to every school across New South Wales, including those in my electorate. It is important to remember how many hours members of parents and citizens associations spend at every school across New South Wales sizzling sausages, selling raffle tickets and doing all those sorts of things. I am sure that they would appreciate a $25,000 allocation which could go towards constructing buildings and providing other meaningful resources for those schools.

Unfortunately, the budget allocation for health is not much better. In the health budget there are no new capital works in my electorate apart from the continuation of the Fahey Government’s promise to provide an acute-care facility at Goulburn Base Hospital. The second half of the funding for that project has now been allocated, and not before time. Where will the additional $400 million that has been promised in this budget go? If the costs of the salary increase for members of the Health and Research Employees Association and the existing debt that has to be repaid by country hospitals are added together, there is not much change from the $400 million. In fact, the figure of $400 million is only a furphy; it goes only a small way towards plugging the gap that occurred in the management of health services during the last two years by this Government.

Page 8582

Tourism is one of the big losers in this budget. In my electorate, tourism and manufacturing are the biggest and fastest growing employers. A lot of people were pleased to hear the Minister for Tourism say on 11 September 1995, "The State Government will not introduce a bed tax." What happened last week when the budget was delivered? A bed tax was levied on central business district hotel accommodation. Many people in the Southern Highlands regard that as perhaps the thin edge of the wedge. It is a Sydney bed tax today and it will be a Southern Highlands and Blue Mountains bed tax tomorrow. Members on this side of the House are looking forward to hearing an assurance from the Premier that that will not happen, but we had better not hold our breath because the Premier regards the CBD tax as a chink of light in the doorway that will enable him to extend the tax to all regions in New South Wales. That is a slap in the face for dedicated tourism representatives in my electorate, which has a strong tourism board and a dedicated group of tourism operators.

The Southern Highlands Olympic committee, a local committee of the council, is doing its best to attract Olympic visitors to the Southern Highlands to stay in our excellent facilities. Those people have all been working very hard in the last few years to do that and to build the industry. They are seeing all of their efforts suddenly put down because fewer and fewer people will choose Sydney as the attractive first port of call. They will go to Melbourne, they will go to Brisbane, they will go to the Gold Coast before they decide to go to Sydney, and they will use Sydney as a springboard to visit places like the Southern Highlands. The Government has talked a lot about jobs, and regional jobs in particular. One of the other taxes imposed by the Government is a levy on electricity distribution. But the Government says not to worry, that this is just a tax that hits the big guys; it is not going to worry families; it is a tax that will affect the big guys, the rich people.

Honourable members should think very carefully about what happens with the levy on electricity distribution. Who pays for that? Mums and Dads pay for it, small business pays for it, and battlers pay for it. In the past few months I was privileged to visit many manufacturers in my area, such as Joy Manufacturing Company Pty Ltd, a company that manufactures mining equipment; Ramsfield Yarns, a company that adds value to woollen products; Vibro Engineered Cements; Rocla Concrete Sleepers; and Tycan Australia Pty Ltd, to name just a few. Those companies are all major users of electricity. It is they who will be paying the levy, and they will have to struggle to make their products competitive against those that come from States that do not have these levies - States that manage their electricity and finances properly. Jobs in the Southern Highlands electorate - and indeed in every other electorate in New South Wales - will be less secure as a result of the electricity distribution levy.

There is a lot of reference in this budget to taxes. It is obvious that the Treasurer looked around to try to find some cash cows, and he found one: he found clubs. The Treasurer thought clubs would be an easy way to get a little more money out of the system. The poker machine tax imposed on clubs will be a huge blow to communities and charities. I should place on record some of the contributions made by clubs in my electorate, both in the Goulburn area and in the Bowral, Mittagong and Moss Vale areas. Revenue from clubs has gone a long way towards providing funds to improve facilities for local hockey, touch football and basketball, and contributing to the indoor heated pool fund in Goulburn and to organisations such as Legacy, the Smith Family, the Salvation Army, the Police Citizens Youth Club and the Cancer Council. Clubs also provide funds for cystic fibrosis research, the Mulwaree High Remembrance Library and many other school projects.

Registered clubs have contributed to buying important medical machinery for our local hospitals. The Premier would rather have that money in Treasury’s coffers than in local hands; presumably he believes that he can spend it better and more wisely. Honourable members should be aware of the impacts of the new land tax. Again the Premier and the Treasurer say that this is a tax on the rich. It must be realised that eventually this tax will be passed on to all sorts of people - including renters: families who rent houses, retailers who rent shops, and people who employ other people. Much like the electricity levy, it will be yet another reason that investors will look twice at New South Wales - they might go to Victoria instead - or that existing employers will think twice about putting on new employees. The Premier’s assertion that by simply taxing the rich he can improve the budget situation loses sight of the fact that the economy is an integrated thing and that when new taxes are levied anywhere, ultimately it is families that pay.

In regard to policing, at present the Southern Highlands area is experiencing some considerable law and order difficulties that the Chamber of Commerce, the council and other interested groups are trying hard to address in a sensible way. Most people realise that the announcement in the budget of the provision of 100 extra police is a joke. Firstly, the provision of 100 extra police does not
Page 8583
meet the resignation, attrition or dismissal rates that are currently occurring within the New South Wales Police Service. So the 100 extra police will not go far at all. This week in the Southern Highlands we have had the advantage of a council and Chamber of Commerce initiative which has examined ways in which to improve the security of shopping centres, the CBD precinct and our parks and gardens. About two weeks ago, in a disgraceful act, vandals ripped advanced trees from Settlers Park in Bowral, which is an area where in the next few months 501 cherry trees will be planted to commemorate the Australian Vietnam veterans in Bowral. It is feared that those trees will also be ripped out, which will be not only an insult to those who served in Vietnam but a disgraceful waste.

If one looks carefully at the budget one will see that last year the Government allocated $206,000 to the street safety program and underspent that allocation. The people of the Southern Highlands electorate are disappointed that the Government had the opportunity to use that money, given that it had been set aside to do more to improve beat policing and to put more resources onto our streets, but it did not avail itself of that opportunity. That clearly underlines the Government’s commitment to beat policing: it is more concerned about penny-pinching and reducing the budget. The electorate of the Southern Highlands has missed out on possible extra police resources. No new police resources will come to the Goulburn area or the Bowral area, at a time when vandalism and stealing are causing a great deal of concern, so much so that many of the local businesses have set up what they call a dob-in-a-vandal scheme. They are desperate to try to find a solution to the problem and to get people to give information and help police to do their job, but they have had to go outside of normal government resources to get the job done.

Agriculture in the Southern Highlands electorate is very important; it is one of the major economic activities. However, the budget includes a 15 per cent increase in user charges to farmers by the Department of Agriculture. This is at a time when farmers throughout the State are struggling, when cattle prices are down, when a good deal of the State is drought declared. It is happening at a time when many local farmers in my area are having to cope with the ovine Johne’s disease problem that is sweeping across some parts of New South Wales. [Extension of time agreed to.]

Nothing has been allowed for the ovine Johne’s disease steering committee strategic plan. In stage 1 of the steering committee plan many local families did what they thought was the right thing: they put their hands up to have their flocks tested. They discovered as a result that the animals tested positive to ovine Johne’s disease. As a result, in the interim period between getting a handle on the disease and making a decision about how to deal with it, these people have been suffering an economic and agricultural apartheid. They are unable to trade their animals, to make an income or to do any forward planning. Many of them hoped that in this year’s budget they would find some emergency provision to help them through this very difficult time until the steering committee plan is formulated and enacted. But there was absolutely nothing in the budget to help them. There is a strong feeling that the Minister for Agriculture really does not understand the extent of this problem in the Southern Highlands and the Southern Tablelands.

I admit that there is good news for some farmers in noxious weed funding, but it is neutralised by both the effect of the 15 per cent increase in user charges and the ovine Johne’s disease problem. There is very little good news in having noxious weed funding if the biggest problem on one’s property is drought, ovine Johne’s disease, or the inability to pay for some of those services.I shall now speak about roads and transport. I was given a copy of the booklet from the Treasurer’s office which was supposed to tell me what was happening in my electorate in relation to roads and transport. It was a slim volume. There has been no significant change in funding for roads in my electorate. No allocation has been made for work on the Wombeyan Caves Road or for the major roads that require attention. Worse than that, nothing has been done about the promise that the Premier made and then broke in regard to tollways. He has turned his back on the people to whom he made that promise, including many people in the Southern Highlands electorate.

The Premier then came up with the cash-back scheme, in the hope that a few more people would support him. However, many people have discovered that they will be left out of the scheme. For example, many business people in my electorate are paying $1,000 a year more than they thought they would be paying. The budget offers no relief in relation to tollways. People who do not have a credit rating or a cheque facility or who use the freeway infrequently - including the unemployed and women - will not be able to take advantage of the cash-back scheme. The budget does not relieve that problem. People in rural New South Wales have demonstrated enormous goodwill in relation to the Olympic Games. However, that goodwill is in danger of being eroded if the Premier does not do
Page 8584
what he promised, that is, open the books on Olympic spending.

Only 2 per cent of the budget has been spent west of the divide, and people in rural New South Wales want to know why. It is easy to see why they are frustrated. They distrust the Carr Government, which has added Olympic labels to all sorts of things. They also distrust the Premier’s reluctance to allow the Auditor-General to look at all Olympic expenditure. I call on the Government to give rural people confidence in relation to Olympic spending and to ensure that their goodwill is well placed. The Premier should open the books on Olympic spending. Under the Greiner Government and the Fahey Government, New South Wales was the pre-eminent State of Australia. New South Wales led the way in all sorts of areas and economic growth was good when compared to the other States. However, under the Carr Government, New South Wales is bumping along the bottom and slipping behind. For example, investment is going elsewhere, and there have been relative increases in payroll tax and stamp duties. The Premier has broken promises in relation to payroll tax. Victoria provides a much more attractive investment climate than New South Wales.

This is a high-taxing budget to catch up with runaway spending and Ministers who are incapable of controlling their portfolios. This is a high-taxing budget to plug the gaps caused by wasteful spending. This is a high-taxing budget that claims to bring equity but hits the people who need the most help - families that rely on government services. Most of all, the budget hurts the State’s chances of creating new and sustainable jobs. The Premier and the Treasurer are taking New South Wales down the disastrous road that their Labor colleagues took other States - I refer to Cain, Kirner, Lawrence, Burke and others. The Premier and the Treasurer are frittering away at the firm economic legacy left in place by Nick Greiner and John Fahey. The people of Southern Highlands have not been fooled by the budget. They know that this is Bob Carr’s old Labor. The Labor Party has betrayed my constituents and New South Wales.

Mr MARKHAM (Keira) [11.43 a.m.]: I am pleased to speak to this year’s great budget. The electorate of Keira was starved of funding for seven years under the previous coalition Government, so it is great to see the Labor Government make a commitment to the electorate. I shall refer to capital works programs and inform honourable members of the commitment that the Carr Government has to regional New South Wales, particularly to the Illawarra. This year an amount of $6.5 million has been allocated for improvements to the southern freeway, which is one of the major export arterial roads in southern New South Wales.

During the next one to two years, a flyover will be built at the intersection of the northern distributor and the F6 to ensure that the traffic flow remains free and easy. At present, there are major obstacles so far as traffic is concerned because of the traffic lights at the intersection. The volume of traffic on that road is ever increasing. The Government has allocated funding to increase the width of the road to six lanes - three northbound and three southbound. This major project is creating job opportunities for many people, not only in the building of the road but also in supplying materials for the road.

Mount Ousley Road is the major arterial road in southern New South Wales. It has been an ongoing problem for many years. Last year the Government addressed the problem - which affects many residents who live alongside the road - by allocating some $2 million for the construction of noise abatement infrastructure along the road. I am happy that this year’s budget allocates $220,000 for an extension of the noise barriers on Mount Ousley Road - one kilometre on the east side and half a kilometre on the west side. I assure honourable members that the residents of Mount Ousley and Balgownie welcome the initiative and applaud the Government for providing the funding in last year’s budget and in this year’s budget.

The University of Wollongong, which is a major university attended by some 11,000 students, is within the vicinity of the F6 and Mount Ousley. Over the past few years there has been a concerted campaign to construct cycleways so students can access the university from north Wollongong station and other areas of the Illawarra. I shall refer to public transport in a moment. An amount of $59,500 has been allocated to construct half a kilometre of cycleway - which will finalise a program that has been in place for 18 months - so that there is access into the university and other educational institutions at north Wollongong, including the Wollongong TAFE college, the Keira high school and the Wollongong high school of performing arts. That is a major plus for my electorate and another good move by the Government.

For some time I have been campaigning for a cycleway to be constructed at Bellambi. People access Bellambi station by walking through the grounds of a private Catholic school. The principal of the school approached me some time ago to see whether funding could be made available to construct a cycleway or walkway on the eastern side
Page 8585
and the northern side of the school so that people could access the railway station and other facilities west of the station. An amount of $40,000 has been allocated in the budget to construct the cycleway. The residents of Bellambi and the principal and teachers of the school will be impressed with the allocation. I bring to the attention of honourable members another project for which I have campaigned. This year’s budget has allocated $10,000 for design work to create pedestrian access across the Princes Highway at the busy intersection of O’Briens Road and the highway at Figtree. A number of schools are not far from the intersection - including Figtree high school and primary school - and students have to cross the busy highway to access sporting facilities.

Debate has continued for quite some time about how to address that issue. Last year I suggested to the Roads and Traffic Authority and the Minister that right-hand turning bays should be incorporated within the intersection’s traffic management plan. However, figures have shown that the traffic problem would become worse further north on the Princes Highway if those turning bays were provided, for the simple reason that the phasing of the lights would hold the traffic up a little longer, creating a problem at The Avenue and the Princes Highway intersection. I shall look at the feasibility of having a roundabout installed or providing pedestrian access under a bridge that crosses American Creek. However, that has some safety problems and I understand the $10,000 allocation is to conduct a feasibility study. This area needs to be addressed and thankfully the Government has provided funding for that project.

I should like to touch on a subject in which I am interested and for which I have campaigned strongly, that is, construction of a science centre on campus east of the University of Wollongong. The budget has allocated $2 million towards that $7.6 million project. Professor Glen Moore, who heads up the team at the University of Wollongong Science Centre is over the moon about the allocation because he knows for years we have campaigned to get funding for that project. Over the past 12 to 18 months four Ministers from the Carr Government visited the science centre. Previously I wrote to various Ministers for education and tourism in the Greiner-Fahey governments inviting them to give consideration to this project sought by the university and the community. The project has hands-on educational facilities, and tens of thousands of school kids from all over southern New South Wales visit that science centre, which at present is housed in appalling accommodation. The $2 million allocation will give this new building construction a real kick-start. It has 200 hands-on exhibitions and will have a 70-seat planetarium and observatory.

The four Ministers who took time out from their busy schedule to visit the centre were briefed by Professor Gerard Sutton, the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Wollongong, and Glen Moore and were impressed by what they saw. Hence, the two million bucks to be injected into that project. This is a three-stage project and I will be fighting for further funding in budgets to come. This allocation will boost commitments from industry and commerce and I will seek further Federal, State and local government funding. The science centre’s vision is to be Australia’s most innovative and exciting hands-on technology centre. Its mission is to improve the science literacy of the community through the provision of hands-on experience and an environment that is both educational and entertaining. That is an excellent vision and mission statement. I should like to pay tribute to the many volunteers who ensure that the science centre is available to the general public seven days a week. I turn now to housing.

The Minister for Housing in New South Wales is under pressure on public housing issues because of the attitude of the Howard Government. However, an allocation to the tune of $305,000 has been included in this year’s budget for housing in the Keira electorate that will go towards the construction of four units of accommodation at Gwynneville, an initiative that I applaud. Access to public housing is an important issue for all honourable members who represent working-class electorates. The public housing provided by the Government is well and truly welcomed in the Keira electorate. I should also like to comment on a neighbourhood improvement program I was delighted to launch earlier this year at the Bellambi Neighbourhood Centre. The Minister for Housing is committed to this program and will continue to monitor closely what is going on within the neighbourhood of Bellambi. It is a housing estate that was constructed back in the 1960s. The theory was to jam as many accommodation units into the smallest possible area of land without regard for the welfare and workings of the residents.

The neighbourhood improvement program has received an allocation of $1.5 million and is working well. It was implemented in consultation with the residents to improve the amenities of the area. The program addresses safety, security, social and community concerns, together with the design and condition of existing houses and improved integration of public housing with the wider community. A change of attitude has occurred among many people living in the Bellambi area. At
Page 8586
long last they have been consulted about what needs to be done within their homes. They are now able to select the colour of paint, something that was never an option in years gone by. That might sound superficial but Department of Housing tenants are human beings and should be treated as such. They should have every opportunity to make a commitment and be involved with changes within their homes and their neighbourhoods.

I congratulate the Minister on his support for this program. Of course, much is still to be done because $1.5 million does not overcome problems associated with poor planning and building. The Federal Government cutbacks for public housing may place some strain on this budget, but I assure the House and my constituency that I will campaign strongly for the program to be continued and expanded. I should refer briefly to other areas within the Illawarra, rather than just in Keira, which only has one hospital, and that is private. The majority of my constituents access health services at the Wollongong hospital campus. This Government has made a commitment to build a new clinical services block and completion of that is well and truly on track.

When I was first elected to this Parliament, in 1988, the then Greiner Government in the run-up to the election promised that the clinical services block would be constructed. That never happened and during each election campaign thereafter I gave a commitment that if a Carr Labor Government came to office, it would build the clinical services block. That is happening now. Besides construction of the clinical services block there will be increased funding for orthopaedic rehabilitation and renal services at Port Kembla and Shoalhaven hospitals, which is good news for the people of Wollongong and Shoalhaven. The cancer treatment centre will be expanded under the guidance of Dr Phil Clingan. He applauds the Government’s initiative in providing funding for the second linear accelerator, which was opened recently at the oncology centre at Wollongong hospital. My colleague the honourable member for Kiama is very happy that the Government has honoured a promise to open Kiama hospital, one of 30 which the coalition Government closed during its seven years in office. They are good, positive measures for the Illawarra. [Extension of time agreed to.]

I do not want to take up all the time of the House because I know other members want to make speeches on the budget. However, I want to refer to what we are doing in Aboriginal affairs. I did not want to speak on the budget without commenting on this area in which I have a very close interest. The New South Wales Carr Labor Government believes that education is the foundation of an informed and just society, the key to overcoming social inequality and to achieving social justice objectives. The Government is committed to building a high-quality and fair education and training system, and this commitment is embodied in the Government’s charter for equity in education and training. Achieving access, participation and outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people will provide clear pathways to employment and life-long learning in key objectives.

Only 20 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people aged over 15 years attain a post-school qualification, compared with 42 per cent for non-Aboriginal people. That needs to be addressed not only by this Government but by governments throughout Australia - in particular, the Federal Government. The New South Wales Labor Government has recognised the need for a greater effort in Aboriginal affairs and has implemented a number of initiatives to redress the situation of indigenous Australians in New South Wales. One of the most positive things to come out of the budget delivered on 6 May is that the Government has committed $20 million to support Aboriginal education services in the Department of School Education. The budget commits the Government to equity programs within TAFE New South Wales and Department of Training and Education Co-ordination, including the TAFE for Aboriginal development division and the DTEC Aboriginal unit.

The Government has implemented other positive things in the area of Aboriginal affairs such as the establishment of a chief executive officers forum on Aboriginal affairs to provide the necessary focus and coordinate efforts in the delivery of services to Aboriginal people; the establishment of a Cabinet committee on Aboriginal affairs involving all key Ministers, to provide vital coordination of the Government’s responsibility in this area; the forging of a partnership between the Government and the Aboriginal Health Resource Co-operative to facilitate a very real and practical working approach to addressing the health needs of indigenous people. The Government is seeking to extend this approach to other areas of its service delivery responsibilities.

The Aboriginal Housing Development Committee has been established to guide government policy on Aboriginal housing issues. In view of what is occurring federally, that is a task I would not like to be involved in. The people involved will achieve their objective, but without any help from the Federal Government. This year $18 million has been allocated for Aboriginal health, a commendable increase of $6.2 million. Even
Page 8587
though things are tough, we have allocated $31 million to the Aboriginal housing program to provide 140 new dwellings. The majority of the homes will be provided through indigenous community-based organisations.

The Minister for Corrective Services has just left the Chamber. I applaud him for making an additional $1 million available for programs for indigenous inmates by funding the indigenous action plan. Indigenous offenders should have every opportunity for rehabilitation to ensure that they are ready for release when their sentences expire. An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women’s consultative pilot project has been developed to target the specific needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women in the New South Wales Government action plan for women. The Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister for Women, who is at the table now, would have had input into that program, and I applaud her for that good work. We have also allocated $100,000 to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission pathways program to increase employment opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in sport and recreation and in industry.

In the time available to me I believe that I have been able to bring to the attention of the people of this Chamber and the Parliament some of the positive things that the Carr Labor Government has achieved in a number of areas. I have mentioned the programs in my local area. I have touched on a number of issues affecting the broader Illawarra area and a number of issues in relation to Aboriginal people. I assure honourable members that I will continue to raise issues affecting the constituency of Keira. I will also continue to raise issues as parliamentary secretary for the Illawarra affecting the broader Illawarra. I will also continue to argue vigorously and debate strenuously issues affecting Aboriginal people throughout the State as parliamentary secretary for Aboriginal affairs. It is imperative that the Parliament has strong views and works tirelessly to make sure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are recognised as the most disadvantaged in our society. We should be doing everything in our power at every opportunity to make sure that their daily lives are enhanced.

Mr RIXON (Lismore) [12.09 p.m.]: The 1997-98 State budget has provided an increase in taxes, an increase in spending and no discernible improvement for the quality and provision of government services to rural New South Wales. This State now holds the dubious honour of being the highest taxed State in Australia, with a record additional $2 million being ripped out of the taxpayers’ pockets in only two years. Rural New South Wales is not getting value for its taxes from the Carr Government; rather, we are seeing the return of traditional Labor financial management epitomised by the ilk of Kirner and Cain. The 1997-98 financial year was meant to herald the beginning of the $1 billion payroll tax relief which the Treasurer, Michael Egan, emphatically promised in April 1995. However, the Carr Government has abandoned this promise and last year actually increased the payroll tax net to include superannuation contributions.

The eight increases in taxes in the 1997-98 State budget are: bed tax $64 million; land tax on luxury homes, so we are told, $50 million; general land tax, $80 million; general insurance premiums, $56 million; poker machine tax, $74 million; stamp duty on luxury motor cars, $11 million; electricity distribution levy, $100 million; and central business district parking, $8 million. All taxes robbing the rich to pay the poor, so we are told. The bed tax will attack the foreigners to Australia. Government members should realise that the majority of people who use city hotels are country people who come here for health, financial or business reasons. These country people are not wealthy. They come to Sydney to conduct ordinary business matters and they are the ones who will be slugged. By increasing land tax, once again the Government is slugging the wealthy. These lands are usually occupied by commercial and rental buildings. The cost of the land tax increases will be passed on once again to the battlers, the people the Government claims to be assisting.

Poker machine taxes will be increased by $74 million. In my electorate Lismore RSL Club, which is establishing a large sporting centre in the developing suburb of Goonellabah and undertaking a great deal of work there, announced on radio yesterday morning that it will be sacking 12 of its staff and work will be very much reduced. So instead of the club providing services to the community, either the State Government will provide them - but, from a look at the budget, it will not - or those services will simply not be provided for the battlers of Goonellabah. The Casino Returned Servicemen’s Memorial Club, which will have an extra $150,000 ripped out of it, will be forced to consider cutting staff and to contract out its catering and cleaning. A motel project it was developing in conjunction with the Casino Golf Club, which would have created employment locally, has now been put on ice and will not go ahead. They are just two clubs that have suffered major effects. A third large club, Lismore and District Workers’ Club, which
Page 8588
provides a great number of services in the town, will have a massive $400,000 ripped out of it.

Mr O’Farrell: What club was that?

Mr RIXON: The workers’ club.

Mr O’Farrell: The wealthy workers’ club?

Mr RIXON: No, they are not wealthy workers. So the Lismore workers’ club is affected. The Government is taking away $100 million from the electricity distributors. That money will come from the pockets of the families who pay the bills to those various electricity distributors, in my electorate to NorthPower. In other words, the battlers once again, one-parent families renting homes and paying electricity bills, will be contributing towards the $100 million rip-off by this State Government. The road budget of New South Wales should be closely examined to reveal the true state of funds allocated by the Carr Government. The amount provided for road funding is $2.19 billion - an increase, so it would appear, of a nominal $180 million over the previous budget.

However, that increase is more than wiped out after allowing for special one-off expenditures this year, such as the Eastern Distributor canopy. That expenditure is just to lay a bit of grass and make things look lovely. In my part of the world we cannot even get a road. The canopy will cost $9.4 million, just for a bit of lawn. What a lovely bit of lawn! I hope that it is watered occasionally to keep it looking green. The Government has allocated $9.4 million for a bit of lawn, yet my electorate cannot even get a decent road. The initial expenditure for the M5 east was $144 million and the M4-M5 cashback is $52 million. The most significant item in the budget is the blow-out in the taxpayer-funded M5 east from $520 million to $580 million, even before the project is underway. Also, there is a special $145 million expenditure for the third year for western Sydney roads. The widening of the M4 motorway at a cost of $32 million will be cool comfort to the remainder of the Sydney metropolitan area or for the Illawarra and the Hunter. It will certainly not help the far north coast or country New South Wales.

Of the funding available from the 3 x 3 roads program $40 million per annum is allocated not to roads but to Sydney’s public transport initiatives. The remainder is split not 60 per cent to country areas and 40 per cent to the city, as it used to be, but it will now be split 57-43, country-city, a decrease in funding again for rural New South Wales. Once again the Labor Party is looking after the big city and forgetting the people in the bush. All non-metropolitan areas will be disappointed with their road funding and many vital projects will take much longer to eventuate. However, I cannot point the finger all of the time and say that the Labor Government is completely incompetent. It got one little thing partly right. I congratulate the Government for putting some money into work on the Summerland Way. The Government had made a promise to put $50 million into new construction works on Summerland Way in its lifetime. Halfway through, it is meeting a quarter of that promise. Nevertheless, we are grateful for even small mercies.

Work to be undertaken on the Summerland Way includes: overtaking lanes in the Richmond River Shire Council area, $1,050,000; pavement widening between Grafton and the Queensland border, $600,000; a new bridge known as Gordons Bridge and associated works between 28.9 to 29.8 kilometres north of Kyogle, $1 million; the Wiangaree deviation, 12.6 to 14.4 kilometres north of Kyogle, $900,000. That is a start, although the project will cost many times that amount of money. Also included in work to be undertaken is: Dourigans Gap realignment, 16.2 to 17.7 kilometres north of Kyogle, $1,180,000; realignment at Unumgar, 41.3 to 44.5 kilometres north of Kyogle, $1 million; Summerland Way pavement rehabilitation, $1,409,500; guardrail improvements Casino to the Queensland border, $50,000. On the Kyogle to Lismore Road rehabilitation works worth $95,000 will be undertaken on the bridge over the Leycester Creek. Overall, the four councils in the Lismore electorate will share $4,958,000 provided for routine maintenance works on various main roads.

I am grateful that my electorate was allocated that amount of money, considering that the Government is a bunch of penny pinchers who look after the needs of the city. The $4.9 million for routine road maintenance work is welcomed. The only trouble is that the electorate needs about 10 times that amount. Nevertheless, I thank the Government for small mercies. Regional development is terribly important to people living in country areas. This year’s budget does not separate State and regional development. In 1996-97 $20.2 million was allocated to regional development, $20 million of which went to Moore Park. However, of that $20 million only $6 million was actually spent and $14 million went off into Treasury somewhere. In 1997-98 $18 million has been allocated to Moore Park. Once again, the Carr Government has allocated regional development funds to Sydney. I suppose Sydney has regions - Sydney north, Sydney south, Sydney west and Sydney east - but most
Page 8589
people interpret regional development as development taking place outside Sydney. I am sure the honourable member for Broken Hill would interpret it that way.

Millions of dollars of investment is being lost to Victoria and Queensland because of lost marketing opportunities. Opposition pre-budget calculations put the growth of funds required for schools recurrent budgets at $266 million to cover teachers salary increases and forward program commitments. The increase in the budget was $265 million, $1 million short of the Opposition’s calculations. However, the back-to-school allowance, costed at $55 million, is included in the budget figure of $265 million and, therefore, can be said to represent a direct cut to schools. Therefore the budget is $56 million short, not $1 million short. The capital program has been slashed by $22 million, or about 15 per cent. Initial analysis of major projects indicates that at least 19 current projects out of 45, or 40 per cent, have been delayed. Fifteen new projects have begun compared with 35 last year.

Further analysis is likely to show serious shortfalls in school maintenance. A future government will have to make up for this serious hollow-log approach to the provision of education facilities. The budget leaves the Government 700 short of its promise to create 1,405 new teachers. Three-quarters of the way through its term, the Government has only met half the promised number. TAFE has really become education’s poor cousin. Capital expenditure is down a massive 33 per cent compared with last year’s budgeted program. On the recurrent side, despite needing $53 million on the Opposition’s estimate to meet salary increases and inflation, the current budget increased by just $22 million, a shortfall of $31 million. The effect of the shortfall will be lack of skilled trades and higher unemployment caused by this Government. The ill-fated restructure of the Department of Training and Education Co-ordination - DTEC - and TAFE continues to take its toll.

In contrast to school and TAFE colleges, the offices of DTEC, a policy and funding body that provides no direct training or education, had a capital works windfall of $4 million, an increase of 125 per cent for something that produces nothing. Look at what the capital works were in my electorate. Was there mention of the library needed at the Lismore High School? No. Was there mention of the library needed at Wyrallah Road Public School? No. But my electorate got the money to complete stage two of the Nimbin school, which was very pleasing. I will be extremely interested to hear the answer to a question I put to parents in my electorate: which would you rather have as a parent, $50 in your hand at the beginning of the year or 1,000 extra teachers? The $55 million, which is the total cost of the $50 for each schoolchild, would have paid for 1,000 extra teachers, or 27,000 extra computers, or in-service training for every teacher for the year.

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I ask members to cease interjecting as it appears that Hansard is having some difficulty hearing the proceedings, and I can understand that.

Mr RIXON: I am sure Government members would have been of the view that the $55 million could have been spent on a 2 per cent increase for every teacher, or it could have reduced the average class size by one student per class, or it could have built 100 new primary halls, or it could have been used as a cash injection of $25,000 for every public school. The Opposition is also very concerned about the health budget. All but $4 million of the $452 million increase in health spending has already been squandered: $230 million will go directly to retire last year’s deficit; $114 million will go to pay unfunded increases to nurses and other hospital workers; $44 million will go to Commonwealth funding adjustments; $22 million will go to inflation; and $38 million will go to the full-year effect of operating new facilities. But that leaves $4 million. So, when I look through the budget papers I should find the drug and alcohol rehabilitation centre, which Lismore has needed for so long. But no, health spending in the Lismore electorate is zilch, nothing; no care for people in country areas once again.

The Carr Government came into office promising no new taxes and no tax increases. It has broken those promises three times, each time more spectacularly than the last. In its first year it increased one tax. Last year it increased three taxes. Today the Carr Government has increased eight taxes. New South Wales should have a healthy surplus as a result of improving economic conditions without the need for tax increases, but the Carr Government is barely breaking even. In April 1995 Mr Egan promised that the first part of Labor’s promised $1 billion payroll tax cuts would be introduced this year. Instead, businesses are carrying extra taxes. The Carr Government is focused on big spending, big taxing and big government instead of improving the underlying financial position of the State to encourage jobs and investment. The more other States apply this long-term focus, the more New South Wales risks being left behind. Businesses will go elsewhere. We have already watched Jeff
Page 8590
Kennett improve things for Victoria. New South Wales is going downhill. [Time expired.]

Mr BECKROGE (Broken Hill) [12.29 p.m.]: I am pleased to contribute to debate on the Appropriation Bill and cognate bills while the honourable member for Bathurst is in the chair. He is an immensely fair man and I know he lets members have their say. I know how much he cares about this place and I am pleased that he is in the chair. I am also pleased to support this budget; I have no qualms about doing so. The Federal budget, which was brought down in Canberra last night, contrasts starkly with the New South Wales budget, which was brought down last week. If people believe that the Labor Party and the Liberal Party are not coming from different directions, they will learn otherwise if they compare those two documents. It would be helpful to understand the philosophies behind the two budgets.

When the New South Wales budget was brought down the media portrayed the Premier as Robin Hood. As the weeks go by and the fine print of the Federal budget is examined it will be revealed that not one sector of government will have gained anything. This year’s Federal budget, like last year’s Federal budget, is a mean-spirited document brought down by mean-spirited people who are not providing this nation with any fiscal leadership. As I said earlier, I support the New South Wales budget. If honourable members were of the view that the budget did not provide for regional electorates they would have only to look at the support that has been given to my electorate. The support my electorate has received in the last three budgets has been absolutely marvellous. I have been a member of Parliament since 1981. Since that time I have seen many budgets brought down by Labor and Liberal governments.

However, this budget, which covers a range of portfolios and addresses every issue in my electorate, is the best budget. I will deal in detail with the matters I am pleased about. The city of Broken Hill is the largest populated area of my electorate, which covers more than 40 per cent of New South Wales. The Government has recognised the contribution made by Broken Hill to this nation in the past and the city has been given it the respect it deserves. The people of Broken Hill watch with wry smiles the travails in Newcastle in relation to BHP. BHP left Broken Hill to fend for itself in 1938. It got everything it wanted out of Broken Hill and did not care about leaving. People with experience of BHP - those who are much older than I am and who have lived there all their lives, and their fathers and grandfathers - would be aware what sort of operator BHP was then. It does not appear to have changed.

Health services in the electorate have received good support in the budget. The hospital that admittedly was planned by the previous Government before it lost office has now been placed on track. A budget allocation of $4 million has been provided towards meeting the total cost of a planned $27 million hospital project. The Government is having discussions with people in Broken Hill about the adequacy of the number of hospital beds. It is trying to achieve some consensus. But people are certainly interested to know that the Government is continuing the new hospital project which will be a great boon not only to Broken Hill but also to many surrounding areas, including Queensland and South Australia.

The hospital is a flagship of the capital works program, but there are many other capital works programs that are under way, including multipurpose service centres at Warren and Wilcannia, which have received funding in this budget. These multipurpose centres are a great idea as they bring together the delivery of health services in one central building. I am sure they have the support of many honourable members as they are an efficient use of resources and enable people to access a wide variety of health services in one area. The $1 million budget allocation for the $3 million Wilcannia multipurpose centre is welcomed. More than $1 million has been set aside to establish a multipurpose centre at Warren. The Warren community is looking forward to the allocation of two more hospital beds. I am giving them as much support as I can to ensure that palliative care beds, or long stay care beds, reflect the needs of the district. General concern has been expressed throughout rural New South Wales about the need for more nursing home beds. I hope all governments will address that difficult proposition. With the goodwill of everyone that problem may be able to be solved, but money and commitment are needed, as well as a change to the way in which the public service advises governments of all political persuasions on the treatment of the population and the formulas to be used for long-stay beds.

Mr Schultz: Particularly isolated areas.

Mr BECKROGE: I agree with the comment of the honourable member for Burrinjuck. People in isolated areas do not have access to private centres such as those that are available in Sydney. People who grow up in rural areas like to die in those areas.

Mr Schultz: Close to their families.

Page 8591

Mr BECKROGE: Close to their families. People from Broken Hill who have moved to Kadina in South Australia, for example, will die in an area which has no bearing on their past and their family members are finding it increasingly difficult to visit them. I would like successive budgets to address this problem. At the moment the delivery of palliative care beds is the responsibility of the Federal Government. I urge all governments to address this matter. It does not matter where people live; people all over Australia have the same problem. I commend Lilliane Brady, the Mayor of Cobar, for her fearful campaign. Anybody who knows the mayor of Cobar will be aware that that is a pretty good description of her campaign. Lilliane is not a lady who lies down and gives up; she is like a terrier. I am sure that Judy Moylan in the Federal sphere will feel the same teeth on her ankles as will the Minister for Health in the State sphere. Lilliane Brady, a dedicated person, represents all those who care about what will happen to the elderly. I commend Lilliane for her efforts. Over many years roads in my electorate have been tar sealed.

Mr Markham: That is why they call you Bitumen Bill!

Mr BECKROGE: I will tell the House why I am called Bitumen Bill. It is because I want bitumen everywhere. Another reason going around is that I did not get off the bitumen. But the true story is that I believe that country areas should have roads similar to those provided in city areas and that major arterial routes should be sealed. I am pleased that the Government has continued funding for what is now known as the east-west road, the road between Bourke and Narrabri. The only sections not sealed at present are in the Brewarrina and Walgett shires. A budget allocation of $1.7 million will continue that program, which I hope will enable motorists in the year 2000 to drive on a sealed road from Bourke to Narrabri. The other major road in my electorate, the Kidman Way, runs from Hillston to Barringun on the Queensland border and then becomes Matilda Way in Queensland. There is a marvellous injection of Federal Government funds for that project. In fact, the Federal Government has taken over that project, which has been isolated from funding cuts. A large sum of money has been set aside to complete that work.

Over the last few years people in Cobar, Bourke and Hillston played off one government against the other. The decision to tar seal this road became very political. I am happy that, in the year 2001, the north-south highway will be sealed and it will take pressure off the Newell Highway. Anyone who has travelled on the Newell Highway, particularly between Dubbo and Coonabarabran, will know that it is a dreadful road on which to drive. The pressure on the Newell Highway will be relieved. The State Government played a big role in providing the impetus to seal the road. However, the Federal election followed the State election. The Federal Government was then asked to do the same thing and it has taken it over. The Federal Government should be given a tick in that regard. The State Government should also be given a tick for its work in the creation of that important road in my electorate.

The budget has allocated funding for sealing of various parts of the Silver City Highway, the important link between Broken Hill and Tibooburra. These days the Roads and Traffic Authority seals roads very well. The bad sections that are knocked out after a few points of rain are attended to. The authority also provides enough length in the bad section to enable drivers to overtake road trains. Anyone who has driven behind a road train on a dirt road, as I have, will know they are hard to get around and may be dangerous. That is where accidents can happen. The continuation of that sealing work is pleasing. I suppose some would like the work to be done faster. But obviously the budget cannot provide funding for everything. The beauty of that is that the program is ongoing, but in budget $640,000 has been allocated for work on the Silver City Highway.

The Cobb Highway runs between Wilcannia and Hay. Again, the process of sealing that highway has been gradual, and $1.1 million has been set aside to provide for sealing between the 128 kilometre mark and the 156 kilometre mark north of Hay. That north-south highway is another important arterial route that will assist in the opening up of western New South Wales. The major routes in western New South Wales are gradually being sealed. Only a small number of roads, although they are long in kilometres, now need sealing. Another matter I refer to is the continuation of the five-year $10 million lead remediation program in Broken Hill. In this budget the Government has provided a little over $2 million as part of that five-year plan. Lead remediation is an important public health issue in Broken Hill, and the Government is doing everything it can to provide a healthy environment. The difficulty is that Broken Hill is on a lead mine. The dirt the kids play in is naturally mineralised. If the money was available Broken Hill could perhaps be moved a bit further away from the mine, but that is not possible.

Funds have been provided to clean up the houses that have suffered badly from the skimps
Page 8592
blowing into the ceilings. The ceilings of many houses are full of dust. The trick is to put in a false ceiling and seal it completely so that the dust does not come through. But lead is heavy, and some ceilings have fallen in. The problem needs to be addressed. It is not as big a problem as has been suggested in the city media, but it may be necessary to continue the program for more than five years - perhaps another ten years, but eventually Broken Hill will be a cleaner city. My electorate has been granted additional units of accommodation in Cobar, Broken Hill and Lightning Ridge. Cobar and Broken Hill, have been granted additional units of teacher housing. Almost $2 million will be spent on housing in those areas.

Professional people arriving in isolated areas certainly need encouragement and support. The Government can provide that support by means of decent housing and other inducements such as attractive pay packages. Certainly it is important to provide those who are married with a decent standard of living and a decent house in which the wife can bring up the children. The teacher housing program is a good one. There is certainly a difficult problem in relation to general housing. I have not been through the Federal budget fully, but it certainly has implications for public housing in New South Wales. I hope that somehow or other the money can be found to continue the construction of public housing at the present rate. Not everyone can afford to buy a house, and as time goes by government is relied upon for the provision of services.

The Government is proceeding with the construction of a periodic detention centre at the Broken Hill gaol. That facility will provide magistrates with the option of incarcerating prisoners on a periodic basis while also allowing them to maintain relatively normal family lives, as they are able to do elsewhere in the State. The gaol is important to Broken Hill. Many people wonder why we are happy to have a gaol in the town. The gaol provides many jobs. Under Mr Yabsley Broken Hill was to lose its gaol. On a whim he decided that a $1 million saving had to be made. They had the choice between a small gaol in Parramatta and the Broken Hill gaol, and because the coalition did not hold the electorate of Broken Hill, Mr Yabsley naturally decided to knock off our gaol. There was a great performance and the honourable member for Keira, who was then the shadow minister for Aboriginal affairs, the Aboriginal people, and the police, who were not happy about escorting prisoners from Broken Hill to Bathurst, were all keen to help and we won the day. The gaol is a symbol, and the expenditure of $1 million on the periodic detention centre is marvellous. I support the budget, but it is essential to keep the pressure on because nothing comes easily to the bush.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Schultz.

[Mr Acting Deputy-Speaker left the chair at 12.49 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]

Mr FACE (Charlestown - Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development) [2.17 p.m.]: Following Anna Wood’s tragic death in October 1995, the Premier and I took decisive action against the Phoenician Club of Australia and the officers of the club in the Licensing Court. This resulted in a lengthy hearing, during which the club defended its action of unlawfully admitting young people to the club to attend rage parties. After hearing submissions from both the Director of Liquor and Gaming and counsel for the club, the magistrate this week handed down his decision on the penalty to be imposed. The Government’s submission to the court stated that it was patently obvious that the club, in order to overcome severe financial difficulties and to continue to operate, looked to save itself by seeking to attract to the club younger members of the community.

The club’s actions on 21 October 1995 were a recipe for disaster. The club embarked on a clear policy of disregarding the conditions imposed by South Sydney City Council concerning security to ensure the protection of patrons. The club and its officers showed little contrition during the hearing. The club, through its officers, sought to deliberately mislead the court as to the document purporting to be a record of functions conducted under the club’s functions authority. Because of the serious nature of the offence, the Government submitted that the court should cancel the club’s certificate of registration and impose a maximum fine of $250,000.

The club submitted that it had not held any further functions in any way approximating the type of function held on 21 October 1995. It said that guest registers and temporary members registers were now being kept properly, so the risk of minors being in the bar, in the poker machine areas or purchasing liquor had been eliminated, which was not the case prior to 21 October 1995. The club also submitted that the action taken by the Government and the tragic death of Anna Wood had a dramatic effect on the club, and so it should. The club said in
Page 8593
its submission that it had been chastened, humiliated and publicly shamed by what had happened as a result of letting go of control of its premises. The magistrate noted that on many occasions the club had acted as a public entertainment facility in breach of the law and had not provided proper supervision, resulting in under-age persons being allowed access to alcohol, poker machines and drugs, both inside and outside the club.

The magistrate said he had taken into account the fact that the club had a number of serious breaches recorded against it. On the other hand, he also took into account the expressions of humiliation and public shame resulting from the club’s dereliction of its responsibilities in letting onto the premises an entrepreneur, but noted that there had been no suggestion of any personal gain to any directors. It appeared that the directors had not followed the wrong course for any reason other than the ultimate benefit of the club, probably to get it out of its financial trouble. It was also noted that there was evidence of a much stricter control in admission of temporary members and guests, and that the club had not attempted to hold similar entertainment.

It is also noted that the club was a centre for cultural activities of the Maltese community and that cancellation would result in the loss of employment of 12 casual employees and the club’s secretary and an inability to pay the club’s creditors. The magistrate said he would not make an order cancelling the club’s certificate of registration but that the imposition of a substantial monetary penalty was required. He fined the club a total of $100,000 and barred the club’s president and a former director from holding office in relation to any club for a period of two years and the club’s secretary for a period of two months. The orders are to take effect from 25 May this year.

The Government has also made an application to the court for costs, which will amount to $105,000. This matter will be dealt with later this month. I hope the size of the penalty imposed on the club and the action taken by the Premier and me not only will be a lesson to the Phoenician Club but will act as a warning to all clubs that young people must be protected from exposure to drugs and alcohol. Any licence holder who chooses to ignore this responsibility can be assured that the Government will prosecute to the fullest extent of the law and seek a substantial penalty, as occurred in this tragic case. This case should also serve as a timely reminder to directors of clubs throughout New South Wales about their responsibility for their actions. I know from experience that many directors work under a mistaken impression about their responsibilities under State and company laws, and this is a clear warning to them that they will be in trouble for not exercising those responsibilities.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Earlier today the Lakes United Rugby League Football Club used the facilities of the Parliament to launch its 50-year history, and I recognise the President and office holders of that club in the gallery.

Mr COLLINS (Willoughby - Leader of the Opposition) [2.21 p.m.]: Though I agree wholeheartedly with the comments reminding the community of New South Wales about the tragic death of Anna Wood as a result of taking an ecstasy tablet and reminding young people throughout New South Wales about the danger of experimenting with such drugs, the action the Minister has just outlined is vastly different from the action that the Government, the then Minister and the Premier outlined in this Chamber in late 1995. Honourable members will understand that the Premier has not made this ministerial statement because he said in this House towards the end of 1995 that the club would be closed.

Mr Carr: That was the court’s decision.

Mr COLLINS: He told this Parliament that he would close the club.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will disregard the interjection by the Premier.

Mr COLLINS: I was responding to the Premier’s interjection. In late 1995 the Premier of this State said that he would not stand for such action and would close the club. This proves yet again that there is a vast gulf between what this Premier says and what he does. The New South Wales community recognises the growing gulf between the hot air the Premier expels and what the Government actually delivers. Yet again the Premier’s media stunt of late 1995 has fallen flat. He has not delivered on his promises to the people of this State. This is yet another example of the Government’s rhetoric far outstripping its actions.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Government members will cease interjecting.

[Notices of Motions]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Cabramatta to order. Government members will cease interjecting and Opposition
Page 8594
members will cease encouraging the honourable member for Hurstville. The House will hear the honourable member for Ermington in silence.

[Interruption]

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

Mr Whelan: On a point of order. Clearly this notice of motion is far too lengthy and argumentative. I ask you to rule it out of order.

Mr Hartcher: On the point of order -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. I will not hear any further on the point of order. I will accept the motion, but I warn members that I will look closely at similar motions because I do not believe they comply with the spirit of the standing orders. I will not make a definitive decision on the matter today. However, I will make a statement tomorrow about the length and content of notices of motions.

Petitions praying that the office of Governor of New South Wales not be downgraded, and that the role, duties and future of the office be determined by a referendum, received from Mr Armstrong, Mr Beck, Mr Blackmore, Mr Brogden, Mrs Chikarovski, Mr Collins, Mr Debnam, Mr Ellis, Ms Ficarra, Mr Fraser, Mr Glachan, Mr Hartcher, Mr Hazzard, Mr Humpherson, Dr Kernohan, Mr Kerr, Mr Kinross, Mr MacCarthy, Mr Merton, Mr O’Doherty, Mr Phillips, Mr Photios, Mr Rozzoli, Mr Schipp, Mr Schultz, Ms Seaton, Mrs Skinner, Mr Smith, Mr Souris and Mr Tink.

Petitions praying that the removal of the Macedonian and Italian interpreters from the Ethnic Affairs Commission in the Illawarra be opposed; and that the Ethnic Affairs Commissioner be replaced with a commissioner who truly represents the Illawarra community, received from Mr Markham, Mr Rumble and Mr Sullivan.

Petition praying that Ryde Hospital and its services be retained, received from Mr Tink.

Petition praying that adequate police be provided for Taree, that forward planning be undertaken for a police station at Old Bar and that the Old Bar police patrol be increased, received from Mr J. H. Turner.

Petition praying that a lift be installed at Turramurra railway station, received from Mr O’Farrell.

Petition praying that west-facing ramps be constructed on the M2 Motorway at Windsor Road, Baulkham Hills, received from Mr Merton.

Petition praying that the Manly Cove foreshores be protected, and that the Manly Council policy that limits the height and scale of any Manly Wharf development be respected, received from Dr Macdonald.

Mr SPEAKER: I welcome His Excellency, Speaker of the House of Representatives and President of the National Assembly of the Thai Parliament, Mr Wanmuhamadnoor Matha, and his distinguished delegation, consisting of the Hon. Mr Paijit Sreewarakan, the Hon. Mr Paisal Yingsaman, the Hon. Mr Sunai Chulpongsatorn, the Hon. Prof. Dr Phaisith Phipatanakul, Dr Chaiyong Satjipanon, Mr Veera Musikapong, Mr Narong Ratanaporn, Mr Burahanudin Useng, Mr Sompol Vanigbandhu, Mr Aziz Kado, Captain Udom Hengcharoen, Miss Duangdao Johnsuk, Mr Luxsakorn Lertwijitsagul and Mr Pramonda Bangharangshi who are visiting our Parliament today and are seated in the Speaker’s Gallery.

Mr PHOTIOS (Ermington) [2.44 p.m.]: I move:

That general business notice of motion (general notice) No. 76 have precedence on Thursday, 15 May.

Dr Refshauge: On a point of order. I have just had an opportunity to look at the motion that the honourable member for Gladesville -

Page 8595

Mr Phillips: It is the member for Ermington.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chair understands to whom the Deputy Premier is referring and does not need any assistance from the member for Wakehurst and others.

Dr Refshauge: The member for Ermington editorialised throughout the reading of his motion. Previously you have ruled that sort of motion to be out of order. Therefore, I ask you to rule the motion out of order.

Mr PHOTIOS: On the point of order. With all due respect to you and your good office, Mr Speaker, the House is well aware that motions can include comment and issues. A question cannot be argumentative; a motion can. The motion is essentially a factual one, and a very detailed one at that.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The point made by the Deputy Premier may have some validity. However, the House would be aware that earlier this afternoon I indicated that I would make a final decision on matters such as this tomorrow. The difficulty the Chair faces is that if this matter is granted precedence, and tomorrow I rule such matters out of order, the order granting precedence will become redundant and will preclude another member from having a matter reordered. In the circumstances I rule the motion out of order.

Mr MARKHAM (Keira) [2.46 p.m.]: I move:

That general business notice of motion (general notice) No. 60 have precedence on Thursday, 15 May.

My motion should have precedence because it is important that this Parliament sends a positive message commending the National Conference for Aboriginal Reconciliation, which will be held in Melbourne on 26, 27 and 28 May, and to the New South Wales State Reconciliation Committee for its work over the past few years. It is also imperative that this Parliament recognises that 27 May is the thirtieth anniversary of the referendum that gave Aboriginal people the right to participate in the affairs of their own country. For those reasons I seek precedence for my motion.

Motion agreed to.

[Notices of Motions for Urgent Consideration]

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

I indicate to the House that I will consider the length of urgency notices, bearing in mind the time limit of five minutes for each of two speakers to such notices of motions to establish priority. I am concerned about the length of the notices and that they are becoming more debating points than notices of debate to be conducted at a later stage. I indicate to the House that I will make a statement about this matter tomorrow.

Mr COLLINS: At a celebrity-filled function on Friday did the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Tourism release this glossy tourism brochure, knowing that the prices published for Sydney’s hotels did not take into account the impact of the 10 per cent bed tax? Which will he pulp, the bed tax or the brochure?

Mr LANGTON: The answer to the first part of the question is yes. The answer to the second part of the question is that the bed tax is part of the budget package.

Mr CLOUGH: Will the Minister for Police supply details of plans to replace outdated Police Service firearms?

Mr WHELAN: Since the last election the Carr Government has progressively been remedying the long outstanding occupational health and safety problems experienced by New South Wales police. I remind the honourable member that already more than 2,000 bullet-resistant vests have been provided to front-line police and almost $7 million has been spent on improving communications systems. Today I can announce that the Government is continuing to deliver improved security and safety not only for police -

Mr Hartcher: On a point of order. The standing orders preclude the asking of questions that call for an announcement of government policy. The Minister has just said that today he is announcing. If he has already announced it, why does he need to announce it again? Standing Order 137, which I will quote -

Page 8596

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chair is quite aware of the standing order.

Mr Hartcher: It says that no announcement of government policy -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chair is quite aware of the standing order. The honourable member for Gosford makes a valid point, but it does not apply in this case. The Leader of the House has the call.

Mr WHELAN: Today I can announce that the Government is continuing to deliver improved security and safety not only for police, but also for the community of New South Wales. Today, with Deputy Commissioner, Field Operations, Bev Lawson, and in the presence of Mr Tunchon, President of the Police Association of New South Wales, I announced that the new Police Service firearm would be the Glock pistol. The total cost of replacing the out-of-date firearms will be more than $11 million. The process of replacing the current weapon was commenced by the Carr Government in November 1995.

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

Mr WHELAN: Let me remind Opposition members who continually interject that as far back as 1991-92 a special purposes committee, called task force Alpha, concluded that the Police Service weapon at that time had unsatisfactory features, particularly in relation to reloading. What did the former Government do about it from 1991-92 to 1995? Nothing! It placed every officer in New South Wales, and consequently the people of New South Wales, in great jeopardy because it failed to adopt the recommendations of task force Alpha, a task force set up by the former Government.

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

Mr WHELAN: That fact alone should cause eternal shame to the Opposition.

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

Mr WHELAN: The tender for the new self-loading pistol was issued by the State Contracts Control Board in May 1996 and closed last August. In March this year I was advised that the contract had been approved by the State Contracts Control Board.

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

Mr WHELAN: As I was concerned about several matters in the tender process, I met with the Commissioner of the Independent Commission Against Corruption, Justice Barry O’Keefe, and asked him to review the tender. On 2 May I received a letter from Justice O’Keefe advising me that the Operations Review Committee of the Independent Commission Against Corruption had considered the matter and determined that no further investigation was necessary. Having been given the all clear I am delighted to announce that, from July this year, New South Wales police will be progressively equipped with new Glock pistols. The tender process was divided into two phases which included assessed safety, technical superiority and cost-effectiveness. This process was undertaken over a six-month period by experts from the New South Wales Supply Service, an independent testing laboratory, experienced armourers and trainers, general duty police and the Police Association. Glock was awarded the tender for the 13,000 or so new firearms. The total capital cost of the firearm replacements, including guns, magazines and reloading equipment, will be more than $9.5 million. Ammunition costs will be approximately $1 million.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is far too much conversation on the front benches on both sides. On many occasions the noise emanating from both sides prevents the Speaker from hearing interjections and hearing members’ contributions. I ask members from both sides to remain silent while the Minister delivers his reply.

Mr Collins: On a point of order. I note the matter that you have just brought to the attention of both front benches. I think the reason for the conversation on both sides of the Chamber is the striking similarity between the answer the Minister is giving now and the answer he gave last year.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. That point of order was totally uncalled for. The Chair is seeking to maintain some decorum in the Chamber.

Mr WHELAN: And it is vastly different from the answer given by the Minister for Police in 1993. Additional training and armoury costs will make up the remaining expenditure. Glocks are used by police officers in 42 countries, including 115 agencies in the United States of America and four agencies in Canada. I am advised that the Glock weapon outperformed all other tendered weapons in
Page 8597
safety features, accuracy, reliability, endurance, design and construction.

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

Mr WHELAN: The Glock was also found to perform best in conditions likely to be experienced in New South Wales, including extremes of heat and cold, humidity, rain, dust, mud and poor light.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Minister for Land and Water Conservation to order.

Mr WHELAN: The Glock’s price was also particularly competitive. Separate contracts for ancillary items such as holsters, magazines and training are now being issued. The Government’s first priority is to arm the police at the front line. By providing better equipment to police in local areas we will also be providing better protection and security for the communities they serve. In July this year Police Service weapons trainers will commence training New South Wales officers with the new weapons. The next class to graduate from the Police Academy will be issued with and trained in the new firearm, as will all future classes. Officers engaged in single unit policing, including highway patrol and dog squad officers and, of particular importance to the honourable member for Bathurst, the honourable member for Broken Hill and the honourable member for Clarence, who have an interest in rural New South Wales, country sectors with fewer than four police will be amongst the first to receive these new guns.

Police in small regional communities like Blayney, Cudal, Menindee, Wangi Wangi, Greenethorpe, Copmanhurst and Yeoval will be among the first to receive their new guns. The weapons will then be progressively issued to other front-line police. Commissioned officers will be the last to receive the new guns. I know that the honourable member for Bathurst will be disappointed with the conclusion to this process, in that the Australian Defence Industries Pty Ltd, which is in his electorate, was not the successful tenderer, despite his rigorous representations over a long period about the replacement Police Service firearm. I am sure that the honourable member understands that the Government is bound by the guidelines which govern tender processes in New South Wales. I also advise the honourable member that the ADI was well outside the State preference policy guidelines. However, it is important that I put on the record the honourable member’s determination to make strong representations on behalf of his constituents.

Mr ARMSTRONG: Has the department of the Minister for Education and Training, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth Affairs banned scripture classes at Monteagle Public School from performing an Easter passion play on the grounds that Christ’s death contravenes anti-violence guidelines? Will the Minister intervene to stop his department from trying to rewrite the meaning of Easter?

Mr AQUILINA: The Opposition, by asking this silly question, has sunk to its lowest depths.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wakehurst to order for the second time.

Mr AQUILINA: The Leader of the National Party, who asked the question, knows that there is no validity to that claim.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai to order.

Mr AQUILINA: He contacted the district superintendent and he went to some lengths to find out the circumstances involved in this case. The Leader of the National Party knows that those circumstances are not the circumstances that he related in this House today. The question he has asked in no way reduces the seriousness with which all Christians around the world regard Easter, nor does it undermine Christian principles. I am advised that, for a number of years, Monteagle Public School has performed a passion play which has been the cause of some controversy in the local area. The current principal believed that the play was particularly violent and humiliating -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai to order for the second time. I call the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai to order for the third time.

Mr AQUILINA: Let me present some of the details concerning this event. Children from kindergarten to year 6 witnessed graphic scenes of whipping, shouting, humiliation, spitting and ridicule. A child portraying Jesus carrying a large cross up a hill, with arms outstretched fully for an extended period -

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

Page 8598

Mr AQUILINA: - and the clothes of the child ripped off and blood painted to portray the effects of the whipping -

[Interruption]

Opposition members say that that happens a lot. A passion play might be appropriate for a prayer group, but we are talking about kindergarten children - children as young as five or six.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Burrinjuck to order for the second time.

Mr AQUILINA: I remember the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai saying on many occasions how vulnerable young people at the age of five or six can be. This issue is nowhere near as serious as the Leader of the National Party has made it out to be. The principal received complaints from the parents of students.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai interjects again I will ask the Serjeant-at-Arms to remove him immediately.

Mr AQUILINA: In one case a parent kept her child at home rather than have that child observe the play. I respect the right of principals to make decisions appropriate to the needs of children in their care.

Mr Armstrong: But do you respect Easter, that is the thing?

Mr AQUILINA: That is nonsense! I do not have to have my beliefs challenged by anyone, let alone the Leader of the National Party. I do not wear my religion on my sleeve and I know what my religion stands for. I do not go around in hypocritical mode either.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a rather sensitive topic. The Leader of the National Party will cease interjecting. The Minister will address his remarks through the Chair.

Mr AQUILINA: Having made those remarks about the rights and responsibilities of the principal, I also indicate that the Education Reform Act provides that schools fix times for local clergy to attend or for other religious education in schools - commonly known as scripture lessons. I am advised that the teacher who organised the performance of the play is in fact a scripture teacher at the school. In relation to special religious education, the Department of School Education chairs a special religious education advisory committee, which has representatives from each of the major denominations. Given the circumstances, I have asked the chairperson of the committee, Dr Alan Rice, to consider the matter, taking into account the relevant advice of the members of the committee and the concerns of principals and parents. If policy implications are involved in this matter, they should be referred to the whole committee to consider whether advice to the director-general is recommended. Clearly there is a proper and appropriate way of dealing with this issue. I am dealing with it in a proper and appropriate way, and the department will make a balanced judgment taking into account the sensitivities of all involved. For the Leader of the National Party to suggest that the Government is in any way denigrating Easter or lowering Christian principles is the height of hypocrisy.

Mr RUMBLE: My question without notice is directed to the Premier. What major projects will New South Wales earmark for special benefit under the Federal Government’s newly announced Federation Fund?

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

Mr CARR: The New South Wales Government will not allow the Prime Minister to use the Federation Fund for political pork-barrelling.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have already warned members that unruly behaviour is totally unacceptable. I expect members to listen in silence to the Premier.

Mr CARR: The fund should be designed to: first, provide a lasting benefit to infrastructure; second, to reinvigorate regional economies; and third, to provide job security. I can announce that the New South Wales Government has this morning already begun work on the proposals that it will put to the Federal Government for consideration by this fund - and those proposals meet all those tests.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Ermington to order for the second time.

Mr CARR: Firstly, I refer to Newcastle. Newcastle workers need help like never before following BHP’s closure decision and the Prime Minister’s apathy. The Government has been working to develop industrial land at Mayfield West. It will finalise a streamlined planning process for the site and begin a marketing campaign for potential
Page 8599
investors. The site has the potential to generate up to 2,000 new jobs for the region, which is vital in offsetting the impact of closing the steelworks at BHP - a decision by the BHP boardroom endorsed by the Federal Minister for Primary Industries and Energy. I have asked the Premier’s Department to examine the contribution of Federal funding to infrastructure that can help us bring jobs to this site - in particular, to improve transport infrastructure, including road, rail and port facilities. Secondly, I refer to the central coast.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Gosford to order for the second time.

Mr CARR: In March this year, despite campaigns by communities on the central coast, the Federal Government refused to support the proposal for the international garden festival to be held there in the year 2000. State Cabinet has sought to give the project -

[Interruption]

Luna Park is not on this list. The Government will not make good your failure in regard to Luna Park.

Mr Souris: You wrecked Luna Park. You are the ones who wrecked it.

Mr CARR: No. Members of the Opposition should cease asking the Government to pour money into Luna Park, after the Opposition lost $50 million. State Cabinet has sought to give the project another opportunity - again without requiring the underwriting of State taxpayers.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order.

Mr CARR: A detailed proposal from the organisers of the project’s management and financial underwriting by the private sector will be submitted for examination in mid-June. The New South Wales Government will maintain its offer to make land at Mount Penang available to the project. The Government’s total contributions are valued at almost $90 million. As with BHP, the Government is prepared to put the money in. But it is reasonable to expect the Commonwealth Government to put $25 million towards this exciting project. That includes $16 million for the cost of the Australian pavilion and $9 million for the cost of Federal services such as immigration and quarantine. As my colleagues well know, this project has the potential to generate thousands of jobs and to give the region the lasting benefit of a great park that is vital for recreation and tourism. Let us put it on the list for consideration by the Federation Fund. A third project - and one that is very important to rural New South Wales but also betrayed by the Federal Government -

Mr Hartcher: You should talk about that!

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Gosford to order for the third time.

Mr CARR: That is a disgraceful performance by a parliamentarian. A third project that is vital for rural New South Wales is also betrayed by the icy indifference of Canberra - in this case by that great statesman Tim Fischer, who enjoys the confidence of all his National Party colleagues. I refer to a great project, which this Government has supported - the prospect of an international freight airport at Parkes in the State’s central west. Estimates show that the project will deliver up to 10,000 jobs for the central west. All the project requires is backing by the Commonwealth.

[Interruption]

They scorn the project. Let Hansard note that the Opposition scorns the project. The proposal will allow agricultural producers in the central west to export their products direct from the central west to the supermarket shelves of Asia. Currently the project is subject to a due diligence study to determine its viability.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is too much audible conversation among members on the front benches on both sides of the Chamber. I call the Deputy Leader of the National Party to order for the second time.

Mr CARR: He is still burbling about Luna Park. The study’s results, expected in June, will decide its future. I should add that once again, as one would expect, it is the New South Wales Government that has supported the project up to this point. It has provided $200,000 to the cost of the study following the failure of Tim Fischer to provide the $300,000 he promised in the last Federal election. Should the project meet the required economic tests, the Government will consider seeking money from the Federation Fund to help meet the $50 million construction costs - a great plan for the central west of New South Wales.

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

Mr CARR: Subject to that economic viability study, the project ought to be backed by the
Page 8600
Federation Fund. A fourth project, one for Sydney’s greater west, is the development of a light rail corridor along Sunnyholt Road which would provide expanded public transport capacities, in particular to the north-west sector. It would reduce vehicle dependency and reinforce the regional economic role of that great centre, Blacktown. I refer to the fifth proposal for the Federation Fund. We have wasted no time getting down to business. We are about building New South Wales. Wherever one goes in this State, one sees blue and yellow posters that say, "building a new hospital", "building a new road", "building a better New South Wales".

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

Mr CARR: The fifth proposal is important for honourable members who represent a vital economic region of the State. I refer to the electrification of the south coast rail line from Dapto to Kiama and from Kiama to Bomaderry, which is estimated to cost $115 million. Design work is yet to be completed for the project, but it is expected to cover 61 kilometres of track work and to take about three years to complete.

[Interruption]

Oh, the genius opposite says that it has not even started. He is a joke. He is the shadow minister for transport. He must have been talking to the Deputy Leader of the National Party - that genius - and getting tips. "How did you lose $50 million on a fun park, George?" is what they are speaking about. The Dapto to Kiama section will generate 150 jobs and the Kiama to Bomaderry section will create up to 200 jobs.

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

Mr CARR: The Federal Treasurer had barely finished his Budget Speech and left the Chamber to light a plutocratic cigar and we were at work asking how the fund can be used to generate jobs for all those who want to work, to create job security for those who work and to create lasting infrastructure for the State - city, country and regional New South Wales alike: jobs for families and jobs for all.

Mr PHOTIOS: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Health. Does the Minister support official plans by the Northern Sydney Area Health Service to downgrade intensive care units at Ryde Hospital and Mona Vale Hospital? Will the Minister guarantee that the hospitals will not become, in the words of one doctor, "nothing more than M*A*S*H units which patch people up and transfer them on"?

Dr REFSHAUGE: I welcome the Opposition frontbench reshuffle. The question of the honourable member for Ermington is the first question relating to health that I have received from the Opposition this year, and it makes a nice change. It is not surprising that they had a reshuffle in the middle of question time to find someone who is prepared to ask a question -

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

Dr REFSHAUGE: Again, the Opposition has got it wrong. Intensive care units are an important part of the New South Wales hospital network, including the northern Sydney area. The intensive care unit at Mona Vale Hospital, in particular, is in the spotlight because the intensive care specialist is resigning. As I have explained to many people, we cannot go to Franklins to buy an intensive care specialist. The Federal Government has said that we have too many doctors - we certainly do not have too many intensive care specialists. We have advertised for a new intensive care specialist for Mona Vale Hospital and we have some time before the present specialist resigns and moves on to work elsewhere. We hope that we can find a replacement and that there will be a seamless transition and no problems.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Pittwater to order for the second time.

Dr REFSHAUGE: The situation is not helped by Opposition members bagging their own hospitals.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Ermington to order for the third time.

Dr REFSHAUGE: The Government has increased funding to hospitals; the previous coalition Government decreased funding to hospitals by 1.5 per cent every year. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition did that when he was the Minister for Health - he introduced the productivity cuts; he is the slasher. Recently he said in this Chamber that he would do that again if the coalition ever got into office - which is slightly different from what the honourable member for North Shore would say.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Minister for Land and Water Conservation to order for the second time.

Page 8601

Dr REFSHAUGE: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said that he would reintroduce productivity cuts and cut hospital budgets, including -

Mr Photios: On a point of order. My point of order relates to the Minister’s non-answer. His answer should refer to the secret report to downgrade Ryde Hospital’s intensive care unit.

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

Dr REFSHAUGE: I know that the honourable member for Ermington does not know where Mona Vale is. He lives on the north shore but he has never been to Mona Vale.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have called the honourable member for Ermington to order on three occasions. Serjeant, remove the honourable member.

[The honourable member for Ermington left the Chamber, accompanied by the Serjeant-at-Arms.]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the honourable member for Hurstville and the honourable member for Fairfield on three calls to order.

Dr REFSHAUGE: For about 35 seconds there was a new shadow spokesperson for health - the Opposition will have to find someone else.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for North Shore to order for the second time.

Dr REFSHAUGE: It would help if the Opposition, instead of perpetuating lies about our health care system, said that the staff who work at Mona Vale Hospital are good and are doing a great job. The Opposition should recognise the hard work of the hospital staff.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Pittwater to order for the third time.

Dr REFSHAUGE: If the Opposition says that the staff are lousy, people will not want to work in the hospital. The coalition’s mealy-mouthed actions and its budget cuts show what it is on about. It is continuing to destroy the public hospital system by undermining the staff who work in the system.

Ms ANDREWS: My question without notice is directed to the Deputy Premier, Minister for Health, and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs. What effect will the Federal budget cuts have on health services in New South Wales?

Dr REFSHAUGE: The question of the honourable member for Peats highlights the lack of respect the Federal Government has for health services in this country. Again, the Federal Minister for Health has been done over by the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. Again, New South Wales has been slugged with more cuts to hospital funding. Once again, Michael Wooldridge has failed to deliver.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Bega to order for the second time.

Dr REFSHAUGE: Once again, the honourable member for North Shore urges the Federal Government to keep cutting health funding. We are standing up to the Federal Government because we believe that public hospitals in New South Wales and throughout this great nation need more support from the Federal Government. Last year the Federal Government took away $34 million from our public hospitals on the basis that there had been cost shifting in New South Wales. But the Federal Minister for Health, Michael Wooldridge, said that it was not the Labor Government that did it, it was the coalition - the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Opposition were the ones that should have been penalised. Michael Wooldridge is penalising the people of New South Wales.

There is no doubt that the $34 million translates to 17,000 patients not getting treatment. Last year Michael Wooldridge said that 17,000 people in New South Wales should not be treated. He wants to penalise the people of New South Wales because of the actions of the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party. This year again that $34 million is not there: it is gone. Another 17,000 patients will not be treated in New South Wales as a result of the Opposition’s colleagues in Canberra and its urging of the Federal Government to keep on making cuts. I refer now to dental cuts. One would have expected outrage from the bush and certainly from National Party members about cuts to dental care and would have expected funding to have at least been restored, but the $30 million is not there either.

Mr Collins: You took dental patients off the waiting list. You just eliminated them.

Dr REFSHAUGE: Here is the Leader of the Opposition. I suggest that members from rural areas
Page 8602
who are particularly hard hit hear that the Leader of the Opposition said that the program should finish. That is what he said.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for North Shore to order for the third time.

Dr REFSHAUGE: Every member representing a rural electorate knows that they are losing dentists and their pensioner patients are not receiving the dental care they need. I suggest they have a meeting with the Leader of the Opposition to explain the facts of life for country folk under the vicious attack by and support of the Federal Government cuts to dental programs. On top of that the Federal Government took $10 million from the special purpose payments to special programs to provide health services to needy areas. This year that $10 million is gone again and has not been restored.

Because the Australian Capital Territory cannot treat patients as effectively and efficiently as New South Wales, New South Wales has to pay at the higher rate, not at the rate it costs in New South Wales. That is costing an extra $6 million this year. Also, the Federal Government removed $4 million from the HIV-AIDS and drug and alcohol programs. One of the cruelest cuts is that last year $14 million was taken out of mental health and this year the Federal Government has made a grand contribution by restoring some of the $14 million that was taken away. To put this matter in context, the State Government put in $7 million extra for mental health but the Federal Government this year is putting only $200,000 towards this for the whole of the country.

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

Dr REFSHAUGE: The State Government is putting in 35 times that amount. This year the fallout in private health insurance is costing this State $240 million because of failure of the Federal Government to live up to the Medicare agreement and to pay the State Government for the fallout. That is almost $400 million that it is costing New South Wales because of the policies of the Federal Government. However, the New South Wales Government increased its funding to health. Over three years more than $800 million extra has been put into health because the Government believes in the public hospital system and is prepared to ensure that it is a major priority.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Georges River to order for the second time.

Dr REFSHAUGE: The honourable member for North Shore, the Prime Minister and the Federal Minister for Health ought to recognise what every health Minister is saying around this nation: we are facing a crisis in our health care system because of the lack of Federal Government direction and commitment to our public hospitals. When $34 million is taken out of the public hospital system, 17,000 patients who should have been treated do not receive treatment. That is why waiting lists in New South Wales are increasing. There is no doubt about that: our waiting lists are going up.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the third time.

Dr REFSHAUGE: Waiting lists in every other State are going up faster than they are in New South Wales because this Government is providing extra funding. In March more than 108,000 patients were treated in accident and emergency departments across the State. The extra funding means that 94 per cent of triage one patients were treated within two minutes and waiting times for elective surgery continue to perform well, with 17 of 20 areas and hospitals achieving 90 per cent or more of their targets for urgent and high-priority surgery patients.

Figures released today for March also take into account the doctors’ strike, which led to about 4,000, or 5,000 cancellations. If that doctors’ strike had not gone ahead, waiting lists would have been significantly shorter than they were in March 1995. Opposition colleagues in Canberra started the strike, not this Government. They tried to stop the number of doctors being able to work in this country and tried to take away the Medicare provider numbers. This meant that 5,000 patients had to be cancelled from the waiting lists and that is reflected in this month’s waiting list figures.

There is no doubt that our hospitals are performing well, with the support of the State Government’s increased funding. The South Eastern Sydney Area Health Service has an annual budget of $667 million and admits 170,000 patients a year. Each year a number of hospitals have difficulty coming in on budget but they expect to come in on budget despite Federal Government cuts. Each hospital is having to bear the brunt of the $30-odd million cut this year. They are finding it difficult, despite the fact that they are working very hard. The Northern Sydney Area Health Service has an annual budget of $424 million and admits 110,000 patients
Page 8603
each year. It is projecting less than a 0.5 per cent budget overrun, but assures me that with more than six weeks to go, it will be able to come in on budget.

The Federal Government constantly rips money out of the health care system and refuses to fix up the failing private health system. Each year it is costing New South Wales $250 million because of the fallout of private health insurance. That is a massive cost shift to New South Wales, yet honourable members opposite cheer on the cuts made by Wooldridge, Costello and Howard. It is clear who cares about public hospitals. This Government has added $800 million to the public hospital budget in three years but $400 million has been taken out by the Opposition’s mates in Canberra.

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

Mr SOURIS: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police. Given that last November the Premier approved the application of the parental responsibility legislation in regional centres, why has the legislation not been implemented and why is there no provision for it in the budget?

Mr Carr: Read the announcement about the legislation.

Mr WHELAN: As the Premier interjected, the honourable member should read the announcements and I will send him all the public press releases that have been issued about it.

Mr Souris: That’s no answer.

Mr WHELAN: The Opposition has no answer to the fact that everywhere one goes in rural New South Wales, as I do, the people of rural New South Wales applaud the Carr Government on its initiatives in relation to the Children (Parental Responsibility) Act.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Vaucluse to order for the second time.

Mr WHELAN: If one looks at the Attorney General’s budget one never knows what one will find. I will not continue to educate Opposition members. I will send them the press releases.

Mr NAGLE: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for the Olympics. How will the Government honour Australia’s past Olympians in the lead-up to the Olympic Games?

Mr KNIGHT: No nation on earth loves its sporting heroes as much as Australia does. And at the very top of the list of Australian sporting heroes are the names of our Olympic champions. They hold a special place in the hearts of all Australians. For us, they represent all that is good about our nation. They represent the ideal of ourselves. They are the epitome of our aspirations. They are role models for all of us. That is why I was extremely proud to announce earlier today plans to honour our greatest Olympians of all time, and to honour them for all time in a place which will soon hold a special resonance in our proud Olympic history - Olympic Park at Homebush Bay, the site of the 2000 Olympic Games.

I was delighted to announce earlier today the plan for the naming of the major streets and roads at Olympic Park. They will be named after Australia’s greatest Olympic and Paralympic athletes. The naming of these roads will play an integral part in educating Australians about our rich Olympic history. The stories of the Olympians we are honouring are tales of inspiration, courage and heroism that all Australians can be proud of. First, we are honouring two people who may perhaps be forgotten by modern generations but who deserve special recognition. Edwin Flack was both Australia’s first gold medallist and our first Olympian, becoming a dual gold medallist in the first modern Olympic Games at Athens in 1896.

Edwin Flack became known as the Lion of Athens, a hero to the Greek crowds, for his outstanding performances in winning the 800 metres and the 1500 metres track events. He also competed in singles tennis, doubles tennis and the marathon, where the British ambassador’s butler acted as his attendant, cycling alongside Flack in a bowler hat offering assistance, where necessary. Edwin Flack organised his own passage to the first Olympic Games and it is partly due to him that we can proudly boast of the fact that Australia is one of only two countries to have attended every modern Olympic Games.

The feats of Sarah, or as she is better known Fanny, Durack, are equally as important. She is Australia’s first female gold medallist - indeed, our only female gold medallist in the first half of this century. She broke 11 world records during her
Page 8604
career. She defied all kinds of prejudice to win a place in the 1912 Games in Stockholm. Administrators opposed her selection then refused to pay her fares, which were raised by public subscription. Despite these setbacks she went on to sweep the pool in the 100 metres freestyle. These two, Australia’s first Olympic greats, will be honoured along with Australia’s other golden legends.

Marjorie Jackson, the Lithgow Flash, winner of two gold medals at Helsinki in 1952, holder of 13 world records, was our first female track and field gold medallist. The people of Lithgow built her a special cinder running track to practise for the Games, and on her return she was feted in an open-top car with thousands of Australians lining the whole length of the route from Sydney to Lithgow. Shirley Strickland was the winner of seven Olympic medals over three Olympic Games. She was the holder of nine world records and was nicknamed the Queen of Running. No female Olympian of any country has ever won more track and field medals than Strickland’s seven.

Murray Rose, swimmer, actor, television presenter, is an Australian hero. In 1983 he was voted Australia’s greatest male athlete by his peers. His Olympic tally of four gold, one silver and one bronze is the highest achievement by any Australian male athlete. Shane Gould, the 1972 Australian of the Year, won three individual gold medals in world record time in the one Olympics. She won five medals in the 1972 Olympic Games and held 11 world records. At the age of 15 she held outright every freestyle world record from 100 metres to 1500 metres.

Herb Elliott at the 1960 Rome Olympics ran probably the greatest 1500 metre race in Olympic history. He comfortably blitzed his opponents, winning by the greatest margin in Olympic history in world record time. Herb Elliott was never beaten in his entire career over 1500 metres or a mile. Dawn Fraser was the star of the golden era of Australian swimming. Of course, she was a member of this Parliament for three years. She was the first swimmer to win the same event in three consecutive Olympics. She held the 100-metre freestyle record for 16 years. She won eight Olympic medals and 30 Australian championships and set 39 world records. She was the first female to swim under a minute for the 100 metres.

The streets of Olympic Park will not only honour those great Olympians. In the year 2000 Sydney Olympic Park will also play host to the Paralympic Games. Thus I am proud to inform the House that we have also named one of the roads after one of Australia’s greatest Paralympians, Kevin Coombes. Australia has as proud a history in the Paralympics as it does in the Olympics, and Kevin Coombes was there in the first Paralympic Games in Rome in 1960. Kevin Coombes was a pioneering Paralympian. He represented Australia in wheelchair basketball in five Paralympics over a 24-year career. The Olympians and the Paralympian I have mentioned join the great Betty Cuthbert, who is already honoured at Homebush Bay, with her name gracing the grandstand at the Sydney International Athletics Centre.

By naming the streets of Homebush Bay after these great Australians we will ensure that their names and deeds will live forever. Other Olympic champions will be honoured in the street names of the athletes village. I take this opportunity to thank the Homebush Bay names committee and in particular Harry Gordon, Australia’s premier Olympic authority, for the work they did in recommending the names of the streets. I am pleased that the names of the streets honour those who have been down one of the toughest roads of all - the road to Olympic glory.

Mr PHILLIPS: My question is directed to the Premier, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Ethnic Affairs. Is he unavailable to attend a cultural diversity and Aboriginal reconciliation carnival at Manly this Sunday? Given that Labor member of the Legislative Council Franca Arena will speak at the rally, why did the Premier snub her by asking Liberal MLC Helen Sham-Ho to represent him?

Mr CARR: I am advised by my colleague the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs that the Hon. Helen Sham-Ho is a member of the National Reconciliation Council.

Mr PHILLIPS: I ask a supplementary question. In view of the Premier’s answer, does he stand by the letter that he wrote from the Premier’s Office inviting Helen Sham-Ho to represent him at that activity?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I rule the supplementary question out of order because it has already been answered.

Mr ANDERSON: I ask the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, and Minister for
Page 8605
Housing: what impact will Federal budget cuts have on public housing in New South Wales?

Mr KNOWLES: Last night John Howard and Peter Costello delivered yet another series of broken promises and told yet another huge lie about public housing funding in Australia. Since the Federal coalition came to government it has repeatedly said that it would maintain its commitment to the funding levels and the terms and conditions of the existing Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement. However, last night Peter Costello - it was repeated by John Howard on radio this morning - delivered what they call a $50 million productivity cut to the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement. The budget papers and the correspondence from John Howard to all State Premiers show that the cut is not $50 million; it is closer to $200 million. To be precise, it is $197 million cut from the agreement over its remaining two years of life.

Let me expose the $50 million myth. In the 1996-97 budget, under the present terms of the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement, the Federal Government has allocated $1.068 billion for distribution around Australia. Last night’s budget saw an allocation for the next financial year, 1997-98, of only $975 million. That of course is an initial cut of $94 million. But wait, there is more. In 1998-99, we are advised, the Commonwealth allocation to the CSHA will be $964 million. That is a cut of another $104 million from the amount that should be provided under the agreement. The total cut to the agreement over the remainder of its term is $197 million.

Put simply, if John Howard had honoured his promises and commitments, over the next two years in excess of $2 billion would have been made available for affordable public housing throughout Australia. There has now been a reduction of $197 million. If John Howard claims that is a $50 million productivity cut, he is lying to the people of Australia. Taking $197 million out of the budget over the next two years will make an enormous difference to the people who need government support for accommodation and shelter throughout this nation. It has to be made clear that John Howard’s trade-off was supposed to be to take the money from the States and hand it out to the private rental bodies through the Department of Social Security rental assistance scheme. It was to be revenue neutral. The second promise was that there would be no cuts. What we find, as well as the $197 million cut to Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement funding, is not an increase in private rental assistance under the Department of Social Security, but a further cut of $200 million over the next four years. That is a shameful, disgraceful, treacherous proposition for John Howard to put to the people of Australia.

But not only the people in need will be affected. You blokes opposite, particularly those of you who come from the bush, have to understand that these cuts will affect jobs in the building industry. Funding of $200 million cannot be taken out of the construction sector in this country without affecting jobs and employment, particularly in rural and regional Australia, and particularly in rural and regional New South Wales. It might be all right for the electorates of Miranda and Georges River. The subcontractors and builders from those areas might be able to get jobs in other places. Last week the electorate of Bega received $1 million for the construction of pensioner units. That project is likely to be stopped. The honourable member for Bega should look the subcontractors in the eye and tell them that their money has been cut. He should work out the impact on the local economy and he will then begin to realise that taking $200 million out of the State capital works program will devastate jobs in rural and regional New South Wales.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the honourable member for Bega on three calls to order.

Mr KNOWLES: That is where the cuts will hit first. John Howard’s $200 million cut to public housing funding around Australia and a further $200 million rip-out of private rental assistance is a kick in the guts for people who need the support of their governments. It is a disgrace! John Howard must be condemned.

CAPITAL WORKS ALLOCATIONS TO
Mr CARR: I wish to provide a supplementary answer to a question asked yesterday by the honourable member for Tamworth relating to new capital works for country New South Wales.

Mr Hartcher: On a point of order. Under the standing orders, a supplementary answer must be given on the day on which the question has been asked. A supplementary answer cannot be given on a subsequent day.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Following clarification by the Clerk, I draw to the attention of the House Standing Order 140(5), which states:

Ministers seeking to provide additional information to questions already answered at the current or a previous sitting shall do so at the conclusion of the question period.

Page 8606

Mr CARR: I am advised that the 29 country electorates mentioned by the honourable member for Tamworth received $1.362 billion in capital works allocations in the State budget. That is an average of $47 million per electorate. The new works component of this record capital works allocation is almost $1.1 billion. It appears that the honourable member for Tamworth has flipped through the capital works program, which appears in Budget Paper No. 4, to arrive at the figure of 10 new capital works worth $10 million for the 16 country electorates west of the Great Dividing Range. He missed more than $1 billion of other new capital works that appear in the individual allocation letters to all State members but only appear in the budget papers under various non-specific headings.

Mr Windsor: Not new works.

Mr CARR: New works. These figures include $767 million of new road funding and other capital funding from the non-budget sector. As in all previous budgets, these figures include some funding from Federal programs, State-owned corporations and other sources. The total capital works allocation for the 16 western New South Wales electorates is $795 million. The 16 electorates west of the Great Dividing Range have received $637 million in new capital works - and I underline "new capital works" - of which $436 million is for roads. In the electorate of Tamworth alone new capital works total $12.3 million, including $849,000 for 13 new housing units, $2.2 million for new rail work for the Rail Access Corporation and $3.9 million for new forest plantations at Walcha.

Mr O’Farrell: Not this financial year.

Mr CARR: You be quiet! I want to compare those figures with the last coalition budget. An analysis shows a massive boost of almost 20 per cent in capital funding for the 16 -

Mr O’Farrell: Tell us the actual spending.

Mr CARR: It is your mid-afternoon mealtime. Last week I saw the honourable member for Northcott in the parliamentary kitchen tearing frozen turkeys out of the freezer. He broke teeth on them.

Mr Hartcher: On a point of order.

Ms Allan: Speaking of frozen turkeys!

Mr Hartcher: I ask the Minister for the Environment to withdraw that remark.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I do not know what the Minister for the Environment said.

Mr Hartcher: I heard it.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chair is unaware of any remarks the member may have made. The honourable member for Gosford has the call.

Mr Amery: Get on with it, you sook.

Mr Hartcher: I heard that also. Did you hear that remark, Mr Speaker?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I heard that remark. The Minister for Agriculture will not inflame the anger of the honourable member for Gosford.

Mr Hartcher: The standing order allows the Premier to provide additional information. It does not allow him to give a totally new answer. In his answer the Premier is now embarking on a comparison of budgets. The standing order allows for the provision of supplementary information that may have been missed in the original answer. It does not allow for a totally new answer.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Gosford is aware that the Chair has no control over those matters.

Mr CARR: Before I was interrupted, I was making the point that there was a 20 per cent increase in capital funding for the 16 western New South Wales electorates referred to by the member for Tamworth. That funding is a 20 per cent increase on the last coalition budget. In the electorate of Tamworth specifically the comparison is even more brilliant. That is not a bad reflection on the advocacy or the representational skill of the honourable member for Tamworth. Between 1994-95 and 1997-98 the capital works allocation to the electorate of Tamworth has more than doubled from $27 million to $59 million. The interesting thing about the Government, though, is that it is taxing the cities and sending money into the bush. It is taxing the luxury homes on Sydney harbour and the hotel beds to send money into the country. I place on the table for the information of members these outstanding records sheet by sheet of the fabulous capital works program for rural New South Wales electorate by electorate west of the Great Dividing Range. It is a terrific story and all Government members are proud of it.

Mr WHELAN: Earlier today the Deputy Leader of the National Party asked me a question relating to budgetary programs. I now know why the Deputy Leader of the National Party lost $50 million
Page 8607
on Luna Park. Budget Paper No. 2 contains the initiative and funding to which he referred.

Questions without notice concluded.

Mr PHILLIPS (Miranda - Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [4.00 p.m.]: In bringing down the budget last night the Federal Government has clearly demonstrated the correct direction for this country. It is urgent that this Parliament debate the significant difference between the economic direction in which the Commonwealth is taking this nation and economic direction in which the Carr Government is taking this State. The other day I heard the comment that Bob Carr is an economic transvestite. He has changed the direction of the economic policy of this State.

Dr Refshauge: On a point of order. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has to convince the House why his motion is urgent and should take precedence. He should not be debating the substance of the motion, which I suggest he is doing. I ask that you direct him to do what he is required to do, and that is to argue why his motion is urgent.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member is straying from the standing orders.

Mr PHILLIPS: It is urgent that the House debates clause (a) of the motion. That clause refers to the granting of taxation relief to families by the Howard Government -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Standing orders require a member to explain why one motion should receive priority over another. At the moment the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is dealing with factual matters contained in the notice of motion.

Mr PHILLIPS: When the Leader of the National Party spoke in an urgency debate yesterday you ruled that he was allowed to refer to the items in his motion.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the National Party was allowed to refer to them in passing.

Mr PHILLIPS: He was reading the points in his motion, and you gave him approval to do that. I am doing exactly the same as he did yesterday.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I remind the honourable member of what I just said.

Mr PHILLIPS: The motion is urgent because last night the Commonwealth brought down a budget that attempts to drive the economy of this nation in a particular direction. Yet the Carr Government has brought down a budget that goes in exactly the opposite direction. It is extremely urgent that we compare the economic impact of those budgets on jobs, on encouraging business to come to New South Wales, on families in western Sydney -

Mr Harrison: And on health.

Mr PHILLIPS: And on health, as the honourable member for Kiama has interjected. That is an important matter. It is urgent that we debate what the Commonwealth has done for the economy of Australia by bringing down the deficit without increasing taxes, compared with the Carr Government, which has dramatically increased taxes to try to achieve a balanced budget.

Mr Clough: On a point of order. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is attempting to tell us why his motion is urgent, and why we should be discussing the Federal budget brought down last night, which has not been debated by either side of the Parliament and still has to go through two Houses of Parliament. I put it to you that it is not an urgent matter.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! In the light of a ruling I made recently, I will not uphold the point of order. The comments I made earlier this week about anticipation of debate as it relates to the State Budget apply also to debate on the Federal Budget.

Mr PHILLIPS: Clause (b) of the motion refers to the responsible management of the national economy by the Howard Government in contrast to the out-of-control spending by the Carr Government and the unprecedented tax hikes on businesses and families - [Time expired.]

Mr MILLS (Wallsend) [4.05 p.m.]: My motion should be granted urgent consideration because last night’s Federal Budget from Treasurer Costello will have a huge impact on New South Wales, on the State Budget and on New South Wales service delivery. It should be granted urgent consideration because most of the impact of the
Page 8608
Federal budget is adverse to New South Wales. The impact on health is particularly adverse. My motion should be granted urgent consideration -

Mrs Skinner: On a point of order. The honourable member should restrict himself to matters that will persuade the House that his motion is urgent, without going into the substance of the debate. You ruled that way in relation to the previous speaker, and I ask you to do so in relation to this speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I uphold the point of order.

Mr MILLS: This matter is urgent because this House must understand the implications of Federal decisions for health service delivery in New South Wales - that is Government members, Opposition members and Independent members. It is urgent because Federal budget cuts to health funding are plunging our health system into crisis. It is urgent because the people of New South Wales need to know as soon as possible how they will be affected by the most significant of the changes.

Mrs Skinner: On a point of order. The member is again entering into substantive debate on the motion; he is not talking about urgency. I ask you to direct him to return to debating urgency.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am sure the member fully understands and will abide by the standing orders.

Mr MILLS: The motion is urgent because the Federal cuts are plunging the State health system into crisis. People are missing out on treatment.

Mrs Skinner: On a point of order.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will hear no further points of order on that issue, as I have already ruled on it.

Mr MILLS: For those reasons my motion should receive urgent consideration by the House.

Question - That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Miranda be proceeded with - put.

The House divided.

Mr Armstrong Mr O’Farrell
Mr Beck Mr D. L. Page
Mr Blackmore Mr Peacocke
Mr Brogden Mr Phillips
Mr Chappell Mr Richardson
Mrs Chikarovski Mr Rixon
Mr Cochran Mr Rozzoli
Mr Collins Mr Schipp
Mr Cruickshank Mr Schultz
Mr Debnam Ms Seaton
Mr Ellis Mrs Skinner
Ms Ficarra Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Fraser Mr Small
Mr Glachan Mr Smith
Mr Hartcher Mr Souris
Mr Hazzard Mr Tink
Dr Kernohan Mr J. H. Turner
Mr Kinross Mr R. W. Turner
Mr MacCarthy Tellers,
Mr Oakeshott Mr Jeffery
Mr O’Doherty Mr Kerr

Ms Allan Mr Markham
Mr Amery Mr Martin
Mr Anderson Ms Meagher
Ms Andrews Mr Mills
Mr Aquilina Ms Moore
Mrs Beamer Mr Moss
Mr Clough Mr Nagle
Mr Crittenden Mr Neilly
Mr Debus Ms Nori
Mr Face Mr E. T. Page
Mr Gaudry Dr Refshauge
Mr Gibson Mr Rogan
Mrs Grusovin Mr Rumble
Ms Hall Mr Scully
Mr Harrison Mr Shedden
Ms Harrison Mr Stewart
Mr Hunter Mr Sullivan
Mr Iemma Mr Tripodi
Mr Knight Mr Watkins
Mr Knowles Mr Whelan
Mr Langton Mr Woods
Mrs Lo Po’ Mr Yeadon
Mr Lynch
Dr Macdonald Tellers,
Mr McBride Mr Beckroge
Mr McManus Mr Thompson

Mr Humpherson Mr Carr
Mr Merton Mr Price

Page 8609

Question so resolved in the negative.

Question - That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Wallsend be proceeded with - put.

The House divided.

Ms Allan Mr Markham
Mr Amery Mr Martin
Mr Anderson Ms Meagher
Ms Andrews Mr Mills
Mr Aquilina Ms Moore
Mrs Beamer Mr Moss
Mr Clough Mr Nagle
Mr Crittenden Mr Neilly
Mr Debus Ms Nori
Mr Face Mr E. T. Page
Mr Gaudry Dr Refshauge
Mr Gibson Mr Rogan
Mrs Grusovin Mr Rumble
Ms Hall Mr Scully
Mr Harrison Mr Shedden
Ms Harrison Mr Stewart
Mr Hunter Mr Sullivan
Mr Iemma Mr Tripodi
Mr Knight Mr Watkins
Mr Knowles Mr Whelan
Mr Langton Mr Woods
Mrs Lo Po’ Mr Yeadon
Mr Lynch
Dr Macdonald Tellers,
Mr McBride Mr Beckroge
Mr McManus Mr Thompson

Mr Armstrong Mr O’Farrell
Mr Beck Mr D. L. Page
Mr Blackmore Mr Peacocke
Mr Brogden Mr Phillips
Mr Chappell Mr Richardson
Mrs Chikarovski Mr Rixon
Mr Cochran Mr Rozzoli
Mr Collins Mr Schipp
Mr Cruickshank Mr Schultz
Mr Debnam Ms Seaton
Mr Ellis Mrs Skinner
Ms Ficarra Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Fraser Mr Small
Mr Glachan Mr Smith
Mr Hartcher Mr Souris
Mr Hazzard Mr Tink
Dr Kernohan Mr J. H. Turner
Mr Kinross Mr R. W. Turner
Mr MacCarthy Tellers,
Mr Oakeshott Mr Jeffery
Mr O’Doherty Mr Kerr

Mr Carr Mr Humpherson
Mr Price Mr Merton

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Mr MILLS (Wallsend) [4.20 p.m.]: I move:

That this House condemns the Federal Government for their latest attack on the public health system, in particular:

(a) cuts of over $600 million to the pharmaceutical benefit scheme;

(b) the effective ending of home visits by general practitioners; and

(c) the failed changes to private health insurance which are diverting hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into company profits.

The Howard Government has once again demonstrated its lack of commitment to health care. Across the nation State and Territory health Ministers have been calling for the Commonwealth to share the increasing burden on the hospital system. But last night John Howard and Michael Wooldridge made it clear that those calls have fallen on deaf ears. As New South Wales injects an extra $452 million into the State health budget to build better hospitals and to improve patient services, the Federal Government is ripping cash out. Since coming to office the State Government has shown its bona fides by putting additional money into health each year. Since coming to office - now with two budgets - the Federal Liberal Government has ripped cash out. That is the kind of contrast that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition did not want to admit to when he attempted to move his motion of urgency.

The second Howard budget has slashed more than $700 million from the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. The Federal Government will take that money out in two ways. Firstly, it is introducing what I will call a new drugs tax - a therapeutical group premium. Simply put, the introduction of the therapeutical group premium means that Australians will be paying more for the latest, safest and best medication in six drug groups. Those groups include ace-inhibitors, beta-blockers and calcium channel blockers, which treat hypertension or high blood pressure; selected Serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, which treat depression; drugs that lower blood cholesterol; and H2 receptor antagonists, which treat
Page 8610
ulcers. This is not a frivolous matter. Clearly those illnesses are affecting a huge number of Australians and all of those people will be affected by these Federal cuts.

Under the new drugs tax the Federal Government will pay a full subsidy for only the cheapest drug in each group. That means that a patient who requires a more expensive drug from the group must pay the difference. It is all very well for John Howard and Michael Wooldridge to claim that no-one will have to pay more because the cheapest drug in the group can be used. But the Federal Government’s advisers say that the more expensive drugs are often safer and have fewer side effects. It has been known around the industry and health workers for quite a while that the Federal Government’s advisers say that the more expensive drugs are often safer and have fewer side effects.

I ask Michael Wooldridge, the Federal Minister for Health, the Prime Minister, and through you, Mr Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for North Shore and all other honourable members in this House what drugs they would want their families to use. Would they choose the cheapest drugs for themselves and their families? Would they encourage their young adult children, who are perhaps going out into the work force or who are students for the first time and on their own in relation to medical matters, to choose the cheapest or the best? What drugs would they want their families to use? Do they really want people they care about to be using the safest drugs with the fewest side effects?

Many families in New South Wales simply will not be able to afford up to $20 extra per prescription for the latest and the best. We will end up with one range of medications for the people who can afford to pay and another for the people who cannot afford to pay. It creates a two-tiered health system: if you have got the cash you get the newest, safest and most effective drugs. The battlers - to whom Mr Howard likes to refer as his battlers - will have to make do with the less safe and the less effective drugs. It is disgraceful that the changes are most likely to affect the aged and the chronically ill, who rely on regular medication. This new drugs tax applies to both pensioners and families, and it does not count towards the safety net threshold.

The second way in which the Federal Government is taking money out of the pharmaceutical benefits scheme is by removing some medications from the scheme altogether. Drugs are being taken off, including treatments for common stomach problems, diarrhoea - that should appeal to the honourable member for Ermington - and anti-inflammatory liniment for relief of muscle pain. Antifungal drugs are also being taken off. Until these changes pensioners and other concession cardholders paid just $3.20 for those medications. From next year those people will have to pay up to $9 for the very same drugs. Again, none of that extra cost can count towards the safety net threshold. That is the effect of the changes to the pharmaceutical benefits scheme.

John Howard and Michael Wooldridge are increasing the pressure on the New South Wales hospital system by ripping out another $34 million this year. They ripped out $34 million last year; they are ripping out $34 million again this year. I remind the House and the honourable member for North Shore, who is constantly attempting to interject, that that is the equivalent of 17,200 fewer patients, 400 fewer beds and 900 fewer doctors and nurses in New South Wales. Yet, the Liberals opposite keep saying that the Government is doing the wrong thing because waiting lists are increasing. How can waiting lists not increase when the Government is copping those rip-offs from the Federal Liberal Government?

The Federal Government is also imposing significant disincentives for doctors to make home visits. There have been paltry, miserly increases for mental health and research funding. Rural health gets an increase of just $2 million nationally. That makes it even more outrageous that Michael Wooldridge and John Howard have managed to fund a $2 million advertising campaign to prop up private health. It shows that the Federal Government obviously has no faith in its private health insurance initiatives. The Carr Government is doing all it can to shore up this State against the pain being inflicted by the Federal Government. Since coming to office this Government has injected an extra $805 million into the health system; $221 million of that increase was announced in the State health budget last week. In the State budget it was revealed that an extra $7 million will be spent on mental health. That is 35 times more than John Howard’s miserly increase for the entire nation.

Mrs Skinner: $28 million?

Mr MILLS: It is $200,000. In the State health budget it was announced that an extra $6 million will be spent on health research. That is seven times more than John Howard’s increase across the whole of Australia. The Carr Government’s commitment to health cannot be doubted. It is there in bricks and mortar; it is there in new services. Importantly, for
Page 8611
the first time, the health dollar is being distributed more fairly. The services are needed in the growth areas: the services are going to the growth areas, thanks to the Carr Labor Government. In the space of a week there can hardly have been a more stark contrast between two budgets. John Howard and Michael Wooldridge are tearing money out of Federal spending on health. They are tearing money out of allocations to all of the States, particularly New South Wales, to spend on health.

In contrast, the Carr Government is building better hospitals and introducing new services. The Carr Government is ensuring that New South Wales patients receive timely care, quality care and locally delivered care. I urge the House to support the urgency motion. The Carr Labor Government gives top priority to health. Honourable members must support the motion to bring the Federal Government to its senses and to get all States and Territories to work with New South Wales to try to get the Federal Government to change its mind and tackle the problems of health funding throughout Australia.

Mrs SKINNER (North Shore) [4.30 p.m.]: The urgency motion is hypocritical and full of inaccuracies. It is obvious that the Government does not regard this matter as important - the Minister for Health sat in silence while his colleague the honourable member for Wallsend moved the motion.

Mr Mills: He did not interject.

Mrs SKINNER: He would have corrected some of your errors if he had interjected. There have been changes to the pharmaceutical benefits scheme, which people in the pharmaceutical industry have described as being of potentially great benefit to the people of this country. The Minister for Health, like most State Ministers, often complains that one of the problems with the health funding formula is that the pharmaceutical benefits scheme is uncapped but the hospital scheme is capped. A responsible Federal Government should look at how to spend money most responsibly in this area. The initiatives announced by the Federal Government in relation to the pharmaceutical benefits scheme are worthy and will have an important effect on the cost blow-out in pharmaceuticals. It is expected that these measures will bring the annual increase in the pharmaceutical benefits scheme to within 7 to 8 per cent - that is hardly a cut.

The honourable member for Wallsend talked about the drugs that will be removed from the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. The reason for removing those drugs from the scheme is that they are cheap, readily available and can be bought across the counter. Therefore, there is no need for taxpayers to subsidise their cost. This is plain good sense and a way to ensure that people most in need and dependent upon government assistance get it. The comments of the honourable member were ridiculous in relation to the removal of some of these ready-prepared medicines from the PBS. Doctors will be asked to consider replacing therapeutic goods with generic or lower-priced goods. The pricing of the alternative brands and the competition in the marketplace will result in premiums of the order of $2.

The honourable member for Wallsend is scaremongering. The honourable member corrected himself in relation to home visits by general practitioners. He did not say that there would be an end to home visits; he said that there would be changes - changes that will be for the better. They will allow general practitioners to reduce the fee that they charge to patients when they see more than one patient on a trip away from their practice, which can only benefit patients and free up the money so that it can be put into other areas in the national health scheme. The honourable member for Wallsend referred to private health insurance. I refer to the State Government’s increased health levy, which was announced in last week’s budget. The health insurance industry has described the levy as a slug on the elderly and the chronically ill. People will have to pick up the premium increase, which may be an added pressure on them.

The Minister keeps telling us that there is added pressure on people in private health insurance. We would have to use the same logical argument and assume that they will drop out. What will happen when they drop out? The Minister keeps telling us that if they drop out of private health insurance, they will become totally reliant on the public health system, which means an added cost to public hospitals. Rather than talk about changes at the Federal level that have a negative impact on patients using public hospitals, let us look at the Carr Government’s 34 per cent increase in the health levy, which raises $15 million a year and will cost families $20 a year. The Government has boasted about its fabulous $50 per child for education. However, it has taken that money away from families by way of the health levy and other tax increases - in some cases, it will be a lot more than $50. The Government has introduced a $20 per family per year health levy - and it has the gall to move a motion like this. I move:

That the motion be amended by leaving out all words after the word "House" with a view to inserting instead: "congratulates the Federal Government for its innovative health strategies, in particular:

Page 8612

(a) the introduction of the option for general practitioners to electronically lodge Medicare claims on behalf of their patients;

(b) the comprehensive national immunisation strategy;

(c) support for dementia sufferers and their carers; and

(d) the first steps in establishing evidence-based medicine in the medical benefits scheme process."

The Federal budget put these important initiatives in place last night, and all honourable members should congratulate the Federal Government on doing so.

Dr Refshauge: On a point of order. The amendment moved by the honourable member for North Shore is a direct negative of the original motion. If she does not like the Government’s motion, she should vote against it.

Mrs SKINNER: Mr Speaker, a precedent has been set in this regard. I placed a motion on the notice paper relating to hospital waiting lists and it has been amended by the Minister for Health. His amendment reverses the intent of my motion.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The amendment and the motion are similar in that they both refer to the Federal Government. The amendment moved by the honourable member for North Shore seeks to congratulate the Federal Government, whereas the motion moved by the honourable member for Wallsend seeks to condemn it. However, the reasons listed in the amendment are different from those listed in the original motion and I therefore rule that the amendment is in order.

Mrs SKINNER: The initiatives of the Federal Government advantage patients and their families and carers. It is therefore appropriate, and a matter of urgency, that the House congratulates the Howard Government, particularly the Federal Minister for Health, on these initiatives. If the Minister for Health were honest, he would agree that these are important moves. The Federal budget offers relief to people suffering from dementia and to their carers, an initiative that will be welcomed by the community. People have been calling for this measure for many years, including the time that Labor was in power in Canberra.

I would be surprised if honourable members opposite did not support that. The Federal Minister previously announced the comprehensive national immunisation strategy, which has been widely applauded in the media and in the community. I would expect the Minister and the State Government to work with the Federal Minister on this initiative. The option for general practitioners to assist their patients, especially those in remote country areas, to access payment for Medicare claims by electronic transfer is a brilliant idea and will free up resources to provide more services for patients. The first steps in establishing evidence-based medicine will be the single most important line over the next decade or so. It is an international move in relation to health. [Time expired.]

Ms HALL (Swansea) [4.40 p.m.]: I am appalled that the honourable member for North Shore supports the Howard Government’s draconian cuts and supports $44 million being taken away from the health budget. I am disgusted that she supports these measures that will adversely affect the people of this State. On the other hand, she probably has no choice in the matter. She has to support and make excuses for her friends in Canberra, which must be difficult. I feel sorry for the honourable member for North Shore. She has misled the House and is advocating multiple patient home visits. It is a variation on group therapy or something along those lines. It is a sad day for the people of New South Wales that she has moved an amendment to the motion that would congratulate the Federal Government. This is a cruel budget prepared and brought down by her Canberra friends, an uncaring Government. I am shocked, disgusted and appalled on behalf of the Swansea electorate and the State as a whole.

The Howard Government’s 1997-98 budget has targeted and hit the most vulnerable people in our communities. It scored a bullseye. It is shameful - but it is not surprising. The Federal budget is devastating for the elderly and the chronically ill in our community. They condemn last night’s budget announcement and they will condemn it at the ballot box, as honourable members opposite will find out. It is disgusting that the Federal Government has imposed higher costs for prescription drugs. It has again cut the budget to New South Wales public hospitals by $34 million and has penalised children and people who are chronically ill and have disabilities. By restricting the number of consultations general practitioners are able to bulk-bill, John Howard has effectively abolished home visits. That decision will affect those people in the community who are the most vulnerable. I think of people with disabilities, and I think of Adolf Maurer, who is a quadriplegic and has to rely on a general practitioner to visit him at home. He lives independently in the community, but this budget decision will mean that people like him will have to go to nursing homes; however, even they will be affected. The practice of general practitioners visiting people in their homes will become extinct.

Page 8613

People who cannot leave their homes and who are unable to pay the fees associated with the visit will be denied the health care they need. That is shameful. These are the elderly, the chronically ill, the disabled and the pensioners within our community. Michael Wooldridge’s budget papers refer to the inconvenience and extra cost associated with visiting patients away from the surgery. It will be more than inconvenient for someone who is bed bound or who is in a wheelchair to visit a general practitioner in the consulting rooms: it will be impossible. The Federal Government asserts that the cost to the patient will be reduced when two or more patients are consulted at the same time. Must we all wait until we are sick and then call the doctor to visit everyone in the one street and bring them all to the one house? That will be unworkable. Effectively it means that people will be all right if they wait until a few cronies are sick before seeking medical attention. I call on the House to condemn the Howard Government and to support the motion. [Time expired.]

Ms FICARRA (Georges River) [4.45 p.m.]: The Federal health budget has been increased over the past year by 7.4 per cent. I will take off my pharmaceutical hat because before I entered this Parliament I was the State sales manager for Hoechst pharmaceutical company. I will take off the drug-pushing hat, the lifesaving hat and will put on the community-representative hat and suggest that honourable members opposite do not know what they are talking about. That is why the New South Wales branch President of the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, Mr John Bronger, said the Government’s move would lead to significant savings so that a greater range of lifesaving drugs can be provided through the pharmaceutical benefits scheme - PBS. Anybody associated with the pharmaceutical industry knows that the costs are burgeoning out of control. The cost to research and develop a new drug is now about $500 million. The Federal Government reimburses about one-fifth of that cost.

The cost of the PBS to the Government rose 16.5 per cent in 1995-96. I refer to one drug - and the Minister for Health should know this - that is the most expensive prescription drug, Simvastatin, a cholesterol-lowering drug. It is one of the newest and the best but it cost taxpayers $126 million. Other cholesterol-lowering drugs were available. The company I worked for specialised in cardiovascular drugs. It manufactured the ace-inhibitors, the calcium-antagonists; it had them all. The Minister for Health and doctors agree that hospital pharmacies provide generic drugs. Australia’s drug evaluation system is one of the best in the world and no drug gets cleared, be it a newly researched drug or a generic drug, unless it passes the tests of efficacy, stability and production supplies.

Ms Hall How many did you give away?

Ms FICARRA: I gave nothing away. Anyone would know that in the hospital budgets generic drugs are prescribed all the time. One should ask the Minister how much generic Frusemide goes out every day. He knows it, he advocates it and the health system nationally and internationally are aware that generics are of a high standard. Not always is the newest and the most expensive the best. Many doctors should look to other alternatives, because there are cheaper ace-inhibitors, calcium-antagonists, H2-antagonists and others.

The Federal coalition Government has done what the former Labor Federal Minister Dr Carmen Lawrence wanted to do for a long time but never had the guts or the support to get it through. It has provided significantly more funds for other needy areas, including $13.3 million over four years for the national child immunisation strategy, which will be compulsory for schoolchildren; $1.6 million for the hepatitis B immunisation programs for pre-adolescents to be provided in schools by the States from next February; $28 million to continue the national mental health strategy; $14.7 million for palliative care - which is very important - and an extra $15 million for Aboriginal health. The Minister for Health, who is at the table, is also responsible for the portfolio of Aboriginal affairs. He should be congratulating the Federal Government on what it has done. There will not be any cuts to home visits. Such claims are a lot of rubbish. The Federal Government is limiting the payment to doctors who make home visits. So if they visit more than one patient the payment is not doubled or tripled; the payment is reduced in accordance with how many extra patients are seen. There is no loading for inconvenience.

Ms Hall: Do you support that?

Ms FICARRA: Yes, I support that. I do not want doctors to be made millionaires. I want equity in the system. Labor members should be advocating that too. Patients will now be able to lodge their Medicare claims directly from doctors’ surgeries, under a $28.3 million four-year scheme to improve access to Medicare for rural Australia. The coalition and the Federal Liberal Government care about rural Australia. Doctors will soon be able to lodge claims for all Medicare services electronically. Some of the 43 Medicare offices in the cities will close; however, none will close in rural areas. They will be exempted. Rural and remote health programs are to be rolled into a single $17.4 million scheme over four years to improve - [Time expired.]

Ms ANDREWS (Peats) [4.50 p.m.]: The Federal Government last night admitted what everybody knows: its changes to private health
Page 8614
insurance are not working. Last night’s budget included a line item for $2 million to be spent on a television advertising campaign to encourage people into private health insurance. The $600 million in rebates has not slowed the dropout rate from private health insurance. Instead, private health insurance companies have already swallowed any savings for families by increasing their premiums. That was a shameful act of betrayal.

A desperate Federal Government now intends to spend taxpayers’ money advertising private health insurance. Already an enormous number of television advertisements encourage people to join private health insurance, yet the numbers still keep dropping. With all the needs which currently exist within the health system this is the most useless way imaginable to spend $2 million. The sad truth is that the Federal Government and the private health insurance industry both have the same aim: to encourage the healthy and wealthy into private health insurance and to drive the poor, the elderly and the chronically ill into the public hospital system.

I have never seen a television ad for private health insurance which has an elderly or sick person being encouraged to insure. They always show healthy people in their twenties walking along beaches. If the advertisements ever show people who actually need hospital care they are either giving birth or wrapped in plaster due to an unforeseen accident. There are no real savings for the public hospital system in encouraging the young and healthy into private health insurance. The elderly and the chronically ill are the people who currently use the hospital system. Once again the healthy and wealthy of Sydney’s north shore are doing well out of the Federal Government. Once again the big corporations and financial institutions are getting a taxpayer subsidy. Once again the battlers are going to pay for it.

The Federal Government has already agreed with a recommendation of the Industry Commission to stop what it calls "hit and run" membership of health insurance. It is going to dramatically expand waiting times for older Australians who need elective surgery procedures such as for cataracts, hip replacements and knee replacements. The Commonwealth intends to extend the waiting times for these procedures to a point where it is no longer desirable to join private health insurance for surgery. With no waiting time advantage, many more patients will rely on the public hospital system for their elective surgery. Up to $27 million in extra burden will fall onto the public hospital system as a result of this change.

I would like to talk about the reality of private health insurance, not Costello’s theory. Families in my electorate do not choose private health insurance because of television advertising. They have to struggle to afford the cost. They have to stretch their family budgets and go without if they choose private health insurance. They have to consider the cost of paying the gap between their health costs and what insurance will cover. Despite the Federal budget, when it comes time to make their decision this year the cost of insurance will be just as high as or higher than it was before the rebates. The Industry Commission report on private health insurance rebates stated:

They are likely to have a moderate, but predominantly short term impact on membership levels . . . the vast majority of the rebates will go to existing fund members.

Existing fund members are concentrated most heavily in Liberal electorates, and $600 million in taxpayers money will be spent on the healthiest and wealthiest members of the community in Liberal electorates. It will be paid for by the elderly and chronically ill in disadvantaged areas of Australia. And to add insult to injury, taxpayers now have to pay for a $2 million television advertising campaign out of the health budget. This is nothing but a bold and arrogant act by a non-caring Federal Government and it deserves to be resoundingly condemned for this outrageous action.

Mr MILLS (Wallsend) [4.55 p.m.], in reply: I thank the members who contributed to the debate: the honourable member for Swansea, the honourable member for Peats, the honourable member for North Shore and the honourable member for Georges River. There were some very constructive contributions to the debate, particularly from the two Government speakers. The honourable member for North Shore has again fallen into the trap of praising health cuts by her Federal coalition colleagues. Specifically, she supported the increase in charges for certain common drugs. So we are going to tell the pensioners, people on low incomes and people with large families about that. Clearly the State Liberals support people paying $9 rather than $3.20 for a range of common medications. That is deplorable. We are not criticising the Federal Government for this; that is a clear statement from the honourable member for North Shore as shadow health spokesperson in this Parliament. In effect, she supports Federal cuts to hospitals, disincentives for home visits by doctors and the failed Federal changes to private health insurance. We reject the amendment proposed by the honourable member for North Shore.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for North Shore has made her contribution and will cease interjecting.

Page 8615

Mr MILLS: I do not understand how the Liberal Party members of this Parliament can have their heads so far into the sand that they pretend that the big cutbacks have not happened. This was the subject of the motion I moved. The Opposition has come up with an amendment that lists a number of smaller items involving improvements. My motion did not knock any small improvements. The improvements referred to in the proposed amendment are the sort of changes and improvements that would have occurred whichever government was in power.

The main point I want to make in reply is that the Liberal Party is coming closer to its dream of a United States-style health system - a two-tier health system with one system for the rich and one for the poor. The budget takes $700 million odd from the pharmaceutical benefits scheme on top of cuts of $500 million last year. The imposition of the new drugs tax of up to $20 per prescription will mean that only the wealthy have access to the latest drugs. Reinforcing the two-tier system, other drugs have been taken off the PBS, forcing families and pensioners to pay the full cost of the medicines.

Until today Australia’s pharmaceutical benefits scheme has provided all Australians with the best possible medicines for their conditions. When the Federal Government’s therapeutic group premium on new drugs takes effect only the wealthy will have access to the newest and best drugs. Battlers will get only the drugs they can afford. In a country where the leading cause of death is cardiovascular disease, it is incredible that the Federal Government is planning to save $600 million by making it more expensive for Australians to get drugs to lower blood pressure and cholesterol levels. The Federal Government is also planning to save $112 million by abolishing the subsidy for a number of medicines. Pensioners will pay up to $9 for those medicines and they will no longer be protected by the co-payment limit of $3.20 for PBS drugs. Again I emphasise that the Liberal Party in Canberra is approaching its dream of a two-tier, USA-style health system.

Once again the small print and the debate on the matter will reveal that health services in the bush and outside the metropolitan area will be the most severely affected. I continually wonder why the honourable member for Oxley, who is in the House, did not contribute to this debate, nor other National Party members. The National Party members never get a guernsey on health debates in this Parliament. They certainly will not support the Liberal Party on this issue because they know that non-metropolitan health services are the hardest hit as a result of the Federal Government budget. I urge the House to support the motion condemning the Federal Government’s latest attack on the public health system in New South Wales.

Question - That the words stand - put.

The House divided.

Ms Allan Mr Markham
Mr Amery Mr Martin
Mr Anderson Ms Meagher
Ms Andrews Mr Mills
Mr Aquilina Ms Moore
Mrs Beamer Mr Moss
Mr Clough Mr Nagle
Mr Crittenden Mr Neilly
Mr Debus Ms Nori
Mr Face Mr E. T. Page
Mr Gaudry Dr Refshauge
Mr Gibson Mr Rogan
Mrs Grusovin Mr Rumble
Ms Hall Mr Scully
Mr Harrison Mr Shedden
Ms Harrison Mr Stewart
Mr Hunter Mr Sullivan
Mr Iemma Mr Tripodi
Mr Knight Mr Watkins
Mr Knowles Mr Whelan
Mr Langton Mr Woods
Mrs Lo Po’ Mr Yeadon
Mr Lynch
Dr Macdonald Tellers,
Mr McBride Mr Beckroge
Mr McManus Mr Thompson

Mr Armstrong Mr O’Farrell
Mr Beck Mr D. L. Page
Mr Blackmore Mr Peacocke
Mr Brogden Mr Phillips
Mr Chappell Mr Richardson
Mrs Chikarovski Mr Rixon
Mr Cochran Mr Rozzoli
Mr Collins Mr Schipp
Mr Cruickshank Mr Schultz
Mr Debnam Ms Seaton
Mr Downy Mrs Skinner
Mr Ellis Mr Slack-Smith
Ms Ficarra Mr Small
Mr Fraser Mr Smith
Mr Glachan Mr Souris
Mr Hartcher Mr Tink
Mr Hazzard Mr J. H. Turner
Dr Kernohan Mr R. W. Turner
Mr Kinross Mr Windsor
Mr MacCarthy Tellers,
Mr Oakeshott Mr Jeffery
Mr O’Doherty Mr Kerr
Mr Carr Mr Humpherson
Mr Price Mr Merton

Page 8616

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment negatived.

Question - That the motion be agreed to - put.

The House divided.

Ms Allan Mr Markham
Mr Amery Mr Martin
Mr Anderson Ms Meagher
Ms Andrews Mr Mills
Mr Aquilina Ms Moore
Mrs Beamer Mr Moss
Mr Clough Mr Nagle
Mr Crittenden Mr Neilly
Mr Debus Ms Nori
Mr Face Mr Price
Mr Gaudry Dr Refshauge
Mr Gibson Mr Rogan
Mrs Grusovin Mr Rumble
Ms Hall Mr Scully
Mr Harrison Mr Shedden
Ms Harrison Mr Stewart
Mr Hunter Mr Sullivan
Mr Iemma Mr Tripodi
Mr Knight Mr Watkins
Mr Knowles Mr Whelan
Mr Langton Mr Woods
Mrs Lo Po’ Mr Yeadon
Mr Lynch
Dr Macdonald Tellers,
Mr McBride Mr Beckroge
Mr McManus Mr Thompson

Mr Armstrong Mr O’Farrell
Mr Beck Mr D. L. Page
Mr Blackmore Mr Peacocke
Mr Brogden Mr Phillips
Mr Chappell Mr Richardson
Mrs Chikarovski Mr Rixon
Mr Cochran Mr Rozzoli
Mr Collins Mr Schipp
Mr Cruickshank Mr Schultz
Mr Debnam Ms Seaton
Mr Downy Mrs Skinner
Mr Ellis Mr Slack-Smith
Ms Ficarra Mr Small
Mr Fraser Mr Smith
Mr Glachan Mr Souris
Mr Hartcher Mr Tink
Mr Hazzard Mr J. H. Turner
Dr Kernohan Mr R. W. Turner
Mr Kinross Mr Windsor
Mr MacCarthy Tellers,
Mr Oakeshott Mr Jeffery
Mr O’Doherty Mr Kerr Pairs

Mr Carr Mr Humpherson
Mr Price Mr Merton

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Mr O’FARRELL (Northcott) [5.10 p.m.]: I ask the House to note as a matter of public importance Labor’s leaked redistribution plan. The honourable member for Ashfield, the honourable member for Keira, the honourable member for St Marys, the honourable member for Lakemba, the honourable member for Waratah, the honourable member for Broken Hill, the honourable member for Clarence, the honourable member for Bathurst, the honourable member for Blue Mountains, the honourable member for Gladesville, the honourable member for Coogee, and the honourable member for Parramatta are the victims of Labor’s leaked redistribution plan. They are the members who will not sit in this Parliament when it resumes in 1999.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for St Marys will resume his seat. The honourable member for Badgerys Creek will resume her seat and remain quiet. I anticipate some interjections during this debate, but I remind members that debate will soon be adjourned for the taking of private members’ statements.

Mr O’FARRELL: Those members should ask themselves why their seats are being sacrificed and why their seats are being weakened. Is it in the interests of electoral fairness? Is it in the interests of electoral equity?

Mr Brogden: No.

Mr O’FARRELL: The answer, as the honourable member for Pittwater says, is a resounding no.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable members for Badgerys Creek, Hurstville and Cabramatta to order.

Mr O’FARRELL: The electoral redistribution plan is a shabby attempt by the Carr Government, driven by John Della Bosca in Sussex Street, to rort the New South Wales electoral process. Not satisfied with having won the last election with 49 per cent of the vote - that is, 73,000 more voters in this State voted coalition than Labor in the last election - at the next election the Labor Party will endeavour to
Page 8617
manipulate the electoral system to ensure that it needs only a 47 per cent vote to regain office. There is no fairness in that. There is no equity in it. This is an out-and-out attempt by Labor for a shabby grab at power. But honourable members do not have to take my word for that. The honourable member for Cabramatta and her colleague the honourable member for Hurstville know about rorts completely. They come from the ranks of Young Labor and are past masters at electoral rorts.

Ms Meagher: On a point of order. I ask that the honourable member for Northcott withdraw that comment.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I do not know which comment the member is referring to.

Mr O’FARRELL: I withdraw the fact that she is a past master. I am sure she is a present mistress in electoral rorting.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Pittwater will exit the Chamber quietly.

Mr O’FARRELL: They do not have to take my word for it, they can take the words of the editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald, of Tuesday, 13 May, which stated:

The real advantage of the plan as far as the Carr Government is concerned is that it could make Labor’s re-election chances more likely. A smaller Lower House could actually permit a Labor victory even if Labor received not much more than 47 per cent of the two-party preferred vote.

Today is Wednesday, but that article that appeared on Tuesday in the Sydney Morning Herald has not been challenged in this place. Ten years ago the people in Sussex Street were protesting about Bjelke-Petersen-style rorts in the Queensland electoral system. They are about to inflict that style of rorting on this State. In 1995 it was 49 per cent of the vote, next time it will be 47 per cent of the vote with the sort of gerrymandering that had people arrested on the streets in Brisbane.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Badgerys Creek is getting a little excited.

Mr O’FARRELL: I am not surprised, because it is her former spouse who is sitting on this committee. Her former spouse is in Sussex Street -

Ms Nori: On a point of order. I raise a very serious point of order. I would like to remind the honourable member -

Mr SPEAKER: Order!

Ms Nori: There is no place in this Parliament or in public life to accuse women of taking advantage of their partners or to make some reference to their partners. Women on this side of the House get here on their merits.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! No point of order is involved. If the member wishes to take exception to a statement, there are other forms of the House which the member can use.

Mr Blackmore: On a point of order. The time is 5.15 p.m.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order involved. The honourable member for Northcott has the call.

Mr O’FARRELL: I made no reference -

Mr Hunter: On a point of order. I was going to remind you of the time.

Mr O’FARRELL: At least we have found one skill the honourable member for Lake Macquarie has. The article in Saturday morning’s Sydney Morning Herald revealed a report that has not been challenged inside this place or outside this place by the Labor Party. It is a dirty attempt to subvert the electoral processes in this State. For more than a year now we have heard leaks from the Labor Party about factional in-fighting within Sussex Street about the redistribution. More than a year ago, in April last year -

Pursuant to sessional orders discussion interrupted.

Mr BLACKMORE (Maitland) [5.16 p.m.]: This evening I bring to the attention of the House a matter of concern regarding the Boatcode that operates in New South Wales. In September 1996 a gentleman by the name of Patrick Burrell from Blue Haven made contact with the Hunter Ski Boat Centre at Heatherbrae near Raymond Terrace to have a boat valued for resale, and also to ask if that business was interested in purchasing the boat. Mr Burrell’s asking price was dismissed by the proprietors of Hunter Ski Boat Centre. Subsequently the asking price of $20,000 dropped in the following
Page 8618
days. The boat was issued with a Boatcode which, as members would be only too well aware, is a recent innovation in New South Wales and is operated on a similar system to REVs - the register of encumbered vehicles - by the Department of Fair Trading.

Subsequently, after a bit of haggling, the price offered was $15,000. Mr Burrell stated that he would have to talk to his wife because "she is the boss". He came back and said that if $5,000 could be paid in cash and $10,000 paid by cheque the sale would proceed. It transpired that Mr Burrell had falsified documents to Boatcode, the requirements of which are to complete an application form, show proof of identity and purchase, and pay the prescribed fee of $35. Apparently Mr Burrell had falsified the proof of identity and purchase, and subsequently a Boatcode was issued. In reality, the boat had been stolen from another property so that Mr Burrell had no difficulty whatsoever in making representations that the boat was his. The Boatcode brochure states:

BOATCODE provides security for vessel owners, buyers, and finance and insurance companies.

For the benefit of honourable members it is compulsory for boat owners to join Boatcode before registering new vessels, before transferring the registration of second-hand vessels and when second-hand vessels are being registered for the first time. A penalty applies if boat owners do not comply with the code. I have taken up this matter with the shadow minister, the honourable member for Monaro, who has been very involved in this campaign. Ultimately, the police charged Mr Patrick Burrell, who appeared in court on a number of counts. He signed a statement of confession and confessed to the debt, which now amounts to $16,200. Mr Burrell has given an undertaking to pay this debt by instalments of $100 per month.

Mr and Mrs Burrell have now left New South Wales and have gone to Queensland. That leaves the proprietors of the Hunter Ski Boat Centre $16,800 out of pocket. I have raised this matter to try to establish what protection is being afforded to people in the community. The Government has made it compulsory for boat owners to join Boatcode, which identifies their boats as their property. It was established after a telephone call that Mr Burrell’s boat was not encumbered and that he was the rightful owner. However, it was later established that the boat had been stolen.

Mr Cochran: Boatcode failed.

Mr BLACKMORE: Boatcode failed. As I said earlier, the fee to join Boatcode is $35, $10 of which goes to the dealer and $25 of which goes to the department. Surely in New South Wales there must be an obligation - [Time expired.]

Mr RUMBLE (Illawarra) [5.21 p.m.]: Residents in the growth area of Shellharbour and its immediate environs have asked me to request the Government to reopen the children’s ward at Shellharbour Hospital. People requiring the reopening of the children’s ward live in both Shellharbour and Kiama municipalities. It must be remembered that the former Government closed Kiama hospital. The present Leader of the Opposition, when he was the Minister for Health, made a commitment to keep Kiama hospital open, but when he departed from the health portfolio and the present Deputy Leader of the Opposition slipped into that position that hospital was subsequently closed.

Kiama hospital is not in the Illawarra electorate; it is in the electorate of my colleague the honourable member for Kiama. The Government has made a commitment to reopen that hospital. Some of the complaints that I have received related to the failure by the previous Minister for Health to respond to correspondence, even though there was a great deal of community anxiety about the reopening of the children’s ward. In the last 12 or 18 months Shellharbour Hospital has been experiencing other problems. Certain members of the medical profession wanted to close the maternity ward. After a protracted campaign the maternity ward was reopened. I mention in passing that residents and community leaders worked tirelessly in that campaign to prevent the closure of the maternity ward.

Sharon Bird, Tessa Parsons and Tom Hawkins of the Kids in Dire Straits committee, an active local committee, have organised public meetings at which residents have voiced concerns about the unavailability of a children’s ward at the hospital, thus necessitating the taking of children to Wollongong Hospital for medical treatment. That must be placing a great deal of pressure on the children’s ward at Wollongong Hospital, just as a great deal of pressure must have been placed on the maternity ward at Wollongong Hospital when the maternity ward at Shellharbour Hospital was closed.

People in the southern reaches of the Illawarra region have had to travel in excess of 20 kilometres
Page 8619
to get to Wollongong Hospital because of the unavailability of medical facilities at Shellharbour. The current Minister for Health has made numerous visits to the local area and has listened to the concerns of local residents. He has said that land would be set aside for the re-establishment of a children’s ward. He supports the proposal to reopen the children’s ward at that hospital. A petition signed by 7,300 people which was presented to this Parliament states:

. . . that there is a need for the children’s ward of the Shellharbour Public Hospital to be re-opened due to public demand and the increase in population in that area.

Your Petitioners, therefore, humbly pray that your Honourable House will consider this matter with the view of re-opening the children’s ward of the Shellharbour Public Hospital.

Shellharbour City Council, which is led by hardworking Alderman Cec Glenholmes, has organised meetings and is strongly in support of the reopening of the children’s ward. I ask the Minister for Agriculture to refer this important matter to the Minister for Health.

Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt - Minister for Agriculture) [5.26 p.m.]: I commend the honourable member for Illawarra for raising this matter and for bringing to the attention of honourable members the fact that he has the support of the 7,300 citizens who have signed a petition asking the Government to reopen the children’s ward at Shellharbour Hospital. The honourable member for Illawarra has acknowledged the high-profile campaign conducted by the honourable member for Kiama, who has been tireless in his fighting for the provision of health services on the south coast and in his electorate. The general health issue in that region was referred to by the Treasurer in his Budget Speech and I have no doubt that that matter will be highlighted by various members of Parliament from that part of the State in the budget debate. I assure the honourable member for Illawarra that his comments and his strong support for the reopening of the children’s ward at Shellharbour Hospital will be referred to the Minister for Health at the earliest opportunity.

Mr RIXON (Lismore) [5.28 p.m.]: I bring to the attention of the House the dilemma faced by cattle breeders in dealing with the possibility of their cattle herds contracting Johne’s disease. While sheep breeders are also concerned about the disease it should be clearly understood that Johne’s disease in sheep and cattle are different and should not be confused with one another. However, it is believed that goats, alpaca and deer could become infected with and spread either strain. Johne’s disease causes cattle to scour, that is, develop diarrhoea and lose condition. That results in a drop in milk production, the cessation of reproduction, and the cattle eventually die. Cattle may appear to be active and have a good appetite while wasting away.

Johne’s disease is spread through faeces, direct from mother to calf when suckling from a dirty udder, or to cattle of any age from contaminated pastures. The disease, which is caused by the mycobacterium paratubercalosin bacteria, has a long incubation period in cattle which usually show no signs of the disease until they are four years or older. There is no cure for the disease and vaccines are not very effective. Infected cattle look healthy in the early stages and often do not react to diagnostic tests. The bacteria can survive in cool, sheltered and moist environments, so contaminated land can be a risk to calves and weaners. Currently in New South Wales it is believed that 4 per cent of dairy herds and 0.5 per cent of beef herds are infected, with a greater percentage in Victoria and Tasmania, while Queensland, which is believed to be free of the disease, has adopted protected area status.

Because protected area status has been adopted in Queensland restrictions are being placed on the movement of stock into Queensland and to the Brisbane show, which will be held in August. An example of the difficulty is the problem being faced by Doug Bennett of the Little Valley Braford Stud at Stratheden, who won both the senior grand champion Braford male and female at the Brisbane show in 1996. As much of his stud stock is sold in Queensland, the show and the ability to sell in Queensland are important to him. The stock going to the Brisbane show this year from New South Wales may be segregated from Queensland stock, thus reducing their exposure to potential customers. To do that the cattle must be blood tested as negative. Doug Bennett, using his local veterinarian, Ross Sillar, has to pay $17, which, after a $5 rebate, reduces the cost to $12 per animal tested.

The market assurance program is being developed nationally to accredit tested herds as being not infected with Johne’s disease and as being a safe source for purchase of breeding stock. Currently about 170 herds are enrolled in the market assurance program, which blood tests the herd three times with 12-month intervals between tests. When enough herds in a region have been tested negative, that region will be given protected area status. Producers will know they could buy breeding stock from that area with confidence.

Page 8620

As yet testing is not a perfect science, with an expected 1 per cent incorrect result from blood testing. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay blood test is used to establish a herd’s probable disease status. One positive test in 100 tests means a probability of no infection, while 50 positive tests in 100 means a high probability that the herd is infected. Cultures grown from gut material obtained after slaughter will then confirm or negative an infection. Currently the Department of Agriculture veterinary laboratories carry out diagnostic testing on a limited basis free of charge, but further tests must be paid for. However, there is provision for breeders enrolled in the accredited national market assurance program to have testing done for between $6 and $3, but farm blood collecting and transport costs could increase that figure. Doug Bennett expects that the full three-test program on his herd of 250 cattle could cost about $10,000 over three years. That cost is quite high in today’s climate of very low cattle prices.

A number of protocols are still to be thought through to ensure that stock remain free from infection. Straying stock, use of cattle dips by a number of properties, saleyards and showgrounds are all possible routes of infection. More research must be done into the provision of improved testing, protocols for eradicating the disease, protocols for preventing re-infection or infection of clean areas, protocols for showing cattle in New South Wales and interstate, and, importantly, ways of keeping costs to the cattle industry of eradicating the disease as low as possible. I seek the special consideration of the Minister for Agriculture of this complex issue.

Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt - Minister for Agriculture) [5.33 p.m.]: I acknowledge the well-researched contribution of the honourable member for Lismore and his concern for the cattle producers whose herds are affected by the bovine Johne’s disease. The control of Johne’s disease in cattle in this State is an excellent example of cooperation between industry and the Government. The priority in New South Wales is realistic, that is, to limit the further spread of the disease. It is widely acknowledged that eradication from individual herds is difficult and may not be cost-effective. Provided further spread is stopped, it is believed that eradication from the whole industry is not justified in the short to medium term. New South Wales continues to support the national market assurance program to promote the trade in cattle that are free of Johne’s disease. Since the market assurance program was developed by a national industry-based steering committee in May 1996, its uptake by producers in New South Wales has been very encouraging. Even though the disease is recognised as being less common in New South Wales than in Victoria or Tasmania, more than 97 per cent of producers who have enrolled in this national program come from this State.

The initiative of the Government in making available more than $2.3 million from the Cattle Compensation Fund to subsidise testing under the market assurance program has been acknowledged by cattle producers in their commitment to the program. During this financial year New South Wales Agriculture will spend $310,000 on bovine Johne’s disease control, on staff salaries, on-costs and laboratory tests. Rural lands protection boards contribute $200,000 per year in staff time. Controls within New South Wales are being tightened to ensure infected cattle are not sold for restocking. I will take on board what the honourable member for Lismore has said about the impact of the disease on the Brisbane show. I will also reply to him in more detail when I have more time about his concerns about the stud breeder who was having some difficulty in moving his stock across the State line. Interstate movement controls are being reviewed in consultation with industry to develop more realistic cross-border arrangements based on vendor declarations. [Time expired.]

Mr STEWART (Lakemba) [5.35 p.m.]: As this House is aware, tomorrow there will be a national industrial strike involving union members at BHP sites across Australia in retaliation to the insensitive and heartless decision by BHP to close down its Newcastle steel plant at a cost of 2,500 jobs. After this closure announcement was made my office was contacted by numerous constituents who work at BHP Port Kembla and who drive or commute to the site on a daily basis. Those constituents were infuriated by BHP’s Newcastle closure decision, which has been seen as a betrayal by management of BHP workers and as a decision made without warning or employee and union consultation.

Given the massive scale of job cuts by BHP, many who work at BHP Port Kembla have told me that they are concerned about their future employment security with a company that has clearly been seen to put profit before people. In this light I inform the House about a meeting that I had
Page 8621
with a senior manager from BHP’s Melbourne headquarters over the weekend. The meeting was convened secretly, after I was contacted by the BHP manager, who was deeply concerned about the current direction of BHP Steel and felt compelled to expose how some of this direction was now being unveiled. During my meeting with the BHP manager I was shown documents indicating that approximately three weeks ago a meeting took place in Singapore involving top BHP management and British Steel management.

I am advised that present at this meeting were the BHP Chief Executive, Mr John Prescott; the Chief Executive Officer of BHP Steel, Mr Ron McNeilly; and Singapore-based BHP marketing executive, Dr Phillip Maddona. I was further advised that approximately one week prior to this meeting the Port Kembla steelworks general manager, Mr George Edgar, visited Japan’s Nippon Steel Company to also negotiate a potential sale of BHP Packaging Products. It seems that Mr Edgar’s visit was part of a negotiating ploy aimed at making the purchase of the packaging products division more desirable to British Steel.

The BHP Port Kembla packaging products division, which tins and rolls steel coils, presently employs approximately 600 people and is a 24-hour work operation. Advice I have received indicates that a deal is now in its last stages of finalisation for the complete sale of the BHP packaging products division to British Steel. I am also advised that to smooth the way for that sale Dr Phillip Maddona will be relocated from his BHP Singapore base to replace the existing group general manager of the BHP Port Kembla packaging and products division, Mr Ian Healey. Dr Maddona’s role will be, as I understand it, to finalise on-site arrangements relating to the sale of the BHP division.

British Steel has a reputation for ruthlessly downsizing its work forces and is considered a strong anti-union company. A takeover of BHP packaging products by British Steel would, I am informed, result in a massive downsizing of the division’s work force and would most likely result in de-unionisation of the work site. I am advised that that downsizing could mean a loss of as many as 300 jobs at the Port Kembla works. BHP has recently announced the closure of its Newcastle steelworks at a cost of 2,500 jobs. In line with this ruthless decision, BHP told its employees that the Port Kembla steelworks would not suffer job losses. Clearly the sale of its packaging products division to British Steel would result in massive job losses at the Port Kembla site.

It is now common knowledge amongst BHP management and wider associated business circles that BHP is opting to get out of steel manufacturing in Australia altogether. The BHP agenda seems clearly set on moving its steel production base into Third World countries where accountability relating to environmental controls and occupational health and safety factors are virtually non-existent. To put matters bluntly, it is my belief that BHP has a policy in Australian steel manufacturing sites of closure by stealth. It seems that the Port Kembla packaging products division will be the first cab off the rank in this subversive closure approach. The question remains as to which division of BHP Steel will be the next target for this fire-sale mentality.

BHP should be honest enough to come clean with its workers and the Government and tell the truth about these sale plans. I strongly urge BHP management to come to its senses and not proceed with any planned sale of this BHP division at Port Kembla. BHP should not be allowed to turn its back on the loyalty of Australian workers. Instead, it should be investing in the country and the work force that has made it what it is today.

Mr GLACHAN (Albury) [5.40 p.m.]: Some years ago a Labor Minister for Health closed the obstetrics unit at the Albury Base Hospital and gave responsibility for all obstetric services in Albury to the Sisters of Mercy at the Mercy Hospital. Since that time, the Sisters of Mercy have provided what I regard as one of the best services for mothers and babies in New South Wales, and possibly in Australia. The Sisters provide a comprehensive and excellent service and, of course, they are noted for their standard of care of those who attend their hospitals. For various reasons, no obstetricians live or practise in Albury. Therefore, the Sisters of Mercy fly in obstetricians from Sydney to provide specialist services. Obstetricians practise in the hospital seven days a week, 24 hours a day.

Obstetricians live and work in Wodonga but they work only at the Wodonga Hospital. Recently there has been discussion about having only one obstetric service for Albury-Wodonga. It has been suggested, for various reasons of cost and efficiency, that the service should be based at the Wodonga Hospital. The Greater Murray Health Service engaged consultants to provide a report outlining options for the service to consider. In the report the consultants said that the capital cost of upgrading the Mercy Hospital would be $2 million capital if it were to continue to provide an obstetric service. The people of Albury-Wodonga should be told why a $2
Page 8622
million upgrade is needed, because the hospital is already providing the service.

The consultants also said that the capital cost of building an obstetric service unit at the Albury Base Hospital would be $4.8 million and that there would be a recurrent cost in addition to that. The consultants also said that the recurrent cost of the service at the Mercy Hospital is $4.1 million, but if it were contracted out to the Victorian Department of Health in Wodonga it would cost only $2.6 million. That would obviously result in a large saving. The people of Albury need to know what the New South Wales Department of Health would get for $2.6 million. Would it only pay for the delivery of the babies at the hospital? Would the rest of the full and complete service at the Mercy Hospital be provided? If those extra services would not be provided for $2.6 million, how much would they cost, bearing in mind that the Greater Murray Health Service said that the extra services would be made available in Albury?

The obstetrics unit at the Mercy Hospital provides Medicare and private patients with access to an antenatal clinic, choices in care from midwife clinic, shared care between general practitioner and obstetrician, and obstetrician care. There is also access to prenatal education, lactation consultants, physiotherapy, social work and a counselling service, domiciliary midwives and the parents and baby unit. Would all of those services be available if babies were delivered only at Wodonga Hospital? Another important point is that at present there are 20 beds at the Wodonga Hospital and 25 beds at the Mercy Hospital. The Victorian Government plans to upgrade the unit at Wodonga so that it can cope with births from both sides of the border. However, it plans to provide only 30 beds. There are currently 45 beds in that area. How will 30 beds which are all situated in Wodonga deal with births from the whole region? The region includes not only Albury but smaller towns such as Holbrook, Culcairn, Walla Walla and others. If the obstetric services are discontinued in Albury and provided only in Wodonga at a particular cost, for how long will the cost be fixed? Will the Victorian Government be able to increase the cost at some time in the future and have New South Wales over a barrel, as it were, because this State has no alternative?

The people of Albury need to know about the ratio of induction of labour, about epidurals and caesarean sections at both Mercy Hospital and Wodonga Hospital so that they can compare the two services and establish what they would receive if the service was available only in Wodonga. They are important issues. Another important issue is that intensive care beds are available only at the Albury Base Hospital; I understand there are no intensive care beds at Wodonga. If the Mercy Hospital decides to give up obstetric services, I will ask the Minister for Health to provide an obstetric service at the Albury Base Hospital. The doctors who practise in Wodonga are paid more per delivery than they would be if they practised in Albury. Is it possible for the Minister to work out a contract system with those doctors so that they could be paid the same amount in Albury as they receive in Wodonga? That would make working at the Albury Base Hospital more attractive for the doctors who currently work across the border.

Mr McMANUS (Bulli) [5.45 p.m.]: For the second time in recent weeks I raise my concerns about the Federal Government’s blatant disregard for the community and about the continuation of its plans to establish an airport in the Holsworthy area. I thank the 2,000 residents who attended a meeting on 30 April at St John Bosco Assembly Hall at Engadine. They voiced their concern and disgust at the Federal Government’s proposal. They also aired their concern about the inability of Danna Vale, the Federal member for Hughes, to appear at the meeting so that they could indicate their apprehension to her.

I have raised the matter to air my concerns about some of the documents from Danna Vale that are floating around the Federal electorate of Hughes and my electorate of Bulli. In the past few weeks she has sent a form letter to every resident in the Federal electorate of Hughes. The letter indicates that she was unable to join her constituents at the meeting that was held at Engadine on 30 April. In the next paragraph she said that she has not been invited to the meeting. In my office I have a faxed letter from Danna Vale indicating that she appreciated my invitation to attend the meeting, but that she could not make it because of a prior engagement. She said in the letter that she was prepared to send a representative to speak on her behalf. Her representative was a councillor on the Sutherland Council, and he spoke on her behalf. I am deeply concerned about the way in which Danna Vale has misled her constituents about her ability to attend the meeting.

The constituents of Engadine, Heathcote, Waterfall and Helensburgh have to be careful of the clever, cunning sleight of hand in the letter. On the back of the letter, which is personally addressed to constituents, is a survey, which seeks information on
Page 8623
issues of concern to her constituents. She lists a range of issues, including local government, State government and Federal Government. The Holsworthy airport proposal is listed. The survey is cleverly designed to create confusion in the community. It tries to deflect community concern over the Holsworthy airport proposal. The community must be made aware of what the office of Danna Vale is attempting to do with this survey. On the other side of the same page is another cunning political trick. An optional survey asks whether constituents are committed party voters or whether they are uncommitted or swinging voters. They are asked to give an indication of which party they vote for, as well as their age range.

The danger is that when the survey arrives at Danna Vale’s office in the reply-paid envelope, all she has to do is reverse it to see who it was originally addressed to, how the person votes and the person’s age and political preferences. That is one of the most devious things I have seen in my career as a member of State Parliament. It indicates that Danna Vale is under pressure because she cannot get any help from her State colleagues in trying to defeat the proposal. They were also unavailable to attend the meeting. The honourable member for Sutherland should be concerned about the effect of the proposed airport on his constituents, but he could not be bothered attending the meeting. Some 2,000 people cannot stand the fact that the Liberal Party is taking this action. Opposition members are a disgrace. This letter that is being sent out in the guise of being fair and equal is also a disgrace. [Time expired.]

Mr R. W. TURNER (Orange) [5.50 p.m.]: I speak on the perennial problem of rail freight and how goods can be brought back onto rail. I thank the Minister for Transport for being in the Chamber to hear my comments and hopefully to respond in some way. I have been made aware of a company called Specialised Container Transport which runs private and special trains between Melbourne and Perth. It also has a fleet of trucks that feed into its system. It uses vans and containers for greater flexibility, but this creates problems with loading, unloading and goods being stolen. However, the flexibility gives them an edge over their competitors. They have gained contracts that companies with only containers are not able to fulfil.

Specialised Container Transport is trying to negotiate specialised freight rates between Sydney and Broken Hill, and out through the central west to Orange and Bathurst. I am sure that the honourable member for Bathurst would also be interested in this concept. The rates quoted by State Rail, which also stipulates other unacceptable terms, are four times greater than those of other States. The company has applied to State Rail for access to Chullora goods yards and has had negotiations with State Rail since Trackfast pulled out of Chullora last year.

Until June 1995, in the first year that private trains were able to run on the State Rail system, the company sent approximately 40,000 tonnes to Perth from Melbourne. In the last 12 months that has increased to 240,000-odd tonnes, and the volume is still climbing. It is a great indication that the company is fair dinkum and is here to stay. I understand that the company will spend $18 million this year on a freight terminal in Perth and up to $30 million on a freight terminal in Melbourne. Since the company has operated out of Melbourne and across to Perth a company called Visyboard Pty Ltd has been able to win contracts for paper that had previously been won by Asian companies. Because of the distance across Australia this company was not competitive until it had the ability to put freight back onto rail through this system. The activities of this company will result in a decrease in this country’s imports, which is another valuable attribute of its system.

However, the company seeks to use the western line over the mountains through to Broken Hill, linking up with the Melbourne line at Port Augusta. This will enable the company to set up a depot at Bathurst. The depot will be important because it will enable particle board from Oberon and dog food currently produced by companies in Bathurst and Blayney to be rail freighted over to Adelaide and to Perth. Those goods are now being road freighted across to Adelaide or Port Augusta, or down to Melbourne and then put on a train. The savings in transport costs will enable the companies to become more efficient and able to compete against importers.

I shall run through some of the benefits if the scheme gets off the ground. A freight train of the length and capacity being talked about by this company can carry 3,000 tonnes of freight, which is equal to the volume carried by 150 trucks. A train with a capacity of 6,000 kilowatts will use 180,000 litres of fuel on that trip as against 150 trucks with a capacity totalling 45,000 kilowatts which will use 1.192 million litres of fuel. The train will save more than one million litres of fuel each trip. That will reduce wear and tear on the highway and will make the roads safer by getting trucks off the road. However, this line must be available for freight because it will make the line more viable. There is a
Page 8624
threat that the line will close down once the Indian Pacific goes national, as it will be using the southern route. This proposal will help to make the line more viable and to maintain its upkeep. At present it is being used infrequently. [Time expired.]

Mr LANGTON (Kogarah - Minister for Transport, and Minister for Tourism) [5.55 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Orange for his courtesy in advising me that he was going to raise this matter and for sharing my passion for rail freight. I am advised that for some time Specialised Container Transport - SCT - has been seeking access to the Sydney to Broken Hill route but has been unable to conclude any agreement with the Rail Access Corporation; it has nothing to do with the State Rail Authority. However, I am advised that negotiations between SCT and the Rail Access Corporation are continuing.

Normally a potential operator would seek to have the matter arbitrated by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal. However, SCT wishes to challenge the effectiveness of the rail access regime and therefore does not propose to use the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal as arbitrator. I am advised that SCT has sought a declaration, that is, use of the New South Wales rail track under the Commonwealth access regime through the processes of the National Competition Council. That council has called for submissions on this matter between SCT and the Rail Access Corporation. Submissions to the council from interested parties closed on 7 April and I am advised that the council intends to present its findings to the Premier by 16 June.

New South Wales leads the way in Australia in rail reforms. This Government’s transport reforms opened access to the essential facilities of the rail industry - the rail tracks - in New South Wales from 1 July, 1996. The Government did not establish the rail access regime to inhibit new operators such as SCT. In fact, the regime aims to assist efficient rail operations and to get freight off the road and onto the rails. We welcome the National Competition Council process. In the interim, negotiations between SCT and the Rail Access Corporation will continue.

Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [5.57 p.m.]: I draw to the attention of the House and, in particular, the Minister for Sport and Recreation the activities of the Woodlands Park Youth Club, a sporting club active in my electorate. Specifically, I draw to the attention of the Minister a request the club has made for funding to assist its efforts in providing sporting opportunities for young people in the south-west region of Sydney. The Woodlands Park Youth Club has a long and proud history of involvement with youth sporting activities. It is geographically based on an area that is bounded by Orange Grove Road, Elizabeth Drive, Brickmakers Creek and Cabramatta Creek. Whilst historically that has been the area it originated from, its membership and players come from a much wider area. I have had dealings with the club over a number of years, originally in my capacity as a councillor on Liverpool City Council. I say without qualification that it is a well-respected and well-run club.

I had the pleasure of meeting with a number of representatives from the club on 5 May. I had a meeting with the secretary, Ann Mullegan, the president, Nick Doolan and Gordon Sainsbury. They requested $10,000 to help their efforts in providing sporting opportunities for young people in the area. Over recent years they have experienced, as have many other areas in south-west Sydney, a greater demand because of the combined effect of urban consolidation, many new developments and some interesting population patterns that have meant there are more younger people of an age to play sport in this area. At first blush one would think that such a request was perhaps outside the normal parameters of funding for sporting organisations, as all honourable members are aware of the fiscal realities in these matters. However, I shall outline a couple of reasons that might make the request exceptional.

The first is that it is not simply throwing more money into a sporting club. It is a little more complex than that, in that the money being requested is a seeding grant to allow new sports and new opportunities for sports. It is not meant to be an ongoing, recurrent type of funding from government sources. It is also part of a strategy to provide socially useful activities and facilities in the Liverpool region. There is a long tradition, especially in working-class areas, of sporting activities binding the community together, providing activities for the community’s young people. This application is very much in that tradition. There has certainly been a long tradition of that in the Liverpool area. Provision of sporting facilities may make up for the significant lack of community facilities that areas in western Sydney have historically suffered from. In that regard the club has written:

Our objective in asking for this grant is to gain funds to cover our first up costs for soccer and for the further development of existing sports by providing structured and supervised sporting facilities for the youth in our area. As you can see by the above list we are asking for the bare minimum that we will require for this financial year as we have three teams ready to

Page 8625
play soccer for next season. Woodlands Park Youth Club wishes to make a difference to the kids in this area. Marsden Road Public School is very close by and has a student body of over 400 students from many different backgrounds quite a few of whom already play with this club. By the expansion of sports and equipment we can accommodate many more of them.

This part of south-western Sydney has experienced a significant influx of refugees and new migrant families from the former Republic of Yugoslavia and from Iraq. They do not have a cultural tradition of playing cricket or rugby league but have an absolute cultural commitment to playing soccer. This club is very sensibly responding to the needs and requirements of the new groups that are living within the Liverpool area. It is developing the traditional old sporting ethos of Liverpool by providing sporting opportunities for young children but it is very sensibly expanding to meet the new needs of new groups. The difficulty is funding. South-west Sydney does not have a lot of rich families: most of the families living there do not have a lot of money. The various costs involved in playing sports mean that unless assistance is provided the children and young people will not have the opportunity of participating because the financial resources are beyond them. Liverpool council has already indicated that it will assist by providing soccer facilities and changing goalposts on grounds. There is in-principle support from the Southern Districts Soccer Federation. It would be appropriate if the Minister could provide assistance as well. [Time expired.]

Mr DOWNY (Sutherland) [6.02 p.m.]: I raise a matter tonight on behalf of Mr and Mrs Manolaros, who are constituents of mine living in the suburb of Illawong. This matter has been the subject of much toing and froing between Mr and Mrs Manolaros, the Department of School Education, the Minister and me for a long period. It basically concerns an application for out-of-area enrolment at Illawong Public School. I will not go into the full details because it would take too long. Mr and Mrs Manolaros live in Wilbung Road, Illawong. One building block away is the boundary between Illawong Public School and Tharawal Public School. Mr and Mrs Manolaros have been forced to send their five-year-old daughter to Tharawal Public School, which is 1.6 kilometres away from their place of residence, as opposed to Illawong Public School, which is only 800 metres away.

Mr and Mrs Manolaros realise that because of the population explosion in the Menai area there have to be enrolment boundaries for the schools in the area, but they felt that they had been disadvantaged by a decision of the Department of School Education. The difficulties are compounded by the fact that Mr and Mrs Manolaros are a one-car family: Mrs Manolaros does not drive a car. She has to accompany her daughter to school by bus. It is costing approximately $24 a week for Mrs Manolaros to travel on the bus with her five-year-old daughter to Tharawal Public School.

Mr and Mrs Manolaros have a two-year-old child as well. In the morning it takes Mrs Manolaros an hour and 15 minutes to travel to the school and back, and the travelling time in the afternoon is 35 minutes. It was hoped that the child by this stage would have overcome her anxieties, but even four months after starting school this year she is still worrying every day about whether her mother will be there to pick her up or will be running late. The department should take into account the local circumstances more than it has in this case. The department could not see sufficient reason for allowing an out-of-area enrolment. Apart from the financial and emotional cost to the Manolaroses, children in surrounding streets who play with their daughter attend Illawong school and she is the only child in the local area who travels to Tharawal Public School.

Now is the time for enrolments at local schools. Recently another constituent visited me with a similar problem with regard to Bangor Public School. More consideration should be given to geographic location in relation to school boundaries in the Menai area. The constituent who visited me recently lives much closer to Bangor Public School than to Menai Public School, yet he has been told that he will have to enrol his daughter in Menai Public School. However, children living on the northern side of Menai Road, which is further away from Bangor Public School, will be eligible for enrolment at Bangor Public School. I note that the Minister is at the table and I certainly do not want to ambush him on this subject but I would ask him to consider this issue. [Time expired.]

Mr AQUILINA (Riverstone - Minister for Education and Training, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth Affairs) [6.07 p.m.]: Unfortunately, I did not have any prior knowledge that this matter would be raised. I note that the honourable member for Sutherland has apologised for that. Had I been given some prior knowledge I would have undertaken to look into the details of the matter. I have sympathy in relation to the issues the honourable member raised. They are not uncommon: they are relevant to many hundreds if not thousands
Page 8626
of children right across the State. There are always accommodation pressures on schools.

Despite the fact that we have a no-zoning policy, each school has an appropriate feeder area and principals must give priority to the students in the feeder area before accepting students from outside the feeder area. Because of population density, in many cases the feeder area for a local school may not necessarily be the closest to the school. It is difficult to explain to parents why that happens, but at all times we try to ensure that there is not undue hardship for parents and for students in accessing their local school or their appropriately designated school. I will look at the details outlined by the honourable member for Sutherland and see whether we can accommodate the concerns of his constituents. My departmental officers will provide me with a report and I will furnish that to the honourable member in the hope that we may be able to resolve the issues that he has raised today.

Mr McBRIDE (The Entrance) [6.09 p.m.]: On 19 November 1996, following the Central Coast Suicide Summit at the Central Coast Leagues Club organised by a locally-based committee chaired by Eric Trezise, a community representative of the Central Coast Area Health Service suicides outcomes group, I advised the Parliament of the details of the central coast suicide crisis. Since that occasion three young people known to my children have committed suicide. Tragically two of those deaths have occurred in the last month: Scott McCluand, 18, took his life last Tuesday and four weeks ago his 14-year-old girlfriend Sandy Kain took her life. As I watched Chris, Scott’s mother, on the Today morning program on Tuesday, the enormity of this tragedy struck again like a sledgehammer. Knowing Chris personally and knowing that she is a gutsy person, I was still overwhelmed by her capacity to front the media in a bid to stop her personal tragedy being repeated.

Chris is right: something should be done and done now. However, as Chris reflected in her interview, there are no simple answers. Many of the suicide cases are unexplainable to family and friends. Superficially there often appears to be no explanation. In one case known to my family the young person was apparently typical of youth on the central coast: happy and in a good job with an attractive career path. Those who saw and spoke with him immediately prior to his death reported him to be apparently happy and content. Tragically, within a day he was dead.

These tragedies beg the question: why does the central coast have this problem, particularly amongst its young people? Chris McCluand mentioned other facets of the problem that I also agree need to be followed up. Chris mentioned a pact amongst young people, between boyfriend and girlfriend, to follow each other into death. She also mentioned the existence of videotapes relating to death and how to commit suicide. Chris mentioned music and lyrics that romanticise and encourage young death and a code of excluding parents from this aspect of their lives. Chris McCluand also made a plea for easy access for parents to information and help when they become concerned about their children. No-one but a mother or carer can pick up the subtle nuances of a change in a youth’s personality. Therefore, it is of paramount importance that access is provided to assistance and advice.

It has been suggested that schools be the focus of a youth suicide strategy. However, I feel strongly that schools are already overloaded with health and welfare-related issues. Health should have the primary role and, as Australia has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, this matter should be approached as a national issue. More than 2,500 suicides occur annually in Australia, which is 1,000 people more, or 67 per cent higher, than the national road toll. We all know the community attitude to road safety and the amount of money that has been spent on it both nationally and by the State. I stress that point: 2,500 suicides annually, which is 1,000 people more than the annual national road toll.

As well, issues such as music, music lyrics and videotapes are Federal responsibilities. Suicide is certainly a massive problem on the central coast, where last year’s suicide rate was double that of the year before and twice the national average, bearing in mind that the national average is one of the highest in the western world. So far as the matter concerns the State Government, this week I made personal representations on the issue of youth suicide on the central coast to the Premier, the Deputy Premier and Minister for Health, and the Minister for Education and Training. All expressed heartfelt concern for the situation. I was told that, notwithstanding the $5.5 million allocated last year and a further $7 million in this year’s budget for suicide-related issues, the central coast situation will be urgently reviewed.

I am appreciative of the collective concern expressed by these senior Ministers and their willingness to direct their departments to urgently address this problem. I will write to the Prime Minister again, urging his Government’s immediate involvement, in particular relating to videotapes,
Page 8627
music cassettes and disks. As I said, suicide is a national problem that needs national support. Through this Parliament I ask the Prime Minister to personally take up this tragic issue as he did the Port Arthur massacre.

Mr AQUILINA (Riverstone - Minister for Education and Training, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth Affairs) [6.14 p.m.]: I acknowledge the concerns that have been raised by the honourable member for The Entrance on this sensitive but pertinent issue. I note the honourable member’s comments that this issue goes far beyond the boundaries of schools and, of course, far beyond the school concerned. Nonetheless, I appreciate that schools play a special role in the needs of young people who have fallen victim to this terrible tragedy of modern times. No issue could be more serious or harrowing than a young person taking his or her life. I am disturbed about the high level of suicide, particularly youth suicide and, as the honourable member for The Entrance said, particularly youth suicide on the central coast.

The Deputy Premier and Minister for Health last year allocated $5.5 million towards a statewide program for the prevention of suicide and the closely related issue of depression in young people. Also, the Minister for Health recognises his particular responsibilities in relation to the broad issue of mental health. Schools statewide have a policy which not only tries to avert youth suicide but also provides an enormous degree of counselling to help the companions, particularly the school companions, of a young person who has suicided. It must be appreciated that the suicide of a young schoolperson has enormous impact on the school community, the fellow students as well as staff. Immediate emergency debriefing and trauma counselling is organised for all staff and students to assist them to come to terms with the incident and its consequences so as to allow them people to return to a normal level of functioning as quickly as possible. Teams of counsellors from local and other schools are sent in. It is a wide and intense counselling process. Youth suicide is a big problem and there are no easy solutions. I congratulate the honourable member on bringing this matter to the attention of the House. [Time expired.]

Dr MACDONALD (Manly) [6.16 p.m.]: It is an interesting coincidence that the matter of youth suicide raised by the honourable member for The Entrance bears very much on the matter I seek to draw to the attention of the House, which is the serious risk of the closure of the Peer Support Foundation. I asked that the Minister for Education and Training be present to hear this statement. The northern beaches area of Sydney has just as bad a record as the central coast in regard to youth suicide: five youth suicides in the last seven months. The peer support program is a community-based non-denominational student-help-student program. Its aim is to develop a sense of self worth, dignity and caring in individual young people and to assist them in managing threatening peer pressure. The foundation’s consultants conduct workshops, usually of two days duration, in which volunteer teachers study program content, practise typical exercises and discuss implementation techniques. They then pass on the training and provide background support to senior students who volunteer to accept group leader responsibility, in other words, peer support student-to-student.

The program is very much in keeping with the main thrust of the Burdekin report recommendations which emphasised the importance of the detection of symptoms and prevention, whether prevention of youth suicide, which is the worst possible outcome, or the prevention of other morbidity in youngsters. Peer groups create the environment in which children gain the confidence to express their innermost feelings and concerns. The Peer Support Foundation, which was founded by Elizabeth Campbell in Manly 14 years ago, in the last year provided training to more than 2,000 teachers from government and non-government schools. Those teachers trained 25,000 leaders, who led 200,000 students through the program, which operates in over 1,000 schools throughout New South Wales.

The peer support program is at risk. Its future is in jeopardy, possibly within the next three to four months, due to the lack of cooperation and moral support from the Department of School Education. As the Minister for Education and Training said, this is the Government which has allocated additional funding for youth suicide prevention, and that is to be commended. But there needs to be more than rhetoric. The Peer Support Foundation must be supported. The reason there is a problem is that at the moment the Department of School Education provides no direct funding to the peer support program but provides relief teachers.

The Department of School Education has reduced the allocation of training and development to schools so that teachers cannot get relief to attend the two-day workshops. They have to get out of the schools to learn about peer support so that they can bring the message back. School development days, when staff are trained at the school, and pupil-free days are now prescribed by the Department of
Page 8628
School Education because of the resultant savings on school bus services. Unfortunately, a lack of flexibility is affecting the training operation. Representations have been made to me by Julie Dawson, the General Manager of the Peer Support Foundation Ltd. Representations have been made also to every parliamentarian.

The Peer Support Foundation Ltd is in crisis. I am desperately keen for the Department of School Education to provide the necessary support. The only other Government support the foundation receives is $160,000 a year from the Department of Health. It seems as though the Department of School Education is not prepared to negotiate on peer support access to schools. It is this lack of flexibility and current lack of funding that is putting peer support so much at risk. The foundation has had the imprimatur of Brian Burdekin, who has been in contact with the Chairman, James Dibble, of the Peer Support Foundation Ltd, who said in his newsletters:

It seems clear to me that effectively operating school peer support groups are creating an environment which greatly contributes to preventing the despair which leads youngsters to experiment with dangerous lifestyles. I see particular value in the "grass roots" link made available between those with developing problems and sources of professional help within the school.

When one considers the millions we are spending on trying to help the homeless and afflicted it is clear that the very small investment we are making in Peer Support is cost-effective.

I am delighted to commend the Program to anyone who might be able to help you to accelerate the valuable work of the Foundation.

I ask the Government to support and to save the Peer Support Foundation Ltd.

Mr AQUILINA (Riverstone - Minister for Education and Training, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth Affairs) [6.21 p.m.]: I share the concerns of the honourable member for Manly in relation to the peer support program, which has now been functioning for 14 years and has grown to be a very successful operation. Older students can learn leadership skills, interpersonal relationship skills, problem-solving skills and many other very valuable attributes. Younger students often establish relationships with their mentors, which may result in longstanding friendships and provide excellent role models. As the honourable member for Manly said, the Government provides substantial financial funding for the peer support program throughout the State, but I am aware from recent correspondence that various schools - not universally across the State, but certainly some schools - are concerned about the impact of lack of relief teachers to enable teachers to undertake training in various programs, such as normal in-service training and training for peer support groups.

However, nothing was specifically directed in recent changes to that issue. Prescribed staff development days save about $5 million a year in bus fees, which is a substantial saving. It would now appear that specified staff development days impact upon the capacity of various teachers to undertake peer support training. I will certainly investigate these matters and try to find a solution so that teachers can continue with their training and support the peer support program.

Private members’ statements noted.

The following bills were returned from the Legislative Council without amendment:

Fish Marketing Amendment (Deregulation) Bill
Friendly Societies (New South Wales) Bill
Gaming and Betting Amendment Bill

[Mr Acting-Speaker (Mr Mills) left the chair at 6.24 p.m. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m.]

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr O’FARRELL (Northcott) [7.30 p.m.]: I was saying before debate on this matter was interrupted that there are two issues in this debate. The first is the delay which is occurring within the redistribution process and the second is a matter of principle that, clearly, is unknown to the Government, that is, the principle of electoral fairness. It has been clear for the past 12 months that factional squabbling within the Australian Labor Party has caused it not to commence the redistribution process. It seems unwilling to commence the redistribution process until such time as Sussex Street gets both factions to agree to a central submission. That may seem reasonable, but I have to say that the redistribution legislation does not state that redistribution shall occur at a time of convenience to political parties; the redistribution process states that redistribution shall occur either when there is malapportionment, which currently exists, or after the second election from the last redistribution occurring, which also exists.

A redistribution has been due in this State since the day after the last election. It does this
Page 8629
Government no good to keep delaying that process. Over Christmas there was an outrageous slur against the New South Wales Electoral Commissioner, Mr Ian Dickson, who had to publicly declare that he would not retire, as many Labor officials had hoped, and that he would participate in the forthcoming electoral process. The Opposition welcomes Ian Dickson’s participation in the forthcoming redistribution. We simply urge this Government to get on with the job. The second issue is one that I am sure Government members have problems with, that is, the principle of one vote one value. We know that Labor traditions are not very principled; we know that the New South Wales Right, which runs the Labor Party and government in this State, is unprincipled; but central to our democracy is the principle that my vote is equal to that of the Minister for Local Government, who is in the Chamber.

It is upon that basis that redistribution should occur. It is clear from Labor’s leaked plan - a leaked plan that has not to this stage been rebutted by anyone in the Labor Party hierarchy, in Parliament or out of Parliament - that the Labor Party seeks to set about a reduction in the size of Parliament, not to save money, not to guarantee a one vote one value principle, but to ensure that this Government is returned at the next election on a minority vote; a vote of 47 per cent of the population. I also note in passing that if a reduction of this House occurs it will represent broken promise No. 346, because at estimates committees only last June the Premier said, "There will be no change in the number of seats in the lower House in the forthcoming redistribution." I make a plea on behalf of the Opposition for the Government to get on with the job. The Government must remove politics from this process.

The Government must examine immediately redistribution legislation to ensure that two things occur: first, that in future there is an automatic start to the process and that we do not have to wait for a government to decide when a redistribution will occur; and, second, that the Government should consider legislation that takes patronage out of this issue and ensures that the Chief Justice, not the Government, appoints the chair of the Electoral Commission, so we can do away once and for all with the issue of political patronage. I have spoken in this House previously about the issue of electoral fairness. I again urge this Government to consider the South Australian legislation introduced under the Bannon Government, which ensures that the party which gets 50 per cent, plus one, of the vote forms government. A great Labor politician said:

You only get good, clean, honest government when you have good clean honest electoral systems where it is known that if 51 per cent of the people vote for a party that party will form government.

That is not the case in this State. We do not have good, clean, honest government because we do not have a good, clean, honest electoral system. Our concern is that we cannot trust Labor with this redistribution process. [Time expired.]

Mr E. T. PAGE (Coogee - Minister for Local Government) [7.35 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Northcott for raising this issue. What is the real situation? Somehow the honourable member latched on to a single article in the Sydney Morning Herald which, somehow or other, has gospel-like significance. I am certain that when an article is published in the paper which is not favourable to the honourable member’s party he would not give it the same validity. A statute which covers redistribution is triggered under the two circumstances described by the honourable member for Northcott. Those two triggers are now in place. There will be a redistribution between now and the next election. The honourable member for Northcott was correct when he said that there could have been a redistribution once this Parliament first assembled, but there is a finalisation date. As long as that redistribution occurs before the next election it will be valid.

That redistribution has to be carried out before the next election; it cannot go beyond that date. It is quite stupid for the honourable member to suggest that, somehow, there is some magic date by which it needs to be done, other than the calling of the next election. I was amazed when the honourable member said that there were two significant issues in this debate. He referred first to the delay. The delay does not matter. The redistribution becomes operative at the next election. It will be done before then and that will be the end of it. The honourable member referred second to a matter of principle, the matter of electoral fairness. The honourable member impugned the reputation of the three commissioners. Later in his speech he said that Ian Dickson, the Electoral Commissioner, was a great guy, but he impugned his integrity by saying that there was a matter of electoral unfairness in the way in which the system operates.

Is the honourable member saying that Ian Dickson will be unfair? I do not believe that. Is the honourable member saying that the judge who will be appointed will be unfair? Is the honourable member saying that the Surveyor General will be unfair? It is appalling for someone of his stature to pour scorn on intelligent people in this State. The
Page 8630
honourable member referred to the matter of principle but he did not refer - and I am sure from the tenor of his speech that he believes in it - to the concept of one vote one value. He referred to the requirement in South Australia for the party that gets the largest number of votes to form government. Neville Wran provided for the abolition of the zonal system in New South Wales. He brought in one vote one value, or equal electorates. John Mason, the Leader of the Liberal Party in those days, and the forebear of Opposition members said:

I have never heard anything more immoral or improper.

John Mason went on to say:

One of the most scurrilous, wicked, gerrymandering, Labor directed acts that has ever been done in this Parliament . . .

That is what John Mason had to say about one vote one value. Reference was made earlier to minority votes. It is true that the Labor Party got more seats in this Parliament and it did not get as many votes as the coalition. That was not my redistribution or the redistribution of my party; it was the coalition’s redistribution. Opposition members carried out the redistribution before the 1991 election; they provided the basis for the votes which took place in 1991 and 1995. While there is some validity in the fact that the coalition received more votes than the Labor Party, it does not take into account the fact that the Labor Party can run marginal campaigns. We know the seats that we need to win. We have candidates and campaign managers who know how to operate in marginal seats, so we win the seats that count.

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Strathfield to order. I call the honourable member for Coffs Harbour to order.

Mr E. T. PAGE: The office I took over when I became the Minister was previously occupied by Ted Pickering, who was in the upper House and who was the guru of the Liberal Party as far as campaigning in marginal seats was concerned. Out the back there was a phone - and the phone is still there - and programmed on that phone were the marginal seats. Whoever was sitting in the back room in that government-funded building running their Liberal campaign had only to press a button to get through to the candidate for Coogee, or the candidate for Bathurst, or some of the other marginal seats. But there were two seats missing: Badgerys Creek and Gladesville. The Liberal Party did not even realise that they were two marginal seats. Of course, that is where the Labor Party was campaigning.

By the time the Liberal strategists woke up, it was too late; we had won those seats before they realised that they were in jeopardy. The reason that we could win government, even though we had fewer votes than the coalition parties, is that we know how to campaign - and we will do that in the next election. Now the Opposition says that all sorts of rules and regulations should be brought in, yet it was the coalition parties that were in government for seven years. Suddenly the Opposition says that for a party to win government it must get 50 per cent of the valid vote. They were in government for seven years, and did nothing about this, but now that they are no longer in government it is a big problem. They say that the Chief Justice should appoint the redistribution commissioners. That was never an issue when the coalition parties were in office. Suddenly they find all sorts of spurious reasons for these changes - spurious reasons, but they do not give a tinker’s cuss.

Going back in history, one of the most dastardly things that happened in this Parliament was done when Willis was the Premier. I think you, Mr Acting Deputy-Speaker, would recall this episode. In the lead-up to the election in 1976, realising the coalition parties were in trouble, he put a motion to the House for a redistribution. The motion was introduced at midnight when the Parliament was sitting, and it finally passed through the House at 2 o’clock in the morning. Where is the fairness in that? What were the predecessors of the honourable member for Northcott doing when that was being pushed through this Parliament? One of the regrets I have about the next election is that the honourable member for Northcott will not be the campaign manager for my opposition. I think this will probably cost us a few votes. In all fairness, by and large Liberals in this State do not know how to run campaigns, so I doubt if they have anyone who could do a better job than he can.

[Interruption]

By way of interjection the honourable member for Northcott talks about the credibility of his people in New South Wales running elections. I remind him that it was the Liberal Party that undertook the redistribution, yet it lost the election last year even though the Labor Party polled fewer votes than the coalition did. That is no way to organise elections. It is no way to run elections for a campaign manager, Ted Pickering, to be unaware until it was too late that Badgerys Creek and Gladesville were marginal seats. That is hardly good campaigning.

All sorts of claims have been made about the article in last Saturday’s Sydney Morning Herald.
Page 8631
The honourable member for Northcott has forgotten that if there are to be any changes to the procedures for redistributions or the number of seats, that can only be done by this Parliament. It cannot be done by the right wing of the Australian Labor Party, the left wing of the ALP or a combination of the two. It can only be done by a vote of the two Houses of Parliament. Whatever comes up before this House has to be passed by the upper House, where there are seven crossbenchers who no doubt will have a pretty firm view on this.

There is no point talking like Chicken Little about the sky falling in. Any redistribution decision will have to come from this Parliament and from nowhere else. Now the Opposition says there is something wrong with reducing the number of seats. One of the first things that Premier Greiner did upon election to office - a redistribution was not due - was to cut the number of seats from 109 to 99. Apparently that was all right, but for some reason any further reduction is a matter of principle. They are completely inconsistent arguments and not worth debating. In summary, at the moment we are talking about spurious rumours. There is a statutory process that must be followed. If that is to be changed in any way, it would have to be done by an Act of Parliament and that would need the support of both Houses.

Mr IEMMA (Hurstville) [7.45 p.m.]: Honourable members have heard a lot about principle and fairness in our electoral system. I remind the honourable member for Northcott what former Premier Nick Greiner had to say in relation to the current electoral legislation that the honourable member for Northcott finds so unfair. In Hansard on 27 February 1990 the former Premier Nick Greiner had this to say about the system and the legislation that the honourable member for Northcott finds so unfair. He said:

The principles to be applied to a redistribution -

that is, his redistribution -

will ensure that there is no scope for a gerrymander in New South Wales.

If that was not enough, John Booth, the former honourable member for Wakehurst, had this to say on 26 March 1990 at page 651:

There is not, and cannot be under this legislation, -

that is the coalition’s legislation -

a gerrymander.

That is the legislation that currently applies to the New South Wales electoral system. The Leader of the National Party - and I note that he is in the Chamber - on 20 March 1990 on page 673 of Hansard had this to say:

The bill before the House will restore true democracy to New South Wales and will give country people the opportunity for fair representation.

That is a system that the honourable member for Northcott says is a rort, is unfair. The excitable honourable member for Ermington also had plenty to say about the system. On 20 March 1990 he said:

The level playing field continues . . . the catchcry is not gerrymander . . . Given the small 1.5 per cent variation allowed between electoral sizes, the boundaries cannot be rorted.

Malcolm Mackerras has also had plenty to say about the sorts of criticisms that the honourable member for Northcott has made. I quote Malcolm Mackerras from an article that appeared in the Australian in March 1995, just one week after the election. Mr Mackerras had this to say:

Every reputable analyst, every fair minded politician accepted the new map -

that is, the 1991 redistribution map -

as eminently fair. The Liberal Party was so delighted it said to itself: Roll on the election.

No record exists of Collins or any other Liberal complaining in March 1991. If the system -

that is, their system -

was so unfair, why did the Libs take so long to notice?

The present procedures produced the 1991 redistribution, which was the fairest that I have examined. If so fair a map can be obtained under the present procedures, what could be the motive for any unnecessary change.

That is the key. Of course, the honourable member for Northcott does not like the fact that the Liberal Party lost the last election. He raises the point that percentage of the two-party vote that the Liberal and National parties polled did not match the number of seats that they gained. He claims that they polled 51 per cent of the two-party vote, but they did not get 50 per cent, plus one, of the seats. That is nothing new and nothing sinister under single-member constituencies. With single-member constituencies that has happened in every State in this country, except in Tasmania. That State has a different electoral system, a multimember electoral system. But that has happened in every State in this country,
Page 8632
and at a national level. I need to go back only to the New South Wales results for the last Federal election to see the sort of imbalance that can occur under single-member constituencies when a large number of seats are held by a very small margin and there is a sizeable swing. The Federal results in New South Wales showed the following pattern. The Labor Party polled 47.4 per cent of the two-party vote in New South Wales but gained only 38 per cent of the seats.

In the Federal elections in 1954, 1961 and 1969 the Labor Party gained more than 50 per cent of the two-party preferred vote but lost each of those elections. It did so because on occasions the results are skewed by single-member constituencies. Because of the reforms to our electoral system by the Wran and Unsworth governments between 1976 and 1988, those results do not mean that those constituencies are malapportioned or that a gerrymander applies. The Minister for Local Government outlined what the former coalition leader, John Mason, had to say when the legislation for one vote one value was introduced. [Time expired.]

Mr O’FARRELL (Northcott) [7.50 p.m.], in reply: It is true in politics, as in life, that what goes around comes around. Based on figures produced by Malcolm Mackerras, if the 1991 State election, which the honourable member for Hurstville has just been rambling on about, had been held on the boundaries introduced in 1987 by the Unsworth Government, Labor would have been elected with only 47 per cent of the vote. But the House is now discussing a leaked Labor plan that shows that with a further reduction of the number of members to 93 Labor would be returned to office with a minority vote. I address one comment to the honourable member for Hurstville: the accuracy of a redistribution is not known until after it has occurred. Only the test of the ballot box proves whether a redistribution is fair and whether it meets the principles set out in the legislation.

I am pleased that the Minister for Local Government participated in the debate and that he enunciated the principle that delay does not count; delay is not a cause for concern. It is important that electors know in which electorate they will vote at the next election; it is important for members to know which electorates they will represent at the next election. The hardest task that members have is letting their constituents know that they exist and are here to help them. At the end of the day that is what we all do in our electorates. That is why delay in this matter is important, that is why the process should have started and that is why there should be some certainty.

The principle of one vote one value is important. The Minister for Local Government referred to a debate that a former Liberal Party leader had with a former Labor Party leader - Mr Mason versus Mr Wran. Neville Wran did many good things with this State’s electoral system. Like Don Dunstan and a number of other Labor leaders around the country, one of the things Neville Wran stood up for was the principle of one vote one value. It does the Minister for Local Government no good at all to retreat from the position put forward by Neville Wran in 1978 and to endorse a proposal that would result in the re-election of the Labor Government with a minority vote. The Minister did not come into the House and say that John Della Bosca, Peter Sams and the Premier had asked him to say that there is absolutely no truth in that article. The Minister did not refute the article, so we can take it that the article is perhaps 80 per cent true.

The second point I want to make is that not that long ago, in a State to the north of us, there was great controversy about the drawing of electoral boundaries. That controversy was fuelled by Labor Party members. They show themselves to be hypocrites when they attack electoral inequities in other States but do nothing about electoral inequities in this State when they are in office. The third point I want to make about the one vote one value system is that for the past 20 or 30 years it has not been an issue in this State. The honourable member for Hurstville could not name one State election in New South Wales in which a minority vote returned a government. I can name one: the 1995 election of the Carr Government with 49 per cent of the vote.

The former coalition Government endeavoured to make the electoral process fairer. It came to office in 1988 with an electoral system that gave Labor a 3 per cent bias. That bias was reduced in the 1991 redistribution. Mr Mackerras’s prospective comments about the redistribution appear to be fair. As we know from the results of the 1991 election, the system was not fair. It did not equate with the sorts of redistributions that were initiated in South Australia by the Bannon Labor Government. They legislate to ensure that the party that gets 50 per cent plus one of the vote is guaranteed government. The reduction in the size of the Parliament brought about by the Greiner-Murray Government was based on principle. It was based upon a genuine commitment to smaller government, a commitment ultimately accepted by the Labor Party. This redistribution is about the Labor Party hanging onto power; it is about denying regional and rural New
Page 8633
South Wales a voice in the Parliament. I am sure the honourable member for Bathurst would be most concerned about that if he were sitting in the Chamber. The important thing is that Labor cannot be trusted on this issue, as it cannot be trusted on other issues. [Time expired.]

Discussion concluded.

Suspension of standing and sessional orders agreed to.

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Leader of the National Party) [7.55 p.m.]: Some budgets are visionary. They are building blocks for real progress; they are milestones in the life of governments. The 1997-98 Labor budget is none of those things. It is the third budget of the Carr Government and history will record it as Labor’s hat-trick of hostility towards people who live in regional New South Wales. The budget offers nothing of inspiration and it contains no government leadership on projects of public importance. It is bankrupt of social responsibility. The 1997-98 Carr budget undertakes only to maintain some existing programs while in other sectors resources have declined in real terms. The budget merely marks time for a group of New South Wales residents who provide vast export income but receive pitifully little in return for taxes paid. A full 16 per cent of the New South Wales population lives in rural and regional areas, yet that group will receive only 2 per cent of the budget.

Let me list the ways in which the budget abjectly fails those who are unfortunate enough not to live in Labor Party priority areas. Roads in country areas will continue to deteriorate under this budget. Funding has been slashed by 5 per cent in real terms. Under the former coalition Government, 60 per cent of the 3 x 3 road funding was put back into country roads. The Premier has cut that figure back to 57 per cent, a 3 per cent loss that will result in the diversion of tens of millions of country road dollars to city road use. When that is added to the 2 per cent erosion effect of inflation, a situation of dangerously inadequate funding is created. That danger is faced every day by country people, tourists and city visitors who must use the country road network.

Many country roads are now past the point of patching and require complete restructuring. Many country councils are struggling to maintain rate revenue and are desperate for further help from the State to keep local roads in a safer condition. By not providing proper routine funding for rural roads, the Government will accelerate a snowballing effect that no future governments of either political persuasion will be unable to salvage. The reduction road funding is also evidence of the Government’s lack of long-term planning in other areas. The BHP steelworks are closing and the port of Newcastle will be looking for business. Has there ever been a more urgent time to get more agricultural exports out of that port? The road that connects Dubbo to Newcastle could be a superhighway of road freight, of cotton and other rural commodities. However, Labor’s budget shows no plans for upgrading the highway and, hence, no common sense in committing funds to one of the most logical responses to the Newcastle economic crisis.

That road is known as the golden highway and that should be a fitting description of a thoroughfare linking rural and seaport industry. Under Labor that name is a mockery. Once again agriculture has been the victim of Labor’s hatred of the heartland. Having decimated the Department of Agriculture in previous years, with 550 jobs having disappeared already, the Carr Government continues the rot with this year’s budget barely exceeding the cost of inflation. The agriculture budget is absolutely flat in development programs and in new and real initiatives for the food and fibre industries. Meanwhile the cost of irrigation water, the most basic and vital input to irrigation industries, will increase by no less than 21 per cent this year. If one remembers the way that similar interest rate rises crippled the farming sector in the 1980s, one would then have some understanding of the impact that this water cost increase will have on farm incomes in irrigation regions. An increase of this size proves that the Government does not understand that most rural industries are currently operating on the most of marginal incomes. The Government does not comprehend that it is
Page 8634
impossible to keep squeezing revenue out of industries that are experiencing a cash drought because of poor prices.

The Minister for Agriculture, the Hon. Richard Amery, has announced that the budget provides for the appointment of 40-plus new field officers. Is he too dishonest to admit that these supposedly new positions are merely filling essential roles left empty by the Government last year to save money? If ever there was a pea and thimble trick, that would have to be it. It was announced on radio on Monday that an additional 40 specialist officers would be appointed to service agriculture across New South Wales, but no mention was made of the fact that in the majority of cases those positions were left unfilled for as long as 18 months because the Government had gutted out the expertise of agriculture and left it without proper and adequate advice at the time of one of its lowest incomes in its history.

Tourism is one of the growth industries in the State of New South Wales but one would not know it from the way the Government has introduced the bed tax. That tax, which will add a massive 10 per cent to the cost of a hotel bed in the city of Sydney, will hurt country people dearly. The extra money that visitors to Sydney will now have to pay for accommodation will mean that they will not take a day trip to the Blue Mountains. Sydney visitors with bigger hotel bills will think twice about a winery tour to the Hunter Valley. They might not now be able to afford the journey to the Dubbo zoo. Many country business proprietors must travel regularly to the city to meet with representatives of government departments, and to attend head office and conferences. They will incur a further weight of cost when they stay at Sydney hotels.

Mr Shedden: Where is your backbench?

Mr ARMSTRONG: I know it is embarrassing for members of the Labor Party who represent suburban electorates when they realise they have been snowed by the Premier and the Treasurer in this budget. The backbenchers squeak because they know that they have been done over by the Carr Government. The bed tax will add $30 to $40 per night to the cost of staying in Sydney for those who have to come to the city because the same Government opposes decentralisation and, consequently, maintains few local offices in country areas. A good example of the impact of this onerous bed tax was never mentioned when the Carr Government looked for Opposition support to move the Royal Easter Show to Homebush.

Country-based members of this House know that for decades hundreds of exhibitors and their families have camped out at the showground for a week or more to provide the crowd-pleasing livestock entries in the Royal Easter Show. Next year at the historic Homebush site hotel accommodation only will be available. In the main, regular show exhibitors were prepared to accept that new cost to help maintain the wonderful tradition of the Royal Easter Show. It is appalling that their reward is to be hit with even higher costs from a Government that deceived country people over its real taxation intentions. The bed tax has also thrown into turmoil the State’s preparations for the Olympic Games.

The Minister for everything Olympic, the Hon. Michael Knight, must be suffering enormous embarrassment because the Premier has cut his legs off. He will not be able to say next week in Europe that Sydney is preparing to welcome the world’s tourists. I will bet he does not say next week in Monte Carlo that the Labor Government is already starting to tax Olympic tourists to prop up its own budget mismanagement. The Australian Hotels Association has dropped vital long-term negotiations to ensure adequate beds are available at suitable prices at the time of the Olympic Games, and the Tourism Council of Australia has today launched a fighting fund to fight the tax. How does that sit with the honourable member for Bankstown and the honourable member for Hurstville? The Tourism Council of Australia and the Australian Hotels Association today have both said that the Government has got it wrong. Accommodation will be a key aspect of the hoped-for success of the Games, particularly in relation to Sydney’s international image.

By introducing this tax and, in the process, breaking yet again his election promise of no new taxes, the Premier has jeopardised a positive image that has been built up over several decades in the tourism industry, just as the industry, a major employer, begins its build-up of business towards 2000. The Minister for Tourism, the Minister for the Olympics and the Premier have been running around the country saying what they will do for the year 2000 and what a great advantage the Olympics will be for New South Wales. But they have withdrawn one of a major factors that attract people from interstate and overseas to visit Sydney, New South Wales, and Australia in the year 2000: visitors are now to be taxed to prop up the Government’s objectionable mismanagement over the past 18 months to two years.

Page 8635

I turn to land tax, which has been increased. That increase is said to impinge on the wealthy. What do the Treasurer and the Premier think will happen when people who own rental premises, be they business or residential, receive the extra land tax assessment? They will pass it on to the tenants so that small business and the average tenants, university students and young couples setting out on their first job, will pay the extra land tax. This socialist Government believes it will hit the wealthy, but it will really hit the poor, those who cannot afford to pay the extra tax. The Government simply does not understand. I know the honourable member for Bathurst, who is in the chair, is terribly embarrassed that the Carr Government has repeatedly broken its election vow of no new taxes. This new budget is yet another round of new taxes.

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: No, I am not.

Ms Allan: He looks terribly embarrassed. That is his normal look.

Mr ARMSTRONG: Indeed, he is embarrassed. The Minister for the Environment acknowledges that. She knows that it is an embarrassment that the Government of which she is a Minister continues to lie to the people of New South Wales. Unfortunately, the budget probably does not reveal Labor’s full plan for the bed tax. Once it is introduced there is nothing to stop this tax being broadened to include all country tourism operations. That would be the death knell for the fledgling bed and breakfast and farm stay sectors. The north coast area will be particularly hard hit. That region relies heavily on tourism for its economic survival, especially as the Government has cut several hundred public sector jobs in the electricity industry. Labor will claim that the tax will not be broadly applied, but it has already been extended beyond the central business district of Sydney to take in North Sydney and the eastern suburbs, both of which are stand-alone areas of the hotel industry.

There is also a strong possibility that the State will receive compensation claims from the travel industry, which sells packages for years ahead. That extremely competitive industry operates on a very slim profit margin and cannot absorb the 10 per cent impact at such short notice. Honourable members are aware of the difficulty of selling the gold pass tickets for the Olympic Games and the embarrassment that has created for Stadium 2000. The Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games, which has bipartisan support in this Parliament and which is supported by the Minister for the Olympics, Mr Knight, has been trying to assist Stadium 2000, but an important part of selling the seats overseas is the accommodation package. What does the Government do?

On the one hand the Government says it will help, but on the other hand it says that it will impose a tax to make sure that the initiative does not work. That is how hypocritical and short of vision the Government is when it comes to understanding how business should be conducted, how tourism should be encouraged and how productive jobs can be created in New South Wales. Business - whether agriculture, tourism, retail or manufacturing - thinks for the future. Business provides jobs by having long-term hopes and long-term planning. Under Labor, business is trying to endure, but what an endurance it is proving to be. In two short years of Labor, New South Wales has become the most expensive State in Australia for costs imposed on business. The very people who battle to create jobs and productivity are the ones bearing the burden. Labor has inflicted upon them the most expensive government, the most expensive costs of doing business, in Australia.

The registered clubs of New South Wales, a major employer in every main country town, will be the unlucky recipients of a jump in poker machine taxes to 30 per cent. Club jobs are vital. The tax rise will result in much of that employment disappearing, particularly in the major clubs of the north coast and the Murray border area. There have been enormous problems in the hospitality and tourist industries in recent years. A number of clubs in the electorate of the honourable member for Murray are currently in receivership. His electorate, which has been prosperous, growing and contributing to the New South Wales economy, has been repressed and is contracting. Yet the Government is going to hit the clubs that have provided so much to New South Wales with a 30 per cent tax as they are going down the gurgler.

We live in an era when banks are closing country branches and national companies are winding back rural offices. Farming families are financially unable to provide traditional jobs on the land. We have never needed those club jobs more. The Lithgow Workers Club is a perfect example. Even the Premier should have heard of this club, known far and wide as the Lithgow workies, with its proud history of country sport sponsorship and helping out Lithgow schools and charities. That club, which has mainly Labor patrons - many of them no doubt helped you, Mr Acting Deputy-Speaker, to be re-elected to this chamber two years ago - says that 40 jobs -

[Interruption]

Page 8636

The honourable member for Bankstown may well laugh but the people holding the 40 jobs that will go are not laughing. The honourable member may laugh at their expense. His callousness will be noted. He laughs as people get the sack. His Government is taxing their employers out of business. The honourable member has the audacity to make fun of families of ordinary battling people while luxuriating on the green leather in this Chamber.

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Bankstown to order.

Mr ARMSTRONG: The honourable member for Bankstown is an insult to small business. [Extension of time agreed to.]

Other club jobs will be cut in Newcastle, a city that faces the loss of 2,500 jobs under the BHP closure and a city for which the Premier has no forward plan in place other than higher taxation. The Premier has gone out of his way to bag BHP. He talked about a boardroom decision. Why can he not be honest for once in his life? Most other people in New South Wales have known for at least 12 months that BHP was going to withdraw from steel making in Newcastle. He is ignorant, lying or not getting any advice: his backbenchers in the Newcastle area are not telling him what is going on.

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the National Party needs no assistance. If members do not cease interjecting the Chair will have them removed from the Chamber.

Mr ARMSTRONG: That was a very fair ruling on those Government members who are making fools of themselves. It seems that it is all right to be a Labor supporter under the Premier; but do not make the mistake of being a Labor supporter and living outside the safe western Sydney seats. Personal safety is an overriding concern throughout regional New South Wales. Much of that concern is about fear of street assault, threatening behaviour and drunkenness in public areas. The budget, with its $31 million cut to street safety measures, including the provision of beat police in country areas, will do nothing to improve the perception of declining authority and rising lawlessness in regional New South Wales.

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Bankstown to order for the second time.

Mr ARMSTRONG: It will further horrify the country public to learn that last year the Government deliberately left untouched $35 million in street safety funds. What do the honourable member for Bankstown and the honourable member for Hurstville think about that? Do they want to interject about it? Two priests were mugged in Muswellbrook and there are gang wars in Orange. Last year assault and rape figures soared. The Neighbourhood Watch system collapsed because its organisers did not get sufficient help from the Premier. Most country police stations were left unmanned, yet the Government left unspent $35 million of its allocation for street safety. In this budget the unused amount has been used to justify a cut of $31 million for next year, meaning that over two years the Premier will have saved $66 million in an area where he was morally bound to spend more. Thinking of this deviousness makes my blood boil because I remember the incidents of crime in the past fortnight. Last Sunday night two priests were robbed and bashed in Muswellbrook for the church collection. Two Saturdays ago there was an apparent gang war over drugs in Orange. Hundreds of people openly flouted drug laws at Nimbin during an illegal marijuana festival.

Ms Allan: That’s not the correct way to pronounce it.

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for The Entrance to order.

Mr ARMSTRONG: The Minister can call it whatever she likes but the fact is that her Government has saved money out of the police budget and a couple of weeks ago allowed the disgraceful exhibition called the Mardi Grass. And the Minister wants to talk about the pronunciation! Why does she not get serious and talk about people, about families and kids? Why does she not think about safety instead of trying to be a little smartypants? Public health facilities have spiralled into crisis under Labor, and that crisis will not be helped by a hoodwinking episode by the Government.

The much-trumpeted increase of $452 million for health in the budget is a deception for the thousands of New South Wales people languishing on hospital waiting lists. Ninety-nine per cent of the alleged increase will go to paying debts and fulfilling other obligations that the Carr Government did not have the moral fibre to deal with last year. For example, $230 million is needed just to fill the underlying health budget deficit. For further illustration, $114 million has to be found for outstanding pay increases for nurses and other hospital workers. In some cases the money will be
Page 8637
used to pay milkmen, butchers and town carriers. Last week in the central west the town carrier had not been paid after about four months for servicing the local hospital. The milkman had not been paid since January.

Mr Iemma: What is the general manager doing?

Mr ARMSTRONG: The general manager is trying to get some money out of the Government that you support. The Government cannot manage health in this State. The Minister for Health offers no leadership. In two years of Labor government local hospital health boards have been removed and mega-health regions have been created. As with the Carr Government’s botched amalgamations of electricity regions, the removal of local people from health decisions has meant the end of local knowledge and experience in individual health matters. The removal of local boards has helped Labor’s deception on health management and declining real funding because the people who are most likely to see a health funding problem are no longer permitted to have an input. In the electorate of the honourable member for Murwillumbah, the Tweed Heads Hospital and the Murwillumbah Hospital, new buildings right to the front door, have been mothballed.

Mr Fraser: Coffs Harbour.

Mr ARMSTRONG: And Coffs Harbour. The Government has not got the money to open those hospitals to accommodate patients and reduce waiting lists, which it promised to do when it came into government. It conned the people of New South Wales once but I guarantee that it will not con them twice. The Government will not con the people the next time. The people of New South Wales do not like being taken cheaply. They understand what the Government has done to the health budget in this State, particularly in respect of the classic examples of Murwillumbah, Tweed Heads, Coffs Harbour and Liverpool. The honourable member for Bankstown can wave his finger as much as he likes but he should apologise to his constituents for not honouring the promises on health. What does this budget mean in real terms?

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for The Entrance to order for the second time. I warn other members who have been called to order that they are now deemed to be on three calls to order. The next member called to order will be removed from the Chamber.

Mr ARMSTRONG: The actual increase in funds of just $4 million is a pathetic effort by any government on a sector of such importance. I remind the Premier and the Treasurer of the unfulfilled election promise to resign if hospital waiting lists were not halved during the Government’s first term in office.

Mr Iemma: Twelve months.

Mr ARMSTRONG: Thank you for the correction and for your support. That makes it even worse. It has been demonstrated time and again that the reduction did not occur; they cooked the books.

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the National Party will address his remarks through the Chair and ignore the interjections.

Mr ARMSTRONG: Absolutely. The interjections are not worth responding to. They are inane and inaccurate. I would much rather talk to you, Mr Acting Deputy-Speaker, than those fellows across there. The bottom line is that the Government made promises to the people of this State that appear within this budget - promises on hospital waiting lists, new construction programs for hospitals, schools and roads and particularly on tollways - and it has failed to honour those basic promises. I understand, as do other members of the Opposition, and as I suspect do the majority of people in New South Wales, the frustration that is experienced by members such as the honourable member for Clarence and the honourable member for Bathurst when they inform the press that they will cross the floor. The honourable member for Bathurst has said five times that he will resign.

Mr Hazzard: You can have sympathy for them.

Mr ARMSTRONG: We can have sympathy for them and understand their frustration. Imagine what it would be like if your own government let you down and you had to go to the public and make those sorts of threats to bring some sanity into your caucus.

Mr ACTING DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Murwillumbah to order for the third time.

Mr ARMSTRONG: Mr Acting Deputy-Speaker wants to hear this because it is important to him. The fact is that the Government has not recognised the mistakes it has made. It has not acknowledged the protests that have come from
Page 8638
virtually every lobby organisation across the State, particularly pertaining to health. It has not endeavoured to acknowledge those protests in the budget for the coming year. The Government is prepared to see people without adequate health care and without adequate access to proper health facilities. It is prepared for this State to lose the place of pre-eminence in quality health care that it had under the previous Government. Some members on the Government side regard this as a joke. I will make sure that they are identified in the Opposition’s press releases. It needs to be highlighted to their electorates that they do not understand and do not care and that they are as callous as the Premier and the Treasurer.

This week the hospital waiting lists are at their highest since Labor came to government. There are 50,000 people awaiting treatment. How do Government members feel now? There are 50,000 people awaiting treatment because the Labor Government has failed to administer and realise that once it occupies the Government benches it has a responsibility to look after people’s health. I predict that this budget will serve only to raise more medical issues in the months ahead, as more holes emerge in the shrinking public health blanket. I ponder again about a Government which spends just 2 per cent of its entire budget servicing 16 per cent of the population, that is, country New South Wales.

The agricultural industry is the largest single employer industry in this country. Agriculture is still the single biggest utiliser of materials. Yet the Carr Labor Government has said country New South Wales will live on only 2 per cent of the budget. The biggest contributors get the smallest take because of the ignorance and arrogance of this Government. Regional people in New South Wales do not begrudge others in the State receiving sensible government funding. But by any fair measure this budget perpetuates the Carr legacy of gutting the bush and the coast to pay for the Government’s excesses and the results of its inability to govern and manage New South Wales.

Mr IEMMA (Hurstville) [8.25 p.m.]: This budget is a reaffirmation of Labor’s principles of social justice and equity. It is important to make that point because the budget has been drafted against a backdrop of severe cuts to Federal funding in various portfolio areas and a continuing vertical imbalance suffered by New South Wales. I shall spend some time speaking about that background of a vertical fiscal imbalance and continuing cuts from Canberra, because they have played an important role in the drafting of this budget and also form the basis for explaining some of the revenue-raising measures, about which the Opposition has had plenty to say.

The Commonwealth Government raises 77.1 per cent of tax revenue but spends only 54 per cent of that revenue on general government expenditure. On the other hand, the States raise only 19.5 per cent of tax revenue but account for 42 per cent of outlays. This vertical fiscal imbalance has worsened in recent years, in particular since 2 March 1996 when the coalition won the Federal election. A look at the distribution of Federal payments reveals a picture of the sort of pain that has been inflicted on New South Wales since the Federal coalition came to power. New South Wales has received a progressively smaller share of shrinking Commonwealth payments. The New South Wales share was down to 29 per cent of total Commonwealth payments to the States in 1996-97. This figure of 29 per cent compares to 31 per cent in 1982-83, a 2 per cent reduction.

If New South Wales received from the Commonwealth the equivalent share of funds the State pays to the Commonwealth in personal income tax, it would receive about $1.3 billion more in general purpose payments per year. The State would then have the option to reduce taxes by that amount. Of course, that did not happen. That figure is roughly equal to the amount the State collects in the form of the total of petrol and liquor franchise fees and the financial institutions duty. Without the $1.3 billion transfer, petrol prices in New South Wales could be reduced by about 7.8 cents per litre - an enormous benefit to country people - a schooner of beer could be reduced by about 13 per cent and businesses could be relieved of paying approximately $400 million in financial institutions duty. Rather than reduce the quantity or quality of services, New South Wales has been forced to increase taxes to cover the shortfall in Federal funding.

At the same time New South Wales has had to provide for an above average share of elderly people for whom the cost of service provision rises exponentially beyond middle age. In recent years the Commonwealth Grants Commission estimated that New South Wales has above average costs for the provision of services, such as technical and further education, hospital and nursing home services, public safety and emergency services, aged and disability services, welfare and transport. These costs and demand pressures have necessitated real growth in outlays slightly in excess of population growth. Demographics are making the strain on the State budget greater and greater, while the share of revenue coming from Canberra to New South Wales
Page 8639
declines. If one looks at particular aspects of the 1996 Federal budget and the budget brought down last night one can see even more starkly the way in which the Federal Government has seriously affected the fund basis for New South Wales. In its 1996-97 budget the Federal Government hacked close to $400 million from New South Wales, including $270 million in general purpose payments and a net reduction of $110 million in specific purpose payments.

The agreement reached for the States at the 1996 premiers conference meant that the States had to make a fiscal contribution over a three-year period to the Federal Government, which resulted in a reduction of $210 million in general revenue grants to New South Wales that could have otherwise been used for essential services such as hospitals, schools, housing and community services. Cuts to specific purpose payments have been even worse, and I would like to highlight some examples of those cuts. The 1996 Federal budget cut $84 million from capital funds for national highways. The Leader of the National Party has had plenty to say about funding for roads in rural New South Wales. The budget saw a reduction in specific purpose payments to New South Wales of $84 million for highways. The dental health program funding was cut by $20 million. A cost shifting penalty of $34 million reduced funding to New South Wales hospitals. Land care funding was cut by $18 million, and increased user charges of 20 per cent were imposed on services for home and community care.

The story gets even worse with the 1997-98 Federal budget, which was handed down last night. It is a tougher budget than last year’s and includes cuts of more than $450 million, which I would like to outline to the House. Further fiscal contribution payments to the Commonwealth of $22 million would have been better used on hospitals, schools and roads, which is something the Leader of the National Party had plenty to say about. Another $150 million was cut from specific purpose payments, consisting of a 1.3 per cent cut in last night’s budget on top of the 1 per cent cut last year. The dental health program has been cut by a further $34 million. Legal aid funding has been cut by $13 million. Child care and pharmaceutical funding has been cut by $50 million. Failure by the Federal Government to honour the Medicare agreement cost New South Wales $250 million. Public housing has been cut by $65 million, with another $65 million cut to come next year.

In addition, the State Government has had to contend with a rise in the estimated post-sale costs of the sale of the State Bank, from nothing to $200 million. That is the fiscal background on which this year’s State budget had to be drafted. Despite those very severe Federal cuts, despite that vertical fiscal imbalance which has continued to worsen, this State budget has been framed to deliver on Labor’s social justice and equity principles. There is no better area to look at for the delivery of those principles than health. Health spending has increased by $452 million on last year’s allocation, which is a total increase of $972 million since the last State coalition budget in 1994-95. An extra $370 million in recurrent funding has been allocated to achieve a fairer share of health services in underresourced areas. In 1997-98 capital expenditure of $471 million will be allocated to rebuild the public health system, which includes $258 million to begin major new hospital projects.

I would like to take some time to go through a number of the projects, because they stand in stark contrast to the record of cuts, closures and sell offs under the previous Government. The hospitals targeted and their total costs are: Nepean, women’s and children’s health services, $58 million; redevelopment of Campbelltown and Camden hospitals, $79 million; State Government nursing homes, redevelopment, $75 million; Royal North Shore, children’s health and paediatric services, $11.7 million; Ballina, redevelopment, $4 million; Blue Mountains, upgrade, $4.4 million; Broken Hill, new hospital, $27.5 million; Coffs Harbour, new hospital, $53.3 million; West Wyalong, new hospital, $6.5 million; Cowra, redevelopment, $1.6 million; Dubbo, redevelopment, $18.1 million; Grafton, redevelopment, $2.5 million; and the Illawarra health strategy, involving the redevelopment of the Illawarra and Shoalhaven hospitals, $50 million.

The list of hospitals continues: the new inner west hospital, $75 million last year, $34 million this year; Kiama, reopened by this Government and now being upgraded, $1.5 million; Lithgow, new hospital, $23.6 million; Manning Base, redevelopment, $26.3 million; Mount Druitt and Blacktown, redevelopment and upgrade of services, $92.7 million; Mudgee, upgrade, $2 million; Maitland, redevelopment, $28 million; Westmead, breast cancer institute, $2.3 million; Queen Victoria, Picton, redevelopment, $7.6 million; Royal North Shore, upgrade, $11 million; St Vincents, redevelopment, $96 million; Sutherland, upgrade, $17 million; Calvary, new aged and rehabilitation services, $17 million; Prince of Wales, upgrade of acute care and ambulatory clinic, $100.4 million; and Wagga Wagga, redevelopment, $2.2 million..

Page 8640

That is the record, and what a record it is, of this budget in terms of new works and works in progress. That stands in stark contrast to the record of the previous Government. I would like to outline some of the hospitals that suffered under the previous Government: Binnaway, closed; Quandialla, closed; Ungarie, closed; Yeoval, privatised; Kiama, closed; Mosman community, privatised; Chatswood community, privatised; Wallsend, closed; Parramatta, closed; Sydney Homoeopathic, closed; Marrickville, closed; Western Suburbs, closed and demolished. I add that because the honourable member for Strathfield is here. Western Suburbs was closed and demolished by those opposite. An announcement was made by the former Government that Canterbury Hospital was to close.

The list continues: St Joseph’s, Auburn, downgraded; Rachel Forster, downgraded; Royal South Sydney, downgraded; St Margaret’s, downgraded; Port Macquarie, privatised; Liverpool, 50 beds lost; Westmead, 140 beds lost; St George, 90 beds lost; Prince Henry and Prince of Wales, 50 beds lost; Sutherland, 36 beds lost; Auburn, 30 beds lost; Bankstown, 30 beds lost; Broken Hill, 39 beds lost; Bulli, 10 beds lost; Dame Edith Walker, 40 beds lost; Gladesville-Rozelle, 100 beds lost; Hastings, privatised; Hornsby 20 beds lost; Manly, 45 beds lost; Macquarie, 24 beds lost; Mona Vale, 14 beds lost; Narrandera, 15 beds lost; Newcastle Royal, emergency ward closed and 20 beds lost; Royal Ryde, 25 beds lost; Greenwich, 25 beds lost; Wellington, 29 beds lost; and Wollongong 10 beds lost. As I stated earlier, this budget pumps $471 million into rebuilding the public hospital system that was run down and degraded by the coalition during its seven years in government. It is a record of seven years of cuts, closures and sell offs.

What revenue-raising measures have brought about that spending in the health area and the $50 payment to parents to enable them to send their children to school? Not one Opposition member said anything about the cuts inflicted on New South Wales by two Federal budgets. Not one Opposition member had anything to say about the declining share New South Wales receives in Federal grants, leaving aside the cuts to specific programs outlined by those two budgets. However, Opposition members have bleated about the number of tax measures that this Government has been forced to introduce to pay for the expansion of public health services and to give families a payment that will make it easier for them to send their children to school. Opposition members tried to defend some of the vested interests that do not like the tax increases announced by this Government. Who are those people?

Reference was made to the land tax that will apply to 2,700 residential homes in New South Wales. The tax will affect those who have waterfront homes and harbour or ocean views. According to Opposition members the Government should not make some contribution towards rebuilding the New South Wales public hospital system; towards making it easier for our children to get a better education; and towards enabling families to send their kids to school. The Leader of the National Party said much about the 10 per cent accommodation tax to be imposed on Sydney’s central business district and equivalent areas such as the north shore and the eastern suburbs. The industries that will benefit enormously from Sydney holding the Olympics are the hotel and tourism industries. This State has embarked on a massive infrastructure program in preparation for the Olympic Games that goes well beyond providing just a stadium at Homebush, a village and associated facilities. There are road projects and new rail links and a lot of money is being spent to make Sydney more attractive. The hotel and tourism industries do not want to make a contribution. They expect taxpayers to fund of the order of $1.3 billion and they will reap the benefits from increased profits and an increased number of visitors. [Extension of time agreed to.]

Those industries do not want to contribute to the provision of that infrastructure and they do not want to defray costs to the taxpayer of making the Games an outstanding success. However, hotel owners, the tourism industry and members of the Australian Hotels Association will be making super profits. I do not know how anyone from the AHA has the gall to criticise the Government for introducing a minor revenue-raising measure in this budget, as a lot of AHA members will receive a windfall as a result of the decision to allow poker machines in hotels. Members of the AHA should not criticise the Government for introducing a minor 10 per cent accommodation tax which will raise $64 million. That modest 10 per cent tax is still well under the rates that apply in places like Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Japan and Germany. It is hypocritical in the extreme for members of the AHA to drum up a campaign in relation to the accommodation tax.

I will now outline some of the major features in the budget that affect my electorate. I am pleased that Hurstville electorate will benefit from an injection of $376 million worth of capital works, regardless of Federal cuts and fiscal pressures on the State Government. Let me outline some of the capital works to which I have referred. A minor but important decision and a first step towards resolving
Page 8641
what for many decades has been a traffic bottleneck problem in Riverwood is the upgrading of the railway bridge at Belmore Road. I am pleased that the Minister for Roads has agreed to set aside $50,000 to enable a working party to be set up by the Roads and Traffic Authority in conjunction with the State Rail Authority to look at options for improving traffic flow in Belmore Road across the railway bridge and the main street in Riverwood. At the moment there is an horrendous bottleneck in the morning and afternoon peak hours when traffic queues up because the bridge is too small. Belmore Road and the bridge must be widened. I am pleased that this small budget allocation will ultimately enable that problem to be resolved.

Another smaller project of equal importance is the $100,000 allocation for the Beverley Hills main street program to improve Beverley Hills shopping centre and the amenities at that shopping centre. Beverley Hills shopping centre, one of the shopping centres in that part of the St George region that is in my electorate, is badly degraded as a result of massive traffic volumes and traffic noise. I am pleased that the RTA set aside $100,000 this year and $50,000 last year to assist Hurstville City Council to improve the amenities and facade of that shopping centre. The total cost of that project is of the order of $3.5 million to $4 million. The State Government is working in conjunction with Hurstville City Council to resolve that problem. The budget allocation for roads this year is $48.9 million. I alluded earlier to health. An allocation of $34 million in the budget will enable the completion of the new Inner West Hospital, which will cost a total of $74 million.

There are larger budgetary allocations, but that allocation of $34 million for the completion of the Inner West Hospital at Canterbury has had a psychological effect on the people in my electorate. That hospital has been built only as a result of the Labor Party winning the 1995 election. To my mind that is the best thing that this Government has done for the people of my electorate. About 45 per cent of my constituents who live in the Canterbury City Council area rely on Canterbury Hospital for their health services. In the housing area this Government is attempting to insulate the people of New South Wales and the people in my electorate from severe Federal cuts. The Government has maintained its commitment to provide public housing for those least able to obtain housing in the private market.

This budget sets aside $3.5 million for planned redevelopment projects for families and pensioners in Riverwood. Two projects will see a total of nine units being constructed in Riverwood; 31 units in Narwee; three units at Penshurst; 11 units at Roselands; and seven units at Beverley Hills. The total cost of those projects is $3.5 million, which is in stark contrast to the Federal Government’s budget provisions. Last night the Commonwealth Government ended 50 years of funding for public housing. It decided to move towards a new system and inflicted on New South Wales the first of its big cuts. Last night the Federal budget contained $60 million worth of cuts and another $65 million will be cut in next year’s budget which will place in jeopardy the provision of public housing across this State.

The Government is determined to insulate the people of New South Wales against the severity of those cuts, while trying to keep together the public housing building program so that the most needy in our community are taken care of. The cut that was announced last night will mean the loss of another 1,000 jobs in the construction industry - a loss that comes on top of the 2,500 jobs lost in Newcastle. In addition to the announced 18,000 more public sector jobs to be slashed from Canberra, that is more bad news for unemployment in this country. It shows that the Federal Government has absolutely no commitment to job creation or supporting unemployed people. One further item I want to mention in relation to the budget is the $144 million set aside for the M5 East extension. That project needs to proceed, and the people of my electorate are looking forward to it proceeding. That is not to say that there are not problems with the current proposal that has been released.

I am pleased that the Minister for Roads has been carefully considering many of the submissions that have been put forward by both the people in my electorate and those in the electorates of my colleagues the honourable member for Rockdale and the honourable member for Canterbury. The Government looks forward to an announcement soon on the project proceeding. In conclusion, this is a budget which ought to be applauded because it delivers very much on Labor’s social justice principles of looking after the most needy in our community. It is a budget that has been framed in very difficult circumstances. As I outlined earlier, it is a budget that has had to be put together in the context of some quite horrendous Federal Government cutbacks in programs. It is pleasing to note that the Government has been able to insulate the very important sectors of New South Wales - health, education, public housing and community services - against the worst effects of the cutbacks that have come from Canberra.

Page 8642

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Gaudry): I take this opportunity to welcome to the gallery tonight guests of the Minister for Education and Training, and of the honourable member for Lakemba. I welcome also guests of the honourable member for Lane Cove, the Putney branch of the Liberal Party. I also note the presence in the gallery of Miss Emma Ashton, a long-term palliative care worker.

Mr RICHARDSON (The Hills) [8.54 p.m.]: I have listened to the comments of the honourable member for Hurstville with a degree of amazement. His reading of the budget is certainly not my reading of the budget. Indeed, this is not a budget in any sense for the battlers. Every person in New South Wales will be slugged by this budget. It is the most determinedly anti-jobs budget we have seen in more than a decade - at a time when, just in the last week, unemployment in New South Wales has risen by 0.2 per cent to 8.1 per cent. Honourable members have only to look at the revenue measures, including those that were introduced last June in the infamous State Revenue Legislation (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill, to see that. I will outline some of those revenue measures so that members of this House can see exactly what impact this budget and other revenue measures that were taken last year have had on jobs in this State.

First, last year there was the broadening of the payroll tax base, which was extended to cover superannuation contributions. The Premier has admitted that payroll tax is a tax on jobs. Indeed, this year the Carr Government promised to deliver payroll tax cuts. Where are those payroll tax cuts? They are absolutely invisible; they are nowhere to be seen in this budget. Last year there was a $113-million grab from employers because they had the temerity to actually employ staff. Last year there was an increase in stamp duty costs on motor vehicles from 2.5 per cent to 3 per cent. That may not seem like much, but companies use motor vehicles and those companies are paying more for those motor vehicles. In this budget there has been a further increase, from 3 per cent to 5 per cent, on vehicles costing more than $45,000. The Treasurer tried to suggest that these were luxury cars. There are many specialist vehicles - four-wheel drive vehicles and other vehicles - that are used for company purposes, for which there is no alternative, that will be caught in the net. That represents an additional cost for business.

I now turn to land tax. A number of my constituents complained to me when they got their new land tax assessment notices at the beginning of this year about last year’s increase from 1.5 per cent to l.65 per cent. The double whammy was that they also had a revaluation of the unimproved capital value on their properties. In some instances they complained of land tax increases of up to 40 per cent. That was not enough for this Treasurer, the Hon. Michael Rueben Egan, and the Premier. We now have a further increase on land tax, to 1.85 per cent. This year an increase of 22.7 per cent has been projected in the land tax grab by this Government; the figure last year was 7 per cent and 7 per cent the year before. It is a tax on investors and on business. It is an inequitable and regressive tax. It is also a tax on renters and on business properties, so it is a tax on jobs as well. For all those reasons the Opposition deplores what this Government has done in relation to land tax. I do not know how on earth it can be seen as being anything other than a tax on business. The $100 million electricity levy, which is supposed to hit 4,000 businesses, will eventually be paid by all businesses, and indeed by all taxpayers by the year 2000 -

Mr MacCarthy: Consumers.

Mr RICHARDSON: The honourable member for Strathfield reminds me that consumers will pay the electricity levy. That will happen when households come under the national competition policy. The national competition policy that this Parliament agreed to was introduced to make Australian businesses more competitive with the rest of the world and with one another, to bring costs down and to create more jobs. In fact, it has been successful; there has been a significant reduction in the cost of electricity to business. As soon as we have actually got this flow-on of cost cutting to business, the Government has imposed a $100-million tax slug and clawed it back again. The duty on insurances has now increased from 2.5 per cent to 5 per cent. That may not seem like much, but it hits almost all consumers and it hits businesses as well. When one starts totting these things up, one starts to realise there is a massive tax on jobs in this State under this budget.

I now turn to the infamous bed tax. I have listened to members on the other side of the Chamber talking about the bed tax. For example, last night the honourable member for Londonderry spoke about the bed tax in enormously simplistic terms as being simply another $10 or so that will go onto the cost of staying in a swank suite at the Hotel Inter-continental. Of course, it is not as simple as that. The bed tax is the Premier’s GST. It could cost 3,000 jobs in the hospitality industry. It means that Sydney will become less competitive against other cities in Australia. Make no mistake - that is what will happen. A letter to the editor in today’s Sydney
Page 8643
Morning Herald warns that conventions will go interstate as a consequence of the bed tax. Overseas visitors will not come to Sydney; they will choose another gateway to Australia.

The Koala Park Sanctuary, a major tourist business in my electorate, contacted me a couple of days ago to complain about the impact of the bed tax on its business. It had written contracts with overseas operators who were going to be brought in on a fixed price. Some of those people are now going to another destination; they will not be coming to Sydney. Business will be taken out of New South Wales. Honourable members have to understand - the honourable member for Londonderry and the honourable member for Hurstville plainly do not understand - that the hospitality industry is not making superprofits. I understand that occupancy rates were down by 6 per cent on this time last year - and that was before the bed tax was introduced. In the hotel industry there is a fine line between breaking even, making a profit and losing money. As a result of the bed tax, hotels that are at the break-even point will go into the red.

I refer to the $74 million poker machine tax. We have already heard about the effect the tax will have on clubs. Earlier today I spoke to the manager of the Castle Hill RSL Club, which is in my electorate. An article that appeared on the front page of yesterday’s Hills News stated that Castle Hill RSL stands to lose almost $1 million - $967,500 - as a consequence of this iniquitous tax. The Castle Hill RSL was ready to expand - either to relocate to another site or to expand the existing site - at a cost of between $17 million and $18 million. That project has been put on the backburner and may not go ahead. As a consequence, jobs in The Hills will be lost - a pattern that will be repeated across New South Wales. In fact, the Opposition estimates that some 10,000 jobs will be lost across New South Wales.

Mr Sullivan: Not in Wollongong.

Mr RICHARDSON: Even the electorate of the honourable member for Wollongong will not be immune from job losses. The Dural Country Club Ltd stands to lose more than $80,000 as a consequence of this iniquitous tax. The club has already contributed approximately $30,000 to people and charity organisations this year. The club does a tremendous job in the local community. That money will be extracted from the local community and, quite honestly, I do not know how the slack will be taken up. Under this Government, workers compensation has increased from 1.8 per cent of wages to 2.8 per cent of wages, which would cost an average of $1,200 a year for a four-person small business. Wherever the State Government has intruded into business, it has increased taxes and charges, and made business less competitive. The Carr Government is anti-jobs, anti-business and anti-battlers.

The Government has introduced taxes on health care. It has increased the health insurance levy by about $20 a year per family. Today the Minister for Health bemoaned the fact that so many people have dropped out of private health insurance. But what is the Minister doing to encourage people to take out private health cover and relieve the load of the public health care system?

Ms Ficarra: Nothing.

Mr RICHARDSON: The Minister is not doing nothing - he is increasing taxes on health insurance and providing a further disincentive for people to take out private health cover, which he claims to favour. I add that 90 per cent of these taxes are being taken from business and the broader community - only 10 per cent of the taxes are being taken from higher income groups. Some people hold the nonsensical notion that the Government is taking from the rich and giving to the poor, thus redistributing wealth. That notion has to be dispelled; it is totally untrue.

The honourable member for Hurstville and other Government members have extolled the virtue of the $50 back-to-school rebate. My constituents do not agree - they are saying that if the money were pooled it could be returned to the schools, which could use it for much-needed capital works, to install computers, to install airconditioners and to carry out additional maintenance. However, that will not happen. Over the past couple of years, education capital works spending has decreased by $46 million, and this money would have made up that shortfall and included an increase for inflation. Some people may benefit from the $50 but, by and large, the hard-working parents of kids in my electorate will have to continue their lamington drives, raffles and fundraising.

Mr O’Farrell: They will be penalised if they self-help.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Gaudry): Order! The honourable member for The Hills needs no assistance from the honourable member for Northcott.

Mr RICHARDSON: The honourable member for Northcott has reminded me that schools are
Page 8644
penalised when they raise money for equipment, such as computers. West Pennant Hills Public School, which is in my electorate, is crying out for a new assembly hall. It currently has a Bristol hall that goes back almost 50 years. The hall, which is made of aluminium, is stinking hot in summer and freezing cold in winter. It holds less than one-third of the school’s students. The school has been crying out for a new hall for years. The Government could build new halls for 50 schools across the State with the $55 million that it will hand out via the back-to-school rebate. The editorial of the Sydney Morning Herald of 8 May concurred with the Opposition’s view in relation to the back-to-school rebate. It stated:

Those Treasury objections stem as much from the impracticality of the back-to-school allowance as anything else. There is no doubt that there are many families and single-parent families, in particular, who find it hard to prepare for school each year. Instead of targeting assistance to these families, however, the Government has made the allowance universal. What is the justification for paying it to parents who are not doing it tough? And why should parents choose to send their children to independent private schools be entitled to the allowance?

I will let honourable members be the judge of that.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wollongong to order.

Mr RICHARDSON: There is a massive tax grab through the budget of $631 million. I have calculated that it will cost the average family in The Hills with two children - even after it has received its back-to-school rebate - an extra $305 a year. Over the past two budgets, the Government has clawed back $863 a year from families in my electorate. It did not have to be this way - the Government had the opportunity to be fiscally responsible, and it blew it. Last year the Government had a $500 million windfall from the property and share market booms. Its tax increases of last year raised $495 million, which more than covered the extra cost imposed on the States in last year’s Federal budget. Cuts in interest rates saved a further $150 million. Despite that and the Treasurer’s claim last year that this year he would be running a $155 million surplus, the underlying surplus is a mere $27 million. One could reduce that figure by $10 million for the Newcastle package not included in the budget.

The Treasurer drew a piece of paper out of his pocket rather theatrically and said, "$10 million here for Newcastle". That takes the figure down to $17 million. The surplus in the budget is actually a deficit of $66 million, but when asset sales are excluded it is closer to $300 million, though some commentators suggest it is as high as $500 million. That is not really surprising because current outlays under this Government have risen by 12.8 per cent. I have mentioned this to some people in my electorate and they are horrified to think that the Government could be so profligate. Inflation over the same period has been around 3.6 per cent. Last year there was a blowout of $556 million; $230 million in health, more than $200 million in State Rail and very little in the way of savings or cost cutting from this Government. [Extension of time agreed to.]

The Leader of the Opposition said in his contribution to the budget debate, "Heaven help this Government when, as is expected, the economy turns down." Alan Wood, writing in the Australian the day after the budget was brought down, stated:

Egan lost his control over expenditure this year, with a blow-out in current spending of over $440 million.

This loss of control continues into 1997-98, with the result that Egan has had to lift taxes by a hefty $600 million, $420 million of it in this Budget.

This flies in the face of one of the key fiscal principles that the NSW Government laid down when it came into office - that of tax restraint.

Percy Allan, a name known to everyone in this House, in the Sydney Morning Herald stated:

However, the balanced Budget this financial year is not because of tight control on spending - current payments overshot Budget by $454 million - but because tax revenues, contributions from government businesses and interest payments proved unexpectedly favourable . . .

But there is no cheer for business, which is expected to create jobs for the unemployed. As Victoria lowers taxes to make itself more attractive to employers NSW puts up land tax for the second time in a year, imposes an electricity distributor’s levy that will be passed on to many businesses, increases general insurance duty and taxes the tourist industry with a CBD accommodation levy. NSW tax rates were already 27 per cent higher than Queensland’s before this Budget’s $458 million-a-year tax rise.

Indeed, New South Wales has the dubious distinction of being the highest taxing State in Australia. Despite the incredible amount of money the Government is raking in, in my electorate only $6.3 million has been allocated for roads, which is 61 per cent less than the amount given to my electorate in the last year of the Fahey Government. That amount of money was boosted by $2 million for the intersection of County Drive and Castle Hill Road. Honourable members may recall that last year there was some television coverage about the great wall of Cherrybrook being knocked down.

Mr O’Farrell: We saw you on television.

Page 8645

Mr RICHARDSON: It was a new role for me. Indeed, the publicity that the residents of Cherrybrook, Hornsby council and I managed to engender actually persuaded the Government to provide $2.7 million in funding for this major intersection. We are grateful for that funding because County Drive was a $6 million road to nowhere; it was a dead end. Also, the allocation of $2.3 million to tidy up the M2 will no longer be needed after this financial year as the road will already be open before the budget takes effect. If one were to take out the $4.3 million, a measly $2 million is left for the fourth largest and one of the fastest growing electorates in the State.

The Government has not allocated funds to improve Windsor Road and only a measly $75,000 has been allocated for New Line Road. Money has not been provided for the traffic lights desperately needed on the corner of Hastings Road and Old Northern Road, nor money for improved access to Mowll Memorial Village, an issue I have previously brought to the attention of the Minister and the House. Mowll Memorial Village has the largest concentration of aged persons in Australia and the build-up of traffic around that village has made access to and egress from the village more and more difficult. There is no money in the budget for the missing links at both ends of the M2. My constituents in The Hills have real concerns about the allocation of funds from this Government to our area.

More important, there is nothing in the budget for public transport. I recall distinctly that one of the planks of the Government’s campaign platform in 1995 was to start work on the Parramatta to Hornsby rail link by the end of its first term in government. Last year the Parramatta to Hornsby rail link was reduced to the level of a feasibility study, with $300,000 allocated for that study. We do not know what has happened to the feasibility study; it seems to have vanished into thin air, but no money has been allocated in the budget for that important rail link. This becomes yet another in the litany of broken promises by this Government.

Mr Amery: You have eight minutes left. How about some solutions and some alternatives.

Mr RICHARDSON: I am glad to hear from the Minister, because I will come to those. Earlier today the Premier referred to five major infrastructure projects which he felt should be funded by the new billion dollar Federation Fund. They included a light rail link from Blacktown to Rouse Hill. For a long time I have been calling for public transport out to Rouse Hill. My preferred solution, as it is for the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils - WSROC - is a light rail link between Rouse Hill and Parramatta, not Blacktown. In some respects it was pleasing to hear the Premier speak, though only briefly, about the notion of putting in public transport to Rouse Hill. More than 250,000 people in that area will be completely car dependent and the only way in and out of that area is a two-lane road. Indeed, I noted that the Premier, in offering his alleged solution, spoke about spending other people’s money.

Mr O’Farrell: He’s very good at that.

Mr RICHARDSON: He is very good at that. He does not talk at any stage of the proceedings about spending State Government money or about acquiring a corridor along which private enterprise could build a light rail link. The Premier is saying that as John Howard established the Federation Fund the Government should put the wood on him to build this light rail link. Unquestionably that is the easy way out. The onus is on the Government, the Premier, the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning and the Minister for Transport to acquire the corridor and get on with the job, not to try to shunt it off to someone else and suggest they do it.

Castle Hill Public School, which was supposed to be relocated, rebuilt and completed by now, has not yet had the first sod turned. I note from the budget papers that it has now been put back to the year 2000. Last year there was a debate in this House about this particular issue and the Minister denied categorically that the completion date had been put back to the year 2000. The budget now says - it is right there in black and white - that it will not be completed until the year 2000. But of course that is part of the strategy: delay the capital works expenditure to help balance the books. Nothing gets done but it helps balance the books.

I noted with real concern that hidden away in the back of the budget papers is a projection that overall capital works outlays will decrease from the 1.9 per cent of gross State product they have been at since 1990-91 to 1.5 per cent of GSP in 1999-2000, after the major Olympics works are completed. What that really means is that money is being taken from the capital works budget for Olympics projects. That is something the coalition never did when it was in government. It also means that there is very little hope of these major projects for my electorate and for other electorates throughout the State being completed, because there is no commitment by the Government to expending money on building infrastructure and building something for the people of New South Wales.

Page 8646

I have heartfelt concerns about the way in which the Government is running the State, as shown by the budget. Labor has gone back to the big-taxing, big-spending days of Cain and Kirner, John Bannon, Brian Burke and Carmen Lawrence. Ultimately, I can see the Government reducing New South Wales finances to the same parlous condition the finances of Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia were in a few years ago. Throughout the budget a blatant disregard for economic reality is exhibited. It will be up to the coalition, the Liberal and National parties, to take control again, to fix up the economy and fix up the mess, as it has had to do throughout the rest of Australia. It is, indeed, every inch a Labor budget.

Mr McBRIDE (The Entrance) [9.22 p.m.]: The 1997-98 State budget is a good news budget for New South Wales and in particular a very good news budget for the central coast. This is the first budget since I became a member of Parliament that shows real concern for ordinary people, the little people, the battlers, the people so often forgotten by the Federal and State governments in their efforts to balance the budget and win the applause of the big end of town. This is a budget for ordinary people, for the battlers - not John Howard’s battlers but Bob Carr’s battlers. This is a budget for the little people: the Pechts of Wyoming, the Livingstones of Ourimbah, the Forsters of Berkeley Vale, the Granlands of Tumbi Umbi, the Shannys of Killarney Vale, the Flynns of The Entrance, the Leslies of Toowoon Bay, the Catts of Long Jetty, the Higgs of Wamberal and the Cohens of Matcham.

This is a traditional Labor budget. Premier Bob Carr and Treasurer Michael Egan have got it right. Some $400 million will be raised to spend on basic services. Taxes on luxury homes, cars and hotels will be raised and tax on city parking will double. Taxes on investment land and insurance policies will also increase. I am happy to acknowledge that. The problem is the continual cuts by the Federal Liberal Government. Not so long ago when the present Federal Minister for Finance was in this place he was saying the same thing. Increasingly, year after year, the New South Wales Government gets a lower percentage of tax revenue from the Federal Government. That is what is happening at the moment. As I said, this is a traditional budget. The Government will use the money that is raised on things such as hospitals, schools, public transport, law and order and welfare. They are the areas in which we will spend the money. I am not in any way embarrassed about those sorts of priorities. I congratulate both the Premier and the Treasurer on sticking to those priorities.

The $50 back-to-school allowance was raised by the honourable member for The Hills. Mothers will receive $50 for each school child at the start of each school year. It is intended to offset uniform and basic back-to-school costs. The Opposition leader said that parents would prefer the $55 million back-to-school allowance to be spent employing more teachers or buying computers. Others have suggested that the money should have gone to parents and citizens associations, or directly to schools, or been otherwise injected into the school system. Opposition members have not recognised what the amount is for. It is not for those purposes; it is for ordinary parents, ordinary working-class parents, the battlers, to help them out at that time of the year.

[Interruption]

Anyone who supports the comments made by the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow minister for education is totally out of touch with ordinary people. Every parent in this State has experienced back-to-school expenses. Some honourable members opposite may not have as yet. I am still experiencing them.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Gaudry): Order! The honourable member for the Entrance will address his remarks through the Chair and will refrain from inciting members opposite.

Mr McBRIDE: It would be bloody hard to get that slug opposite excited. Mr Acting-Speaker, you are a parent. You know as well as I do that new school uniforms, sport uniforms, socks, shirts, shoes, stationery, pencils, rulers, school and excursion fees and other costs are incurred by parents every year. For the first time a government, a Labor Government, has recognised the annual mini financial crises suffered by families throughout the State and has allocated money directly to the pockets of the mums and dads who are looking after children. I am proud to be part of a Government that has done that. That is real, good government. It is what government is supposed to be about: looking after ordinary people. We are not about making people down the big end of town happy. We are not about making the stock exchange happy. We are not about increasing the salaries of bloody BHP CEOs and people like that; we are doing something for ordinary people. Opposition members should recognise that, because if they do not recognise it they will never get back onto the Government side of the Chamber. I will have to slow down for a while.

Ms Ficarra: Take a tablet.

Page 8647

Mr McBRIDE: No, I do not need a tablet. The winner in this budget is health. Spending is up to $452 million. Spending on health is now approximately $4.5 billion which amounts to a quarter of the total budget outlays of $20.5 billion. In education recurrent spending is up $188 million to $5.4 billion with an increase of 250 schoolteachers. An extra 100 police officers are to be employed throughout our State. Who are the losers?

Mr O’Farrell: Ordinary Australians.

Mr McBRIDE: The honourable member for Northcott said the losers are ordinary Australians. If the honourable member for Northcott refers to the millionaires at Vaucluse as ordinary Australians he is totally out of touch.

Ms Ficarra: People working in hospitality.

Mr McBRIDE: The honourable member for Georges River and the honourable member for Northcott claim that the budget is not about ordinary people. The millionaires at Vaucluse are not ordinary people. If the honourable member for Northcott read the articles in the paper he would see that those people do not even know they will have to pay extra money. The way they arrange their finances they do not pay the tax out of their pockets anyway. The losers are home owners with luxury homes at Vaucluse and around the harbour with unimproved capital values of $1 million. I will never live in a house with an unimproved capital value of $1 million, and not many people in New South Wales will have that opportunity. Bearing in mind the money that has been spent on Sydney Harbour, those who have the opportunity of enjoying the Sydney Harbour foreshores and the beauty of the harbour should kick in.

The honourable member for Northcott, who is a bit of an expert in this area, would know that the pay-as-you-earn taxpayers, the ordinary people, the battlers, every year are paying a bigger proportion of total taxes in this State. Every year business is paying a decreasing proportion of the total tax collected in this State and, indeed, in the whole of Australia. So those 2,800 people who have land with an unimproved capital value of more than $1 million are the big losers. I do not feel sorry for them. The purchasers of luxury cars are also big losers. Some of the young Labor people are in the BMW crew -

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Georges River will have her opportunity to contribute to this debate. She will listen in silence.

Mr McBRIDE: They are very rare, as we all know. The yuppies who drive those luxury cars will have to pay a bit of extra money. I do not feel sorry for them. If they want to drive around in BMWs, bad luck! The honourable member for The Hills said there was a big problem with four-wheel drives. All around The Hills one sees mums taking children to the preschools in their four-wheel drives. They are lovely cars for the mums to drive around in. If they do not want to drive a four-wheel drive they can drive a smaller car. They chose four-wheel drives. Every time those four-wheel drives are filled with fuel it costs $50 or $60. If the owners have a real problem with the extra money that they will have to pay, they should not drive around in four-wheel drives. I do not feel sorry for them either. In relation to the bed tax of 10 per cent in Sydney -

Mr O’Farrell: A loss of 3,000 jobs, more than at BHP.

Mr McBRIDE: The honourable member for Northcott must believe in fairies. The simple fact is that Sydney happens to be the most beautiful city in Australia and 60 per cent of inbound tourists choose to come to Sydney. Most of those people have never seen Sydney before they come other than on a video or in a brochure. Sydney has the Opera House. Who built the Opera House? The ordinary taxpayer paid for the Opera House and that helps to make Sydney one of the most beautiful cities in the world. The fact is that the taxpayers of New South Wales have put money into Sydney and that benefits tourists who come here. Those tourists choose to come here and will continue to come here. Don’t worry about that! If the honourable member for Northcott wants to talk down the State, if he is not proud of his city that is his problem. But I am proud of my city. It is one of the great cities of the world. As I said the losers are those people who can afford to pay the tax increases. The proceeds of the tax increases will be spent on better hospitals, schools, services, and roads, more jobs and on providing a more secure future for ordinary Australians.

Mr Sullivan: And no bed tax at The Entrance.

Mr McBRIDE: My colleague the honourable member for Wollongong points out that the bed tax will not be extended to The Entrance. This is a truly Labor budget. As the Treasurer said, it is every inch a Labor budget.

Ms Ficarra: Old-style Labor.

Mr McBRIDE: I am not embarrassed to support old-style Labor if it means that the mums will get an extra $50 in February next year for every
Page 8648
child who goes to school. I am happy and proud to stand for old-style Labor. There are concerns in the club industry relating to increase in poker machine tax. Representatives of a number of clubs have approached me as a member representing the central coast about this tax issue. However, I remind the industry of the position taken by the Opposition in relation to this particular tax. The Opposition will oppose the tax in this House but when the question is put as to whether it would repeal the tax if it came to government, the answer is no. The Opposition is beating the drum to cause concern amongst the club industry. For what purpose? The simple fact is the Opposition will not repeal that legislation. It is all flim-flam. That is all they are doing, beating the drum.

Mr Iemma: Pop-up Pete, the flim-flam man.

Mr McBRIDE: Yes, pop-up Pete, the flim-flam man. It is typical of him.

Mr Martin: The cellophane man.

Mr McBRIDE: The Minister for Fisheries said he is the cellophane man. When the acid was dropped on the Leader of the Opposition and he was asked whether he would repeal the legislation - in other words, he was asked whether he would take that tax back if he came into government - his answer was no. The Opposition is winding up a lot of hot crock because the simple fact is when it is put to the test it will not repeal that legislation. As I said the budget is a great budget for New South Wales, for ordinary people, and it certainly delivers to the central coast on the core sector priorities of education, health and roads. The 1997-98 budget includes over $12 million in capital works in The Entrance electorate.

The budget proves conclusively that the Carr Government is willing to provide a fair share of funding to improve basic services in growth areas such as the central coast. Many times I have had the opportunity to speak in this Chamber about the growth on the central coast. I will not continue with that now but the simple fact is that not only is the central coast the fastest growing area in New South Wales. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics figures, it is also the fastest growing area in Australia. Funding for better schools and roads helps to build a secure base for essential services in the community. Funding for local schools has been given a real boost.

This year an allocation of $1.8 million has been made for the relocation of Narara Public School to Newling Street, with an estimated total project cost of $5 million. Ourimbah Public School will receive $2.6 million for stage two upgrading works, which is part of a $4.47 million upgrade of the school. Stage two of Tumbi Umbi High School has been allocated $730,000, with construction of the school to be completed later this year. One-fifth of new capital works expenditure on schools in the 1997-98 budget has been allocated to schools in The Entrance electorate. I congratulate the Minister for Education and Training, the Hon. John Aquilina, on his recognition of the growth in my electorate and the priority for schools there. Honourable members in this Chamber have spoken about renewing school halls. I would like school halls for schools in my electorate, but the majority of them were built at the turn of the century and they do not have school halls.

Mr O’Farrell: What have you been doing for the past two years?

Mr McBRIDE: This Government has a great record in education. I am totally proud of my record, the Government’s record, and particularly the Minister’s record in education expenditure in my electorate in the past two years. It is a great record! As I said, of all new capital works expenditure in this budget, one-fifth or 20 per cent of it will be spent in my electorate. That is a good record by any standard. In the roads budget $8.9 million has been allocated to the Gosford City Council area and $7.4 million to the Wyong Shire Council area, a total of $16.3 million for new roadworks. [Extension of time agreed to.]

[Interruption]

This debate is supposed to be serious. It is about the battlers of this State. The honourable member for Georges River should show more respect and concern for ordinary Australians and the ordinary members of this State. Another $4.5 million has been allocated to complete the final link of Wyong Road and The Entrance Road to Tuggerah. The cost of the project now totals $60 million, with the dual carriageway project to be completed this financial year. That major project has been ongoing in my electorate and in the adjoining electorate of Wyong. It is great to be able to announce in this Parliament that the eight-year project will be completed in this financial year. Funds have been allocated in the budget for new roadworks at north Gosford, Wyoming, Niagara Park, Lisarow, Wamberal, Forresters Beach and Long Jetty. Roadworks are a top priority for the central coast, as anyone who lives in the area, has passed through the area or has holidayed in the area would know.

Page 8649

The budget has met the road priorities of my electorate and of other electorates on the central coast. Good traffic facilities at intersections are the key to efficient management of traffic, and funds have been allocated for works at six intersections. The total reconstruction of Pitt Road and The Entrance Road at Wamberal, including traffic lights and pedestrian crossing, bus priority traffic controls and redesign of the shopping centre parking area will cost $858,000. Construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Henry Parry Drive and Cary Street, North Gosford, will cost $180,000. Construction of turning right and turning left lanes at the intersection of Pierce Street and the Pacific Highway at Niagara Park will cost $175,000. Construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Watkins and Pacific Streets, Long Jetty, will cost $180,000. Installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Pacific Street and The Entrance Road at Long Jetty will cost $80,000.

Mr O’Farrell: What about Gosford?

Mr McBRIDE: Gosford should get a new member. The honourable member for Gosford was a Minister. What did he do for his electorate when he was a Minister in the Greiner and Fahey governments? He did nothing. The Renwick Street and Pacific Highway intersection at Wyoming is a major intersection. Works including realignment of the creek, upgrading to dual carriageway status, and reconstruction and realignment of existing carriageway will cost $1.5 million. I publicly acknowledge both the Minister and the Roads and Traffic Authority for targeting intersections in my electorate as a major traffic issue.

I certainly take the view, and I have expressed it many times to the RTA, that improving intersections is the most efficient way of using limited road funds to improve the efficiency of the network. Funding of $2.2 million have been allocated for the Brooks Avenue to Renwick Street-Pacific Highway link at Wyoming. These works will complete the dual carriageway from the Manns Road-Pacific Highway roundabout to Renwick Street. The creation of that dual carriageway was a major commitment of the 1995 election. I am happy and proud to announce in this Parliament that that election commitment has been honoured and that, in fact, all the election commitments made on roads in 1995 have now been honoured in the second year of the Carr Government. All the road improvement commitments I made in the 1995 election campaign for my electorate have been honoured.

Ms Ficarra: Let’s talk about tolls.

Mr McBRIDE: The honourable member for Georges River should listen. I said "my electorate". An amount of $112,000 has been allocated for the investigation and planning of new works for the route development study on The Entrance Road between Erina and Shelly Beach. School pedestrian safety on the Pacific Highway from Chamberlain Street, Lisarow, to Manns Road has been addressed with the allocation of $240,000 for the community consultation process and to kick-start the planning stage of the safety improvement plan. The total of that funding reflects the priority given to school transport safety issues by Premier Bob Carr and the Government. Before leaving the subject of roads, I would like to inform the House about the Chamberlain Street, Lisarow, intersection. As a result of a meeting organised by the Lisarow parents and citizens, in association with the Narara Public School, it was decided that action would be taken to try to improve the safety issues associated with the length of the Pacific Highway from Lisarow to Narara.

Mr O’Farrell: Did you attend the meeting?

Mr McBRIDE: Yes, I did. I attended the first meeting of the task force to improve safety on the Pacific Highway from Narara to Lisarow. That meeting was held at the Central Coast Leagues Club Ltd on Monday, 12 May. The task force comprises representatives from the Roads and Traffic Authority, Gosford City Council, the Police Service, the Department of Housing, Narara primary school, Lisarow High School, Narara parents and citizens, Lisarow parents and citizens, Gosford parents and citizens, community members, business, and local bus services. The task force will undertake a road safety study, which is unique on the central coast. This is the first time the local community and the Roads and Traffic Authority have jointly commissioned a study. The local community will be fully involved in the development of a safety improvement plan. As I said, I am very proud to announce in this Parliament that the meeting has already been held. In three months the problem has been identified and positive action is now being taken.

I turn to health. Under a $3 million strategy announced in this week’s budget, a new multipurpose health care centre is to be located at the Long Jetty community care facility, which was formerly known as the Long Jetty Hospital, which will include an after-hours general practitioner medical service. Again, this commitment was given to my electorate prior to the 1995 election, and I am proud to announce that the Government has
Page 8650
honoured that commitment. In education, health and roads the Government has honoured commitments it gave in the 1995 election. If the honourable member for Northcott were in my shoes I am sure he would be as proud as I am if he could say that after two years of a coalition government every commitment given on essential core elements of policy in his electorate had been honoured in two budgets. The new centre, as I said, honours an election commitment made by the Minister for Health, the Hon. Dr Andrew Refshauge, and me to The Entrance electorate in 1995.

The Minister for Health, the Hon. Dr Andrew Refshauge, should be congratulated on his commitment to the project and on the allocation of funds in this year’s budget. He is an excellent Minister. The establishment of this centre is also public recognition of the immense efforts of Helen and Geoff Ambler from the Berkeley and the Chittaway Progress Association. They have vigorously campaigned for this centre, for its facilities and for its services. That is one of the enduring and admirable characteristics of people who live on the central coast. As honourable members know, I live there, and I highly recommend it. The area has great community spirit. Last week a representative from the hospital who used to work in Sydney said to me that the one great characteristic of the central coast, which is totally different from the metropolitan area, is the sense of community spirit that exists in the hospital and the total support of the community for the hospital. That is the sort of electorate I am proud to represent.

Mr O’Farrell: Do they reciprocate?

Mr McBRIDE: They certainly do, because they voted me in twice.

Mr O’Farrell: Make the most of it, because they won’t vote you in for the third time.

Mr McBRIDE: This genius ran the last campaign. Notwithstanding everything he said, they re-elected me. I want to put on the record publicly my sincere thanks to the honourable member for Northcott for his efforts in the last State election to not only get me re-elected but to put us on this side of the House. As I have said, all commitments on health, roads and education have been honoured. In the five years I have been in this Parliament, two new high schools have been constructed in my electorate. How many have been constructed in the electorate of the honourable member for Northcott?

Mr O’Farrell: Do they have halls?

Mr McBRIDE: The high schools are brand new, and they have halls. They have halls because they are new. The old schools in my electorate have a problem. I am dismayed at your attitude. I want recorded in Hansard your cynical attitude to the people on the central coast.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Mills): Order! Honourable members will address their remarks through the Chair. The Chair is sick and tired of this barrage of interjections from the honourable members for Northcott, Georges River and Oxley. They will restrain themselves and the honourable member for The Entrance will direct his remarks through the Chair.

Mr McBRIDE: The second stages of the construction of two new high schools in my electorate, Narara Valley and Tumbi Umbi, will be completed later this year. Narara Public School will be relocated as the old school is on a terrible site near the Pacific Highway. Those old weatherboard schools, which were built in the early part of the century, are historic buildings by any standards in Australia. Children living on the central coast are going to schools which were built 50 years or more ago. This Government is building two new high schools and one new primary school in my electorate. It recognises the growth in the central coast area. As I said earlier, that is a credit to the Minister for Education.

When the Minister was in opposition he visited the area many times and examined those school sites. He visited the Tumbi Umbi site and the Narara Public School site. He showed a real interest in those schools. But more than showing a real interest, he has delivered to the people on the central coast and the people in The Entrance. I have given honourable members my opinion of this budget but I want to give them the opinion of the toughest arbitrator of the performance of any Labor government - the central coast Express Advocate. The editorial in that paper -

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! The Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for Fisheries and the honourable member for Northcott will cease interjecting. If the honourable member for Northcott cannot restrain himself I will call him to order.

Mr McBRIDE: The editorial, which is entitled "That’s More Like It, Bob!" states:

It’s good news week on the Central Coast following the release of the State Budget.

The coast has done very well with a heavy emphasis on education.

Page 8651

At last Narara primary school is on the move to a new site, booming Blue Haven gets its own school . . .

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Northcott to order.

Mr McBRIDE: The editorial continues:

And $7 million will be spent at the Juvenile Justice Centre at Kariong.

The toughest arbitrator on any Labor government is the central coast Express Advocate. The honourable member for Gosford, who is in the Chamber, would know what I am talking about as he is a personal friend of the editor. I can imagine what the honourable member for Gosford did with his Weetbix when he read that editorial.

Mr Martin: What about his toot-toot doona?

Mr McBRIDE: I hope he did not do it on the toot-toot doona. A newspaper headline entitled "We’ve done well" - [Time expired.]

Mr O’FARRELL (Northcott) [9.52 p.m.]: The only comment I make about the speech of the honourable member for The Entrance is that the honourable member for Gosford does not actually eat Weetbix; he is a real man and he eats Nutrigrain.

Mr Martin: They are both unhealthy and you are an advertisement for them.

Mr O’FARRELL: I will have you for breakfast. For three years the Treasurer of this State -

[Interruption]

Mr Acting-Speaker, I seek your protection.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Northcott will receive no protection from the Chair so long as he uses first person direct references across the table. He should direct his remarks through the Chair.

Mr O’FARRELL: For three years the Treasurer of this State, in delivering his annual budget, described it as being "every inch a Labor budget". Having witnessed each performance and having studied the budget papers for three years I can only surmise that this budget seeks to divide, to spend money on the basis of political considerations alone and to revive Labor’s historical commitment to high taxation. On the basis of the Treasurer’s performance to date and as a result of Labor’s policies in this State it is not a performance of which anyone should be proud. This budget is another divisive budget; it seeks to divide Sydney between those who live in the north and those who live in the west. It seeks to divide the State between those who live in western Sydney, the Illawarra and Newcastle and those who live in other parts of rural and regional New South Wales.

The budget seeks to divide New South Wales between those whom the Government deems to be rich, regardless of reality, and those whom it deems to be poor. This division might more accurately be described as those whom the Carr Government believes support it and those whom it believes do not. Last Tuesday I listened in part to the contribution of the Hon. Ann Symonds in another place in the budget debate. Whilst the Hon. Ann Symonds and I might strenuously disagree about approaches and aims in government we both agree about the nature of government. We both believe that government should govern in the interests of the entire community. The Hon. Ann Symonds told the upper House:

The first responsibility of government is its duty to its citizens.

It is a matter of regret to me and to many impartial observers of politics in this State that that is not a role the Carr Government is comfortable with. Not for it the concept of assessing need and determining expenditure accordingly. Instead, it adopts the notion of divide and rule - a policy firmly grounded on the principle that needs do not arise in Sydney north of the Parramatta River and Darling Harbour or in country New South Wales outside the Sydney-Newcastle-Illawarra conurbation. This hypocritical policy is typical of the only type of leadership this Premier is capable of providing. Currently there is an ongoing wider debate in this country which is causing division and tensions within the community. All the major parties and their leaders have spoken out against the politics of division and debate that this has created. Even the Premier of this State has joined the chorus. Yet in New South Wales he practises the very tactics for which he condemns Pauline Hanson. The use of dishonest labels -

Mr Martin: Are you a Hanson supporter?

Mr O’FARRELL: If the Minister would like to be breathalysed I would be more than happy to oblige. He should not be in that state.

Mr Martin: On a point of order -

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Mills): Order! The Minister will resume his seat. I was about to call him to order for constant interjection.

Page 8652

Mr Martin: On a point of order. There is an unwritten law in this Parliament concerning the conduct of members. The statement made by the unscrupulous member for Northcott was totally uncalled for. He ought to withdraw the inference that he just made.

Mr O’FARRELL: There is no inference. Get a breathalyser. Go on! Get a portable kit.

Mr Iemma: That is disgraceful!

Mr O’FARRELL: Look at him!

Mr Martin: Mr Acting-Speaker, there is a matter before you. The honourable member for Northcott should withdraw all inferences that he has made.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Northcott will withdraw the inference behind that comment. It is not characteristic for those sorts of remarks to be made in this Parliament.

Mr O’FARRELL: It might not be characteristic; it might be true. Mr Acting-Speaker, in deference to your ruling, I withdraw.

Mr Martin: Scumbag!

Mr O’FARRELL: Mr Acting-Speaker, I ask you to ask the Minister to withdraw his comment.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! I did not hear the comment. The honourable member should get on with his speech. I will protect him if he gets on with his speech.

Mr O’FARRELL: Mr Acting-Speaker, I expect from you the same courtesies that you would extend to any other member of this House.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! I remind the honourable member for Northcott that he has already been called to order and he has been given considerable tolerance by the Chair. I call members to order when interjections get beyond the pale and I call them to order without favour.

Mr O’FARRELL: So the scumbag opposite can say that to me and you will not call him to order?

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: I do not know whether the honourable member is taking a point of order or whether he is just having an argument with the Chair, but he has been given the call to continue his contribution on the budget debate.

Mr O’FARRELL: On a point of order. The Minister said to me across the table that I was a scumbag. Mr Acting-Speaker, I seek your protection and you tell me to get on with it. That, therefore, means that the word "scumbag" is parliamentary. I am seeking your ruling.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! I will not rule that that term is unparliamentary. There is no point of order. The honourable member for Northcott has the call to continue his speech.

Mr O’FARRELL: On a point of order. Can I expect any protection from the Chair from the Minister opposite?

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! I have ruled on the point of order. The honourable member for Northcott should continue his speech. If he does not wish to continue it I will call the next speaker.

Mr O’FARRELL: I am happy to continue. I thought I might have received the traditional protection of the Chair. In this State the Premier practises the very tactics for which he condemns Pauline Hanson - the use of dishonest labels to promote discontent and division and the proffering of dishonest solutions to deny to sections of the community equal access to resources. When the Premier comes into this Chamber and attacks the wealthy and the rich who live in Sydney’s north he is as offensive as Pauline Hanson when she attacks Asians and Aborigines. When the Premier boasts that the budget benefits Sydney’s west, Newcastle and the Illawarra, at the expense of the rest of Sydney, he is as guilty of being offensive as Pauline Hanson is when she seeks to divide black and white communities in this country. Both seek to promote hatred. Both are guilty of creating divisions within society - one on racial grounds and the other on class. Both concepts are outmoded and out of place in Australia and in this State as we enter the next millennium.

Who are the rich and the wealthy that the Premier so loathes? Last week on radio station 2BL the Treasurer rang the station in response to comments made by the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai about the back-to-school allowance. The Treasurer commenced his remarks by stating that whatever the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai said, people should understand that he, the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai, represented "the wealthiest electorate in this State". As if that excuses the sorts of iniquities the honourable member for
Page 8653
Ku-ring-gai was pointing out. What the Treasurer said will come as a surprise and as news to those people who live in and around Hornsby and in all those suburbs and communities extending north to the Hawkesbury. It will even come as a surprise to the Hornsby branch of the Labor Party, and it will also surprise the many social and community workers who work daily in that area.

This Government, in its third successive budget, seeks to allocate funds