Full Day Hansard Transcript (Legislative Assembly, 9 September 1999, Corrected Copy)

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

Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield - Minister for Police) [10.00 a.m.]: I move:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow:

(1) Government business to have precedence of the Address-in-Reply debate at this sitting; and

(2) the routine of business to commence at 3.00 p.m. this day.

The motion will allow the Minister for Education and Training to introduce the University of New South Wales (St George Campus) Bill and deliver his second reading speech. Standing and sessional orders were suspended yesterday for that purpose.

Mr Hartcher: This motion will give you the opportunity for all purposes.

Mr WHELAN: No; singly, only, exclusively for this bill. Secondly, the Prime Minister has arranged a luncheon in honour of His Excellency Mr Jiang Zemin, the President of China, at Admiralty House, Kirribilli. Following that luncheon, meetings will be held at senior government level with the Prime Minister and the Premier. Therefore today’s question time will not be held until 3.00 p.m. At the conclusion of the Minister’s second reading speech on the University of New South Wales (St George Campus) Bill the House will resume the Address-in-Reply debate.

Mr HARTCHER (Gosford) [10.03 a.m.]: Though the Opposition does not intend to require the House to divide on the motion, I should place on record the concern of the Opposition that constant changes to the Government’s program are not notified to anyone. Members find out about them only at 10 o’clock in the morning. Attendance in this place is always like taking a ticket in the lottery: one wonders what one will pull out of the lucky dip at the end of the process.

The Government has many days in which it can introduce its legislation. The Minister for Education has made a big fellow of himself over the past few months, threatening the University of New South Wales, Trinity Grammar School and everyone else. He has been trying to look tough and to do everything possible to avoid the real issue he must face, which is teachers’ salaries. He will have plenty of time to introduce his legislation. Nonetheless, he has chosen to eat into time that has been set aside for other purposes so that he can introduce the bill today.

Mr Aquilina: That is nonsense.

Mr HARTCHER: The Minister says that is nonsense. How many press statements has he issued on this matter in the past few weeks? Everyone knows what he will say this morning. There is no need for urgency to place the matter on the record or for anyone to know what the legislation contains. It could easily wait until next week, and the Minister and everyone else knows that. Notwithstanding that, the Government constantly changes the program. That is the first point raised in the motion moved by the Leader of the House.

The second issue relates to the attendance of the Premier at the luncheon organised in honour of the President of China by the Prime Minister. Surely invitations for that function went out weeks ago. The date of the visit of the President of China has been well known for some time. The invitation by the Prime Minister to the Premier to have lunch has been well publicised and the Premier would have received that invitation weeks ago. Everyone has known about that for some time. But members of this House are told about it at 10 o’clock on the day, when they are advised that question time is to be deferred until 3 o’clock.

The Leader of the House has had weeks to circulate the information to everyone that on Thursday 9 September question time will be deferred for three quarters of an hour, but he did not bother to say anything until four hours before the event. That is an ongoing sign of his arrogance. Let the word "arrogant" be displayed on the epitaph of the Leader of the House. His arrogance will be recorded on his epitaph.

Page 220

Mr Whelan: You will wait.

Mr HARTCHER: We will wait until 2003.

Mr Whelan: You will go back to the Hitler-like arrogance.

Mr HARTCHER: Hitler-like arrogance? What about the gang behind you - the cheer squad you bring down every morning to back you up?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Gosford should direct his remarks through the Chair.

Mr HARTCHER: As my colleague the honourable member for Bligh said, this is a case of bad management and shows the poor attitude of Government members to this House. I should say finally regarding the visit of the President of China that honourable members should not ignore the fact that this is another totalitarian leader who has come to Australia, a totalitarian leader who 10 years ago condoned the shooting of people in Tiananmen Square. This Government tolerated the Cuban Ambassador, who has ruled with a rod of iron for 40 years, coming to this Parliament, and now it wants to reorganise question time because of the visit of another totalitarian leader.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Members on the Government benches will cease interjecting.

Mr HARTCHER: If no-one else will, I am prepared to go on record as saying that I do not believe that this House should reorganise its schedule for the visits of dictators. It is appropriate that I place that on the record, just as the Opposition places on the record its concerns for the people of East Timor.

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

Mr Whelan: Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister of Australia, the honourable John Howard indicated -

Mr Hartcher: Point of order.

Mr SPEAKER: I will put the question.

Mr Whelan: Before you do, Mr Speaker -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Minister will resume his seat. If he wishes to speak further to the motion, he may make a personal explanation at the appropriate time.

Motion agreed to.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr AQUILINA (Riverstone - Minister for Education and Training) [10.09 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The bill will ensure the retention of a valuable public asset to serve the educational needs of the southern Sydney region. It gives legislative effect to the policy of this Government - to retain the St George campus of the University of New South Wales at Oatley as a high-quality site that can be used to meet the educational and training needs of the people of southern Sydney. The St George Campus site, a 6.25 hectare property, is twice the size of an average high school, with a five-storey classroom block, seminar rooms, performing arts space and extensive playing fields. It is located on the main Illawarra railway line within a few minutes walking distance from the Oatley railway station.

The location provides excellent access to students and the community. It is ideally suited for the delivery of education and training programs. The history of the St George campus provides a crucial foundation for this debate. The land upon which the St George campus is currently located was originally acquired by the State in December 1972 to be used as the site for a new high school in the Oatley area. At that time, however, the need for an additional high school did not eventuate, and the Department of Education decided to use the land for a campus of the Alexander Mackie Teachers College. The campus subsequently became part of the Sydney College of Advanced Education [CAE] and housed its teacher-training facility.

For the duration of the Sydney CAEs occupation of the site, the title to the land remained with the Crown. The Higher Education Amalgamation Act 1989 transferred the management of the St George campus to the University of New South Wales under a memorandum of agreement. The memorandum, signed by the University of New South Wales, had a clear intention of ensuring that the site would continue to be used by the university for public educational purposes. The intention of this Parliament was made clear in the Higher Education Amalgamation Act, and I quote from section 22 of that Act:

The property of the Sydney CAE that relates to the St George Institute of Education is vested in the University of New South Wales . . . to be applied by the University for the purposes for which the University is established.

Page 221

I repeat: to be applied for the purposes for which the university is established. Section 6 (1) of the University of New South Wales Act 1989 quite clearly lists the following functions:

(a) the provision of educational and research facilities of university standard;

(b) aiding, by research and other suitable means, the advancement, development and practical application of science to industry and commerce;

(c) the provision of instruction and the carrying out of research in the disciplines of humane studies and medicine and in such other disciplines as the Council may from time to time determine; and

(d) the conferring of the degrees of Bachelor, Master and Doctor and the awarding of diplomas and other certificates.

Nothing in there says anything about making a profit or selling public assets. At the time the university obviously understood the intent of the Higher Education Amalgamation Act. The memorandum of agreement plainly states that the university:

. . . will use its best endeavours, through its educational profile and through the development of the institute, to serve the education needs of the region and the broader community.

Although the university assumed the control and management of the St George Campus in 1989, it did not obtain title to the land at that time. The title had rested with the Crown since 1972, but control and management had been vested in the Sydney College of Advanced Education. It was an arrangement that worked - it kept the asset in public hands, but gave free use and access of the land to the college. But in 1991 the university appealed to the then Minister for Education and Youth Affairs, the Hon. Virginia Chadwick, to transfer title over the land from the Crown to the university. The then Minister sought the advice of the Crown Solicitor on the transfer of the valuable freehold title to the university. The strongly worded advice of the Crown Solicitor was clear:

It has never been considered by this Office that a Minister could so dispose of any public land for a nominal consideration. It has always been the view of this Office that any such disposition should be at the true value of the land, as determined by the Valuer-General.

The university gave a further undertaking in 1992. The university’s property manager wrote to the then Government in the following terms:

It is intended that [the site] will continue to be used for the teaching and research purposes of the University in accordance with its Act.

I emphasise that point. The then Minister obviously relied on the university’s undertaking and transferred the land for $1. The advice of the Crown Solicitor clearly stated that if the land was to be transferred for anything other than market value, it would have to be on the understanding that the land would continue to provide some ongoing benefit to the Crown. As Minister for Education and Training, I am not willing to see a valued educational facility like that at St George wound down and taken out of the public domain.

Last year, the University of Wollongong stated that it was willing to take over the campus, and continue to run a teacher-training facility on the site. I indicated in this House my support for such a transfer. But the University of Wollongong required extra funding from the Commonwealth to facilitate any transfer of the St George campus. The Government supported the University of Wollongong in its negotiations with the Commonwealth to secure the necessary seed funding. The Federal Education Minister, demonstrating the Commonwealth Government’s lack of commitment to higher education, initially insisted that any funding for a transfer would need to be taken from another university’s funding.

Furthermore, the Commonwealth expected the New South Wales State Government to broker the arrangement! The Carr Government opposed this absurd arrangement. Did the Commonwealth seriously expect that another university, itself suffering under Federal budgetary constraints, would willingly sacrifice its funding so that the University of Wollongong could take over the campus? Our Government continued to press for an outcome which would retain the St George campus for public education without resorting to legislative action. It was at this time that the Opposition, through the then member for Ku-ring-gai, now member for Hornsby, introduced a private member’s bill that, among other things, ensured that a lease could not be granted over the St George campus without the approval of the Minister.

Let me make it clear from the outset: The Government did not support the bill at that time, not because it disagreed with the intention of the bill but because for all its good intentions the bill was premature and pre-emptive. At the time the Government was seeking an outcome that required either additional Commonwealth funding to enable the campus to continue to operate or to be transferred to the University of Wollongong or some other negotiated agreement for the ongoing public education use of the campus. The Government believed there were still plenty of opportunities for a
Page 222
non-legislative negotiated solution before resorting to legislation. In August last year the Council of the University of New South Wales formally voted to sell the St George campus.

I am advised that the council was evenly divided - 10 votes to retain the campus, 10 votes to sell it with the casting vote of the then Chancellor coming down in favour of the vice-chancellor’s proposal to sell. Under section 17 (2) of the University of New South Wales Act 1989, the university is required to seek my permission if it wishes to sell land. In October 1998 the university formally requested permission to sell the campus for $13.5 million to an independent non-government school. It was at around this time, in the run-up to the Federal election, that Minister Kemp promised to "examine the supply of higher education to southern Sydney" and to "consider the investment of additional educational resources". Following this commitment from Minister Kemp I again wrote to him seeking the additional funds he had promised.

Unfortunately, Minister Kemp’s reply to me earlier this year indicated that the Commonwealth would not fulfil its pre-election commitment and provide the additional funding required. Having exhausted that final option it was then my responsibility under the University of New South Wales Act 1989 to determine whether to approve the proposed sale of land. Following initial consideration of the issues involved, in particular the potential loss of a public and community asset to a private interest, as well as the wider educational and training needs of southern Sydney, I advised the vice-chancellor of the University of New South Wales on 2 June that I would not authorise the sale of the campus.

Mr O’Doherty: Was he happy?

Mr AQUILINA: No. My decision not to authorise the sale of this campus is not the result of some ideological disposition on my part that is opposed to the disposal of university assets. Each and every request is evaluated on its merits. For example, I intend to approve the sale of a sizeable piece of land in Cowper Street in Kensington that the university owned for some time. The land was never intended to be used as a place for public instruction. It was not Crown land that was sold for a dollar. It was not subject to a covenant or agreement for specific purposes. Rather, it was acquired back in the late 1960s for student accommodation. The university now wants to sell the land to finance student accommodation closer to the main campus.

The decision of the university council on the Cowper Street property is laudable, and the re-allocation of resources is commendable and appropriate. For that reason I will approve that sale.
But in the case of the St George campus it is different. The public interest will suffer if the university effectively removes the land from public use. The intention of all university Acts is to ensure public scrutiny where required. This bill does not seek to change that. It will not impinge on the traditional arms-length relationship between universities and governments. Nor does it seek to influence the academic or research agendas of universities.

I formally wrote to the vice-chancellor on 4 June advising him of my decision and indicated that Cabinet had authorised a review of the educational training needs in southern Sydney. I invited the university to participate in that review and especially sought to consider how it might be constructively involved in the development of a new public education facility on the site. On 7 June, following consideration of my letter of 4 June to the vice-chancellor, the Council of the University of New South Wales authorised the finance committee of the university to explore the option of leasing the site to a private interest.

Under section 17 (3) of the University of New South Wales Act 1989 the University Council may, without the approval of the Minister, lease its properties for a period of up to 21 years, if such a lease is beneficial to the university from either academic or financial reasons. Following receipt of advice that the University Council had sought to exercise this option I personally telephoned the vice- chancellor on 8 June to advise him of my concerns about this course of action. I indicated to him that if this option were to be implemented the Government would consider introducing special legislation to ensure that all options, including the possible use of the St George campus site in any new educational facility as a result of the review of educational training needs in southern Sydney, would not be precluded. In a news release dated 8 June, I also publicly announced the Government’s intentions to undertake this review and the possibility of introducing special legislation.

The Government’s intention to undertake a review of the educational training needs of southern Sydney with the possibility and very real probability of the future utilisation of the St George campus was made clear. This is a point acknowledged publicly by the vice-chancellor on at least three occasions. The Government appointed Dr Alan Laughlin, Assistant Director-General (Secondary
Page 223
Education) with the Department of Education and Training, to undertake the review. Dr Laughlin consulted widely, inviting input from local schools, TAFE colleges, community leaders, local councils, local members of Parliament, the University of New South Wales, and interested members of the community.

The terms of reference for the review sought to examine the education and training needs of the region, and in particular how the St George campus could be utilised in the future provision of education in the area. During the course of Dr Laughlin’s review the vice-chancellor of the University of New South Wales informed me on 6 July, despite my earlier advice and announcement of 8 June, that the university was close to finalising the lease of the St George campus site to a private interest.

Mr O’Doherty: Shame!

Mr AQUILINA: The honourable member for Hornsby says "Shame!" I concur. I advised that the university’s intention to lease the site was in direct opposition to the Government’s stated concern to ensure that the future use of the site meets the needs of the wider community. In particular I reminded the Vice Chancellor that I had indicated to him on a previous occasion that I would be taking to Cabinet a proposal to nullify any such lease. I advised him that Cabinet had now approved the drafting of a bill to make null and void any lease of the site entered into on or after 1 April 1999 by the University of New South Wales. I also advised that I was strongly of the view that any decision on the future use of the site should await the findings of the review of education and training provision in southern Sydney.

Despite my advice the vice-chancellor advised me on 8 July that the university had entered into a lease with Trinity Grammar on 7 July - a full month after the Government had clearly indicated its intentions to make null any void any such lease. Any claims therefore that the intent of this legislation is retrospective are without substance or validity.

The significance of this site and the importance that it remain for wide community educational and training use has been reinforced by Dr Laughlin’s review. The review highlighted the fact that a number of primary schools in the region have reached maximum capacity, which has had the flow-on effect of increased enrolments at local high schools. As the demography of the region changes, the trend in enrolment demand for both primary and secondary schools is expected to increase.

The current picture in senior secondary schools is more varied. A number of schools - Penshurst Girls, Blakehurst High and Beverly Hills Girls - are almost at capacity and, due to their restricted sites, have their enrolment levels capped. On the other hand, two other schools in the area have relatively few senior secondary students, and are unable to provide a sufficiently wide range of courses for the Higher School Certificate.

In the area of higher education, the Southern Sydney Institute of TAFE is at capacity on its current sites. Its highest demand courses are unable to accommodate all applications. For example, in information technology courses this year, the St George TAFE college had to turn away 1,075 applicants due to lack of accommodation. Adult and community education in the area faces similar pressures. The St George and Sutherland Community College cannot meet the demand for a number of its courses, primarily due to lack of available accommodation in the area. The college has more than 20,000 enrolments, and has to pay some $200,000 per annum in rent to accommodate its classes. The principal of the college, Patricia Carroll, has written to me saying that the college could make immediate use of 20 additional classrooms to house existing demand.

Finally, while the region has a high overall participation rate in tertiary courses, the lack of a university campus in the region means that significant numbers of young people now travel daily to Wollongong to undertake university studies. Perhaps more disturbing than the distances young people are having to travel is the lack of opportunities for mature-age students. The absence of a university campus in the area has resulted in the St George region having the lowest level of participation by mature-age students in tertiary study in greater Sydney. Not only is there a picture of education and training need at all levels, but there is overwhelming community support for the retention of the campus.

Not only did the review reveal the deep community concern at the potential loss of this campus, but I have received many letters in support of the Government’s position. For example, Ms Ellis of Hurstville Grove wrote, "I commend you on your decision to refuse the UNSW request to sell the St George Campus." Mrs Smith of Mortdale wrote, "I read with pleasure of your decision to block the sale. This institute will remain accessible to all." Mr Hill of Oatley wrote, "Thank you for deciding to keep the Oatley Campus within the public education system. A site like this is a very valuable asset."

Page 224

The teachers of Bexley Public School, the parents and citizens association at Brighton Le Sands, the Penshurst Girls High School parents and citizens association and the President of the Teachers Federation, among others, have written to commend the Government for its stand on the St George campus. I have also received petitions with hundreds of signatures supporting the retention of the campus for broad community use. No doubt my colleagues representing the electorates of Kogarah, Georges River, Rockdale, Lakemba, Heffron and Miranda can tell many similar stories. With the review revealing the need for new education and training opportunities in southern Sydney and the groundswell of community support, the review recommended that the site be retained for use. It recommended further:

A public education and training multi-campus precinct be established on the site involving a senior campus of a collegiate group of government secondary schools, a TAFE campus, and some presence on the site of the St George and Sutherland Community College and a university.

The recommendation of the review is in line with the Government’s collegiate education plan, as endorsed by the people of New South Wales in March this year. The establishment of a collegiate campus will allow the local government schools with enrolment pressures to expand. It will allow those schools with small senior years to offer a broad range of subjects for the HSC to foster better outcomes for the future. It will enable TAFE to offer much needed courses to the community of southern Sydney, and create better pathways for secondary students to gain vocational qualifications. It will re-establish a university presence in southern Sydney for the benefit of the community - for mature-age courses, for beginning undergraduate courses, and for access to research resources.

The Government believes that the establishment of an Oatley educational precinct will enable access to high-quality education and training opportunities for the broader community in southern Sydney. I am also considering the possibility that such a collegiate arrangement at Oatley could be used as a flagship school as part of initial teacher education. I have asked Dr Gregor Ramsey, as part of his extensive review of teacher education, to investigate ways to improve practicum, and within his terms of reference, I intend to ask him to include the possible use of collegiate arrangements as "navigator schools". It is still my hope that the University of New South Wales could and would play an active role in an Oatley education precinct.

Let me turn now to how the legislation itself will work to secure the possibility of establishing an Oatley education precinct. This is not a complex piece of legislation. It seeks to do four things. Firstly, clauses 4 and 5 will make void ab initio any lease or licence of the St George campus entered into on or after 1 April 1999, without incurring any liability for the Crown. Although the Government’s policy was announced on 8 June and the University of New South Wales deal was done on 7 July, the Government believes that the 1 April date would provide certainty and protect the Crown. Clause 4 requires the university to refund to the non-government school any rent paid by it under the lease. Similarly, clause 5 requires the university to refund to the non-government school any payments made by it under any licence.

Secondly, clause 6 provides that future leases or licences over the campus may not be granted without the approval of the Minister. It could be argued that this is not a new power at all. Rather, it is simply a closing of the loophole by which the University of New South Wales sought to effectively and permanently alienate this public asset from public use. The Minister will not be able to direct the university, interfere with the university or compel the university in any substantially new way. Any argument which says that this legislation presents a threat to the independence of universities is a red herring. This simply extends the already existing power for the Minister to say yes or no to a proposal for a long-term lease of university lands.

It is an almost identical power as that contained in the bill introduced in this House by the former member for Ku-ring-gai, now the honourable member for Hornsby - a power the Opposition endorsed and supported. Thirdly, clause 7 of the bill gives the Minister the option to compulsorily acquire the St George campus at a future date by proclamation if required. The vice-chancellor has flagged the fact that the enacting of this legislation would leave the university in possession of the land, but with no progress toward a solution. I have outlined the Government’s plan for the future. I invite the university’s participation. The university has a long and proud tradition of excellence in tertiary education. I take this opportunity to congratulate the university on this as it celebrates its fiftieth anniversary.

But the legislation puts in place a mechanism to retain the land and enact the Government’s plans if the university does not wish to participate. Let me make it clear: this is not automatic, nor is it a foregone conclusion. The Government would still prefer a negotiated agreement with the University of New South Wales and for it to be involved in future plans for the campus. But should the university
Page 225
obstruct creative plans for the public use of the land, I will have little choice as Minister but to act to ensure the retention of a high-quality public education facility for the people of southern Sydney. The taxpayers of New South Wales rightly expect that public assets be used for public benefit. If the university no longer plans to benefit the public with this asset, then it is incumbent on the Government to intervene, to negotiate, and as a last resort if necessary to resume the land, so that the community continues to benefit.

Fourthly, clause 8 makes it clear that the Crown is not liable for any compensation to anyone as a consequence of any lease or any licence being voided, the compulsory acquisition of the land, or the enactment or operation of the legislation. There is no reason why the taxpayers of New South Wales should be expected to compensate the university or the non-government school or, indeed, any other party for their agreement to a lease which should never have been entered into. However, the Government is not unreasonable. Just because the university has no legal right to compensation does not preclude negotiations for an appropriate ex gratia payment which may be paid upon proof of capital improvements on the site between the date of occupation and 1 April 1999.

This legislation will give effect to the policy I publicly announced and personally conveyed to Vice-Chancellor Niland on 8 June 1999. It is not without some disappointment that the Government has had to introduce this legislation to ensure that the St George campus site remains available for all future options to meet the education and training needs of southern Sydney. Had the university not entered into a lease and sought to co-operate more fully with the Government’s review this legislation would be unnecessary. Equally, it was not necessary or appropriate to introduce this legislation prior to today because when the House last sat no lease had been entered into and the review was still yet to be completed.

A lease of this nature with a private institution - a 10½-year lease with a five-year option at a $1.25 million rent per annum - entered into by the university has in effect alienated the site from wider community and public use and is a loss of a public education and training asset. Legislation of this type is unusual, as is the university’s decision to ignore and pre-empt the Government’s review. However, the short-term lease provisions allow the university to negotiate a rolling lease that amounts to a permanent lease, without ministerial approval. Not to enact such legislation would severely limit the future education and training options for thousands of people in southern Sydney.

As the former Opposition education spokesman, the then member for Ku-ring-gai, said in relation to the St George campus during his second reading speech last year when introducing his private member’s bill, "It is an extremely important educational facility for the southern Sydney region." and, "The Coalition hopes that the St George Campus will continue to provide public education." and again, "It is in the interests of the public in the southern Sydney region that this campus remain for the purpose for which it was intended." and yet again, "The Coalition believes the overriding public interest is for this site to remain available for the education of New South Wales students, particularly those in the St George area." It is clear from the strongly worded argument from the Opposition that it holds the same view as the Government and the wider community. Given the Opposition’s publicly stated position on this matter, I would hope and expect its support to ensure that this site in southern Sydney will not be lost to the broader community and public education.

Finally, let me say once again: The Government has had a clear position in favour of keeping the St George campus in public hands for use as a public educational facility. The Government clearly indicated its intentions to prevent a lease of the campus - both publicly and personally with Vice-Chancellor Niland. The vice-chancellor admits himself that he was aware of the Government’s intention to legislate to prevent a lease of the campus. Let me say it again: In this context this legislation is not retrospective and it is both incorrect and unfair to describe this legislation as such. The legislation retains this valuable public asset for the future public education and training needs of southern Sydney. A vote for this bill is a vote for southern Sydney. To oppose it is to see this asset lost to the community, perhaps forever. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr O’Doherty.

Debate resumed from 8 September.

Mr HUMPHERSON (Davidson) [10.40 a.m.]: I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to the Governor’s Speech, which I have to say at the outset really was characterised by what I would describe as an uninspiring vision for the State over the next four years. It was, in many ways, a re-announcement of policies that have been the subject of press releases over the preceding months. It was
Page 226
substantially boring in content. The content was acknowledged to be such by many of the guests who closed their eyes for extended periods. Even the Premier chose to read throughout the delivery of the speech. It was characterised also by the poor management of the event by the President of the upper House, Meredith Burgmann, who quite appropriately was chastised by caucus in advance; it looked like that event would be mismanaged.

Again the poor management was evident, as was acknowledged by her upper House colleagues rolling the President on a ruling given during question time. About the only notable announcement in the speech related to infrastructure. As has been made clear in this House, most of the funding for the announced infrastructure works comes from Federal sources and from the private sector. Little or no credit is due to the Carr Government for any of those major projects. However, in my contribution I intend to focus on what was absent from the Governor’s Speech and what should be on the Government’s agenda, in particular from the perspective of my constituency. The issue that is of most significance in the Davidson electorate at this point - a matter that has been ignored by the Government and has had little sympathy from it - is the proposed sale and development of urban bushland.

If there is one thing that characterises Sydney, was helpful in Sydney’s selection as an Olympic venue, and distinguishes Sydney from most other major cities around the world, it is our urban bushland and urban national parks. Davidson falls between two national parks, being Garigal National Park - most of which is within the electorate of Davidson - and the Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park. Both of those national parks form a bushland corridor that extends from Sydney Harbour all the way to the Hawkesbury River in the north. At the point where the bushland corridor crosses Mona Vale Road are two substantial portions of land, about 36 hectares in total, which are not part of our national parks but have been assumed by many people to be so because they are contiguous, undisturbed bushland areas. Those portions of land are owned by the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council. Those lands are to be offered for auction next Tuesday.

Despite representations by myself and many people throughout the local community, with substantial support from many interest groups, the Government has failed to address this problem before the auction of the land. I have appealed to the Government to acquire this land. I have appealed to the Government and to the land council to negotiate a land exchange. There has been no productive outcome from those appeals. Despite community will and what I assume to be the Green credentials of the Premier - a matter he always talks about - the Premier has turned his back on this urban bushland of Sydney. So that honourable members will recognise the significance of the matter that I am speaking about, I will describe the land parcels. The land falls either side of Mona Vale Road.

The area east of St Ives Showground extends about a kilometre. It is an area of 36 hectares, 360,000 square metres, or about 89 acres in old measurement units. In total area, it is equivalent in size to about 600 standard housing blocks. It is owned by the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council by virtue of a successful claim under the State Land Claims Act 1983. The claim was approved in the late 1980s. It falls within the headwaters of both Cowan Creek catchment and the upper Middle Harbour catchment, both of which are very significant catchments, because this is steep terrain and both catchments are protected as national park.

The community was outraged in mid-August when for sale signs were raised along Mona Vale Road. It has been the perception that this land was national park and therefore was protected, which would be appropriate because it forms a significant part of the bushland corridor along Mona Vale Road. I, with a great deal of assistance from the community, organised a rally on 21 August at very short notice. About 340 people attended the rally. We had support from the respective catchment management committees, the National Parks Association, the Total Environment Centre, local councils, local interest groups and a large number of citizens, many of whom had never sought to protest about development of any kind. The gathering unanimously called on the Government and all interest groups to help protect and preserve the land. Late in the evening before the rally the Minister for the Environment sent a fax in which he acknowledged the significance of these lands. I quote from that fax:

. . . the strategic location of these lands, in an upper catchment contiguous with both Ku-ring-gai Chase and Garigal National Parks, is of importance from a regional conservation planning and park management perspective. In addition, given their location, the blocks may contain Duffy’s Forest ecological community, a threatened ecological community, or the threatened species Microtis anguisii and Grevillea cayleyi. The lands also have notable aesthetic and catchment protection values.

. . . I have instructed the NPWS to urgently recommence discussions with the MLALC . . . to explore the possible exchange of a number of residential blocks held by the

Page 227

NPWS, which are of limited conservation value, for the two larger MLALC blocks on Mona Vale Road. If successful, these negotiations will secure these higher conservation value, and strategically located, parcels of land for addition to Sydney’s national park estate.

Nobody would disagree with those sentiments. I will refer to the land council shortly. But, as far as the Government is concerned, the matter has not been followed up to any effective degree. It has not been successful in its approaches and has not been prepared to put up its hand to try to solve the problem and commit the funds necessary to preserve or protect the land. Indeed it has not been prepared to rezone the land to protect it in that way. As the Minister said in the faxed letter, there are a number of species of flora on the land which have been identified. A thorough survey has not been conducted. I want to make it clear that there are a number of valuable flora on the site which are now put at risk. They include rare orchids and rare native trees, significant flowering shrubs, four uncommon tree associations, as well as many other species of flora and fauna that have not even been identified clearly in this significant site. Botanists who have looked at the site over the past weeks cannot believe that there could be any proposal to clear or develop the land.

Although the land actually falls into the Warringah Council area, the Ku-ring-gai Municipal Council is equally concerned because of the catchment impact. Both councils that control the catchment have recorded their concern and have called for preservation of the land. Warringah Council strongly opposes development of any form on those portions of land and supports the transfer of this land into both the Garigal and Warringah national parks. There has been no response whatsoever from the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council [Metro LALC], which makes the community inordinately angry and extraordinarily frustrated. The Aboriginal land council representatives in the area have demonstrated an amazing lack of recognition of community concerns for the preservation of this portion of the land and, indeed, for land itself.

The land council took umbrage at the Warringah Council’s resolution which was designed to preserve the land. The council claimed that the Warringah Council had sought to discriminate against the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council. On the contrary, the council had focused on preservation of the land and not on discrimination. At all times over the past month, members of the community who have protested have stressed that the issue is preservation and not discrimination. In fact, the community has gone to great lengths to ensure that that is demonstrably not the case. The land council’s response to the Warringah Council’s concern was to play the race card in an attempt to bring race into the equation. If anything, the criticism of the land council by the community was not as strong as it would have been if the land had been owned by a major corporation. A letter from the land council claimed:

. . . the only reason that you propose a resolution in relation to sale of land by a private owner is that the sale is by an Aboriginal Organization.

That statement is quite incorrect. The letter went on to state an extraordinary and appalling conclusion:

. . . Metropolitan Local Aboriginal land council reserves its rights against and holds liable Warringah Council and individual councillors for any loss and damage Metro LALC suffers as a result of Warringah Council’s actions.

That is clearly a threat against Warringah Council and against the community for having expressed a view and for having sought to preserve the land. The land council intends to press on and seek any way possible of obtaining recompense. If the land council does not obtain the prescribed or desired sale price, it will take legal action. That shows great intolerance to community views and attitudes in relation to bush land preservation, and I cannot imagine anything more unacceptable to the local community. It demonstrates an astonishing arrogance and ignorance of the desires of the community. As long as six months ago the catchment management committee sought to approach the land council to ask if it would be prepared to swap the land for land elsewhere in order to seal its preservation.

The land council declined and has refused to discuss the matter ever since. The land council is hell-bent on putting the land up for sale. Next Sunday, which is two days before the proposed auction, there will be a last-ditch rally by the local community to try to demonstrate to the Government that the land is important and the community wants it saved, and to advise any prospective purchasers, including the land council, that the community will not sit back and see the land developed without putting up one hell of a fight. The only other option available is for the local councils to rezone the land to ensure that it is preserved regardless of who buys it or occupies it. I will support the local council in doing that.

I acknowledge in passing that both the Warringah and Ku-ring-gai councils have been tremendously supportive. I acknowledge also that the Federal member for Bradfield, Brendan Nelson, has been supportive in making representations, following
Page 228
the lack of success with the land swap negotiations, to the Federal Minister for the Environment, Senator Robert Hill. That was done as a last resort to try to obtain funding to preserve the land. Potential purchasers of this land need to be aware of community opposition. An example of community attitude locally is the Ardel site at the Allambie Heights development.

Over the past seven years, the developer has been unsuccessful with the proposed development because of community opposition. Any prospective purchaser of lots situated on Mona Vale Road will go through the same hoops and cross the same hurdles. A prospective purchaser will have to fight every inch of the way. The community will not stand by and let this sensitive area be developed. As far as the community is concerned, this land it should be quarantined from developments and preserved as native bush land. The approach taken by the land council is extraordinarily disappointing in the eyes of the local community. As a demonstration of its concern for bush land preservation, its actions border on intransigence.

I wish to allude briefly to the history of the Racial Discrimination Act because it is significant. The land council was entitled to claim the land under the 1983 Act, which also provided for a 7.5 per cent hypothecation of land tax to be transferred to land councils statewide over the past 15 years and which has amounted to approximately $520 million over that period. The land council sought custodianship of the land under provisions of the Act which related to kinship with the land and a spiritual connection with native land.

It would appear that the non-Aboriginal population of Warringah has the greater kinship and spiritual connection with native bushland. Although I find it impossible to understand the land council’s environmental objections, it needs to be understood that the land council in the Warringah area owns not only these portions of land but also approximately 400 hectares of land, some of which has already been sold - although it is equally environmentally sensitive as is the land to which I have been referring. Nevertheless, if the land council so chooses, the land is potentially saleable.

My experience with the land council has not been good. I make it clear that in 1993 I sought to support the land council’s claims in relation to approximately 50 portions of land in the Oxford Falls area. I wanted the land to be protected and in some way incorporated into the Garigal National Park. I approached the land council, which indicated to me that if I could facilitate granting of the claims, it would be prepared to negotiate on the incorporation of that land into the Garigal National Park. I kept my side of the deal and approached the then land Minister. He acceded to my request and the land claims were granted.

Subsequently I approached the land council to discuss incorporation in some way of that land into the Garigal National Park to acknowledge its environmental significance. The response from the chairman of the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council, Jenny Munro, was, "I’m not going to talk to any white politicians about Aboriginal land." Over the seven years that I have been a member of Parliament, I have received no greater offensive comment than that. She reneged on an in-principle agreement to talk about the land’s incorporation. Since that time, I have had no faith and no trust in the land council. Its activity over past weeks has only reinforced my view.

Another experience I had with the land council was when it sought to claim portions of Crown land that it had become aware of as recently as a year or so ago. A local disability charity organisation was seeking to develop the land. The land council issued a claim in respect of that land and caused a delay of approximately nine months in the project, which resulted in additional costs of tens of thousands of dollars to be borne by that charitable organisation. I believe that occurred simply because the vacant portion of Crown land came to the land council’s attention. [Extension of time agreed to.]

This episode demonstrates that the approach of the Aboriginal land councils is not governed by a desire for preservation, but substantially by a desire to obtain ownership of as much Crown land as possible. I have no problem with the Aboriginal land councils’ ownership of native bushland. But when, in obtaining land, they ignore the needs and desires of local organisations and the community, they are at odds with the interests of the wider community. Sadly, the acquisition of land by the local Aboriginal land council is seen by many members of the local community in the northern areas of Sydney as reminiscent of children in a toy shop: they go in, grab whatever they can, do not share, and, when they have finished, dispose of their acquisitions at will.

At a time when we are talking about Aboriginal reconciliation, it has to be a two-way street. There is a need for both sides to appreciate the values, cultural interests and aspirations of both Aboriginal indigenous Australians and non-indigenous Australians. I have not seen sufficient indications from groups such as the Metropolitan
Page 229
Local Aboriginal Land Council - and I accept that council is not representative of all land councils - to demonstrate that they wish to acknowledge the desires and concerns of non-Aboriginal Australians.

There are problems within the existing Act that need to be remedied. I do not believe that land claims for significant environmental parcels of land ought to be granted. Where land has significant value, particularly as a national park, clearly that should be sufficient grounds for land claims to be refused. That was the problem with the two portions of land I am referring to. Arguably, those portions of land were illegally or illegitimately granted in the first place. I was advised last night by a member of the Davidson Park Trust, which was previously responsible for the land on what is now the Garigal side of the catchment, that as early as 1974 a resolution and proclamation was made that this portion of land, then Crown land, should be preserved and incorporated into the surrounding bushland. Despite efforts on the part of the trust, that proposal was not successful.

A clearly identified purpose for the land and community benefit were not taken into account in the granting of the land claim. Even worse, at the time of the granting of the claim in approximately 1997, the local council, Warringah Council, was not notified. A vital question needs to be answered as to whether the claims for the two portions of land were legitimately granted by the local land council. The local community will not rest. If the land council proceeds with a sale of the land at auction next Tuesday evening, which appears likely, any prospective purchaser should be put on notice that I, the local community and the local council will not rest in a fight against clearing or developing the land.

According to the latest Valuer-General’s valuation, the land has an unimproved capital value of $1.2 million. Any purchaser who pays more than that amount, or any seller who expects to receive more, will be dragged through every hoop and across every hurdle. They will suffer numerous protests and every possible difficulty will be put in their path. I will seek support both in the House and from the local council for the land to be rezoned and preserved.

I will seek support from all three levels of government for funding to acquire the land to ensure that it is preserved in its native state as part of the two respective national parks. In conclusion, I express my great disappointment and sadness that the significance of the land has not been acknowledged by either the Premier or the Minister for the Environment and translated into a desire and preparedness to commit funding for the purchase of the land. No doubt the money could be found, but there is no willingness or commitment on the part of the Premier to preserve Sydney’s urban bushland.

Mrs BEAMER (Mulgoa) [11.04 a.m.]: I endorse the Government’s program for this session as set out by His Excellency the Governor in the other place. With the new millennium and post-Olympics era approaching, the Government is faced with many challenges. As was clear from the Governor’s speech, these challenges have to be met by the implementation of programs. One of the greatest and most important challenges the Government faces is on the drug issue. As the Governor said, the Drug Summit held last session was valuable in highlighting the complexity of this issue and the fact that there is no single answer. The community must work together to find long-term solutions to this problem. Recognising this, the Government will spend $118 million on drug and alcohol services, almost double the amount that was spent in 1995.

The drug and alcohol issue affects my local community. The only methadone clinic under the Wentworth Area Health Service operates in my electorate, and has more than 250 clients. Over the years of its operation a great deal of concern has been expressed about the site in Queen Street, St Marys. Clients congregate around the site, which is situated close to many shops. Consequently, the Wentworth Area Health Service recently lodged a development application with Penrith City Council in a bid to relocate to a site in Werrington.

The new site will offer not only a methadone clinic but also counselling and rehabilitation services, which are desperately needed in western Sydney. This area is chronically underserviced by counselling and rehabilitation assistance for drug and alcohol problems. There are no detoxification units in the area. I look forward to the services being expanded by the Government. My community has a great many problems with these issues, particularly the alcohol issue. The community is severely disadvantaged by not having detoxification beds in the area.

However, the location of the new methadone clinic has caused concern. The provision of such services raises emotive issues. We have to work closely with the local community and safeguard the standards of other people in the vicinity of the methadone clinic. The program can be successful only with community support and with a well-run clinic that is monitored by the Department of Health.
Page 230
Privately run clinics dispense more methadone per person than government-run clinics and their rehabilitation levels are inferior. These issues have to be addressed by the Department of Health when it examines privately run methadone clinics. I hope the community considers the proposal with an open mind, because drug addiction affects us all, particularly in the area of crime.

Crime is one of the major areas in which our community feels the effects of drug addiction. With that in mind, I look forward to the Government introducing plans to build a new police station at St Marys. The current St Marys police station does not have holding cells, is made up of demountable buildings and is grossly inadequate to service its community. In the last election campaign I was delighted that the Minister for Police visited my electorate and inspected a new site for a police station. I look forward to accompanying the Minister when he tells the Treasurer about the wonderful proposal. This good outcome for St Marys will allow the local police to operate in the most effective manner.

As the Governor said in his speech, we need more police and smarter policing. If a police station in my local area has no holding cells police officers have to travel to St Marys or Mount Druitt in order to question alleged offenders. That takes valuable time, which could be spent policing in the local area. I take this opportunity to commend our local area commander, Paul Carey, and his police officers. They do a fine job, and make the local community feel safer. I thank my local police for their diligence in looking after my constituents.

This is an exciting time for the city of Sydney and the State. We are looking forward to the Olympics. It is imperative that the Government has a program which goes beyond the Olympics. It is imperative that we strive to maintain the lowest level of unemployment in Australia. The Government’s post-2000 jobs plan will ensure that we have the best economy in Australia for some time to come. Five projects alone listed under the plan total almost $3.9 billion, or 173 per cent of the Olympics infrastructure program.

As part of the post-2000 job plan the Government is also encouraging people in western Sydney to use public transport. The construction of 90 kilometres of bus-only transit ways will cost $761 million over the next 10 years. That is 34 per cent of the capital works budget. It is imperative to encourage people in my electorate to use public transport. My electorate, which is located in the South Creek valley, has some of the worst pollution readings in Sydney. The valley traps air from the whole of Sydney, and most of that air is polluted. If public transport is utilised effectively, it will solve the problems of congestion and air pollution. Air quality in the South Creek area is the subject of constant discussion in my electorate.

Also important, of course, are the massive employment projects in western Sydney. The Boral employment and residential development project at Greystanes is worth $600 million. It represents 27 per cent of the capital works program and will generate more than 10,000 jobs over the next 10 to 15 years. The Sungei Way group’s high-technology business park, adjacent to Australia’s Wonderland, is worth $500 million. That represents 22 per cent of the capital works program and will create 5,000 jobs over the next 10 to 15 years.

Those two projects will generate 15,000 jobs close to my electorate and will be a valuable boost to the western Sydney economy. They are genuine jobs for my constituents and will not come at the expense of clean air and a good night’s sleep. Badgerys Creek airport hangs as a pall over my electorate. The environmental impact statement for Badgerys Creek airport suggests that 19,000 jobs will be created. My electorate will appreciate the 15,000 jobs created by the two infrastructure programs in western Sydney more than the 19,000 jobs created by the Badgerys Creek airport.

If the Federal Government goes ahead with the Badgerys Creek airport, it will be one huge white elephant. It will be $5 billion worth of wasted infrastructure. The Federal Government has no vision. It cannot tell the people of my electorate that it will be of any advantage to them. My constituents want genuine jobs, not jobs at the expense of their air quality or lifestyle, or jobs created by the imposition of noisy planes which will wake them up in the middle of the night. They do not want to have to stop their children’s lessons while the planes fly overhead.

Members representing country electorates continually talk about their constituents being disadvantaged and being the first to be pushed out of Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport. People who live in areas surrounding Kingsford-Smith airport will get more noise from jumbo jets, with no relief from small aircraft. When they call for an airport at Badgerys Creek they are calling for people in those areas to be subjected to far more noise.

While the Federal Government continues to make life difficult for families in western Sydney, I am pleased that the State Government continues to
Page 231
look after them. The Government has a proven track record of providing the best health services for the people of this State, and that will continue. This year alone the Government allocated $6.9 billion for recurrent health expenses and a further $449 million will be invested in new health and hospital assets. Much of this funding will directly benefit my constituents, with the expansion of emergency and critical care services at Nepean Hospital.

The women and children’s health building at Nepean Hospital will be a great asset to the families of western Sydney. The place in which I bore my five children was inadequate and out of date. It was with a great deal of delight that the Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for Women saw that building ripped apart to allow the new building to be constructed, at a cost of $40 million. The project will provide the best neonatal intensive care services and birthing centre. With the near completion of stage two of the redevelopment of Nepean Hospital, the people of western Sydney will soon have the world-class health facility that they deserve. Last year saw the completion of the food preparation centre and the opening of the oncology unit at Nepean Hospital, and expansion is continuing. In the past the people of western Sydney were grossly underserviced in health services.

By looking after our children, the Government is also taking the first step in looking after tomorrow’s families. Young people of western Sydney are currently being provided with opportunities they have never before received. An amount of $87.3 million has been allocated for literacy and numeracy programs, while $390 million will be spent over the next four years on new and replacement computers, cabling and additional Internet connections to schools. I had the pleasure of seeing fine young students at one of the schools in my electorate show the Premier how much they use their computers as a tool for learning. The computers will ensure that our children are well prepared to face the challenges of the new millennium. A further $19.4 million will be spent on adult and community education to ensure that adults are not left behind and that they fulfil their potential.

The Government is looking after families, especially people who have just had their first child. In looking after youngsters we enable families to stay together in a way that will be productive for the whole community. As the Minister announced last week, education programs that are available to children in preschool facilities and to children whose mothers look after them at home or whose carer is someone else are an investment that will pay huge dividends, not in the short term but in the long term.

Every dollar that is spent on a child in the age group 0-5 years is a saving of at least $7 in the age group 10-15 years. It is incumbent on governments to stop thinking about the four-year term, to stop thinking about how to get the greatest return in the short term. We should start thinking about long-term programs that will enable us to better look after families. During the Drug Summit the group with which I was involved talked about children in the age group 0-3 years. Some people in the prevention group questioned why we were putting emphasis on children in those age groups. Those three years of a child’s development are critical, as they have much to do with what occurs to that child in the teenage years and in adulthood.

When one talks to people such as Professor Vinpani, who addressed the Drug Summit, it is frightening to realise that some parents do not understand that children feel the stresses and strains that their parents have during those first three years; that the stresses and strains that they think their children will forget in fact become a legacy for life for some of them. Professor Vinpani said that brain development in children up to three years of age was greatly impeded by a lack of nurturing. If we manage, through the foundation for new babies, to reach families in crisis at that early stage and to prevent potential problems, we will have had a long-term impact on the lives of many people.

Perhaps it will mean that in the future we will have declining delinquency rates, declining child crime rates and declining drug use. We will be able to look forward to being a nurturing society that allows families to raise their children with prospects they have not seen before. I applaud the Government for its initiative of providing programs for early childhood education. It is a great step forward. I am pleased that early education programs will be available not only to children in formal child care but also to all parents and to those families in which the primary carer is the mother, the grandparent or an aunt.

I have heard some criticism of the program. Some people have said that the program will not be delivered by trained people. Mothers and fathers are training themselves in child care from the time they have their first child. They teach their children how to talk and they help and guide their children through the first steps. They help their children with basic things like counting, the alphabet, et cetera. This program will enhance the ability of parents to deliver formal structures in a way that children can clearly understand. I commend to the House the Government’s program as outlined in the other place. It shows that we are a government with vision and a government that has the foresight to see past the
Page 232
next four years and into the future. It is particularly gratifying that the people of western Sydney will gain much from the Government showing an interest in their concerns and future prospects.

Mr ROZZOLI (Hawkesbury) [11.24 a.m.]: It is my pleasure to participate in this Address-in-Reply debate. I congratulate the Government on holding a formal opening of Parliament so that we could have an Address-in-Reply debate. This debate gives honourable members an opportunity to canvass a number of matters in the Governor’s speech as well as matters that they may think should have been in the Governor’s speech but were not. This is an important debate in the parliamentary year. I shall comment on a number of matters raised by the Governor in his speech.

The Governor referred to the Drug Summit. The Drug Summit was an interesting and worthwhile Government initiative, although I believe that it was not conducted in a manner that provided the best outcome possible from collecting together such an interesting and informed group of people - including a number of people who were interested and needed to be informed on the subject matter of the debate. I would prefer to have seen the summit process extended over a longer period to allow the working groups, perhaps after initiation of the program, to meet over a period of weeks or even months to work up in greater detail - and to have costed out in the process of working up that detail - the initiatives that eventually formed the basis of the recommendations of those groups.

While the Drug Summit was an interesting exercise in focusing attention, I fear that because it was telescoped into one week it was a blip on the horizon which then passed equally as rapidly from the minds of people who should be focusing on this most serious problem that our community faces. I welcome the initiatives introduced by the Government since the Drug Summit. However, those initiatives are still extremely limited. While the Government seems to have allocated a large amount of funding, it is still nowhere near enough.

[Debate interrupted.]

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield - Minister for Police) [11.28 a.m.], by leave: I move:

That Standing and Sessional Orders be suspended to permit the consideration of 16 private members’ statements following the adjournment of the Address-in-Reply debate.

At the conclusion of the honourable member’s speech the House will deal with private members’ statements that should have been dealt with yesterday.

Motion agreed to.

[Debate resumed.]

Mr ROZZOLI: As I said last night in another debate, it is not so much the amount of money that is allocated for these programs; it is the efficacy of the program outcomes that counts. The Government must institute strict accounting for its programs and expenditure on those programs because it must drive the dollars as efficiently as possible to deliver on-the-ground benefits in that area. We need to maintain the focus of the community’s attention on drug-related matters and ensure that the public understands that at the end of the day minimising the harm that drug abuse does to the community is the most significant outcome we can achieve. It is not an area for grandstanding. We should not preach - I use that word in the broad sense - to the community about the evils of drug abuse; we should get down to the essential elements of treating people who are suffering from substance abuse.

I briefly pick up the comments of the honourable member for Mulgoa about the problem as it affects very small children. Early intervention is essential. In the life of most drug-addicted persons there are a number of windows of opportunity when they seek to break from their addiction. The problem in the current programs of drug treatment is that we often close the door on these persons when they reach out for help. We must overcome that problem in the initiatives that we adopt.

There is a long way to go in addressing the drug addiction problems in our society. Drug addiction is still accelerating. Many things are still not understood. For example, it is not simply the smoking of cannabis that is causing harm but the practices allied with it that create problems by introducing toxins into people’s systems. The great harm they do is identified as being harm caused by cannabis but it is actually caused by the toxins associated with the method by which the cannabis is ingested. Education in this regard is needed. There is a need for attention to detail and reaching out to get the community to understand the nature of the problem.

Page 233

I turn to the problems in the Police Service. There is no doubt that the Government has focused a lot of attention on providing better policing, a more honest police force of maximum integrity, but on the ground we are not getting the full effect desired. The capacity of police officers to perform their duties is being curtailed. Because I have a widespread electorate I represent a number of police districts, and they all have domestic violence officers. In most communities there is enough domestic violence to keep one domestic violence officer working full time. Those officers are being taken off their domestic violence duties and put on to general duties. They are struggling to perform their domestic violence role while coping with the shortfall in manpower at their station in regard to general duties.

Whilst it is good, as outlined in the Governor’s Speech and in the Government’s program, that initiatives are being taken in policing, major areas in policing are failing to deliver on the ground the services which the community needs. Unfortunately, society appears to be becoming more violent, aggressive and prone to criminality. I believe it is probably allied to the first point I spoke about, which is the drug problem. It is exacerbating the problem, nevertheless the problem is there and we have to become smarter, more efficient, more capable and more directional in how we approach these problems if we are to overcome the difficulties.

The Governor mentioned in his Speech road and transport initiatives. I could not let this opportunity pass without making brief reference to Windsor Road. The Parliamentary Secretary for Roads, who is at the table, was there when I raised this matter in a private member’s statement. She wrote to me only recently outlining initiatives the Government said it was taking with regard to Windsor Road. A major announcement was made in the last week or so about $200 million being spent on Windsor Road over the next 10 years. But the press release said nothing more than we already knew. It is a classic tactic of the Government to rebadge and re-issue initiatives which have been stated over and over again. The great fanfare of trumpeting gave all credit to my colleagues from Riverstone and Londonderry, denying all the work by several other members in the area.

Approximately one life is being lost on Windsor Road every two weeks. There has been an extraordinary upsurge in the number of deaths and injuries - with property damage and disruption - on Windsor Road. I seriously plead with the Government to get down to the nitty-gritty of the problem on Windsor Road and to provide funds in advance of those mentioned in the press release so that remedial work can be done to introduce safety measures to preserve life and prevent property damage and disruption as soon as possible.

I realise that we will not be able to suddenly wave the magic wand and fix the road overnight, but we could at least be programming the early construction of work at various intersections and at sections of the road where there are major blockages placing the travelling public in danger every day of the week. Proof of that danger is staring us in the face day after day. If Windsor Road is not fixed up for 10 years, at the present rate of loss of life it will cost 80 to 100 lives simply because we have not put the resources into fixing the problem sooner. By road building standards the amount of money we seek is not great.

I now move to the Governor’s reference to reforms to ensure the sustainability of the WorkCover scheme. The problems are immense. The burden on the community continues to increase. I would be the first to agree that the problems faced by any government in reining in the cost of the WorkCover scheme are enormous. The challenge is great but, as in so many areas of the Government’s administration, the Government is prone to pay lip-service to the need to do something but does very little to address the problem. As in so many other areas, there is a lack of consultation with the real stakeholders. The Workers Compensation Advisory Council is made up of a very restricted number of stakeholders. Unless the consultative process takes in a much larger number of stakeholders we will never get on top of the problem.

Only in the last day I wrote to the Attorney General pointing out the additional expenses loaded onto litigants and therefore the workers compensation scheme as a result of the way court listings are administered. In the performance audit report of the Auditor-General - one of the last he issued before he retired - this very problem was enunciated, supporting everything that I said in my representations to the Attorney General.

Even if that problem can be remedied, it will not solve all of the difficulties relating to the cost blowout in workers compensation. The real cost burden comes not only from the size of claims and the compensation that is paid to injured parties but from the immense waste of money on the administration of the system. Spending money on administration rather than on those who should benefit from the scheme denies benefits to those who are genuinely injured and wastes money that
Page 234
could be well used in other areas to assist the people honourable members are charged with representing.

I should make brief reference to the Government’s Families First initiative, which I believe to be an excellent program aimed at early intervention and assistance to young families. I commend to the Government a submission that has been placed recently before the Families First program by the Living IN CommunitieS program [LINCS] in the Hawkesbury area. The LINCS program has been operating for several years and has developed an enviable record for the manner in which it delivers services to mothers of newborn babies. The organisation offers assistance to families to help them to remain at a maximum level of functioning.

Those involved with the LINCS program have a great deal of experience in training people, both professionals and volunteers, who are an essential part of the early intervention program. The thrust of the submission to the Families First program is to fund through the Hawkesbury LINCS program a training scheme for others in the State. At meetings held with practitioners in the field one thing that has been raised time and again is the lack of training programs. The Hawkesbury electorate has an excellent training module which it is prepared to administer on behalf of other groups in the State. I am sure that will be welcomed. The module is not overly expensive, and I urge the Government to give favourable consideration to that program with a view to assisting a much wider range of people involved in administering the Families First program.

Finally I should mention briefly the pollution problems in the Hawkesbury electorate. The honourable member for Mulgoa mentioned the pollution of South Creek, probably the most polluted tributary of the Hawkesbury-Nepean river system and one of the most polluted waterways in New South Wales. I urge the Government to give immediate attention to this waterway. I regret that no mention is made of it in the Governor’s Speech. I have raised the matter on numerous occasions, but no-one has done anything about it. The Government should introduce a backlog sewerage program to maintain clean waterways in the State. The Hawkesbury electorate has a scheme called the Three Town Sewerage program, which deals with the sewerage system in the villages of Glossodia, Freemans Reach and Wilberforce.

That scheme has passed all environmental tests, but additional funding is required from the Government to accelerate the program, as it is too expensive to expect those who are beneficiaries of the scheme to meet the full costs. That has been acknowledged, and I understand that Sydney Water is considering making a submission to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] requesting a small incremental increase in water and sewerage charges across the whole of its jurisdiction. That will enable the implementation of backlog sewerage programs.

Great strides have been made in the improvement of the health of the Hawkesbury-Nepean catchment area through the activities of the Hawkesbury-Nepean Catchment Management Trust, of which I had the privilege of being the Deputy-Chairman for its first five years and I thank the Government for reappointing me recently for a further five years. I will continue to give my full attention to that trust. I spend approximate 20 hours a week on trust business and it is one of the great joys and interests of my life.

It is essential that resources be established in critical areas to enable us to deliver on solutions to the major problems that remain in relation to the pollution of waterways and the upgrading of major sewage treatment plants to a higher degree of treatment than is available at present. Greater effort must be made to pick up the backlog in sewerage works and to sewer intense areas such as caravan parks and tourist developments to ensure a high level of treatment of effluent from those areas. That is important for the ongoing welfare and amenity of the Hawkesbury-Nepean rivers system.

Debate adjourned on motion by Ms Meagher.

Pursuant to resolution private members’ statements taken forthwith.

Mr BARTLETT (Port Stephens) [11.45 a.m.]: A number of requests have been made to me and to my electorate office regarding problems being faced by six of my constituents in relation to the Securities Industries Act of 1997. These constituents held licences under the Act, but the licences were not renewed in 1999 because of convictions which, in some cases, appear to be minor and date back to the early 1990s. In one case the penalty involved was a fine of $150 and $30 compensation and in another instance an apprehended violence order was issued.

Under section 16 (1) (a) of the Act stealing is an offence which requires the commissioner to
Page 235
refuse a licence or to disqualify a licence if the offence has occurred within 10 years of the licence being granted. These relatively minor matters have now resulted in family men being unable to ply their trade as locksmiths or security guards as they have had their licences forfeited under the Act. The only option available to my constituents was to appeal to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. Unfortunately, it is impossible for the tribunal to consider any subjective elements, such as the degree of seriousness of the offence. No matter how minor the incident, as subjective matters cannot be taken into account the decision not to grant a licence holds good.

A resident from Medowie, for example, was the coach of a local football team. He went away on a weekend to an end-of-season function and took responsibility for one of his players who damaged a little box of pot plants. As he was the coach and no-one would admit to being responsible for the incident, he paid the fine. That occurred in 1991 and now prevents him from gaining a licence. A locksmith from my electorate who has four children had an apprehended violence order taken out on him in the early 1990s and can no longer ply his trade. A young man told my electorate office staff that he had been in trouble with the law but had managed to turn his life around. He is devastated because as a result of his earlier problems with the law he can no longer ply his trade.

The Act prevents the commissioner and the appeal judge from considering any subjective elements. Even the judge who has the obligation of reviewing these decisions is precluded from considering matters of a subjective nature. The Act has affected many people and has resulted in the commissioner and the tribunal being forced to ignore the needs of constituents with minor offences. This has had a profound effect on the livelihood of many people. The legislation has a very strong retrospective element. An offence committed 10 years ago, no matter how minor, can be taken into account to prohibit a person from being granted a licence and thus earning a livelihood and gaining stable employment.

In its present form the law is harsh, and I seek a review of section 16 of the Security Industries Act 1997 as it allows no discretion. I request that in the meantime interim licences be issued to applicants asking for reviews so that they can continue to ply their trade. Section 16 of the Act makes it mandatory to refuse an appeal. Subjective matters cannot be taken into account; if there has been a conviction of any sort the commissioner must refuse an application for a licence. Judge O’Connor, in one of his decisions on this matter, said:

I certainly recommend to the Government that there be some reconsideration of the way in which the scheme is currently structured.

I agree with that comment, and I ask the Minister for Police to revisit the issue and consider issuing interim licences to those requesting reviews.

Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle - Parliamentary Secretary) [11.50 a.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Port Stephens for his contribution and commend him for his obvious concern for his constituents and the plight in which they find themselves. The honourable member may be aware that when the Government introduced the Security Industries Act 1997 the Minister for Police made a commitment to review the Act after 12 months. The Minister has appointed me to chair that review. Advertisements were placed in major newspapers and industry magazines advising of the review and calling for submissions. I also intend to write to all major stakeholders, including industry associations, industry representatives and the relevant unions, inviting them to attend hearings and present their concerns about the Act. Those steps were taken to ensure that those with an interest in the Act were able to participate in the review. I assure the honourable member for Port Stephens that the issues he has raised will be included in the review of the Act.

Ms SEATON (Southern Highlands) [11.52 a.m.]: First I welcome to the Parliament the students, parents and teachers from Southern Highlands Christian School. It pleases me to have them visit Parliament House, and I look forward to showing them around the building. I speak about the need to develop and improve the existing facilities at Picton Public School. It is an excellent school, which has an active parents and citizens association led by Mrs Tyler, whom I congratulate. I have had several meetings with Mrs Tyler, who is very keen to develop a master plan for the future construction of facilities at the school, which has facilities that are historic, to say the least. I refer particularly to its wooden demountable classrooms, which have been in use for many decades and are in need of an upgrade.

The school is in urgent need of a larger hall, as the existing hall is completely inadequate for the needs of the school. I visited the school on a day when band practice was taking place in the hall. All of the children in the band were squashed into the hall, doing a great job producing great music. I am sure the honourable member for Camden, who is in the Chamber, would know about the great band at
Page 236
Picton Public School. I am sure anyone who attended the School Music Festival at Picton High School recently night to hear the music of schools from all around my electorate, particularly those from the Wollondilly area, would agree that the Picton Public School band produces a great sound.

The 18 classes at the school are housed in four brick, pre-1920 buildings, four other classrooms, a special education classroom, and a computer laboratory. The school’s current enrolment of 462 students means that it almost needs one more demountable classroom. I believe that the school’s enrolment numbers strengthen the case for permanent classroom facilities as well as the new hall. The school has an excellent new library. Unfortunately its location is leas than ideal. There are four wooden demountable classrooms and a small hall, as I have already mentioned, which accommodates only two grades at the one time and is extremely cold in winter and extremely hot in summer.

The school has five metal demountable classrooms. The administration block, a charming historic building on the school grounds, includes the school office, a duplicating room, a clinic/sick bay and the principal’s office. That building is inadequate for the administrative and formal meeting needs of the school. There is no accommodation for the school counsellor, the support teacher for those with learning difficulties, the reading recovery teacher, integration aides, or the relief from face-to-face teacher. The school has a canteen. The toilets have been on the list to be upgraded for two years and desperately need renovation. There is also a very small playground area.

This excellent school does a great job with the facilities that it has, but it desperately needs more. The population of the Wollondilly and Picton areas is increasing and the number of primary-age children is increasing. Adequate provision must be made for future facilities. One opportunity to do so came up two weeks ago, and I urge the Minister to take advantage of it. The house next door to the school became available for sale. I have joined the parents and citizens association and the principal of the school in making representations to the Minister for the urgent purchase of the land and residence. It is extremely important that we take the opportunity - and it is perhaps a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity - to acquire the property now. Opportunities of that sort do not present themselves very often.

The school is land-locked by two roads; it is on a difficult, triangular-shaped site. I also point out to the Minister that if this land is purchased it might well result in a less expensive solution to the problem of the long-term provision of better and permanent facilities at the school. If the school has that extra space and is able to come up with a better master plan, it may well be that what has to be done at the school will cost less than it would cost if we did not take advantage of this opportunity to purchase this piece of land. As I have said, Picton Public School is an excellent school. It has excellent staff and an deeply committed parents and citizens association. I urge the Minister to make provision in the education budget for these new facilities, to adopt the master plan when it is prepared, and to ensure that we are able to provide the best possible facilities for the future students at Picton Public School.

Ms ANDREWS (Peats) [11.57 a.m.]: I wish to outline to the House the plight of poultry farmers and their families on the Central Coast. The outbreak of the dreaded Newcastle disease in the Mangrove Mountain area in April 1999 caused much hardship among chicken growers and other members of the local community who are either directly or indirectly involved in the poultry industry. It is only now that the farms are being restocked, and it will be quite some time before the farmers derive any income from their usual livelihood.

On 21 June the New South Wales Government lodged an application for exceptional circumstances assistance on behalf of the poultry farmers on Mangrove Mountain. Almost three months later there has not been any positive response from the Federal Government. All it has done is set the application aside. This is despite the fact that the New South Wales Minister for Agriculture, the Federal member for Dobell, the Poultry Meat Group of the New South Wales Farmers Association and I have made repeated pleas to the Federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to process the application now to relieve the suffering of the Mangrove Mountain poultry farmers and their families. Those pleas have fallen on deaf ears.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the Newcastle disease outbreak at Mangrove Mountain meets the criteria laid down for exceptional circumstances assistance. The New South Wales Government’s application for exceptional circumstances assistance clearly demonstrated that the extent of the impact would last well beyond 12 months - in fact until at least 2001. The long-term financial impact of the disease on the poultry industry was clearly demonstrated in great detail in
Page 237
the application itself. In an appendix to the application almost 60 pages of case study data outlined the financial circumstances of 28 poultry farms.

It is unfair to expect farmers who have been affected by the Newcastle disease outbreak to wait 12 months before an application for exceptional circumstances assistance is considered. That is what is being suggested by the Federal Government and the bureaucrats in Canberra. In comparison, apple growers in Batlow, who were badly affected by the severe frost on 25 October 1998, were granted exceptional circumstances assistance on 7 July 1999, only a few months after their application was lodged and some eight months after the event itself.

This assistance to the apple growers was granted in recognition of the fact that the effects would be ongoing for some time, and most likely for more than 12 months. Why should the criteria suddenly be altered when it comes to the chicken growers? The golden rule of consistency does not appear to have been applied in this instance. There appears to be a lack of understanding by the Federal Minister and his colleagues of the situation relating to the poultry farmers’ dilemma. In the meantime, many of the poultry farmers are relying on food parcels to tide them over. Counselling services are being provided to a number of families through the Central Coast Area Health Service. The delay in processing the exceptional circumstances application is, I believe, a deliberate ploy by the Federal Government, based purely on financial grounds, to not provide the much-needed assistance to the poultry farmers of the Mangrove Mountain district.

The farmers and their families in the meantime are hurting, and they are hurting badly. The ex gratia payments, which were similar to unemployment benefits, have now ceased. As I mentioned earlier, many poultry farmers are relying on food parcels for their existence. These people are very proud, and it distresses them to have to rely on social security and donations of food for the first time in their lives. After all, I am speaking about people who have been very self-sufficient and who, through absolutely no fault of their own, have had to helplessly stand by and watch as their livelihoods were virtually removed from them in order to stem the outbreak of Newcastle disease. That outbreak was the worst recorded incident of an exotic disease outbreak among animals since the commencement of European history in Australia.

Only for the successful public campaign launched by the New South Wales Minister for Fair Trading calling on the banking institutions to be understanding of the poultry farmers and their inability to keep up their loan repayments, many of the poultry farmers would now be facing an even worse dilemma. The decision by the New South Wales Government to make low-interest loans available to the poultry farmers has also been of great assistance. The chicken growing and processing industry is a very important one for the Central Coast economy. It has been estimated that the 73 farms located within the controlled and restricted zones of the Newcastle disease outbreak provide employment for 1,150 people. I urge the Federal Government to show a little compassion and to approve the exceptional circumstances assistance for the Mangrove Mountain district poultry farmers without further delay.

Dr KERNOHAN (Camden) [12.02 p.m.]: This week Camden Public School is celebrating its sesquicentenary. In 1849 James and William Macarthur gave an acre of land on the corner of John and Mitchell streets, Camden, for a national school to be built. Currently, three of their direct descendants who live in the family home Camden Park, namely William, Victoria and George Macarthur-Stanham, are enrolled in years 4, 2 and kindergarten respectively. Other generations of the Macarthur family are also participating in these celebrations. Camden National School opened in temporary rented premises, Doust’s cottage on the site of today’s Camden High School, and Charles Elder was appointed teacher, with his wife Mary-Ann to assist him, and by 1850 there were 150 children enrolled.

The first permanent building on the current site was opened in 1851. It has been replaced twice since then, with major additions to the school complex. The school’s name has changed a number of times. Originally Camden National, it was changed to Camden Public in 1867; Camden Superior School in 1902, because senior classes were taught; and Camden Central School in 1944, when it provided high school classes to intermediate standard for pupils from surrounding primary schools. In 1956, when Camden High School opened, it reverted to primary status as Camden Public School, with 416 students and 10 teachers. Today, Camden Public School has its first female principal in 150 years, Dr Dawn Brien, with 463 students and a staff of 30.

Many people famous for various talents have attended Camden Public School, including Annette Macarthur-Onslow, author and illustrator, who won
Page 238
the Children’s Book Award in 1970; Mark Long, Australian representative softball pitcher; Sue-Ellen Fuller, Miss Australia 1998; and Professor Graeme Clark, eminent surgeon, who developed the cochlea ear implant for the hearing impaired. Coincidentally, Camden Public School’s youngest pupil today is a three-year-old enrolled in the school’s special classes for the hearing impaired. The esteem in which this school is held was indicated last Sunday - Fathers Day, 5 September - when over 2,000 people, including former pupils, principals, teachers and staff, registered at the reunion held at the school from 10.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. Former students came from as far afield as Perth, Townsville, Tasmania and New Zealand.

Not only recognised as a fine school by those who attended it daily, Camden Public School was accredited as a Centre of Excellence for Health and Physical Education from 1989 to 1994, and received the Australian Council for Health and Physical Education Award in 1997 for the most outstanding school program for health and physical education in New South Wales. The reunion, co-ordinated by Christine Parkin and Janice Taylor, and a number of other activities - including a school history which was co-ordinated by Cathy Bagley and Edwina Stannum - were planned by a sesquicentenary committee of 24, chaired by school council chairman Fred Whiteman, whose sons Edwin and Elliott are the fifth generation of Whitemans to attend the school.

A special school assembly of pupils, teachers, parents and VIP guests filled Camden Civic Centre at 10.00 a.m. on Monday 6 September. There a commemorative plaque from the Minister for Education was unveiled and a huge birthday cake was cut by the oldest former pupil attending, Marie Starr, aged 95, who was a pupil in 1910. She was aided by one of the youngest pupils, four-year-old Bradley Hancock-Kowe of the hearing impaired class. This segment was introduced by the 1999 girl school captain, Karen Grice, Marie’s great-granddaughter, while the boy school captain, John Matheson, spoke about a time capsule to be opened in 25 years time and again at the school’s bicentenary celebrations. Those attending the assembly returned to the school for the official opening of the long-awaited and much-needed new school library building. Celebrations continue this week, to terminate with a fete next Saturday. This is a very fitting celebration for one of the State’s oldest public schools - reports indicate it is the twelfth or thirteenth oldest school in New South Wales - which has served its local community so well for so long.

Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle - Parliamentary Secretary) [12.06 p.m.]: I wish to bring to the notice of the House the opening in Newcastle on Friday 3 September by the Premier of the convict lumber yard. That lumber yard is an important part of the industrial and social history of Newcastle. In fact, it is the foundation of Newcastle as a convict settlement in the early 1800s and of the development of one of the first industrial sites in Newcastle. This is a most important opening because it is the focal point of a final link in a whole range of Federal, State and local government funding that has brought focus to the historic nineteenth century landscape of Newcastle east and the central business district of Newcastle.

I mention the programs of the former Federal Government, with spending of some $5 million on the restoration of the Customs House, the stationmaster’s cottage and the paymaster’s cottage. The Newcastle foreshore project in the 1980s transformed an industrial site, the railway yards and the Zaara Street power station into a foreshore park that is absolutely first class and very much loved by the people of Newcastle. The transformation that is now occurring, with the private sector putting money into the redevelopment of inner city buildings, is very important.

I should mention the Irene Hall, Wheeler House, Cohen’s Warehouse and other inner city buildings. These are now being transformed into residential buildings. That is bringing population back to the inner city and making the inner city of Newcastle not only a residential but a first-class tourist area. Obviously, this was not always so. At one stage the site was proposed for a five-star hotel. That was violently opposed by the people of Newcastle. They filled the Town Hall to protest against that proposal. Opportunely, John Turner, a local historian, took his dog for a walk across the vacant site. The dog, in answer to a call of nature, revealed the convict brick.

Being a historian, John Turner recognised the relevance of the brick, and this resulted in a dig on the site by a whole range of enthusiastic Newcastle people. That dig revealed the first convict work site, a forge that went back to the establishment of settlement in the early 1800s. Since that time there has been ongoing planning by the Newcastle City Council, its heritage architects and planners. On Friday 3 September the Premier opened a wonderful interpretive centre. It shows, as does the Sydney
Page 239
Museum, the whole of the social and industrial fabric of early Newcastle. That was a momentous occasion. The centre is situated on a nationally significant site and is on the National Estate Register. The New South Wales Heritage Office has given $200,000 for interpretive works to be placed in the east end of Newcastle. Of that funding, $40,000 has been spent on interpretive plaques and statues to be erected on the site.

The Premier, through his Arts Ministry, gave $50,000 for local artists. The work they designed and fabricated was unveiled on the site that day in an impressive ceremony that involved not only the artists but also our local arts community in dance and music performances. It was a wonderful day for the city. I pay a compliment to the Federal Government for giving $250,000 under the national tourism development program, in recognition of the tourism potential of the attractions of Newcastle - our harbour, our beaches and our historical sites. The city has received a great deal of investment from State, Federal and local government. The recognition of Newcastle provides enormous tourism potential and promotes the city as a wonderful area to recreate and live.

Mr STONER (Oxley) [12.11 p.m.]: I wish to speak about the New South Wales Children’s Choir, which is performing in Sydney next week. Many schoolchildren from my electorate of Oxley will be participating in the performances and have looked forward to the event for many months. From the Nambucca district alone 43 children will travel from the mid-north coast to Sydney on Saturday 11 September to perform in the choir at a church on Sunday 12 September. In particular, the children have been eagerly anticipating singing on the steps of the Opera House on Monday 13 September. This performance was to be taped, and the children and their parents would be rightfully proud of their part in such a special recording.

However, they have now been told that the Opera House performance has been deferred until Wednesday 15 September to coincide with a date 12 months prior to the opening of the Sydney Olympics. They have been told that the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games [SOCOG] intervened to change the date to enable a link-up with Lausanne on Wednesday. That is fine and dandy for city children, but for country children the change to the schedule has rained on their parade. City children do not have a problem changing their schedule from Monday to Wednesday, but country families cannot afford an extra two days in Sydney because of a last-minute whim of SOCOG.

They already have to meet significant costs associated with the original schedule, such as travel costs from the mid-north coast and accommodation costs in Sydney. A minimal contribution of $25 per child was granted by the Government towards their considerable costs. School parents and citizens associations have been fundraising for months, but the limited funds raised by the local communities will not enable the children to stay any longer. The children will miss out on the taped performance on the steps of the Opera House on Wednesday because they have to go home. In an effort to appease the families involved, a consolation prize has been offered.

On Monday they can travel to Homebush, at their own expense, and participate in a recording of two songs. I am sorry, but two songs does not an album make. Naturally, the schoolchildren involved - who will come not only from the Oxley electorate but from many country areas - are bitterly disappointed. From my perspective, this is another Olympics related fiasco which again highlights the Government’s mismanagement of sensitive issues. It is another case of an insensitive Sydneycentric bureaucracy not being aware of, much less caring about, country needs. If the Government had a heart it would provide additional assistance for country children who are participating in the New South Wales Children’s Choir event to enable them to stay until Wednesday, so that they can continue to be a part of one of the most important events in their young lives.

Mr PRICE (Maitland) [12.16 p.m.]: I seek to highlight a problem associated with apprehended violence orders [AVOs] in my electorate. I preface my speech by saying that in the majority of cases AVOs are deservedly issued, and I believe that women are by and large the major sufferers. Occasionally there is a situation in which a male appears to have been badly treated in the way an AVO has been issued and sometimes enforced. I raise this issue on behalf of Mr David Rouse of Lennoxton Road, Vacy, who has unfortunately separated from his wife but is looking after his two children - one aged 12, who is the captain of Iona Public School, and the other aged 8 or 10. I understand that an older sibling is seeking work in Newcastle. Mr Rouse received advice at Paterson Police Station on 14 July that he had been summonsed to attend Belmont Local Court the next day - less than 24 hours notice was given.

Page 240

A complaint had been made to Belmont police on 9 July about an incident that allegedly occurred on 30 June. Paterson police received the summons on 12 July, and it took two days for the summons to get to Vacy. Mr Rouse is concerned that the delay may have been deliberate. I do not necessarily agree with his view, but the time span is too short to arrange independent legal representation. On his arrival at court Mr Rouse was asked by a police officer if he agreed with the terms of the AVO. He did not. Mr Rouse was advised that he could not have legal aid. He went to the chamber magistrate who, apparently, gave him very little advice. In the court the sitting magistrate made it clear that he did not support the case that Mr Rouse was trying to put forward. Mr Rouse claims that he was not advised of what was happening.

Mr Rouse has since discovered that he could have demanded a hearing in which his ex-wife would have had to prove her case. As he was not advised or given an opportunity, in his opinion, to seek advice, he signed a document that indicated he agreed to the terms and conditions of the AVO without a case having been proved. Under these circumstances Mr Rouse feels - and I think quite rightly - that whilst many groups are available to assist women, there appears to be no mechanism to assist men in court situations. Mr Rouse is doing the best he can for the family he has been left with. He is concerned about the attitude of the magistrate but he has to deal with that himself. I think better advice should have been available to him at the time and warrants should be delivered by the police within a reasonable time.

Mr Rouse is a self-employed businessman. He had to advise staff on his bricklaying team that he would not be available and that they would have to make their own way to work. It is his usual practice to pick them up. In such instances fairness and equity should prevail. I hope that the Minister for Police or the Parliamentary Secretary will forward my concerns to the Attorney General. I am concerned about the way the courts conduct themselves with regard to apprehended violence orders. I know the police are concerned about them. I hope that a review of the legislation and its application will be considered by the Attorney General and the Minister for Police to avoid similar representations being made to me.

Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle - Parliamentary Secretary) [12.21 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Maitland for bringing this matter before the House. I assure him that I will convey his concerns to the Attorney General. The Attorney General’s Department is currently conducting a review of apprehended violence orders, and obviously the police will work closely with this review. I am also advised that in the last budget the Government allocated $120,000 to the Judicial Commission to fund the training of magistrates. Obviously, the honourable member’s proposition expresses a need for the magistracy to receive some training. His constituent could refer this matter to the Judicial Commission. I again thank the honourable member for bringing this matter before the House and I will make sure that it is conveyed to the Attorney General.

Mr O’FARRELL (Ku-ring-gai - Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [12.22 p.m.]: Each year since 1950 on the first Sunday following Anzac Day a ceremonial march has occurred along the Pacific Highway, Gordon, between Ku-ring-ai Municipal Council’s Chambers and the Anglican Church of St John the Evangelist - a distance of some 500 metres. The march is part of the commemoration services for the 2/18th Battalion AIF Association. St Johns, Gordon, has effectively acted as a garrison church to that battalion since 1920. It houses two historic crosses - the Pozieres cross and one from Changi. The first formed of material found on the battleground, the second at that notorious prison camp. Both crosses testify to the bravery of those young Australians who fought for peace, liberty and democracy - those things that many of my generation take for granted.

I have enjoyed my association with members of the association who so willingly and bravely fought for this country. Their courage, commitment and continuing optimism are an annual source of inspiration to me. At this year’s commemoration after the wreath laying ceremony it was announced that the traditional march to St Johns would not occur because of a decision by local police which apparently related to staffing issues, traffic delays and abuse from motorists. The day after the march, 3 May, I wrote to the Minister for Police seeking a review of the decision. My letter, in part, stated:

At a time when many in the community, including the Premier, are urging a greater interest in our history, especially our military past, and attendances are up at remembrance services, I am surprised at the Police Service’s decision and I request that you review it.

In support I would argue that the actual inconvenience to north-bound traffic is slight given the actual march took less than fifteen minutes and, in any case, is inconsequential given the sacrifice made by members of the 18th Battalion in two World Wars.

Page 241

A week later I received a letter from Mr Paul Gemmell, President of the 2/18th Battalion AIF Association, also protesting the police decision. Mr Gemmell stated:

We feel very strongly that this special commemoration service should be allowed to proceed next Anzac Sunday, 30 April 2000 and thereafter. The service honours the hundreds of the fallen of the 18th Battalion AIF, lost mainly at Gallipoli and Pozieres in World War 1 and over a third of the 2/18th Battalion who lost their lives in World War 2 including 98 in our first major battle at Nithsdale estate Johore, Malaya, which was a severe Japanese defeat, and 152 men murdered by the Japanese in Sandakan and on the Sandakan-Ranua death march.

Mr Gemmell understandably added:

Surely it is not too much to expect that those who gave their lives for the freedom we enjoy, freedom to stage such traffic disrupting events as the gay Mardi Gras, Serbian protests, or various political marches on Parliament House, should be allowed this small annual peaceful, but very meaningful and very Australian commemoration march.

I used Mr Gemmell’s letter to again raise the matter with the Minister for Police. On 23 June the Minister replied and rejected my plea and that of the 2/18th Battalion AIF Association. His letter repeated the earlier arguments relating to traffic disruptions advanced to stop this year’s and future marches. I genuinely believe that that answer and the earlier decision are not only irreverent and disrespectful but incredibly miserable. They ignore the sacrifices made by members of the 18th Battalion and, if allowed to stand, will downgrade the importance of this commemoration service. Like many honourable members, I usually stand in this place at this time requesting improvements to road conditions and public transport infrastructure to help people to get to where they want to go more quickly and safely.

Today I have no hesitation in arguing that on this one Sunday of the year I believe traffic delays are justified. The commemoration service should take precedence over motorists. A small delay on this one day may help remind affected motorists of the sacrifices made by so many back then for us today. I simply do not believe that a short closure of one of the six lanes of the Pacific Highway, Gordon, is too great an ask given the contribution that members of the 18th Battalion have made to this country in two world wars. Like many in this House I have witnessed a welcome revival and interest in recent years, especially amongst our young people, in remembrance services. I am always astounded by the number of young children who attend dawn services at places such as Roseville and Hornsby.

I applaud, and will continue to applaud, the Premier’s efforts to ensure that the history and lessons of these conflicts are effectively taught within our schools. The events in our region today and in various parts of the world remind us of what was at stake in the conflicts in which so many Australians fought and died in World War I and World War II. I do not believe it is too much to ask that the traditional commemoration march along the Pacific Highway be restored. I again plead for the Minister of Police to respect tradition, to honour the sacrifices made in war and to help promote the continued commemoration efforts of the 18th Battalion AIF.

Mr ANDERSON (Londonderry) [12.27 p.m.]: Madam Acting-Speaker, I bring to the attention of the House a number of functions that have happened and will happen in our combined electorates. Last Friday evening I had the privilege of representing you at the crowning of the Veil of St Marys. Continuously for 24 years the St Marys community has celebrated the St Marys festival, a festival sponsored by Penrith City Council and the local community. The celebration last weekend was as successful as any that has been held in the previous 24 years. Firstly, the weather was absolutely perfect. The Minister for the Olympics should note that the Saturday and Sunday of that weekend were acknowledged as the driest in Sydney’s record, so perhaps the grand opening of the Olympics should be held on that date so that we are guaranteed a dry day. The people have committed themselves very diligently to the festival.

I offer my congratulations to Miss Robyn Wise, the chairman of the group, so ably supported by Mrs Billie Randall and Mr Alf Randall, who have held executive positions for the full 24 years. They are ably supported by Brian King, Sydney Glover, Norm Strain and Jan Bergin. Those same people who were working last Saturday to make this the outstanding success that it was were at the very first festival. The weather was just fantastic and the crowd was estimated to be 35,000 to 40,000. That bears testimony to the success of the festival. The number of street stalls by community groups was again a record. More groups took the opportunity to participate in this festival than ever before. Again, it bears testimony to the wonderful community spirit that exists in our joint electorates.

I hope that that community spirit continues into this weekend. I warn the honourable member for Tamworth that the wonderful Tamworth Country and Western Music Festival is under attack from the Sydney Country and Western Music Festival. The Sydney festival started last year in the electorate of
Page 242
St Marys and is continuing this year. The response to our first venture in this field has been twice as good this year. I have enjoyed the hospitality and entertainment provided by the people of Tamworth over many years. I enjoy country and western music, as do many others. When Joe MacManamon offered to hold a country and western music festival in Sydney and asked whether we would be interested in participating, obviously we said that we were interested.

Members opposite are welcome to come along with their 10-gallon hats and enjoy the entertainment next weekend. All this is testimony to the community spirit that exists in our joint electorates. The community wants to be part of these festivals; it certainly supports the festivals. The number of people who attended last Saturday and the number of bookings we have received for the many functions that will be held over the next weekend bear testimony to the fact that the Sydney Country and Western Music Festival is going from strength to strength.

The service clubs in my area have jumped in with two feet; they want to be part of the festival. For example, the official opening will be held at the Penrith Sporting and Cultural Club on Friday night. There will be participation by Rooty Hill RSL, the St Marys Band Club, the St Marys Leagues Club, the St Marys RSL Club and the St Marys Bowling Club. All the clubs want to be part of this wonderful festival. They are all keen to hold a function on their premises. We compliment them on their participation. I hope that this is just another example of the ongoing strength of western Sydney.

Mr OAKESHOTT (Port Macquarie) [12.32 p.m.]: All those who are involved in public education policy on the mid-north coast are working very hard to improve education. Therefore, it is extremely disappointing to see this new Government stamp its mark on TAFE services by making a range of cutbacks throughout New South Wales, especially at the North Coast Institute of TAFE. We are seeing a $67 million cut from the TAFE budget in the 1999-2000 financial year. That equates to 630 full-time jobs. That is a transfer of $30 million from the TAFE budget to the school budget.

Combine that with concern about student-teacher ratios being removed from all curriculum documents from July 1999 and course co-ordination hours being withdrawn from curriculum documents and it is not a pretty sight. Funding for the North Coast Institute of TAFE has been cut by $2.4 million. Recently I was told that that will lead to between 25 and 35 redundancies. Included in the cutbacks at the north coast institute is the loss, on 1 January 2000, of the Coolangatta showcase campus, which has been very successful in attracting Queensland students to the North Coast Institute of TAFE.

We will see cuts in job numbers, including management positions. The number of cluster director positions will reduce from six to three. The position of director educational development and planning at the Institute Support Office, Port Macquarie, has been cut. Teaching positions in the construction, transport, engineering, manufacturing and textile, clothing and footwear faculties will be cut. Teachers and class support staff in the above faculties and administrative staff at the Institute Support Office, Port Macquarie have been asked to express an interest in voluntary redundancy. Offers of voluntary redundancy may be made to teachers in all other faculties.

The Port Macquarie-Wauchope campus will lose a cluster director position with a salary of approximately $75,000. The position of director educational development and planning with a salary of about $75,000 has been cut. One administrative officer, who has a salary of approximately $35,000, will cease duty on 8 October. Letters inviting expressions of interest in voluntary redundancy have been sent to all teachers in the electrical trades, electronics, and clothing, textiles and footwear faculties at the Port Macquarie Campus. The salaries for those positions range from $43,000 to $50,000. Letters inviting expressions of interest in voluntary redundancy have been sent to the head teacher of building and construction at Wauchope campus, who receives a salary of about $56,000.

All these cuts will have an enormous impact on the local community. Residents and employees may have to travel significant distances between TAFE campuses to access vocational education and training in electrical trades, electronics, building and construction, and clothing, textiles and footwear as fewer courses will be offered locally. This is a cutback in services. Vocational opportunities in these industries are being reduced for school leavers. We will see bigger class sizes. Due to the loss of the skills and experience of full-time teachers, high-level diploma courses may have to be withdrawn. The advent of larger class sizes could result in a compromise on health and safety standards.

Support for students with special needs will be reduced. There will be a reduction in the number of permanent employees in the work force and an
Page 243
increase in casual employees. Services to regional New South Wales will be lost, resulting in the loss of money from the local community. This is the stamp of the new Government. The people of regional New South Wales must also accept the fact that New South Wales TAFE has been forced to spend $180,000 on purchasing Olympic Games tickets, accommodation and hospitality for clients and senior bureaucrats. One can see how well that has gone down in the current environment.

The Minister argues that the cost per student is higher in Victoria and Queensland. I ask the Minister where the rationalisation will stop and social justice will begin. Yesterday we had the same arguments and the same debate in relation to group homes. New South Wales is delivering some exciting programs relating to literacy and numeracy, youth at risk, juvenile justice and the Aboriginal community. These programs are intensive but they are also expensive. It is time the Government stopped making cutbacks to TAFE in our local area and thought about providing support and increased funding to our local community.

Mr NAGLE (Auburn) [12.37 p.m.]: Local council elections in New South Wales will be held next Saturday. I shall talk about the two councils that make up the famous seat of Auburn - Auburn Council and Bankstown City Council - and a few of the characters who have served on those councils, including Bankstown’s pride and joy, former Australian Prime Minister the Hon. Paul Keating. Counsellor Terry Keegan has now retired from Auburn Council. Terry and I have been an integral part of the Auburn area for a long time. Terry was elected to Auburn Council in 1968 and I was elected to Auburn Council in 1971. Terry and I have continually fought with each other since 1968.

In 1968 Terry was a Labor councillor and a prominent member of the left wing of the Labor Party. In 1972, for a reason I will not mention, Terry left the Labor Party and became an Independent councillor and an active supporter of the Liberal Party. As has been said, "The road to Damascus is very short." Although Terry and I argued with each other for some 30 years, Terry made an impact as a councillor and as the mayor of Auburn. He and Councillor Stan Hedges were the longest serving mayors in Auburn. As reported in a local newspaper, Terry said:

I’ve been through a lot of hard times, but they’ve been a lot of good times. I’ve met some wonderful people in our community.

Terry is 61 years of age and is retiring to Hawks Nest. I wish him all the best. Terry, Councillor David McGuire, Councillor Pat Tarlington, Auburn Town Planner, Eric Black, Councillor Charlie Noble and I went to see Tom Uren when he was the Minister for Local Government in the Whitlam Government. We persuaded him to create a big park in the centre of Sydney.

That became the Auburn Botanical Gardens. The local Review Pictorial reported Terry saying at the opening of the gardens on 11 September 1977 - two days from now it will be 22 years ago - that it was the jewel in his political crown. With other people he was an integral part of the establishment of the gardens, which are visited by thousands of people in my electorate. I wish Terry all the best in his retirement. Though we argued a lot and disagreed on many issues, he did work for local government in New South Wales.

Rhonda Donaldson was a Labor councillor for the past four years. She has now moved to the Richmond area, and I wish her well in her retirement. She performed very well. She is a very courageous lady who had to endure a lot of abuse by bodies involved in local government but she showed great tenacity and courage. I wish Rhonda, her husband, Anthony, and all her family the best. Emile Chantiri, a Liberal councillor, is also retiring. In his four years on council he served with distinction and I congratulate him.

I was a great supporter of Councillor Judy Jones in her first few years on the council but at the last mayoral election she exercised her democratic right not to vote. She could be described as an environmentalist or a green. When she and Councillor Erica Hockley exercised their right not to vote - my view is that people elected to council should vote on all issues - they handed the council up to local developers and real estate agents. That will be a bad mark against her name, but she too served the council well, did her job and worked hard for the people she represented.

From Bankstown council I say goodbye to Councillor Phil Lopez, who has served for a long time on Independent and Labor councils - a man of great courage and tenacity. I also wish Councillor Grant Lee and Councillor Helen Westward all the best next Saturday at the election. Paul Keating Park in Bankstown central honours the former Prime Minister. It is a credit to him, Councillor Ian Stromborg, Grant Lee, Helen Westwood and all the people who supported its establishment.

Page 244

Mr BROGDEN (Pittwater) [12.42 p.m.]: Since my election in May 1996 I have been very concerned about the lack of facilities for young people to have social outings at night. The northern peninsula, because of its later development in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, is not blessed with youth drop-in centres or a plethora of community halls. With the closure of the Rock Lily nightclub about two years ago the number of under-age dance facilities for young people went from two to one, the only other one being the Avalon Returned Services League Club, which on odd occasions will run an under-18s dance for kids in Pittwater.

There was a problem within the community of young people going from party to party on Saturday nights, often in groups of 200 to 300. This caused concern in the community. There were very few instances of vandalism or violence or other crime but parents had a genuine concern that there were very few things for the kids to do. Yet the community has the best beaches in Sydney, beautiful parkland, great sporting opportunities and huge sporting clubs - so many things for kids to do during the weekday and on weekends, but very little to do at night.

In league with the present Mayor of Pittwater, Councillor Patricia Giles, and the previous Deputy Mayor, Councillor Julie Hegarty, we went to the four local high schools - Barrenjoey High School, Pittwater High School, Narrabeen Sports High School and Mater Maria College - to talk directly to the students in groups large and small about what they wanted by way of opportunities for social activities, particularly on Friday nights and Saturday nights.

It was a very profitable experience. Kids at Pittwater wanted a variety of activities. They did not want a particular band or even bands or a disc jockey [DJ] but put forward a number of options. There were discussions about whether it was appropriate to have a function every Saturday or Friday night. In short, the conclusion was that the preference was for DJs, and sometimes bands once a month or once every other month. It was thought that holding events weekly would make them stale or boring and they would then not be patronised by young people. The admission price target decided was between $10 and $16.

In view of that we thought there was a need to go further. In the past year I have co-ordinated a series of meetings with school principals and presidents of parents and citizens associations, Councillor Julie Hegarty from Pittwater Council and the council’s social agency staff, in particular Fiona Winter. Last Thursday at an excellent meeting the group heard a presentation from a very impressive young South African boy who has been in Australia for two years, Nick Luitingh. He lives in Narrabeen and goes to St Ives High School. At the age of just 18 he has been running a series of exceptionally successful and profitable dances for young people in Mona Vale and Avalon.

My purpose in bringing together the group last week and some months ago was to access school halls for Nick and other promoters to use for social activities. We have only Mona Vale Memorial Hall and the Avalon Community Hall, which are adequate but not perfect. They are certainly not big enough. In contrast, Barrenjoey High School, Pittwater High School and Narrabeen Sports High School all have facilities that could be used effectively and efficiently for under-18 dances in Pittwater. Nick gave an excellent presentation and I am confident that, with the understanding that there are people in the community who will run successful and safe dances for under-18s, the schools will come on board and offer their halls as facilities that would be very useful to provide more opportunities for genuine social outlets for young people in Pittwater.

Mr CAMPBELL (Keira) [12.47 p.m.]: The weather outside shows that spring has sprung, and before we know it summer will be here. I take this opportunity to talk a little about the effort put into and the contribution made by surf life saving clubs in the Illawarra branch of the surf life saving movement. As well as being a sporting organisation it provides a community service and has a very strong volunteer component. There are 17 beaches in the Illawarra branch of the movement, eight of which are in the electorate of Keira, which I am proud to represent.

As part of my work as a local member I attended the presentation night of the Illawarra branch of the Surf Life Saving Association on 17 July this year as a guest of the branch - president Ken Sweeney, vice-president, Rob McKie and the director of life saving, Kevin Crick. They all have a long and dedicated commitment to the surf life saving movement at both club and branch level, and have put in some effort at the State centre.

On that evening I noted the strong support the surf life saving movement has from the corporate community in Wollongong and the Illawarra. The sponsors include: BHP, McDonalds, Westpac, the
Page 245
Registered Clubs Association, Dwyers, Sydney Water, Integral Energy and Wollongong City Council, which has had great leadership over the last eight years that will finish on Saturday, if I may sing my own praises, having been Lord Mayor for the last eight years. Other sponsors are Wave FM, a local radio station, the Joint Coal Board, Aceit - Gino Arcello is a great supporter of a lot of sports - and Coca-Cola.

Through their support of the association those sponsors made possible a number of presentations. I acknowledge that the Seventeenth BHP Patrol Efficiency competition was won by the Bellambi Surf Club, a small club that struggles to maintain sufficient members to survive and nevertheless makes a real contribution to water safety. The club has won four of the last five patrol efficiency competitions. That demonstrates the commitment of the volunteers.

The most outstanding patrol member award, called the BHP Medal, was won by Stephen Duggan, who is also a member of the Bellambi Surf Life Saving Club. The suburb of Bellambi has a very large public housing estate, about which I have spoken previously in a private member’s statement. Sydney Water sponsored the most improved club award, which went to Thirroul. Honourable members may be aware of two prominent iron men in the surf lifesaving club movement, Darren and Dean Mercer, who are members of the Thirroul club. A former Speaker of this House, the Hon. Laurie Kelly, is a life member of the Thirroul club.

The award for the most improved junior club went to Austinmer, whose members patrol a special and delicate beach in the far north of the branch area. Austinmer had not previously had a junior organisation and in one year worked extremely hard to establish its nippers club that will ensure the future strength of the club. Sydney Water also sponsored the Board of Lifesaving Control member of the year. A fellow called Ron Bradley, who has been associated with the surf life saving organisation in the Illawarra forever and a day, won the award.

Ron is a member of the Corrimal club and was a member of the famous march past team. I recall that he was the coach of a junior march past team when I was a member of the Corrimal Sandpipers. I shall not divulge how long ago that was. Ron Bradley now lives in the same street as I do. He is a humble person and could not believe that he had won the award. I extend my congratulations to him, particularly on his efforts over many years in the surf life saving movement.

As I said at the beginning, the Surf Life Saving Association across the country consists of a band of volunteers who work extremely hard to raise awareness of safety and put their lives on the line on occasions to carry out rescues on Australia’s beaches. In the summer of 1998-99, which was the period covered by this presentation night, not one life was lost on the Illawarra branch beaches whilst they were patrolled by members of the association. I extend my congratulations on that effort.

Mr WATKINS (Ryde - Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister for Sport and Recreation) [12.52 p.m.]: The honourable member has raised an important matter. His praise for the surf life saving movement is appropriate at this time when we are moving towards the swimming season and our attention is focused on safety on our beaches. The surf life saving movement is unique to this nation and is very much part of the Australian character. Members of the movement provide an excellent service for the hundreds of thousands of people who visit the State’s beaches, and in particular for visitors to this country, to ensure that they have a safe place in which to enjoy the surf.

The surf life saving movement carries out important work in educating Sydneysiders about water safety and in a range of other areas along the coastline. As the swimming season approaches drowning statistics are on the minds of everyone. The number of drownings in the ocean is very low, the bulk of them being rock fishermen who often ignore advice about safe places and times to fish. It is the proud boast of the surf life saving movement that drownings on beaches along the New South Wales coast are minimal. During this week it was suggested to me that on patrolled beaches there have been no drownings when people swim between the flags.

Appropriately, the honourable member for Keira, a former mayor, has sung the praises of the surf life saving movement. I draw attention also to the fine work done by the former Minister for Sport, the honourable member for Parramatta, and to her support for surf life saving organisations in this State whose members use their expertise to protect beachgoers. The honourable member for Keira should be commended for drawing attention to this magnificent association.

Mr J. H. TURNER (Myall Lakes - Deputy Leader of the National Party) [12.54 p.m.]: I raise the concerns of Mr and Mrs Infield in regard to
Page 246
access to their property. Mr and Mrs Infield first contacted me 2½ years ago, but this matter had been proceeding for almost five years prior to that. Their concerns relate to access to their property via Rail Access Corporation land. It may be necessary to go through a history of this matter to explain the detail. In February 1997 I wrote to the former Minister, the Hon. B. Langton, outlining the problem and noting that a licence agreement that had been entered into had lapsed for some reason and that the access road was barely trafficable and was subject to flooding.

I informed the Minister that Mr and Mrs Infield had no means of access to their property other than to traverse the subject road, or the non-existent level crossing. No positive action was taken. On the contrary, my constituents advised me that rather than allowing access, the Rail Access Corporation erected a barbed wire fence across the road which inhibited them further from gaining access to their property. When this was brought to the attention of the Minister in June 1997 the fence was removed. However, in July of that year a gate was erected. I quote from a letter I sent to Minister Langton:

I enclose herewith photograph . . . which shows a gate which has apparently been moved back and a new gate has been put in place, but still shows that no approaches to the railway line. Mr Infield and his family still cannot traverse the railway crossing at that point. The only way of access is by the disputed access road which is in an extremely poor state of repair . . .

In October 1997 a reply was received advising that an on-site meeting was to occur in the foreseeable future. By November that meeting had not been held and I so advised the Minister. On 19 December 1997 I referred the matter to the present Minister. Mr and Mrs Infield advised that a meeting was to be held in February, and this was confirmed by the Parliamentary Secretary for Transport. The meeting was scheduled for 9 February 1998, but there was no show by the Rail Access Corporation.

On 9 February 1998 I wrote to the Minister for Transport and told him that the meeting had been scheduled for that day, that four representatives from the council and representatives of the Racecourse Trust had attended but no-one from the Rail Access Corporation turned up. I said further that it was then exactly one year and three days since I had first raised the matter with the former Minister and that there seemed to be "a reluctance on the part of the department and the Rail Services Authority to attempt to resolve this matter".

I received correspondence from the Minister on 26 February 1998 advising that a meeting would be held on the following day. That did not occur. On 7 April 1998 there was a meeting at which the council and the Rail Access Corporation agreed to examine the cost of the work that was required. On 20 May 1998 the council wrote to Mr Infield asking him to contribute to the cost of the work involved. Mr Infield wrote to me on 15 June 1998 and said:

Destroying two cars, water damaged brakes, electricals and ongoing maintenance - no deliveries; furniture, building supplies, livestock et cetera, friends and relatives unable to visit, loss of income, stress, have all taken their toll. We feel the word "compensation" is a far more appropriate and just than the one council used in asking for "contributions".

I wrote to the council requesting that it waive any contributions, and subsequently received a reply advising that would occur. On 21 August 1998 the council wrote to me advising that the options were being considered and had been referred to the Rail Access Corporation for final resolution. The council noted that the Rail Access Corporation had been somewhat quiet in putting the matter forward. On 9 December 1998 I again wrote to the present Minister requesting that he prod the Rail Access Corporation.

I received a response from the Minister on 14 July 1999 advising that the matter was proceeding. I have received a letter from my constituents confirming that the agreement has now been signed. However, none of the comprehensive work set out in the agreement has been started. They sent me an account for the cost of repairs to a car and advised that a licensed mechanic had told them to get rid of the car because it would not be economical to repair it. On behalf of my constituents I ask that the matter be resolved once and for all.

Mr SCULLY (Smithfield - Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads) [12.59 p.m.]: I understand that this matter concerns a level crossing which was closed in 1987. Since that time Mr Infield has used an adjoining road called Urara Lane to gain access to his property. I am aware of correspondence between the honourable member and my office. I am informed that the Rail Access Corporation has agreed to upgrade the access road within the next few months and that Mr Infield has agreed to that upgrade.

However, I am also informed that there is some disagreement between Mr Infield and the Rail Access Corporation as to how substantial the upgrade should be. I am unaware of the compensation matters the Deputy Leader of the National Party has raised, but if there is some disagreement between one of my agencies and his constituents about how far the upgrade of the access road should go, I am happy to have a look at the
Page 247
matter to ascertain whether there may be a way of resolving it. Perhaps he and I should have a discussion about the matter as the days and weeks unfold.

Motion by Mr Watkins agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to permit:

(1) private members’ statements to be now interrupted and resumed at 2.15 p.m.; and

(2) a second motion to be proposed for private members’ statements to be noted, upon the conclusion of the motion before the House.

[Madam Acting-Speaker (Mrs Beamer) left the chair at 1.03 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]

Pursuant to further resolution private members’ statements taken forthwith.

Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [2.15 p.m.]: I draw to the attention of the House the serious case of my constituent John Cassone. Mr Cassone is concerned that he has been treated unfairly and discriminated against in relation to his employment with the Police Service. My constituent was employed for over 12 years as a transit officer. In 1988 the members of the transit police branch of the State Rail Authority were transferred from the control of the State Rail Authority to the Commissioner of Police. As I understand it, this was formalised in the Police Department (Transit Police) Act 1985. The bulk of transit police officers who so wished were sworn in as probationary constables of police once they had completed a bridging course. This, however, has not happened to Mr Cassone. A letter dated 20 August 1999 from Commissioner Peter Ryan sets out what occurred. In part the letter reads:

With respect to Mr Cassone, it is clear that he currently is unable to perform the inherent requirements of duty of a transit police officer, nor is he able to perform the inherent requirements of duty of a constable of police. Additionally, it is clear that the situation is not one which might remedy itself in the near future.

In recognition and appreciation of the special circumstances in which Mr Cassone finds himself, the Service has offered to him a series of options aimed at maximising his opportunity to continue to be employed by the Service. One of those options is not one which would be available to other ex-transit police officers in a similar situation to Mr Cassone.

Mr Cassone suffers from multiple sclerosis. This clearly imposes some restrictions and constraints upon him. For example, he finds it hard to walk more than 100 metres without an aid, and he uses a wheelchair for general use outside of work, but not, it should be stressed, while he is at work. Despite these limitations, Mr Cassone is currently employed at the Green Valley police station. He carries out the duties of a station officer. He is perfectly capable of performing these duties. He is able to walk around the station as necessary. The duties that he presently performs, as set out by Mr Cassone, are as follows:

The taking of P5 accident reports, security and shooters’ licence enquiries and applications, general counter enquiries from the public, answering telephone calls from the public and responding to those calls, putting jobs on to CIDS and allocating those jobs to car crews, referring people to PAC when appropriate, taking reports of crime and completing COPS events.

In a submission to the Police Service, Mr Cassone put his argument in a nutshell:

I still want to work as I have two children and also it would be beneficial to my well-being. I can personally see no problem to being sworn in as I perform all general station duties and what is asked of me. I feel I have been a valuable staff member during my time at Green Valley and wish to continue in this role.

The Police Service, however, is providing to Mr Cassone only a number of options and those options are unpalatable to him. One of those options is medical retirement. That is quite unattractive to my constituent. He is still a young man with a dependent family and has otherwise restricted employment prospects. Another alternative is for him to accept a position as a general administrative officer within the police department. That is fine as far as it goes, but it brings with it an annual salary loss of some $20,000. Mr Cassone has effectively been told that his time for making a decision will expire at the end of June 2000. His current salary maintenance will then cease.

One other barrier to my constituent being sworn in as a police officer is the requirement to attend the bridging course. This seems, in the circumstances of this case, a fairly pointless requirement. Given the duties that he currently performs, and would continue to perform as a police officer, the course would not be of much assistance. Of greater significance, however, is that at the Goulburn Police Academy there are many, many stairs and steps, and that fact would restrict the likelihood of Mr Cassone being able to attend there. He regards that aspect as one of the discriminatory elements in the matter.

Page 248

Mr Cassone, in his discussions with me and my office, has emphasised a number of points. First, he vigorously disputes that he is incapable of performing any of the police duties that he is currently performing. Second, he disputes the apparent assessment by the Police Service that he cannot stand or walk for significant periods of time. Third, he vigorously disputes an assertion by the Police Service that he is dependent on a wheelchair during his hours of work. Frankly, Mr Cassone feels that he is capable of carrying out a useful career as a sworn police officer. He is clearly capable of doing the duties that he is performing now. With respect, that is a view with which I clearly agree.

Of even more concern, Mr Cassone has pointed out to me situations involving other individuals who also suffer from disability conditions who are performing work as sworn officers. He pointed to one officer with cerebral palsy and another with multiple sclerosis. Mr Cassone has pointed to individuals who were members of the transit police and have been sworn into the Police Service and are carrying out precisely the same duties as he is performing now. One would have thought, as a matter of logic, there should be no prohibition upon him becoming a sworn police officer. I have previously made representations in relation to this matter to the Minister for Police. I ask the Minister once again to look at this matter and perhaps review what has occurred.

Mr RICHARDSON (The Hills) [2.20 p.m.]: My colleagues the honourable member for Hawkesbury and the honourable member for Baulkham Hills and I have been waging an ongoing campaign to have the vital western Sydney lifeline of Windsor Road upgraded. Last week the Minister for Roads held a hasty press conference in The Hills at the corner of Windsor Road and Old Windsor Road, Kellyville. He dragged along with him the honourable member for Riverstone and the honourable member for Londonderry, ignoring the local Liberal members, and announced that the Government would spend $200 million on Windsor Road over the next 10 years and congratulated the honourable member for Riverstone and the honourable member for Londonderry "for their hardworking efforts to secure the upgrade". Here is what one of my local papers, the Hills Shire Times, had to say about that statement:

No-one has worked harder to get this road upgraded to cater for today’s horrendous traffic, let alone tomorrow’s, than . . . local Liberal MPs Wayne Merton (Baulkham Hills), Michael Richardson (The Hills) and Kevin Rozzoli (Hawkesbury). But were they given any credit for their efforts by the minister? No. In his important announcement the minister gave credit for "securing the upgrade" to his Labor mates John Aquilina (Blacktown) and Jim Anderson (Londonderry). Jim who?

What a classic example of political backslapping, or should that be backstabbing. We know who’s been working hard to get work carried out on this vital arterial road. And so do you, minister. Come on, put party politics aside and give credit where credit is really due.

I agree with the editorial in the Hills Shire Times. The Government should stop playing political games. The time to fix the problem is now, not in 10 years time. With 47,500 voters, 8.3 per cent over quota, my electorate now has the greatest number of voters of any electorate in New South Wales and the highest growth rate. The population of Baulkham Hills shire is expanding at 6 per cent per year, and most of that growth is concentrated in the Kellyville area.

Windsor Road - on which the Minister for Roads staged his press conference - is a single-lane road in each direction. During the morning peak time, every hour 1,680 southbound vehicles travel an average speed of less than 20 kilometres per hour. By 2006 it is projected the number of vehicles will increase to 4,000 per hour travelling at an average speed of zero. A city the size of Canberra cannot be built on the outskirts of Sydney without the necessary infrastructure. Yet that seems to be this Government’s intention. Whose idea was it to develop the north-west sector? Who first approved the development? Who was the Minister for Planning in 1984? It was Robert John Carr.

In his press release on 3 September the Minister for Roads restated the Government’s previous four-year strategy, and he added improvements, including: a four-lane divided carriageway between Schofields Road and Garfield Road; a new Rouse Hill deviation with new signals at Annangrove Road; a new deviation between Schofields Road and Mile End Road, with right-turn bays to Rouse Road and Mile End Road; and new traffic signals at the Victoria Avenue intersection, with a widened four-lane carriageway for 400 metres either side of the intersection and a right-turn bay to Victoria Avenue.

While I welcome the Government’s new found concern for Windsor Road, its response is inadequate. Under its proposal only 10 kilometres of a 30 kilometre road will be upgraded, and it still does not provide for four lanes between Seven Hills Road and Showground Road. There will continue to be a bottleneck along the pinch points on this stretch of road, leaving the greater part of the road as a
Page 249
continuing black spot. Currently a death occurs on Windsor Road every fortnight. The map accompanying the press release included a heavy rail line from Castle Hill to Mungerie Park. That is dependent on the Epping to Castle Hill line being completed, which in turn cannot be started before the Parramatta to Chatswood link is completed.

Understandably, the Government has given no time frame for the first train to pull into Mungerie Park station. However, it has given a time frame for Baulkham Hills Shire Council to increase housing densities in the absence of dedicated public transport. That time frame is now. I repeat the words from the Hills Shire Times editorial: Come on, put party politics aside. Let us do that. I appeal to the Government to stop the political point scoring and fix Windsor Road before it seizes up completely and scores of more people die. The Government knows, and has known for many years, what has to be done.

In 1995 the Australian Labor Party candidate for Hawkesbury, Barry Calvert - whose slogan was "Working for Hawkesbury" - issued a press release in which the then shadow Minister for Roads and Transport, the unlamented Brian Langton, stated that he would be allocating funds within the first term of a Carr Labor Government to complete the widening of Windsor Road to four lanes. We are still waiting. In the meantime, the campaign is still alive. My office has received numerous calls from the constituents of the honourable member for Londonderry wanting copies of the petition that is currently being presented to the Parliament. Windsor Road must be fixed now.

Mr SCULLY (Smithfield - Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads) [2.24 p.m.]: What an astonishing performance! I think the honourable member for The Hills is upset because I forgot to invite him to my press conference. I am flabbergasted at his performance. Shame on him! His community wants bipartisan support for improvements to Windsor Road. I am delighted that the honourable member for Londonderry and the Minister for Education and Training, who represents the electorate of Riverstone, have got behind the Government initiative, instead of falling over each other to try to take credit for what was done. At a recent meeting with councils and the Minister for Education and Training, which was also attended by the honourable member for Hawkesbury, the Government committed $60 million over a four-year period to the project.

I understand that the honourable member for Hawkesbury was appreciative of the Government’s support for his community. That commitment has now been expanded. As I said last week, Windsor Road and Old Windsor Road are the Parramatta Road of the north-western suburbs of Sydney. The expenditure by the Government of $200 million over the next 10 years will make a fantastic contribution to resolving the problems that are faced by people of the north-western suburbs who travel on those roads. Let us look at what this Government has done for the Liberal Party constituencies of the north-western suburbs of Sydney. We are going to build a rail line to Castle Hill. Michael Photios said to me, "That is a good idea. The Liberal Party did not even think of it. We will give you the intellectual property rights on that. We appreciate it, thank you."

Although it is their constituency, the Liberal Party did not even think of it. The Liberal Party did not think of a bus way from Castle Hill to Blacktown. And now the Liberal Party did not think of improvements to Windsor Road and Old Windsor Road. Recently I was asked about a petition. I have not heard of the petition. The honourable member for The Hills can write all the petitions he wants, if that makes him feel good and gets his name into the Hills Shire Times. This Government is getting on with the job, and construction work has already commenced. The honourable member for The Hills will find out over the next few years -

Mr Richardson: Ten years.

Mr SCULLY: An amount of $200 million over 10 years is a significant commitment by the Government to the honourable member’s community. He should work in partnership with the Government to deliver the infrastructure his local community needs, instead of playing party politics.

Mr WEBB (Monaro) [2.26 p.m.]: I wish to refer to an event I attended about one month ago that may be of interest to the schoolchildren who are present in the gallery today: the sesquicentenary celebrations of the Braidwood Central School. For a central school in New South Wales to be able to celebrate 150 years operation it is a significant achievement. I understand that only four or five other central schools in New South Wales have enjoyed similar celebrations. One such school is at Pambula, which serves the electorate of Monaro. Many of the buildings at Braidwood Central School were constructed in those early times, as were many other buildings in Braidwood itself.

The celebration was attended by the Regional Director of Education from Batemans Bay, Mr Col
Page 250
Waters; the principal of Braidwood Central School, Mr Rodney McClure; the mayor of Tallaganda Shire Council, Mr Geoff Hassell; and many parents and friends, students and ex-students of the school. On the day of the celebrations the Federal member for Eden-Monaro, Gary Nairn, cut a ribbon at the school’s recently constructed pole and ironwork gateway. Next to the gateway is a recently constructed wall displaying symbols that represent elements of the town and education, including two hand prints - one of a kindergarten child, the youngest in the school, and one of a year 12 student. The wall is a symbol of the school, the town and the community.

I congratulate Maureen Faviell, secretary of the sesquicentenary committee, for the work that was done preparing for this occasion. The feeling of ownership and dedication to the community and to education is vital to the wellbeing and viability of small regional communities. That is exemplified in this case by a school that is 150 years old. The records of attainment of students of Braidwood Central School and their subsequent pursuits and achievements after leaving school are proof of the excellent quality of education provided at that school. The age of this school and the way its history and buildings have been maintained and preserved are in keeping with the historical nature of Braidwood itself.

On the day of the sesquicentenary celebrations a book entitled Braidwood Central Schools Sesquicentenary - 150 years of Education in the Bush was launched. It documents the history and contains wonderful photographs of events at the Braidwood Central School during its 150 years. Many historical buildings in this historical town provide visitors with a wonderful trip into the past. The town is famous for the making of a number of films including Ned Kelly and The Year My Voice Broke. In addition, through the efforts of Tourism Tallaganda in utilising the historic nature of the old buildings, Braidwood is getting a good reputation as a tourist stopover and day visit centre for visitors from Canberra, the South Coast and from central and southern New South Wales and beyond.

However, a school like Braidwood Central School cannot operate with old buildings alone forever. The school board, staff and parents and citizens, together with the local shire council, have been lobbying for some time for new infrastructure - a school hall - as the present building is inadequate. That needs to be placed on the priority list. It is hoped that with the support and commitment of the department the community will be able to celebrate the school’s 200th anniversary in 2049, and so on. During the celebrations on 7 August a time capsule was buried. I hope to be in Braidwood in 2049 when that time capsule is opened.

Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle - Parliamentary Secretary) [2.31 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Monaro for bringing to the attention of the House the celebration by Braidwood Central School of 150 years of operation. It has received great community support and reinforces in us all the value of public education and the benefits it brings to our local communities.

Mr ASHTON (East Hills) [2.32 p.m.]: I oppose the proposal by the Federal Government to upgrade Bankstown Airport to allow it to take regional aircraft, thus freeing up as much as 30 per cent of extra slots for jet aircraft at Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport [KSA], making greater profits for KSA and sweetening the pot for full privatisation of KSA later on. The proposal goes hand in hand with a scheme to move general aviation to a minor airport at Badgerys Creek.

The Federal Government’s airport policy looks like it is being run by the pilots in the movie Flying High or perhaps by the character played by Jerry Lewis who ran "Eddy’s Airways". Bankstown Airport is situated entirely in my electorate of East Hills. It is the busiest airport in Australia - the fifth biggest in the world in terms of aircraft movements. Already thousands of people suffer noise and other disruptions caused by this airport. I am not, however, suggesting that Bankstown Airport should be closed - it is the greatest employer of people in our city.

Who are in favour of this proposal? John Howard perhaps; John Anderson, the new Leader of the National Party in Canberra; and a chap who wrote a thesis on the subject for a degree. I am not too sure whether he passed! The list of those opposed to this proposal is much longer and those on it are more informed. The list includes the Standing Committee on State Development of this Parliament objected to any increase of regional aircraft into Bankstown; rural mayors of all persuasions, including the honourable member for Dubbo; the Minister for Local Government, who yesterday proclaimed the opposition of Country Labor members of Parliament to the proposal; and the Government.

It seems by any account that just about everybody is opposed to any increase in regional air
Page 251
traffic into Bankstown. If one can believe what one reads in the Dubbo Daily Liberal, Kerry Chikarovski, the Leader of the Opposition, is also opposed to Bankstown receiving regional aircraft. Regional airlines, inner city residents and councils, and people living in regional and rural New South Wales are against this proposal. The people of country areas do not want to fly to Bankstown, and the people of Bankstown do not want them to fly there. That is not a matter of being inhospitable, it is a matter of being practical.

Regional travellers would still be several hours from the central business district or KSA. Our roads, motorways and rail links do not provide the speedy access that is imagined in Canberra. Travellers will still have to disembark from regional planes, collect their luggage, meet buses, connect with trains or get on the motorway, and they will not be much closer to Sydney’s KSA unless they flew there directly anyway.

Why has this proposal surfaced 20 years after the 1978 major airport noise of Sydney [MANS] study completely rejected it, and 10 years after Bankstown was completely rejected as an option in the 1985 survey? After an exorbitant environmental impact statement process and a legendary fight by residents of south-west Sydney the Holsworthy airport proposal was canned. There has been no suggestion of an environmental impact statement process in Bankstown at all. If this lunatic proposal was to get the go-ahead, the east-west runway would have to close. That would affect present noise sharing operations in Sydney, and Sydney would no longer be the premier city in Australia - it would simply be a transit lounge where travellers arrive to fly on to other destinations or to dreary southern destinations such as Melbourne.

Sydney’s KSA ruins half the lifestyle of Sydneysiders except those who live in the Bennelong electorate. Bankstown regional airport would ruin the rest of Sydney’s lifestyle, and a general aviation airport at Badgerys Creek would complete the pattern. The Federal Coalition’s airports policy is a shambles. The secret agenda for Bankstown is to distract attention from Liberal Party problems over Badgerys Creek, and particularly the four Federal marginal Liberal electorates held there - Macquarie, Parramatta, Lindsay and Macarthur.

Bankstown and 700,00 to 800,000 people can be sacrificed for the need to save those seats. John Howard and John Anderson remind me of the two pilots in the film Flying High. Honourable members may recall that one was fairly mad and the other was a rubber dummy. The State Government will not assist them in any way, nor will local councils. The people of south-western Sydney will fill the Homebush stadium in their opposition to this lunatic proposal. This fruitloop proposal should be canned now.

Mr R. W. TURNER (Orange) [2.37 p.m.]: Today I speak on behalf of some fundraising committees operating within my electorate, namely Orange Apex Club, the Lions Club of Orange, the trustees of the Carcoar Show and the committee in charge of the Japanese Garden. When they wish to conduct functions that involve the service of alcohol they are unable to obtain a licence to do so because of work bans imposed by the Department of Gaming and Racing.

The committees can get what is known as a hotelier extend licence or a bring-your-own [BYO] licence. Just imagine a BYO licence for the 60,000 patrons who will come to the Australian national field days in late October. Committee members and trustees give up days of their own time to organise such functions - some even take two or three days from their holidays. Orange Apex, the Lions Club and organisers to the Carcoar Show are being denied major fundraising opportunities - although they have been told that if local police are prepared to turn a blind eye, as it were, they could function without a licence. However, they are not prepared to do that because they may run into problems with their insurance. If they do not have a licence they may not have insurance cover. They have contacted their insurance companies but have not yet received an answer on that matter.

Orange Apex has been conducting this event at the Australian national field days for just on 20 years without a problem. The Lions Club has been there for some 10 years. Yet suddenly, because of some bureaucratic bungling, they are being threatened and denied an opportunity to raise funds to assist the clubs with their community work over the next 12 months. I am disappointed that the Minister is not prepared to do anything at this stage. He is prepared to let the dispute run its course, which is an enormous inconvenience for these four committees.

Not only will the four committees in my electorate be affected in this way; virtually hundreds of committees throughout the State will be affected, and there is no sign that the dispute will be settled in the near future. The clubs have been casually told that provided the local police are happy and turn a
Page 252
blind eye the whole thing can go ahead. These days people have a propensity to sue at the drop of a hat. None of these committees is prepared to take the risk at this stage.

I hope that the situation will be resolved as soon as possible so that these committees can legally and freely do what they have been doing for many years without having a cloud over them as to whether they should hold the function. If the committees get a hotelier extended licence, which is a possibility, that will reduce the profit made on the day, because the licence conditions state that either the licensee or an employee must attend the function for the entire time the bar is open.

Weekend penalty rates for employees mean that the committees will lose all their profit or at least the cream. If that is the case, a couple of them have said that it would not be worthwhile holding the function. Although the committees have been given an alternative, that alternative is simply not viable. I hope the Minister will put pressure on his department to resolve the situation so that committees throughout New South Wales can continue to hold a function that they have been holding for many years.

Mr COLLIER (Miranda) [2.42 p.m.]: I express my extreme disappointment with the Mayor of Sutherland shire, Councillor Kevin Schreiber, for his failure to honour an important promise he made to the people of the shire. Sutherland shire is well known for its beautiful beaches, like Cronulla and Wanda, its waterways like Port Hacking and the Georges River, and for the Royal National Park. People are concerned about the maintenance of their beautiful beaches, rivers, waterways and the park.

Kevin Schreiber printed and sent out 70,000 coloured reply-paid postcards to shire residents. He used at least $15,000 of ratepayers’ money to do so. The postcards expressed concern about pollution and water quality, and were to be returned to the shire council. The cards were addressed to the Premier care of Sutherland Shire Council. The cards contained this notation:

Sutherland Shire Council will forward these cards to the New South Wales Premier on your behalf.

Kevin Schreiber went public and told the people of Sutherland shire that he would present the cards to the Premier. Some 5,000 people were concerned enough to take the time and trouble to fill out the postcards and to return them to the council chambers. Many of these postcards were sent to the mayor to be given to the Premier well before the State election in March. Hundreds of these postcards bear the postmark to prove it. Did the mayor pass them onto the Premier? No!

Did Kevin Schreiber give these cards to me as the member for Miranda or to my colleagues the honourable member for Heathcote and the honourable member for Menai to pass on to the Government? No! It did not matter that our electorates form part of the shire. It did not matter to Kevin Schreiber that the honourable member for Miranda, the honourable member for Menai and the honourable member for Heathcote share many of the same constituents with him. Kevin Schreiber also ignored the honourable member for Cronulla, who is a member of his own political party. He did not even have enough confidence in the honourable member for Cronulla to ask him to pass these 5,000 postcards to the Government.

So what happened to these 5,000 postcards? They lay gathering dust in the Sutherland Shire Council chambers, hidden under Kevin Schreiber’s desk. Waiting, waiting, waiting! The first session of Parliament came and went but the postcards that 5,000 concerned citizens filled out sat under Kevin’s desk. The voices of 5,000 people were silenced unilaterally until Kevin was ready. The postcards sat under Kevin’s desk until 31 August - almost six months - until the State Cabinet met in my electorate of Miranda. Kevin was invited to the Premier’s reception. Here was his big chance. Kevin made a big song and dance in the local media; he said that this would not be a cheap election stunt less than two weeks out from the council elections.

Forget about gifts. Kevin Schreiber told everyone that he would present the Premier with the 5,000 postcards in five environmentally friendly calico bags. But what happened? Kevin arrived with the calico bags all right. The Premier was present; all the Ministers, including the Minister for the Environment, were present; the Premier’s staff were present; and more than 100 shire residents and community leaders were present. Here was Kevin’s big opportunity. But what did he do? Did he speak to the Premier, the Ministers or the Premier’s staff? No! Did he present the five environmentally friendly calico bags bulging with postcards to the Premier? No! Did this man of the people talk to anyone in the Premier’s Department? No!

Kevin had a cup of tea and a sandwich. He then got cold feet and left the reception. He forgot about the money that the Carr Government is
Page 253
pouring into the Cronulla sewage treatment plant. Off he went. Regardless of what went through his mind and caused him to leave, this was a gutless act - a contempt for the $15,000 of ratepayers’ money. One may well ask what happened to the 5,000 postcards. Here they are - 5,000 postcards in five calico bags! After everyone had left the reception they were found lying on the floor, hidden under a coffee table where Kevin had left them. The voice of 5,000 shire residents was discarded and ignored like rubbish. I am disappointed that Kevin Schreiber could not be bothered to present the concerns of 5,000 shire residents to the Premier as he had promised.

Mr Hazzard: Did you steal them?

Mr COLLIER: No, we found them. I will not do a Kevin Schreiber; I will present the cards to the Premier. I will not ignore the people of the shire as Kevin Schreiber did.

Mr McGRANE (Dubbo) [2.47 p.m.]: Along with other Federal and State parliamentarians, I recently had the pleasure of attending the fourth Paddock to Parliament forum organised by New South Wales Women in Agriculture at Dubbo. Some honourable members of this House were speakers. The honourable member for Burrinjuck addressed the forum on the challenges which lead to opportunities. For honourable members in this House and people who are not involved in such organisations I shall outline what New South Wales Women in Agriculture is about. This organisation is part of the State development of New South Wales. It covers the State from one end to the other.

This group of women believes in promoting Australian farmers and their products. They are opening doors to rural women’s views and they are taking steps to have a say in their own future by improving the skills of women to enable them to participate fully in their industry. The Paddock to Parliament concept, by which the policies developed by the Women in Agriculture conference are bought before politicians, is invaluable. It is time for politicians, State and Federal and from all parties, to listen to the points of view of Women in Agriculture.

The forum was attended by a number of politicians from both sides of the House: Tony Windsor, the member for Tamworth; Katrina Hodgkinson, the member for Burrinjuck; the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner; the Hon. D. F. Moppett; Senator Sue West; and Tony Lawler, the Federal member for Parkes. Other members represented the Minister for Agriculture and the honourable member for Barwon. The Paddock to Parliament concept is a new format for getting across the point of view of Women in Agriculture to the political decision makers of Australia. Mrs Sarah Thompson of Cassilis referred in her paper to the changing face of agriculture. She said:

The Government cannot be blamed for all the problems that exist and government cannot control or slow down the rate at which we are experiencing change. However, government through its policies makes an enormous impact with the way change is managed, on the impacts and consequences of change. And if government values rural communities, rural people, indeed, agriculture, then government has to listen.

A number of papers were presented on the day. Domestic violence is more hidden in the country, especially on isolated farms and in towns where victims are afraid to report incidents. Counselling services are not generally available in small communities. There are now fewer ministers of religion. They provided confidential counselling in these areas. I was also staggered to learn the following statistics. The far west region has a sexual assault rate of 230 per 100,000 compared with the New South Wales average of 139.7 per 100,000. Rural areas report a higher rate of domestic homicides than urban areas - 47 per cent compared with 37 per cent. The Orana and far west region has the second-highest rate of domestic homicide in the State, 15.8 per 100,000.

Mrs Rosemary Langford from Geurie referred to the work she and her group have done in putting forward to the Government a case for parental education in the Dubbo area. It was a great forum for politicians of all parties, State and Federal. I congratulate the organising committee of the Dubbo forum, Julian Campbell, Rosemary Langford, Alison Nicholls and Audrey Tremain.

Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle - Parliamentary Secretary) [2.52 p.m.]: I commend the honourable member for Dubbo for bringing before the House the Paddock to Parliament forum of Women in Agriculture held in Dubbo. It raised important issues concerning the challenges and difficulties facing women in country New South Wales in terms of agricultural pursuits and specific problems facing women in the country. It can only be beneficial for those matters to be brought to the attention of the Government and the Opposition in the Parliament.

Mr R. H. L. SMITH (Bega) [2.53 p.m.]: I speak on behalf of constituents of the northern half of the Bega electorate and in response to a public
Page 254
rally I attended on Saturday 28 August at the Ulladulla Bowling Club. I acknowledge that the honourable member for South Coast also attended. The rally was organised by Mr Alan Pedder and Mrs Jenny Puglisi of the Milton-Ulladulla branch of Diabetes Australia. In their letter to me dated 9 July 1999 they point out the huge difference between the services available to people with diabetes in the northern part of the Shoalhaven compared with those in the southern half in the Milton-Ulladulla area. I quote briefly from the letter:

The north has the luxury of full-time medical professionals who assist in the treatment of this condition. The professionals needed include a Diabetes Educator, Dietitian, Podiatrist, Social Worker, Optometrist, Dental Technician among others that may be required to treat associated conditions complicated by diabetes.

Diabetes is a self-manageable condition provided the person with diabetes has the professionals to assist in their training. This then allows the person with diabetes to remain at home and not to overload the public hospital unnecessarily.

I have frequently spoken on health-related issues in the House. A large percentage of elderly retirees have moved into my electorate to enjoy a relaxed lifestyle by the coast in their later years, but they bring with them an increased demand for health services. This fact was at least recognised by the former Minister for Health - unfortunately it was not backed up by the funds needed to cater for the increased demand. The main purpose of my statement today is to bring to the Government’s attention the glaring lack of health services in the Milton-Ulladulla area.

When the Coalition was in government there was a huge injection of capital works funds into health facilities in my electorate. A new community health building was established at Pambula. The operating theatres at Bega hospital were completely refurbished and the Moruya and Batemans Bay hospitals were substantially upgraded, at a cost of $8 million. I point out that Milton hospital is located just outside my electorate in the electorate of South Coast but it services a significant proportion of my constituents from Burrill Lake, Termeil, Ulladulla and surrounding areas.

In 1994 the then Minister for Health, Ron Phillips, announced a $300,000 upgrade of the accident and emergency unit at Milton hospital. There was a firm commitment from the Leader of the Opposition that if the Coalition were elected to government in March 1999, $3 million would be allocated to upgrade Milton hospital. Unfortunately for the people of southern Shoalhaven, the Coalition is not in government and their health needs continue to be ignored by the Carr Government. As I have stated, hospital facilities south of Burrill Lake are up to a reasonable standard while to the north there has been a huge injection of funds into Shoalhaven hospital at Nowra, the Kiama hospital has been re-opened, and Wollongong Hospital receives huge amounts of funding. None of this is much comfort to the people in the lower Shoalhaven.

I totally reject the Government’s policy of regionalising health services. We need to provide services where the people are, rather than expect people to leave their homes and travel to receive basic health services. The Coalition saw this need and offered to work towards a planned solution. This involved the networking of services with larger medical centres, which would avoid duplication of services but which would still provide people with services at their local hospitals. Ulladulla is a growth area. Statistics indicate that the growth rate in the southern Shoalhaven is higher than the State average and higher than that of the Illawarra. Yet Milton hospital has fewer beds now than it did 13 years ago.

I do not have time today to do other than mention briefly the deficiencies of Milton hospital. For example, there is no dedicated maternity unit, surely the most basic requirement in a local hospital. The theatre is outmoded and cannot cater adequately for day-surgery procedures such as treatment of skin cancers or minor vascular work. I call on the Minister and the Government to recognise the urgent need to substantially upgrade Milton hospital, thereby closing the gap in the chain of hospital facilities on the South Coast.

Private members’ statements noted.

[Mr Speaker left the Chair at 2.58 p.m. The House resumed at 3.03 p.m.]

Mr SPEAKER: I welcome to the Parliament Mr Mark Gissiner, the immediate past President of the International Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement. An international conference of the association has been held in Sydney in the past week.

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield - Minister for Police) [3.03 p.m.]: I move:

Page 255

That Standing and Sessional Orders be suspended to allow:

(1) the Premier to move a censure motion against the Leader of the Opposition forthwith; and

(2) the following time limits to apply to the debate:

Mover - 20 minutes
Leader of the Opposition - 20 minutes
Four other members - 10 minutes
Leader of the Opposition in reply - 10 minutes
Mover in reply - 10 minutes.

Mr Hartcher: When will we have question time?

Mr WHELAN: Question time will commence immediately following this debate.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of the National Party to order.

Mr HARTCHER (Gosford) [3.05 p.m.]: I move:

That the motion be amended by leaving out the word "forthwith" with a view to inserting instead "following the completion of question time."

Question time has been abused consistently by this Government over the past six months. In the last week of the previous session of the Parliament question time was denied every single day. Yesterday question time was deferred until later in the evening and today question time is to be deferred again. The whole process of the Parliament is being consistently interrupted simply so that the Leader of the House can play tricks with the parliamentary schedule. The more important issue relates to the way the Leader of the House handles the Parliament.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Does the honourable member for Gosford have the amendment in written form?

Mr HARTCHER: I will write it out.

Mr SPEAKER: It should be handed up now.

Mr HARTCHER: I will hand it up. I have four minutes and five seconds of speaking time remaining. The more important issue relates to the way the Government has handled the allegations relating to the Lord Mayor of this city. The Government has refused to allow any investigation of or debate about the allegations against the Lord Mayor. Yesterday the Government would not even allow a letter that I held, detailing allegations of sexual misconduct by the Lord Mayor, to be tabled in this Parliament. It did not have the courage -

Mr Whelan: Point of order.

Mr HARTCHER: You are abusing the processes of this Parliament.

Mr Whelan: And I will continue to do it.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Does the Minister seek to take a point of order?

Mr Whelan: Yes. This is a continuation of the dirty play that occurred yesterday, when under the guise of a point of order -

Mr Hartcher: What is the point of order?

Mr Whelan: The point of order is that the honourable member for Gosford is limited in his reply and must not delve into the substance of the debate. He must not make allegations about anyone. This motion is about whether standing and sessional orders should be suspended.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of the National Party to order for the second time.

Mr Whelan: The debate is limited to that issue. The honourable member cannot have a wide-ranging debate about any other issue.

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

Mr HARTCHER: This issue is -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Does the honourable member have his amendment in written form?

Mr HARTCHER: Yes, and I hand it up. I thank you for your indulgence in allowing me to write it out, though we were given zero notice by the Leader of the House that he intended to move this motion. That is the sort of courtesy with which the House is run. The allegations against the Lord Mayor are of the gravest nature.

Mr Whelan: Point of order: I draw your attention to the fact that the honourable member for Gosford is ignoring your ruling and ignoring the standing and sessional orders of the House. He is attempting to continue the outrageous allegations that he commenced yesterday. In this debate he is not permitted to raise any issue other than why standing and sessional orders should be suspended. This is a confined debate limited to establishing why standing and sessional orders should or should not be suspended.

Page 256

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Davidson to order. I uphold the point of order. The honourable member for Gosford understands the standing orders.

Mr HARTCHER: Standing orders should not be suspended, because the business of this House is more important than the Government playing games with censure motions. If the Government is serious about an issue it will allow that issue to be properly investigated. If the Premier had the courage to allow matters to be properly debated, they would be properly debated, but he does not have that courage. The Premier held a press conference and defended the Lord Mayor, allegations against whom he had not even investigated. For Lucy Turnbull, the Labor candidate for Deputy Lord Mayor, to say that she investigated the allegations by asking the Lord Mayor whether they were true and accepting his explanation -

Mr Whelan: Point of order: I ask you to request the honourable member for Gosford to resume his seat. He is repeatedly and continually abusing the process of this House. He is not speaking to the issue at hand, which is why standing and sessional orders should be suspended. That is the single issue before the House; it does not relate to anything else.

[Time expired.]

Question - That the word stand - put.

The House divided.

Mr Amery Mr Lynch
Ms Andrews Mr McBride
Mr Aquilina Mr McManus
Mr Ashton Mr Martin
Mr Bartlett Ms Meagher
Mrs Beamer Ms Megarrity
Mr Brown Mr Nagle
Ms Burton Mr Newell
Mr Campbell Ms Nori
Mr Carr Mr Orkopoulos
Mr Collier Ms Saliba
Mr Crittenden Mr Scully
Mr Debus Mr W. D. Smith
Mr Face Mr Stewart
Mr Gaudry Mr Tripodi
Mr Greene Mr Watkins
Mrs Grusovin Mr Whelan
Ms Harrison Mr Woods
Mr Hickey Mr Yeadon
Mr Hunter
Mr Iemma Tellers,
Mr Knowles Mr Anderson
Mrs Lo Po’ Mr Thompson

Mr Armstrong Mr O’Doherty
Mr Barr Mr O’Farrell
Mr Brogden Mr D. L. Page
Mrs Chikarovski Mr Piccoli
Mr Collins Ms Seaton
Mr Debnam Mrs Skinner
Mr Hartcher Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Hazzard Mr Souris
Ms Hodgkinson Mr Torbay
Mr Humpherson Mr J. H. Turner
Dr Kernohan Mr R. W. Turner
Mr Kerr Mr Windsor
Mr McGrane
Mr Maguire Tellers,
Ms Moore Mr Fraser
Mr Oakeshott Mr R. H. L. Smith

Ms Allan Mr George
Mr Black Mr Glachan
Mr Gibson Mr Merton
Mr Knight Mr Richardson
Mr Mills Mr Rozzoli
Mr Moss Mr Stoner
Mr Price Mr Tink
Dr Refshauge Mr Webb

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment negatived.

Motion agreed to.

Mr CARR (Maroubra - Premier, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Citizenship) [3.22 p.m.]: I move:

That this House censures the Leader of the Opposition for permitting the abuse of parliamentary privilege by members of the Opposition.

Yesterday confirmed the complete bankruptcy of the Liberal Party of New South Wales. No wonder Lynton Crosby concluded in his election inquiry that the Liberals were defeated on "issues of confidence, credibility and experience". Yesterday this Government made announcements about the cross-city tunnel, the post-Olympics jobs plan for this State, Internet health and more reading recovery teachers. In other words, we addressed the welfare of six million people of this State.

By contrast, yesterday the Opposition produced a smear directed at a candidate for an election for
Page 257
Lord Mayor involving 10,000 voters in Sydney’s central business district. The performance we witnessed in this House and had reported from the upper House smacked of a group of hysterical young Liberals intoxicated by the fact that they were making outrageous allegations in the Parliament and would be titillated by seeing their names in the paper the next day. It had all that tone to it. Mr Crosby concluded in his report:

There is a culture of self-promotion amongst some in the New South Wales Liberal Party which serve to undermine the Leader.

We saw that at work yesterday. The extent of the culpability of the Leader of the Opposition is debatable. Was she bullied by the Greiner machine, which has been touting this smear for some months? Was she ordered by Nogarotto? Is it the notoriously poor staff who work from her office once again in evidence?

Mr Hartcher: Point of order: The Premier moved a motion relating to an alleged abuse of parliamentary privilege by members of the Opposition. The motion does not particularise any occasion, date or time. Therefore, the Premier is required by the standing orders to speak to the issue of an alleged breach of parliamentary privilege. He cannot refer to a distinct, actual incident because the motion does not do so. The Premier must relate his contribution to the issue that he has put before the House - and that is the issue of parliamentary privilege. His whole speech so far has not been devoted to that; it has been devoted to what happened yesterday.

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

Mr CARR: What is beyond debate is that the Leader of the Opposition condoned character assassination to boost the political fortunes of a Liberal colleague. She condoned the hysterical high-pitched attack of Mr Hannaford. She condoned the hyperventilating and strident attack made by the honourable member for Gosford yesterday. This is not a debate about candidates in the Sydney City Council elections; it is a debate about integrity, credibility, and the responsible use of parliamentary privilege. The former Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for Willoughby, made an eloquent contribution to a debate on this issue in November 1996. He said:

It is fundamental to our democracy that members of Parliament have parliamentary privilege. It is equally fundamental that they exercise responsibility. Members of Parliament should not prejudge people without sufficient evidence.

Let me come to the question of evidence, because I have two revelations to make to the House. Yesterday Mr Duncan Gay in another place alleged that local government inspectors identified at least four incidents where a total of more than $100,000 of council money was paid secretly as settlement of sexual harassment claims to female staff against the Lord Mayor of Sydney. That was the allegation: those occasions on which secret payments were made to settle sexual harassment claims to female staff against the Lord Mayor of Sydney. I have a response from the Director-General of the Department of Local Government. It states:

The Department of Local Government can find no record of any allegation of sexual harassment against Lord Mayor Sartor nor any payment of $100,000 or otherwise to satisfy such a claim.

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

Mr CARR: By leave, I table Mr Payne’s response. Further, Tony Harris would not be considered a servant of this Government. He would not be considered a compliant tool of this or any other government. But the former New South Wales Auditor-General was Sydney City Council auditor from 1992 to 1999. Mr Tony Harris states:

Although I am no longer the Auditor-General, I should advise that in the several Audits of Sydney City Council’s Financial Statements, including those for 1998/99, no payments of the kind mentioned in the Upper House of Parliament yesterday were observed by the Audit Office.

He goes on:

Had such payments existed, they would have been brought to my attention.

That is the statement of Tony Harris. By leave, I table his comments. Yesterday the Leader of the Liberal Party in the Legislative Council made allegations of sexual harassment against Lord Mayor Sartor - "some as recent as this year". Not one, but some "as recent as this year". He referred to a large number of complaints lodged before the Anti-Discrimination Board about the Lord Mayor. He produced not one scrap of evidence. The President of the Anti-Discrimination Board, no less than Chris Puplick, a former Liberal Senator, rebutted that yesterday. Late yesterday the former Attorney General, John Hannaford, read from a letter of complaint to the Anti-Discrimination Board written in late 1992. What he did not read into Hansard was a press release of the Anti-Discrimination Board of 8 January 1993. It said the complaint had been withdrawn.

Page 258

Mr Hannaford was Attorney General at the time. If he was so concerned about the issue - remember the dates, 1992 and 1993, the period when he was Attorney General and the Leader of the Opposition was Minister for Women - why was nothing done then? She was a Minister in that Government - she was Minister for Women - and the issue was known in 1992 and 1993. If the Coalition was so concerned about this issue, why was there no action in the intervening seven years? Why only action now?

I wonder why this issue has been brought to life with two or three days to go to the Sydney City Council elections? Could it be that the Liberal Party has been caught out without a policy, without a plan for these elections, but that the Greiner machine, backed by Michael Yabsley, is desperate to control Town Hall? I have warned before there is a group of developers, mobilised by Yabsley, intent on seizing control of Town Hall and installing Kathryn Greiner as Lord Mayor.

Mr Hartcher: Point of order: The Premier is traducing the reputation of a person outside the Parliament. The Premier has raised allegations that the person is involved in some corrupt deal with other developers for political purposes. He should be required to substantiate those allegations.

Mr CARR: The proper forum for a serious complaint or allegation to be heard is the Anti-Discrimination Board [ADB]. Although that forum exists, it has not heard of such a complaint. That was confirmed to us in writing yesterday. Everything the Opposition has said has been rebutted by the statement from the Director-General of the Department of Local Government, the former Auditor-General, yesterday. Since the election it has been my wish to make generous allowance for the Leader of the Opposition. I make every allowance for her inexperience, and I acknowledge the difficulties she faces in her job. I know the demands and even the temptations of her role, but I also know its responsibilities. I embraced those responsibilities for seven years as Opposition leader in this place.

I passed the only test that is available to the Leader of the Opposition. There is only one test available for the Leader of the Opposition. In this case inexperience is no excuse; there is no justification for the unjustifiable. Abuse of parliamentary privilege is not an ancient academic question from the mists of time. Just in the last Parliament there was a notorious case of abuse of privilege. The words of the former Leader of the Opposition in that debate deserve to be quoted again in this House. He referred very correctly to "the lethal weapon of parliamentary privilege". That lethal weapon was used yesterday by the Liberal Party in this House. However, it was not directed at a member of this House. An accusation was not made against a Minister; it was made about someone outside the Parliament. The allegation has not been made to the Anti-Discrimination Board, as we know from information that was supplied by Mr Puplick, the chair of the ADB, yesterday.

Were these matters raised at the regular meetings held over the last five years by the Sydney City Council? The alarm bells rang in the last week and the Greiner machine, mobilised by Yabsley, said, "We need a last-ditch issue." An issue has been discovered with days to go to voting. It all comes back to the responsibility of the Leader of the Opposition. She kept out of the matter yesterday, but she needs to explain to this House today why, in the face of this statement I have tabled from the Director-General of the Department of Local Government, Tony Harris, the former Auditor-General, she permits her members to go unrebuked. The choice for her is very clear: to apologise unreservedly for the damage her team did yesterday in this Parliament to someone’s reputation and to discipline her colleagues.

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

Mr CARR: The Leader of the Opposition faces censure in this Parliament today because of her failure to bring leadership to her parliamentary team. It is no good posturing as an Opposition leader, as a leader of a once great political party, if she is not prepared to exert the responsibilities of leadership.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI (Lane Cove - Leader of the Opposition) [3.32 p.m.]: The hypocrisy of the Premier is breathtaking. The hypocrisy of this man to stand in this House and accuse me because I choose to stand up for the women in this State against a man -

[Interruption]

Aren’t you prepared to listen, Bob? The Premier is not even prepared to listen to the truth. The Minister for Women and the Minister for Small Business, who sit here and listen to this debate, may feel ashamed that they are party to this action by the Premier.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Minister for Women to order.

Page 259

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: Of all people, the Minister for Women should understand that women who are involved in sexual harassment and intimidation find it incredibly difficult to make such matters public. They need people to stand up for their rights.

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

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: I find it extraordinary that the Minister for Women is leaving the Chamber - she is not prepared to sit here and listen to this debate. I move the following amendment to the motion moved by the Premier:

That the motion be amended by leaving out all words after the word "That" with a view to inserting instead:

"this House censures the Premier for failing to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct against the Lord Mayor and for personally continuing to endorse the Lord Mayor and further, censures the Minister for Women and the Minister for Small Business for their failure to show leadership in the protection of women in the workplace".

I accept that sexual harassment is one of the most serious allegations that can be made. Women who are involved in sexual harassment understand that it is not about sex, it is about power. In their positions they are powerless compared to the position of the Lord Mayor. Honourable members well know that the allegations about the behaviour of the Lord Mayor are longstanding. Those allegations, which have been ongoing since 1992, have been brought to the attention of the Opposition. As the Leader of the Opposition I have an obligation to put those allegations into the public arena and to ask the Premier to refer the matter for proper inquiry, as the Treasurer did earlier today. There is a precedent to hold an inquiry. A former Leader of the Opposition said:

Clearly without an inquiry the details of this affair will be dribbling out bit by bit. I think the most dignified way of wrapping this up is to have an inquiry, with the privacy of the women absolutely respected.

I agree with those sentiments, which were expressed by the then Leader of the Opposition in relation to Terry Griffiths. Why is there now a double standard? Why does the Government not call an inquiry in relation to the Lord Mayor? Honourable members may not be aware that earlier today the Treasurer gave notice of a motion referring my upper House colleagues the Hon. J. P. Hannaford and the Hon. M. J. Gallacher to the Legislative Council Standing Committee on Parliamentary Privilege and Ethics for investigation.

The Coalition considers that course appropriate because the privilege and ethics committee is the appropriate forum in which to conduct a full inquiry. The women will be able to give their evidence and their identity will be protected. These women have already been humiliated enough by the Lord Mayor but they want an opportunity, and we need to give them an opportunity, to give their side of the story. The Opposition would be delighted to have such an investigation because we would like to bring forward a number of witnesses.

The first person on the list of witnesses should be the present Deputy Lord Mayor of Sydney, the Hon. H. S. Tsang. He should be asked what allegations were brought to his attention and what action he took. The Lord Mayor’s running mate, Lucy Turnbull, admitted on radio today that she had heard of these allegations and made some investigations. If she was concerned enough to make investigations we should find out whether the allegations she heard about are the same as those that have been made to the Opposition.

The Opposition would also like to make sure that the women who have been sexually harassed have an opportunity to put their side of the case, as would their family members and friends who have brought the allegations to the Opposition. Those people are concerned that women in the Town Hall have been intimidated and harassed by the Lord Mayor. Some of the women are no longer at the Town Hall because of that behaviour, and they deserve an opportunity to put their cases. They and the Opposition understand the need for privacy.

If those women were to appear in camera before the Standing Committee on Parliamentary Privilege and Ethics it would give them a chance to put their case, in the same way as the women in the Griffiths inquiry were given their privacy. As the Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism and every woman on the other side of the Chamber should understand, privacy is of paramount concern to these women. They are not the only people the Opposition would like to call to the inquiry.

The Opposition wants to call both current and former senior and junior employees of the Town Hall. In particular it would like to call employees who had the responsibility of dealing with incidents involving the Lord Mayor. Their evidence would be highly relevant to such an inquiry and it is important to hear what they have to say about the Lord Mayor’s behaviour. The Opposition would like to call evidence from people involved in other agencies that have dealt with the Town Hall.

Page 260

The Opposition has a long list of witnesses who would like to come forward but have been afraid to go on the record. They have personal fears and fears for their professional positions. If they appeared before a committee, with the protection of Parliament, they would have the freedom to tell their stories. The Premier can attack me all he likes, but since the allegations were raised yesterday the Opposition has received more phone calls from women in this city who have said, "Please keep it up. You’re on the right track. No-one before has had the courage to put these allegations into the public arena." The Opposition has the courage and the women want to pursue the allegations.

Those women have urged us to fight for a full inquiry, and that is exactly what we intend to do. Some calls have come from individuals and others have come from intermediaries representing more than one woman. Many people have a stake in this matter and want it resolved. But because of the nature of these allegations very few of the women want to make it public. The same thing happened in the Griffiths affair. The Minister for Police can shake his head, but it is exactly what happened in the Griffiths affair.

[Interruption]

The honourable member for Kogarah was not here at the time and she does not know what happened. I remind her by quoting the then Leader of the Opposition, who said, "The public is entitled to know what standard the Premier has applied in this, and indeed all cases, dealing with misconduct." That is what the Opposition is asking now. What standard is the Premier prepared to apply to the Lord Mayor? Why does the Premier protect him? Why is he not prepared to have an inquiry to establish the truth of these allegations? Why is he prepared to say that because the Opposition is standing up for the women involved it is in the wrong?

Mr Ashton: Why haven’t the women come forward before?

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

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: Members of the Government have missed the point entirely by asking why the women have not come forward before. The point is that they are scared they might be intimidated. We think that the privilege and ethics committee is an ideal forum for these matters to be dealt with. The performance of the Carr Government in protecting the Lord Mayor of Sydney is one of the most cowardly and self-interested political acts that New South Wales has seen in years.

The Australian Labor Party is more interested in sharing in the power in the Town Hall than protecting women who need protection. That is an extraordinary attitude for a party which purportedly has an interest in promoting and protecting women in the workplace. The Labor Party is prepared to take any step to ensure that the Lord Mayor is re-elected on Saturday on the back of its votes. That is why the Premier personally intervened to make sure that Mr Sartor got Labor Party preferences. That is why the Premier rang Eric Roozendaal and said, "Make sure Frank gets our preferences."

I say to the Premier that the Coalition understands that the New South Wales Right wants to make sure that when the Labor Party cracks the whip the Lord Mayor says, "How high should I jump?" That is why the Premier intervened and why he is personally endorsing Frank Sartor. The Opposition is concerned that today in this Chamber the Premier blustered and carried on and talked about what the Opposition has done, but he did not talk about the actions that he is taking and the consequences of those actions.

The Premier says to every woman in the workplace who has had the courage to make a complaint against someone like the Lord Mayor that she is not to be believed. This Premier says that he does not think those women need to be protected. If the Premier is so convinced that the Lord Mayor has nothing to answer for, why will he not have the inquiry? He should support the inquiry and give the women who have rung my office this morning and said, "You’re on the right track, please continue" an opportunity to come forward and say why they have made the statements they have made to me and why they have left the Town Hall.

Former employees of the Town Hall should be asked why they left and what action they took when they were employees of the Town Hall in relation to the Lord Mayor’s behaviour. I know that some members of the Government know the truth about these allegations and are as concerned as I am. The decision to raise these allegations now was made because I believe it is important that propriety and probity in the Town Hall are matters of public importance. I do not accept that allegations that someone in the Town Hall who has intimidated, harassed, scared and humiliated women in the way that it is alleged the Lord Mayor has done should be untested and unpublicised.

Page 261

It is important that the women of this State understand that this Parliament and honourable members will protect them and stand up for them. That is clearly something that the Premier is not prepared to do. I make it clear that the Opposition has received allegations from a variety of sources. People who have worked and are still working at the Town Hall have told us that there has been a series of formal and informal complaints regarding the Lord Mayor. We have been told that these allegations have been dealt with through a range of channels, including the Anti-Discrimination Board [ADB], and mediation. In some cases the victims have simply felt too intimidated to come forward and, as I said, they have simply left their jobs.

We have seen the letter of complaint to the ADB referred to by the Hon. John Hannaford. That complaint details physical coercion, sexual advances and threats to keep silent - and I emphasise the words "threats to keep silent". That is the sort of behaviour the Government is condoning. Understandably, the woman who made the formal complaint to the ADB feels that she has suffered enough and does not want to take the matter any further in terms of more publicity.

We have taken advice from a married woman’s family, who told us earlier this year that the Lord Mayor tried to pressure her into a liaison. The woman does not want to come forward because, understandably, she is uncomfortable with the actions taken by the Lord Mayor. She no longer works at the Town Hall. My colleague in the upper House the Hon. John Jobling had to give advice to someone who was working at the Town Hall about what she should do in relation to the unwanted advances of the Lord Mayor. Not surprisingly, she has also left the Town Hall.

As I said, we received phone calls this morning from more women asking us to continue to pursue the allegations we are making. The Opposition and I do not resile from raising questions about the Lord Mayor’s behaviour. Importantly, let me ask this question: What will the Premier do about these allegations? The Premier strongly called off an investigation into similar allegations in this House not so many years ago. He has now done a complete about-face and says that what I am doing - standing up for the women of this State, trying to protect these women and, most importantly, trying to ensure that this sort of behaviour does not happen again, that women can work in the workplace and not feel victimised and subject to abuse by someone in a position as powerful as that of the Lord Mayor - is wrong.

The Premier says that we should not be standing up for these women, we should not be pursuing these allegations, we should not be acting on behalf of these women. I am sorry - I disagree. I believe that as legislators and as people who hold positions of leadership in the community we have an obligation to stand up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. Yesterday I moved a motion of no confidence in the Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for Women because she was not standing up for people with disabilities.

I would be a hypocrite if I had not been prepared to act on these allegations when they were brought to my attention. Why are we doing this now? We are doing this now because an important part of the political process is openness and probity in relation to people who are standing for high office. We need to ensure that people know and understand that these allegations have been made. I challenge the Government to start an inquiry, call the people, get the evidence, find out the truth of these allegations and make its own decision about them.

Opposition members understand what it means to be a victim, to be in a less powerful position than the person who is intimidating. We understand how these women feel. I am appalled and disgusted that the women on the Government benches are not supportive of the women who are making these claims. I am appalled and disgusted that the Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism and the Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for Women are not prepared to take on this matter and follow through on the allegations.

I am absolutely and totally appalled at the hypocrisy of a Premier who stands up and says that he does not care about the women of this State. All he cares about is securing a position in the Town Hall. All the Government needs to do is start an inquiry, get the evidence and understand the depth of feeling about and problems with the Lord Mayor. Only then will members opposite understand why I have taken the action that I have.

Ms MOORE (Bligh) [3.52 p.m.]: I strongly support the motion before the House, particularly after hearing the contribution of the Leader of the Opposition. It is one of the worst contributions I have heard in this House in almost 12 years. I am appalled and shocked at what I just heard. I support this motion that we censure the Leader of the Opposition for permitting parliamentary privilege to be abused by members of the Opposition. I censure
Page 262
the honourable member for Gosford for his outrageous, disgraceful and despicable slander of the Lord Mayor. What we saw yesterday and what we have seen today is a gross misuse of parliamentary privilege. As it is only three days before a critical city council election the action is despicable.

This is just the latest act of party-political desperation that has been brought to us by the same production team that gave us the 2.00 a.m. superannuation scam and the Peter Collins back stab. I believe that the letter referred to in the article in this morning’s Sydney Morning Herald referring to the 1992 complaint that has since been withdrawn was also the result of a political set-up to which the Lord Mayor has been subjected. The community is disgusted with this ruthless, unprincipled, desperate and foolish party action. It sees such desperate acts and judges them accordingly.

When people go to vote they look at the candidates and the credibility they have built up through their term in office. Voters also look at the achievements and commitments of the candidates. Before elections I have been regularly subjected to the sort of thing we have seen today, and I regularly receive a response from the community about those actions. I have known Frank Sartor since 1980. I knew him as a resident activist and a colleague on the former city council, and when he was the director of the Public Accounts Committee of this Parliament. I have also known him as a councillor and Lord Mayor of the reconfigured city council for the past eight years.

Honourable members know that over the years I have not agreed with Frank Sartor on certain issues, but I should like to say in his defence today that I believe he is incredibly energetic, competent and dedicated. Frank Sartor’s achievements over the past eight years are formidable. It is extraordinary for the honourable member for Gosford and the Leader of the Opposition to seek to destroy the reputation that has been built up in public life over those years. Although I think Frank Sartor’s achievements over the past eight years have been formidable, I have strongly condemned his approach to the Cook and Phillip Park project and the street furniture deal. I am critical of both the process and those projects themselves. However, I believe the 10,000 people who will vote on Saturday will look at the achievements -

Mr R. H. L. Smith: We are talking about something fairly serious.

Ms MOORE: We are talking about something fairly serious and I shall try to set the record straight. We have had the most outrageous political attack, for political purposes, on someone’s achievements, integrity and considerable contribution to public life in this city. One needs only to look at the documents recently produced by Sydney City Council. I speak as a former city councillor and I am therefore in a very good position to assess Frank Sartor’s contribution. I appreciate that members of the Coalition are not really interested in that contribution to the city, but the people of the city of Sydney are very interested.

Mr O’Farrell: No, we are interested in getting to the bottom of it.

Ms MOORE: You are just despicable. You are one of the people who have been involved in this. You might laugh because you do not think it is important or serious to destroy someone’s reputation and character. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will have the opportunity to speak in this debate if he wishes, but I object very much to his interjection on such a serious matter. I would like to remind the House of the considerable achievements of Frank Sartor over the last eight years in terms of budget reform, dramatic planning reform, the contribution to public safety and -

Mr O’Farrell: On a point of order: We are debating a censure motion against the Leader of the Opposition. The Government has claimed that she has abused parliamentary privilege. In turn the Leader of the Opposition has moved an amendment in relation to the non-city activities of the Lord Mayor. It is terrific to have the honourable member for Bligh listing the Lord Mayor’s credits but can we go to the heart of the matter, which relates to allegations of sexual harassment and a desire by this side of Parliament for those matters to be investigated?

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

Ms MOORE: Of course the Opposition does not want me to talk about Frank Sartor’s achievements and contribution. The very purpose of the scurrilous attack on his reputation three days before an election is to try to minimise his opportunity at the election and to help the Liberal candidate, Kathryn Greiner, who is, as the Premier properly said, backed and supported by Michael Yabsley and the developers from the big end of town, who do not support the proper planning processes that Frank Sartor has put in place over the past eight years. I pay tribute to Frank Sartor’s contribution and to his achievements. I refer to the statement that the Lord Mayor made yesterday in
Page 263
response to this scurrilous and unsubstantiated attack on his reputation.

Opposition members do not think it is important that they seek to destroy someone’s reputation in this Chamber but we would all agree that the most important thing we have in life is our reputation. The Leader of the Opposition today spoke without any evidence or substance about a variety of women. She referred to phone calls she had this morning, totally unsubstantiated. If she was so concerned about this matter why did she not raise it when she was Minister for Women?

If Kathryn Greiner is so concerned about this why has she not raised it in the city council? Why is it being raised three days before an election without any substance or any evidence even though the Auditor-General, the director of the local government department and the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board have all said that there is no evidence there? Opposition members claim to have evidence from unnamed sources. Members can say anything in this Chamber about other members or people outside the Chamber if they are totally without character themselves. Would we do it? I would like to think that the majority of us would not do it but we have seen the Leader of the Opposition do it today and we saw the member for Gosford do it yesterday.

Mr Hartcher: Oh!

Ms MOORE: He jokes about it. He does not really care about the unprincipled things he does. He thinks it is all right in this Chamber to destroy someone’s reputation. How is Frank Sartor feeling today? How is his family feeling today? I would suggest that they would be feeling very depressed and shattered. Michael Yabsley once did that sort of thing to me in this place. He made totally unsubstantiated allegations. Members might remember that he hid when the television cameras were on and he had to withdraw and apologise because the allegations were unsubstantiated.

In the 12 years I have been a member this is a new low, and that is saying something. I am so disappointed in the honourable member for Gosford and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. It shows that that little group - the super scam, the Collins backstab, the Sartor reputation destruction, all these little efforts - will do anything for political purposes. It indicates to us that they are without principle. They will take any step to achieve their political ends. It is absolutely disgraceful. I hope that on Saturday, after the election, Sydney will continue to benefit from the dedicated energy and competence of Frank Sartor and his Living Sydney team. I call upon the Leader of the Opposition to apologise unreservedly to this House and to Frank Sartor. [Time expired.]

Mr HARTCHER (Gosford) [4.02 p.m.]: I support the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition. I draw the attention of the House to the way in which the Government has handled the whole issue. It has not allowed it to be debated as an issue in this Chamber. It prevented me from tabling a letter detailing the allegations yesterday. The Government would not allow me to speak on the motion when it came up under suspension of standing orders this afternoon. It would not even allow five minutes on the point. The Government has not allowed it to be debated in the Legislative Council. These are serious allegations. Why is the Government covering up?

Why is the Government covering up for this man? Because he is its instrument in the operation and control of Sydney City Council. The Australian Labor Party is playing politics with serious allegations, as the honourable member for Bligh said. That is why they should be investigated. If the Government were serious it would say that because the member for Gosford, the Hon. Mike Gallacher and the Hon. John Hannaford have raised serious allegations about the Lord Mayor of Sydney the allegations should be investigated. The allegations should be investigated and the members making the allegations should table their evidence and an inquiry should be held.

What has the Government done? It has tried to stop debate and has attacked the Leader of the Opposition. In making that attack it has traduced the character of the Hon. Michael Yabsley, a former Minister and a former member of this House. He may not be a personal friend of the honourable member for Bligh but if she had listened to the debate she would have heard the Premier traduce the character of Michael Yabsley. These people opposite are total hypocrites. They will not investigate allegations about the Lord Mayor but in talking about the abuse of parliamentary privilege they abuse it themselves.

I have not heard members opposite attack the Premier for abusing the reputation of Michael Yabsley. He was accused of running a machine for a group of developers. Everyone would understand the serious implications of what the Premier was driving at. Yet we are the ones who are told that we are abusing parliamentary privilege. Every day in this Chamber the Premier attacks people. He attacks members of this House and people outside this
Page 264
House. Ministers attack people outside the House. Yet the honourable member for Bligh never says a word about it.

Because she has an affinity with the Lord Mayor and a dislike for Michael Yabsley she is prepared to get into bed with the Government on this issue. If the Government is serious about parliamentary privilege it will investigate issues that are raised under parliamentary privilege, so that members can ask questions of Ministers and receive answers and raise serious issues. What can be more serious? It is at the highest level of seriousness that the Lord Mayor of Sydney on four separate occasions is alleged to have sexually harassed staff. It is alleged that money has been paid in some fashion to suppress those allegations.

Ms Moore: There is no evidence.

Mr HARTCHER: The honourable member for Bligh has not determined the issue on the basis of evidence; she has determined it on the basis of the speech made by the Premier. Even worse is the attitude taken by the candidate for deputy lord mayor in the Sartor camp, Ms Lucy Turnbull, who is reported to me as having said that she investigated the allegations thoroughly and found they had no substance. What was the basis of her thorough investigation? I am given to understand the basis was that she asked Frank Sartor whether the allegations were true. That is not a thorough investigation. Members of this Parliament and the people of the State are entitled to know that people in high office act with due standards of decorum and propriety.

Mr Whelan: Don’t say that.

Mr HARTCHER: The Minister would never want that said. He would not want that standard applied to him, and I can understand why. Nonetheless, the people of this State are entitled to know about Lord Mayor Sartor before the election, not after it. Should it be that when serious allegations are made they should not be investigated because an election is to be held in three days time? Should people not be entitled to form their opinions about this man knowing all the facts about him? To clear this man of these allegations - and they are allegations - one would expect that it would be necessary to hold an inquiry. One would not simply get a letter from the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board, dated yesterday, which only goes back to 1995.

Why does the letter go back only to 1995, when some of the very strong allegations relate to a period before 1995? Why did the letter begin in 1995? One can draw the very obvious inference that the Lord Mayor did not want the Anti-Discrimination Board to go back beyond that date, a date he chose arbitrarily and said that he was clear from that day on, though he may not have been clear before that date. Why has the Lord Mayor not come out in his own defence? Why has he sent out the General Manager of Sydney City Council to plead his case? Why has he sent out his candidate for deputy lord mayor? Why has the Lord Mayor not been prepared to face the television cameras and say, "I have never done it"? He has not been willing to do that. Why not? Why have the allegations been made? Why are people ringing the office of the Leader of the Opposition and saying that they have had a similar experience?

Mr McManus: Who?

Mr HARTCHER: An inquiry would establish who these people are.

Ms Moore: I could come in here and say that people have told me that Chris Hartcher has been sexually harassing them.

Mr HARTCHER: That is right, and an inquiry would clear me. That is the beauty of it.

Ms Moore: Three days before the election?

Mr HARTCHER: There was no problem getting a letter from the Director-General of the Department of Local Government; that was very quick. There was no problem getting a letter from the Auditor-General; that was very quick. There was no problem getting a letter from the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board; that was very quick. Why could there not be an inquiry which was advertised and people invited to raise their concerns?

The Government is engaged in a cover-up for the Lord Mayor for political purposes. The Australian Labor Party is giving him its preferences; Robert Ho is giving him his preferences. The Labor Party is determined to ensure that Frank Sartor wins on Saturday. It is out to protect him by suppressing these allegations from being raised and investigated in the Parliament. It is protecting him by having the Premier stand behind him.

The Labor Party is protecting the Lord Mayor and is determined that he will defeat any candidate who stands against him, including Kathryn Greiner. This has nothing to do with personalities. This is all to do with propriety in public office and the standards shown by the Lord Mayor. The people of
Page 265
New South Wales are entitled to know the character of the Lord Mayor of this city. Allegations have been made against him and the Opposition is entitled to ask that the allegations be investigated. It does not really matter when the allegations were made; what matters is how they relate to the person’s character in the discharge of his office. The Minister for Police was not prepared to allow these documents to be tabled yesterday.

Mr Whelan: It is a document, not a letter.

Mr HARTCHER: You would not allow letters to be tabled. Along with the Premier, the Minister has been engaged in an attempt to suppress debate. The honourable member for Bligh knows only too well how the attempt was made to suppress debate. The Premier has protected this man, but the Minister for Small Business and the Minister for Women have shown no interest in protecting women in the workplace. That is what this is all about: the protection of women in the workplace from sexual harassment. They are the allegations involved. Accordingly, the coalition supports the amendment and believes that the Premier should be censured for his actions.

Mr KNOWLES (Macquarie Fields - Minister for Health) [4.12 p.m.]: I do not normally take part in these types of debates. I have always sought to avoid them because I have seen them come and go and am aware of the grubby tactics that are the hallmark of Oppositions of all political persuasions. Yesterday when I heard the honourable member for Gosford describe an individual, without evidence, as "a serial sex offender in the Town Hall" it made me sick. I could not believe that the honourable member would stand in this place and describe the Lord Mayor of Sydney as a serial sex offender. That disgusted me to the core of my being. I could not believe that the honourable member would do it. Even less can I believe that the Leader of the Opposition allowed him to get away with it.

I happen to know Frank Sartor. As Minister for Planning I had a lot to do with the Town Hall over the last four years. I did not always agree with what Mr Sartor did, but he is now a man with a couple of kids who forevermore has on the public record, in Hansard, the tag "serial sex offender". That is an indictment that should be repudiated by the Leader of the Opposition. It is shameful. The Leader of the Opposition said this is not about sex, it is about power. She was damned right, it is. It is about the power of this Parliament and the opportunity that the Parliament gives to people to abuse or to use it, for either good purposes or the scurrilous activity that occurred yesterday in relation to Frank Sartor, the Lord Mayor of the City of Sydney.

Honourable members have observed the same thing today. Honourable members have learned today that the Leader of the Opposition had been aware of allegations made by a married woman since earlier this year. Is it not a surprise therefore that a couple of days before an election she trots it out in the Parliament? She said, "We want these allegations not to go untested or unpublicised."

Mrs Chikarovski: Point of order.

Mr KNOWLES: What she did was to publicise them first. They had the honourable member for Gosford raise the allegations. That was an absolute disgrace.

Mrs Chikarovski: To correct the record, I said -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition is aware that she will have 10 minutes in which to reply to the debate. She should not interrupt to take a point of order that she knows is completely unfounded.

Mr KNOWLES: The Leader of the Opposition may take all the formal procedural points she likes, but she cannot demonstrate leadership in this Chamber. In her first speech in this place as Leader of the Opposition she made it clear that she believed that this place should see an end to the vindictiveness and the personality-based politics associated with smear and innuendo. In Hansard she is recorded as having said:

There is no longer a place for aggressive, personality-based politics . . . we were elected to this Chamber to work on solutions to the problems that beset modern society.

When the going gets tough and the polls start to slide down, when she is looking to claw back some credibility, what happens? She lets the manager of Opposition business say in this Parliament that the Lord Mayor of Sydney is a serial sex offender and that the Opposition wants to check whether that is true. That is shameful! If the Leader of the Opposition has any evidence, there are many proper forums in which it can be properly tested. She has deliberately brought those allegations into this place. She has passed the stone, she has hung the bloke, and now she wants to test it. What chance does anyone have if we use the processes of the Parliament in that manner? The honourable member for Willoughby, God rest his soul, identified -

Mr O’Farrell: He is still alive.

Page 266

Mr KNOWLES: You have tried to kill him. You have tried to bury him, and you are not doing much to help your leader by letting her get away with this sort of stuff. In 1996 the honourable member for Willoughby, when he was Leader of the Opposition, made it very clear - and the Premier put the quote into Hansard - that privilege carries with it responsibility, as does leadership, as does a pretender to being a Premier of New South Wales. To allow these sorts of things to go unremarked upon, unchallenged and unchecked is a sign not of leadership but of gutlessness. The honourable member for Gosford should be called to account and made to apologise, not by the Parliament but by the Leader of the Opposition. If he is allowed to make allegations in relation to Frank Sartor, it will happen time and again.

Many of us in this place have families and children, and a lot of us hold our role as members of Parliament in high regard. This is the first time in my political career that I have spoken in a censure debate. I have done so because yesterday I was stunned. When the honourable member for Gosford said to this House that there is a serial sex offender in the Town Hall, no member opposite rose to say, "Hang on, Chris, you don’t have the evidence, and if you did you should have done something about it in another way." The person to do that is the Leader of the Opposition. Why does she not do it? She might have all the evidence in the world, she might be able to test this, so why does she not do it? But you should not do it here in the form in which you are doing it, because you know in your heart that what you are doing is making a grubby, political attack and you have been hung out to dry. You should make the honourable member for Gosford apologise, and if you have evidence you should take it to the appropriate forum.

Mr Hazzard: Point of order: The Minister for Health should address his comments through the Chair.

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

Mr KNOWLES: What were members opposite thinking of yesterday when they did not appropriately identify - other than by way of the tag "serial sex offender" - the Lord Mayor of Sydney, without evidence, without justification, and without any subsequent information other than more innuendo? In public life, it is the easiest thing in the world to come into this place, protected by those brass barriers that allow members to escape censure, and make those sorts of allegations. I have sat on both sides of the House and watched it happen. Along with members on both sides of the House I have hung my head in shame when those sorts of things have happened - but none more so than yesterday!

From time to time the honourable member for Gosford is not a bad sort of bloke. He is a knockabout bloke, a happy-go-lucky sort of fellow. But what he did yesterday was plain wrong. I believe a lot of people in this place understand that and know it. Members cannot stand in this place and call someone a serial sex offender without any evidence whatsoever, then on the following day make further allegations without any more evidence, and then have their leader do nothing about it. The words of the Leader of the Opposition in her first speech as leader were hollow. She said she wanted this place to be a proper place for public debate about solutions to the problems that beset modern society - they are her words. She has let herself down, her side has let her down if that is the tactical advice that they have given her, and she should be ashamed. The only way she will expunge what she has done is by forcing the honourable member for Gosford to make an apology, and she should apologise on behalf of the party she represents.

Mr O’FARRELL (Ku-ring-gai - Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [4.22 p.m.]: There is some bipartisanship in this debate, despite everything that has been said. During the Premier’s speech the honourable member for Fairfield, a member who at times has been known by this side of politics to write letters that have been incredibly honest, interjected on the Premier, "Hypocrite!" Shortly thereafter, he left the Chamber. We agree. The Premier could not be a greater hypocrite if he tried. Today he demonstrated not a skerrick of compassion or concern about women in the workplace who may be affected by sexual discrimination or sexual harassment. Despite all his great words, the Premier has not made an attempt to acknowledge that in certain workplaces around this country women are harassed and discriminated against.

He did not use the opportunity today, when that issue was at the nub of the debate, to express any sympathy or concern for those people. Why would he not do that? Because he has a problem with women. On more than one occasion in this Chamber he has referred to women on this side of politics as bitches, and has never withdrawn those comments. Wendy Machin and the Leader of the Opposition can attest to his treatment of women. When it comes to women, the Premier cannot stand in this place and say, "I am standing up for women", because he has no identification with them and no
Page 267
concern for them. He has no real commitment to those issues that I, as a bloke, do not understand but that many women face in their workplaces around this country. The Premier’s hypocrisy was also exposed by the Minister for Health in his speech.

Mr Whelan: Point of order: This is a motion of censure against the Leader of the Opposition. The member is obliged to confine his remarks to that motion.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I remind the Leader of the House that the honourable member for Gosford has moved an amendment to the motion.

Mr O’FARRELL: For the information of the Leader of the House - and we know that he does not always pay attention - the first part of the amendment seeks to censure the Premier for his failure to investigate, so we are discussing the Premier’s failures. The Leader of the House is concerned that the Minister for Health, when he first spoke, talked about the grubby tactics of Oppositions of all political persuasions. Given the Premier’s speech in this debate today, one may be forgiven for thinking that he comes to this place with clean hands, as though he entered the Chamber yesterday, was anointed Premier for life and has had no background in this Chamber. Members of this House know full well that that is not true.

When he was Leader of the Opposition the Premier took this State, this House and parliamentary privilege to new lows. I well recall that on 28 February 1990 in this place he besmirched the reputation of Wal Murray and caused an Independent Commission Against Corruption inquiry to be held. That inquiry found no fault on the part of the former Deputy Premier but certainly found great fault on the part of Mr Carr and his staffers Mr Hawker and Mr Baueris. The Premier is the sort of man who seeks to lecture members on this side of politics about the use of this House, about the misuse of parliamentary privilege, and about the way things ought to happen. If there is a serial abuser of parliamentary privilege in this House, it is the Premier. He is followed closely by the Leader of the House.

The House resumed on Tuesday, but there was no question time. The House sat yesterday, but question time was deferred. Members on this side of the House have been denied the opportunity to hold the Government accountable. Whether that relates to the Industrial Relations Commission and serious matters that go to the hearts of at least two members in this House, matters that were covered up at the highest levels before the last election, or to other matters we have been denied every opportunity to raise the issues in this House.

Towards the end of the last session question time was cancelled on a number of occasions. Again this week there has been manoeuvrings and devices have been used to ensure that the Opposition is denied the opportunity to fulfil its fundamental purpose for being in this House, which is to hold the Government accountable. What are we, as an Opposition, to do if allegations are raised with us during a parliamentary recess and this is the first opportunity on which those allegations can be aired? That is the issue before the House.

My colleague the honourable member for Liverpool was in this Chamber. His maiden speech was on this precise subject. He rose in this place and sought to besmirch the reputation of the honourable member for Camden in relation to anti-discrimination matters. Those are the sorts of grubby tactics that occur in this place. Never before had we heard such a maiden speech. He got about 20 words out before he was ordered to resume his seat. I and the Opposition will not take lectures from members opposite about how this House should be used and about abuse of privileges, because members opposite are the serial abusers of the rules and privileges of this place.

Another interesting thing about this debate - I hope the honourable member for Manly addresses this point - is that we have heard contributions from the honourable member for Bligh and the Minister for Health. Their contributions have been used solely to attack members on this side of the House. To be fair, the honourable member for Bligh also attested to the hard work of the Lord Mayor. At no stage, having decided to join the debate, did either of those honourable members seek to testify as to the character of the Lord Mayor or address themselves to the issues that are the nub of this debate: the serious allegations of sexual harassment and sexual discrimination against the Lord Mayor.

The honourable member for Bligh attested to the fact that the Lord Mayor is hardworking. I have to say to the honourable member for Bligh that there have been before the Anti-Discrimination Board proven cases of acts of discrimination and harassment by very respectable people who had commendable white Anglo-Saxon work ethics. Her statement is a complete and utter nonsense. What pains me about the honourable member for Bligh is that she is prepared to join with the Labor right and ensure that there is no investigation of these matters.

Page 268

As the Leader of the Opposition has said, we welcome what is occurring in the upper House. The leader in the upper House has referred the allegations of Mr Hannaford and Mr Gallacher to the Standing Committee on Parliamentary Privilege and Ethics. We welcome that, we embrace that and we endorse that. We will be seeking to amend that reference to ensure that that committee can call witnesses. If I had my way, that job would start tomorrow so that we can start to get to the bottom of this. Unlike another matter in this House that was relayed to the Industrial Relations Commission, matters before the upper House committee cannot be covered up, they cannot be kept out of the public eye. Matters can go unanswered before people have a chance to vote.

I finish on this point. My concern in this debate is that we have opposite a leader, in the Premier, who evinces no concern about the heart of this debate. He postures mightily about privileges and about the abuse of the Chambers but does not get to the nub of the issue. He does not identify any concern. I pose a hypothetical question: If there were two leaders of two political parties in this place and they knew that within their own ranks there was a person harassing, abusing, discriminating against another, which leader would I prefer to have on my side?

Would it be the Premier, who may well in past lives have ignored those issues because he has no concern about the affect of abuse, physical or otherwise, upon women in his party, or would it be my leader? I am proud to stand up here and say that I support my leader because she is not prepared to be silent, because there are women in workplaces round this country who are forced to be silent, who will not raise these issues and who deserve to have them investigated.

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield - Minister for Police) [4.32 p.m.], by consent: Wal Murray was a member of this Parliament. He had the right to defend himself in this Parliament. The Lord Mayor of Sydney has no right to defend himself in this Parliament against the Opposition’s scandalous allegations. Terry Griffiths was Minister for Police and a member of Parliament. The allegations about him were proven - but only after a period of 12 months of the Labor Opposition of this State forcing the then Government, of which the Leader of the Opposition was a Minister, to do something about a former Minister for Police. I mention that only because I want everyone to understand that Griffiths and Murray were members of Parliament. Frank Sartor is not, and he has no rights in this Parliament. As the Minister for Health said, the Opposition is seeking to make absolutely sure that the reputation of Frank Sartor is one characterised by those horrible words "serial sex offender".

I listened intently to what the Leader of the Opposition said. She indicted herself today because her words were: "We have taken advice from a married woman’s family, who earlier this year told us, told us earlier this year, that the Lord Mayor tried to pressure her into a liaison." She is a member of Parliament. What has she been doing for the last eight months? Why has she not been down there at the Anti-Discrimination Board with this woman, in confidence, putting these allegations to a proper forum? This Chamber is not a court. The Leader of the Opposition has had this information, on her own admission, for eight long months. In those long eight months this poor woman that she referred to has been given no help.

Mr O’Farrell: How do you know that?

Mr WHELAN: No help whatsoever, because the Leader of the Opposition has done nothing about it. But what of the timing of the announcement? Honourable members may have forgotten that it was the honourable member for Gosford who yesterday stood up to take a point of order during the debate and mentioned the words. Yesterday the Opposition moved for urgency. What was the urgency matter to do with? It was a motion of no confidence in Faye Lo Po’, the Minister for Community Services. Why was the urgent motion not to do with the Lord Mayor of Sydney?

Why would the Opposition think that a motion of no confidence in a Minister, about the conduct of a Minister’s portfolio, is more important than the grave allegations about the Lord Mayor, a person who cannot defend himself in this Parliament? In a cowardly way they introduced this matter - not in a notice of motion, of which they gave eight or nine yesterday, but by way of point of order. Then the Leader of the Opposition in the other place, with full knowledge of everybody in the upper House, asked a series of questions about the Lord Mayor of Sydney.

The fact of the matter is that their timing is not about protection of women. Their timing is about getting Frank Sartor. That is all it is. It has nothing to do with protecting women. It is all about making sure they get a headline to besmirch Frank Sartor, to defame him, and to defame him knowing that he cannot defend himself in coward’s castle. If ever this place was correctly defined in that manner, it is today, because every allegation put up by the Opposition has been profoundly rebutted by the
Page 269
Premier. Those rebuttals come, in particular, from the Anti-Discrimination Board, headed by a former Liberal senator, and from the auditor of the Sydney City Council. All of the allegations that have been made in the upper House have been rejected.

There are no new allegations. In my electorate office, every week I get countless allegations. What do I do? I send them to the proper forum. I do not stand up here in Parliament and pretend this is a court. There is no chance of people coming into this place to defend themselves unless they are members of Parliament. We do not cross-examine witnesses. We do not put evidence to the test. We do not put it to proof. All that the Opposition wants to do, and all it was about yesterday, is timing. Opposition members felt that they could, on behalf of the Greiner machine, kill Frank off.

For eight months the Opposition has had this information - on the Leader of the Opposition’s own evidence. She had that letter in 1992. The letter that Opposition members want to produce looks to me like it is unsigned. Now it is not a letter, it is a document. But they will not produce it to let members of Parliament see it. They have had it since 1992. Why then, two or three days before the Sydney City Council election do we have this letter? Can anyone help me here? The fact of the matter is that their campaign is in tatters. They are desperate. The candidate said that she did not know anything about it. She asked, "Why didn’t they tell me?"

The Leader of the Opposition said that she did not know. She said absolutely nothing. All she did was make an admission that a woman came to see Opposition members more than eight months ago. The Opposition has known about this matter for eight months. Although the Leader of the Opposition had the opportunity to do something last session, she never raised the matter. What does that say about her credibility? A woman has made an allegation that she has been sexually harassed by Frank Sartor and the Leader of the Opposition has not raised it in Parliament. Why not? Because it is baloney - it does not exist.

This is a political conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in New South Wales at the highest possible level. There is a conspiracy at the top of the Liberal Party, using the parliamentary Liberal Party for its own filthy gain - and the prize is the position of Lord Mayor of Sydney. The Liberal Party does not worry about ruining reputations. It does not let anything stand in the way of a grab for power. It does not ensure that a person receives a proper hearing by referring complainants to the Anti-Discrimination Board. The Opposition has a blind spot about women, and it relates to Terry Griffiths. It took eight long months before we drove him out of here. They did not get rid of him.

Mr Hazzard: Point of order: I am sure, Mr Speaker, you have anticipated my point of order.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! No, I have not.

Mr Hazzard: You know what the points of order are when they are taken by Government members. The point of order is that the Minister for Police is using a prop.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! No point of order is involved.

Mr Hazzard: The Minister is using a prop. He is waving it in front of the television cameras.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chair has ruled on that in the past.

Mr WHELAN: The modus operandi of the Opposition is filled with mal fides. Yesterday the honourable member for Gosford was not allowed to table what he now refers to as a document. This is not a court of law. Under Standing Orders 82 and 137 honourable members must prove the authenticity of a document. Therefore, the document was refused. But that did not stop the Opposition going to the press gallery at 7.30 p.m. and circulating the letter, clearly to peddle the story and to give it impetus and status. Once a document is used outside the House it is highly defamatory. The document was circulated in the press gallery, sponsored by the Liberal Party minders, even prior to it being released for publication under privilege in the upper House. The upper House inquiry does not call evidence. The only people to give evidence in the upper House will be members of the upper House. [Time expired.]

Mr BARR (Manly) [4.42 p.m.], by consent: This issue is about process and the abuse of process. I object strongly to this august House being used as a kangaroo court to make unsubstantiated allegations of a most serious nature against a candidate two days before a council election. The Liberal Party has been a great party with legal tradition. Many great lawyers have represented the Liberal Party over the years. The present Leader of the Opposition is a lawyer and was a tutor at the College of Law, and many shadow bench members are lawyers. They have totally abused the legal process, and they know it. If they do not, then there is something very wrong.

Page 270

Opposition members come to this Chamber and make a defamatory remark under parliamentary protection without substantiation and without due acknowledgment of the correct processes and procedures and the appropriate forums to deal with these matters. That shows moral bankruptcy on its part. It is not the role of this House to test these allegations; that should occur through the proper judicial process. If Opposition members do not understand that, I do not know why they are in this business.

Unfortunately, the Liberal Party has gone feral. It has been heading downhill for a long time. At the last election through its campaign of negativity and far right-wing agenda, the Liberal Party lost a lot of the mainstream votes that it once captured. If the Liberal Party continues down that path it will continue to lose votes. The Liberal Party has lost all credibility. It should not make such assertions a few days before an election, in which the high stakes are high - who controls city hall. Mrs Greiner made some pathetic comments today. She said that she wished she had been told beforehand, as though she were totally innocent and did not know anything about it.

The Opposition should take this matter to the appropriate forum and not sling allegations before the Parliament in a cavalier and reckless way. It shows a lack of leadership on the part of the Leader of the Opposition. In her speech she never used the word "alleged". She took it as fact that these things had happened. I find that attitude from a lawyer repugnant. I do not believe that the Opposition has shown any respect for due process. Its conduct is shameful and reflects poorly on all Opposition members who are lawyers, their advisers and the Leader of the Opposition. They have shown no propriety and probity - two words that were used by the Leader of the Opposition in her speech. She did not show any propriety and probity in this debate. The Leader of the Opposition has not shown any leadership, and it is a great disgrace.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI (Lane Cove - Leader of the Opposition) [4.47 p.m.], in response: The Government has entirely missed the point throughout this whole debate. The motion moved by the Premier is the clearest demonstration that he has missed the point. Sexual harassment is about the abuse and irresponsible use of power. We have the word of the Premier himself on this issue. As honourable members know, only a few years ago the Premier demanded a wide-ranging inquiry into sexual harassment claims against a former Minister, Terry Griffiths.

Today the Government comes into this Chamber and uses the power of its numbers in an attempt to block the Opposition’s efforts to stand up for and protect those women who believe they have been intimidated, bullied and harassed. It is ironic. This issue is about the power of authority. Yet the Government responds in the only way the New South Wales right wing of the Australian Labor Party knows how: a display of power. We did not hear one word of concern from the Premier or the Minister for the Police for the alleged victims.

[Interruption]

They laugh when I talk about victims of sexual harassment. No wonder the women of this State tell the Opposition that the Labor Party has no concern or agenda for women. They are an absolute disgrace. We did not hear one word of concern from the Premier for the alleged victims. All the Premier did was bluster. The Premier produced some formal responses from statutory authorities. I must say, from what he said, that he made those inquiries within very formal and defined values. They were thorough inquiries, no doubt, because he managed to get the answers within 24 hours. It is an absolute disgrace that he purports to give that sort of information on such a broad-ranging issue in such a narrow way.

Today the Premier and his supporting speakers have said that they do not care about those who are powerless to act. Where is the Premier’s human face? Where is the human face of this Government? The Premier did not mention the women involved once in his very short speech - he did not even make a passing reference to, or express concern for, the victims. To top it all off, the Premier and the Minister for Health talked about the abuse of parliamentary privilege - which is a bit rich coming from this Government. Are these Labor Party members who used and abused Parliament in this Chamber day in and day out for seven years in opposition serious? This is the same mob who, without a single shred of evidence, regularly attacked the integrity and reputation of members on this side of the Chamber.

[Interruption]

Government members ought to be careful about what they say about people in this Chamber because they are accountable to other members for their behaviour. I am absolutely amazed! The Minister for Health talked about the abuse of parliamentary privilege. As I said, Government members have short memories. The Minister either has a short memory or a poor understanding of the
Page 271
issues that concern many women in this city. I will clarify one issue raised by the Minister for Police. The allegation that a woman was approached by the Lord Mayor earlier this year has only recently - during the recess - come to the attention of the Opposition. We raised the issue in the Chamber at the earliest opportunity.

If the Minister deliberately chooses to dissemble and mislead the Chamber, that is his business. The Opposition does not resile from the allegations that have been brought before this Parliament over the past few days. These serious claims have been raised because members of the Opposition honestly, in their heart of hearts, believe that women in this State need to be protected from people who are in positions of power. These allegations have not been raised incorrectly, as the Premier said. They have not been raised, as the Premier incorrectly said, because of some pressure exerted on me by a former Premier, Mr Greiner, or indeed a former Minister, Mr Yabsley. That very statement by the Premier highlights what can only be described as his patronising way.

In his usual dismissive way the Premier is choosing not to listen to a woman in this Chamber. That is a perfect illustration of what honourable members expect from the Premier, who is patronising and paternalistic in his views of women in the work force. How dare the Premier suggest, even for a minute, that these serious allegations have been raised only because I have been directed to do so by two gentlemen. The Premier should not dare to patronise me. I find the way the Premier patronises women in general offensive, and I particularly take offence at the way he chooses to do so with me. He should not dare question my credentials. He should not dare question my right as the Leader of the Opposition to raise important issues in this State.

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

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: The Premier should not question my right as Leader of the Opposition to raise important issues affecting women in this city. It is my job to represent the views and aspirations of the people of this State. The Premier can walk up and down all he likes; he can posture all he wants; he can play act as much as he likes - we know he is good at it - but he should not dare to question my integrity or the way I carry out my responsibilities. It is totally and completely out of order for the Premier to patronise any woman, including me.

The Opposition is absolutely committed to making sure that matters of public interest are put into the public arena. The Opposition will continue to do so because it has an obligation to represent the interests and views of the people of this State, including women and those who are not in a position to speak for themselves. Yesterday the Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for Women was not prepared to stand up for people with disabilities. The Premier is now not prepared to be concerned about sexual harassment. The Government has totally and completely abrogated its responsibilities to those who are less powerful than it. The Opposition will not do that.

Mr CARR (Maroubra - Premier, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Citizenship) [4.57 p.m.], in reply: Would one describe that as a disgraceful or lame performance? The Leader of the Opposition condemns herself with her own words. Her speech was taped when she said, "We have taken advice from a married woman’s family who earlier this year told us [the Opposition] who earlier this year told us [she repeated it] that the Lord Mayor tried to pressure her into a liaison." There was no action in this Parliament from the Leader of the Opposition in the last session to direct this complainant towards the appropriate body, the Anti-Discrimination Board. There was no attempt to raise this matter in the Town Hall, in the Sydney City Council. The Leader of the Opposition said she received a complaint earlier this year - no action was taken.

With the Sydney City Council election only days away, all of a sudden the Parliament is enlivened by accusations from the Opposition. The words of the honourable member for Gosford were "a serial sex offender" in the Town Hall. That was said without any affidavit, without any documentation, without any witness being produced. That was an absolute travesty of how these matters ought to be proceeded with. The essence of this matter is the question of process and how these matters are to be dealt with. It is no good invoking Terry Griffiths. He quit at the insistence of the then Premier, Mr Fahey. The front page of the Daily Telegraph Mirror of 27 June 1994 records it all; he "resigned from the State Cabinet because of problems with staff". Do not pretend that we up-ended parliamentary procedure to force this Minister out over sexual harassment. His victims were heard at an inquiry headed by Carmel Niland. Process! That is how it was proceeded with.

The Opposition has made three specific accusations. The first accusation is about a host of
Page 272
complaints being lodged with the Anti-Discrimination Board. The president of the board says that that is not the case. Second, the Opposition alleged in this Parliament that secret payments were being made to the victims of sexual harassment in the employ of the Town Hall. That was rebutted by the Director-General of the Department of Local Government.

Mr O’Farrell: Where’s the evidence?

Mr CARR: I see - there has to be evidence that the allegation, unsupported by any evidence, is true. The honourable member for Gosford said "serial sexual offender". The Opposition is now saying that the onus is on Sartor to clear his name. What about the onus being on members opposite to back their outrageous allegations? Are members opposite saying that the former Auditor-General, Tony Harris, somehow watered the results when he reported that, looking at the accounts of Town Hall, there were no payments being made? That is what he said. Is he bound in loyalty to this Government? He is this Government’s most persistent critic - certainly not a charge that can be made of the Leader of the Opposition. No affidavits, no statutory declarations and no documentation was provided to support the Opposition’s claims.

Mr O’Farrell: A bit like Walsh Bay.

Mr CARR: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition lied about Walsh Bay. I heard what he said. He said that the report of the Independent Commission Against Corruption cleared Wal Murray; it did not. He said that it condemned the tendering process and condemned me and my staff; it did not. There was no finding in the Walsh Bay report against me or my staff. None. The honourable member got it absolutely wrong and he should withdraw it. Government members well recall that the ICAC inquiry into Walsh Bay made no finding whatever against me but it criticised the tendering process - a travesty of a tendering process - administered by Wal Murray. That is the record. The report is in the library, and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition should look it up.

What a performance by Hannaford in the upper House! It was as bad as the performance of the man who replaced him as Leader of the Opposition in the upper House and as bad as the performance of this creature opposite. But Hannaford was not rebuked by the Leader of the Opposition. If honourable members believe Mr Hannaford, he waited seven years to pursue allegations that he was aware of when he was Attorney General in 1992 and 1993. He was aware of the allegations but he waited seven years before pursuing them. We wonder why the Opposition raised the allegations this week. It raised them this week because Mrs Greiner sees herself as Lord Mayor of Sydney in Olympics year and Mr Yabsley sees a group of developers controlling Sydney Town Hall. The honourable member for Bligh knows these characters. She confirmed that that is the correct working hypothesis for this event: a group of developers with Kathryn Greiner as their front person, designed to get their hands on Sydney Town Hall. That is precisely what this group is all about.

Ms Moore: Yes. Yabsley dreamt it up.

Mr CARR: Not only do I congratulate her but I acknowledge -

Ms Moore: It has the stamp of Yabsley all over it.

Mr CARR: It has the paw prints of Yabsley all over it. This is out of the Yabsley CorPol office. This whole disgusting episode is a brutal bid for power in Sydney Town Hall. The message went to this hapless lot - the worst Opposition in the State’s history - that they must deliver for the Greiners, deliver for Yabsley and do their bit for the cause of a Liberal-controlled Town Hall. That is all this is about. With their campaign fading and dropping out of sight the allegations had to be raised this week. The Leader of the Opposition, instead of resisting or standing up to it in principle, allowed it to go on.

A moment ago the Leader of the Opposition had the audacity to say, "How dare the Premier stop me speaking out about this?" The fact is that she spoke out about it only when we moved the motion. That is all that was required to get her to speak on it. In fact, she has been condemned for not doing anything while the rest of her grizzly crew pursue this campaign, without evidence, against Sartor. That is the condemnation. How could she say that I tried to stop her? I have given her the very vehicle to comment on this by bringing this motion forward.

[Interruption]

Honourable members had a question time yesterday. There was hardly a revelation in the contribution of members opposite to question time yesterday. I am getting rather used to a question time at dinner time; it has a lot going for it. The Leader of the Opposition has failed to condemn reckless abuses by her parliamentary team, including shadow ministers in this House and in the Legislative Council. She has failed to condemn them. In her speech today she should have unreservedly apologised to the Lord Mayor. This is an abuse of process. It is about the way complaints should be treated. The idea that the Leader of the
Page 273
Opposition can say that she sat on this complaint for eight months and only detonated it now is further confirmation.

Mr O’Farrell: She didn’t say that.

Mr CARR: That is what she said. She said, "We have taken advice from a married woman’s family, who earlier this year told us". Yet nothing was done until the city council elections were only two days off. That alone should support a motion of censure carried by this House. I commend the motion to the House.

Question - That the words stand - put.

The House divided.

Mr Amery Mr McGrane
Ms Andrews Mr McManus
Mr Aquilina Mr Martin
Mr Ashton Ms Meagher
Mr Barr Ms Megarrity
Mrs Beamer Ms Moore
Mr Brown Mr Nagle
Ms Burton Mr Newell
Mr Campbell Ms Nori
Mr Carr Mr Orkopoulos
Mr Collier Ms Saliba
Mr Crittenden Mr Scully
Mr Debus Mr W. D. Smith
Mr Face Mr Stewart
Mr Gaudry Mr Torbay
Mr Greene Mr Tripodi
Ms Harrison Mr Watkins
Mr Hickey Mr Whelan
Mr Hunter Mr Woods
Mr Iemma Mr Yeadon
Mr Knowles
Mrs Lo Po’ Tellers,
Mr Lynch Mr Anderson
Mr McBride Mr Thompson

Mr Brogden Mr D. L. Page
Mrs Chikarovski Ms Seaton
Mr Debnam Mrs Skinner
Mr George Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Hartcher Mr Souris
Mr Hazzard Mr Stoner
Ms Hodgkinson Mr Tink
Mr Humpherson Mr J. H. Turner
Dr Kernohan Mr R. W. Turner
Mr Kerr Mr Webb
Mr Oakeshott Tellers,
Mr O’Doherty Mr Fraser
Mr O’Farrell Mr R. H. L. Smith

Ms Allan Mr Armstrong
Mr Black Mr Collins
Mr Gibson Mr Glachan
Mr Knight Mr Maguire
Mr Mills Mr Merton
Mr Moss Mr Piccoli
Mr Price Mr Richardson
Dr Refshauge Mr Rozzoli

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment negatived.

Question - That the motion be agreed to - put.

The House divided.

Mr Amery Mr McGrane
Ms Andrews Mr McManus
Mr Aquilina Mr Martin
Mr Ashton Ms Meagher
Mr Barr Ms Megarrity
Mrs Beamer Ms Moore
Mr Brown Mr Nagle
Ms Burton Mr Newell
Mr Campbell Ms Nori
Mr Carr Mr Orkopoulos
Mr Collier Ms Saliba
Mr Crittenden Mr Scully
Mr Debus Mr W. D. Smith
Mr Face Mr Stewart
Mr Gaudry Mr Torbay
Mr Greene Mr Tripodi
Ms Harrison Mr Watkins
Mr Hickey Mr Whelan
Mr Hunter Mr Woods
Mr Iemma Mr Yeadon
Mr Knowles
Mrs Lo Po’ Tellers,
Mr Lynch Mr Anderson
Mr McBride Mr Thompson

Mr Brogden Mr D. L. Page
Mrs Chikarovski Ms Seaton
Mr Debnam Mrs Skinner
Mr George Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Hartcher Mr Souris
Mr Hazzard Mr Stoner
Ms Hodgkinson Mr Tink
Mr Humpherson Mr J. H. Turner
Dr Kernohan Mr R. W. Turner
Mr Kerr Mr Webb
Mr Oakeshott Tellers,
Mr O’Doherty Mr Fraser
Mr O’Farrell Mr R. H. L. Smith

Page 274
Ms Allan Mr Armstrong
Mr Black Mr Collins
Mr Gibson Mr Glachan
Mr Knight Mr Maguire
Mr Mills Mr Merton
Mr Moss Mr Piccoli
Mr Price Mr Richardson
Dr Refshauge Mr Rozzoli

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt - Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation) [5.24 p.m.]: It is with regret that I inform the House of the death of Mr Ian Hawker, President of the Sheepmeats Council of Australia. Mr Hawker was tragically killed in a motor vehicle accident whilst travelling from his home in Coonabarabran to Dubbo. From there he was planning to head on to an New South Wales Farmers Association Sheepmeats Committee meeting in Sydney.

Ian Hawker was just 57 years old. To his wife, Pat, and two adult children Kylie and Tim, and three grandchildren I extend condolences on behalf of all honourable members. The New South Wales Parliament should record that Mr Hawker will be remembered for making a significant contribution to the sheepmeats industry in New South Wales and, indeed, in Australia. He was elected as President of the Sheepmeats Council in May this year. Before that he was its vice-president for three years. Recently he was involved in negotiations over the issue of the United States of America setting new tariffs for Australian lamb imports.

Ian Hawker was the Coonabarabran branch secretary of the New South Wales Farmers Association from 1978 to 1981, branch chairman from 1981 to 1988, a member of the New South Wales Farmers Association General Council from 1987, and a member of the New South Wales Farmers Association Sheepmeats Committee from 1988. Mr Hawker was appointed and served as chairman of that committee from 1992 until July 1999 and was a member of the New South Wales Farmers Co-operative Board of Directors from 1996.

He was also a very community-minded person and was a Coonabarabran show committee member for 12 years, a Rural Lands Protection Board director, a bushfire brigade captain and a TAFE committee member. I know that Mr Hawker will be sadly missed by all who knew him. I met Ian on numerous occasions and always found him to be an affable person who was dedicated to his causes. His contribution to his industry and his community will be remembered for years to come. I am pleased to record that contribution in the Parliament today.

Mr SLACK-SMITH (Barwon) [5.28 p.m.]: The Opposition joins with the Government in expressing its deepest sympathy to the family of Ian Hawker. He was 57 years of age when he tragically lost his life as a result of a motor vehicle accident in my electorate, between Coonabarabran and Dubbo. At the time of his passing he was President of the Sheepmeats Council of Australia, representing the industry he loved. In recent times he championed the cause of the Australian exports of lamb to the United States of America.

Ian Hawker began his services to farming when he became secretary of the New South Wales Farmers Association branch in Coonabarabran in 1978. He was elected to the New South Wales Farmers General Council in 1987. Ian Hawker was a special type of person, an excellent listener and a hard worker, and he had a great capacity to get things done. He was respected not only in the sheep and general agricultural industries but also in the Coonabarabran community. Agriculture, not solely the sheep industry, has lost a special person, a person who gave the industry much more than he could ever receive. To his wife, Pat, their children Kylie and Tim, and their grandchildren Lucy, William and Gemma the Opposition joins with the Government in extending sincere condolences.

Mr CARR: In the absence of the Minister for the Olympics the Minister for Roads and Transport will answer questions on his behalf. In the absence of the Deputy Premier I will answer questions on his behalf.

Petitions praying that the establishment of heroin shooting galleries be opposed and that consideration be given to the introduction of legislation for drug reform, received from Mr Debnam and Mr Iemma.

Page 275

Petition praying that the head lease proposal for North Head Quarantine Station be opposed, received from Mr Barr.

Petition praying that an indoor aquatic centre be built at Wagga Wagga, received from Mr Maguire.

Petitions praying that a committee be established to review the Firearms Act, received from Mr George, Ms Hodgkinson, Mr Oakeshott, Mr D. L. Page, Mr Slack-Smith, Mr Souris, Mr Stoner, Mr J. H. Turner, Mr R. W. Turner and Mr Webb.

Petition praying for increased police strength at Kings Cross local area command and police foot patrols in Woolloomooloo, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying for increased police presence in the Surry Hills area, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying for increased police presence in the East Sydney and Darlinghurst areas, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying for opposition to the construction of a stadium at Bondi Pavilion for the volleyball event during the 2000 Olympic Games, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that construction of a new Brunswick Valley hospital be included in the capital works program for 1999-2000, received from Mr D. L. Page.

Petition praying for opposition to the closure of Seaforth TAFE, received from Mr Barr.

Petition praying that consideration be given to the introduction of additional safety arrangements at the crossing between Thornton and Crescent Streets, Fairlight, received from Mr Barr.

Petition praying that the Victorian Taxi Yellow Fleet and Royal Blue multipurpose Taxi be retained as taxi service providers for Goulburn, received from Ms Hodgkinson.

Petition praying that a pedestrian crossing be installed on Bayswater Road, Rushcutters Bay, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that consideration be given to the construction of a light rail transport system for Moore Park, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that Moore Park be used for passive recreation after construction of the Eastern Distributor and that car parking not be permitted in Moore Park, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that the Woolloomooloo wharf redevelopment project include provision for a ferry wharf, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that a pedestrian crossing be installed on Belvoir Street, Surry Hills, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that holders of pensioner concession cards and the Seniors Card receive equitable travel concessions on transport, received from Mr Oakeshott.

Petitions praying that Windsor Road be upgraded and widened within the next two financial years, received from Mr Richardson and Mr Rozzoli.

Page 276

Petition praying for the reinstatement of staff at Countrylink stations and travel centres on north coast rail services, received from Mr Stoner.

Petition praying that legislation be introduced to prohibit the use of impounded animals for experimentation, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that bushland along Mona Vale Road, presently owned by the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council, be purchased and preserved as a national park, received from Mr Humpherson.

Petitions praying that septic tank owners be exempted from inspection and registration fees, received from Ms Hodgkinson and Dr Kernohan.

Petition praying that any rezoning of the White City site be opposed, received from Ms Moore.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: My question is directed to the Premier. Has the Premier asked his Minister and Labor Party powerbroker Eddie Obeid to explain why he asserted yesterday that he held no shares in Hapgeti when the company’s own annual returns - prepared by Mr Obeid’s son - shows the Minister to be the sole registered shareholder?

Mr CARR: Mr Speaker -

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: I have not finished the question.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Premier was in order in commencing to answer the question. The Leader of the Opposition is entitled to ask only one question. However, on this occasion I will extend some latitude to her.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: Is Mr Obeid lying or is he just incompetent?

Mr CARR: When you can get only 25 people to vote for you in a censure motion you know who is incompetent. The vote the House has just had was a vote of no confidence in the Leader of the Opposition. What a disgrace! Only 25 could straggle in to vote on the censure motion. I refer the House to the statement made in another House by the Minister yesterday. I challenge the Leader of the Opposition, if the Opposition wants to debate this further, to take a complaint to the Independent Commission Against Corruption, which exists to hear grievances about the tendering process. The House will also note that this whole matter concerns an argument about a tender generated by a dissatisfied representative of a company in the Sydney City Council area.

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

Mr CARR: If, after the Minister’s statement in the Legislative Council yesterday, there is anything to argue about, take it to Independent Commission Against Corruption.

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

Mr CARR: He has been demoted. He used to sit on the front bench but now he is down there. His contribution in the election campaign resulted in him losing responsibility for education.

Mr McMANUS: My question without notice is to the Minister for Health. What improvements have been made to patient access and advisory services in the health system?

Mr Hartcher: The short answer is none.

Mr KNOWLES: After the honourable member’s performance yesterday, and after only 25 votes in a censure motion, he should want to get as far away as possible.

Mrs Skinner: What about the fruit salad?

Mr KNOWLES: What about the fruit cake? What about the Christmas bon-bons? With 25 members voting on a censure motion - one percentage point higher than their primary vote in the elections - they are doing very well. I should
Page 277
advise the House that last Monday I received a letter from the husband of an aged pensioner who had been advised by her orthopaedic surgeon that the chance of her having a mini knee replacement in the public health system is "almost nil". The orthopaedic surgeon had advised this elderly gentleman that his wife, " . . . may well die of old age before a pain relieving operation could be scheduled."

We know that is not true, and it says a lot for the view of the orthopaedic surgeon. The correspondence I received was quite heart wrenching. The elderly couple advised me that they had only their pension to live on. They had no other means of support, and it was simply beyond their means to take the orthopaedic surgeon’s advice and take out private health insurance and pay private health premiums to have the operation sooner. Sadly, my office receives many similar letters from time to time, as I suspect do other members of Parliament on both sides of this House.

All too often patients, particularly the elderly, who need the support of the public health system, are almost totally reliant on the advice of their doctors and specialists, and are not able to question the advice given to them. The power relationship between the surgeon, the doctor and patients such as those who have written to me is entirely unequal. At a time when people are most vulnerable because of their illnesses, the inability to obtain quality information, to obtain the whole picture about the range of options available for treatment, simply adds to their stress.

Whilst I do not doubt that the orthopaedic surgeon was providing correct advice regarding his own waiting list, it is almost always the case that those requiring surgical treatment in our public hospitals have a range of other options. However, in response to the letter that I received my office contacted the patient access co-ordinator of the Health Department on that same day. I can report that, far from dying of old age before undergoing her knee replacement, the lady now has a range of options, including the option of having her operation performed within the next four months. The operation can be undertaken by a different orthopaedic surgeon at another hospital and, of course, the elderly lady and her husband are both very happy indeed.

This woman was not given any special treatment. She was not given a ministerial bump up the list. She was given some options. She was simply one of the many people who use the patient access service to check out their alternatives when advised of inordinately long waiting times for surgery. Another is the man who was told last February that he would have to wait 12 months to have a hip replacement. By using the patient access service, he has had his operation after three months. Another is a woman who needed cataract surgery and was told by her surgeon that there was a minimum wait of 12 months. Eight weeks later, after using the patient access service, she had the operation.

The principle behind the patient access service is a simple one. The patient access co-ordinator, who runs the service, has more information on the respective waiting lists and waiting times for each specialist. Armed with that information, patient access can let people know about their alternatives and choices. So, instead of having one choice - that is, to be told by an orthopaedic surgeon that she might die before she could have a knee replacement - this lady had a range of options and could be given alternatives, with regard to both surgeons and hospitals, and have the necessary procedure performed sooner rather than later. It is worth putting on the public record that New South Wales has one of the shortest waiting lists for surgery of any State. In New South Wales, for every 1,000 people only eight are waiting for elective surgery. That compares with 12 for Victoria and 14 per 1,000 people for Queensland.

Mrs Skinner: And it has deteriorated since your Government has been in office.

Mr KNOWLES: It may be under stress, but it is certainly not deteriorating at the same rate at which members opposite have been deteriorating, particularly over the last 40 minutes. That is a creditable record, but it needs to be constantly managed. Of course, it can be managed better by providing consumers with more information about the range of choices that are available to them. To date, the patient access co-ordinator has successfully resolved more than 90 per cent of all inquiries. In simple terms, that means that patients have their waiting times substantially reduced. Patient access was originally established by my predecessor, the Deputy Premier, under the waiting list reduction program, and it has been very successful. In the past year the service has handled 2,000 cases. Since it was established four years ago it has dealt with 5,000 cases.

Members will recall that yesterday I announced the Government’s intention to increase the range of choice options for health consumers by placing information on waiting lists and waiting
Page 278
times on the Internet and to seek the co-operation of surgeons and other practitioners in having individual surgeons’ lists published in that form. I can further advise that, allied to that initiative, the patient access service will now be substantially expanded and become a permanent service available to the public, general practitioners, and, indeed, anyone who wishes to use it. We have established a free call number so that the service is accessible to everyone in the State. The number is 13 23 29. The service will be advertised widely to ensure that as many people as possible can access the service and its benefits.

I encourage people who are waiting for elective surgery, and who have been told that they have no alternative but to wait 12 months or exceptionally long periods for their surgery, to at least contact the service to find out what other options may be available. People can then make up their own minds about the waiting lists and waiting times and have increased input into their health care needs.

[Questions without notice interrupted.]

Mr SPEAKER: I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of His Excellency Mr Shin Hyo-Hun, Ambassador of the Republic of Korea, and the Consul General, Mr Baek Ki-Moon. I welcome them to Parliament.

[Questions without notice resumed.]

Mr SOURIS: My question is directed to the Premier. Who will meet the cost of repairing a number of antique chairs valued at more than $6,000 each which were wrecked during a late-night party hosted by the President of the Legislative Council in the President’s dining room last session?

Mr CARR: That is a serious allegation. If the Leader of the National Party has any supporting evidence, I will have the matter investigated.

Mrs BEAMER: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Community Services. What is the latest information on a Government plan to set up a wills register?

Mrs LO PO’: I commend the honourable member for Mulgoa for her continued interest in social issues. The question is particularly important, because this year is the International Year of Older Persons. In New South Wales almost 1.5 million people are over the age of 60. That is a sign of a truly successful society. People are not only living longer, they are remaining healthy and active for longer. The Government wants to reinforce to all people, particularly those who are ageing, the importance of making a will.

A will gives people peace of mind that their assets will be distributed according to their wishes. But wills are often made many years before they need to be used. It is up to the person making the will to let his or her loved ones know that a will exists and where it is kept. Not being able to locate a will can put enormous stress on families, particularly on those trying to locate it after the death of a loved one. Indeed, many of us have heard horror stories of terrible disputes between families over a person’s will. The Government is serious about acting on this problem.

At present there is no single body a person can notify when he or she has made a will. If a will is not found, the estate is distributed under laws that provide a useful safety net, but it may not necessarily be what the person wanted. However, there are no guarantees that a person’s assets will be distributed in the way he or she wanted. We want to make it easier for families. We want to give people, particularly older people, peace of mind that their possessions, the very things that they have worked hard for, will be distributed in exactly the way they planned. We understand that people would not want their loved ones to bicker over what they leave behind.

Today I am able to announce that, for the first time, people in New South Wales will be able to register the existence of their wills. Under a new pilot program, the register will record that a will has been written and stored in a particular location. The Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages is now consulting with key experts on the register. The register would merely record the existence of a will and act as a reminder system for a person’s family following that person’s death. The will itself would continue to be stored wherever a person chooses - be it with the person’s lawyer, bank, a close friend, inside the family Bible or in any other place.

A similar wills register operates in the Canadian province of British Columbia. The wills register receives about 50,000 will notifications each year. It is expected that there would be about 70,000
Page 279
a year in New South Wales, based on our larger population. The register will be voluntary and merely a record of information provided by a person. The registry will also be able to accept notifications for wills made in the past. It is proposed that only the person himself or his authorised representative will be able to check the register for the will during his lifetime. Proof of a person’s death will be required before the search will be authorised for another person. The registry will seek comments and suggestions from members of the public and consumer organisations during the pilot program. We look forward to their input.

Mr TINK: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police. Are the telephone numbers of police calling talkback radio and the media to complain about budget cuts and other things being monitored by internal affairs in an ASIO-like operation? Is this part of the Commissioner’s vow last year to nail police who speak to the media to a tree in Hyde Park?

Mr WHELAN: I actually listen to talkback radio and it sounds like Liberal Party members ringing up. To answer the honourable member’s question, no.

Mr TINK: I ask a supplementary question. In light of the Minister’s answer, will he listen to the tape that I have in the Chamber and then direct the Commissioner of Police to remove any journalists’ phone numbers from the monitoring system - a system described by the journalists’ union as a serious interference in the free flow of information and the public’s right to know?

Mr WHELAN: I do not know whether it is a tape of Andrea Bocelli or a tape of someone else.

Ms HARRISON: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Western Sydney. What is the latest information on the western Sydney industry awards?

Mr YEADON: For the first time western Sydney has a whole-of-government approach to stimulate jobs, innovation and investment - the western Sydney jobs plan. The plan will build partnerships between business, the community, local government, universities, and government departments such as Urban Affairs and Planning, State and Regional Development and the Office of Western Sydney. One of the major components of the jobs plan is the western Sydney industry awards. The awards are helping to position western Sydney industry in a competitive, global economy. They profile the quality of western Sydney’s most innovative businesses and support key industries that are integral to the future growth and development of western Sydney. They are good for businesses, good for industry and good for the people of western Sydney.

For example, the producer of digitised video security, Zone Communication, found that the award won by the business made a real difference. Zone won an inaugural western Sydney award for innovative service delivery. Business owner Bill Nolan took his western Sydney industry award to America as a key part of his business promotion. He found that his award has given him the extra competitive edge and credibility that he needed to break into new markets. Since winning the award in March this year, Zone Communications has won United States contracts worth $1.7 million. Zone is currently quoting for a country club in Long Island, 11 supermarkets in New Jersey and a skyscraper in New York.

Another of the western Sydney industry award winners, radio station 2WS, has also benefited from the award which it won. The general sales manager of 2WS, Brian Blacklock, said that the awards had cemented awareness about the radio station’s contribution to the growth and development of western Sydney. Radio station 2WS won more than one award; it also won the information technology award. That award has raised the use of Internet broadcasting to benchmark status. Another award winner, the Tolson Group, Australia’s largest mushroom exporter, has had a 40 per cent growth in business since it won the agribusiness awards. Tolson group Chairman, Kevin Tolson, said that the prestige of winning the award has helped the business achieve new export sales in Asia, especially in Hong Kong and in Japan. This is the kind of result that we are promoting in western Sydney. These awards provide the recognition that businesses need as a catalyst to grow more, further stimulating the western Sydney economy. Tomorrow I am launching the awards for the year 2000.

[Interruption]

I am pleased that members of the Opposition recognise how important this initiative is for western Sydney. There is still a modicum of common sense left on the Opposition benches. These awards provide the recognition that is really needed for businesses in western Sydney. I am pleased to
Page 280
announce that two new categories will be added to next year’s awards - global excellence and industry training. These additions are the result of discussions with the business community and they reinforce the strategic nature of the 2000 western Sydney industry awards.

The awards are just one part of the Government’s jobs plan for the western Sydney region. Just last Monday my colleague the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning released the regional environment plan for Parramatta. He is putting the Government’s jobs plan in place. This plan supports the creation of 25,000 new jobs in the Parramatta central business district. The New South Wales Government’s State environmental planning policy 59 - central western Sydney economic and employment area - has also made new developments at Greystanes and Blacktown possible. Those developments are expected to generate another 11,000 jobs.

Mr Hazzard: Over the next 100 years.

Mr YEADON: No, over the next 10 years.

Mr Hazzard: When we are in government.

Mr YEADON: Just to drive home to the honourable member for Wakehurst how successful this Government has been in job creation, in its first term it created 111,000 jobs, and we intend to build on that success. The western Sydney industry awards are an outstanding example of the State Government working with local businesses to promote jobs, investment and innovation in the region. The Carr Government has made jobs a priority in western Sydney. It has put in place our western Sydney jobs plan, and it is helping business to deliver. We will keep working with commerce and industry to create jobs in greater western Sydney.

Mr ASHTON: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Land and Water Conservation. What is the latest information on water flows in the Murrumbidgee River?

Mr AMERY: This is my big chance. There are only four members of the National Party in the Chamber. What do honourable members think they would say if we asked them what is the biggest issue confronting the leader of the so-called biggest country party in New South Wales?

Mr McGrane: Salinity.

Mr AMERY: The honourable member for Dubbo is wrong; it is not salinity.

Mr Torbay: Water reform.

Mr AMERY: The honourable member for Northern Tablelands is wrong; it is not water reform. It is broken chairs in the Legislative Council. Country Labor and members on the crossbenches should visit country New South Wales tomorrow and say, "Don’t raise water issues. The biggest issue facing rural New South Wales, according to the Leader of the National Party, is broken chairs in the Legislative Council." I commend the honourable member for East Hills for his interest in environmental issues, and in particular the water reform process. Environmental flows were first introduced in July 1998 in each of the State’s six regulated rivers and the Barwon-Darling, representing a major landmark in water management in this country.

I remind honourable members that environmental releases are being made to ensure the fundamental health of our river systems. Of course, this is necessary if we are to sustain our rural and regional industries. Environmental flow rules were developed by community-based river management committees last year. Those committees are made up of representatives of farming interests and conservation interests as well as local councils and government agencies. Honourable members may have heard some comments made about the Murrumbidgee flow rules in recent months. As a matter of fact, I might have expected a question from the honourable member for Murrumbidgee on this very issue.

Mr Piccoli: You closed question time.

Mr AMERY: I am pleased you stayed. Despite some initial hurdles, I can inform the House that last month the Murrumbidgee River Management Committee reached unanimous agreement on a modified set of environmental flow rules for the 1999-2000 season. The agreement reached by that committee will improve the certainty and predicability of water allocations for irrigation in the spring. This is vital for the irrigation industry, particularly the rice industry, which is worth some $300 million at the farm gate and $600 million to the local economy as a whole.

Briefly, the rules say that for this season irrigators are able to borrow environmental water to boost their early season allocations. This means an increase of 4 per cent to the early season general security allocation, taking the total allocation figure
Page 281
for general security use to 50 per cent. The objectives of the environmental flow rules are to maintain a minimum flow in the river reach immediately below the dam; to maintain some natural flows and variability downstream of the dam; to protect the flows at the end of the river system; and to provide an environmental contingency allowance to meet a number of other environmental objectives. The modified flow rules include two storage thresholds in Burrinjuck Dam of 30 per cent and 50 per cent, below which environmental releases are limited. In other words, full environmental releases will not occur until Burrinjuck Dam reaches 50 per cent capacity. And, for the record, the dam is still just a little under 30 per cent.

I commend the Murrumbidgee River Management Committee members for their work in developing the modified set of flow rules. I particularly thank them for their perseverance and professionalism in reaching this favourable outcome, which is a win for both the environment and for the irrigation industry. The problems that they experienced in negotiating the flow rules have demonstrated the complexity of managing rivers to meet a diversity of needs. Also, I am pleased to say that the local member for Murrumbidgee has recently written to me supporting these new rules. He said in his letter to me:

I was very pleased to see the Murrumbidgee River Management Committee finally come to consensus on changing the rules to allow greater security for water users while still allowing water to be set aside for environmental flows.

He concluded by thanking me for approving these new rules. We are tracking the effects of the environmental flows very carefully. In the Murrumbidgee Valley there are two major environmental flow monitoring programs. I know these things do not interest the Leader of the National Party but he should not worry, we will get the chairs fixed. You can tell rural people that we will get the chairs fixed and they do not have to worry. One of the two major environmental flow monitoring programs in the Murrumbidgee Valley is part of a statewide program known as the integrated monitoring of environmental flows, co-ordinated by the Department of Land and Water Conservation.

The other is a collaborative project between Charles Sturt University and the Department of Land and Water Conservation. Those programs are complementary, and they have collected preliminary observations on the effects of environmental flows during the 1998-99 water year. The department’s monitoring program involved the identification of aquatic invertebrates, aquatic plants, frogs, water birds, and also the sampling of water quality and assessment of wet land habitats and conditions. Sites were chosen to include wetlands of varying sizes, and with different hydrological features and grazing pressures.

In September last year the Murrumbidgee River’s extensive system of wetlands received a vital boost, with environmental flows of around 118,000 megalitres. More than 30 wetlands benefited from the additional flows, stretching over 800 kilometres of the river. Many of the known wetlands within this area had not received water since 1996. Yet a number of ecosystems depend on having a wet and dry cycle in order to thrive. Wetlands as far downstream as Hay, where Cabinet met for the first time in history only a couple of weeks ago, also received water from these flows, and wildlife and aquatic plants showed an immediate response. How many Cabinet meetings did the Coalition have in Hay? None. That is why Hay voted Labor; the Coalition ignored them.

Some sections of the river benefited more than others, with large areas of red gum forest and numerous wetlands between Darlington Point and Carrathool being inundated. Low-lying forested areas around Darlington Point in particular were covered for a period of up to a week, giving the trees and importantly young seedlings a good watering and growth spurt. As a result of these new flows, about nine different species of frogs were observed calling and breeding in the wetlands. Other species were identified.

A large number and variety of birds were breeding, with up to 98 active bird nests being located. An even larger number of birds were merely feeding. Some 940 water birds were seen at the Yarrada lagoon. Other wetlands had variable bird breeding events, based on the size and extent of the flows. It was good to see a large number of bird and plant species thriving as the result of these flows. Low-lying wetlands, particularly in the Darlington Point to Carrathool area, connected up to three separate times with the river. This is an important process for improving river health as it allows the transfer of important nutrients and bugs back into the river.

These are all tangible achievements. However, I must emphasise that a longer-term monitoring program, looking five to 10 years ahead, is essential. That is advice that the Leader of the National Party could take: he should be looking five to 10 years ahead. Continued monitoring will provide a clearer picture of the interaction of river flow patterns and river health. This is, of course, complemented by
Page 282
other monitoring programs that focus on social and economic impacts. We must maintain the integrity of the current environmental flow regimes if we are serious about maintaining the long-term health of our rivers. Environmental flows, designed to ensure adequate river health, are a fundamental part of this Government’s water policy.

As I said earlier, I am pleased to receive this question on this important progress in the water reform process. The issue of water reforms and environmental flows in the Murrumbidgee have featured large in rural media, as Country Labor members will attest. Those matters are far more important than the issues raised by the Opposition today. One would have thought that important issues dealing with country New South Wales would have been raised by the Opposition in this House. The lack of interest in rural issues shown by the Opposition is clear evidence of the reason we have an ever-increasing crossbench and an ever-increasing number of Country Labor members in this House.

Ms MOORE: My question is directed to the Premier. Given that the Disorderly Houses Amendment Act 1995 is due for reconsideration and the growing evidence is that the legislation as enacted is failing to adequately regulate brothels, when will the Government initiate a review of the Act?

Mr CARR: The importance of that amendment carried by us in 1995 has now broken the historic link -

Mr Debnam: They are brothels, Bob. Your Act, Bob.

Mr CARR: Ding! Ding! You voted for it!

Mr Debnam: It is your Act to put brothels in every suburb of Sydney.

Mr CARR: It was carried in the Parliament. No wonder the Liberal vote in Vaucluse dropped 5 per cent!

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I draw the attention of the House to the behaviour of the honourable member for Vaucluse. Earlier I placed him on three calls to order. He nodded, thus acknowledging that he was aware that he had been placed on three calls. He then deliberately stood up and began an exchange with the Premier across the table. He obviously wants me to dispense with his services. On this occasion I will refrain from doing so. However, I warn him that he will be deemed to be on three calls to order when the House next meets for question time.

Mr CARR: He had responsibility for a large part of the marginal seats campaign. They said, "Vaucluse is safe. We’ll shift him to the front" and look what happened! Back in Vaucluse there was a 5 per cent drop in the Liberal vote. The Disorderly Houses Amendment Act, which was passed with the support of all members of the House in 1995, with his support, broke that historic link between brothels, criminals and corrupt police. This area will never be fixed. It will always be a potentially tragic and unsatisfactory area of public policy. If anyone has a dramatic solution, they had better advance it because the administration of the sex industry or of brothels will always be fraught with difficulty.

Mr O’Farrell: Empower the police.

Mr CARR: He says, "Empower the police." It was police corruption that created the problem in the first place! That is why it was transferred to local government. It was one of the concerns raised in the royal commission, you idiot!

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting.

Mr CARR: I have to consider some form of review to see whether any change in the way the law works might be satisfactory. I have just received a note. Honourable members might recall an answer to an earlier question thrown at me by the Leader of the National Party. The President of the upper House says that no chairs have been broken, but she advised the one person who has used her dining room more than anyone else is the Leader of the Opposition!

Mr W. D. SMITH: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Gaming and Racing. Has the Government any plans to extend its highly successful liquor accord program to the Shoalhaven area?

Mr FACE: What the honourable member for South Coast has been able to achieve in the short time since his election demonstrates that all the ingredients are present for a successful liquor accord to be passed within his area. He is a dedicated local member along, and is supported by police, other stakeholders in a caring community and responsible licence holders. We are in a position to announce today the formation of the liquor accord in the South Coast area.

Page 283

It was my pleasure to meet most of the licence holders in the Shoalhaven area soon after the election, something I could not achieve previously with the former local member. I know those licence holders are as committed as the Government to stopping alcohol-related antisocial behaviour and crime. That is not to suggest that Nowra and the surrounding environments he represents are any worse or better than other parts of New South Wales. Like any large centre, it has its degree of problems.

I am happy to inform the honourable member for South Coast that I shall be visiting Nowra on 28 September to launch the liquor accord. Accords have been in place in other parts of the State for nearly two years. Some of the most successful ones are being crafted from the original model from Dubbo, with the assistance of the former mayor, who is now the honourable member for Dubbo, and one recently completed in the city of Armidale. I have no regrets about the situation pertaining to Nowra.

The previous honourable member for South Coast did nothing to help that community solve the problem. He is on public record as having raised the issue with me in the Parliament and I gave him all the advice on how to go about trying to resolve the problem. In fact, outside the Chamber I offered him the resources of my department and of the ministry, but that offer fell on deaf years. I can only come to one conclusion: He did not want the problem resolved or he did not understand. Clearly, my firm feeling now is that it was probably the latter.

That has all changed and I am happy to say that in the short period of time since the election we are now in a position to move forward from 28 September. It will give me a great deal of pleasure to attend the Shoalhaven region. The goodwill that has been achieved already on this issue is commendable. Throughout the State, with the co-operation in many cases of people on the other side, we have achieved implementation of approximately 35 accords. Many honourable members will know that we are making good progress in places that one would have thought 18 months ago would not have been achieved.

One of the most notable is the Hastings area, which I viewed recently with some of its stakeholders. That will probably be a good model for far-flung areas of the State such as Lake Macquarie. The honourable member for Swansea and the honourable member for Lake Macquarie are now proceeding down the track of formulating an accord, despite the continued and surprising lack of support from Lake Macquarie City Council.

In general, an accord sets out the principles and standards agreed to by the signatories. As I have said in this House before, there is not one particular accord; each accord can be different in features resulting from different local circumstances. One main advantage of liquor accords is that they are based on local participation. Frankly, the reason for their success is the co-operation of licensees, police, councils and the community.

At one period of time the present mayor of the Sutherland shire, Kevin Schreiber, raised the matter with me in a club in the Menai electorate. My reply was the same I gave to Eric Ellis, the former member for the South Coast. However, once again, that advice fell on deaf ears. Yet, the honourable member for Cronulla quite rightly has raised several times in this House the concerns in that area.

The new member for Miranda has raised the matter with me, and now that I have spoken with local police and other stakeholders, the crafting of a liquor accord will proceed in that area in the near future. I am sure we will have the support of the honourable member for Cronulla; he will get nowhere with the present mayor of Sutherland because though he thought the accord was good, because it came from the Labor Party he considered that it must be bad.

Throughout the State people from both sides of the political fence are saying this has been one of the great advantages of coming to terms with antisocial behaviour. The city of Taree had a lot of trouble with various aspects of antisocial behaviour on the streets. Through the accord there has been a 65 per cent drop in alcohol-related incidents in Taree.

Probably the best result in specific terms is in Dubbo. The latest figures of reported assaults to December 1998 shows a 45 per cent drop. These figures are not cranked up by me. If we have similar co-operation to that of the honourable member for South Coast and the numerous other members I have mentioned, the accord will go a long way to overcoming many of the problems police face. Much police time is taken up dealing with these problems and the liquor accord is a positive move resulting from harm minimisation legislation that was introduced 3½ years ago. At that time the industry was suspicious of the legislation, but that same industry now says it is the best thing that has ever happened.

Questions without notice concluded.

Page 284

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains - Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [6.20 p.m.]: I wish to make a ministerial statement about the draft plan of management for the Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park. Horse riding, which takes place in many national parks, has been a major management issue for the north metropolitan district of the National Parks and Wildlife Service [NPWS] for many years. During the past 20 years there has been a dramatic increase in the number of horses kept for recreational riding in the Duffys Forest area, which is adjacent to Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park. That has led to increased threats to the park’s environmental values from erosion along tracks used by horses and despoliation and weed invasion from horse manure.

A new draft plan of management for Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park has been circulated internally, considered by the advisory council’s management planning sub-committee and exhibited publicly. The plan contains a number of measures to limit damage to the park by horses in order to conserve the natural environment of the park and to provide equitable access for recreation. The draft plan proposes that, amongst other measures, minimum impact horse riding practices will be promoted. Local horse riders have already objected to the listing of the Duffys Forest community as an endangered ecological community under the Threatened Species Conservation Act. However, it is estimated that only 15 per cent of the original area of that community currently exists in the form of a number of remnants.

The draft plan proposed the closure of two tracks - the Wilkins Loop track and the Long track - so that they can be revegetated and protect the endangered Duffys Forest. The plan also proposes to open the Terry Hills track, as well as new access trails on Booralie Road and another track linking Wirreanda Road to the Terry Hills track. Therefore, the number of trails available for horse riding remains approximately the same. As this is a draft plan, all comments received need to be considered by the NPWS advisory council before submission to me for consideration for adoption. The draft plan of management for Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park was prepared following consultation with stakeholders. The public exhibition was extended to enable further consultation.

The NPWS is presently evaluating all submissions. That comprehensive process will allow all submissions to be fully and properly considered. However, without wishing to pre-empt the outcomes of the process, I acknowledge the concerns of horse riders about particular aspects of the draft plan. I had no intention of introducing horse bum bags and rubber shoes and I had no intention of banning horse riding per se from the park. On the other hand, it is absolutely necessary to improve the management of the park to limit the damage caused by horse riding. The details of how that is to be done is the subject of evaluation by the NPWS.

Ms SEATON (Southern Highlands) [6.23 p.m.]: In response to the Minister’s statement about the draft plan of management for Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park, it is important to note that of all the national parks, reserves and other areas under the management of the National Parks and Wildlife Service, more than half of those facilities do not yet have plans of management in place. Those plans of management are taking forever to produce, and people are worried about the consultation process. Not enough money has been made available by the Minister to undertake the job properly.

The draft plan of management is causing concern for people who have traditionally used Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park responsibly and sustainably. Included in that group are horse riders and boat owners. The draft plan has been characterised by a complete lack of consultation with some of the most important user groups, who have been using the park for more than 100 years. They enjoy the environment and use the park responsibly.

The draft plan of management is about money. It is about this Government not being prepared to put enough money into the national parks system to facilitate sustainable and responsible use. The issue is not environment values. The Minister is trying to cloak it in some sort of nonsense about concerns for environmental values. That is not his motivation at all. Treasury has tapped him on the shoulder and said, "We are not going to give you the money. You had better find a way to keep those people out." The Minister has locked the users out of the parks. Ku-ring-gai Chase National park is not the only one. Parks in my area have been closed to responsible horse riders, who have been using the parks and doing their bit on a volunteer basis to contribute to their upkeep and security. He has simply locked them out.

The Minister denies that he ever mentioned the words "bum bags" and "horse booties". Such a
Page 285
proposal would never be accepted by any of the horse riders I met at the rally held last weekend outside Parliament House. I am a horse rider and the prospect of bum bags or nappies on horses would fill any responsible horse rider with horror. Not only do they look ridiculous, they are downright dangerous to horses and to riders. No responsible horse rider would accept such a proposal. The Opposition has seen the reports and proposals from the NPWS. Another person who agrees with the Opposition that this is an absolutely ridiculous proposition is Graham Richardson, a former Federal environment Minister, to whom I had the pleasure of speaking on a radio program about a month ago. He was flabbergasted that this proposal could come from this Government.

The only alternative for responsible horse riders is to accept what the Minister is trying to do - that is, shut them out of the park - but that is not acceptable. Riders have been using this park responsibly and sustainably for a long time. The park supports many jobs and other aspects of the economy in the northern beaches area. The Minister should realise the consequences of his actions and should consult properly with all of those concerned. If he had had the guts to attend the rally outside Parliament House last week he would know the depth of feeling about this matter. The Coalition supports the sustainable use of parks by responsible riders. [Time expired.]

Mr TRIPODI, by leave: I want to correct the record in reference to a remark that was made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. He wrongly claimed that I had used the word "hypocrite" in relation to the Premier. The word "hypocrite" was solely and exclusively directed at the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr OAKESHOTT (Port Macquarie) [6.27 p.m.]: I was pleased to hear the Ministerial statement that was made by the Minister for the Environment. Coalition members view it as a backdown and a win for the Opposition. We would have liked to have removed this motion for urgent consideration. However, there were four keys words in the Minister’s statement and every honourable member would have heard them. They were "minimalist impact horse riding". The Coalition wants a definition of "minimalist impact horse riding".

Mr Whelan: Point of order: The honourable member for Port Macquarie knows that he should refer to the issue, that is, the need for his motion to be heard urgently. He needs to be able to explain why the House should regard the matter as a priority. He is not allowed to debate the substance of the motion.

Mr OAKESHOTT: This motion is urgent because we are talking about several draft plans of management that are currently before the Government. Although wilderness areas are being decided upon, we are talking about booties, bum bags and nappies. The Minister said that he will not implement those measures, yet he continues to talk about minimalist impact horse riding. I do not know of any other type of minimalist-impact horse riding, except for booties, bumbags and nappies. We want this motion for urgent consideration dealt with. We want to condemn the Carr Government for making horses wear booties and bumbags in New South Wales national parks.

We want the Government to confirm that it will not put those regulations in place. We want the Government to confirm that horse riding is a legitimate sport and a legitimate activity in national parks in New South Wales and that it deserves the support of the Government. It is a legitimate and popular activity among people throughout New South Wales. As honourable members are aware, obesity in schools is at record levels. Kids are not getting outside or participating in sports as they used to.

Draft plans of management are before the Government, wilderness area assessments will be decided and they include proposals for nappies and booties. It is all very well for the Minister to walk into this Chamber and say that such regulations will not be put in place, but they are still in place in the draft plans of management and the wilderness area assessments. The Minister continues to talk about minimalist-impact horse riding. This motion is urgent. It is an attempt to get the Government to back down and explain completely its position on booties, bumbags and nappies; what it means by minimalist-impact horse riding; what it will do to support horse riding as a legitimate activity in national parks in New South Wales; and what it will do to support horse riding as a popular sport in New South Wales and get a few more people involved.

Page 286

The motion is urgent, as was reflected in the protest about Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park held on Saturday. Unless honourable members were out to lunch on Saturday, they would have noticed a strong protest of about 200 vehicles with floats behind them at the front gates of Parliament House. Included in the protest was the former member for Monaro, who had a lot to say on this issue. It was good to see him again. There is also a threat to the very popular Bicentennial National Trail, a multi-use 5000-kilometre trail that runs down through Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria. It is a very popular trail that is used for horse riding and many other public activities. However, four wilderness assessments are sending fear through the horse riding community, fear that the Bicentennial Trail, which was a gift to the horse riding community, will be cut.

Question - That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Port Macquarie be proceeded with - negatived.

Motion by Mr Whelan agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow:

(1) the taking of up to five private members’ statements forthwith;

(2) no divisions or quorums to be called; and

(3) the House to stand adjourned at the conclusion of private members’ statements.

Pursuant to further resolution private members’ statements taken forthwith.

Ms MEAGHER (Cabramatta - Parliamentary Secretary) [6.35 pm]: I wish to detail an important proposal, put forward by the Salvation Army in conjunction with other community stakeholders, to open a cafe in the electorate of Cabramatta. Last week at Cabramatta project office, together with representatives of the Fairfield Area Health Service, the Cabramatta police, the Cabramatta community centre and the Salvation Army, I attended a meeting of the Cafe Horizon Group. We were there to work with the Salvation Army to develop a proposal to submit an application for the next round of funding assistance from the Casino Community Benefit Fund to establish a cafe. The aim of the project is to provide vocational training and life skills to disadvantaged young people, particularly those recovering from addictions, by operating a cafe with access to a range of support services on a holistic and integrated basis.

The cafe’s target group will be young people aged from 15 to 25 years who reside in or identify with the Fairfield local government area, with particular emphasis on young people at risk in Cabramatta. The cafe will also target young people who have difficulty in accessing or succeeding in traditional environments. The target group will include young people recovering from addictions, the long-term unemployed, young people living in refuges, early school leavers, young people from non-English-speaking backgrounds, and indigenous young people. The focus of the group will be to train young people to a Certificate II level in hospitality - coffee shop operation. The cafe will provide other types of work-related training including the development of work ethic and skills, and encourage personal development while providing young people participating in the program with an opportunity for job placement.

The cafe will also support young people once they have finished their training. It is envisaged that the cafe and its staff will be able to provide young people with support in a whole range of areas including, but not limited to, personal matters, and family relationships and social issues of particular importance to them. The proposed cafe will operate from Cabramatta and will be able to train 15 young people at any one time. When trained the participants will be able to gain full-time or other productive employment. The cafe will be open to the public, but will attract only a modest level of trade consistent with being primarily a training facility. The proposed cafe will be located in the Cabramatta central business district and will operate between 11.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. Monday to Friday. The aim of the cafe is to operate at a break-even level, with a balanced income derived from sales and training fees.

As well as providing qualifications for the cafe shop operation certificate, the cafe will train young people for work. This will be achieved by an agreement currently being negotiated with local registered clubs. The trainees will not be paid, but will be eligible for unemployment benefits for participating in an approved training program. This is an important initiative. The community groups in Cabramatta welcome the interest and the efforts of the Salvation Army in this proposal and in the development of applications not only to the Casino
Page 287
Community Fund but also to the series of funds available through the Department of Education and Training to assist young people at risk. The program is important because it targets the most vulnerable people in Cabramatta, those who are most at risk of becoming victims of the drug cycle and drug-related crime within the local community.

The program offers young people a brighter future and the opportunity of a fulfilling lifestyle whereby they are able to achieve not only a greater sense of self-esteem by having gained a qualification and employment but also by developing a more suitable peer network. The program has been made possible with the support of the community centre and the area health service. I congratulate all of those involved. As the local member I will give it my utmost support. It is an important part of the Cabramatta project, which I have detailed to the House on numerous occasions. It is a whole-of-government approach dealing not only with the health needs of the community but also policing needs. In the final stages it is also about breaking the cycle of unemployment in the area, offering young people a future. Despite the abrogation of the Federal Government in this regard the community is taking a lead in providing hope and opportunity for its youth.

Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [6.40 p.m.]: On behalf of the residents of the northern beaches I express concern about the ever-diminishing level of services being offered to them by the Government. In the past few years the northern beaches Police Service has been destroyed. Officer numbers have been reduced by almost 70. Last Monday I was advised that at a meeting of the northern beaches local command officers were advised that there was no money available to purchase uniforms. Officers were told they have to turn out the lights when leaving their offices - not to keep their minds focused on criminal investigations but rather on turning out the lights!

They have been told that they cannot make any telephone taps without prior written approval of the area commander. If the commander is away active policing problems would be created. In other words, if police want to tap telephone lines in the normal course of a drug investigation, the money should be there. They should be able to carry out their policing duties without feeling as though they are being strangled by lack of finances. Now they have been told that finances are the order of the day. They have to think finances first and crime second.

Hospitals on the northern beaches are currently under review. They have suffered a reduction in the level of service because of a lack of sufficient funds. Without any prior warning Seaforth TAFE has been threatened with closure and will supposedly close at the end of this year. The northern beaches has only two TAFE colleges, Seaforth and Brookvale. Apparently the Carr Government has slashed something of the order of $4 million from the budget of the Northern Sydney Institute of TAFE. That is being translated into a reduction in services to residents and students on the northern beaches.

Residents have been told that Seaforth TAFE is old and needs expenditure, an obligation of the State Government. Contrary to some advice, Seaforth TAFE has had an increase in student numbers. In 1998-99 accounting and commerce student numbers increased from 510 students to 550; fine arts student numbers increased from 239 to 304; and marketing, advertising, public relations and real estate student numbers increased from 586 to 630. Higher school certificate, Japanese, Year 10 and learning centre student numbers decreased slightly from 362 to 303 but have shown solid support. The total student increase is 5 per cent from 1,687 to 1,787 between 1998 and 1999.

The Carr Government proposes to move 1,180 accounting, commerce, marketing, public relations and real estate students to Brookvale TAFE and to throw 304 fine arts students to the dogs. They will have to find their way to Meadowbank or Hornsby - a ridiculous suggestion to anyone who lives on the northern beaches. Unfortunately this Government thinks that everybody has transport systems like most of western Sydney and other areas in which the Government has high numbers of voters.

The northern beaches does not have a good transport system. Young students, students with disabilities or students who rely on wheelchairs will somehow have to catch two or three buses and take 2 to 2½ hours to travel from the northern beaches to Meadowbank and another 2 to 2½ hours to return. People who are currently able to drop off their children at school, go to TAFE and undertake a course to give themselves an advantage in life, the 303 young people who are currently studying higher school certificate subjects and Year 10 students, will be forced to travel to North Sydney.

It is ridiculous! It will add an hour to travelling time for those who come from Palm Beach or the northern parts of the peninsula. In essence, the Carr Government has walked away from its responsibilities to residents on the northern
Page 288
beaches. People are entitled to a reasonable TAFE which will provide wonderful opportunities for young or old people or people with disabilities to pursue studies and to create new lives for themselves; that will give them a sense of self-esteem and provide job and career opportunities. However, northern beaches residents are being treated like fifth-rate citizens, not second-rate citizens. I call on the Minister to look at what is happening on the northern beaches and to make sure that our students are not subjected to third-world standards.

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield - Minister for Police) [6.44 p.m.]: I remind the honourable member who mentioned the Police Service that the last budget was a record budget, and I am sure the whole of the Police Service will get part of that generous largesse. The law in relation to telephone interceptions is that the regional commander must give consent. There have been no changes to the law. We do not allow police officers without the express permission of senior officers to do such a serious job. To suggest there is a cutback is sheer nonsense.

Ms MEGARRITY (Menai) [6.45 p.m.]: I draw the attention of the House to the ludicrous $500 million proposal to transform Bankstown Airport into a major regional air traffic facility, currently under active consideration by the Howard Government. Robert Wainwright, transport writer for the Sydney Morning Herald reported on 14 August this year that:

Charles Sturt University, backed by the Tourism Task Force, provided the Federal Government with a study that found that moving regional airlines to Bankstown from Sydney Airport, would avoid the need to build Badgerys Creek for 14 years. It would also boost by 34 per cent the number of arrival and departure slots at Sydney Airport for jets.

The director of the university’s western research institute, Mr Tom Murphy, stated:

Our research indicates that current access to Kingsford Smith is not secure, especially if Badgerys Creek proceeds.

Mr Murphy went on to say that the Bankstown Airport proposal:

. . . would include a runway upgrade, a minimum capacity of 30 movements per hour and bus and/or rail links providing transfer time to Sydney Airport of 25 minutes and the CBD of 40 minutes.

He concluded:

The package delays the need for the second Sydney airport at Badgerys Creek by up to 14 years. The value of delayed construction is itself valued at $1.4 billion in present value terms.

In September 1998, just one year ago, this Parliament released a report from the Standing Committee on State Development regarding the provision and operation of rural and regional air services in New South Wales. The foreword by the chairperson of that committee, the Hon. T. Kelly, stated in part:

Throughout the inquiry process, the Standing Committee heard strong objections to regional air services being directed to Bankstown Airport. Rural and regional communities rejected the redirection to Bankstown, as it would increase travelling time, increase travel costs and is inconvenient, particularly to passengers wanting to connect to interstate or international flights or travel to the centre of Sydney. The airline operators opposed any redirection to Bankstown, primarily for the reason that passengers do not want to travel to Bankstown. Residents in the Bankstown area have been vocal in their objection to regional aircraft using Bankstown Airport for reasons of noise and air pollution and safety considerations. Additionally, residents under the flight paths for Sydney Airport objected to regional aircraft being directed to Bankstown, as these smaller aircraft provide relief from the noisy jets at Sydney Airport . . . The Standing Committee . . . firmly recommended that regional air services maintain access to Sydney Airport and that they should not be directed to Bankstown Airport.

True to form, however, the Howard Federal Government has its own agenda, and has again shown disregard for the welfare and opinions of local communities in south-west Sydney. On 3 June in this Chamber, in support of an urgent motion by the honourable member for Liverpool concerning Hoxton Park Airport, I recorded that community groups and residents who live near Bankstown Airport have for years struggled and struggled to gain information about the obvious expansion of facilities already under way.

Bankstown Airport has become the fifth busiest airport in the world. All inquiries have been met with a flat denial of the evidence that is apparent to everyone blessed with the gift of sight. Despite its location in a major residential area, Bankstown Airport does not even have a curfew, but, unlike Hoxton Park, at least it does have a control tower, but only between 6.00 a.m. and 8.00 p.m. To add insult to injury, a so-called Bankstown Airport environment strategy was recently published by Bankstown Airport Ltd.

The so-called strategy does not address a whole range of issues that really should be addressed if one truly considers an environment strategy. A lot of issues relating to the operation of the airport were not even discussed, nor is there a program of works to combat them.

Page 289

I will close for now with some comments by the Georges River Environmental Alliance [GREA] in a recent media release headed "Bankstown Airport; another ridiculous Federal Government charade". GREA stated:

The poorly researched proposal to use Bankstown Airport as Sydney’s regional airport hub could turn into another costly and time wasting fiasco, reminiscent of the Howard Government’s recent bizarre and doomed resurrection of Holsworthy as a second airport option.

A proper EIS would demonstrate what those familiar with the demographics and geography of south west Sydney already know.

More than 500,000 live in the established suburbs that come right up to the border of what can only be described as a landlocked, pocket sized site.

Bankstown Airport sits on the banks of the Georges River, and on the dangerous Moorebank-Milperra floodway, which has been described by a Public Works research report as "the most dangerous . . . in the State . . . (PWD 1983, Moorebank-Milperra Flooding Study)

The Georges River Environmental Alliance hopes to see this proposal hastily dismissed. If this option is to be taken seriously, it necessitates a full EIS, which is bound to demonstrate its foolishness and its devastating potential for social and environmental impact.

I concur with those sentiments 100 per cent.

Mr MERTON (Baulkham Hills) [6.50 p.m.]: I welcome the announcement by the Minister for Roads that a $200 million upgrade is to take place of Windsor Road and Old Windsor Road. However, I am deeply concerned that the proposal will take 10 years to complete and when the work is finished less than one-third of Windsor Road will have more than one lane. I find it extremely interesting that the Minister for Roads chose to make such an announcement at this particular time and residents have queried whether it has anything to do with the Blacktown City Council elections this coming Saturday where Labor candidates are standing for office.

With my colleague the honourable member for The Hills and the honourable member for Hawkesbury I have been actively campaigning to petition the State Government to do something about the Windsor Road traffic mess. These petitions are coming into my electorate office at a fast rate. I read today where the Labor member for Riverstone has accused Liberal members of Parliament of "jumping on the bandwagon" because we were aware that the Government was holding strategic meetings with the Roads and Traffic Authority to discuss proposed works to Windsor Road. I for one certainly believe that these so-called strategic meetings have been going on for far too long. The residents of this part of Sydney are sick and tired of talkfests. They want action. I remember that back in February 1996 I received a response from the Parliamentary Secretary for Roads following my representations to the Minister about my concern over traffic conditions on Windsor Road. The Parliamentary Secretary stated:

The need to widen Windsor Road has been recognised. However the work has not been included in the 1995/1996 budget.

In his July 1996 response the Minister for Roads stated:

A strategic route analysis is currently being undertaken for the full length of Windsor Road.

In June 1998 the Minister for Roads replied to my continuing representations as follows:

I am informed that the RTA has been investigating the upgrading of Windsor Road at a strategic level to identify future demand and potential issues to be resolved.

On 17 September last year in this House I voiced my grave concerns about the lack of action by this Government on Windsor Road. I said at that time that people were moving into homes in Kellyville, Rouse Hill, Schofields and Parklea and urgent attention must be given to upgrading Windsor Road. I was deeply disturbed by an NRMA survey in March of this year which listed the top intersections named in insurance claims. Included in the list were Windsor Road intersections with Old Windsor Road, Seven Hills Road, Victoria Avenue and James Ruse Drive.

In June Baulkham Hills Shire Council decided to make representations to the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads and the RTA regarding the provision of public transport for the Rouse Hill development area and the current state of Windsor Road. At that time stage one of the Rouse Hill development area was being developed and it was expected to accommodate 43,000 people. It was in that same month that the Parliamentary Secretary responded to my further representations once again as follows:

The Roads and Traffic Authority is currently developing a strategy for improving Windsor Road between Windsor and Parramatta taking into account both current and future traffic projects.

In July I again received a response from the Parliamentary Secretary, who said:

Page 290

The RTA is currently developing a strategy for improving Windsor Road.

In July I made urgent representations to the Minister for Roads requesting details of the $60 million for proposed roadworks for Windsor Road which was included in the 1998-99 budget. On 15 July I was advised that the Minister had arranged for the matters raised to be examined and that a response was to be provided as soon as possible. As of today’s date I have not received any such response. I have repeatedly called upon the Carr Government to implement urgent action to improve Windsor Road where traffic is already at a standstill. The increasing housing activity, coupled with our lack of public transport, is a very serious issue which the Government has chosen to ignore.

I am now pleased to see that the Government is finally starting to acknowledge the truth contained in my constant representations to the Minister for Roads that the people of the north-west sector are being faced with monumental traffic problems. It must never be forgotten that it was Bob Carr, when he was the Minister for Planning, who signed off the north-west sector. However, since this Government came to office no action has been taken to improve the situation in regard to roads and transport for the north-west sector.

Ten years is far too long for the people of this area to wait for Windsor Road to be upgraded. I am pleased to note that both local papers, the Hills Shire Times and the Hills News have actively supported the upgrading of Windsor Road. This week the Hills Shire Times published an excellent editorial, which I am pleased to say acknowledged the efforts that I, the honourable member for The Hills and the honourable member for Hawkesbury had made to bring about these proposals. The Hills News also supported the upgrading in this week’s issue.

It is a grave problem for the people of north-west Sydney to have, as the only arterial road to their place of residence, a road that is by 1960s standards outdated. The traffic flow on that road is exceptionally heavy and results, unfortunately, in a high accident rate, which is a constant concern. Although these proposals are welcome, they do not go far enough. I ask the Government to take immediate action to enable work to take place in a far shorter time frame than announced by the Minister for Roads. It is simply not good enough that only one-third of the road will have two lanes in 10 years time. I agree that it is a step in the right direction but I ask that the Government undertake the upgrade soon, so that the people of north-west Sydney have the road network to which they are entitled.

Mr W. D. SMITH (South Coast) [6.55 p.m.]: I wish to speak about Lake Wollumboola, which is situated about 30 kilometres west of Nowra at the beach-side village of Culburra. Known as an intermittently opening coastal lagoon, the lake is unique to the New South Wales coastline, with an area of 10 square kilometres when full and four square kilometres at mean sea level. It has a five-metre depth, including one metre below mean sea level, so when open it loses water to the open ocean. Changes to the lake are generally determined by weather conditions. During dry periods the level falls significantly and the extent of dryness is such that it is possible to walk some distance towards its centre without getting wet feet. When full, it is a combination of fresh and salt water. When the lake is at low levels a strong smell of hydrogen sulphide is produced, caused by anaerobic bacteria, decomposing dead organic matter.

An unfortunate by-product of this metabolic activity is rotten egg gas. The problem of the smell has created public concern in the past year or so, even though it has been a phenomenon occurring for decades. The Environment Protection Authority says that the level of the lake has fallen over the years since modern development, an inevitability when silt has slowly found its way to the lake through drainage and rain. Over time with the building of townships, roads, et cetera., the environment has changed and this activity has added to the flow of mud and silt into the lake. Erosion, of course, would also occur naturally. With the level of the lake decreasing the rotten egg smell apparently occurs more often. Drought periods make it worse and it seems that only good bouts of heavy rain are the best way to keep the problem at bay.

There are residences close to the lake which have been there for several years, as well as new homes built in the past 10 to 15 years. I have visited the lake on several occasions. To the east are dunes, a surf beach and an outlet to the sea. To the west are forests and scrub. To the south is Coonamia Creek, which is a tributary beside the south-west catchment area for which the State Government paid $14 million two years ago. To the north is Culburra township and residences. The lake is an ecological marvel from every standpoint and when full it is transformed, with the appearance of thousands of migratory birds, swans, pelicans and ducks. There are amphibians, such as the rare green and golden bell frog, and marine life such as prawns, water snails, crustaceans, seagrasses and fish. The wetlands breeding areas thrive with new life.

Page 291

There are also rare glider possums and the brown-eyed owl, as well as rare orchids in the catchment area - all in all, about 200 to 300 species of fauna. One of the most important aspects of the lake area is the breeding site for the little tern, which breeds on the dunes of the spit area. In recent years there were problems with foxes destroying the nesting areas. About three years ago the National Parks and Wildlife Service mounted a huge public campaign asking for help in protecting the breeding sites. Almost every group of eggs had been destroyed the season before. The public campaign was successful, with a great response, and many volunteers assisted with the setting up of protection barriers. They also kept watch and that year a small group of little terns survived. This season more than 200 chicks survived.

The lake is also used for recreational activities such as boating, fishing, waterskiing, windsurfing and sailing during the summer. It is a great tourist attraction. At the same time Culburra residents have complained about the smell. I have a petition containing nearly 1,100 names and at least 10 letters. It is a serious concern for residents. It is so serious, in fact, that one person has signed the petition three times. Unfortunately, I cannot table this petition as the previous Liberal member had not informed the community of the appropriate format for petitions. However, the sentiment expressed remains valid. The smell apparently has become progressively worse over the years and now seems to be a serious problem for members of the community. Residents need to keep windows and doors shut because of its unpleasantness. Suggestions have been made to the council by members of the public that the lake be opened to the sea to allow for a better flushing system. However, the Environment Protection Authority [EPA] says that this will not solve the problem.

The EPA has suggested several strategies, including reducing seagrass at the edge of the lake through macrophyte and algal harvesting, preventing the artificial opening of the lake except during periods of low water levels and hypersalinity, and maintaining sufficient water levels and water quality in the lake to prevent dieback of the seagrass. However, it seems that these solutions are costly and could well be damaging to the lake’s ecology. We need to find a workable solution that will suit all sides of the situation. We must consider the needs of our community and at the same time protect the lake’s environment. I seek the advice of any Minister or Opposition member who may be able to offer advice or a solution to this malodorous situation.

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield - Minister for Police) [7.00 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for South Coast for raising this matter of concern to his electorate. I note the failure of his predecessor to organise a proper petition. It is a shame that the honourable member will not be able to present a petition by way of the normal parliamentary process. However, this document can be tabled on behalf of the honourable member so that the voices of his constituents are heard. Accordingly, by leave, I seek leave to table the document.

Private members’ statements noted.