Full Day Hansard Transcript (Legislative Assembly, 22 September 1999, Corrected Copy)

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

Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.

Motion by Mr Face agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow Government business to take precedence of the Address-in-Reply debate at this sitting.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt - Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation) [10.01 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The bill will simply amend an oversight that occurred in the drafting of the Meat Industry Amendment Act 1998. That Act reconstituted the board of the Meat Industry Authority so that it is more representative of the sectors of the meat industry for which the authority is responsible. The improvement in the industry representation on the board of the Meat Industry Authority demonstrates the Government’s recognition and endorsement of the concept of industry representation in management contained in the 1994 Junor Report into the New South Wales Meat Industry Authority. It also reflects the rationalisation of food regulatory authorities and the co-regulatory strategy recommended and endorsed by the 1997 food safety task force, chaired by Mr John Kerin, and the 1998 Commonwealth-State review of food regulation chaired by Dr Bill Blair.

A consumer representative has served on the board of the Meat Industry Authority since the passage of the Meat Industry Act in 1978. However, that position was inadvertently left off the board when section 45 was amended last year. The person who has held the position of consumer representative since August 1984 is Mr Tom Hannon. Mr Hannon has demonstrated the value of consumer representation through his substantial contributions to the deliberations of the board in the areas of consumer needs and consumer expectations. Also, through his position working with union members he has been able to convey consumer expectations back to slaughter floor procedures and thereby assist with the huge change in culture that has occurred in the meat industry over the last decade in moving away from prescriptive regulation towards quality assurance programs.

Up until the commencement of the Meat Industry Amendment Act 1998 on 1 July this year, the consumer representative was appointed from nominations received from the New South Wales Labor Council. The consumer representative traditionally was chosen from amongst people with direct contact with the employees in the meat industry, so as to combine employee representation with consumer representation. It has been decided that the consumer representative need not necessarily be an employee representative. This will widen the pool of persons who will be eligible to serve on the board of the Meat Industry Authority. I will be able to choose a suitable person, who may or may not be a union representative, to represent consumers of meat.

By August 2000 the functions presently performed by the Meat Industry Authority will be taken over by Safe Food Production New South Wales. This newly created body took over the administration of the dairy industry on 1 July this year. Expert advice with regard to the different fresh food producing industries to be administered by Safe Food Production New South Wales will be provided by consultative councils. There will be a Meat Industry Consultative Council which will be composed of the same categories of persons who presently make up the board of the Meat Industry Authority. When the Food Production (Safety) Act 1998 was amended to insert a consumer representative on the Meat Industry Consultative Council words similar to former section 45 of the Meat Industry Act 1978 were used. Therefore, if it is left, the consumer representative on the Meat Industry Consultative Council will need to be a
Page 1028
member of a trade union. To be consistent with the membership of the board of the Meat Industry Authority it is desirable to amend the membership of the Meat Industry Consultative Council so that the consumer representative need not necessarily be a member of a trade union.

The importance of maintaining input from consumers was highlighted in the 1998 Commonwealth-State review of food regulation. This review emphasised the need for governments to work in partnership with the food industry and with consumers to improve Australia’s food safety systems. This partnership approach has been implemented by the former Dairy Industry Authority and the Meat Industry Authority. The Food Production (Safety) Act 1998 further promotes the concept of a partnership between government, industry and consumers through the requirement for industry and consumer consultation prior to the adoption of food safety schemes.

Each food safety scheme must nominate an existing consultative body, or establish such a body, for continuing consultation in its operation and in relation to any proposed changes. These consultative bodies must include consumer representation. The Food Production (Safety) Act 1998 also established the Safe Food Advisory Committee, which must include a consumer expert. This bill reinforces the new infrastructure provided by Safe Food Production New South Wales. This new authority will implement the preventative food safety programs now required by national standards. It will enforce the proper auditing of these programs so that they can continue to provide the highest level of consumer protection. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Slack-Smith.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr KNOWLES (Macquarie Fields - Minister for Health) [10.07 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Tobacco use is recognised as the largest single preventable cause of death in Australia. There is no known safe level of tobacco use. The extent of the adverse health effects of smoking requires strong action by Government to limit young people’s access to tobacco products, to deter people, particularly young people, from starting to smoke and to encourage existing smokers to stop. Research conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that approximately 90 per cent of smokers began using tobacco before the age of 20 years. Norwegian research and other research undertaken by Ann-Maree Ashburn suggest that the later the onset of regular smoking the more successful a person will be in giving up smoking. These two findings point to the importance of reducing the uptake of tobacco consumption, particularly by young people.

Part 6 of the Public Health Act 1991 is aimed at preventing young people from becoming regular smokers, ensuring the public is warned about the dangers of smoking, and minimising the promotion of tobacco use generally. The prohibition on sales to young people, the prohibition on advertising and the requirement for health warnings are the primary strategies through which this is achieved. Active enforcement of these provisions has provided an effective means of reducing sales to minors. A 1992 study, conducted across several Sydney suburbs and using children aged 12 and 13, revealed that 39 per cent of retailers were prepared to sell cigarettes in contravention of the law.

Another study conducted in the same year in a rural area of New South Wales revealed that 63 per cent of retailers were prepared to sell cigarettes in contravention of the law. More recently the department, through its survey of compliance monitoring activities by area health services, has found that the average rate of sale to those under 18 years of age has reduced to about 20 per cent. However, the rate of sales is still too high. More needs to be done to deter advertising breaches and illegal sales of cigarettes to children.

Until 1997 retailers of tobacco products were required to hold a licence under the Business Franchise Licences (Tobacco) Act 1987, and the system was linked to tobacco control legislation. If the retailers repeatedly breached the tobacco control legislation, there was discretion for the licence to be cancelled. The Department of Health found that the threat of the cancellation or suspension of a licence to sell tobacco provided a significant incentive to sellers to comply with restrictions on selling to minors and advertising of tobacco products. However in 1997 the High Court of Australia decided that a number of the provisions of the Business Franchise Licences (Tobacco) Act 1987 (New South Wales) were in breach of section 90 of the Constitution and therefore invalid. The remaining provisions were repealed in December 1997.

Page 1029

The Public Health Amendment (Tobacco Control) Bill will see the proposed negative licensing system ensuring any retailer who repeatedly breaches sale or advertising rules relating to the sale of tobacco product could be excluded from the market. Proposed section 61R provides that individuals or companies will be suspended for two months from engaging in the business of tobacco retailing where they have committed two tobacco-related offences of the same type in a three-year period. Offences dealt with under section 556A of the Crimes Act 1900 will also be included. An additional 12-month suspension will result if a third offence is committed in the three-year period. The suspension provisions operate automatically on conviction for a second or third offence.

The suspension will not operate until 21 days after the conviction occurs or such longer period as the director-general determines. Affected retailers will be able to continue to operate until completion of any appeal that is lodged in relation to the relevant conviction. The penalties for continuing to trade while suspended are substantial. Any individual retailer who, while suspended, continues to engage in tobacco retailing could incur a maximum penalty of $22,000 for a first offence and $44,000 for any subsequent offences. A suspended body corporate continuing to engage in tobacco retailing could incur a maximum penalty of $44,000 for a first offence, and $88,000 for any subsequent offences.

The suspension will only operate where two or more convictions are sustained by a retailer for the same offence. It is recognised that in many stores the owner of the business cannot provide direct supervision of each and every tobacco sale by an employee to ensure that they do not breach the legislation. Convictions against individual employees alone for sales to minors offences will not count for the purposes of the suspension provisions. However, where an employer is successfully prosecuted for a breach of section 59 the offence will be counted.

It is important to recognise that in such prosecutions there is a defence for employers who establish that they exercised due diligence to prevent the offence from occurring. Many retailers operate from a number of different premises. The suspension provisions will operate only for those premises in which the offence that triggered the suspension occurred. The bill will also prevent a suspended retailer from establishing new retail tobacco businesses within a five-kilometre radius of the suspended premises during the suspension period unless an express exemption from the Director-General of Health has been obtained. The bill includes provisions to prevent companies from restructuring their business affairs to avoid the operation of any suspension.

Environmental health officers will have the power to seize tobacco products which they reasonably believe are being sold or remain on display in a store in contravention of the suspension provisions. If the person is convicted of the offence of selling while suspended, the tobacco products will be forfeited. The products will be returned where offence proceedings are not commenced within 42 days, the court finds the person did not commit the offence or finds there are exceptional circumstances that justify return of the products, or the director-general becomes satisfied that they were not in possession for committing an offence.

The bill will also insert a new section to make the occupier of premises on which a vending machine is located responsible for the sale of tobacco products through that machine. Proposed section 61FB will limit the manner in which tobacco products can be sold. The bill will prohibit the hawking of tobacco products in public places and door to door. All sales of tobacco products must be effected from the service area of a shop or licensed premises or from a vending machine. It is important that tobacco retailers play their role in preventing people under the age of 18 from smoking. While retailers cannot stop young people from smoking, they can assist by obeying the law and refusing to sell cigarettes to minors in the first place.

In 1996 the State Government introduced a proof-of-age card to assist retailers in the identification of minors. If retailers are not satisfied a person is over the age of 18 years, they have the right to refuse sale. Organisations representing retailers have been advised of the proposed introduction of this legislation. While some have expressed concern that the suspension provisions will have a significant impact on businesses, it should be recognised that those that comply with the law will have nothing to fear. The bill will ensure those retailers who repeatedly breach the tobacco control provisions of the Public Health Act can be excluded from the market. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mrs Skinner.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr FACE (Charlestown - Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the
Page 1030
Premier on Hunter Development), on behalf of Mr Whelan [10.16 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Government is pleased to introduce the Law Enforcement and National Security (Assumed Identities) Amendment (Corrective Services) Bill. This bill is evidence of the Carr Government’s ongoing commitment to law and order in this State and, in particular, its commitment to providing law enforcement agencies with the means to effectively target those suspected of serious crimes such as drug trafficking. Last year the Government implemented the Law Enforcement and National Security (Assumed Identities) Act 1998 to permit the chief executive officers of authorised agencies to approve the acquisition and use of documents in assumed names for law enforcement purposes.

The Assumed Identities Act is an important initiative in the fight against crime. It allows law enforcement and national security officers to obtain documentation such as drivers’ licences and credit cards in an assumed name and to use them in the course of their authorised duties. In most cases an assumed identity is needed when officers must have direct contact with suspects, for example, in undercover operations or to protect investigations into corrupt police or public officials. Officers involved in an undercover capacity are not the only people who require the protection of an assumed name; others include technical staff and surveillance officers.

The Department of Corrective Services’ State Investigative and Security Group [SISG] employs surveillance officers to investigate drug trafficking in gaols, alleged corrupt activities by Corrective Services staff, and inmates who breach the conditions of their parole or other prerelease programs. The SISG has been operating since November 1994. It plays a major role in protecting the safety of inmates, visitors and staff in correctional centres. It is evident that it is necessary for the Department of Corrective Services to be an authorised agency for the purposes of this Act, so that investigators will have an enhanced capacity to tackle the problem of drug trafficking in prisons.

An important function of the SISG is to verify inmates’ compliance with the terms and conditions of temporary leave of absence under section 29 of the Correctional Centres Act 1952. This includes work release and day and weekend leave schemes. In order to carry out their duties SISG officers sometimes have to give proof of their identity to maintain contact with a person whom they are investigating or to protect the integrity of a covert operation. It is essential that in such circumstances officers can give an assumed name. Otherwise their own safety or the integrity of a case they are working on could be jeopardised.

Corrective Services investigators have been using documentation in assumed names such as false drivers’ licences which they obtained under the ad hoc system that existed prior to the introduction of the Law Enforcement and National Security (Assumed Identities) Act. The Act now restricts the issue of such documentation to authorised agencies only. At present agencies authorised to use the Act are the New South Wales Police Service, the New South Wales Crime Commission, the Independent Commission Against Corruption, the Police Integrity Commission, the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Secret Intelligence Service, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, and the Australian Customs Service.

There is a clear need for the Department of Corrective Services to be included as an agency authorised to use the Act. Without the support for law enforcement activities that the Act provides, the department is not able to carry out essential services to protect the public. Equally importantly, Corrective Services needs access to assumed identities for its officers so that they can identify drug trafficking in gaols and mount effective operations to prosecute the criminals involved.

The bill builds on the Government’s previous initiatives in the fight against crime. It will permit officers employed by the Department of Corrective Services to obtain documentation in assumed names and use it in the course of their official duties. In order to do this, the bill makes a small amendment to section 3 of the Act to include the Department of Corrective Services in the definition of authorised agency, and the Commissioner of Corrective Services in the definition of chief executive officer. The bill is further evidence that the Carr Government is pulling out all stops to give police and other law enforcement agencies the powers and tools they need to do their job. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Tink.

Debate resumed from 21 September.

Mr O’DOHERTY (Hornsby) [10.20 a.m.]: As the honourable member for Hornsby and the shadow minister for community services I express my deep disappointment at the way in which the Government
Page 1031
is tackling this question. Most honourable members were supportive of statements over the past few months by the Premier that gambling in New South Wales had reached saturation point. Honourable members rejoiced at the report of the Productivity Commission that in world terms New South Wales has high levels of problem gambling let alone high levels of available gambling - the two matters being linked.

Members of the Opposition were profoundly disappointed, however, with the Government’s response. I join with the Council of Social Service of New South Wales [NCOSS] and others in saying that although the Government is taking some steps in the right direction, it has hardly commenced the journey of resolving a problem that has overtaken the lives of thousands of people, indeed families, in New South Wales. NCOSS and I are concerned that the bill seeks to set up a framework that will enable the Government to regulate. Indeed, it assumes industry self-regulation, but it leaves all the detail of schedules and regulations to the bill, aspects that can easily be changed from time to time.

When this bill is passed there will be no precise legislative control over the industry, which all honourable members believe should be controlled. Industry self-regulation can only go so far; legislative control is required. The Legislature must take a stand and we, as legislators, must make sure that we express our concerns about gambling through legislation that it is our right to pass in this House. Members of the Opposition are extremely disappointed also with the response of the Government, which is taking a softly, softly, do-not-frighten-the-horses approach to controlling problem gambling in New South Wales. I shall refer to some comments issued by NCOSS, a body whose one and only aim is to stand up on behalf of the social needs of the people of New South Wales, particularly those who cannot speak for themselves. NCOSS submitted:

. . . the NSW Government’s continuing lack of response to the IPART report recommendations concerning:

•the establishment of an independent gambling regulator;

•the development of co-ordinated problem gambling policies and programs;

•the proper conduct of effective social impact assessments on gambling expansion and new products;

•and the conduct of a well managed and relevant gambling research program

is disappointing and acts to reduce the effectiveness of harm minimisation proposals, in general, and this draft Bill, in particular . . .

NCOSS believes that without changes, the construction of the draft Bill signals an unacceptable reliance on industry self regulation and passive Ministerial gestures which will not deliver the consumer protection outcomes the Bill purports to achieve and which the general community is seeking.

I emphasise those words because NCOSS believes that the gestures of the Minister for Gaming and Racing are passive. He does not want to take on the industry and make effective legislation on behalf of the vulnerable consumers of New South Wales. NCOSS, not the members of the Opposition, makes the claim that the Minister is passive. It calls for changes and suggests that the level of self-regulation on the part of the industry is unacceptable. The council does not say that for political purposes; it says so because of its overwhelming concerns for those who are vulnerable to gambling addiction in New South Wales. The views of the council are shared by the Opposition. NCOSS submitted further:

NCOSS has suggested to the Premier and the Minister, that the Government examine the option of establishing a Gambling Industries Ombudsman for NSW.

The Opposition would like to see that suggestion progressed, but there must be a gambling regulator, independent of Government. I will put a persuasive argument for that proposition in a moment. The submission continues:

Whilst NCOSS supports greater regulation of gambling advertising, it is difficult to provide specific comments when no proposals are included in the draft Bill.

We are concerned that simply creating powers to subsequently regulate could lead to either a lack of, or ineffective, measures, which do not sufficiently improve consumer protection.

This is reinforced by the lack of government action on current gambling advertising which may be deceptive, even though government can use provisions of the Fair Trading Act or the Trade Practices Act.

With regard to the Fair Trading Act, the Carr Government may act in relation to those advertisements that assault me every time I turn on the radio, watch the television and read my newspapers.

Ms Moore: You should listen to ABC radio.

Mr O’DOHERTY: I do listen to ABC radio; it is my station of choice these days, and it provides an excellent service. To the great annoyance of my wife I often listen to two or more radios or watch a number of televisions at the same time. It is a habit
Page 1032
I picked up when I worked in the industry that I do not seem to be able to shake. As I consume media I am assaulted by advertisements that try to fool and deceive me dishonestly. They tell me that I am going to be a winner if I buy a lottery ticket or scratchie, or if I purchase a Lotto ticket my life will be changed forever.

The advertisements tell me that I am going to be forever happy, that all my problems will be resolved, that people will come up to me in the street and shake my hand and like me, and that my family will love me forever. It is not true to say that if I win money all those things will happen and that my family will love me forever. My family will love me if I love them first. The honourable member for Parramatta is nodding her head in agreement. She is a person who knows good family values and understands what parents should teach their children, and that does not mean teaching them that they will always be happy if they buy a scratchie or that they will always be successful if they win money. As members of Parliament we must stand up against such untrue statements.

The school students who are present today in the gallery should understand that their lives will not be changed if they buy a lottery ticket. Advertisements that tell them that happiness depends on winning the lottery or Lotto or winning on the horses are deceiving them. The Government already has the power to take action against such advertising, NCOSS clearly says so, and yet it has failed to do so. That is why the minimal protection provided by this bill is manifestly inadequate.

Mr SPEAKER: The students in the gallery are from Malabar Public School, which is in the electorate of the Premier.

Mr O’DOHERTY: I say to our visiting students that this bill will be effective and provide adequate power to the Government if the changes proposed by the Opposition are accepted. They will then be able to grow up in a world that is not over-reliant on gambling and in which their families are not fooled by false inducements offered by people who offer gambling to them. In relation to inducements, the NCOSS submitted:

NCOSS believes that offers of holidays, extensive ranges of goods and services, gifts, payments of household bills and similar inducements, which are separate to the provision of core services at the gambling facility, should be burned.

NCOSS urges further action in that respect. It supports the provision of counselling service signage but suggests that it should be extended to include:

•displaying and holding and holding pamphlets and written information about G line and other gambling counselling services; and

•providing the signage in community languages

After all many problem gamblers in our community do not have English as their first language. The Government needs to strengthen the provision in the manner suggested by NCOSS and the Opposition.

NCOSS makes mention in its submission of on-the-job and off-the-job training and the development of curricula and courses in the responsible service of gambling. I encourage the Government to introduce that as a matter of urgency. New South Wales TAFE would be well placed to offer that training. NCOSS goes on to say that while it supports providing information to players about how games work and about the odds, as the productivity report noted, it is difficult to display odds in a way that is not deceptive to people We need to provide good information. Many clubs have areas where there are no windows, no clocks on the walls - a Las Vegas-style atmosphere - and the architecture of the place is designed to take people out of reality and fool them into spending more money than they intended to. As legislators we have a responsibility to ensure that does not happen.

The Opposition is calling for an independent regulator. I acknowledge the work of the Anglican social issues committee in its submission to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] inquiry in August 1998. I mention this in the light of the comments by Government members, including the honourable member for Bankstown. I was sickened to hear the honourable member say last night that that is what gambling should be about, having a bit of fun and knowing when to stop. If the honourable member for Bankstown thinks that is the case he is seriously misinformed. The Anglican social issues committee submission noted:

Various studies worldwide have shown an incidence of problem gambling of between 1% and 3%. The Victorian Casino and Gambling Authority reported last year that up to 3% of Victorians our problem gamblers, and that their behaviour also affects the broader community . . .

The submission goes on to say:

NSW has an even higher proportion, with some studies reporting up to 5.3% of gamblers having a problem with their gambling.

That is a substantial number of people. That figure comes from a University of Western Sydney study conducted on behalf of the Casino Community
Page 1033
Benefit Fund. This figure is recent and relevant to New South Wales. Another study of club members that was conducted recently suggested that 3.4 per cent of patrons may have a gambling problem. Even that level is higher than in the other States of Australia, in Canada or in New Zealand. That means that Australia, by virtue of the New South Wales figures, is a world leader in the level of problem gamblers. The Anglican social issues committee submission goes on to say:

Perhaps this is not surprising when placed in the context of the suggested causes for damning addiction. Poker and slot machines and are considered to be the most addictive method of gambling and in New South Wales has almost 10 per cent of the world’s poker and slot machines and 74 per cent of the nations club-based machines.

These figures come from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. The submission says:

Considering that 80% of New South Wales residents gamble, 37.8 per cent of them weekly, these figures represent up to approximately 160,000 problem gamblers in New South Wales alone.

Again that comes from the study conducted by the University Western Sydney. We are legislating on behalf of those people. They are the people who require us to take action for their protection and for the protection of their families. The potential for community harm has been recognised, as the Anglican social issues committee says, by successive State governments. We ignore it not just at our peril but at the peril of the children, who are the victims of families where the breadwinner goes to the club or pub of a Friday afternoon, or whenever the pay packet comes through, and loses the lot. We are supposed to be acting on behalf of the children of those families and the wives who end up being abused because of the stress placed on those families.

As the Anglican social issues committee says, the Government of New South Wales, which has an extremely heavy reliance on gambling for its revenues - in excess of $10 billion a year - has a conflict of interest when making decisions about regulating the gambling industry. The Treasurer should exclude himself from discussions in Cabinet about gambling, because he is reliant on the revenue, but we know the Treasurer believes gambling is a great thing. The honourable member for Vaucluse provided the House with many statements of the Treasurer recorded in Hansard when he was speaking about what he believes are the benefits of gambling. The Treasurer has a conflict of interest and the Government has a conflict of interest because of its reliance on gambling revenues, yet the Government keeps to itself the ability to regulate.

As a result, the House gets this wimpish bill from a passive Minister - not my words but the words of NCOSS - who refuses to tackle the problem on behalf of the people who require us to take action. Therefore, the Government must hand over the regulation of gambling to an independent authority. That is my firm personal opinion and it is the opinion of NCOSS, the Anglican social issues committee and many others. We have enough gambling in New South Wales. If there is a proposal for further gaming machines in a particular local area, as there was recently at Berowra in my electorate, the social impact of those additional machines must be taken into account. I for one say we have enough.

Mr HICKEY(Cessnock) [10.35 a.m.]: It is a privilege to speak today to the Gambling Legislation Amendment (Responsible Gambling) Bill. The bill is significant because there is nothing of its kind in any other State, Territory or Commonwealth legislation. No other Government has ventured along this path before, and the bill represents the world’s best practice. The honourable member for Hornsby said a lot about its faults, but clearly he forgets that the Coalition was in government between 1988 and 1995 and no legislation was put forward to do any of the things that the Opposition now proposes. Similarly, he has not suggested any amendments to the bill - he has put forward a lot of rhetoric. The House should be wary of the amount of rhetoric it is hearing from the Opposition about this bill. Amendments may be made down the track to strengthen certain parts of the legislation, but it is a great step forward.

As the Minister said in his second reading speech, this is an historic bill. The bill recognises those of us in the community who participate in gambling as an enjoyable, harmless pastime as well as those whom gambling has and will caused considerable stress, anxiety and problems - not just individuals but their families. Importantly, this bill is a statement of the Government’s commitment to ensure that persons who wish to spend their time and money gambling do so with their eyes wide open. The approach being adopted is similar to what was adopted 3½ years ago in relation to harm minimisation of alcohol use.

One beneficial outcome of the legislation is the toll-free 24-hour-a-day telephone helpline known as the G-line. This service, which will operate seven days a week, is free and confidential and will be available in a variety of languages. This is most beneficial, because not only English-speaking people are afflicted with the gambling bug. There is no question that we are witnessing an interesting
Page 1034
debate - as to whether it is appropriate to tax people who are gambling. Why not put in place minimisation measures that will benefit those persons who need them most?

Overall, the measures proposed in the bill are directed at ensuring the creation of a more responsible approach to gambling. The key elements include, first, ensuring operators do not target groups that are vulnerable. That is, minors, people who are disadvantaged and people with gambling addictions; second, that gambling is advertised in ways acceptable to the general public and which embrace the community’s concerns; and, third, ensuring that operators do not engage in activities that may tend to exasperate or encourage irresponsible gambling by consumers. That may be, for example, providing credit for gambling or offering inappropriate inducements to gamble.

The bill is also directed at ensuring that operators are educated about the harm associated with gambling and the most appropriate means by which that harm can be avoided or minimised; consumers are significantly warned or educated about the matters associated with gambling activities and the problems associated with uncontrollable or excessive gambling; and consumers who may have problems know where to go to obtain help and have direct access to it.

The Liberal Opposition is disappointed at the Government’s response. It said last week that we have hardly begun our journey. The Liberal Party had time to get out of bed and turn off the alarm clock when it was in government and it did not. The Liberal Opposition has not proposed amendments, merely delivered a lot of rhetoric. Opposition members only want their names in Hansard. They claim that advertising needs to be regulated. That is what the bill does. All I heard last night from one speaker was "smoke and mirrors". He wanted to put the blame on Treasury. How much revenue did the Coalition receive from poker machines when it was in government?

The Government is looking at the issues from the perspective of harm minimisation. It is listening to the community. Specific provisions relate to advertisements for the winning of lottery schemes and the organisation of certain gambling activities by minors. Those provisions are relevant to other activities covered by the amendments proposed in the bill. The bill goes a long way towards addressing the problems associated with gambling. It again shows that the Carr Labor Government listens to community concerns and acts on them for the benefit of all members of the community. That is why I commend the bill to the House.

Mr BARR (Manly) [10.42 a.m.]: I support the intention of the Gambling Legislation Amendment (Responsible Gambling) Bill but it could go a lot further in protecting consumers and implementing the recommendations of the recent report of the Productivity Commission. The bill has good intentions but it is very anaemic. The problem is that it is trying to play social catch-up long after the horses have bolted. The honourable member for Hornsby said that there was a softly-softly approach so as not to unsettle the horses, but the point I make - if I am mixing metaphors - is that the horses have long since bolted. Casino legislation was supported by both sides of the House, with the exception of the Independents.

Both sides come to the debate without clean hands. The 1,500 poker machines of the casino disrupted a longstanding equilibrium whereby the registered clubs had machines and there was general community acceptance of the cross-subsidisation that took place. Poker machines allowed for cheaper eating, entertainment, gymnastic activities, sporting facilities and so on. The Government had to cope with competing interests of the Registered Clubs Association and the Australian Hotels Association. Basically, it allowed a proliferation of poker machines across the State. So now, as has been said many times, we have 10 per cent of the world’s poker machines with 0.1 per cent of the world’s population. That is a remarkable figure.

Unlike Las Vegas or Atlantic City, where the gambling is focused in particular areas, in New South Wales it is ubiquitous. Every hotel has poker machines, and severe social problems can arise from that. The Minister for Gaming and Racing and the honourable member for Bankstown claimed that capping does not make any sense. For example, they said that Victoria has 29 per cent of the number of poker machines in New South Wales yet 61 per cent of the turnover of New South Wales machines. Ipso facto, limiting poker machines does not mean anything because of the Victorian example.

By extension, one could argue that reducing the number of machines would increase the turnover per machine. The argument put forward is analogous to the arguments of the gun lobby: that is, poker machines in themselves are not harmful; it is people who cause the problem. In essence, that is what the Government is saying. What I am saying, as I would say on the issue of gun control, is that the more of this sort of equipment there is the more social problems there will be. Let us think of just one scenario. Shift workers coming off shifts go to the local pub. For a long time serious alcohol problems have been associated with people who, because of the nature or hours of their work, are dislocated
Page 1035
from the mainstream. Not only is alcohol an issue; there are poker machines to play. That pattern causes serious problems.

The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal inquiry estimated that in 1997 $3.6 billion was lost through gambling by the New South Wales population. We know very little about the redistributive effects and the opportunity costs of that kind of expenditure. The $3.6 billion spent by consumers on gambling devices is money that could have gone toward the purchase of other goods and services. It could potentially mean that other areas suffer, or families suffer, because people get themselves into economic difficulties. The Productivity Commission estimated that 1 per cent of Australian adults, 140,000, have severe gambling problems, level three problems; and 1.4 per cent, 190,000 additional adults, have level 2 problems. That is a total of 330,000 people.

The honourable member for Hornsby said that 160,000 people in New South Wales are estimated to have severe gambling problems. The Productivity Commission estimated that 240,000 adult gamblers, or 1.7 per cent of the adult population, experience significant adverse outcomes as a result of their gambling. The commission says that the overall message from the analysis of the characteristics of problem gamblers is that there are few clear individual risk factors for who will become problem gamblers. Rather, certain playing modes - particularly regular gambling on continuous forms - appear to be a greater determinant of the risk of developing problems. In other words, the availability of gambling devices presents problems.

The bill goes through the motions of trying to bring in some kind of restitution, of playing some sort of social catch-up with the problems that have arisen from the proliferation of gambling devices. But it does not do much. It pays lip-service to harm minimisation principles. In allowing increased gambling we should have adopted the precautionary principle and looked at possible impacts. There should have been social impact statements in relation to problem gambling. The bill deals with issues such as credits, or smart cards, which I will come back to. Some months ago I wrote a submission to the Productivity Commission in which I suggested basically two things. The first was the creation of some sort of tribunal. Some members have referred to an independent regulatory body. That is certainly what is needed. There is an inherent conflict in the Government raising revenue and also regulating gambling.

A separate body is needed. The main concern in my submission to the Productivity Commission has not been spoken about, and that is drink gambling. There is a degree of unconscionability in what is happening. People are invited to enter into a contract. Unlike an invitation to treat in normal outlets, the machine makes the offer and the gambler accepts by putting money into the machine. If a gambler is inebriated I believe that that will amount to an unconscionable dealing. That issue has not been addressed in any way, shape or form. If people are going to get blotto and then play poker machines, they will not be in full control of their faculties, and they will spend more than they should.

I suggested in my submission to the Productivity Commission that some sort of tribunal should be established. People who have been drinking and gambling may seek a remedy before the tribunal, based on unconscionability of contract. The rules of evidence applying to the tribunal should include a presumption in favour of a gambler being intoxicated in circumstances where he or she has lost in excess of a statutorily prescribed amount within a designated time frame, say, 12 hours. So that would place the onus on the provider to prove that the player was not affected by alcohol at the time of losing money and, if that could not be shown, the player should be entitled to a refund of the amount lost in excess of the prescribed amounts.

I suggested in conjunction with this a smart card system, which this legislation is hinting at. If we want to determine how much money people have lost we must have some sort of tracking device. The smart card is the way to go. This smart card, which could be implemented on a voluntary basis - I would not suggest that it should be implemented in any other way - could be inserted into each machine and it would keep a record of the details. Non-use of a card would provide evidentiary difficulties for anyone seeking to claim before this outside tribunal. Gambling addicts could have a voluntary limit placed on their cards and the cards would operate to block further play once that limit was reached.

Once the prescribed or voluntary limit was reached, that fact could be flagged to the provider who would then be required to give the customer a warning. Proof of warnings would constitute a defence on the part of the provider of machines, and before any outside tribunal. We have serious problems with the gambling issue and this bill does nothing to address them. It makes some gestures towards the sorts of issues which we are seeing in New South Wales, but it does not go far enough
Page 1036
towards addressing the serious problems that we are facing. As the years go by these problems will increase and the issues of social dislocation and hardship as a result of addictive behaviour will become more and more apparent.

Ms MOORE (Bligh) [10.53 a.m.]: What does a bill that has in its title the term "responsible gambling" reflect of our social values? Where have we arrived as a society when governments sell assets which generate revenue to provide better services and instead raise revenue through the misery and exploitation of its citizens - the problem gamblers? All honourable members know that gambling is a nice little revenue raiser for government, whether it be a Coalition or a Labor government. The Federal Government’s recently released Productivity Commission draft report says it all. That report points out that total gambling expenditure in Australia has trebled in 15 years. Much of that growth has come from an increase in the numbers of gaming machines. Australia has 21 per cent of the total number of electronic gaming machines in the world, and more than half of those are in New South Wales.

There is community alarm about the gambling industry. The commission’s national survey found that 71 per cent of people who were surveyed thought that gambling did more harm than good, and 50 per cent thought that the number of gaming machines should be reduced. The draft report estimates that 2.3 per cent of Australia’s adult population are problem gamblers, that is, 330,000 people. Sixty-five per cent to 80 per cent of problem gambling is associated with gaming machines and we in New South Wales have the highest rate of problem gambling.

Young people form a significant proportion of problem gamblers and those problem gamblers make huge demands on community and public services. The draft report also points out that the numbers of people needing help are growing rapidly and that existing data on treatment is scanty and unreliable. The report also questions the production-side benefits of gambling and states that those benefits are illusory. The report states that the resources employed in the industry could be put to better use elsewhere if the industry did not exist. It also states that the current regulatory environment of the gambling industry nationwide is incoherent, complex, fragmented and often inconsistent. The report makes reference to the fact that there is a key role for consumer protection and it states:

The principle of informed consent should apply with particular force to the gambling industries, given the potential for consumer losses. The draft report strongly recommends meaningful ‘price’ information (i.e. about the odds); explanations available on how games work; statements of expenditures readily available to gamblers; health (or wealth) warnings; control of (misleading) advertising; control of ATM locations near gambling; possible modification of game features on gambling machines; more opportunities for venue-owners to exclude problem gamblers, and for problem gamblers to self-exclude from venues.

The report also states:

The draft report recommends strongly an independent ‘control commission’ with responsibility for and authority over all gambling industries in its jurisdiction, to allow for more coherent decision-making.

That recently released draft report states that there has been a lack of community consultation. The report is scathing about the gaming industry and it challenges the economic benefit claims of the industry. It points out that the industry’s real downside is problem gambling. It calls for more coherent and transparent regulation. The report then states:

. . . (the present ‘incoherent’ regulation which it notes is obviously the consequence of piecemeal legislation, usually under pressure from vested interests); sees the industry as protected from competition and enjoying monopolies in many areas; is critical of the totally inadequate consumer protection in the gambling industry.

I ask the Minister: Why are we dealing with this legislation now? Why did the Minister not wait until the final report of the Federal Government’s Productivity Commission on gambling is available in November this year? If we wait it might afford us a better and more informed approach to legislative change, which the draft report points out is urgently needed. Looking specifically at the bill, it obviously goes some way towards addressing the negative social impacts of gambling. But, as other speakers have said, and the Council of Social Service of New South Wales [NCOSS] maintains, it does not go far enough. It must be amended. If it is not to be amended in this House by the Minister I call on crossbench members in the upper House to ensure that it is amended so that the provisions that are currently located in the regulations are included in the bill.

Over 100 submissions were received in response to the exposure draft bill, including one submission from NCOSS. Welfare organisations are expressing the same sorts of concern that was expressed in the draft report of the Productivity Commission. One of the serious problems within the bill - a matter that has been raised by other speakers - is that gambling has become a major source of revenue for government and we have to question the extent to which this bill generally seeks
Page 1037
to address the problems of problem gambling given, as I said earlier, that it is such a nice revenue raiser for the Treasurer. For that reason it is perhaps not surprising that the majority of measures have been included in the regulations rather than in the bill.

Provisions included in the regulations relate to controls on advertising, observable standards, training of those conducting gambling, inducement prohibition, the genuineness of information about gambling, and signage about counselling services and the location of automatic teller machines and EFTPOS. NCOSS believes that, because these potential harm minimisers are not in the bill, far too much emphasis has been placed on self-regulation. While this legislation is a commendable step, it is an ineffective response to the issue of problem gambling as it provides no means of guaranteeing that the industry will self-regulate. We need legislation that will spell out the principles and, much more specifically, move much of what is in the regulations into the bill. An alternative would be to change the wording of the bill so that the Minister for Gaming and Racing must regulate - rather than may regulate - in these areas.

In other words, the bill should insist that it be imperative for the Minister to enforce his regulations within a specified time frame, for example six months, rather than leaving it to the industry. Furthermore, NCOSS, while supporting the bill in principle, regards it as only one part of the Government’s responsibility to address the social impact of gambling on individuals. Other aspects of Government responsibility would include the establishment of an independent gambling authority and gambling industry ombudsman, and clarification of the role of the Department of Gaming and Racing in the responsible regulation of gambling.

The establishment of such bodies would not only provide greater opportunity for consumer complaint, it would mark a recognition that a systemic response to the problem is necessary, rather than piecemeal responses contingent upon industry consent to regulate. Following the recognition of the problem and its redress in systemic terms, NCOSS supports the notion of mandatory pre-emptive training in responsible gambling practices for all employees and managers in the gambling industry, instead of the bandaid provisions in the bill for training to occur only if and when an operator is found guilty of an offence under the legislation. This would not be difficult to organise via accredited courses through TAFE or private education facilities, and should be provided for in the legislation.

NCOSS also suggested that the Government regulate the number of poker machines until this legislation is passed. That could be done by invoking the power provided for in the anti-competitive clause of the National Competition Policy, which permits the Government to legislate against the competitive proliferation of poker machines if that is in the public interest. The Government is also empowered to regulate the price of gaming machines, That could be another measure to restrict the proliferation of these machines while the bill makes its passage through Parliament.

While the bill should be supported in principle, as other speakers have said, it does not go far enough. Given the impossibility of walking down the street without encountering a poker machine in the corner pub, genuine legislation is required to address the problem of excessive gambling and its social effects. The impact of problem gambling on those in close relationship to the gambler has serious consequences in fiscal, emotional and physical terms.

In order to convince Parliament and the public that the Government genuinely wishes to address the problem, the bill should legislate in the following areas: signage about the lodgment of complaints by patrons; advertising control measures; inducement control measures; extension of proposed amendments about counselling service signage to include display of pamphlets on counselling services, and G-line in community languages; compulsory pre-emptive training for staff and managers in the gambling industry; specific attempts to limit cheque cashing; and regulation of automatic teller machine and EFTPOS transactions.

In the past I have opposed the proliferation of poker machines, and the casino - as did my Independent colleagues at the time, even though it was supported by all the major parties in the Parliament - because of the impact of gambling on families and individuals. By this bill the Government acknowledges that gambling has terrible social impacts. In its current form, however, I question the effectiveness of the bill and strongly urge the Minister to amend it before it goes to the Legislative Council. If that does not occur, I urge the Legislative Council to amend it along the lines I have just outlined.

Mr RICHARDSON (The Hills) [11.03 a.m.]: This legislation has been made inevitable by the Government’s own addiction to gambling. It is much like closing the stable door after the horse has
Page 1038
bolted. During the past four years under this Government the number of poker machines in New South Wales has increased from 60,000 to 97,000. It is no coincidence that, according to the Productivity Commission, and as other speakers in this debate have noted, New South Wales, with more than 10 per cent of the world’s poker machines and half the Australian total, should have the worst gambling problem in the nation.

The Productivity Commission’s detailed draft report entitled "Australia’s Gambling Industries" shows conclusively that access to gambling opportunities is the key issue to be considered. As indicated in the summary of the draft report at page 29, there is a direct correlation between the number of poker machines and the prevalence of problem gamblers. In New South Wales, which has 97,890 poker machines, the prevalence of problem gamblers is 2.8 per cent - that is, the highest in the nation. In Victoria, which has 29,804 poker machines, the figure is 2.01 per cent, which is high enough.

Interestingly, in Queensland, which has 30,448 poker machines, the prevalence of problem gamblers is 2.52 per cent, which is a much higher percentage per capita than the figure for Victoria. In Western Australia, which has only 1,125 poker machines, the prevalence of problem gamblers is only 1.8 per cent and in Tasmania the percentage is 0.47 per cent. These statistics indicate a clear correlation between access to poker machines and the incidence of problem gambling.

Of course, Australians are the heaviest gamblers in the world, and New South Wales is at the head of the pack. That is not a particularly joyous role for us to play; it is not exactly Olympic gold. As the Productivity Commission noted, problem gambling has a very serious effect on people’s lives. The commission conducted a survey of problem gamblers, which noted:

•one-tenth of those with significant gambling problems - and 60 per cent of those in counselling - admitted seriously contemplating suicide as a result of their gambling;

•nearly one-half of those gamblers in counselling reported losing time from work or study due to gambling;

•gambling losses averaged 20 per cent of household income for problem gamblers (compared to 3 per cent for the general population), and

•one in five problem gamblers admitted "borrowing money without paying it back", with one in two going into debt to finance their gambling . . .

The Productivity Commission also addressed the sharp rise in the number of women gamblers. The commission stated that this was a direct result of the explosion in the number of poker machines around Australia, but particularly in New South Wales. About 10 per cent of gamblers provide 80 per cent of the revenue to the States. This demonstrates how much of a problem gambling can be for certain individuals.

Perhaps the most surprising conclusion in the Productivity Commission’s report is that, despite the massive increase of more than 50 per cent in the revenue from gambling over the last 4½ years, the benefits of gambling are largely illusory. In other words, there are negative benefits from gambling. Despite the fact that the Government is planning to take $1.558 billion from gamblers in this State in the next year, the benefits that flow to the community do not outweigh the negative effects to the community from problem gambling.

We must realise that we cannot fool the people. Despite the fact that 80 per cent of adults gamble in Australia, 70 per cent of Australians think that gambling does more harm than good. Indeed, the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] in its inquiry last year drew similar conclusions. In his second reading speech the Minister quoted the statistic referred to on page 4 of the IPART report, and I believe the honourable member for Manly also quoted the same statistic. The report at page 4 states:

The ability of a statewide ‘cap’ . . . on the total number of gaming machines to control growth in problem gambling is doubtful. Victoria has only 29% of the gaming machines operated in New South Wales, yet generates a turnover of 61% of New South Wales’ turnover.

The Minister was so excited about that statistic that he repeated it for the benefit of the House. Surely that statistic is disproved by the statistics produced by the Productivity Commission, which show a clear correlation between the number of gaming machines in the community and the incidence of problem gambling. The Minister quoted the following excerpt from the Productivity Commission’s draft report:

If a cap were set on poker machine numbers in NSW well below the current (level) then it could be expected to have significant adverse impacts on clubs and the people who use their facilities.

I am not sure whether anyone has been talking about setting a cap well below the current level. But, according to the Productivity Commission’s report, 92 per cent of people surveyed did not want an increase in the number of gaming machines. Once again it is obvious that the people cannot be fooled; they understand that there is a direct causal link between the number of gaming machines in the
Page 1039
community and the incidence of gambling. The Productivity Commission also noted that caps on gaming machine numbers can help reduce accessibility and thus problem gambling. Of course, in New South Wales there is a cap of 30 machines for hotels - I might add that before this Labor Government came to office the cap was nil - and no cap for clubs. The Productivity Commission believes that venue-based caps are superior to global caps. It stated:

Venue capping can enable a more controlled expansion of gambling, while impacts are monitored.

This is a challenge for the Government. The Minister alluded in his second reading speech to the issue of setting caps. I might add that the Premier seems to have lost his original enthusiasm for setting a cap on the number of gaming machines in this State, which he enunciated after the Productivity Commission’s draft report was brought down. That is the challenge for the Government: should it introduce a venue-based cap rather than a global cap? The people of New South Wales have had enough of this unfettered expansion of the number of poker machines in this State.

What the Government has done by introducing this bill is commendable as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. The fact that the Government exponentially increased the number of poker machines in the community then said, "We have got a problem", and introduced legislation to deal with the problems that that increase has created, I believe demonstrates the hypocrisy of the Government. I had an interesting talk with Mr Pat Daley of the Salvation Army. He told me that in the past 12 months there has been a 20 per cent increase in the demand for the services of the Salvation Army due to problem gambling alone. That again is indicative of the causal link between the number of gambling machines in the community and the incidence of problem gambling.

Obviously, there is a much greater need for counselling for problem gamblers and for research into gambling, but what has the Minister done? Not content with changing the role of the Casino Community Benefit Fund some years ago - honourable members might remember that the money that went into that fund originally was hypothecated entirely to dealing with problem gambling - the Minister has now changed the name of the fund by this legislation to the Community Benefit Fund "to more accurately reflect the role and nature of the fund and to overcome the uncertainty that exists in some areas in the community as to the purpose of the funds derived from the community benefit levy."

I might say that there was no confusion or uncertainty in the community as to the purpose of those funds before the Government changed that hypothecation about four years ago. That is contrary to recommendation 6.2 of the IPART report that all of that money should be hypothecated to "gaming related problems, responsible gaming practices and for general research into gaming". Most of the key measures, as noted by the honourable member for Bligh, are contained in the regulations, the objects of which include:

(a) to require registered clubs [and hotels] . . . to display notices and supply information to patrons about:

(i) the availability of counselling services in a number of community languages . . .

(iii) the chances of winning prizes from playing approved gaming devices

(iv) the receipts and payouts from the operation of approved gaming devices, and

(v) the potential for excessive gambling to cause financial, social and other problems . . .

(d) to require prizes over $500 won from approved gaming devices to be paid by cheque and not cash to the prize-winner, apart from the first $500,

(e) to require cash dispensing facilities (such as automatic teller machines) to be located in an area away from the approved gaming devices.

The Opposition supports all of those recommendations. In fact I made similar suggestions in a press release earlier this year. I also suggested that the odds of winning should be included on game cards. I have obtained some of those game cards from a local newsagent. As other honourable members have noted in this debate, there are numerous references in those brochures to the fact that it pays to play, the benefits players will get, how they will be rich for life and, as the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai said, "All of your problems will be put behind you." All you have to do is buy a lottery ticket and you will be set up for life.

But the brochures do not set out the odds against winning a major prize in one of these games of chance. In respect of Powerball, for example, the odds are 55 million to one, and for the $2 lottery it is nine million to one. Those figures are available from Lotteries New South Wales, but one must telephone its office to find out. I do not know why those odds should not be published in the literature. People should be able to make informed choices; when they play a game of chance they should know or be able to work out what the odds are. People who go to the races know what the odds are when they back a horse, and can make an informed
Page 1040
choice. That is a more appropriate way of dealing with Lotto and lotteries, and it is consistent with the thrust of the Government’s legislation.

The legislation and the draft regulations before the House do not go far enough. I wonder whether that is because the Government is of the view that if the odds were widely known or available fewer people would buy lottery and Lotto tickets. Some games give a 65 per cent return to players, with 35 per cent going to the Government. That fact is not widely known or not widely publicised. The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal report had this to say about responsible advertising:

. . . NSW Lotteries is selling the chance of attaining a ‘fantasy’ and may warrant different advertising standards.

IPART was critical of slogans such as "It could be you", "Win a truckload of cash" and "Scratch me happy". That is not the biggest deficiency; it is the failure of the Government to set up an independent gaming commission, which was the major recommendation contained in the IPART report. IPART made out a very strong case for the establishment of an independent gaming commission. As some honourable members have noted, there is a poacher and gamekeeper issue involved. Members of the Labor Party, when they were in opposition, strongly criticised this concept in other government utilities, namely Sydney Water. There is no reason why the Government should not adopt the same approach to regulating gambling in this State.

Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan) [11.18 a.m.]: I wish to express a number of concerns about gambling in general. In particular, I support the concept of an independent gaming commission in New South Wales. Very little that can be said at this stage would be new in this debate. Suffice it to say that we in New South Wales are in the extraordinary situation of having more capacity to gamble than the entire continents of North America or Europe. New South Wales has more poker machines and gambling devices, more ways of separating those who gamble from their money, than either of those two northern hemisphere continents. That says something about the capacity of New South Wales citizens to afford gambling - and I suspect that they cannot. It also says something about the State’s dependence on gambling for its income.

I am being quite frank when I say that successive New South Wales Governments have geared much of their sources of revenue to the so-called gambling dollar. That has always been done on the basis that people who gamble are using throwaway, non-essential money, not money used to provide for the bread and butter and the other essentials in their everyday lives, and therefore the government of the day has the right to supplement its revenue and assist the community by distributing that gambling dollar throughout the community.

Let me be frank about this, I do not foresee a reversal in policy in the near future by any government of any persuasion. Our first challenge is to recognise that there is a two-tiered society in New South Wales. The majority of people in this State are not regular gamblers. However, a considerable amount of the government finances, provided by taxpayer dollars, is supported by regular gamblers, who are in the minority. Over the years social reports have indicated that many of the people who contribute to the gambling dollar are not in a financial position to do so.

During any past depression or recession in this country, the racing and gambling industry has been one of the last industries to suffer. People down to their last bob, as the old adage goes, would have a couple of pounds on a horse or buy a lottery ticket to try to rescue themselves before the sheriff came to take their house or business. We have a responsibility in this place to show leadership. Whilst the majority of people do not gamble, an enormous amount of government resources is provided to assist people who are having difficulty copying in mainstream society - who are in difficult financial situations or social circumstances - as a result of gambling.

On the one hand, a considerable amount of the Government’s budget in social services and health is geared towards gamblers. On the other hand, they are encouraged to gamble and spend their hard-earned dollars, in many cases when they cannot afford to do so. About three months ago on a Saturday morning I stood in my local newsagency for about 1½ hours, talking to the proprietor and watching customers come and go. As a rough statistic, three out of five customers who received change from $5 - after buying a newspaper or perhaps lollies for their children - spent it on a gambling ticket. That reinforced my theory that 80 per cent of sales are made on impulse. There is no doubt that gambling is one of the biggest impulse products in society.

Customers in a newsagency, or at other establishments where gambling tickets are sold, will hesitate, think about it and then go back and spend a couple of dollars on gambling. Clearly, this House has a responsibility to recognise that we have created a system and environment in which the State is dependent on gambling for its income. Gamblers
Page 1041
are effectively propping up the State, but in many cases cannot afford to do so. Warning signs can be placed on tickets and over the doors of businesses that sell gambling tickets, or on poker machines and credit card machines in clubs and hotels; but unless we recognise that that is a token effort, a fetter, to deal with the problem, we will not redress the imbalance in our society and assist those people who are bleeding because of their excessive gambling.

Gambling has been made so easy. One of the easiest things to do in this State is to gamble one’s money. It is harder to access a convenience store, such as a 7-Eleven store, than it is a gambling establishment. Within 200 metres of Parliament we can invest our money in just about every form of gambling ever dreamed of by mankind. Within the next ten minutes we can bet on the horses, football, international politics and international events in Europe. We can buy tickets in soccer pools and football tickets. We can bet on just about anything we like. With one telephone call we can contact Centrebet at Alice Springs and go for our lives. In a few months time, we will be able to sit back in a chair in front of the television set and, with the swipe of a card, bet our entire life savings.

The sooner we abandon the idea that our consciences are salved by the posting of warning signs and get serious about dealing with this problem, the sooner we will be able to redress the imbalance in society from gambling. Once again, I implore the Government to address this matter in a positive manner and to establish a gaming commission in New South Wales. There is no doubt that sensible people in the community want it. There is no doubt that gamblers who cannot afford to gamble are suffering. The excessive oversell and easy availability of gambling is capturing the psychology of impulse sales. It is incumbent upon us to keep in perspective the need for balance and to ensure that the majority of society is not supported at the expense of the minority.

Mr PICCOLI (Murrumbidgee) [11.25 a.m.]: I also wish to speak to the Gambling Legislation Amendment (Responsible Gambling) Bill. It is with some distress that I read the contents of the amendment bill, because of what it seeks to do rather than not do. While I commend the Government for taking steps in the right direction, Opposition members have repeatedly spoken about the lack of initiatives to curb this serious problem. I know from personal experience that the people who are most affected by gambling are the ones who can least afford it. My family’s property in Griffith employs many migrant workers who perform hard work picking onions and fruit for low wages.

On a few occasions that I have been to the ex-servicemen’s club in Griffith, I have seen those people putting all of their hard-earned money through the poker machines. It breaks my heart to see them gamble all their wages after the hard work they have performed. I think they do that because they see winning the lottery or a jackpot as an answer to all their problems. Tragically, our society has not only allowed this to happen, but has actively encouraged it. Young people are also adversely affected by the gambling scourge that has affected this country, particularly this State.

Some of my fellow university students spent tens of thousands of dollars on poker machines and card machines by the age of 22 or 23. It was money absolutely wasted. By the age of 23 they should have had $20,000 in the bank for a deposit on a house. Some young people find themselves in debt or with no money in the bank because of their gambling. I reassert the Opposition’s call for an independent gaming authority. It is a disgrace that 10 per cent of all poker machines in the world are contained in this State. Most people consider Las Vegas as the mecca for gambling. We do not have to look that far afield.

It has been argued that a cap cannot be placed on the number of gaming machines in New South Wales because it will create an artificial market. I cannot accept that, when restrictions and caps are placed on everything else. There are stringent restrictions on the issuing of liquor licences, which creates an artificial market for liquor licences. There does not seem to be any problem about that. We justify placing a cap on liquor licences from a social perspective. I cannot see any difference between placing a cap on liquor licences and placing a cap on the number of gaming machines in New South Wales.

The final point I seek to make is about the role the Government should play. Can it remove itself from regulating gaming because it does not want to interfere with market forces? That would be stepping away from a prime responsibility of government. On being elected to Parliament I understood that one of my first responsibilities was to protect society and children from the dangers of gambling. I call on the Government to take further measures to stop the scourge of gambling.

Mr MERTON (Baulkham Hills) [11.31 a.m.]: I oppose the legislation. Though it might be worthy in principle, it fails to address the fundamental fact that under the present Government gambling revenue has increased by 50 per cent. The budget has projected income of $1.5 billion from gambling this
Page 1042
year. In the previous year about $3.4 million remained unexpended from the community benefits payments scheme. In this debate other members have referred to the State’s dependence on gambling. The Government seems to be relying on revenue from gambling, but it should give consideration to whether the State has made too many avenues available for gambling. The statistics show that about 10 per cent of the world’s electronic gaming machines are located in New South Wales, which proportionately has a minute population.

Mr O’Farrell: What does the Salvation Army say?

Mr MERTON: It is not only the Salvation Army but the public who are saying that enough is enough. Reasonable people are entitled to say that there is something fundamentally wrong when a State is dependent on gambling as a source of revenue. That does not apply simply to people who might be wowsers or have a grudge against gambling. Those sorts of things are being said by responsible and reasonable Australians. The community is subjected to too many pressures to gamble and the opportunities for them to do so are too great. One can gamble against almost anything except a fly going up a wall, and probably by the end of the week someone will take that bet. The day will come when people will be able to put their credit cards into a machine and gamble.

I do not always agree with the honourable member for Manly but he made a good point when he said that those who gamble on poker machines often are affected by alcohol and are unable to make the correct decision. Harm minimisation is wonderful, but the Government needs to look at the real source of the problem. I suggest that there are too many avenues available for gambling in New South Wales. It is time the Carr Government closely examined the social problems that causes. A recent report suggested that of the problem gamblers - and that is 15 per cent of those who regularly gamble, 15 of every 100 people who gamble regularly - one in four has been either divorced or separated as a result of gambling addiction, and a tragic one in 10 had contemplated suicide.

The basic problem is that too many avenues are available for gambling and that the Government is dependent on revenue from that source. It should give consideration to the social problems related to gambling. According to the report to which I referred, 75 per cent of those who were surveyed stated that gambling does more harm than good, and 90 per cent of them did not want an increase in the number of gaming machines. The Government is acting contrary to community attitudes. Enough is enough! Harm minimisation is great, but the Government has not faced up to the fundamental problem.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Kerr.

Motion by Mr Face agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow the resumption of the adjourned debate on the Address-in-Reply forthwith.

Debate resumed from 20 September.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI (Lane Cove - Leader of the Opposition) [11.36 a.m.]: I feel some sympathy for His Excellency the Governor, Gordon Samuels. The speech the Government asked the Governor to deliver to mark the opening of Parliament was predictable and had a strong sense of deja vu. It was predictable because it had those familiar hallmarks that are becoming increasingly associated with the Labor Government. What was delivered on behalf of the Premier was not so much a vision for the future of this State as an apology for an administration devoid of any new ideas.

Barely six months after being returned to office the New South Wales Government has become a government of inertia. Here is a Government with no vision, a Government with no apparent strategic plans for the future, and certainly no plan beyond the Olympics. This is a Government in a state of suspended animation. That is not only my view but the view of those in the community who expect more, much more, from a newly re-elected administration, especially one with a sizeable majority.

When I said earlier that this administration was devoid of new ideas - in fact, devoid of any ideas - I was referring in particular to the long list of projects and plans outlined in His Excellency’s Speech. The truth is that those projects and plans are nothing but a series of re-announcements, more like a long wish list than a plan for the future. Some of those projects, such as the cross-city tunnel, have been announced so often that the public scepticism barometer has absolutely shattered. The reality is that a number of themes are starting to define and
Page 1043
dominate the performance, or lack of performance, of this Government and, indeed, of individual Ministers.

These themes are financial mismanagement, arrogance, an uncaring attitude and secrecy. I shall deal first with financial mismanagement. The budget delivered to the House only a few weeks ago was a budget full of holes, as I said at the time. It was a budget based on shonky figures and even shonkier projections, a budget based on the expectation that the good times will roll on forever. Thanks to John Howard and Peter Costello, the national economy is doing particularly well, especially in comparison with the economic performance of many of our neighbours in South-east Asia. The economic performance of New South Wales is being driven largely by the pre-Olympic boom in construction and building. While that continues, the State budget will appear sound. But what will happen when the inevitable downturn arrives? What will happen when the good times stop?

The widely expected downturn in the New South Wales economy reinforces the view held by the business community that the Treasurer’s projections are dodgy, to say the least. The Coalition contends that there is a billion dollar black hole opening up in the budget as a result of increased competition in the electricity sector alone. The budget papers show that dividends and tax equivalents from the electricity industry declined by a massive 28 per cent in only one year from $913 million to $658 million. Yet the Treasurer is now predicting that revenue from this sector will improve; it will bounce up by 62 per cent over the next four years. No-one believes that, not even the Treasurer, I suspect. However, these are the figures that underpin the Government’s economic strategy for the next 12 months and beyond.

This is fantasy land; it is Eganomics at their very worst. It should not be forgotten that these figures come from the same Treasurer who has given New South Wales that most unenviable of titles: the highest taxing State in Australia. It should not be forgotten for one second that taxes and charges have increased by 30 per cent under Labor in this State and will continue to increase over the next 3½ years. When it comes to the arrogant use and abuse of power, no-one does better than the New South Wales Labor Party machine. That is its trademark. Every day in this House honourable members witness that arrogance.

I want to remind the voters of this State that this Parliament, the mother of Australian parliaments, has sat for barely 24 days since the March election. I also remind the voters that the rules and standing orders of this Parliament have been rewritten and manipulated by Labor for its own political convenience. In the last session of Parliament Labor regularly used its numbers to gag or abort debate in this House. Labor went to the extreme of actually abolishing question time for three days in a row in the last session merely to avoid answering embarrassing questions about the potentially corrupt conduct of Labor members of Parliament. It was an absolute disgrace.

I do not think I exaggerate when I describe this as a clayton’s parliament. The memorandum of understanding signed barely eight years ago by the former Liberal Premier Nick Greiner and three Independents has long ceased to apply. Democracy is the poorer for it. But the manner in which the Government treats Parliament with utter contempt is symptomatic of the way in which Labor treats the electorate. Just one example will suffice. Before the election Labor guaranteed that train and bus fares would not increase beyond the inflation rate, an undertaking which members of the Opposition were happy to support. Only three months later train and bus fares increased by an average of 14 per cent.

In case those percentage terms do not mean much to members of the Government, I should remind them that a one-way trip from Fairfield to the city now costs $4.20, an increase of 80¢ since the 27 March election. I chose Fairfield as an example because that is the closest major railway station to the electorate of the Minister for Transport, and Minster for Roads. When the Minister, who I suspect is driven to work every day and probably has not caught a train from Fairfield for some considerable time, was asked to explain the totally unjustified fare increases he dismissed the question out of hand.

The Minister dismissed hundreds of letters and calls of complaint by saying that the higher fares were justified because services had improved in recent years. He should try to tell that to commuters who use the trains daily, who complain daily about trains being dirty and who have seen a 400 per cent jump in reported assaults on trains and platforms in the first six months of this year. He should try to tell that to the thousands of commuters who are angered by late or cancelled train services.

Mrs Skinner: They laugh.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: The honourable member for Murray-Darling and the honourable member for Cessnock laugh. They have absolutely no understanding of how angry people are about
Page 1044
what the Government is doing to train and bus services. They laugh about the fact that the people of this State expected a certain standard from the Government and they are being betrayed. They were given an undertaking and they have been betrayed. The Minister dismisses their concerns by saying, basically, that the people who are complaining do not know what they are talking about.

As I said earlier, this is a Government of inaction: nothing ever happens. As one of my colleagues said recently, watching the Carr Government is like watching an episode of Seinfeld It is amusing at times, but nothing ever happens. Basic services have been ignored in the Speech written by the Government. Problems faced in education, roads, transport, public and personal safety have been ignored by Labor. But its greatest and most public failing has been in health.

The Coalition believes that every citizen in this State has a right to access the very best medical and hospital services available. We recognise the pressures of running a modern public hospital system, but how can a Government stand by and watch waiting lists for elective surgery, which it promised to halve, climb to record numbers? How can a Government with even a small dose of compassion stand by and watch as the elderly are forced to wait, often in pain, for at least 12 months for major surgery?

[Interruption]

Are the members opposite saying that they do not care about the people waiting on the hospital waiting lists either? What do they care about? They do not worry that people are complaining. The honourable member for Murray-Darling has some personal experience of the health system; I wonder whether he was dealt with under the public health system. If he was waiting for elective surgery he would probably have to go to the bottom of the list. How can a Government stand by and allow its emergency departments to deteriorate to the level where ambulances are turned away at the hospital doors because there are no beds? How can a Government stand by and allow intensive care patients to be ferried from hospital to hospital across the metropolitan area in search of a single, solitary bed?

Since 27 March the Labor Government has failed the people of this State in health services. Apart from once again blaming the Federal Government, the response of the Minister for Health is to set up yet another buffer between himself and the thousands of patients suffering every year because of a lack of access to basic hospital care. When 11 of the most senior doctors in the State went public and asked for additional immediate funding to shock-start an ailing system, the Minister told them to go away. He told them that there is no more money in the kitty.

The Minister told them, "Who cares anyway, because the Labor Government is here for another term of office." He is arrogant and uncaring. The ultimate sign of arrogance is to consult with people and then ignore them. Underpinning the financial mismanagement of the Government, its arrogance and its failure to provide even the most basic of services is the Government’s obsession with secrecy. I guess that when you have failed so spectacularly in many areas, secrecy is your only line of defence.

The Sydney Morning Herald, which I must say is no friend of the Coalition at this stage of the political cycle, declared New South Wales to be the most secret State in the nation. My good friends at the Sydney Morning Herald are not the only ones saying that. The Ombudsman, the former Auditor-General and community groups have complained of a Government that again and again abuses its powers and hides behind a wall of secrecy. In this State, freedom of information has well and truly become freedom from information.

I take this opportunity to foreshadow a number of Opposition amendments to the freedom of information legislation during the current Parliament. The time has come for a thorough review of freedom of information legislation to ensure that it works as it was intended and opens the doors to the decision-making process of government and the public sector, rather than bolting the doors even tighter. The people of New South Wales spoke on 27 March, as was their democratic right and responsibility. They gave Labor an undeniable mandate to take this State into the next century.

The Coalition went to the electorate with a comprehensive set of policies, some of which were controversial, some of which were not. We went to the electorate with a conviction that we had a plan for the new millennium and, importantly, we put those policies on the table for all to see and dissect, unlike our opponents, who kept the electorate in the dark about a number of its real intentions. The Coalition accepts that it has much work to do over the next 3½ years to regain the confidence and trust of the electorate. As leader, I have started that process, travelling across the State to listen to the community - in small country towns, in larger rural centres and in our suburbs.

Page 1045

We have also started the process of re-evaluating our policies, while at the same time rebuilding and reinvigorating our side of politics. Being in Opposition is never easy, as the Premier found during the seven years or so he occupied these benches. The task we face on this side of the House is substantial, but it is not impossible. As the results of the Victorian election clearly show, the pundits can get it woefully wrong. The electorate makes up its own mind and it hates being taken for granted. It is true that it will take a little time, but the voters of this State will eventually realise that they are being taken for granted by an arrogant, secretive, and uncaring Labor Government.

In assessing the performance of this Labor Government and its Ministers, I conclude by setting out the foundations on which I intend to rebuild the credibility and electoral standing of the Coalition parties, the parties I will lead to the next election. I believe State government is fairly straightforward. One gets one’s house in order, one manages it properly and openly, and then one uses the proceeds to deliver the very best basic services. It is not rocket science. What we need is the ability to listen, a commitment to take the tough decisions when required for the benefit of all, and the determination to always follow through. Above all, we must always ensure openness and accountability.

I want to have a State where the elderly are no longer afraid to walk their neighbourhood streets; a State where families have access to world-class public health services; a State where our schools can offer the very best in education regardless of postcode. I want to have a State where young women on their way home from work can feel safe using trains after dark; a tolerant and inclusive State where cultural diversity is encouraged as part of the wider Australian celebration; a State where the most vulnerable - the homeless, people with a disability, the poor - are provided with a suitable safety net rather than being ignored.

I want to have a State where the benefits of good fiscal management translate into better schools, better hospitals and safer streets. I want to have a State where we build communities, where we build neighbourhoods instead of tearing them down. In conclusion I remind the Premier of the words of one of his political heroes, Thomas Jefferson. In 1813 Jefferson said, "The people . . . are in truth the only legitimate proprietors of the soil and government." Mr Premier, those words ring true in 1999 and I suggest that you take stock, for otherwise your Government will founder on the rocks of complacency and arrogance.

Mr BLACK (Murray-Darling) [11.52 a.m.]: I stand here today as a proud member of Country Labor because we have delivered an excellent budget for the bush, and the next three budgets to come will be better. In listening to the Leader of the Opposition speak -

Mr Brogden: Point of order: The honourable member is referring to the State budget. This is the Address-in-Reply debate. I know that he was in hospital at the time of the budget debate but I thought you might bring to his attention that this is the Address-in-Reply debate and not the budget debate.

Madam ACTING-SPEAKER (Mrs Beamer): Order! There is no point of order. The honourable member for Pittwater is well aware that the Leader of the Opposition made a very wide-ranging speech.

Mr BLACK: The Leader of the Opposition referred to an article in the Sydney Morning Herald. There is a delightful line in the Sydney Morning Herald today. It said that Kennett has stolen something else: the Liberal Party election result from New South Wales. In this Address-in-Reply speech I start with roads. There is no more significant infrastructure issue than roads in western New South Wales. I am delighted that more than half the roads budget of $2.2 billion has been committed to rural and regional roads. I am also delighted that the Government intends to continue to commit more than 60 per cent of the record 3 x 3 funding to country roads.

Recently the Government announced its intention to support country roads by committing no less than $661,750 to the Far West, My electorate includes the Far West and the south-west, and in days to come there will be an announcement on the south-west. Yesterday it was announced that $250,000 would go to the Bogan shire to seal an additional 12 kilometres of Main Road 228 from Hermidale towards Nymagee. The grants will be matched dollar for dollar by the local shires. The Bourke shire will receive $170,000 for construction and bitumen sealing of Main Road 404 from Bourke towards Hungerford. Broken Hill City Council will receive $130,000 for pavement reconstruction. Central Darling shire will receive $111,750 for construction and sealing between Wilcannia and the now thriving tourist community of White Cliffs.

These are significant sums, which demonstrate a continuing commitment of the Government to infrastructure in western New South Wales. There is
Page 1046
also a continuing commitment to the bridge reconstruction program. I refer particularly to the bridge between Moama and Echuca, the bridge at Euston and the bridge at Curlwaa in the Wentworth shire. The moneys are well committed and show the intent to maintain infrastructure. I note that in the House yesterday recurrent funding for the Speewa ferry was mentioned. That will be welcomed by all the Speewa community - people who live off the land and people who need the ferry for access to their properties and egress for their farm products.

Yesterday Bankstown Airport was debated in the context of whether intrastate aviation would be transferred from Mascot. I am keenly aware of a meeting four weeks ago in the office of the Deputy Prime Minister involving operators of intrastate aviation in New South Wales. One of the operators, Hazelton, said that it was not interested in a transfer from Mascot to Bankstown but four major operators said that if a sufficient financial inducement was offered they might consider moving to Bankstown. Such a transfer would be unsatisfactory to everyone in western New South Wales. People in western New South Wales demand the same right to land at Mascot as Americans, Japanese and other overseas people coming to Australia.

Twenty per cent of people flying from western New South Wales to Mascot get on connecting planes, whether they be interstate or overseas planes. If intrastate aviation is shifted to Bankstown that will not be possible. It would mean travelling from Bankstown to Mascot to transfer luggage, a completely unsatisfactory situation. The situation would be further exacerbated for people in the Far West because instead of flying intrastate people will choose to fly via Mildura with Horizon Aviation or another operator to make it an interstate flight, or alternatively will fly from Broken Hill to Adelaide and then back into Mascot. That is not a satisfactory situation in terms of the logistics of people in the Far West of New South Wales having access to the central business district of Sydney.

While speaking on transport I again congratulate the Government on its continuing intent to maintain rail services in western New South Wales. A previous leader of the National Party, the former member for Barwon, decided to sack the Comet train service from Sydney to Broken Hill. That was one of the first actions taken by the Greiner Government. One of the first actions taken by the Carr Labor Government was to put the service back on track. It is no longer known as the Comet; it is now known as the Outback Explorer. This magnificent train service is fully supported by a range of community groups, whether they be from western New South Wales and travelling to Sydney or pensioner groups from our great and glorious sister city of Bankstown going to Broken Hill on the Outback Explorer to see the gateway to the outback and to experience what it is like on the best side of the Blue Mountains.

For many years road sealing has been vetted by governments. Through local government we have been able to establish a list of priorities for sealing roads in western New South Wales. This is a first, an achievement for local government in western New South Wales. For the first time the community of western New South Wales has been able to gather together to make decisions, in consultation with each other, about where precious dollars for road sealing should be spent in western New South Wales. Because of the changes we are currently experiencing in the demography and industry in western New South Wales there is nothing more urgent than the continuation of the road sealing program. The fact is that not since the 1890s has the pastoral industry been in a worse economic state; certainly it is a long time ago.

The price of sheep commodities, whether they be meat or wool, are at record lows in real terms. The McLachlan report commissioned by the Federal Parliament claims that around 80 per cent of our pastoralists should go to the wall, that is, they should get out of the industry. On top of that, we have the demise of the mining industry. An announcement is to be made later today about a new copper mine in the Bogan shire. I am sure that news will be welcomed by all members of the House. The reality is that the mining industry of western New South Wales will never again employ the number of miners that were employed in the 1980s. In terms of value and tonnages, one miner today is producing 10 times more than 10 miners produced in the 1980s. With the demise of the pastoral industry and the loss of employment opportunities in the mining industry there is an increasing need, in order to preserve the demography of western New South Wales, to focus on the two emerging industries: irrigation and tourism.

The Government recognises the importance of irrigation to western New South Wales and promotes it. I am pleased to report that a meeting of irrigators held in Broken Hill on 20 July was attended by representatives of the 15 major irrigation groups in western New South Wales. Before the meeting I was warned that it was unlikely that agreement would be reached between the high-security people of the Sunraysia region and the low-security people of the rice growing areas. I was warned that there would be little in common between the cotton irrigators of
Page 1047
Bourke and Lachlan and the rice growers of the southern regions.

The meeting, which lasted for 2½ hours, was a total success. It concluded without disputation. A number of issues that the Government will address between now and the end of the year were put to the meeting, including property rights and the feast and famine issues that have bedevilled irrigators, particularly those on unregulated rivers such as the Darling River. The Government recognises the increasing importance of irrigation, particularly with reference to the downturn in our traditional industries, namely the pastoral and mining industries.

While I am on the subject of irrigation I should like to talk about oranges. I am very grateful to members of the National Party for delivering to me last night a quantity of McDonald’s orange juice. This morning I gave some of it away to a very large company in Broken Hill; there was simply too much for one person. Before coming into the Chamber today, however, I was told that, for some reason, none of the company’s staff has turned up for work today. In any event, I thank members of the National Party for their kind thoughts. There has been some speculation about a book of poetry written by the honourable member for Barwon. I have been reading it, and it is great stuff. It has fortified my views on a number of matters. I assure members opposite that the publication I have will not only be a treasured addition to my library, it will also be compulsory reading for my family.

I should like to refer to the subject of orange juice when speaking about irrigation. I am sure the honourable member for Murrumbidgee would be the first to agree that we must do something about commodity prices in general, but we also must do something specifically about commodity prices in the citrus industry. I notice that the honourable member for Murrumbidgee is nodding his head. I am sure he acknowledges the truth of that statement.

I refer again to the recent election results in Victoria. In Mildura, which comprises the major part of the Sunraysia region, the swing against the Kennett Government was 27 per cent. The National Party candidate in Mildura finished third of all the candidates. Not a bad result for what used to be regarded as blue chip National Party territory! The seat was won by an Independent member, Russell Savage, with whom I have had discussions about orange juice and petrol prices. Mr Savage and I intend to work together, on behalf of both Victorian producers and New South Wales producers, to try to rectify the problem of commodity prices in the citrus industry.

Consumers have the right to know what they are purchasing. I would be the first to support the honourable member for Murrumbidgee on such an issue, and I am sure he would support me also. Whether orange juice comes from the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area or Sunraysia is not a matter of disputation. However, we must ensure that consumers are able to make an informed choice about whether they drink Australian orange juice - and it must be borne in mind that this State produces 40 per cent of the orange juice produced in this country, which is not insignificant - or orange juice from Brazil or some other country. That is the point we need to drive home.

The issue of petrol pricing will not go away. On the day that Country Labor met with Professor Fels in his Melbourne office the differential between the price of petrol in western New South Wales and the price of petrol in Melbourne was 17¢. On the following Friday the Prime Minister responded to Country Labor by saying that market forces would sort out the price differential. Well, I remind him that market forces have had two decades to sort it out!

Mr Oakeshott: What are you doing?

Mr BLACK: We in New South Wales will maintain pressure on the Federal Government to introduce appropriate legislation to fully disclose wholesale prices in the cities and country areas. We will continue to bring those figures out and embarrass the Federal Government. People are saying, "Why is it that all these wholesale price reductions have been made available when there are petrol wars in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, and so on? Why aren’t those same wholesale price reductions made available in the bush?" That is the bottom line.

The silence of National Party members on this issue is deafening. It is equally so from their Federal colleagues, with one exception. I congratulate the Federal member for Riverina, who broke ranks and wrote to the Federal Treasurer about the matter. This Government will not let this issue go away. It affects country people generally to the extent of $300 per year per family, and in Broken Hill it costs families $500 per year. National Party members will do nothing about the situation; they would rather forget about it or sweep it under the carpet. They prefer to just let things go along as they are and adopt the attitude, "As long as we have our diesel rebates, everything is okay." Tourism is an emerging industry in the west. Tourists want to come to the west, but they should not have to suffer these ridiculous petrol price differentials that exist between metropolitan and western New South Wales.

Page 1048

I conclude by saying that it is the continuing determination of the Government to proceed with heritage grants to western New South Wales. Some members opposite should come out west and see the real country. Our quality of life is second to none. The honourable member for Coffs Harbour in particular should come out west to improve his education. He might come and have a look at the mining industry, for example. Despite Federal cutbacks, the New South Wales Government has given an additional $350,000 for geophysical exploration; that, for the benefit of the honourable member for Coffs Harbour, is for the aeroplanes that might fly over Coffs Harbour. We might have to put him in an RAAF aeroplane to give him an education.

As for the pastoral industry, the New South Wales Government and the Federal Government are jointly funding an exeat counsellor. I know that the National Party will support that because they know that exeat counsellors are required more now than they ever have been. I welcome the John Kerin report; I urge all honourable members to consider the recommendations of that report, which relates to the best part of New South Wales - a part that is being very well looked after by this Government. [Time expired.]

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Oakeshott.

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr KERR (Cronulla) [12.12 p.m.]: I will speak only briefly to this bill, which goes some way towards dealing with gambling problems. It should be commended for some of its innovative measures. However, New South Wales continues to have a proliferation of gambling, though gambling has been recognised as a major problem. That has been acknowledged by the Premier and all responsible people. It is a matter that requires urgent attention. Problem gambling has brought tragedy to many homes. I will not refer in detail to the statistics that have been given to the House by honourable members, suffice it to say that they show that New South Wales is at the vanguard of a gambling fever.

No longer can these gambling problems be ignored. No longer can we tolerate the proliferation of gambling that is occurring. The Opposition in the previous Parliament sought a gambling inquiry. Fortunately, the Federal Treasurer has acceded to that request and is providing vast information regarding the lack of resources that this country suffers from because of gambling. I say "lack of resources" because, due to social problems, funds must be allocated to deal with those social problems and away from other tasks that require urgent action. The bill is to be commended for its direction, but it does not provide a solution to a serious problem in our community.

Mr FACE (Charlestown - Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development) [12.14 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions to the debate on the Gambling Legislation Amendment (Responsible Gambling) Bill. As I said in my second reading speech, this is landmark legislation. The bill represents the first stage in the Government’s package of responsible gambling measures designed to address problem gambling and ensure harm minimisation in gambling in New South Wales.

There has been a degree of hypocrisy in this debate in the sense that some honourable members who are saying what should be done now were in a position for some years to do something about the matters they now raise. I am not ignoring the issues. Most honourable members of this House who are reasonable know that I have a personal commitment to do something about this vexed problem. This bill is a world first. In fact, in 1994 I took on board what was being said by many people who were concerned about gambling addiction and wrote a social conscience paper that we went to the people with in 1995.

Because this is a first, it has taken considerable time to get to the present position. I will briefly outline some of the problems that created the difficulty. In a sense, we would have been in this position about 15 months ago had it not been for the shenanigans of mainly the National Party in the upper House. The exposure draft of this bill attracted 108 written submissions. I thank all of those who took the time and trouble to respond to the exposure draft. That was a fairly good response to an exposure draft of a bill. I can assure all of those who responded that their comments and suggestions were carefully considered and have assisted in making the bill stronger and more effective. That, really, is what the draft was about.

I trust that the draft regulations that I tabled during my second reading speech, as the second stage in the Government’s responsible gambling package, attract the same degree of useful and
Page 1049
constructive comment as was received on the bill. I would make further comment about that, because quite frankly some contributions made in the debate came from honourable members who obviously had not read the regulations. If they had, they would not have made some of the statements that they did. I certainly would welcome comments on both the draft regulations and on the other proposals for consideration outlined in the explanatory material included with the regulations.

It is really a sad indictment of honourable members who made some unfortunate statements, because not only did I table the regulations; I also tabled explanatory material with the regulations so that at the end of the day we would end up with a set of regulatory measures that are balanced, sensible and in the broader public interest. I will refer to some provisions of the bill to clear up some of the misapprehensions and misinformation that were part of this debate. A degree of self-righteousness accompanied some of the remarks that were made in this debate. I am concerned about gambling addiction, but many people do not seem to realise that addiction comes in a number of forms.

I could refer to other addictions that many people would not know about. Some people have a compulsion or addiction to chocolate; others are addicted to fixing up motor cars, to the detriment of families. A number of the measures contained in the bill apply to other relevant gambling activities covered by the amendments proposed by the bill, such as public lotteries, totalisator betting, and other betting activities. The bill also includes other specific provisions relating to advertisements for winning lottery schemes, the organisation of certain gambling activities by minors, and amendments to alert a court to the option of counselling, instead of the imposition of a penalty, where a problem gambler has been found guilty of breaching a casino exclusion order.

Let me turn again to an issue that I mentioned in my second reading speech, an issue that has been the subject of comment in the context of the bill. I refer to capping the number of gaming machines - which seems to be the answer to everything, according to some honourable members on the Opposition side and others within our community. Many people have had a lot of say about this issue in recent weeks, months and years, particularly in the context of the more than 1,400 registered clubs in this State that currently have no limits on the number of machines that they may operate.

However, as I said when I introduced this bill, when viewed against the history of machine gaming in this State and the industries that have grown up around it, the question of a general limitation on machine numbers is not a simple one. I would be the first to accept that at least two previous governments should have done something about this matter. But they did not. The first thing that needs to be done is to make clear exactly why a cap or other limitation should be put in place.

The knee-jerk reaction of some Opposition members is for a limit to be imposed. If a cap is the answer to minimise problem gambling in the community, it must be recognised that both the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] and the Productivity Commission were highly sceptical of the effectiveness of such a strategy. Some Opposition members said that IPART and the Productivity Commission suggested that a cap was the panacea, but that suggestion did not appear in their reports. In my second reading speech I quoted extracts from both reports. It is worth repeating IPART’s comment on this point. It stated:

The availability of a statewide "cap" (limit) on the total number of gaming machines to control growth in problem gambling is doubtful. Victoria has 29% of the gaming machines operated in New South Wales, yet generates a turnover of 61% of New South Wales turnover.

A number of Opposition members were highly critical of that example. The reality is that a cap does not minimise gambling. That has been proved. The report clearly indicates that placing a cap on the number of machines would not result in a decreased turnover. Players would simply play the same machines more often. A submission to IPART from the Wesley Gambling Service, which I deeply respect, stated:

. . . there can be no suggestion that placing a cap on the number of poker machines will be of any assistance in controlling problem gambling.

The Productivity Commission draft report drew similar conclusions in relation to this State, where machine gaming has been a part of registered clubs for more than 40 years. Before one introduced a capping arrangement, one would need to take into account the effect of such an arrangement on the club industry as a whole, and not merely focus on containing the growth of one or two large clubs.

If gambling machines were abolished, small bowling and golf clubs, particularly in country towns, would go to the wall. There is not a great deal of rationale for the comments of some members today. There is a real prospect that a global cap on clubs across New South Wales will increase the value of existing machines and severely
Page 1050
disadvantage smaller clubs, particularly in country areas, and medium-size venues. At the same time, imposing a cap on the number of machines held by individual clubs will do little to reduce the overall pool of machines available for operation by clubs as a whole. It may result in an increase in the overall number of poker machines as clubs move more quickly to operating the maximum number.

It has been suggested also that an announcement advising no capping arrangements will result in a reduction in the number of machines in operation as venues reduce their stockpile. As I said in my second reading speech, this complex policy issue requires careful and mature consideration. There is the very real danger that the imposition of a quick-fix solution may cause more problems, rather than solve the present problems.

To this end, I advise the House that the Government is pursuing a whole-of-government approach to closely examine this issue, and also other significant issues relating to gambling in this State, against the backdrop of the Productivity Commission’s draft report and the IPART report. A group comprising senior representatives of my office, my department, the Cabinet Office, the Premier’s Office, Treasury and the Department of Community Services will present a report to Cabinet early next year. That is an indication of my concern, and that of the Premier, about many of the matters that have been raised.

The group will address the important structural issue of the establishment of a Gaming and Liquor Authority, which was recommended by IPART. Again we heard from the Hon. R. T. M. Bull, who has an obsession about it, and other Opposition members about the establishment of an authority. They cannot provide us with a model, however; they do not have one. Several models are available. There will be no knee-jerk reaction from the Government; it will follow a timetable to get achievable results. All that the Hon. R. T. M. Bull knows about a gaming commission are the words "gaming commission". Ask him to provide a model structure and he is silent; he cannot provide one.

IPART recommended the establishment of a form of gaming commission to oversight gaming in New South Wales. The IPART recommendations are under review. The Government will not rush in and make decisions on a matter of such critical importance. Comments made about this matter at the time of the recent election do not stand up to scrutiny. On 2 March, prior to the election, the Hon. R. T. M. Bull, in a speech to a gaming forum, said that a Coalition Government would establish an independent gaming authority, the functions of which would include those of the Casino Control Authority and the gaming functions of the Department of Gaming and Racing and the Liquor Administration Board to regulate and administer gaming in all venues.

The Opposition’s proposed regulatory structure flew in the face of the recommendations of the IPART inquiry, which the Opposition looked to for its policy formulation. The Opposition proposed separating liquor control and regulation from gaming, whereas IPART recommended that liquor and gaming be kept together. The Opposition proposed merging the controlling functions of the Casino Control Authority and the Liquor Administration Board with the regulatory functions of the Department of Gaming and Racing. IPART recommended strongly that all control functions should be carried out by an independent body, quite separate from enforcement. The Opposition proposed that a gaming commission should determine fundamental policy matters, such as the level of gaming permitted in the future. IPART noted:

Under the Westminster system of Parliament, it is well accepted that governments should be held accountable by the electorate for significant policy decisions which impact on the wellbeing of the community.

There are discrepancies between the Opposition’s proposals and the results of the IPART inquiry, as I have outlined to the House today. In essence, the Government agrees with many of the findings in the IPART report. However, while the bill will not address the establishment of a gaming and liquor authority as recommended by the IPART report, this significant structural issue will be addressed by the high level working group, which I have described for the House. The Premier has set up the group to consider this and other significant gambling issues in this State, against the backdrop of the Productivity Commission’s draft report. As I have said, a report of the working group is expected to be presented to Cabinet next year.

I would like to say a little more about the Opposition’s hypocritical attitude to an increase in gaming machines in clubs and hotels. The Opposition has said that gaming machine numbers have exploded under this Government. In an effort to put to rest any suggestion for a cap and a gaming commission, let us take a reality check and look closely at the figures. What happened when the Opposition was in government from 1988 to 1995, a period of almost total vacuum for responsible gaming policy in this State for clubs, hotels and other gambling venues? The Coalition had seven years to do something. I refer to historical data
Page 1051
contained in the 1997-98 New South Wales gaming analysis published by the Department of Gaming and Racing and also to the most recent statistics published by my department last month.

In 1988 clubs in this State operated a total of 48,782 gaming machines, and hotels operated approximately 6,000, making a total of 54,782. By 1995 clubs operated 62,332 machines and hotels operated 11,609, a total of 73,941. Therefore, over the course of the term of the previous Government gaming machines increased by a total of 19,159 machines. Machine numbers in hotels increased by upwards of 20,000, an increase in percentage terms of 34.97 per cent. I repeat: an increase of just about 35 per cent. I ask honourable members to compare that percentage increase with the 31 per cent increase since Labor came to office. The major part of that increase was the result of allowing hotels to operate poker machines, a move that was supported by the Opposition. That proposal was not opposed; there were no amendments. Another example of the Opposition’s hypocrisy.

Ms Moore: I did not support it.

Mr FACE: I am talking about the Opposition. The comparison of figures for the two periods when there has been no cap is even more significant. During the time the Opposition was in government machine numbers in clubs increased by almost 28 per cent, from 48,782 to 62,332. However, since 1995, when Labor won government, machine numbers have increased by barely 17 per cent. What did the Coalition do when in government to respond to this remarkable increase in machine numbers? Did it impose a cap on the number of machines that clubs could operate? Of course not! Did it attempt to establish a gaming commission? Of course not!

Did it try to introduce anything that even remotely resembles the array of consumer protection and harm minimisation measures that are in this responsible gambling bill and in draft regulations? Of course not! It is obvious that despite being provided with explanatory notes of the draft regulations members of the Opposition have not read them. That has been in place for a long time, but I doubt whether there has been anything even close to the hypocrisy of the Opposition on this topic. The Government has been left to pick up the pieces resulting from the inaction of previous governments, not only the former Coalition Government.

Opposition members spoke about the details of the package. The honourable member for Port Macquarie, who led for the Opposition, obviously had not read the regulations. He said that this was all smoke and mirrors. I almost took a point of order on him for tedious repetition. If Opposition members had read my second reading speech, they would have noted that I tabled the most detailed regulatory controls as well as the bill. In particular, the honourable member for Port Macquarie said that the package did not deal with training. He came up with the brilliant idea that training in responsible gambling practices should be a universal prerequisite for management in industry.

It is interesting to look at the draft regulations. They contain detailed requirements for those involved in gaming operations in clubs and hotels, and provide that within two years all of those people must have undertaken training in responsible gambling practices. Those requirements have been detailed in relation to many other areas. I urge Opposition members to read the second reading speech for their edification. Clearly, the honourable member for Port Macquarie was caught out. He said that provision should be made for that training, but he had not read the regulations, which provide that in two years such training will be a requirement.

Much has been said about the Government’s delay in bringing forward the package that will implement harm minimisation measures. How long did it take the former Coalition Government to respond to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] recommendations on responsible practice? Those who make these claims are seeking to rewrite history. They do not allow the facts to get in the way of a good story. Let me examine the facts. I remind honourable members of what I said in the House on 28 April 1998 at the conclusion of my second reading speech on the Liquor and Registered Clubs Legislation Amendment (Community Partnership) Bill:

Finally, this bill also signals a more rigorous approach for the industry to confront the harmful effects of problem gambling in this State, and to embrace the responsible service and promotion of gambling activities. In this regard, I foreshadow that I will shortly . . . bring forward to this Parliament an innovative and comprehensive legislative package which will set up the scene for upgrading and streamlining regulatory controls over a range of matters relevant to the responsible conduct of gaming and wagering in this State. So much is the interest in this situation that even a commercial television station in Britain recently screened part of what the Government is doing.

This package will build upon an array of measures already in place in more recent gaming and wagering control legislation in New South Wales and will supplement important harm minimisation and patron care measures adopted by a number of individual operators and outlets to date, including many of the clubs which have already, despite the fact that there has been no overall policy, done their best to try to address the problem, accepting the moral responsibility that goes with it.

Page 1052

I also said at that time:

In addition, the package will include balanced and sensible measures relating to the advertising and promotion of gambling activities, problem gambling counselling signage, training in the responsible service of gambling, involvement by minors, access to cash, and other important reforms. Much of the detail of the substantive parts of these new measures will be the subject of full community consultation . . . I look forward to speaking further about them soon.

That was back in 1998. We know now that the community partnership legislation was debated in the Legislative Council and was amended at the instigation of the Opposition, with the support of the Independent members, to establish a lengthy inquiry into all of those matters. That inquiry was conducted subsequently by IPART. As a result, the foreshadowed harm minimisation legislation was put on hold. In other words, as I said earlier, we should have been at the present stage 15 months ago. The Opposition knew at the time of moving the amendment in the upper House that a Productivity Commission inquiry was to be held in the Federal arena. They wanted to duplicate that process.

The Opposition has had a continual aversion to this commission and to capping, which the Opposition spokesman in the other place has spoken at length about. No inquiry has been held. If that amendment had not been made, the legislation would have gone forward and most of the controls provided for in the exposure draft regulations would be operational. The Opposition will forever be indicted for holding up this process for approximately 15 months.

For example, the proposal for putting club and hotel staff through the responsible gambling training program would have been well under way; there would have been tighter controls over advertising and inducements; basic consumer information would have been required to be displayed in regard to gambling activities. As a result of the intervention of the Opposition and the Independent members in the other place almost 12 months have been lost in putting these vital measures into place.

Opposition members, including the former Leader of the Opposition, Peter Collins, have been in a frenzy about another matter. Labor Party policy in opposition was to allocate Government funds for research into the causes of problem gambling in New South Wales. That brought about the establishment and operation of the Community Benefit Fund, so that problem gambling could be addressed in the long term rather than in the simple short-term, bandaid programs that may prove to be costly and ineffectual. Before the establishment of that fund no money was available, but members of the Coalition parties continued to criticise and denigrate the Government’s proposal.

The Labor Party’s commitment has been well and truly implemented through the Community Benefit Fund. The imposition of the special 2 per cent levy on casino gaming revenue has generated many millions of dollars for the fund. I believe that it is the largest provision of funding to counter gambling problems in Australia’s history. The main objective of the fund is to ensure that money raised from the levy is dedicated and used. I remind honourable members that when I became the responsible Minister I changed the structure of the fund so that there were trustees.

Under the former Government the proposal was to allow the Minister of the day - at that time the Hon. Anne Cohen - to do a Jeff Kennett and distribute largesse to a large number of community organisations. There was no mention of the scheme being conducted in the way that I have structured it. I had independent people appointed as trustees. They have been criticised and pilloried from time to time but are decent people in their respective theatres of work - people such as Harry Herbert - and have worked away quietly for the trust. Until I changed the structure, the Opposition’s intention was to allow the Minister to distribute the money willy-nilly, in other words a bit of pork-barrelling.

I am proud that we now have funding to deal with problem gambling and to provide other community benefits. The objectives of the fund are to provide for appropriate research into gambling and the social impact of gambling on individuals, families and the general community of New South Wales; to promote industry and community awareness of problem gambling and associated activities through education campaigns, which have proved to be effective; and to support organisations offering counselling services for problem gamblers and their families.

Those things have already been done, from a base of nothing in 1995. A further objective is to ensure that money raised is used to fund such other community projects and services as may be determined to be of benefit to the community generally. Several Opposition members, including the honourable member for Willoughby, continually criticised what the Government was doing with the fund. However, the same people were writing to me seeking that I intervene on their behalf and override the decisions of the trustees. They are hypocrites.

Page 1053

The Government believes that research and education regarding the social problems caused by gambling stand at the forefront of activities that should be addressed by the resources available from the Community Benefit Fund. That is why I allocated money from the fund for the two baseline studies, in 1995 and 1996, and an update study in 1997 in readiness in 1998 for harm minimisation legislation. That has been delayed by 12 months. We were setting the framework with these baseline studies to ensure that this legislation became operative. The studies have provided the 11 trustees who are responsible for administering the Community Benefit Fund with a valuable reference point for their activities and responsibilities.

To date, contrary to what has been suggested by Opposition members, in excess of $23 million has been granted or committed to projects involving problem gambling and other worthwhile community services. Yet there have been utterances from Opposition members suggesting that the Government fiddled with the fund and accusing the Treasurer of raiding it. Obviously the honourable member for Vaucluse was in high spirits when he spoke last night. His contribution to the debate lasted for only eight minutes. He had not read the regulations.

The honourable member for Vaucluse has obviously not read the regulation. Of the $23 million, $16.6 million has been allocated to specific gambling research and education, and counselling and treatment projects. The conservatives continue to mutter that the fund was fiddled and frittered away. Those funds have resulted in new or expanded education programs, and intervention and rehabilitation services for problem gamblers, including targeted ethnic communities - which is long overdue; and gambling-related research topics, as well as projects of a broader community nature.

Very importantly the Community Benefit Fund also funds a toll-free 24-hour telephone help line seven days a week. Funds in excess of $4 million have been committed to the provision of around the clock telephone counselling and referral services for problem gamblers known as the G-Line New South Wales. Recently it gave me a great deal of pleasure to relaunch the G-Line service at its headquarters in Sydney. The service is free, friendly and, most importantly, confidential and operates in a variety of community languages. Anyone who has ever experienced a gambling problem or who knows someone who is a gambler is urged to give the service a call.

Unlike with alcohol and drugs, the symptoms of problem gambling are not apparent. For those who may need the service the telephone number is readily available. Overall, it is the trustees’ practice for grants to be provided in response to applications which are sought through advertisements published in major city, country and ethnic newspapers from time to time. Many members of the Opposition would be interested in the current round of applications. Once again they have criticised me but at the same time they have their hands out for the community organisations that they represent.

I will refer to a number of matters that were raised in the debate in relation to controls on advertising and consistency in guidelines for display of externally visible hotel and gaming-related advertising material. The bill contains provisions that will ensure responsible gambling advertising. The bill also introduces a number of important consumer protection measures. Those measures will ensure that people who wish to spend their time and money gambling will do so with their eyes wide open. The bill provides an option for the court to make an order requiring the casino operator to publish correcting any false, misleading, deceptive advertising concerning many forms of legalised gambling activity. In addition to or as an alternative a penalty may be imposed in respect of certain offences.

These offences will be contained in the Acts, and the regulations will deal with responsible gambling matters. Once again the accusation has been levelled at me that the legislation has no teeth. This bill will provide an incentive for those who conduct gambling activities to advertise those activities in a responsible but, most importantly, accurate way. The bill also provides for regulations to be made that restrict gambling advertising in draft regulations, namely the Casino Control Act, the Liquor Act and the Registered Clubs Act.

There will be strong controls on gambling-related advertising in those regulations with the intention of ensuring that a more balanced impression of gambling is created in the advertising of gambling activity. The IPART inquiry reported that some advertising slogans used by gaming operators are not completely accurate, or emphasise only the potential upside to gaming expenditure. IPART cited an example of a slogan which says "Everyone’s a winner" used by a well-known hotel group to promote its gaming room.

The new provisions in the bill, together with those in the draft regulations, are intended to ensure
Page 1054
that advertising material is acceptable to the community and does not prejudice consumers. The productivity commissioner reported that many submissions to the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into Australia’s gambling industries have the potential to advertise gambling activities in a way that reinforces false beliefs about gambling. The commissioner expressed a view that there are grounds for tighter controls of gambling advertising where it is felt that the information provided by the gambling supplier would have the effect of reinforcing inherently false beliefs about the odds of winning or about the way gambling technologies work.

The provisions of this bill will enable regulations to be made for tighter control of gambling advertising, contrary to what was suggested by members of the Opposition, particularly if it might have the effect as outlined by the commissioner. I have put the detailed proposals on the table for general comment, and I would welcome feedback on them before we move forward. The honourable member for Bligh referred to guidelines for displaying externally visible hotel gaming-related advertising which is rife in her electorate. So far as gambling advertising by hotels is concerned, these controls will build upon the guidelines for display of externally visible hotel gaming-related advertising material made recently under the liquor regulations following consultation with the Hotels Association. Those guidelines will commence on 1 December 1999.

Consumer protection is one of the hallmarks of the bill. The bill contains broad regulatory-making powers in respect of the information to be provided and signs to be displayed about gambling activities, with the intention of enabling consumers to make an informed choice about gambling activity. I am sure there will be much discussion in relation to the regulation, so far as the provision of information to players is concerned, by both the industry and the public generally. This issue has been closely considered in the development of the draft regulations that I have tabled.

I welcome any comments that honourable members may have on the draft regulations, on how best to provide information to gaming machine players about such things as their chances of winning and the cost of playing the machine or whatever other form of gambling it is. Importantly, it is also the intention of the bill to require the provision of information to those consumers who may have a problem as a result of the misuse or abuse of gambling activities as to where they can get help.

I note that many of those who provided comments on the exposure draft bill raised the issue of communicating information into community languages where the ethnic composition of a gambling venue’s clientele warrants it. That is a very valid concern and one which I have considered in the development of the draft regulations under the Liquor and Registered Clubs Act. Another important consumer protection measure is contained in the amendment to the Public Lotteries Act about which the honourable member for Hornsby seemed to have a consuming interest. Once again he has obviously not read the regulation.

The amendment provides that it is an offence for a person to advertise the availability on a commercial basis of information suggesting that the person will have an increased chance of winning a prize in the lottery. If a particular method of selection is made that kind of activity has the effect of reinforcing false beliefs about lotteries, and the Government says that that is clearly inappropriate. Overall the various measures in the bill will work to enhance the education of those who seek to gamble as they will do so with their eyes open. One other matter which was not debated at any length dealt with restrictions relating to the position of automatic teller machines [ATMs] and electronic funds transfer at point of sale [EFTPOS].

This bill will require facilities on licensed premises for the withdrawal or transfer of money from banks and authorised deposit-taking institutions, such as from ATMs and EFTPOS, to be installed or located in parts of the premises that are separate from those parts of the premises where gambling activities are conducted. The primary intent of the bill is to provide an opportunity for a person who has been gambling and who wishes to withdraw further funds to continue gambling to have more time to think about the implications of the increased expenditure. Some people have expressed the view that the facilities should be removed completely from clubs and hotels.

New South Wales is a big State and in many country towns the local club or hotel is really the only place where people can withdraw cash after hours with a degree of safety. The location of the facilities will be the subject of consultation before final recommendations are made. Another vexed problem that has been raised in this debate relates to credit. The previous Government took the stand that this Government has taken in regard to credit being advanced for the purpose of gambling. The bill also introduces two new offences which relate to the provision of cash advances and credit for the purposes of enabling a person to gamble. Proposed
Page 1055
section 126A of the Liquor Act and proposed section 54C of the Registered Clubs Act build on the existing prohibition against cash advances.

Those sections will not impact on withdrawals from ATMs where staff is not involved. The industry providers do not have a good record in this area. There have been instances of cheques being cashed and credit taken to the stage where one club had overtaken the mortgage on the home of an elderly lady. I say strongly that cash for credit is not acceptable.

I have already dealt with the issue of gambling training. I appreciate that the industry codes of practice have an important part to play in promoting responsible gambling. An aspect of the Government’s gambling harm minimisation policy that has been pursued for some time is fostering industry initiatives to promote responsible gambling. Once again, we have come from a base of nothing. I was roundly criticised for things I said in my early days in the Ministry. I indicated that various gaming and wagering providers effectively had not accepted that they had any responsibility. I am happy to report that, as with harm minimisation in relation to alcohol, there has been a considerable turnaround.

The Productivity Commission report has probably had an impact. Overseas industries realise that there is a possibility of court action in relation to consumer liability. Especially in northern America, industries realise that if they do not act responsibly they will find themselves in court one day. Unlike industry codes of practice and industry-based responsible gambling initiatives, the standards in the bill will be enforceable if people do not do the right thing. The Betsafe group of clubs has been established. Responsible pamphlets were issued by the Australian Hotels Association after poker machines were acquired by hotels. Prior to the last election the club industry formulated a long-term strategy for responsible gambling. So the industry is taking a much different attitude now.

I turn now to self-exclusion schemes in clubs and hotels. The bill encourages clubs and hotels to have a self-exclusion scheme or program in place providing an indemnity against civil and criminal liability for any act done or omitted in good faith in accordance with the indemnity provisions by persons involved in the conduct of gambling activities in a club or hotel. The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal noted that self-exclusion is a program of merit which often symbolises recognition that a problem exists. It can be the turning point whereby rehabilitation is commenced. All gaming facilities should be encouraged to offer self-exclusion programs to patrons who are problem gamblers.

The indemnity provisions state that it is lawful for a person involved in the conduct of gambling activities at a club or hotel, using no more force than is reasonable in the circumstances, to prevent a person who has agreed to enter into a self-exclusion scheme from entering those parts of the club or hotel used for gambling, and to remove that person from those parts of the venue. The indemnity provision applies only to self-exclusion schemes: that is, a scheme in which a person at his or her own request is prevented from entering or remaining in parts of a club or hotel used for gambling. For the purposes of the indemnity provision, the scheme must be conducted in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the regulation. These requirements are outlined in the draft regulations under the Liquor and Registered Clubs Act, which I have tabled.

In other words, we want this to work. While ever there was a doubt that someone could end up in court we would have had problems. I received submissions on the draft bill suggesting that protection from liability should be extended to a third party exclusion scheme - where a third party such as a family member has the right to have the gambler excluded from the venue. One or two members raised the issue of card-operated gaming machines. There are provisions in the Liquor and Registered Clubs Act for recognising the emergence in the marketplace of card-operated gaming machines. I understand that such cards are about to be introduced. The technology has reached the stage of enabling that and I would encourage the process.

The bill will enable introduction of gaming machines that can be operated by cards, the making of regulations dealing with the types of cards that may be used and the amounts that may be stored on the cards. These details will be subject to consultation with relevant industry groups. Discussions on the matter are taking place now. They will take into account the relevant harm-minimisation principles. It is thought that the cards will assist in our knowing how much people are spending, without in any way infringing on their privacy. The cards might enable us to overcome many problems.

It is worth ending as I started: without a doubt the bill is clearly the most emphatic legislative statement ever made in this Parliament about the need for gambling activities to be conducted responsibly and for harm associated with the use and misuse of gambling to be minimised. It represents
Page 1056
the fulfilment of a clear commitment by the Government made to the people of this State earlier this year. As I said previously, we would have been at this stage much earlier had other things not intervened.

The bill is the culmination of a long period of intensive work in a most difficult and complex area. I am proud to have initiated it more than five years ago with the release of the social conscience stand on gaming position paper that was written with great assistance from various people available to me at the time. I thank those who participated in development of the bill. I thank my ministerial and departmental officers who have laboured long on the bill. It has not been an easy road. I am looking forward to comments on the draft regulations. Again, there will be a consultative period so that better and workable legislation results. I am satisfied that, as with other aspects of the portfolio, the operation of the regulations will continue to be monitored. No doubt the legislation will come back here from time to time - sooner rather than later. I strongly commend the bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.

[Mr Acting-Speaker (Mr Lynch) left the chair at 12.57 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]

Mr AQUILINA (Riverstone - Minister for Education and Training) [2.15 p.m.]: I have been advised of a particularly sickening incident at Vincentia High School in which a number of animals have been killed. A pregnant doe and three kids were killed by stabbing, and several chickens had their heads pulled off. I understand the agricultural plot of the school was broken into last night. The incident is shocking and depraved. An immediate police investigation is under way. Obviously the school community is very distressed and disturbed by the incident. I am advised that initial investigations indicate that the sick person or persons responsible for the act were not associated with the school and no students were involved. The full force of the law will be brought to bear on anyone found to be responsible.

Mr O’DOHERTY (Hornsby) [2.17 p.m.]: The New South Wales Opposition joins with the Government in condemning this act. We hope the perpetrators can be found and that steps will be taken immediately to deal with them. I commend the principal and staff for their efforts to provide for the welfare of all students, who will doubtless be distressed by the incident. These kinds of incidents are not new. They are evidence that we live in a society in which some disturbed young people live in very complex situations. The Opposition urges the Government to make more resources available to deal with all the circumstances surrounding students who sometimes exhibit difficult behaviour.

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.

Petition praying for opposition to the construction of a McDonald’s restaurant on Moore Park, received from Ms Moore.

Petitions praying that a committee be established to review the Firearms Act, received from Mr Armstrong, Mr George, Mr Slack-Smith, Mr Souris, 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 opposition to the construction of a stadium at Bondi Pavilion for the volleyball event during the 2000 Olympic Games, received from Ms Moore.

Page 1057

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

Petition praying for opposition to any funding cuts to TAFE, received from Mr Lynch.

Petition praying that three classrooms destroyed in a fire at Lurnea Public School be replaced, received from Mr Lynch.

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 Woolloomooloo wharf redevelopment project include provision for a ferry wharf, 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 consideration be given to the construction of a light rail transport system for Moore Park, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that consideration be given to the erection of pollution barriers on the northern side of Syd Einfeld Drive, received from Ms Moore.

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

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

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

Petition praying that the practice of supplying stray animals to universities and research institutions for experimentation be opposed, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that the House totally and unconditionally abolish animal vivisection on scientific, medical and ethical grounds and that a new system be introduced whereby veterinary students are apprenticed to practising veterinary surgeons, 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.

Petition praying that an investigation be conducted into the continued viability of hotel licences in country centres, received from Mr Maguire.

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

Petition praying that the introduction of compulsory competitive tendering for roadworks in regional and rural areas be opposed, received from Ms Hodgkinson.

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

Page 1058

Mr STONER (Oxley) [2.26 p.m.]: I move:

That General Business Notice of Motion (General Notice) No 9 (State Environmental Planning Policy 14) have precedence on Thursday 23 September.

This motion is of great importance to country and coastal New South Wales. State environmental planning policy [SEPP] 14 is designed to protect coastal wetlands. However, following a study undertaken by the Southern Cross University, with the support of New South Wales Farmers, the suggestion has been made that wetlands have not been improved or protected in the best possible way by SEPP 14. On the contrary, the social and economic impacts of SEPP 14 have been particularly deleterious for country New South Wales. In fact, a high percentage of land-holders affected by SEPP 14 have indicated that their social status has declined as a result of it.

This policy has not achieved its objective of conserving wetlands. The Opposition fully supports conservation of wetlands. We fully support preserving the unique flora and fauna that is found along coastal New South Wales. However, SEPP 14, which was introduced in a rush by the former Minister for the Environment, has never been evaluated; a social and economic impact statement has never been prepared.

Mr Fraser: It is still costing people money.

Mr STONER: Absolutely. The Opposition calls for a fair and open public inquiry into SEPP 14 to establish whether it is achieving its objectives. If it is, well and good. We also want to know the social and economic impacts of the policy on country New South Wales. There are other ways of conserving wetlands and not disadvantaging private land-holders. However, SEPP 14 has disadvantaged land-holders.

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

Mr STONER: The Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act, which is referred to in the Environment Protection Authority Act, should be used in this case. That is why the Opposition asks for an inquiry.

Question - That the motion be agreed to - put.

The House divided.

Mr Brogden Mr Piccoli
Mrs Chikarovski Mr Richardson
Mr Debnam Mr Rozzoli
Mr George Mrs Skinner
Mr Glachan Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Hartcher Mr Souris
Mr Hazzard Mr Stoner
Ms Hodgkinson Mr Tink
Mr Humpherson Mr Torbay
Dr Kernohan Mr J. H. Turner
Mr Kerr Mr R. W. Turner
Mr McGrane Mr Webb
Mr Maguire Mr Windsor
Mr Oakeshott Tellers,
Mr O’Doherty Mr Fraser
Mr D. L. Page Mr R. H. L. Smith

Mr Amery Mr Lynch
Ms Andrews Mr McBride
Mr Aquilina Mr McManus
Mr Ashton Mr Markham
Mr Barr Mr Martin
Mr Bartlett Ms Meagher
Mrs Beamer Ms Megarrity
Mr Black Ms Moore
Mr Brown Mr Nagle
Ms Burton Mr Newell
Mr Campbell Ms Nori
Mr Carr Mr E. T. Page
Mr Collier Dr Refshauge
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 Gibson
Mr Collins Mr Knight
Mr Merton Mr Mills
Mr O’Farrell Mr Moss
Ms Seaton Ms Saliba

Question resolved in the negative.

Motion negatived.

Page 1059

Mr BARR (Manly) [2.39 p.m.]: I move:

That General Business Notice of Motion (General Notice) No 19 (Closure of Seaforth TAFE) have precedence on Thursday 23 September.

This motion relates to the closure of Seaforth TAFE, a matter of considerable urgency and concern to the local community. The senior management of the Northern Institute of Technology made the announcement without consultation with the community. The matter is urgent because we are coming to the end of the academic year. Unless the closure is deferred, arrangements will be put in train and it will be difficult to reverse the decision.

I ask the House to recognise the important role of Seaforth TAFE, and I call on the Minister for Education and Training to reverse the decision of the Northern Institute of TAFE to close Seaforth TAFE while there is still time to do so. I ask that this matter be given precedence so that all the issues can be debated in Parliament.

Motion negatived.

Mr SPEAKER: I draw the attention of the House to the presence in the gallery of the High Commissioner for India, Mr C. P. Ravindranathan, the Consul-General for India in New South Wales, Mr Vijay Kumar, and two former Ministers of this House, Ms Wendy Machin and Mr Milton Morris.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: My question is directed to the Premier. Given the Premier’s previous commitment to lifting the status of the teaching profession, why has he allowed the Department of Education and Training to distribute to parents a letter which principals say will damage the morale and reputation of teachers? Has the principals’ peak professional body described the letter as "very political", and does it breach the Premier’s own guidelines designed to ensure that schools are not used for political propaganda purposes?

Mr CARR: It is a factual letter and does not do any of the things alleged by the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr SOURIS: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs. Given the Minister’s admission that the lack of skilled labour in regional areas is an impediment to investment in local industries, how can he expect the position to improve when he supported the Carr Government’s decision to cut 630 jobs from TAFE, thereby dramatically reducing tertiary education opportunities in country New South Wales?

Mr WOODS: The commitment of this Government to regional development and economic growth in rural New South Wales is clear and demonstrable. Programs aimed at getting skilled labour to country New South Wales have been put in place in the past couple of years, including the Lifestyles program which clearly identifies that impediment.

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

Mr WOODS: Right across the board - in health, education, emergency services - country areas are getting their fair share, and much more than they received under the Coalition Government.

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

Mr WOODS: These programs and policies come from a basic belief that country New South Wales deserves a fair go, and a better go than they got under the Coalition Government. That belief is based on a clear difference in policy between the Government and the Opposition. The proponents of the National Party have no beliefs; they do not believe in anything. Not one of them has a particular belief or ideology. I hear them saying, "Yes, we do." The Leader of the National Party recently said, "I would encourage people to vote for people who do not represent any particular party ideology." In other words, he said vote for people without any particular ideology. He is talking about his own party, because it has no beliefs.

[Interruption]

I know that the Leader of the National Party has views about spinach pies, but not about anything else. National Party members have no views, no beliefs. That is why they say one thing out in the country electorates and something different when
Page 1060
they come here. In relation to TAFE, the Leader of the National Party knows full well that he should put the question to the Minister for Education and Training. But regional development is my responsibility.

Since 1995 almost 400 businesses have been specifically assisted through my department, representing potential investments of more than $1 billion and 10,500 new jobs. Only the other day the House heard from the Premier the Government’s plan for post-2000 investment in country New South Wales. New South Wales is the powerhouse of the Australian economy. It is the aim of this Government to ensure that investment and prosperity are spread equally. The basic difference is that we believe in a fair go for country New South Wales and the National Party does not.

Mr BLACK: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads. How is the Government responding to calls by Country Labor to support rail services in the Riverina and Broken Hill areas?

Mr SCULLY: The honourable member for Murray-Darling has asked another question about the Western Division. Yesterday he asked about roads and today he has asked about rail services. Railways are extremely important to rural communities. All honourable members will be aware that they connect towns and communities, enable farmers to get produce to markets and enable country kids to get to schools and universities. I have travelled to country New South Wales a fair bit, talking to folk about the importance of enhancing and upgrading country rail services.

Country Labor has been doing its bit to advocate the calls by rural folk to have their rail services enhanced even further. Opposition members are not interested in this issue. As some members on this side of the House will be aware, the Rail Access Corporation is undertaking a $300,000 study into further upgrading rail lines for commercial, freight and other uses. For the first time this Government is reversing the trend of governments to close rail lines and services. That action has been very well received.

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

Mr SCULLY: Country Labor is bringing the message back to the Government that country folk are appreciative of the commitment of the Government.

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

Mr SCULLY: The Government is allocating $16 million to reopen the lines between Cowra and Blayney and between Kandos and Gulgong. As I reported recently to the House, they are two of the first lines reopened by any government in the past 30 years. The reopening of the line from Cowra to Blayney will create 50 new jobs. That is not all; the Government is doing much more for country rail services. The Government subsidises Freight Rail by $76.5 million. The honourable member for Tamworth often complains to me that the Government should do more for the north-west. I am sympathetic to his call for funds. He knows that Country Labor has also advocated the provision of more funding for that region. That is why the Government subsidised Freight Rail to the tune of $76.5 million. At least the honourable member for Tamworth understands what Country Labor is about.

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

Mr SCULLY: It is essential to subsidise farmers and people producing crops in the north-west, the harvest belt of New South Wales, so that they can get their goods to market. We must subsidise graziers to ensure that their livestock can be transported to markets. That is why the Government has subsidised Freight Rail. The Government also subsidises unprofitable rural rail lines by $175 million. That is what underpins our commitment to close no further rail lines. That is an important commitment I give to Country Labor. Members of Country Labor can go forth with the clarion call to the bush that no more rail lines in New South Wales will be closed while Labor is in government. The people of New South Wales need a Labor Government, underpinned by Country Labor, supporting the Government’s commitment to the bush to protect country railways. Do not let the National Party get in charge.

What happened when the last Coalition Government was in power? Passenger services to Broken Hill were closed; passenger services to Griffith were closed; 14 rural rail lines and services were shut down. Countrylink patronage fell. What did Labor do when it came to office? Opposition members obviously do not like this. They know that this Government reopened the passenger rail service to Broken Hill. It restored the passenger rail service to Griffith. I am pleased to announce that the Government has additional initiatives for Broken Hill and Griffith.

On behalf of the Government I announce that we will commit $12 million to buy three new
Page 1061
passenger XPT rail carriages which will be dedicated to the Broken Hill and Griffith services. Currently the carriages used on that haul are 45 years old. It is important to make that long journey as comfortable as possible for country folk who wish to come to Sydney or to travel from Sydney to the Riverina and Broken Hill. The Government will ensure that the new carriages are much more comfortable; they will be airconditioned; the toilet facilities will be wheelchair accessible; seating for the disabled will be available and full buffet and luggage facilities will be provided.

I give a message to Country Labor to take to constituents. The Government is doing all it can for rural rail services in this State. The new carriages will be built and in service on track by early 2002 and will provide much more comfortable travel for people going out west. I am keen to make sure the carriages are built and on line as soon as possible. I will report regularly to Country Labor to make sure that the message gets out and that country folk have improved rail services.

Mr McGRANE: I address a question without notice to the Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation. What action has the Minister taken to curb the current mouse plague that is affecting primary producers in the central west of New South Wales?

Mr AMERY: The honourable member for Dubbo has asked another question about country New South Wales. It is pleasing that he raises these matters in the House.

Mr Carr: I think that is another seat the National Party will have to write off.

Mr AMERY: The National Party has no chance of winning Dubbo back. The mouse plague is an important issue for country New South Wales. I would have expected a little more silence from the vegetable section on the Opposition benches. Yesterday the shadow minister -

Mr O’Doherty: Point of order: This is a matter of great concern to country members and all honourable members of the House. The Minister should stop trivialising the question.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! No point of order is involved. I call the honourable member for Rockdale to order.

Mr AMERY: How did the honourable member for Hornsby get back to that end of the front bench? Has there been a promotion overnight? Yesterday the shadow minister for agriculture issued a statement about the mouse plague. I thought that a National Party member would seek to ask a question and I had prepared some notes to respond to the statements made by the shadow minister for agriculture. It was foolish of me to expect that I would be asked a question by a member of the National Party. The honourable member for Dubbo may have heard comments that New South Wales Agriculture, the Government or I should have given earlier warnings about the possibility of a mouse plague. It was suggested that people were caught unawares. The problem is costing farmers a lot of money, as the mouse plague in 1995 did.

As early as April this year New South Wales Agriculture issued a warning to the rural and farming communities that the circumstances and conditions were conducive to a mouse plague during this season. The statement made by the shadow minister for agriculture was incorrect. The present problem is the amount of bait available to control the plague. The bait in storage was determined on commercial grounds by the sole Australian manufacturer, which has sufficient bait on hand to treat 160,000 hectares of crop, a greater area than the total area of pasture affected by the mouse plague in 1995 that covered the Moree, Croppa Creek and North Star triangle.

Following that plague, a working group consisting of members of the Grains Council, the New South Wales Farmers Association and the Government was set up. The answer to the question of the honourable member for Dubbo is that the department does not store bait. That decision was made by the manufacturer.

[Interruption]

Members of the Opposition should calm down. They could have asked the question. The group agreed zinc phosphide should be used rather than strychnine due to environmental and trade concerns. The honourable member for Lachlan will recall that in 1995 the use of strychnine was the issue. As the Minister at the time, in consultation with the Minister for the Environment, I approved the use of strychnine for a mouse plague. However, the Australian Wheat Board and the grain industry in general has asked the Government not to use strychnine for mouse plagues in future because of its impact on trading our grains on overseas markets.

Page 1062

Strychnine is now no longer an option for the control of mouse plague. I can assure honourable members that the Government, my office and the department have been working with the commercial provider of the baits. I understand that 5 tonnes should be available for bait preparation by 28 and 29 September. The timetable for the shipment of the chemical from Egypt and its arrival in Darwin and then in Melbourne will depend on the normal commercial realities of shipping potentially dangerous or hazardous chemicals from overseas.

New South Wales Agriculture staff have been working with the Rural Lands Protection Board, which mainly administers the problem, and with farmers to supply perimeter baits. All available zinc phosphide was rushed to worst hit areas in a very short time. Exacerbating the problem, many farmers were unable to detect the mice in their crops until the crop heads began to fall off. In most cases, that was too late to prevent a rapid increase in mice numbers. If a farmer discovers mice in his crop he should ring the Rural Lands Protection Board or the district agronomist to give advice. In short, all that can be done is being done. All of the current bait in stock has been used and extra bait will arrive shortly. Farmers, New South Wales Agriculture and the Rural Lands Protection Board are working very co-operatively in this area.

Mr BLACK: My question is directed to the Deputy Premier, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for Housing.

[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the Deputy Leader of the Opposition on three calls to order. I ask the honourable member for Murray-Darling to repeat his question. Because of the volume of interjection from the Opposition I was unable to hear the question.

Mr BLACK: How is the Government responding to calls by Country Labor to create jobs in the Nyngan region?

Mr Hazzard: Point of order: Mr Speaker, will you be taking calls for questions today or will they all be given to the Government in a series?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! At the time the Chair gave the call to the member for Murray-Darling the ratio of questions was three to one in favour of the Opposition. The member for Wakehurst will resume his seat. I call the Premier to order.

Dr REFSHAUGE: I am delighted we had the visitors from the deaf school here. I think they probably chose a good time to leave when the honourable member for Wakehurst stood up. How does one explain the stupidity of that injection in sign language? I think we have all got a few signs, but how would one explain that stupidity?

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

Dr REFSHAUGE: The honourable member for Murray-Darling is a foundation member of Country Labor. I thank him for his question of great insight. I am delighted to inform the House that the Government has approved the $42 million Tritton copper mine near Nyngan which will create 172 jobs in that area.

Mr O’Doherty: Point of order: You have repeatedly ruled that displays of the kind indulged in by Government members are grossly disorderly in this House. Not only did the Minister flout your ruling but so too did the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads who is already on a call, and I ask you to put him on three calls.

Mr SPEAKER: No.

Mr O’Farrell: Further to the point of order: I support my colleague on that issue. From the glimpse I had of that cap - and the member might like to confirm - it says "Country Labor". Given that that is not a registered political party, Mr Speaker, could you refer this matter to the Attorney General because that is an offence?

Dr REFSHAUGE: More jobs for country New South Wales are being delivered by the Carr Government. Country Labor is constantly keeping up that pressure to make sure that jobs are delivered in rural areas of New South Wales. The mine has been approved under a State planning policy that seeks to generate major employment opportunities in industrial development. The approval of the Tritton mine brings to a massive $4 billion the value of projects under this policy since 1995.

Mr O'Doherty: Point of order -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Minister will resume his seat. I remind the member for Hornsby
Page 1063
that prior to taking his last point of order he was called to order.

Mr O’Doherty: The standing orders require that members shall be in their places and shall be uncovered in the Chamber.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the Minister for Health on two calls to order.

Mr O’Doherty: The standing orders provide that members shall be uncovered in the Chamber. I draw your attention, as the upholder of the standing orders, to the fact that the honourable member for Murray-Darling was wearing a hat in this Chamber, which is clearly in contravention of the standing orders, and I ask that you toss him out.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Standing Order 62 provides that members shall not wear headdress in the Chamber. At the present time the member for Murray-Darling is not wearing any headdress. There is no point of order.

Dr REFSHAUGE: Those projects are creating more than 6,500 jobs of which 4,300 are in country New South Wales. Great support is being given by Country Labor. Honourable members opposite will agree that this is a great opportunity for the people of Nyngan who had such devastating problems some years ago with the floods. Their resilience and commitment to fight back is being rewarded by the fantastic Tritton mine, a $42 million enterprise.

This follows on some fantastic examples of how the Government is creating employment in country areas. It follows the upgrade of the Pacific Highway from Hexham to Queensland, representing a $1.6 billion investment and creating 1,000 jobs a year. It follows the $350 million Visy pulp and paper mill at Tumut, with another 980 jobs. There is the $250 million Cadia mine, bringing 500 jobs to the region. The Port Waratah coal loader is a $345 million project that will create 500 jobs. The $42 million Tritton mine I have announced today is a major milestone in our drive to create jobs in country New South Wales. It will bring important social and economic benefits to the communities of western New South Wales. It will employ 172 people when fully operational - a major boost for local families and for local businesses.

It will also make a significant contribution to the nation’s exports. Over a 12-year period the mine will produce some 10.2 million tonnes of ore. The ore will be reduced to copper concentrate and then trucked to Port Kembla for processing into copper sheets for export. About 300,000 tonnes of copper metal will be produced from the concentrate. The mine is also expected to yield about 75,000 ounces of gold and 3.8 million ounces of silver.

I emphasise that I have imposed 53 strict environmental conditions of consent on the development to protect the area. They include: requiring appropriate monitoring; avoiding all Aboriginal archaeological sites; designing suitable roads and intersections; establishing noise and vibration criteria; and regular performance reviews for construction and operation, including independent environmental auditing. The Department of Urban Affairs and Planning has carried out a rigorous environmental assessment of the proposal with other government agencies and Bogan Shire Council.

The mine owners were also required to prepare a species impact statement in support of the application following the department’s consideration of submissions and the review of the environmental impact statement. This is a good indication of how Country Labor is achieving more for country families. It is a great opportunity for the people of Nyngan - a $42 million enterprise that will create 172 jobs. It is fabulous news for that wonderful part of New South Wales. Mr Speaker, we cannot let it go unnoticed that the honourable member for Gosford has been demoted from his position as shadow leader of the House. The former shadow minister for education was dumped. They will all start to dissipate and move away. Chris, we welcome your move to the back bench. We wave goodbye as you fade away into the horizon.

Ms ANDREWS: My question is to the Premier. How is the Government recognising the valuable work of community-based volunteers?

Mr CARR: This is a wonderful question about the wonderful work of wonderful people - volunteers. By the way, volunteers are very evident at work throughout country New South Wales. There was great news for country New South Wales today with the success of the Government’s legislation bringing down the cost of green slips. Reductions in green slip premiums throughout the country amount to about $80. This is because of our legislation.

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

Mr CARR: I am told that if the Opposition and Democrat amendments had got up the cost of green slips would be about $600.

Page 1064

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

Mr CARR: With all the attention to Country Labor I have had to have these posters printed this morning. "Country Labor", coming soon to a seat near you.

Mr Hazzard: Point of order: Mr Speaker, you have ruled before that members cannot use props. You are losing control. The Premier is now running the show in a most arrogant display. Hats, posters and anything else he wants to bring in simply become the order of the day.

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

Mr CARR: Volunteers do a terrific job and we want to help them. There are volunteers in our schools and our hospitals. They work to improve our natural environment, and 50,000 volunteers from all around this great State will be there during the Olympics. During the election campaign I released a very good policy - one of the policies that contributed to the outstanding success of members on this side of the House - which was called "Promoting our Volunteers". It highlighted that 1.8 million people in this fine State do volunteer work. There are about 25,000 non-profit community organisations and the people who work for them -

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

Mr CARR: The Opposition does not like this. It does not like anything that is positive or up-beat. Its policies are outlined today winding back protection of coastal wetlands. We are back where Ian Causley and Wal Murray left off 10 years ago. The Opposition has learnt nothing. We are back with Matt Singleton, who had to be drummed out of the Parliament for wanting to concrete coastal wetlands. We have a different message.

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

Mr CARR: Our message is support for volunteers. I said that we would increase funding to volunteer referral agencies this financial year and I am pleased to announce today that that commitment has been delivered.

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

Mr CARR: An additional $145,000 has been allocated to nine community volunteer organisations. Volunteering New South Wales - a great organisation - will get $50,000 to help improve co-ordination and recruitment of volunteers. Honourable members can see the country bias in what I am about to announce in the following list: $15,000 to the Armidale Regional Volunteer Centre. I am sure it will be very welcome to the fighting Independent country member, whom I do not think the National Party will ever shift. I do not think you will get that seat back, George, do you? Is that the feedback you are getting from the area? There will be $5,000 for volunteering Bathurst to give it a little help along. There will be $10,000 to the Central Coast Volunteer Referral Agency.

I am sure the honourable member would agree that that will be very welcome. There will be $5,000 to the Hunter Volunteer Centre and $15,000 to Volunteer Link in Hurstville. The great community of Hurstville is getting a little assistance for its volunteers. I know that it will be very satisfactory to the immensely popular local member. By the way, I do not think the Opposition will get that seat back either. I think Kevin will win there for a long time. But that is all right: As the Leader of the Opposition said today, you do not have to be very intelligent to be an Opposition Leader. She said that in her speech. That is a remarkable thing to say.

I do not want to embarrass anyone in the ministry but $15,000 will go to the Ryde-Hunters Hill Volunteer Referral Agency. It will be very welcome there. The Minister for Fair Trading is immensely popular in his electorate, not least because of the marvellous work he has done in consumer protection in fair trading. I am not sure that the immense personal popularity of Mr Photios will be levelled against him in the next election. There is also $15,000 for Volunteering Connections, a great organisation in Taree, and $15,000 for Liverpool Volunteer Resource Centre. I notice that members opposite have rearranged themselves on the front bench today. The honourable member for Gosford, keeping to the timetable set out in the Sun-Herald, has distanced himself from the Leader of the Opposition. He is moving further and further away.

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

Mr O’Doherty: Point of order: My point of order is a serious one. It relates to the conduct of Government members, who are taking their lead from the Premier. This is the third occasion during
Page 1065
question time on which Government members have displayed props. By doing that they contravene your rulings. They display their arrogance and they demean you. By demeaning you, they demean the whole House. I put it to you that unless you assert your authority at this point this House will become more of a farce at the hands of the Premier than it already is.

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

Mr CARR: It was not a prop. It was last weekend’s Sun-Herald. It quoted the honourable member for Gosford as saying that he was not planning to run for the premiership until he was 61, at the 2007 State election. I could not get that sort of coverage when I was Leader of the Opposition. Two full pages in the Sun-Herald! The Leader of the Opposition should not have sacked her press secretary. He was doing a wonderful job up until he got the heave-ho. Without the much-criticised Luis Garcia, the Leader of the Opposition would not be where she is today.

Mr D. L. Page: Point of order: My point of order relates to Standing Order 138, which provides that the answer must be relevant to the question. The question was about volunteers in country New South Wales. This arrogant Premier is not addressing that issue.

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

Mr CARR: I was talking about volunteers for the job of Leader of the Opposition. I want to encourage rather than discourage volunteerism. Whether the volunteers are from surf life saving organisations, bush fire brigades, State Emergency Service units, or whether they visit and care for our elderly, their work deserves underpinning and support by government. They are an example to all of us. They are the cornerstones of community spirit, no matter how much the Opposition front bench wants to sneer. The Government is pleased to support outstanding organisations such as the nine I have mentioned today.

Mr HAZZARD: I direct my question to the Minister for Corrective Services. Why was the community, and particularly the family of Donna Newland, not notified that her convicted killer, Daniel Miles, had escaped from prison, despite the fact that Miles had previously threatened to kill other members of the Newland family, and that he was not recaptured for six days?

Mr Whelan: Point of order: It is public knowledge that this matter is currently before the criminal courts of this State and is therefore sub judice. It is inappropriate for any member of this House to comment on any issue relating to this matter.

Mr HAZZARD: To the point of order: The rule of sub judice is often used by the Government to avoid answering questions that should be asked in this House. The sub judice rule clearly provides that a jury must be likely to be prejudiced. This matter has not even reached the committal stage. There is absolutely no way that a jury will be involved for possibly another two years. The matter cannot possibly be considered to be sub judice.

Mr Scully: How can you possibly say that?

Mr HAZZARD: Because I am a lawyer, and you are not. Stick to your buses! I want an answer to the question, as do the family members. What the Leader of the House has said is clearly wrong. On many occasions in this place former Speakers have ruled against such points of order. I ask you to rule against the Leader of the House and allow the question to be answered.

Mr Whelan: Further to the point of order: I refer you to a learned ruling by former Speaker Rozzoli in 1988. Page 120 of Decisions from the Chair reads:

The Chair always relies and gives maximum weight to the advice of the Attorney General on whether a matter is sub judice.

Speaker Rozzoli then went on to say:

When the subject matter relates to matters of criminality, the sub judice rule is to be applied more strictly than it might otherwise be.

Charges have been laid, the matter is before the criminal courts of New South Wales, and the matter is therefore sub judice.

Mr Hartcher: To the point of order: This issue arose in the previous Parliament. You will recall that you received a letter from the Attorney General and you ruled in relation to certain matters at the time. I am not sure whether that is recorded in Decisions from the Chair, but you certainly made a ruling at that time. At that time you made the point that the interests of the Chamber are best served by
Page 1066
maximum freedom being allowed to members and that you would only circumscribe that in the most exceptional circumstances.

In this case, as has been put to you, charges have been laid. There have been no hearings, and a matter is not sub judice unless it is actually before a court. The laying of a charge or the issue of a summons in a civil matter does not make the matter the subject of the charge or summons sub judice. The legal process does not commence until the court hearings commence. In this case no court hearings are under way.

Mr J. H. Turner: To the point of order: The question does not involve the sub judice rule. The question is directed to the Minister for Corrective Services. It is about a question as to why a family was not notified about a person escaping from prison. The Opposition simply wants to know why this family was not told for six days - and when they were told they were told by a friend - that the person who murdered their sister and daughter had escaped from prison. That is what the question is about.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask the honourable member for Wakehurst to hand me a copy of his question. I will decide before the conclusion of question time whether the question is in order.

Mr O’FARRELL: My question is directed to the Premier. Will the Premier explain how confidential legal documents prepared for the Industrial Relations Commission, including a sworn affidavit alleging potentially corrupt conduct by the honourable member for Parramatta, ended up in the hands of Labor Party Secretary Eric Roozendaal just weeks before the March election?

Mr CARR: Here they go, back in the gutter again. This is an absolute disgrace! After the Opposition’s scandalous attack on the Lord Mayor, one would have thought these mud-slingers would have learned their lesson. What a disgrace!

Mr SPEAKER: Order! My attention was diverted and I did not hear the question. I ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to repeat it.

Mr O’FARRELL: My question is directed to the Premier. Will he explain how confidential legal documents prepared for the Industrial Relations Commission, including a sworn affidavit alleging potentially corrupt conduct by the honourable member for Parramatta, ended up in the hands of Labor Party Secretary Eric Roozendaal just weeks before the March election?

Mr CARR: Let me deal with this -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I rule the question out of order.

Mr CARR: I want to answer the question.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question contains a personal reflection on the member for Parramatta. Standing Order 82 requires that such matters are to be dealt with by way of substantive motion. The facts of the matter are awaiting determination by a court and it would not be in accordance with the practice of the House to deal with a substantive motion before those facts are determined. I am personally aware of the stage the court proceedings have reached and I therefore rule the question out of order. That ruling may have some bearing on my ruling in relation to the question asked by the member for Wakehurst. I have not yet made a decision about that matter.

Mr MARTIN: I ask a question without notice of the Minister for Fair Trading. What is the next step in Country Labor’s fight for cheaper petrol in the bush?

Mr WATKINS: I thank the honourable member for Bathurst for the question and commend him for his commitment, as part of the Country Labor team, to getting a fairer deal for his constituents. I can advise the House that the next stage of Country Labor’s fight for cheaper petrol prices in rural and regional New South Wales will start in the next few days. From Monday, advertisements will appear in rural and regional newspapers advising country consumers how they can make verbal submissions about petrol prices.

From 15 October, Department of Fair Trading investigators will join Australian Competition and Consumer Commission officers to take verbal evidence from motorists in 13 regional centres of New South Wales. We know that country motorists are paying over $300 more for petrol than do city motorists. We also know that last month country motorists faced the highest petrol prices since the Gulf War. Now we are told that petrol prices could reach $1 a litre by the end of this year. Today I can announce that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission confirmed that it will visit Broken Hill, Bega, Wagga Wagga -

Page 1067

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

Mr WATKINS: - Dubbo, Bathurst -

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

Mr WATKINS: - Nowra, Maitland -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Port Macquarie to order.

Mr WATKINS: - Wyong, Port Macquarie, Grafton, Tamworth, Armidale and Moree. Those regional centres were identified as areas where petrol prices are of particular concern to country people. In August this year the price of petrol in Broken Hill was 10.7¢ per litre higher than the metropolitan average. In Bega, petrol was 9¢ per litre higher than the metropolitan average.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the member for Port Macquarie on three calls to order. I place the Deputy Leader of the National Party on three calls to order.

Mr WATKINS: I repeat, in Bega petrol was 9¢ a litre more than Sydney motorists paid. In Bathurst, the difference was 8.2¢ per litre.

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

Mr WATKINS: It is interesting that the Opposition expresses concern about this issue. That is because they know that Country Labor has been kicking the goals on this issue and that the Opposition has been doing nothing - absolutely zero.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The level of interjection in the House is unacceptable; neither the Chair nor the public can hear what is being said. A number of members have been placed on three calls to order. The next member who interjects will be removed by the Serjeant-at-Arms.

Mr WATKINS: Officers of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [ACCC] and the Department of Fair Trading will be visiting the country centres that I have listed. If there is a need for other evidence to be taken from other centres round New South Wales, Department of Fair Trading investigators will be made available for that purpose. This latest initiative will give country motorists a chance to have their say. It will enable country motorists to speak face-to-face with experts trained in detecting and prosecuting uncompetitive behaviours. This is part of the Carr Government’s commitment to making sure country people get a fair deal.

As honourable members would know, the Government ran a petrol hotline between 16 and 22 August. Opposition members might laugh, but 3,500 calls were made to the hotline, and about 200 written submissions were received in that week. It was a most successful initiative. Subsequent to that event, the Department of Fair Trading identified 23 alleged breaches of the Commonwealth Trade Practices Act. Those related to matters such as harassment of a service station operator by an oil company when he tried to lower prices; a service station operator being refused petrol at the tanker delivery stage unless he increased prices to the level dictated by the oil giant; and bowser prices being higher than the advertised roadside price.

I forwarded those allegations to the ACCC on 2 September for further consideration and assessment. It is now up to the ACCC to decide what further action needs to be taken. I stress that those are apparent breaches of the Trade Practices Act, which is Federal legislation. I encourage country motorists to now have a further say about this petrol pricing problem. I would especially encourage people working within the industry - whistleblowers - to come forward and tell the ACCC and Department of Fair Trading investigators what they know about what is going on.

Suspect practices may include competitors regularly raising their prices at exactly the same time as a result of collusion, or it may be suppliers threatening to withhold petrol if a service station sells at less than a certain price. The public will be able to provide evidence in written form, or in personal presentations, to officers of the Department of Fair Trading and the ACCC. To make a personal presentation, members of the public will have to contact Fair Trading officers nominated in the advertisements by 15 October. Written evidence in response to the current project also will be due by 15 October. In conclusion, I would point out that we must remember that the regulation of petrol is primarily a Commonwealth responsibility. Commonwealth legislation primarily determines the structure of the industry and the level of competition in it.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have warned members that they are not to interject. The member for Hornsby is out of order. I ask the Serjeant-at-Arms to remove the member for Hornsby, who may attend the Parliament next day.

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

Page 1068

Mr WATKINS: It is about time the Prime Minister, John Howard, listened to the concerns of people in rural and regional communities, that he listened to his constituents, and delivered on the promise that he made to the Australian people in the last two Federal elections.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask the Serjeant-at-Arms to remove the honourable member for Port Macquarie.

Mr O’Farrell: Point of order -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will hear the point of order when the honourable member for Port Macquarie has been removed.

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

Mr O’Farrell: My point of order goes to the issue of partiality by the Chair.

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

Mr O’Farrell: After the honourable member for Hornsby was removed, the Premier made an audible interjection which you ignored.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the Deputy Leader of the Opposition does not resume his seat I will ask the Serjeant-at-Arms to remove him from the Chamber.

Mr WATKINS: It is about time the Prime Minister delivered on the sacred promise he made before the last two Federal elections to the people who live in rural and regional Australia that he would reform the petroleum industry to drive prices down. He has broken that promise and breached that commitment to the Australian people. Petrol prices in country New South Wales have gone in one direction, and that is up. I assure the House, and Country Labor members in particular - and I would like the members representing the electorates of Bathurst, Cessnock, Maitland, South Coast and Murray-Darling to inform their communities of this assurance - that the Carr Government will continue to do all it can to promote competition and fair trading in the petrol industry in New South Wales.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The sub judice rule is open to a number of interpretations. It is normally assumed that if a person has been charged and is before the court, the sub judice rule could apply to questions relating to that person and to the offence alleged to have been committed. In the past Speakers have allowed such questions to be asked on the understanding that the answers are not likely to influence any decision to be made by a judge or a jury. I ask the Minister for Corrective Services to take care about the way in which he answers the question. If he strays beyond the limits to which I have referred I will ask him to resume his seat. The member for Wakehurst may proceed.

Mr HAZZARD: I direct my question to the Minister for Corrective Services. Why was the community, and particularly the family of Donna Newland, not notified that Donna Newland’s convicted killer, Daniel Miles, who had previously threatened to kill other members of the Newland family, had escaped from prison and was not recaptured for six days?

Mr DEBUS: I am advised that charges have been laid in relation to this matter and it is before the courts. I am advised that any debate in this House could be prejudicial to the forthcoming trial. The honourable member for Wakehurst could well jeopardise the forthcoming trial by attempting to debate related matters in this House.

Mr THOMPSON: My question without notice is to the Premier. Has the Government received advice from the Independent Commission Against Corruption concerning allegations that were made about the honourable member for Parramatta?

Mr CARR: It is with enormous pleasure that I answer this question. The answer will demonstrate that the Opposition has crashed as it did following the Sartor allegations two weeks ago. I can put information before the House that will bear that out.

Mr Hartcher: Point of order: Earlier today you ruled that a question in relation to the honourable member for Parramatta was out of order because it concerned matters of a personal nature. The question asked by the honourable member for Rockdale also relates to the honourable member for Parramatta. There is no substantive motion before the Chair concerning the member, and such a motion must be moved if a member’s affairs are to be dealt with by the House. Accordingly, the question by the honourable member for Rockdale is out of order.

Page 1069

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ruled the earlier question out of order because it contained a personal reflection on the member for Parramatta. The question asked by the member for Rockdale contains no such reflection.

Mr CARR: The Opposition does not like to hear it. The House will judge that in relation to this matter the Opposition, as with the question asked earlier today by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the questions asked by the Leader of the Opposition and the honourable member for Gosford two weeks ago about the Lord Mayor, has fallen flat on its face. I am in a position to give the House correspondence from the Independent Commission Against Corruption on this matter. Look at them over there! Another collapse? They have been caught out again. They have done it again; they have learned nothing. There have been more untested allegations, and they have fallen flat on their faces again. There have been more smears, and they have been caught out again. All they have are smears, and their smears fall flat.

Let us see what remains of the untested allegation that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition attempted, with the support of his leader, to get up before the House today. On 26 February the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly forwarded to ICAC, in accordance with Section 11 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act, copies of affidavits sworn by former electorate staff of the honourable member for Parramatta and the honourable member for Auburn. On 10 March the Clerk received a letter from the ICAC relating to the affidavits. The letter stated:

I refer to your report of 26 February 1999 . . . concerning alleged activities of members of the Legislative Assembly, including the Hon. G. M. Harrison.

The Opposition deals only in unsupported and untested allegations - about the Lord Mayor and about these members of this House. As was the case with the Lord Mayor, the allegations here have fallen flat. Once again, they have not learned anything. The letter continued:

The report has been examined by Commission officers and the view formed that the matter raised is not one which should be made the subject of a formal investigation by the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission will not be pursuing it.

As was the case with Frank Sartor, the Leader of the Opposition and her deputy have been caught out. Once again they have dropped untested allegations in this House under parliamentary privilege - another smear to salvage something that is beyond salvaging, the New South Wales Liberal Party.

Mr BROGDEN: My question is directed to the Minister for Sport and Recreation, and Minister for Fair Trading. Why has the Minister failed to act against fitness centres that have breached the industry code of conduct by offering membership deals of up to three years, when as many as 10,000 people have been ripped off by centres closing down and owing customers millions of dollars?

Mr WATKINS: The question addressed to me by the honourable member for Pittwater relates to the fitness industry code of practice in New South Wales. On 26 July 1998 a code of practice for fitness centres was officially launched. The voluntary code is designed to set minimum standards of service, safety and fair trading within the fitness industry. The code of practice was developed in response to fitness centre closures, which left consumers out of pocket. The code was jointly developed by the Department of Fair Trading, the Department of Sport and Recreation and Fitness New South Wales, the industry body representing fitness centres in this State.

Under the code, fitness centres must provide prospective members with sufficient information to make informed decisions about joining. They must also offer a range of membership plans, including a monthly payment option, as well as maintaining a high level of cleanliness and providing mechanically safe equipment and qualified staff to run fitness programs. The code also established processes for resolving consumer complaints against fitness centres.

The Government has assisted in raising awareness of the code amongst consumers and fitness centre operators. I strongly encourage consumers to choose fitness centres which subscribe to that code. I encourage them also not to sign for extended periods. At present 76 fitness centres have subscribed to the code. The Department of Fair Trading and the Department of Sport and Recreation will continue to liaise with Fitness New South Wales on the matter.

Mr O’Farrell: Mr Speaker, during question time the Premier accused me of conducting a smear against the honourable member for Parramatta. I refer the Premier in my defence to the Full Bench decision of the Industrial Relations Commission.

Page 1070

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has not been given the call. He will resume his seat.

Questions without notice concluded.

Mr CARR (Maroubra - Premier, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Citizenship) [3.52 p.m.]: This is an extremely important motion. It is urgent because BHP closes its Newcastle steelworks next week. This is one of the last opportunities for the House to debate the issue before BHP closes.

Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [3.53 p.m.]: This motion is urgent because it is now almost two months since the convicted murderer Daniel Miles escaped from the John Morony Correctional Centre. In the six days that he was out of prison no notification was given by the Department of Corrective Services or the New South Wales Police Service to the public or to the family of the victim, Donna Newland, that he was out wandering the streets. This matter is urgent because those who have waited eight weeks for the Minister to announce the outcome of his inquiry into what went wrong are becoming anxious that the Government does not intend to make any statement.

The matter is urgent because members of the family, one of whom, Jenny Newland, is present in Parliament today, have made it clear to the Opposition and wish to make it clear to the House that they have suffered for the past 10 years, since October 1990 when their 16-year-old daughter and sister was murdered by Daniel Miles. During the time of that man’s imprisonment in New South Wales the family had a degree of comfort. However, the family suffered enormously, as would anyone after a member of the family had been murdered.

Can honourable members imagine their feelings and their state of mind when they found out that the Carr Government, through the Department of Corrective Services and the Police Service, had failed to notify the community that this man walked clear of the John Morony Correctional Centre on Tuesday, 27 July 1999? The news that came to the family that Daniel Miles was out of gaol had an horrific effect on them. Those matters need to be considered urgently by the Parliament. Jenny Newland wants honourable members to know that her mother, the mother of Donna Newland, the 16-year-old girl killed by this person, did not receive any call from any Government department, and even to date has received no notification, explanation, apology or undertaking about a future explanation.

What the family has suffered is beyond the imagination of all honourable members. Mrs Newland was notified, after 10 years, when the matter was brought to her attention by a family friend. Mrs Newland has been under care and receiving counselling for 10 years. It is now only a few weeks since she received a call from a family friend who said, "Have you seen Donna’s picture on the TV? The man who murdered her is out, he has escaped." The shock waves that went through the family and should go through this House make this an urgent motion for consideration. We should not seek to participate in a cover-up or to avoid laying the facts bare before the people of New South Wales. The Minister for Corrective Services acknowledged that.

In response to calls from members of Donna’s family, other family members and people in the community he said that he would hold an inquiry. The family and the community have been waiting to learn the outcome of that inquiry. This motion is urgent because the community is entitled to know whether there would be a similar failure and another family would suffer if someone walked out of prison today. Would the community be put at risk? I am talking about a violent criminal, a person who murdered a young girl.

Why will the Carr Government not carry through its promise to announce the outcome of its inquiry? If an inquiry was held, Parliament and the community are entitled to know about it. It is urgent that the family be told about any inquiry, for their peace of mind. The family and the community of New South Wales consider that it is urgent that the Carr Government respond to their concerns and simply say what went wrong. We want a guarantee that this will not happen again, and it is urgent that that guarantee be given.

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

The House divided.

Page 1071

Mr Amery Mr Lynch
Ms Andrews Mr McBride
Mr Aquilina Mr McManus
Mr Ashton Mr Markham
Mr Bartlett Mr Martin
Mrs Beamer Ms Meagher
Mr Black Ms Megarrity
Mr Brown Mr Nagle
Ms Burton Mr Newell
Mr Campbell Ms Nori
Mr Carr Mr E. T. Page
Mr Collier Dr Refshauge
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 Iemma Tellers,
Mr Knowles Mr Anderson
Mrs Lo Po’ Mr Thompson

Mr Armstrong Mr Piccoli
Mr Barr Mr Richardson
Mr Brogden Mr Rozzoli
Mr Collins Mrs Skinner
Mr George Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Glachan Mr Souris
Mr Hartcher Mr Stoner
Mr Hazzard Mr Tink
Ms Hodgkinson Mr Torbay
Mr Humpherson Mr J. H. Turner
Dr Kernohan Mr R. W. Turner
Mr Kerr Mr Webb
Mr McGrane Mr Windsor
Mr Maguire Tellers,
Ms Moore Mr Fraser
Mr D. L. Page Mr R. H. L. Smith

Mr Gibson Mrs Chikarovski
Mr Knight Mr Debnam
Mr Mills Mr Merton
Mr Moss Mr O’Farrell
Ms Saliba Ms Seaton

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield - Minister for Police) [4.06 p.m.]: I move:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to provide for debate on the motion for urgent consideration as follows:

Mover - 10 minutes
Member next speaking - 10 minutes
Six other members - 5 minutes
Reply - 5 minutes

Mr HARTCHER (Gosford) [4.06 p.m.]: Every honourable member in this House has the same rights and privileges.

Mr Whelan: Do you want to speak on the motion or don’t you?

Mr HARTCHER: I am speaking on the suspension motion. We are all here to represent our electorates and you, as Speaker, grant the same rights to each member. There is not one rule for the Premier and one rule for every other member of this House. The Leader of the House now proposes to recast the formula for motions for urgent consideration so that special indulgence is given to the Premier. That special indulgence would not be extended to either the Leader of the Opposition or any other member of this House.

The procedures of the House give all members an equal opportunity so that no one person is entitled to special privileges. Only the arrogant claim special privileges. Members of the Opposition are concerned that special privileges are being granted to one member of Parliament. All members agree that the Hunter is an important area. The Coalition wants to debate policies that will help the people of the Hunter as we are concerned about job losses in the region. We will fight for the people of the Hunter as we have always fought for them, but that is not the issue at the moment.

The issue of concern is that special privileges are granted to one side of the House and denied to the other. Neither the Independents nor members of the Opposition get an opportunity to move urgent motions. The Premier has never before moved an urgent motion; he has not come into the Chamber except at question time. In the eyes of the Premier, he is affording the House a rare privilege deigning to attend other than at question time. The political arrogance of the Premier is starkly displayed: he is never in the Chamber except at question time, and rarely wants to do anything at all in the House. However, when he wants to speak in the House he demands special privileges. The Opposition rejects the notion that any member of Parliament should have special privileges. The Opposition rejects any claim that the whims of the Premier should be indulged.

The Opposition believes that each member is elected to represent an electorate, each member is
Page 1072
equal, each member has the right to participate in debate and each member has the right to move urgent motions. There is not one rule for the Premier and another rule for everybody else.

Question - That the motion be agreed to - put.

The House divided.

Mr Amery Mr Lynch
Ms Andrews Mr McBride
Mr Aquilina Mr McManus
Mr Ashton Mr Markham
Mr Bartlett Mr Martin
Mrs Beamer Ms Meagher
Mr Black Ms Megarrity
Mr Brown Mr Nagle
Ms Burton Mr Newell
Mr Campbell Ms Nori
Mr Carr Mr E. T. Page
Mr Collier Dr Refshauge
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 Piccoli
Mr Barr Mr Richardson
Mr Brogden Mr Rozzoli
Mrs Chikarovski Mrs Skinner
Mr George Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Glachan Mr Souris
Mr Hartcher Mr Stoner
Mr Hazzard Mr Tink
Ms Hodgkinson Mr Torbay
Mr Humpherson Mr J. H. Turner
Dr Kernohan Mr R. W. Turner
Mr Kerr Mr Webb
Mr McGrane Mr Windsor
Mr Maguire Tellers,
Ms Moore Mr Fraser
Mr D. L. Page Mr R. H. L. Smith

Mr Gibson Mr Collins
Mr Knight Mr Debnam
Mr Mills Mr Merton
Mr Moss Mr O’Farrell
Ms Saliba Ms Seaton

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Mr CARR (Maroubra - Premier, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Citizenship) [4.17 p.m.]: I move:

That this House recognises the significance of the closure of BHP on 30 September to the Hunter community.

Moving the motion gives me the opportunity to spell out the different attitude taken to the problems of the region by the Labor Government and that taken by conservative governments. Opposition members voted against this matter being discussed. They do not want regional issues discussed. Indeed, the Opposition has no members from the Hunter to join in the debate. Our approach as a Government following the decision of BHP to get out of integrated steel making was to move in to assist in the growth of new jobs.

That is why we established the $10 million Hunter Advantage Fund. I can report to the House - it is a message of optimism and buoyancy for the Hunter - that in 2½ years the fund has assisted no less than 25 companies. Businesses locating or expanding in the Hunter include manufacturers of veterinary pharmaceutical products, electronic components, concrete products, composite wood, clothing and textiles and cleaning products. There is also a tourist leisure park, a boatbuilding firm of excellence, and an aquaculture facility.

Together, those companies, assisted by the Government through the $10 million Hunter Advantage Fund, are generating about 1,280 full-time and 194 part-time jobs. This is only a beginning. In my 30 visits to the Hunter in the past 2½ years I have visited many of the workplaces and spoken to managers, investors and workers. I have been impressed by their dedication, skill levels and determination to achieve for the region. All of them have acknowledged the assistance of this Government in setting up the fund, in being in touch
Page 1073
with industry, in assisting and facilitating at every stage.

The steel river project is a good example. It is a collaboration between the State Government, local government, business, unions and residents. It is an advanced industrial and high technology production area with an innovative, streamlined approvals process - the kind of initiative that is giving the region an edge in the chase for jobs. In January this year the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation [CSIRO] announced the relocation of a sustainable energy centre for the Asia-Pacific region to the site. That is 100 jobs drawn into the region because we had our people talking to the CSIRO and saying, "If you want a site somewhere in Australia, think of the Hunter. Think of the steel river site."

Boulder Steel has announced its intention to locate a specialty stainless steel mill there - another 150 direct and 1,000 indirect jobs. We have 150 hectares of deepwater riverfront. One possibility we are working on is the establishment of a new container port in the form of a multipurpose terminal. A $6 million feasibility study is being conducted into that. On my last visit I was looking at plans for the expansion that is going ahead, which represents 200 construction jobs over the next two years. The coal loader is being expanded by one-third. All these port-related expansions are flowing from my Government’s first decision at its first Cabinet meeting held in Newcastle in April 1995. That decision was to confer port autonomy and corporatisation on the port of Newcastle. The people of Newcastle have plunged into this activity, and I think the honourable member for Dubbo served on the first port authority that we established.

Mr J. H. Turner: You probably appointed him.

Mr CARR: I think that is a fair conclusion. By the way, on his last visit to the Hunter the Prime Minister praised the New South Wales Government for its work in bringing jobs into the Hunter. He is a fair person. That is something of a snapshot of the work we have been doing to pull new jobs into the Hunter. Every time I go there I talk about the partnership we have with Federal and local government. I talk about the strengths of the education system in the Hunter. I was at the dinner that launched the new unified business organisation in the Hunter. The State Government agencies are working with all the private sector organisations designed to promote the Hunter. My colleagues can talk about this at great length.

The steel works will shut on September 30. It is a watershed event in the history of Australia’s most famous industrial city. An enormous amount of Australia’s wealth has been generated by those steel works. The steel works were launched during the First World War, in 1915. That was an historic moment and a great achievement for Australia, acquiring what other settler societies in the world, like Argentina, failed to acquire - that is, an iron and steel industry. Now, in the face of global economic forces, we are losing integrated steel making in the Hunter. That is disappointing.

I was there on the day BHP made that announcement. I cancelled everything else, chartered a helicopter and was there with the workers in the plant. I went to the union’s headquarters and spent an hour talking to representatives of all the unions. So, we were in it from day one, working with the work force and management, dragging people together and allocating money to get new jobs there. We ought to be commemorating what the managers, the investors and, above all, the men and women in the work force of BHP Newcastle, have achieved for Australia over all these years. It has been so vital to our efforts in two world wars, so vital in lifting Australian living standards, so vital in generating capital in all sorts of areas - such as BHP using the capital it accumulated from the highly profitable Newcastle steel making to invest in Bass Strait oil and gas.

Australia’s economic history is tied up in this plant. Australia is a stronger nation because of what the work force, the management and investors have achieved in Newcastle. At its peak in 1980 the steelworks employed 12,000 workers. When the closure was announced in 1997, the labour force had fallen to less than 3,000. Over the past 2½ years 519 employees have left through voluntary severance, 21 have been transferred to other jobs at BHP operations in Newcastle and 80 have found jobs with BHP outside the Hunter.

On Thursday next week the final 1,452 employees will finish. That will leave around 300 staff for a limited time to oversee decommissioning work. These figures show the huge impact the steelworks have had on employment in Newcastle. I know the atmosphere in this great city is one of disappointment and apprehension but it looks also to new possibilities and opportunities. It is a positive approach that we, as a government, working with the local members, and the Minister assisting me with Hunter affairs, have done a lot to cultivate and nurture. We are now looking at a much more diverse economy in the Hunter than we would have in 1980, with strong tourism, the vineyards, and advanced manufacturing such as the boat-building operation.

Page 1074

The boat-building operation is terrific. That operation has relocated to the Hunter from Fremantle, with assistance from the Hunter Advantage Fund. The manager told me that he had apprentices who were so honoured to work as shipwrights after their TAFE training that they work through their lunch hours. They do not even stop, they are so thrilled to have a job in advance ship building and boat building. Boats from that outfit go to boat shows in Florida and elsewhere in the United States. They are luxury vessels built in the Hunter for export around the world. That shows what advance manufacturing can offer the Hunter. I think that place provides 100 jobs and they are anchored in the Hunter with great opportunities for young workers because we used the Hunter Advantage Fund to get them.

So this is a time for us to reflect on the great achievement that the BHP steelworks represented in the story of industrial Australia. New prospects await the people of the Hunter and there will be difficulties along the way, but with the determination of this Government to go on assisting and working with the people of the Hunter they will seize those opportunities. A great part of the industrialised manufacturing history of the State is about to come to an end but let us get together as a community and see that from the sadness of this occasion we unite in grabbing every new opportunity for wealth generation and employment in this great region for this great community.

Mr J. H. TURNER (Myall Lakes - Deputy Leader of the National Party) [4.27 p.m.]: The Opposition notes the closure of BHP at the end of this month. Of course, it is a significant event for the Hunter Valley - indeed, a significant event for New South Wales. BHP has been part of the valley, part of New South Wales and part of the industrial fabric of this State for just on 82 years. Naturally, its closure will bring some change to the way things occur in the Hunter Valley. It will bring changes to employment and work modes, but, on the other side, there is room for optimism. The Premier has spoken about the Hunter Advantage Fund, and the Opposition acknowledges that, but the Federal Government has also played a part. It took the shutting of BHP to jolt this Government into any form of action for the Hunter.

The Hunter was considered a backwater by the Government until the closure was imminent. If the closure had not occurred nothing would have been done by the Government. It has done very little in the overall scheme of things and it all seems to centre on Newcastle.

The Premier takes great poetic licence when using the word "Hunter". Very little is being done for the people of the Upper Hunter - in my former home-town of Cessnock or in Muswellbrook, in the electorate of the Leader of the National Party, or in Singleton. What is happening with the Hunter Advantage Fund? Nothing is happening, yet those areas are as equally affected by the BHP closure as are areas in Newcastle.

I am not alone in my comments. The mayor of Lake Macquarie said that areas in Lake Macquarie were affected by the closure of BHP. Let us be clear that when the Premier speaks of the Hunter he is speaking about Newcastle. He is not talking about Gloucester in my electorate, where his policies on the timber industry have seen the same percentage-type drop in employment in that area as they have in Newcastle. No assistance has been given to the shopkeepers and traders in the area that have been affected by it.

I do not wish to deny the workers of BHP any of their rights for assistance but there has been significant assistance to BHP, particularly when the steel industry adjustment program came in. For example, about 15 years ago the Steel Industries Assistance program was brought into existence. That program was introduced to assist the downgrading from about 12,000 employees to the 5,000 employees who were there when it was announced that BHP would close. So there has been a downgrading over a period of five years.

BHP gave 2½ years notice of the current changes, and of course packages have been put in place by BHP and others to ensure that workers will receive benefits from the transition from steel making. I am not aware of many industries, small business people or traders who have received that sort of assistance. I do not want to see the abrogation of steel making in the area, but the fact is that over a long period there has been an acknowledgment that BHP was to wind down, and generous compensation has been awarded by the Federal and State governments through the Steel Industries Assistance program.

All is not lost. Some people have said that with the closing of BHP a crutch has been removed from Newcastle. I was born and raised in Cessnock and I worked in Newcastle. I knew that BHP was always there. The people of Newcastle used to say, "Don’t worry, we don’t have to do much in Newcastle because BHP is there. BHP will look after jobs, and BHP will always be with us." Of course, a lot of opportunities were lost in Newcastle
Page 1075
because the leaders within the community did not really go out to seek the alternatives. With the announcement of the closure of BHP it became obvious that there would have to be a change. That was summed up in an article in the Sydney Morning Herald of 30 April 1997, which read:

The fact that the city still has unemployment several percentage points above the national average is testimony to how slowly other industries have taken up the employment slack caused by BHP’s downsizing and the time it takes to retrain employees for other jobs. But the point about Newcastle is that other industries - such as coal mining, wine making and aluminium smelting - have continued to expand and others - such as tourism and high-technology industries - are continuing to develop. Newcastle has already demonstrated there is a future after steel.

That is an issue that is now coming to light and it is one that the Government should be pursuing with a lot more vigour than a Hunter advantage fund, which basically supports only the small number of organisations that the Premier announced in his speech. The Premier referred to a boat-building company which is exporting boats around the world, which is very pleasing. There is a boat-building firm in Taree, a fine firm called Stebercraft. But this Government decided to buy its police boats from Western Australia. So the boat-building industry in Taree has suffered from that. There must be continuity in the Premier’s rhetoric in relation to supporting jobs in the Hunter, on the mid North Coast and indeed right across country New South Wales.

The Carr Government is Newcastle-Sydney-Wollongong centric. That is obvious by the emphasis the Premier put on the closure of BHP in leading the first-ever urgency debate that he has contributed to. He is now clearly showing that this Government’s real colours as we know them are Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong and they will remain that way. In fact, as I understand it, under recent planning announcements those areas are designated as constituting the Greater Sydney area. I return to the situation with regard to life after BHP. An article in the Newcastle Herald of 16 April - we are getting closer to the date of closure - stated:

The report prepared by the Hunter Valley Research Foundation on the social and economic context of the closure of BHP’s Newcastle steelworks may be unduly pessimistic.

The report notes, for example, that retail spending has remained high in the Hunter Region in the past 18 months despite doubts about the economy, that commercial building construction has expanded despite a contraction in housing activity, and that employment has increased in higher-skilled occupations even as low-skill jobs have declined.

These positive indicators hardly suggest a region that is down on its knees.

There is also the evidence of other studies, like one on Hunter employment by Newcastle University’s Employment Studies Centre.

It found that while the spotlight was put on big job losses at major industries substantial job growth was occurring in smaller firms but going unpublicised.

It is clear that the industry itself, in the democratic process, is starting to put jobs in Newcastle. I am sure that the paltry amount mentioned by the Premier in the Hunter Assistance Fund would not go too far in encouraging people to come to the area. One member of the Labor Party does not believe that the Premier has done the Hunter proud, and that is the honourable member for Cessnock. An article in the Newcastle Herald of 17 April stated:

Milkman turned MP Kerry Hickey agrees with his Federal counterpart Bob Horne that the Hunter has been taken for a ride.

Mr Hickey, elected to State Parliament on March 27, said while his region has helped keep Australia’s economic record on track through the export of coal and production of electricity it has received relatively very little in return.

Perhaps the Labor Party is developing some honesty when Labor members are actually showing that the Premier’s rhetoric is simply that: rhetoric. They have been taken for a ride. This is a typical Carr smoke-and-mirrors exercise. We know that the Premier has a Minister to assist him on Hunter matters. That Minister is a fine gentleman and I have a lot of time for him, but, as he admitted in the estimates committee hearings, his office is a post box. He has two representatives who look after Hunter matters. The Premier is trying to say what a wonderful place Newcastle is and what a wonderful place the Hunter is, but he has made only a token gesture by providing the Minister assisting the Premier on the Hunter with two employees to look after matters pertaining to Newcastle and the Hunter Valley.

There will be life after BHP, notwithstanding the Carr Government. There will be opportunities that probably would never have seen the light of day if BHP had continued to operate in Newcastle. It is a tribute to the Novocastrians that they have been able to rise above the closure of an industry that has been the focal point of their lifestyle and their town for so long and given the people of the Hunter Valley, and particularly Newcastle, job opportunities. However, more assistance needs to be given, more innovative ideas and views need to be developed, and businesses need to be encouraged to establish in Newcastle, particularly the upper Hunter and mid Hunter areas where jobs are vitally important to smaller communities that do not have the assistance package that the Premier has announced for the employees of BHP.

Page 1076

Mr FACE (Charlestown - Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development) [4.37 p.m.]: In 1911, when plans were put forward for the establishment of a steel plant in Newcastle, BHP general manager, Guilloaume Delprat, and the Chairman, John Darling, were seizing an opportunity. They were, in Delprat’s words, seeking "a future more prosperous". They were building the foundations for the conversion of Australia into the industrialised, developed economy that it is today. Now, 88 years later, once again the task is to look to the future.

As we move into the twenty-first century BHP will be continuing its presence in Newcastle, looking to play a prominent role in the continuing economic development of the region, but it will not be manufacturing steel. Already the changing face of Newcastle is obvious. Major employers today are health and education. Developing industries include tourism, call centres, marine engineering, wine, defence and high-technology industries. But we need to continue to identify and develop industries which will make Newcastle a place with "a future more prosperous".

Members on this side of the House are going to be positive and look forward. More than any other region in New South Wales, Newcastle and the Hunter have had to re-evaluate their future and discover their new opportunities. With the withdrawal of BHP from steel making and the loss of jobs in the mining industry, State and local government, business, trade unions and the community have joined together to reshape the region’s future. The Hunter now, more than ever, offers strong incentives for business investment, from prime industrial sites such as steel river with a special 28-day approval process to new and exciting agribusiness ventures.

Many of the things that are now occurring resulted from some of the major decisions made in the late 1970s and 1980s by the then Labor Government to expand the economic base of the Newcastle-Hunter region. BHP and Leighton Constructions are in the process of conducting a feasibility study on turning a part of the BHP site into a multipurpose terminal. The proposal is to develop a world-class multipurpose terminal comprising a container terminal, general cargo, roll-on-roll-off terminal and car terminal facility, along with associated industrial and commercial development on the main site of the existing BHP Newcastle steelworks. All of these projects are still in the negotiation stages, but it is possible that they will go ahead and this will be positive for the Hunter Region.

We heard much from the honourable member for Myall Lakes about the $10 million fund and where that money was being spent. He seemed to suggest that all of those funds went to Newcastle. The places that received some of the funding include Rutherford, in Maitland; Thornton, in Maitland; Williamtown, in Port Stephens; Cardiff, in my electorate; Warners Bay, in my electorate, as part of Lake Macquarie; Tomago, in Port Stephens; Bobs Farm, in Port Stephens; and Wyoming, in the electorate of Lake Macquarie and in the city of Lake Macquarie.

For heaven’s sake, I wish the honourable member would do his homework for once. More than 50 per cent of the Hunter Advantage allocation has gone to other local government areas in the region. Our administration of Hunter Advantage has been transparent; it has been a hands-off administration, one of not backing winners. I cannot say the same for the $10 million spent by the Federal Government. It has been hands-on, handing out grants willy-nilly, and no-one knows where that money was spent or on what. It appears to me to be a case of backing their mates and winners.

The people of the region did not sit down and cry. The Government has got moving and done things. It established the Hunter Beyond 2000 Committee, which brought about steel river, the concept of manufacturing in bond, and has established the Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 Committee, on which the Leader of the National Party sits. That committee, despite some criticism of it, at least has made some progress in trying to promote further development and job creation in the region.

Trade missions overseas have secured business that we would never have had if we had not gone to South-east Asia. I led the trade missions to South-east Asia and to Asia, and we are to visit mainland China at the end of October or early November. A range of manufacturers negotiated with companies in those countries, and more than $10 million worth of exports in manufacturing, which have supplied jobs that we would never ever have had, has resulted from the two trade missions that I led. There was a further trade mission into the South Pacific Rim, which I did not participate in, and it was just as successful.

Whilst the demise of steel making as we have known it, the closure of the steelworks, and an associated reduction in employment marked the end of an era in Newcastle, a city that has been identified with its steelworks for nearly the whole of the twentieth century, at the same time it also serves as a signpost for changes in direction that are for the
Page 1077
better in Newcastle in the long term, as a consequence of the co-operation between all sectors of the community, regardless of their political spectrum.

Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan) [4.42 p.m.]: It is not news that BHP will close its Newcastle works; that proposal has been in progress for more than a decade, and was certainly on the table when the Liberal and National parties were in office from 1988 to 1995. This will not be one of those afternoons when opposing members will say, "My promise is bigger than yours" but it has been the scene of the Premier going on with a lot of hollow talk and claims that do not stack up with the facts about who has really looked after the Hunter and Newcastle over the past couple of decades.

Simply put, BHP decided to terminate its operations when its Korean competitors switched to electric ovens many years ago. BHP decided it could not compete on the open market because of that fact. I simply ask: Which government achieved more than 1,000 new jobs in high-tech industry in Newcastle in the past decade? That was the Fahey-Armstrong Government of 1993-1995, with the acquisition of the Australian Defence Industries project, which undertook the minehunter construction program. That involved the construction of six minehunter vessels in Newcastle, creating more than 1,000 direct jobs for the life of those minehunter vessels.

That contract was won against intense competition from Fremantle in Western Australia, Adelaide in South Australia and Melbourne in Victoria. All of those cities had established operations in the building of similar defence-type craft. That contract was won with the New South Wales Coalition Government working in co-operation with what was then the Federal Labor Government. Initially the Federal Government was opposed, on political grounds, to New South Wales winning that contract. However, the Coalition Government managed to convince the Federal Government that Newcastle was the best site for the project. With some strategic management on behalf of the Government and public servants at the time, as well as judicial placement of properly spent government funds, we acquired that project.

But the wheels came off the enterprise because of a change of government in 1995, just as the project was getting under way. The real profits to come from that project were in the new technologies being developed for the building of those minehunter vessels. The opportunity was there for a number of high-tech small industries to bounce off that major project. It took the New South Wales Labor Government about three or four years to realise that it had dropped the ball by not maximising its opportunities, particularly through local TAFE colleges, and by not encouraging private enterprise in a much stronger fashion.

The Premier mentioned the corporatisation of the Port of Newcastle. Yes, the Premier did corporatise the port, but in fact all he did was sign off on the proposal. That process had been well and truly developed in the term of the previous Coalition Government, as was rehabilitation of the foreshores of Newcastle and the Honeysuckle projects. That came as an aftermath of the rehabilitation of Newcastle following the disastrous earthquake. So the Carr Government cannot crow about its achievements, because all it did was take advantage of what had already been done by the former Coalition Government and, in the main, by private enterprise - public companies paid for by the mums and dads of this State. The Government put a little bit of money in, but it cannot fairly make the claims to victories that it did this afternoon.

There has been no real decentralisation of government departments from Sydney to Newcastle in the term of the Carr Government. No real government project has established in Newcastle or in the Hunter Valley in the term of the present Government. There has been no recognition of the demise or importance of the wool industry in Newcastle, and there has been no replacement industry to replace those traditional wool sales. When Rundles got into trouble, this Government did nothing to re-establishment a manufacturing industry to employ those highly skilled workers in Newcastle and in the Hunter. Nor has there been support from the Government for the wine industry - the fastest-growing primary export industry that this nation has. The Government has ridden on the back of that industry. It has gone to the cocktail parties and openings, but it has not done anything more than put on an annual luncheon in this place for the wine industry.

I would like to think that the Government contribution would have been more positive, but it really has been a case of smoke and mirrors today. The fact is that Newcastle and the Hunter have done remarkably well despite what the Government has or has not done. The Government has been like a postage stamp on the back of a parcel. It is about time it recognised it has a responsibility to put real support into the area, to take advantage of the technology that is in the area and the opportunities that present to put industry into the area. The Government should be fair dinkum, rather than
Page 1078
playing smoke and mirrors today as a cover for its inaction.

Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle - Parliamentary Secretary) [4.47 p.m.]: Today’s Newcastle Herald, in an article headed "BHP hot and on a roll for shutdown", pointed out that in the final month of steel making, Newcastle had achieved "near record production and safety performance with something like 25 per cent fewer people." The major recent achievements, it said, included weekly, monthly and six-monthly blast furnace production records, daily record steel making production, and record steel ladle life of 128 heats in refractories.

That is a great tribute to the hard work, the teamwork, the mateship and loyalty of the steelworkers of Newcastle who, over 84 years, have built the reputation of BHP. On their backs, BHP has become the international company that it is today. I recognise in particular the aspect of trade unionism within the steelworks and pay tribute to the late Maurie Rudd for the enormous amount of work that he did in this wind-down period to ensure that workers had the training, working with the Beyond 2000 Committee, and drawing BHP in to construct the Pathways program. When we recall that we should remember Maurie Rudd.

This is an industrial landscape that we will not see again: the blast furnaces, the basic oxygen steel making, the sinter plant, the coke ovens, that fantastic plume of steam that is an icon in Newcastle. At the end of this week all of that will go. Over the past year the Newcastle Workers Cultural Action Committee has sat down with steelworkers and, working with Pat Cranney, they put together a series of interviews and came up with a molten arts project. The words of the steelworkers themselves tell the story:

It has iron ore, fines coke, limestone, quartzite and a little bit of dolomite. A bit of black and a bit of red and a bit of white and all the different shades of materials. We then fuse them together and we improve the quality a lot and then feed them to the Blast Furnace. The furnace ignites the coke and it starts to burn and all the rest of the stuff fuses together around it.

I’ve been in this shop for about 37 years. Started on February 13th 1961. I came here virtually straight from school. My grandfather started here in about 1915. And Dad was here for 42 years. When I was a young fella, I was offered a job as an apprentice butcher, and Dad said that: "BHP was good enough to look after my father and me, it’ll look after you. You’ll have your job at the BHP and follow the family lines." And Dad had a nice piece of four-by-two and it was always a good persuader. So when Dad said something you either said something back and ducked and weaved, or did what he said. Simple as that. Dad’s gone now.

The interviews continue, about working through the hard years at BHP, the difficult and dirty work within the blast furnace, and the fact that many people worked in dangerous and hot conditions. They were steel makers, a proud group of men who sustained BHP through that period. I will read another extract:

The boss we had in the pipe shop, old Jack Langley, he was a company man and that was it. If you had a ten ton weight block of concrete and you had to move it, Jack got the book out. Even if there was a 20 ton crane there, if the book said that you put it on rollers and roll it, you’d put it on rollers and roll it. It didn’t matter whether the crane was there. That’s how it was. Whatever the book, the BHP book said, there was no other way to do it, that was it. You knew where you stood with him.

This series of statements by workers clearly indicates the culture that sustained BHP for 84 years. All of that goes at the end of this week. We keep the rod and bar mill, but steel making will disappear. Something that will not disappear is the 84 years of waste that has been deposited on the steel river site, which has been cleaned up, and on Kooragang Island. There appear to be no plans for ongoing remediation of that site. BHP must take a good-neighbour and good-company approach. It must ensure that it takes care of its blast furnace products and industrial processes from cradle to grave, so that following the cessation of steel making in Newcastle, our city is left with not only the legacy of a wonderful work force but also a clean environment.

Mr SOURIS (Upper Hunter - Leader of the National Party) [4.52 p.m.]: I join honourable members in supporting this motion relating to the closure of BHP and its economic impact on the Hunter. I endorse most of the comments that have been made by previous speakers, but I will not repeat them. I will expand on them and emphasise that the loss affects the whole of the Hunter, not merely Newcastle. I do not say that to be disparaging, but to focus the attention of honourable members on the plight of the upper Hunter.

The upper Hunter has lost 2,000 jobs from the coalmining industry. The half-closure of Liddell Power Station, a major base load power station of 2,000 megawatts, has affected 200 jobs. Under the hands of the Labor Government, the electricity distribution network, formerly the county councils and electricity authorities, has been amalgamated. That amalgamation has cost jobs in the upper Hunter, as well as in the lower Hunter. We have seen the closure of timber milling in the upper Hunter at the hands of the Carr Labor Government by a conversion of State Forests land to national parks, which has affected 27 jobs in the town of Muswellbrook.

Page 1079

Aberdeen abattoir has recently closed, with a loss of 400 jobs. In listing those job losses, I am pointing out that the impact on the upper Hunter, which has a lower population, is far greater than the impact of the closure of BHP on the lower Hunter. On top of that, the upper Hunter is facing more cuts. The Hunter needs a lot of help. I ask the Carr Government to similarly consider the job losses in the upper Hunter and the need for a one-off capital stimulation of approximately $10 million, the same amount that was associated with the BHP stimulation package. After all, on a per capita and area basis the impact is greater on the upper Hunter than on the lower Hunter.

At the moment there are threats of budget cuts at the hands of the Carr Labor Government. Muswellbrook and Scone police stations are facing the loss of one night of 24-hour policing. The Explorer night service - the XPT replacement train which carried a night service through the Hunter to a destination at Armidale and Moree - has already been cancelled. It is virtually the first thing the Carr Labor Government did when it took office.

The Carr Government has dropped the extension of the F3 motorway to at least Branxton, which would connect with the New England Highway north-bound to Brisbane. That project mysteriously disappeared from the integrated transport concept, the vision book that was launched with great fanfare by the Carr Government just prior to the election. Singleton police station was promised 24-hour policing. That is a broken promise. Recently, the Government announced the closure of the National Parks and Wildlife Service regional directorate at Muswellbrook. That new building, purpose-built for the job, was opened with great fanfare by the former Minister for the Environment and the Premier. They were at Muswellbrook for the Australian Labor Party State Country Conference. The highlight of the conference was the official opening of the new directorate. It will be closing shortly.

Other losses are: the closure of the Department of Land and Water Conservation directorate; 22 jobs at railway stations and signalling areas, particularly in Singleton and Muswellbrook; and the threatened and imminent loss of 67 jobs in the TAFE system, at a cost of $200 million in the Hunter Valley alone. Recently we have also endured the loss of operating theatre times at Singleton, Muswellbrook and Scone hospitals. All of these cuts have occurred under the Carr Government, on top of the job losses, which are greater per capita than the job losses in Newcastle.

Mr BARTLETT (Port Stephens) [4.57 p.m.]: In the time available to me I will have a nostalgic look at the closure of BHP and the way of life in Newcastle. The BHP of my childhood brought a rhythm of life to the Newcastle community. A change of shift saw huge numbers of men and women pass through the gates onto the ferries and punts. In the early 1960s I lived in Stockton, and BHP probably had 12,000 employees in its work force. The work was hard, often hot and dirty, and overtime shifts generated that little extra for mum and the kids. Shiftwork was the order of the day, and every child in Stockton knew that the noise level had to be kept down because a neighbour was on shift.

Every woman knew that the washing lines needed to be wiped before hanging out the washing, as the dirt and grit would be everywhere and the clothes would have a black line on them if a bit of the clothesline was missed. In some weather conditions, especially a westerly, the wind blew the smoke from the BHP stacks over Stockton, carrying the stench and grit. On those occasions the washing was not hung out. My neighbours, Reg and Flora Maund, used to say how lucky we were to live in Stockton because the westerly only blew for a maximum of three months a year, and the rest of the year the muck blew over Newcastle.

For 12 months I lived in Mayfield, and I still remember the hundreds, perhaps thousands of pushbikes that entered and left the BHP gate at the change of shift. One year I worked on the Department of Main Roads vehicular ferry, the punt, which connected Newcastle to Stockton. I shovelled coal and ash, raised and lowered the ramp and undertook general deckhand duties. There were three ferries, Koondaloo, Lungurena and Koorangabba. At the change of shift the pushbikes, which were always kept until the last car had taken its position on the punt, were then let on. The laughter, the friendship and the ride across the harbour after a day on the job was always a pleasant way to end the shift. Everyone knew that bikes were preferable to cars, because at peak time cars would have to wait up to 90 minutes to get across, whereas pushbikes caught the next punt.

The work was hard, dirty, and often dangerous, but families and the city prospered. Mateship was strong. It still is in the Hunter. The boss in Sydney or Melbourne was always trying to make his fortune from the sweat of the workers. We all knew that. There was a common bond of decency, willingness to help and concern for one another, which persists today in the whole of the Hunter region.

Page 1080

Last weekend I had the pleasure of addressing the fiftieth reunion of the HMAS Assault migrant camp at Fly Point. A number of speakers spoke about the beauty of the area after coming from war-torn and destroyed Europe. The migrant camp was often the first place to settle until a job became available in 1949, 1950 and 1953, and the newly arrived migrants, speaking little English, went off to Newcastle to live and join the BHP work force once they had settled in. BHP was a stepping stone for adjusting to Australian life and gaining acceptance and prosperity for their families in their adopted country.

The work was dangerous. I heard of one incident at the recent Ribbon of Steel community event in which in one day three generations of the one family - grandfather, father and son - who worked alongside one another died together in a BHP accident. The work force was tough and hard, loyal to itself and to its values. BHP is ceasing to make steel in Newcastle. Generations of skill and experience are coming to a close and, like manufacturing all over the world, displacing a blue-collar work force and the income that went with that work.

Paul Anderson, the chief executive officer of BHP, recently told a gathering I attended that BHP could never again do for its workers at other sites what it has done for the workers of BHP in Newcastle. I pay credit to BHP for that assistance. Four thousand workers in Zimbabwe and 2,000 at BHP’s United States copper mine received no such help when those mines were closed just recently. I also pay credit to the Ribbon of Steel activities that BHP ran to involve the community, share the memories and bring the community together to mark the closing of steelmaking at Newcastle. It was a wonderful, worthwhile exercise.

BHP, of course, is still in Newcastle. Half the site will be made available for dockside activities, and the rod and bar division will continue, employing some 1,200 workers, whilst BHP slag, a by-product and waste for 70 or 80 years, is now being used as a road base. The cessation of steelmaking at Newcastle is sad in many ways, but it will create a cleaner city with far less air pollution. Restored areas of the site, like the steel river site, will provide space for new industries, new jobs and new opportunities based on the wonderful port, harbour, transport infrastructure and skilled work force that awaits those ready to invest in a secure future.

Mr KERR (Cronulla) [5.03 p.m.]: It is a very important motion that is being debated here today:

That this House recognises the significance of the closure of BHP on 30 September to the Hunter community.

The honourable member for Lachlan talked about the history of BHP and the opportunities this Government has missed. It is appropriate to talk about the history when one looks at the impact on the Hunter that this closure will have. In Mike Steketee’s biography of Neville Wran the author had this to say about the former Premier’s efforts:

Whereas the proposed coal loader at Botany Bay would have been privately financed, the Government now had to find the funds for the new loader and this subsequently led to union demands that a third coal loader at Kooragang Island in Newcastle also be publicly owned. The decision also raised a major problem of how coal from the Burragorang Valley, south-west of Sydney, and the western fields around Lithgow, would be transported to the Port Kembla loader. It is a problem the Government still has not resolved, even though the loader was commissioned in 1982.

The author went on to say:

Poor Government decision-making was a major factor in the problems that beset the export coal industry in 1982 but it was only one factor. Bastardry by trade unions also played a large part. Strikes during the construction of the Port Kembla coal loader delayed its completion for more than a year and added $60 million to its cost. Construction of a third loader at Newcastle was delayed by nearly three years because of union demands that it be publicly owned. These delays, together with other stoppages by coal-mining and rail unions, led to quotas being imposed at both Newcastle and Port Kembla ports. At one time in 1982 there were 60 ships, which the Opposition dubbed "Wran’s navy", queued outside NSW ports waiting to load coal.

The tragedy is that the foundations for the prosperity of the Hunter could have been laid down at that time. Neville Wran’s biography also contains the following interesting paragraph:

Wran’s confrontation of his critics had now become a personal mission. He saw the transformation of the economic fortunes of Newcastle and the Hunter Valley as one of the lasting achievements of his administration, one of the things for which he would be remembered. He was bewildered that there was so much opposition to developments which would bring jobs to a region which had previously feared for its future. He was particularly stung by that fact that much of the opposition, particularly within the ALP, came from those with secure jobs, often in the public sector and the universities. He was genuinely puzzled by the criticism of part of the trade union movement in Newcastle, led by the left-wing Trades Hall Council, and found it difficult to reconcile their opposition with their professed concern for working men and women.

I make the point that the vision was stymied at that time by pure bastardry by individuals. That must not happen again. Honourable members today have paid tribute to the role of BHP during the course of its stewardship of the steel industry. One honourable member said that his father had told him to get a job at BHP because that had been good enough for his
Page 1081
father and grandfather. That happened in a number of generations. The honourable member for Port Stephens, who spoke immediately before me, mentioned BHP’s creditworthy role in supporting the work force and how that contrasted with the overseas experience.

Of course, there needs to be a vision. Newcastle recovered from the earthquake because of its comradeship and its courage. Duplication of the rail line between Newcastle and Sydney is needed. Williamtown should become a freight airport. The Newcastle port should be a container port. There is a need for this integration, given the maritime facilities and rail and road junctions in the area. There is enormous potential. As various members have stated, the new high-tech industries can go to the Hunter. It has the richest hinterland in Australia and enormous tourism potential. A former member, Mr Morris, has entered the Chamber. He made a great contribution to the Hunter and will continue to do so. I remember particularly the apprenticeship scheme and other schemes implemented by Mr Morris that have benefited the Hunter, a region that would have been much worse off without them.

Motion agreed to.

Mr R. H. L. SMITH (Bega) [5.15 p.m.]: I bring to the attention of the House a matter that involves Robert and Margaret Smith of Malua Bay. To my knowledge, they are not related to me. In 1994 Robert and Margaret used their life savings to buy their dream retirement home, a house in Malua Bay near Batemans Bay. Approximately 18 months after they moved in they noticed cracked brickwork and binding doors and called in a building consultant, Mr Brian Dawson of Merimbula. On Mr Dawson’s advice, they engaged three separate engineers, all of whom determined that the root cause was faulty foundations.

The house had been built on fill placed in an old creek bed. The Department of Fair Trading was contacted and a mediation was arranged between all parties. However, it was unsuccessful. As the builder did not accept responsibility, the owners applied to have the matter heard by the Building Disputes Tribunal. That hearing did not proceed as the tribunal determined that only minor faults existed and the two-year liability period had expired. I assure honourable members that the faults are not minor. The footings are moving and the house is basically falling apart.

I recall vividly that during my interviews with the Smiths Margaret told me, with considerable embarrassment, that when visitors to the house used the bathroom they had to leave the door open. The owners then proceeded to lodge a claim with the Department of Fair Trading under the seven-year warranty of the Builders Guarantee Fund. The department rejected the claim as it said that the builder had built the house in accordance with the plans. A complaint lodged with the Eurobodalla Shire Council produced a similar response. The council’s letter dated 1 September 1998 stated:

Standard Trueline specification and house plan was used. Footings and slabs to Council code and approved plans.

My letter to the council produced the following response from the mayor:

Council’s legal advice is that it is not responsible for the damage to the Smith’s property. I have been advised that Council was not aware of the existence of any fill on the Smith’s land at the time their house was built. Furthermore, Council itself did not place any fill on the land, or give approval for anyone else to do so.

The house insurance does not help the Smiths as the problem lies in the construction, not the subsequent damage. I am sure that honourable members will agree this is an appalling situation and that they can imagine the terrible impact it is having on an elderly couple. Their home is falling down around their ears, and rough estimates to try to repair the damage are of the order of $60,000. The department does not accept responsibility, stating that the builder is not at fault as the house was built according to plans approved by the council. The council does not accept responsibility, stating that it did not know that the house was built on fill and that the foundations were laid in accordance with standard plans.

The insurers will not accept responsibility. Faulty workmanship should be covered under the Builders Guarantee Fund. On 21 July this year I appealed direct to the Minister. He did not even reply. However, the department responded on 8 September that it could find no fault with the builder. I am not a builder but I think in primary school I learned what happened to houses built on sand. Margaret and Robert Smith lodged an appeal to the Commercial Tribunal against the department’s decision.

Page 1082

On the advice of their barrister they withdrew the appeal. However, this did not prevent the department from sending them a bill, which was magnanimously capped at $5,000. I have been advised that similar complaints against the Department of Fair Trading are legion, as they were against the former Building Services Corporation. That is a matter for the Minister to sort out. My concern in this matter is that Robert and Margaret Smith be given a fair go. I call upon the Minister to make himself personally aware of the facts of this case and to ensure that this couple receive justice in regard to their house.

Ms MEGARRITY (Menai) [5.20 p.m.]: Last week I received some interesting correspondence from Dr Ian Garrard, chairperson of Greener Sydney 2000, about sponsorship opportunities. The mission of Greener Sydney 2000 is to conserve and establish vegetation in Sydney’s land and water transport corridors and broader environment prior to the Sydney Olympics in the year 2000. As host for the year 2000 Olympic Games, Sydney has a responsibility to provide an environmentally friendly Games. Part of Sydney’s successful Games bid included a commitment to the conservation and protection of natural ecosystems. That includes native bushland, wildlife habitat, indigenous plant species, forests and waterways adjacent to Olympic sites.

The Greener Sydney 2000 program, with the support of private companies and public bodies, has been very successful in helping to co-ordinate the addition of some three million plants into urban grey spots, especially along Olympic transport and sporting routes. With his correspondence Dr Garrard enclosed the June 1999 Greener Sydney 2000 update document in which he particularly noted that the growing tree tally was nearing three million plants. That is three times the original one million target set by the Greener Sydney 2000 Committee in 1994 as its goal prior to the Olympics. He noted that Liverpool City Council in my electorate has made a significant contribution through its planting. That came as no surprise to me, because Liverpool City Council has a well-developed and well-deserved reputation for environmental management and innovation in recent years.

The elected members of Liverpool City Council for the 1995-1999 local government term determined that the protection and enhancement of the local environment was a priority. To help achieve that objective, in 1996 the council’s General Manager, Brian Carr, combined the functions of several teams of council officers previously working in relative isolation from each other. Officers from the policy area, parks and recreation, flooding and drainage, and the community protection enforcement areas were combined. Under the talented and capable management of Mike Ritchie, former policy adviser to the Lord Mayor of Brisbane, the team worked hard to address serious environmental issues in the Liverpool local government area.

Whilst the management arrangements are presently under review, the council should be commended for its efforts, including the Greenprint for Liverpool City strategy. The greenprint acknowledges that Liverpool’s greener spaces - bushland remnants, the many parks, sporting fields, waterways and rural lands within the city - contribute greatly to the quality of life we all enjoy. They are also vital as wildlife habitat and they shelter many native plants and animals. Green spaces maintain good air and water quality and help to cool the city, in this instance acting as the lungs of Liverpool. One important project within the bushland rehabilitation programs for the greenprint is called "A million trees for Liverpool". In the council’s 1995 proposal document for the million trees project it was acknowledged that it was "ambitious" and that:

. . . statistically speaking, to plant a million trees is a formidable challenge. However, as an expression it is designed to capture and stimulate the public imagination . . . It is something for the whole community to work towards.

Liverpool council’s success in this project is proved independently by the information sent to me by Dr Garrard of Greener Sydney 2000. I draw the attention of honourable members to the fact that the person to plant the very first tree in the million trees project was the Hon. George Paciullo, Mayor of the City of Liverpool. After a distinguished career in this Parliament George Paciullo was re-elected as the Mayor of Liverpool by popular vote in September 1994 and again in September 1995. In the recent local government elections, which were held on 11 September, George Paciullo, opposed by six other candidates, in an overwhelming endorsement by the people of Liverpool improved his position, taking 60 per cent of the first preference votes.

The people of Liverpool resoundingly endorsed George and the ALP team to the extent that an additional Labor councillor was elected in the south ward - six out of 10 possible positions overall. I heartily congratulate Councillor Wendy Waller, Councillor Cecilia Anthony, Councillor Ali Karnib, Councillor Steve Bowman, Councillor Joe Gauci and Councillor Tony Beuk. I wish them good luck in the
Page 1083
challenges before them. I offer my congratulations also on a job well done to the first-time campaign director, Paul Bryant. I note that he was ably assisted by his talented partner, who is also leader of the north ward team, Wendy Waller, and the ever hard-working local ALP branch members.

Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan) [5.24 p.m.]: The matter I raise relates to an application by Mr B. D. Heilman, of 53 Kendal Street, Cowra, to the Department of Land and Water Conservation on 20 April this year in an attempt to acquire an irrigation licence - or what may more properly be described as a licence to sink a ground water bore - to irrigate certain lands in the Cowra district that he and others recently purchased for the explicit purpose of establishing horticulture, in particular the planting of olive trees.

The saga commences on 20 May when Mr Heilman rang regional manager, Martin, who was not available and left a message for him to ring back. On 25 May Mr Heilman rang Martin, who again was not available and he asked to speak to Mr Gordon Lennox, who was also not available. He left a message for one of them to ring him back. On 27 May Mr Heilman rang and spoke to Mr Lennox, who said there was a backlog of applications because they had not had a hydrologist for a while. They were trying to catch up, but it could take some time. On 24 June Mr Heilman spoke to Mr Lennox, and the matter was no further advanced. He emphasised to him the importance of the matter because he had to plant olives in September-October.

On 20 July Mr Heilman rang Martin, the regional manager, and Mr Lennox, but neither were available so he left a message for one of them to ring him back. On 3 August Mr Heilman spoke to Martin, who said he was not familiar with his application. Mr Heilman told him he was very anxious to get a result of some description because he has purchased a property and the olives. He said he had organised to have the ground ripped, made an application for fertiliser, arranged for an irrigation system, et cetera, and that he was due to plant at the end of September or in early October. Martin said he would look into it and ring Mr Heilman back the next week.

On 12 August Mr Heilman rang and was told that Martin was at a training course. He left a message to ring him as soon as possible on his return. On 19 August Mr Heilman rang. Martin was not in but he left a message for him to ring him back. On 24 August Mr Heilman rang. Martin was not available and he left another message. Martin returned his call and said that no licences were being issued in the foreseeable future and that a moratorium was put in place the previous Friday, 20 August. Mr Heilman told him that his application had been submitted in April, and Martin said that did not matter. On 19 August Mr Heilman rang Martin O’Rourke, a hydrologist, who did not return the call. On 24 August Mr Heilman rang Mr O’Rourke, who returned his call in the afternoon. Mr O’Rourke informed Mr Heilman of the moratorium of 20 August.

In 1997 the Government brought down a policy for ground water management in the upper Lachlan Valley. That program for the five-year period from 1997 to 2002 clearly stated that prior to the 2002 sunset there would be full public consultation regarding future policy for the management of ground water in the upper Lachlan. There was no public consultation whatsoever before the moratorium was imposed on 20 August. Mr Heilman is one of a number of people who have been caught and, in some cases, severely disadvantaged financially. They may have purchased land, borrowed money to put in new technology, or contracted for the supply of certain products into the future.

Most importantly, the moratorium has lessened investor confidence. The area involved covers the fastest growing area of chardonnay grapes in Australia today. It extends from Jemalong, which is south of Forbes, to Wyangala Dam, east to Cudal, and west to Young. Young is the world’s largest prune growing area. A $28 million winery, one of the biggest in Australia, is being constructed at Cudal. That potentially significant area has been virtually mugged by the Government without notice.

I am pleased that the Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation is in the Chamber because I mentioned this matter to him privately a couple of weeks ago and I look forward to his response. I believe the Government has acted in a cavalier way. It owes compensation to those affected. At the very least, it owes them an explanation, first, as to why its officers were not prepared to respond to licensed applicants and, second, as to why those people were not at least extended the courtesy of being advised that there was to be a change of policy. One of my constituents, an investor in New South Wales, applied on 20 April and was stalled until 20 August, when he was told no applications would be accepted. Why could the officers not have told him that in April, so that he could have been saved
Page 1084
further expenditure and legal expenses and made other arrangements for planting other crops in the spring?

Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt - Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation) [5.28 p.m.]: The honourable member informed me that he intended to raise this matter today. He said that his constituent had made numerous calls to the department, which he listed in Hansard. I take those comments very seriously as I believe that the public service, and my department particularly, should provide the best possible service to clients. I will investigate the matter and provide him with a response. If his information is confirmed I will certainly make sure that Mr Heilman is contacted. I understand that the embargo has caused some concern. Honourable members will realise that the department is currently undertaking a hydrological assessment of the sustainable yield in the management areas.

Our aquifers have been stressed and our water allocation in need of review. I acknowledge that perhaps there was a limited amount of consultation before the embargo was put in place. The honourable member should appreciate that there has to be an embargo while the extent of the allocations already made are assessed. Hopefully, when the management plan has been completed a better-informed decision may be made about which licences will be approved. I take the concerns of the honourable member for Lachlan very seriously. I am very concerned about the below-standard level of service, and I will certainly investigate the matter. I will ensure that the department contacts Mr Heilman in the next couple of days.

Ms ANDREWS (Peats) [5.29 p.m.]: I bring to the attention of the House the seventieth anniversary of netball in New South Wales this year. The occasion was marked with the simultaneous blowing of a million whistles across New South Wales at midday on 31 July. The Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister for Sport and Recreation joined in the celebration and wished Netball New South Wales a very happy birthday and a successful future. The Minister expressed a desire that netball in this State should continue to grow, maintaining its place as one of the most popular women’s sports played in New South Wales.

Indeed, netball is a very popular sport. The former Minister for Sport and Recreation, the honourable member for Parramatta, is a keen netball player and when she was Minister she was always most supportive of the sport. I accepted an invitation to join in the whistle blowing celebrations with the Woy Woy Peninsula Netball Association. A special cake was baked to commemorate the occasion. I take this opportunity to acknowledge the time and hard work that the executive of the Woy Woy Peninsula Netball Association has put into maintaining a high profile for netball in this densely populated area.

The Secretary, Daphne Short, the President, Sharon Bailey, and the Treasurer, Margaret Thoms, have all been involved with the local netball scene for many years. They do a tremendous job on a voluntary basis and deserve much of the credit for making netball such a popular local sport. They also receive strong support from other members of the association’s management committee, to whom I also pay tribute. It has been through the past and current efforts of those associated with the Woy Woy Peninsula Netball Association and the Gosford Netball Association that netball has become such a popular sport on the Central Coast. Both those associations are within my electorate of Peats.

Woy Woy’s home base is Lemon Grove Reserve at Ettalong Beach, while Gosford’s courts are at Adcock Park in West Gosford. This year on the Queen’s Birthday weekend the annual State championships of Netball New South Wales were proudly hosted by the Gosford Netball Association at Adcock Park. The State championships were officially opened on Saturday at 8.00 a.m. by the Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister for Sport and Recreation. Over the weekend 3,000 of the State’s finest netball players, coaches and supporters gathered at West Gosford for the championships, which were sponsored by Dairy Farmers.

Seventy-seven teams competed in the three-day championships. That was the second occasion on which Gosford had hosted the State netball championships, the last time being in 1979. The Minister congratulated the Gosford Netball Association on its efforts in staging that major event. Teams from Gosford participated in the open, 19 years and under, and 17 years and under championships. A team from Woy Woy participated in the 17 years and under minor championship. All teams performed very well, giving of their best in the face of formidable opposition. They did their respective associations proud.

The President of the Board of Directors of Netball New South Wales, Mrs Marilyn Melhuish, OAM, the General Manager, Mr Colin Wilson, and other directors made all the invited guests feel most
Page 1085
welcome. The long weekend event gave a tremendous boost to the economy of the Central Coast region. In addition, it allowed the opportunity for the many natural attractions which are so bountiful in the region to be showcased to netball players, their families and supporters from other parts of the State. The entire weekend was a great success, an outcome undoubtedly due to the time and energy which the Gosford Netball Association devoted to hosting the event.

I place on record my congratulations to and appreciation of that association, the board of directors of Netball New South Wales, and all those associated with netball in this State for making the sport one which can be enjoyed at every level, from "netta" in the primary school playground to the highest level of international competition in the Commonwealth Games. Netball is the most popular women’s sport played in Australia, with approximately 1.3 million players Australiawide. It is my hope and the hope of many others that netball will be taken up by many more countries so that in the not-too-distant future netball will be played at the Olympics. I join with the Minister for Sport and Recreation in wishing Netball New South Wales all the best for the future.

Mr D. L. PAGE (Ballina) [5.34 p.m.]: The biggest single issue in the Ballina electorate and, indeed, the whole of the North Coast is inadequate health funding and the impact it is having on our local communities. In fact health services on the North Coast are in crisis. To put it bluntly, insufficient money is being provided to meet increasing demand. In some cases perfectly good facilities are not being utilised because there is insufficient recurrent funding to enable services to be delivered. Under the statewide resource distribution formula the Northern Rivers Area Health Service is entitled to 4.2 per cent of the State health budget but it is receiving only around 3.86 per cent. In other words, the area health service is underfunded by $16 million.

The latest budget allocation of $184 million will make the situation worse because total funding this year, including enhancements, will be $1 million less - I stress "less" - than last year, yet demand has continued to increase. According to the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, population projections for the North Coast show strong growth of 2 per cent to 3 per cent per annum for the next decade and beyond. For example, Byron shire is predicted to increase its population by 16 per cent between 1996 and 2001, and by 32 per cent by 2006.

The fact is that the New South Wales health system is sick and in crisis, and nowhere is it more sick and more in crisis than on the North Coast. It appears that bed numbers could be halved at Byron Bay and Mullumbimby hospitals, reduced at Lismore Base Hospital from 200 to 160, and reduced by 17 and 15 beds respectively at Casino and Campbell hospitals. The list goes on. The local area health manager publicly admitted that the Northern Rivers Area Health Service is underfunded according to the State Government’s own resource distribution formula. Dr Sherbon is doing his best but he can only manage what he is given by Macquarie Street, and that is clearly not enough.

Many services are facing closure or cuts as a result. One is the renal dialysis service. In Ballina, for example, there is an excellent new self-care unit as well as a new home training unit. This facility is being underutilised, with funding for only one shift per week of four patients on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. If more funding were available there would be at least two shifts. One resident of Ballina, a 55-year-old pensioner, Mr Max Luck, a long-term patient who has taken responsibility for his own dialysis, cannot access care from the hospital in the next street. This patient must travel for treatment to John Flynn Hospital in Queensland.

His wife, who is a migraine sufferer, has to drive her husband to the hospital three times a week, covering some 900 kilometres, and they are not eligible for isolated patients travel and accommodation assistance scheme [IPTAAS] payments. The cost of that travel is prohibitive for these pensioners. I must point out to the Carr Government that under normal circumstances Max Luck and his wife saved the Government $20,000 a year through home dialysis, and they have personally incurred additional costs of $1,000 to set up their home for dialysis. Mr Luck cannot currently dialyse at home because of the emergency surgery he underwent. The situation will continue for a couple of months, yet Mr Luck cannot dialyse next door at Ballina District Hospital because there is funding for only one shift per week involving only four patients, and he just cannot get in.

Other dialysis patients need services in Lismore, Ballina and Grafton. Currently they are being transferred out of the area and away from their homes and families. For example, I am aware of a pensioner widow aged 69 who has just started dialysis and must have hospital care. Because she could not be treated on the North Coast owing to
Page 1086
lack of funding she had to relocate to Sydney to live with her daughter, who is expecting a baby in four weeks. Her heavily pregnant daughter has to transport her for treatment two or three times a week. This pensioner widow was given less than 24 hours notice to shift her treatment from Lismore to Sydney. That is a disgrace.

To summarise, Ballina, Lismore and Grafton all have good renal facilities but they are grossly underutilised because of inadequate State Government funding. Surely it is more cost-effective to treat these sick patients in their own area than to pay the added cost of accommodation and transport through IPTAAS where it is available. Moreover, it is much better for patients to have their families nearby. The problem will be solved only with proper funding. The time for action is now. I was advised today that another patient from the North Coast had to go to John Hunter Hospital last weekend. Also, five more local dialysis patients will need dialysis treatment within the next three months. They cannot be treated locally unless someone dies. That is a scandalous situation. I call on the Carr Government to provide the Northern Rivers Area Health Service with its proper share of funding and not to short change the area as it has done in the past.

Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle - Parliamentary Secretary) [5.39 p.m.]: I had the pleasure last weekend as a member of this Parliament and a former student of attending the celebration of 125 years of public education at the Kendall Central School. The ceremony’s importance was recognised with the attendance of the Hon. Jan Burnswoods, representing the Minister for Education and Training; Mark Vaile, the Federal Minister for Trade and member for Lyne; the honourable member for Oxley, Andrew Stoner; the area superintendent; a whole range of members of local parents and citizens associations; and many current and former students of the school. It was a strong affirmation of the importance of public education, particularly in a small country town, and the deep involvement of the community in the school. It has social as well as educational importance in the town.

The current principal of the school, Ms Carmel Thew, emphasised that importance in her opening address. She also apologised on behalf of public education to students who had passed through the school without achieving the benefit of an education - perhaps because of the conservative nature of education in the past. She particularly apologised to indigenous members of the community who had had difficulty at school. Mr Bill Ellis, who attended the ceremony, taught for 43 years in the secondary section of the school. He and his wife, Isobel, were a font of learning to the school’s students. Their contribution to Camden Haven and the local community was recognised.

Dr Tim Thornton, who was school captain in 1956, brought to my attention the need to emphasise to the education Minister the wonderful contribution of Bill and Isobel Ellis. Teachers in country towns perform an important role in the community. That was demonstrated on the day by the teachers of Kendall Central School. They had organised displays of dancing and a sporting tableau which involved all the visitors and the teachers. The junior and senior choirs also performed. Forty-two years ago when I was a student Mr Charlie Rose, who also attended the ceremony, wrote the school song. It was performed by the junior choir. It struck me that I still remembered it. I would sing it for the House but it might drive members out of the Chamber. The words are:

In Camden Haven’s lovely vale
Stands the Central School we hail.
Its mottos, virtues here are taught -
Service, scholarship and sport.
Shout aloud "We are proud
Of Kendall District Rural School"
School whose name we proclaim
The valley’s shining jewel.

That is the first verse. It demonstrates the feeling of students and the community toward the school. Also in attendance at the ceremony was Mr Reg Perrot, who, at 88 years of age, is the oldest former student and is very well known to my family. Reg proudly showed the entries of his name in the punishment book, as many of the older students did. He said that on one memorable occasion he had about 27 cuts before recess. I think that was probably a world record. It is that sort of thing that jogs one’s memory.

It was an emotional day for me, as I am sure it was for all the other former students. It indicated to me, a working class boy from a timber town where education was highly prized but not easily accessible, that with the benefit of public education over that 125-year period a whole range of people had been able to become either community members or to move on and benefit further from the strength of that education.

Mr WEBB (Monaro) [5.43 p.m.]: I should like to provide details on the carbon credits
Page 1087
mechanisms, an issue that I have been interested in for a long time. I ask the question: What is New South Wales doing about climate change? I believe that with the new millennium and the advent of carbon credits trading we will turn the corner on climate change. This has major implications for regional development reafforestation, pollution, salinity control, and Australia’s economic future. An office in international greenhouse partnerships is responsible for the development of international co-operation regarding carbon trading and greenhouse emissions. There is massive export investment potential in this area. Both Invest Australia and Austrade are listed as Commonwealth contact agencies.

Since becoming a party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, Australia has adopted a comprehensive action program to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Australia’s efforts are part of an international campaign to combat the threat of global warming. The adoption of the Kyoto protocol in December 1997 was an important further step, after the Agenda 21 and Rio de Janeiro agreements, in developing a global response to global warming. Australia’s target of restricting greenhouse gas emissions to an 8 per cent increase in emissions from its 1990 levels during the first commitment period of 2008 to 2012 represents a significant challenge for Australia and this State. Realistically, this target represents a reduction of almost 30 per cent in our emissions from the business-as-usual projected levels.

Australia’s primary effort towards meeting this target will be through a range of measures. Some $180 million worth of Commonwealth initiatives are aimed at combatting climate change within Australia. Included in these initiatives and continuing Commonwealth programs aimed at tackling climate change are the highly successful Greenhouse Challenge program, the Cities for Climate Protection program, the development of an environment strategy for the automotive industry, and the implementation of a range of renewable energy schemes. I have spoken on previous occasions in this House about renewable energy schemes. The challenge faced in that regard by the State is immense, but I believe the rewards are worth it.

I turn now to flexibility mechanisms under the Kyoto protocol. The Kyoto protocol adopted three very important flexibility mechanisms, including emissions trading, joint implementation, and the clean development mechanism. When effectively used, these three greenhouse mitigation tools will provide significant opportunities to leverage the best possible environmental and economic outcomes from a range of co-operative international activities. These flexibility mechanisms are aimed at facilitating the achievement of future greenhouse reduction commitments in a more cost-effective manner. In the case of joint implementation and clean development mechanisms, mutual benefits in greenhouse reductions and economic development will accrue to participants from co-operation on a project basis.

Prior to the Kyoto protocol several countries, including Australia, participated in a pilot phase, which provided opportunities for participating countries and individual organisations to build strategic alliances in trade and investment, and to gain experience in factors determining savings in greenhouse gas emissions and the implementation of monitoring, reporting and verifying procedures. The International Greenhouse Partnerships program will be overseen by the Greenhouse Partnership Office, with a plan to articulate the objectives and activities to be pursued. It will be an evolutionary plan.

The objectives of the International Greenhouse Partnerships program are to help establish co-operatively implemented project-based flexibility mechanisms; to facilitate mutually beneficial emission abatement projects; to encourage developing country involvement in climate change mitigation; and to enhance trade and investment links. To achieve this Australia will negotiate with governments to establish the operational arrangements. Australia will work with industry and co-operate with partners to gain project experience and facilitate commercial projects that have the potential to deliver greenhouse gas emissions reduction credits. At this early stage it is important that the State Government gets involved to support regional development and farm diversification through regional development.

Mr GREENE (Georges River) [5.48 p.m.]: I draw to the attention of honourable members an ever-growing health problem that cannot, and should not, be neglected. One cannot turn a blind eye or a deafened ear to the fact that hepatitis C [HCV] is still, unfortunately, the fastest-growing infectious disease in Australia. The extent of this epidemic was highlighted last year by the Standing Committee on Social Issues inquiry into "The Neglected Epidemic", which was recently followed by the release of a national report entitled "Hepatitis C: A Review of Australia’s Response".

To give honourable members a snapshot of HCV in Australia, there are an estimated 200,000
Page 1088
infected people throughout Australia, or around 1 per cent of the Australian population. According to the 1998 Standing Committee on Social Issues, approximately 11,000 new HCV infections are occurring every year across the nation, with half of these in New South Wales. I emphasise that around 30 new infections are being diagnosed each day, and again almost half of these cases are in New South Wales. The number of notifications of HCV to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System has grown from 4,116 in 1991 to 19,661 in 1998. With these statistics it is clear that HCV is the fastest-growing infectious disease in the land. The incidence of the infection in the general community is low, but in some risk groups it can be very high. For example, a survey of clients of the needle and syringe programs in 1997 showed that 50 per cent were infected. Efforts at controlling the transmission of the disease necessarily involved education and prevention activities targeted to people with high risk behaviours.

HCV has largely affected people who received blood or blood products prior to 1990, people engaged in tattooing and body piercing, health care workers and overwhelmingly people who inject illicit drugs. The report highlights the fact that, unlike HIV, HCV does not have a cohesive or united community to advocate for those with HCV. HCV, a viral disease, has only had a specific laboratory test available since early 1990. HCV attacks the liver. It has been known for at least 20 years that a strain of hepatitis that occasionally followed blood transfusion was neither hepatitis A nor hepatitis B. In 1988 the agent responsible in most cases was identified and named HCV. It is likely to become a chronic condition leading to chronic liver disease. There is no vaccine available or cure, and there is little prospect of such a vaccine in the short term.

In the absence of an advocate, the report considers it to be the role of motivated parliamentarians to come forward to fill the gap to support HCV sufferers. That is why I take this opportunity to fill the void. This is my opportunity to speak out on HCV issues, and in particular to highlight the main issues surrounding the disease, and to call on the Federal Government to heed the call of these people and their families.

Men account for 63 per cent of HCV-positive diagnoses. Almost 90 per cent of HCV diagnoses occur in the 20 to 49 year age bracket, 60 per cent in the 30 to 49 year age bracket, and 30 per cent in the 20 to 29 year age bracket. There is chronic carriage of the HCV virus in at least 50 to 80 per cent of cases. In some patients there are no symptoms and the patients remain healthy. About 20 per cent of people with HCV progress to cirrhosis within about 20 years, and of these a proportion, that is 5 to 10 per cent, will develop liver cancer within another 5 to 10 years.

Action is required, but it must be backed by political will and motivated by compassion. Recently I received a lengthy submission from one of my constituents concerning the real injustices occurring with HCV. It is very important to obtain a commitment from government to ongoing funding for clinical and herbal research. The New South Wales Government has committed some $1.5 million this year, and I congratulate Minister Knowles on that financial commitment, but it is for social and behavioural research, not clinical research. This is all very good, but what about those now living with the disease, some as young as 20 and 30 years old?

The Commonwealth Government response to HCV has been to minimise its transmission and to minimise the personal and social impact for those already infected with the virus. The 1999 Federal budget provided $12.4 million for this purpose over the next four years. I acknowledge that there are no quick-fix answers. However, one must realise that we should all make a difference. It is imperative that an effective treatment be found for HCV, and such a priority requires both Federal and State governments to fund clinical studies to identify and understand new treatments for HCV. This should include herbal treatments. We are heading for a blow-out in HCV care over the next 10 years of about $4 billion.

Mr RICHARDSON (The Hills) [5.53 p.m.]: Tonight I want to congratulate those people who were elected to Baulkham Hills Shire Council on 11 September. Five new councillors were elected, while seven sitting councillors were returned. The major issue in the election was the over-development of the shire. All candidates paid at least lip service to the issue in their campaign literature - which for some of them, given their support for the pro-development policies of the former mayor, was more than a little hypocritical. The attitude of residents - and it was residents councillors Larry Bolitho, John Griffiths, Sonya Phillips and Les Shore, all of whom I am pleased to say were re-elected, supported - is typified by this letter from Castle Hill resident Jean Tyler, published in the Hills News on 13 April:

What on earth is happening to the once beautiful Baulkham Hills Shire? Everywhere you turn you are confronted with dozens of townhouses being erected where once stood nice homes . . .

Page 1089

Castle Hill resembles a bomb site . . .

For council to advertise this as the Garden Shire is false advertising - Developer’s Paradise would be more appropriate.

I moved here about 12 years ago with my family and built a new home in a beautiful area which had lots of trees and pleasant homes . . .

We moved here at a not inconsiderable cost and with lots of dreams. These dreams have been shattered, thanks to the greed of the council and unscrupulous developers.

The attitude of the outgoing council, and its propensity to ride roughshod over the wishes of local residents, was exemplified in the vision outlined by former mayor Geoffrey Brooke-Cowden in his last interview before leaving office. Councillor Brooke-Cowden wanted a railway station in the centre of Castle Hill, with an adjacent parking station for 1,700 vehicles and a 16-level skyscraper above it. That is not the Castle Hill that my family moved to 28 years ago. And it is not the Castle Hill that most local residents want. That is shown by the election results of 11 September.

In an earlier column in the Hills News dated 11 May 1999, Councillor Brooke-Cowden argued that the ageing population and a reduction in the number of two-parent families in the shire created a need for medium and high-density development. It is not axiomatic that on reaching the age of 65 everyone will want to move to a townhouse or apartment. Plenty of senior citizens live quite happily in their four-bedroom homes, and the garden helps to keep them healthy. Which came first, the smaller proportion of two-parent families or the medium-density housing?

Councillor Sonya Phillips, who topped the poll in Central ward, said this week that the election result had sent a clear message that the community is sick and tired of pro-development councils, that urban consolidation is on the nose. Her sentiments were echoed by Save Our Garden Shire candidate Martin Tolar, who topped the poll in West ward. This Government has mandated that councils meet housing density targets or face losing their planning laws. However, Baulkham Hills shire is unique in that it has no government-run public transport apart from 200 metres of railway line at Carlingford.

My electorate has the greatest number of electors in New South Wales and is the fastest growing. Baulkham Hills council is settling 5,000 new residents a year, most of them in the Rouse Hill development area in the western part of the electorate. We cannot allow this rate of development without providing appropriate infrastructure. Yet the Government’s housing density edict has led to parts of Kellyville being zoned for densities of up to 45 dwellings per hectare. Kellyville is 10 kilometres from the nearest railway line, and, on even the most optimistic projections, I am unlikely to live long enough to see the Government’s proposed railway line to Mungerie Park opened.

Castle Hill is facing the prospect of eight-storey blocks of flats on the old Castle Hill public school site, while there are similar proposals for the Baulkham Hills shopping centre. Why should there not be some parts of Sydney where these sorts of buildings - or Geoffrey Brooke-Cowden’s 16-level monstrosity - are not erected? That is consistent with the Government’s own policy, outlined in its Action for Transport 2010 plan, to "promote urban development along new railway lines". Alternatively, if we are to accept apartment blocks, that should be on the proviso that the infrastructure is provided first. But the people should be allowed to choose between public transport or higher densities.

I have previously proposed that council should set up an architectural review committee to oversight contentious developments and to assist developers of townhouses and duplexes to integrate their developments into the existing streetscape. I would hope that the incoming council takes this suggestion seriously. It is not a matter of being against development; it is a matter of being against inappropriate development. As a first step towards securing the future of The Hills, I would propose a meeting between the new mayor and local councillors, as well as State and Federal members of Parliament, to discuss these and other issues. I would hope we would then be able to present a united position on development, infrastructure and urban consolidation to the Government.

Hornsby is the other council in my electorate, and I would like to congratulate councillors Berman, Brown, Horne, Pringle and Russell in particular on their election or re-election. Hornsby is different in that it boasts not one but two railway lines, and if the Parramatta to Chatswood link is built it will have three. There obviously are greater opportunities for increased densities than in the Baulkham Hills shire but, as my colleague the honourable member for Hornsby points out, there should be a study done on the social impact of building large numbers of unit blocks in Hornsby town centre. Ultimately, planning is all about quality of life. If the Government cannot provide what the people it purports to represent want, then it deserves to go.

[Private members' statements interrupted.]

Page 1090

Motion by Mr Whelan agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to permit one further private member’s statement at this sitting.

[Private members’ statements resumed.]

Mr MARKHAM (Wollongong - Parliamentary Secretary) [5.59 p.m.]: At 10 a.m. on Friday last week I attended the launch of the Eora Star, a launch that the Redfern Aboriginal Corporation [RAC] purchased without any funding from any governing body. The program that the corporation put in place with the new launch is a Harbour Dreaming Aboriginal Culture Cruise. It operates a 13.81-metre vessel, surveyed for 57 people, on Sydney Harbour offering bare-boat charters, function cruises, education tours for groups and schools covering both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal history of the harbour, and cultural cruises covering Sydney Harbour from an indigenous perspective and providing traditional foods and entertainment.

I was very pleased to be invited to the launch, which took place off the man-o’-war steps near the Opera House last Friday. Phil Duncan welcomed guests to the launch; Senator Herron officially launched the project that the Redfern Aboriginal Corporation has taken on board. The Redfern Aboriginal Corporation is a registered body that operates a community-managed employment and training program for Aboriginal clients from the inner city of Sydney. The goals of the corporation are to establish a sound economic base to provide employment and training into the future for Aboriginal community members of the Redfern area. The corporation is a public benevolent institution that operates on a non-profit basis, with all income returned to the community in the form of training and employment.

The Eora Star will employ a captain and four crew. Those people are drawn from the Redfern Aboriginal community. This is a very positive step in the move towards self-sufficiency for the Redfern Aboriginal community. Lee Silva, who has been the driving force for the Redfern Aboriginal Corporation, was very proud and pleased to welcome guests aboard. Some 30 or 40 people attended the launch of the vessel on Friday. We ventured out under the harbour bridge, and at Goat Island a young Aboriginal guide gave us an interpretation of Goat Island from a European perspective and an indigenous perspective. This is a great opportunity for the Aboriginal people of Redfern to tell residents of Sydney, New South Wales and Australia, as well as visiting international guests, more about the indigenous perspective of Sydney Harbour.

The Redfern Aboriginal Corporation operates a number of projects. The major project is a community development employment program, which is funded by the Federal Government and is basically a work-for-the-dole scheme. Under this scheme the RAC has an allocation of 80 positions that operate throughout Redfern. Some other projects the RAC has undertaken are: a community organised placement program to place people in local community organisations that suffer staff shortages due to budget restraints; and a program of community health workers who actively retrieve contaminated waste, such as injecting paraphernalia, from the Block and surrounding areas. A return rate of 50 per cent of 40,000 syringes and associated materials per month has been turned around to a consistent return rate of between 90 to 100 per cent.

The RAC has also undertaken a household refuse service and a furniture removal service and has an administration unit to facilitate its projects. It also runs a number of businesses. Redfern Aboriginal Corporation Construction has been operating for 18 months, employing 10 land conservation and restoration trainees, six apprentices and carpenters and six apprentice bricklayers. The media does not publicise these positive projects with positive outcomes for the Aboriginal people at Redfern. It is about time that they were recognised. That is why I have brought the matter to the attention of the House. I express my support for these projects, particularly the Harbour Dreaming Aboriginal Cultural Cruise.

Ms MEAGHER (Cabramatta - Parliamentary Secretary) [6.04 p.m.]: It is important that this House notes the ongoing commitment of the honourable member for Wollongong in Aboriginal affairs. As a Parliamentary Secretary, I often have House duty during private members’ statements, and I note the member’s commitment to raising issues of concern to Aboriginal people in this House. The Eora Star launch is not only an opportunity to create employment for five young Aboriginals from Sydney city, but also an opportunity to showcase their culture, heritage and connection to Sydney Harbour to a broader cross-section of New South Wales residents and visitors.

Page 1091

This project helps bridge the divide between Aboriginal and white Australia and will assist in the reconciliation process. I am sure I speak on behalf of all honourable members when I congratulate Phil Duncan and Lee Silva on getting the Eora Star project off the ground and running. I also commend the Redfern Aboriginal Corporation for its ongoing work in developing employment and training opportunities for young Aboriginal people. Training and employment opportunities provide people with a sense of belonging and improve their self-esteem. They go a long way to break the cycle of social dislocation that is experienced by the Aboriginal people of Sydney. I congratulate the honourable member for Wollongong on his efforts.

Mrs SKINNER (North Shore) [6.09 p.m.]: On Friday 3 September I had the privilege of attending the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the Mosman Evening College in my electorate. It was a well-attended function at the Mosman Club, but an event which engendered mixed emotions. Those who attended were pleased and proud to celebrate the achievements of Mosman Evening College over its 50 years, but we were also very sad to, in effect, farewell Kate Campbell, who retired as director in 1998 and is now extremely ill.

I had heard of Kate Campbell before I was elected to Parliament through reports of local events and issues, and I had spoken to her on the telephone. I had also heard of her passion and interest in educational matters, when I had worked in the ministry of education and youth affairs. I first met Kate Campbell during the by-election campaign when I was elected to Parliament in 1994. I was visiting the newly refurbished Mosman High School where Kate’s powers of persuasion had won space for her precious evening college. I was with my good friend and former education Minister, the Hon. Virginia Chadwick. Virginia Chadwick turned to me and said, "Now watch out for this Kate Campbell. She’ll ask for the world and it’s impossible to resist her." How right she was.

Kate is a woman of indomitable spirit, seemingly boundless energy, total commitment, enthusiasm, and an absolute determination to achieve the things she thinks are worth fighting for. She is a terrier when it comes to never giving up. As one of her colleagues said, "I like to think that in whatever personal battle Kate is now embroiled, she is fighting just as strongly for herself as she has always done for other people." Kate Campbell epitomises the saying: "Ask a busy person."

Born in Perth, Kate first worked with the Army, lived with her family in England and eventually settled in Sydney. During the 1960s and 1970s Kate had worked as a volunteer with the Workers Education Association [WEA] of New South Wales, and was chairperson of a committee which organised courses between North Sydney and Palm Beach. She claimed that one of the highlights of this period of her life was the advancement of the cause for women in adult education and the provision of day-time courses for women. In a newspaper article in 1990 she said:

We very soon had over 500 women a week coming to whatever venues we could find. In the winter, they came with blankets and a thermos to freezing church and scout halls.

When we offered psychology for beginners, which my husband taught -

her husband being an academic -

150 women turned up.

He freaked out, said it was unmanageable. So the women sorted themselves into three groups who could come at different times. It was wonderful to see the co-operative way they worked together and supported each other to do this.

That was the spirit of Kate Campbell, always looking at things from a positive point of view. She served on numerous WEA committees, and became founder of the New South Wales branch of the Australian Association of Adult Education, which in 1989 became the Australian Association of Adult and Community Education. From 1977 to 1981 Kate opened and ran an adult education centre on the campus of SCEGGS Redlands, Cremorne, and built it up to a well-established centre. In 1983 she was appointed the first full-time principal of an evening college and was the first woman appointed to an evening college.

Under her leadership, enrolment at Mosman Evening College has grown to more than 10,000 students each year. This well-respected institution provides a plethora of quality courses, ranging from computer studies to belly dancing. My personal friendship with Kate extended beyond my involvement with her as a member of the college council. Despite the workload associated with running a growing college, Kate’s enormous energy and passionate personality meant that she could never resist involvement in other issues which she felt were important.

As a new member of Parliament, and appointed to a committee to review the then Government’s policy on ageing, I came across her in her capacity as a member of the Premier’s
Page 1092
consultative committee on ageing. Kate was never one to sit quietly on the side. She spoke out at meetings and chased people at the end of meetings. Kate was on the selection panel for the Sydney Medical School, helped establish Mosman’s community radio station, and was an active member of Balmoral Rotary. She was made a member of the Order of Australia in recognition of her services to adult education in 1990.

Mr CAMPBELL (Keira) [6.14 p.m.]: Wollongong City Gallery is a regional gallery that serves the Illawarra and the electorate of Keira. Although this regional gallery has a small staff, it has an ever-growing reputation for quality exhibitions and its collections program. The gallery is housed in a building which was formerly the administrative chambers of Wollongong City Council from the mid-1950s to the mid-1980s. The building has a number of exciting exhibition spaces within that have potential for all sorts of creative uses and exhibitions.

One of the signatures of the Wollongong City Gallery is its permanent collection of Aboriginal artworks. Many of the works have been donated by a number of prominent people in Wollongong and Sydney, and it is that permanent collection of Aboriginal works that gives the gallery some reputation. For the past several years, Wollongong City Gallery has been engaged in a long-term project to survey and present the art of Aboriginal people of the Illawarra and the South Coast of New South Wales, from the Royal National Park to the Victorian border.

The project has become known as Pallingjang, a Tharawal word meaning saltwater. It has brought many Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people together to celebrate the richness and diversity of the remarkable land, culture and history that we all share. My reason for talking about this part of the gallery’s collection is the exhibition of some of the works from the permanent collection in the Fountain Court in Parliament House. Those works are by Tim Allen, from Nowra; Jodi Boota, from Gerringong; Kevin Maxwell Butler, from Wollongong; Vally Law, or Djitdjit as some of us know her - she is a Wollongong artist these days; Georgina Parsons, Val Saunders, Marilyn Smart, Gwendolin "Shirley" Stewart, Cheryl Strickland and Freddie Timms.

I encourage honourable members to view this Pallingjang exhibition series from the permanent collection of the Wollongong City Gallery. A number of the paintings and the works, which will be on exhibition until towards the end of October, tell the stories of the artists’ life’s journey. The Freddie Timms work depicts the Mount Keira-Wollongong massacre. However, a number of the works talk about the journey and the dreaming of a number of the artists, many of whom make a significant contribution to our community in other ways. Vally Law, for example, put a huge amount of effort into the travelling exhibition of a sea of hands as part of the recognition of the stolen generation.

A number of prints in the exhibition were produced by students of the Aboriginal arts and practices course at Bombaderry TAFE, which of course is in Nowra. I congratulate Louise Brand, the curatorial officer, and Heidi Hillier, the exhibitions and collections officer, of the Wollongong City Gallery who are responsible for the exhibition in the Fountain Court. I also acknowledge the work of the Director of the Wollongong City Gallery, Mr Peter O’Neill, who has worked very hard to build the reputation of the gallery as a regional gallery of pre-eminence within our State. The gallery is supported financially by Wollongong City Council, but it also receives assistance from the New South Wales Ministry for the Arts and is a member of the Regional Galleries Association of New South Wales.

Wollongong City Gallery has strong corporate support from within the community, and that support gives the gallery the opportunity to curate exhibitions such as the one that I have been talking about. It also provides the lifestyle aspects that go with having a significant regional gallery and, through the artworks of its collection and the support that that collection receives from the community, the opportunity for us to explain the strength of the community from which I come.

Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [6.19 p.m.]: I particularly wish to focus this evening on the new Warringah and Manly councils on the northern beaches and congratulate the councillors who have been elected to both councils. I wish them well in their endeavours to represent their respective communities. Both councils have separate issues but there are some core issues that I would like to address. During my period as a member of Parliament, Warringah Council has never been acrimonious. Its members have had the odd political stresses but, like it or lump it, they have generally never been rude to each other and largely have put their political differences aside for the good of the community.

Page 1093

I may not always agree with every decision of Warringah Council, but I could not detract from their spirit of camaraderie and the way in which they have worked together for what they have seen as the benefit for Warringah residents. Accordingly, I acknowledge the long-serving members of the council, some of whom have Labor connections but did not run under the Labor banner. However, they were committed to doing what was right. I acknowledge retiring councillor Tom Webster, who was a fine member for Wakehurst some years ago. I thank Tom for his public service and thank his family and his wife Maija for supporting his pursuit of public service.

Brian Green, who was a candidate for Manly at the previous State election, no longer serves on Warringah Council. I thank him for his service and thank his wife Helen and his family for supporting him in making his contribution. I thank Brian Brook and his wife. I also thank two councillors who have Liberal connections but have always acted in the best interests of the council without regard to those political connections. They are Elizabeth Jones and Sam Danielli. I would encourage the new council to continue on the track of politeness and courtesy to each other.

I welcome the new councillors: Ruth Sutton, Phil Coleman, Peter Forrest, Kevin Smith and David Stephens, who have joined longer serving councillors Peter Moxham, Julie Sutton, John Caputo and Darren Jones on Warringah Council. I know Peter Forrest through the local school. I have had the pleasure of doing reading and computer work with his daughter Anri, who is eight. I look forward to working with all the new councillors. Ruth Sutton was a deputy principal at one of the local schools; Phil Coleman is a representative of the museum. Each will bring a quality to working with the existing councillors.

The single biggest issue that the last Warringah Council faced and that the new council will face was the holy grail of striking the appropriate balance between development and the environment. I call on the council to recognise the community concern about the environment and not feel that it should just jump because the Carr Government says jump in its push for urban consolidation. The Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, which is driving the agenda, put pressure on the prior council and doubtless will put pressure on the next council to come up with medium-density strategies. Urban villages were born out of this. Allambie Heights and Narraweena residents rejected it.

I encourage the council to tell the Government to go to blue blazes if it keeps on with its gun-at-the-head diplomacy on urban consolidation. We need a better mix of housing. If that were the sole issue, that would be fine. Unfortunately, the Government has not provided additional transport, better hospitals, or additional water facilities so there cannot be a great amount of extra development. I congratulate Manly Council as well. The new councillors are Jean Hay, Katrina Page, David Dickman, Adele Heaseman, Richard Morrison, Peter Dee, Julie Heraghty, Sue Sacker, David Barr, Barbara Aird, Brad Petterson and Judy Lambert. Manly Council, unfortunately, has had a history of acrimony. I hope that under Mayor Jean Hay new heights will be set for acceptable council behaviour.

Despite one councillor seeming to spend an inordinate amount of time taking the mickey out of other businesspeople on the council, I hope the councillors will now all work together and come together in a spirit of singular purpose. That purpose should be for the residents and ratepayers of Manly and the very best of well-considered council decisions. I acknowledge that the majority on the council are Liberals, and I anticipate that they will have an inclusive approach to the new council. I am sure they will work with the Labor candidate Julie Heraghty and each of them will set aside personal and political differences and work for the one purpose of Manly. I look forward to the council addressing some of the big issues like the wharf interchange and the rocks on Manly Beach as soon as possible.

Mr BROWN (Kiama) [6.24 p.m.]: On 11 September residents of New South Wales were asked to direct their attention to the election of their community leaders in the local government elections. The electorate of Kiama covers four local government areas, which depict the diversity of people and issues within the Kiama electorate. Those areas are: Shellharbour City Council to the north, Kiama Municipal Council in the heart of the electorate, Shoalhaven City Council to the south and Wingecarribee Council to the west. Since my election to this House in March this year I have made it a commitment to liaise with the staff and councillors of those councils. These hard-working people have shown a strong commitment to their communities, and the new councillors look as though they will follow this fine tradition.

Firstly, I congratulate the councillors of Kiama Municipal Council: Councillor Joyce Wheatley,
Page 1094
Councillor Luke Twyford, Councillor Peter Knott, Councillor Sandra McCarthy, Councillor Les Davey, Councillor Ruth Devenney, Councillor Howard Jones, Councillor Robert East and Councillor Warren Steel. Last night the four Labor councillors caucused and elected Councillor Joyce Wheatley as mayor. The ballot for the position of deputy mayor was neck and neck, but Councillor McCarthy won the day. The rest of the council again showed a sign of faith in the Labor administration of the council when they returned the previous mayor, Councillor Joyce Wheatley, unopposed and Councillor Sandra McCarthy as deputy. The deputy's ballot was won by six votes to two over Councillor Robert East.

One of the great results in the local government election for Kiama Municipal Council was the election of Luke Twyford. He ran on a youth ticket with Skye Richardson. Luke and Skye helped to form a new branch in Gerringong-Gerroa and have been members of the Labor Party for only three months. Luke Twyford now represents his area on council. His election is a credit to those two young people, their families and friends, particularly Brook Richardson, Tim Twyford and Lana Johnson. I am sure the General Manager of Kiama Municipal Council, Brian Petschler, will have a co-operative council that will work for the betterment of the people of Kiama. Unfortunately, two of the retiring councillors, Ed Gilmore and Neil Bell, were not successful, and I would like to acknowledge their contributions to the electorate of Kiama.

Secondly, I congratulate the councillors of Shellharbour City Council. They are councillors Tom Hawker, Philip Reid, Michael Smart, Sue Moran, Don Briggs, Bill Fowler, John Tease, Leon Cicolini, Joan Vinton, Barry Bird, Neil Burke, and John Murray. Labor again has control of that council, although the mayor is no longer a member of the Labor Party. Unfortunately, the Labor mayoral candidate, Councillor David Hamilton, was the victim of some press which, in my opinion, did him irreparable harm. I record my acknowledgment of the dedication David, his wife, Moya, and the unsuccessful candidate May Hudson had to the city of Shellharbour. I assure them that I will continue to push for the many issues they have fought for. I look forward to David’s continued interest in the southern Illawarra region. The successful mayoral candidate was Cec Glenholmes. I have a good working relationship with him and the General Manager, Brian Weir.

Thirdly, I congratulate the councillors of Shoalhaven City Council, particularly the new mayor, Greg Watson and councillors Pam Arnold, John Anderson, Bill Hilzinger, Jane Bange, Sally Gjedsted, Patricia Mason, Peter Murphy, Jack Kerr, Shelley Hancock, Josi Young, Mark Hurley and John Pinkernagel. Finally, I congratulate the councillors elected to Wingecarribee Shire Council who will have their mayoral and deputy mayoral elections tonight. They are councillors Paul Tuddenham, Sara Murray, Philip Yeo, Peter Reynolds, David Wood, David Fairall, John Sherborne, Thomas Gair, Heather Carter, Gordon Lewis, Richard Mandelson and Larry Whipper. I have had a number of dealings with Larry Whipper and John Sherborne in the past. I am pleased that they have been elected to represent the Wingecarribee shire. I look forward to working with them and all councillors in the Kiama electorate during their next term.

Mr STONER (Oxley) [6.29 p.m.]: Yesterday I spoke in the debate about the closure of the King Gee factory at Kempsey. I asked the Government what assistance might be made available to the people of Kempsey following the closure of one of the area’s largest employers. I make a suggestion that could be of concrete assistance to the people of Kempsey. The area has a need for a multipurpose stadium. The district services about 20,000 residents. Yesterday I mentioned that Kempsey has serious social issues related to youth crime and homelessness. The electorate has a large indigenous population and young people have few places to go and few things to do in Kempsey. The electorate has problems related to drugs, crime, and child neglect. Yesterday I mentioned specifically a syringe attack on young schoolchildren late last year.

Various segments of the community have identified the need for a multipurpose stadium which would provide a venue for indoor activities such as basketball and netball. The community needs role models, and sport could play a vital part in the lives of young people, indigenous and non-indigenous. The Kempsey Police and Citizens Youth Club at present has only a mobile van. No drop-in centre is available for young people, who would welcome that sort of interest. The stadium could be used as an entertainment venue by travelling shows and bands. At present Kempsey does not have that type of facility. A multipurpose stadium similar to those that have been provided in many towns of comparable size would be of great benefit to the people of Kempsey.

Local government and community organisations in the region have identified a multipurpose stadium as being one of the highest priorities for the town. A suitable site has been
Page 1095
identified at the showground in the middle of the town. Discussions have been held with various government agencies, including the Department of Sport and Recreation. The regional manager, Mr Paul Hernage, has thrown his weight behind this proposal. He suggested that funds may be available through the regional sports facilities program. However, a maximum of only $300,000 would be available from that source for a regional sports facility. The cost of a stadium has been estimated at approximately $500,000. The Kempsey Shire Council could not possibly match that level of funding. Kempsey is one of the poorer shires and has a rural road network that was badly damaged in the recent bad weather on the north coast. Also, it has a small rates base.

Other departmental portfolio areas would benefit from having available a multipurpose stadium, because of the social benefits it would provide. I instance community services, health, police, education and the arts. The local Kempsey police strongly support the provision of a stadium. There should be a whole-of-government approach to the project, which is the subject of enormous community support. If funding were made available through a number of portfolios, it would not break their budgets. The support of the regional co-ordination unit is required. Jill Lang is based in Lismore and I have approached the unit about this matter. It is needed to facilitate discussions between the various portfolio areas and to arrange meetings with community groups, agencies, local government and the relevant State departments. The project falls outside the nine dots, if I might refer to them in that way. There is no single funding program that would be appropriate. If the project proceeds it will provide enormous benefits for a community beset by many problems. It will give youth, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, an outlet, an interest, a caring environment and, most importantly, some hope.

Mrs BEAMER (Mulgoa) [6.34 p.m.]: I raise an issue of serious concern to me, my constituents and workers in the waste industry. The matter involves the disposal of clinical and related waste, such as disposable nappies, incontinence pads and sanitary pads, from health facilities. At present clinical waste disposal is done by one of two methods: acid bathing or incineration. They are collected by specially trained removalists and taken to the sites. Reclassification of those products is causing serious concern amongst the waste industry and its workers. Waste Service New South Wales, which operates the State-owned tips, has issued a customer information sheet which in part states:

The NSW Department of Health has issued guidelines for the management of waste from health care facilities which advise that wastes such as disposable nappies, incontinence pads, sanitary napkins and tampons can be disposed of in the general waste stream without any prior treatment.

This advise is supported by the NSW EPA’s new "Environmental Guidelines: Assessment, Classification & Management of Liquid & Non-Liquid Wastes" which changes the classification of these wastes from "hazardous waste" to "solid waste". This change is brought about without any alteration at all to the characteristics of the waste which previous rendered it "hazardous". For example, the potential to cause infection remains, and the potential to cause offence remains.

Waste Service continues to regard sanitary consumables as Clinical and related waste (CRW). In the interest of protecting our staff, customers and visitors, Waste Service refuses to accept any component of the Clinical and Related Waste Management Centres.

Our view is that landfilling of untreated CRW is a disposal option of last resort. Significant effort is applied to keeping untreated CRW out of the waste stream destined for landfill disposal at Waste Service’s Waste Management Centres.

The remaining option is for operators of private waste sites to take that kind of clinical waste. I received a letter from the Mr Tony Khoury, Operations Manager, Cleanaway, Erskine Park, who states:

RTA is disappointed at the lack of any proper consultation with waste transporters on this reclassification of waste.

•Purely a cost based decision by NSW Health.

•Backpedalling of standard for proper treatment without any good reason other than cost.

•A further problem is in terms of NSW Governments waste minimisation objectives because if we go back to the Castlereagh situation, untreated clinical waste will need special burial/immediate cover and therefore will consume more landfill void space.

•Absolutely no recognition is given to the fact that sanitary napkin waste will contain a large number of needles. This type of waste is generated in Pubs/Clubs/Shopping Centres etc. and disposal of this waste as general waste poses an even greater risk to the Waste Industry workers.

I refer to a further problem in relation to this issue. Both the Health and Research Employees Association and the Transport Workers Union are opposed to any such reclassification because of the occupational health and safety concerns of their workers. The privately held landfill sites, three of which are in my electorate, can apply for a special licence and thus take that kind of waste, sidetracking what is now the proper way in which development consents are obtained.


Page 1096
When council gives a development consent that says it can only take solid waste, and the Environment Protection Authority decides to change the guidelines whereby it reclassifies solid waste, council is then placed in the position of taking waste that it did not want. The community concerns about this matter should be extremely grave. In order for a council to prosecute anybody who breaches its guidelines, that is the development consent application, it would have to take the matter to the Land and Environment Court.

Anyone who has applied for a licence can say to that court that they have a licence from the EPA which is, in fact, the paramount body on environment protection, and ask a council to show cause why it should not have such a licence. In the past, councils have been asked to show cause why their consents should not be modified in the way in which the EPA has seen fit to do. I raise these concerns because three landfill sites are in my electorate. I am concerned that, when my constituents go there on a Saturday morning in their vehicles, hazardous waste will be at those sites that are only really fit for building material and other similar solid waste. I urge the Government to consider this matter.

Mr McGRANE (Dubbo) [6.39 p.m.]: The electorate of Dubbo is fast becoming the regional communications heart of Australia. It has one of the world’s greatest research instruments, the Parkes radio telescope which is at the forefront of world astronomy. Now the city of Dubbo is set to become the hub of a worldwide mobile telephone revolution which will finally give rural and remote customers unlimited communication range and coverage.

At the end of July 1999, Vodafone Globalstar launched an additional four low-earth orbiting satellites from Cape Canaveral. Vodafone Globalstar has now successfully launched 36 satellites. Engineers from Globalstar’s ground control centre in San Jose, California, again used its Dubbo command gateway, together with five other worldwide gateways, to help raise the satellites. The other gateways used were located in France, South Korea, Argentina, South Africa and Texas in the United States of America. There are three Vodafone gateways or ground stations in Australia at Dubbo, Mount Isa and Meekatharra in Western Australia. Those gateways switch calls received via Globalstar satellites onto other telecommunications networks in Australia and internationally.

I have been told by Vodafone Globalstar that the service in Australia will be delivered through a 52-satellite constellation which will provide Vodafone mobile coverage to 100 per cent of Australia. If all goes according to plan, the new service should be operating by the middle of next year. It will transform the way people and businesses communicate in rural and regional Australia. They will have the ability to make mobile calls, send faxes and transfer data to all parts of Australia, which is very welcome news to all regional areas within Australia. Good communication networks are essential for the development of regional Australia. Regional New South Wales needs the infrastructure network of roads, transportation by rail and air but a communication network is also needed.

Vodafone Globalstar is great for regional New South Wales and great for Australia. Honourable members have heard lots of promises in regard to Telstra and other networks but in regard to the mobile network in regional New South Wales especially, the service is very poor. If one travels only 10 kilometres out of the city of Dubbo one is out of range on a mobile. This is groundbreaking news that has come to our community very quietly. Vodafone Globalstar came to the city area of Dubbo, developed three satellite set-ups and has now added another three. In a sense that company has been a quiet achiever.

The telephones will be slightly larger than the mobile telephones that honourable members use now and the call charge will be approximately $2 per minute. It is said that the telephones will become smaller and the charges will become cheaper. Vodafone Globalstar represents a great advantage to regional New South Wales, and in particular to the city of Dubbo.

[Mr Acting-Speaker (Mr Lynch) left the chair at 6.43 p.m. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m.]

Motion, by leave, by Mr Whelan agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to permit three additional members to speak for up to five minutes each on the matter of public importance.

Mr WINDSOR (Tamworth) [7.30 p.m.]: National competition policy has had resounding
Page 1097
impacts, both positive and negative, on the economy as a whole. The issue we are debating is the impact of competition policy on country communities, which can be different in the larger regional centres and smaller country communities. In some cases the larger regional centres can gain at the expense of the smaller regional communities. Competition policy, Hilmerism, the economic rationalist theory that many members talk about, has had an impact on country communities, and not all of it has been positive.

I am pleased that the Leader of the House has moved to allow more speakers in this debate because the matter is crucial to the future of country New South Wales. Effectively, after the Victorian election, this has been country week in the Parliament. It is a fitting time to analyse the impact that competition policy has had and the effect it could have into the future. I am pleased to see the Minister for Agriculture at the table. Agricultural issues affect country New South Wales. The Council of Australian Governments [COAG] and groups promoting national competition policy pressurise Parliaments across Australia in their making of decisions. Federal funding also has an influence.

Yesterday I asked a question of the Minister for Transport and today a number of issues were raised about how the Roads and Traffic Authority will be funded into the future, and whether it will be able to compete in tendering processes. Those are important issues. I was disappointed that yesterday the Minister for Transport, in effect, walked away from answering my question. The Government, the Premier, Country Labor and many others in the Parliament have been proactive in their concerns about country areas.

I hope the Minister for Agriculture will take on the concerns of those who are genuinely interested in country New South Wales in relation to rural impact statements. Competitive tendering is being driven by competition policy, which is being driven by agreements of Premiers and Ministers at COAG meetings. Whether it be the RTA, the Rail Access Corporation or the Railway Services Authority, competition policy can impact on country communities in ways I do not know. I have an idea of the result but no-one really knows what will eventuate. The National Competition Council web site states that the aim of the council is:

To help raise the living standards of the Australian community by ensuring that conditions for competition prevail throughout the economy that promote -

here are the important words -

growth, innovation and productivity.

There are doubts whether that is occurring in practice across the community. New South Wales is a microcosm of Australia, which is an urban society. We have a very large land mass. The economic theories that work in other areas may not work as effectively in the Australian environment. We are told by all sorts of political gurus that we must be internationally competitive. No-one disagrees with that, but export industries in particular that are at the forefront of competition policy operating against the background of other things that are happening internationally and domestically are in a very unfortunate position.

It is a fact that world markets are corrupt. We cannot do anything about that, unfortunately; we are not big enough. We found that out in East Timor. There is also an impact from the domestic cost structure. In agriculture, mining and other export industries the cost structure is essentially artificial. Some of that is driven by the Federal Government and some by the State Government. I do not want to get into blame but payroll tax, fuel tax, Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service fees, corporatisation of the power industry and such things affect the competitiveness of any industry in the world market. So the world market is corrupt and we are corrupt at home. The Minister for Agriculture will soon act on the dairy industry, but we are milking people trying to earn export dollars, the very dollars we need as a nation to exist.

Fred Hilmer realises that competition policy does not take distance into consideration. From what I have heard, he is shocked at the interpretation of competition policy by governments. People in the country a considerable distance from the source of power find that competition policy theory is to their disadvantage. The theory has been applied to water in Sydney, South Australia and other places. If it is applied to power and other resources which are essential to the existence of any community, why is it not extended to food? I am not a proponent of this but there are people in Canberra and in this building who are proponents of it - some coming from an environmental perspective and others coming from other perspectives.

If we look at food as a basic resource, it can be argued that, because of the corrupt domestic activity that has gone on in the past, food can be accessed more cheaply from other places instead of growing it here. What I am saying is that the theory flowing from the Federal Government to the State Government through the COAG agreements is driving the nation towards a feedlot mentality. It is driving us to depopulate vast areas of inland Australia The theory has absolutely no regard for
Page 1098
distance. We are all extremely concerned about what is going on in Kosovo, East Timor and other places. But in a sense we have a theory that is cleansing country areas of New South Wales.

We have governments that are aiding and abetting because of the agreements in relation to the benchmarks that they have to reach. We have competitive tendering in relation to the Roads and Traffic Authority [RTA], rail jobs, and other matters. We have Ministers in this Parliament who refuse to look at the impacts of those major changes on those communities. If those changes are good for us, what is wrong with having a transparent look at them? Why do we not have rural impact statements? I ask the Premier, because he is the one who introduced the rural impact statement, to be genuinely concerned about impacts on rural communities and to put in place a process in relation to these changes, particularly tendering in relation to the RTA and other matters.

Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt - Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation) [7.40 p.m.]: I commend the honourable member for Tamworth for raising what I consider to be an extremely important issue. Competition policy is now being questioned on both sides of politics and at all levels of government across the country. Having said that, I must now concede that competition policy probably has not been all bad. I do not believe anyone in the country, for example, would argue that competition policy has not enhanced telecommunications. The idea of bringing in competition to compete against Telecom has probably improved our telecommunications system no end. I believe that is at least a win for the principle of competition policy.

I do not entirely accept all the comments made by the honourable member for Tamworth in relation to the Minister for Transport, who I believe argued in this House the other day that the introduction of competitive tendering for road maintenance services, including works provided by both the RTA day labour workforce and local government, is the key to making savings on road maintenance. These savings can then be put back into road maintenance. The Hon. Tony Kelly, MLC, presently chairs the Standing Committee on State Development. The Minister for Transport has asked the standing committee to inquire into the costs of road maintenance in New South Wales and the impact of Federal cuts to road maintenance funding. Overall, that is about getting efficiency in the way we are spending money, and I hope that ultimately that will bring benefits to rural New South Wales.

I turn to rural impact statements. The honourable member for Tamworth is correct when he says that the Premier introduced rural impact statements into the system. When any issue goes through Cabinet Ministers have to prepare a rural impact statement to demonstrate what financial impact the proposed action will have on families, the State, inter-state relations, and, of course, rural communities. The honourable member for Tamworth may disagree about whether the rural impact statements are public documents.

The national competition policy has had major impacts on country communities. Some have been positive, but most have been negative. The Carr Government has often fought against the blind imposition of competition policy on some of our key agricultural industries. The dairy, rice and egg industries are the industries that spring immediately to mind. The dairy industry is at the forefront of public debate at the moment, and the egg industry was deregulated before competition policy forced these sorts of changes on many of our industries. All of those industries, particularly the rice and dairy industries, have been under scrutiny by the National Competition Council. The egg industry, of course, was very much part of Greiner-style economics of the late 1980s.

Members of this House will recall that in 1998 the Carr Government decided against the deregulation of the dairy industry at the farm gate. That issue is not yet resolved. That followed a national competition policy review which recommended against deregulation. The farmers worked hard on that review, and the conclusion was that deregulation would have a major adverse impact on country communities. Now, of course, we are getting a feeling of deja vu. In recent months Victoria has been pushing the deregulation barrow. The New South Wales Government has strongly opposed that move and the dairy farmers of this State are equally opposed to it.

The Queensland Government has taken an identical stance and has also opposed the deregulation policy. Here in New South Wales Country Labor has also been extremely vocal on the issue. The honourable member for South Coast has been in constant contact with his local dairy farmers and is constantly knocking on my door to find out what further pressure can be put on the Victorian Government. I understand that he will speak later in this debate. If Labor were to win government in Victoria we would all be in a much better position. Labor has already indicated its opposition to dairy deregulation, unless dairy farmers vote for such deregulation. That sensible stance should be supported.

Page 1099

The egg industry, which was deregulated by the former Government, has already gone through change. I would hate to see the dairy industry go down the same track. The egg industry was deregulated in July 1989 by the former Coalition Government without the current pressures of competition policy and possible penalties on the New South Wales Government. New South Wales is the largest egg-producing State in Australia, and the move effectively deregulated the national market. At first retail prices fell because the levy of 30 cents per dozen was removed. However, retail margins actually increased and the retail price of eggs soon rose faster than the consumer price index. Meanwhile, prices paid to egg producers fell. That highlights what the honourable member for Tamworth has put to the House. Then in March 1996 egg prices rose by 50 per cent. In 1994 the Milne Poultry Digest stated:

Almost 40% of producers who owned quota in July 1989, the date of deregulation, have ceased egg production.

The digest continued:

. . . the remaining producers are struggling to survive, mainly through the strategy of shedding staff and working very long hours.

Another report in 1997, entitled "Interdependence and Integration of the Egg, Processed Food and Food Service Industries", stated:

Deregulation has been accompanied by reduced egg production, lower values, reduced margins, falling farm numbers, and reduced exports.

The report continued:

The main beneficiaries of deregulation appear to have been the retailers who have captured the lion’s share of the benefits through increases in margins.

We have heard that song before. The former Coalition Government also made the decision to deregulate the dairy industry beyond the farm gate. That decision was made back in 1992-93. The deregulation came into effect last July, and the results have been well publicised in the last few months. The average retail price of milk has gone up, not down, by about 16 per cent and large processors and retailers have increased their margins. Milk vendors, however, were forced out of business and the farm gate price was squeezed down by three cents a litre.

The National Competition Council also wants New South Wales to partly deregulate the rice industry. That means removing the vesting powers of the Rice Growers Co-operative, which supports the domestic marketing arrangements. That is despite the fact that the Rice Growers Co-operative competes very successfully on the international market against the big rice-producing countries of the world and is also subject to competition on the domestic market from imported rice. The rice industry supports a strong farming community of more than 200. The industry is based predominantly in the Riverina-Murray area and generates considerable employment and financial security for the region.

The National Competition Policy seems to result largely in a process which transforms small family businesses into large corporations. It transfers wealth to fewer and fewer people and has a major impact on country towns, as the Dairy Farmers Association highlighted in its submission to the competition review. Any economic theory will support this: The farmers are in a poor bargaining position against big business, so their margins are often squeezed down and they often sell out to bigger operators. Fewer families survive when some industries are deregulated, and that results in an overall downturn for country towns and economies.

The rationale for deregulation is that it releases resources that can be more efficiently used elsewhere. That was highlighted to some extent by the mileage analogy drawn by the honourable member for Tamworth. But "elsewhere" may often mean overseas, so the economic benefits are lost to Australia and local country communities. Value-adding activities are also transferred out of the regions, and sometimes out of the country. It is clear that regional economies suffer as a result of competition policy We also see a reduction in local employment opportunities, with a subsequent reduction in rural populations. That changes the whole make-up and dynamics of rural communities.

I close by repeating what I said at the outset: Competition policy is not a one-sided argument for the knockers; there have been some wins. Telecommunications have been good. Competition may drive down the cost of delivery of services. While there may be differing views about tendering for road maintenance, the benefits will flow through to regional economies. Competition and purist economic rationalist policies impact on primary producers, the weak link in the theory.

I hope that the Victorian election result, party politics aside, will drive a rethink, not only in Victoria, that will lead to a dramatic reshaping of the dairy industry in all the States and Territories of the country, and that members of all political parties will pause to consider the implications of
Page 1100
competition policies and how they are applied. The fact that States are held at gunpoint of financial penalties by the Federal Government is one fact that does not make me proud of the former Federal Government. With those comments, again I commend the honourable member for Tamworth for bringing on this matter in the House. Right across this country it is time we looked at the value and implications of competition policy on a case by case basis.

Mr TORBAY (Northern Tablelands) [7.50 p.m.]: I begin by commending the honourable member for Tamworth for bringing this matter of public importance to the attention of the House. I was delighted to hear his contribution and that of the Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation. Competition really is about letting market forces prevail. It is motivated by the pursuit of efficiency. This pursuit of efficiency, as an end unto itself, is destructive, especially to regional communities. Governments have been relying on market forces to pursue efficiency. This is the foundation of economic rationalism. Competition policy, under the name of economic rationalism, is raping regional areas. One could find an economic rationalist to report on why New South Wales should not even exist; it is probably not efficient according to the criteria currently being used. Market forces essentially are centralising systems, and that underpins the ongoing growth in urban centres.

Freeing up markets and imposing competition on everything that moves is starting to paint a grim picture for both metropolitan and regional Australia. As cities grow because of competition policy, the cost of infrastructure and social problems escalate, and regions stagnate, lose services and become unattractive, as the Minister referred to when pointing to some issues. As a consequence, regions become high-cost locations for doing business. Then it becomes almost impossible to attract people and industries to those regions, exacerbating the problem. Dr Roy Powell, Executive Chairman of the Centre for Agricultural and Regional Economics, based in Armidale, wrote an Economic Development Opportunities and Needs paper in which he said:

It is not surprising that the entrepreneurs head to the cities apart from those that depend on the natural resource base. There they will find many fellow travellers to share their ideas with, have ready access to information, almost any form of specialist business support services (including finance), labour skills and commercial property. These agglomeration economies are generally not present in regional Australia and are part of the higher costs of operating businesses in regional locations that are unlikely to be fully compensated for through lower site rentals.

What are we to do? We must grow business in regional New South Wales. We must develop social and community objectives for regions. Dr Powell’s report went on to say:

Without growth in the business sector, there will not be growth in employment and population, which will make it difficult to maintain regional infrastructure and services. The regions will become less self-reliant and increasingly dependent on "subsidies" based on tax revenues levied on urban businesses and residents. A reversal of the trends in the regional economies is a prerequisite for the broad-based development of those regions that include social and community objectives.

We must incorporate social and community objectives in the process. We must help businesses in regional areas to get their costs down. We must take regional development seriously. Competition policy has depleted the social infrastructure of New South Wales. I would refer to the comments of Chris Sidoti, the Human Rights Commissioner, who has drawn attention to the plight of regional New South Wales in his work. I commented on this matter in my contribution to the Address-in-Reply to the Governor’s Speech. Chris Sidoti raises a number of issues that should be ringing the alarm bells for regional Australia but particularly in country New South Wales, where the statistics reveal a disgraceful situation.

A social audit was canvassed by the Hon. John Della Bosca. I would like that process pursued. A social audit is at the heart of the issue raised this evening by the honourable member for Tamworth. It asks questions such as: What are the impacts and flow-on effects to regional communities of government decisions? His reference to a dismissive attitude regarding tendering out of road maintenance highlights the issue. We have had to fight, and are continuing to fight, to have the social impacts of the decision taken into account. That should have been item 1 on the agenda. Just like an alcoholic must come out of denial, if we are to take action, we must firstly acknowledge that competition policy has wreaked havoc on regional New South Wales. Once that acknowledgment is given, we can move to correct the situation.

Mr W. D. SMITH (South Coast) [7.55 p.m.]: National competition policy has had a significant effect on rural and regional New South Wales. The Government has frequently argued against the mind-set of competition policy in some of our main agricultural industries, and I wish to focus on the dairy industry in this debate. Following a national competition policy review that recommended against deregulation, in 1998 the Government decided against deregulation of the dairy industry at the farm gate. The reason for that was that the farmers
Page 1101
deduced that deregulation would have an extremely negative effect on rural and regional communities.

For some time the Victorian Coalition Government has strongly voiced its support for deregulation. Last weekend’s election result reflects a clear thumbs down by Victoria’s dairy communities, with the biggest swing against the Coalition being in those communities. Gippsland East showed a 13.1 per cent swing away from the Kennett Government, Gippsland South showed a 12.9 per cent swing away from the Government, Benambra had a swing from the Government of 8.6 per cent, Swan Hill 8 per cent, and Shepparton 7.3 per cent. There are 1,817 dairies in New South Wales, employing about 7,500 workers. On the South Coast, 110 dairy farmers supply milk to factories at Albion Park, Moruya and Kangaroo Valley. So it is a vital industry, and it has been part of the fabric of the South Coast since its settlement.

Farmers tell me deregulation could cost them $50,000 to $70,000 per year. In New South Wales it is estimated that 600 dairy farmers will be put out of business. This is about a third of dairy farmers in this State. That would be a huge reduction, and it would have a massive impact on employees and their families. On the South Coast, it is figured that 30 farms will be seriously affected, with a fall in milk production of approximately 16 million litres. This will result in the economic loss of $5 million in my electorate. Most importantly, it means a loss of about 60 jobs. Those jobs will be difficult to replace, both in my community and in others like it, which are already under great pressure through unemployment.

It is estimated that agriculture supports four flow-on jobs for every on-farm job; that is taking into account things like transport and processing. To lose all those jobs from local communities therefore would have a major impact on regional economies. Families will struggle, and communities will feel the knock-on effects. Farmers are in a terrible bargaining position against the big operators, and their profit margins are being cut so much that often they are forced to sell. Alternatively, they may well get into more debt by borrowing large sums to increase herd size - a risky business. They might decide to sell off part of the farm to developers, with the consequent loss of valuable agricultural land that can never be reclaimed as it has houses on it, an unacceptable outcome for the State.

Credit must be given to the Minister for Agriculture for the establishment of the Farm Gate Deregulation Assistance Committee, which has on it representatives from New South Wales Agriculture, the Department of Land and Water Conservation, the New South Wales Dairy Farmers Association, the Dairy Farmers Co-operative and National Foods. Its main job will be to act as a steering committee to help farmers to adjust to the impact of farm gate deregulation. More than $2 million will be available to be used for financial and social counsellors to advise dairy farmers on new business directions and help them adjust to the forces of deregulation. The committee also will be able to provide a direct link to service and advice from New South Wales Agriculture.

Chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [ACCC], Professor Allan Fels, and groups such as the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics [ABARE] predicted that the deregulation of the dairy industry would result in a reduction in retail milk prices by up to 20¢ a litre. Clearly, this has not been the case. Since deregulation last July, milk prices have risen by an average of 10 per cent. Consumers are losing out, and dairy farmers are losing out too. When deregulation first came in, farmers’ margins were squeezed down by just over 3¢ a litre, to just under 50¢ a litre, so that they could compete with Victorian farm gate prices.

From 1 January the Minister for Agriculture and the Dairy Corporation approved a 1¢ increase, once the market had stabilised generally. In September the dairy division of Safe Food approved a further 1.5¢ per litre increase for dairy farmers. Despite the industry being in a state of flux, we are doing our best to keep our dairy farmers buoyant. The Government and Country Labour do not support farm gate deregulation. The Minister for Agriculture has been in communication with the agriculture Minister in Queensland, who is of a similar mind. I commend the honourable member for Tamworth for raising this issue in Parliament.

Mr SLACK-SMITH (Barwon) [8.00 p.m.]: I wish to speak about the impact of competition policy on country communities. Some time ago the Leader of the National Party and member for the Upper Hunter announced that economic rationalism is dead, as far as the National Party is concerned. The National Party does not say that competition policy is all bad. We say that a pursuit of efficiencies in our rural communities must continue. If that means that rural New South Wales needs assistance to continue, so be it. The National Party would support that approach.

I would like to refer to some industries and organisations which have been severely impacted by competition policy. Firstly, under the local council
Page 1102
tendering process, contractors may come into town, do a job for $5 million, then leave town and take the money with them. What happens to the small businesses - the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker? What happens to the numbers of teachers and police in a town? A snow ball effect starts a decline in country areas, simply because the money does not stay in the towns. Another issue that has been in the headlines lately is the tendering process for rail maintenance. I personally know many railway fettlers who have spent a lifetime on the maintenance of railway lines in various areas of my electorate. Under the tendering process contractors will come in, get their wages, and take the money out of town. Of course, the towns will die.

The Opposition totally opposes the deregulation of the dairy farm industry. Unfortunately, unless we can twist the arm of Victoria it will continue. I also wish to refer to the electricity industry in New South Wales, particularly in my electorate and the electorates of the honourable member for Tamworth, the honourable member for Northern Tablelands and a few members in the northern part of New South Wales. NorthPower has been a diabolical failure in country towns because it does not create employment. Local staff who were once employed in local towns by the electricity company - maybe five, 15, 20 employees - are not employed any longer. That has a dramatic effect on the local community, on wages, on police and teacher numbers and on the economy. It may mean that a doctor or nurse will leave town or two or three beds in a local hospital will close. The ultimate result is a decline in our rural communities.

We are always in a process of change. But this national competition policy needs to be treated with great caution and requires intensive consultation. I refute the Minister’s statement that in every policy decision the Government takes into account the economic and social ramifications on small communities. I believe it is just a tick in a little box in the corner of a page to say that the community has been consulted. Often only two or three people are consulted, and an intensive investigation of the social, economic and environmental impacts on small communities is not undertaken.

I do not support subsidies and tariffs in any industry. However, we are faced with competition from overseas countries. For example, Japan has impositions on meat and the United States of America has landing ports embargoes. Our wool is moved through Mexico to get it tariff free into the USA. The Opposition supports a level playing field, but let us ensure that it is well and truly level.

Mr PICCOLI (Murrumbidgee) [8.05 p.m.]: I believe, and have believed for a long time, that the whole issue of competition policy, the Council of Australian Governments [COAG] and even economic rationalism, whatever that means, comes down to the role of government. I do not believe that the role of government is purely to create a super-efficient State with a super-efficient economy, at the expense of every other aspect of our economy. In the past 10 or 15 years that is the way government has evolved. I hear too many politicians and their staff talk about competition and the need for efficiency at the expense of everything else, and that in some way it is an assumed role of government. Even more disturbing, more and more I hear commentators, politicians and staff singing the same song as business people. I have a dear friend who is an economist.

Mr Anderson: Shame.

Mr PICCOLI: It is a bit of a shame. What he tells me needs to be done in the economy are the same things that politicians are telling me should happen. When that occurs, we will be in big trouble. Economists and accountants have an objective: efficiency and a return on capital investment. But New South Wales is not New South Wales Pty Ltd. We have broader social obligations. We are starting to see that the effects of competition policy and this drive for efficiency are costing this State in many other areas. A review of the competition policy by a Commonwealth Senate Committee stated:

The Communications Law Centre submitted that current discussion on competition policy reform concentrated too much on the supply side of the economic equation (that is, that efficiency and economic gains are the primary goals) and that insufficient attention was being paid to the demand side of the equation (issues such as access, equity, pricing, quality, standards and privacy).

I agree with that assessment from the Communications Law Centre. The Competition Principles Agreement [CPA] outlines the factors that have to be considered when dealing with issues of competition policy. Referring to the CPA, the National Competition Council stated:

. . . subclause 1(3) provides governments with a consistent approach to assessing whether the commitments to reform contained in the intergovernmental agreements threaten desired social objectives. The inclusion of the subclause in the CPA reflects the desire of governments to make clear their view that competition policy is not about maximising competition per se, but about using competition to improve the community’s living standards and employment opportunities.

As the Minister for Agriculture stated, there have been benefits from competition policy. We have all seen those benefits, some of which have accrued to
Page 1103
rural areas. However, I beg both the State and Federal Governments to look at subclause 1 (3) of the CPA and adopt its provisions - that competition policy is not about maximising competition. In the implementation of this policy far too much emphasis has been placed on the unbelievable desire to maximise competition.

Competition is not the solution to the problems that face this State, but it is needed to improve the community’s living standards and employment opportunities. Another thing I should mention is the lack of oversight of the National Competition Council. It was envisaged when the National Competition Council began that it would be overviewed by the Council of Australian Governments but, according to the Senate report, there has been no such overview. I call on both the State and Federal governments, and I will do whatever I can as well, to make sure that a constructive review of the national competition policy is conducted. There have been many benefits but the overarching desire to implement national competition policy at every turn is producing many negative effects, particularly in rural New South Wales.

Mr WINDSOR (Tamworth) [8.11 p.m.], in reply: I thank the Minister for Agriculture for being present in the Chamber. His contribution was invaluable. I thank also the honourable members for Northern Tablelands, South Coast, Barwon and Murrumbidgee. Tonight’s debate was conducted as a discussion of the issue rather than as an attempt to determine who was right and who was wrong. That is significant because there is a general view in the Parliament that maybe it is time to have a close look at the impacts of the arrangements that were made some years ago. I urge the Premier and other Ministers and the Federal Government to do that.

The Minister for Agriculture made an important point, which the honourable members for Barwon, Northern Tablelands and Murrumbidgee backed up, when he said that there had been important pluses in competition policy. I have no doubt about that. In the late 1980s when I was a member of the Grains Council of Australia I was trying to drive efficiencies in the grain industry and the people involved along the chain who had an impact on the cost structure of those involved in the farming community.

Mr Fraser: The chain gang.

Mr WINDSOR: The chain gang. I have been part of the process. A mechanism exists within this Parliament or in the Federal Parliament to measure the impact of national competition policy on country communities both large and small. Academic institutions would willingly assist any government in evaluating the process. The argument is that if these things are good for us - some of them are and some may not be - they are good for us at a cost or a benefit. I was involved in the country summit process in 1996, as was the member for Northern Tablelands and other honourable members in the Chamber, and that summit came up with the idea of the rural impact statement.

This Government has determined before it makes major changes to measure the impact of those changes on the community so that it can openly say that the community will receive certain benefits but it will have a cost elsewhere. I do not have an argument with that. The argument is that we do not have a process. Rhetoric comes out of the ministry, and honourable members have heard it over the past few days during Country Week in the House. In effect, there is an assessment of the social impacts on communities.

The Premier and the Minister for Transport have an ideal example at the moment because there is great concern in rural communities about the impact of competitive tendering on road maintenance - I do not know whether it is a good or a bad thing - on the cost of delivery of tar to the top of the road, on the number of schoolteachers and children in schools, and the flow-on impacts, whether through that process a major city-based firm, as happened with maintenance in the Department of School Education, will move into the area, obtain the tender, do the work and take the money back to the city. What impact does that have on the infrastructure and the community of country New South Wales?

If New South Wales wants a feedlot, economic rationalism is the way to go because the most efficient way of delivering the highest number of services to the greatest number of people at the lowest possible cost is to put them on top of each other in a feedlot and let them share the same downpipe for their refuse. But if that is the sort of society we want to end up with in country Australia and in Australia generally, God help us. It is about time that we pulled up this debate and had a close look at the impacts, other than economic impacts, on country communities of national competition policy.

Discussion concluded.

Page 1104

Debate resumed from 14 September.

Mr D. L. PAGE (Ballina) [8.17 p.m.]: I lead for the Opposition, which will not oppose this legislation. The Strata Schemes (Leasehold Development) Act 1986 was enacted to enable Australian-style development on land owned by the Crown or a public authority, including a council, without the Crown or public authority having to divest its freehold interests in the land. This was achieved by allowing for titles to be issued in respect of long-term leases of strata lots, for example, 99-year leases, from the Crown or from a public authority. The developments at Darling Harbour and The Rocks are examples of this type of legislation.

Various groups, including churches and clubs, as well as individuals, real estate agents and the like, have lobbied that this concept should apply equally to the non-government sector. I cannot see any reason why that should not be the case. The purpose of the bill is to allow privately owned land to be developed by means of a leasehold strata scheme. Under the scheme, strata-type development could be undertaken on land that the owner wished to lease but not sell.

There are a number of arguments in support of the legislation. Firstly, it will provide greater flexibility and additional options for property owners, investors and developers involved in the supply of commercial, industrial and particularly residential land. Secondly, it will provide greater choice for consumers in the type of property tenure available to meet demands. Thirdly, it will provide more opportunities for the private sector, including institutions and charity groups, to reduce development or operational costs and provide affordable housing. Finally, it will provide more opportunity to effectively use vacant and underutilised properties.

The House has just debated national competition policy, and it is relevant to note that the existing legislation is inconsistent with national competition policy principles. At present, government land may be developed by leasehold strata, but privately held land does not have the same opportunity. The proposed amendments will ensure that privately owned land and government land have the same development potential. There are a number of consequential amendments that relate to this legislation. The consequential amendment to the Local Government Act 1993 will ensure that leasehold strata lots created over land owned by a rate-exempt body are not exempt from rating.

Another consequential amendment to the Land Tax Amendment Act 1956 will ensure that leasehold strata lots created over land owned by a land tax exempt body are able to be assessed for land tax. I should indicate that the Opposition when considering the legislation sought input from and had consultation with a number of organisations, including the Property Council of Australia, the Real Estate Institute of New South Wales, the Law Society of New South Wales and the Institute of Surveyors of New South Wales. It is fair to say that they had no objections to the legislation.

The only query I have about the legislation relates to the period of leases. On reviewing the legislation I could not see any reference to whether a limit had been placed on the term of leases. I understand now from the ministerial adviser that there is no limit, so it is possible for someone to have a 200-year lease. That clarifies the position. As I said, the Opposition does not oppose the bill. We believe there are good reasons for the same regime being applied to the private sector as applies to leasehold strata development in the public sector. The Opposition does not oppose the bill.

Mr MERTON (Baulkham Hills) [8.21 p.m.]: As the honourable member for Ballina said, the Opposition supports the bill. The legislation will be of great interest and benefit to a number of organisations, including churches and other religious entities which are unable or do not wish to dispose of freehold fee simple land but would prefer to deal with land by way of lease, and hence a leasehold strata title subdivision. For that reason the bill is a worthy improvement to current legislation. It will be relevant also to many retirement villages. Those who buy a unit in a strata development will be entitled to separate title deeds, albeit on the basis of a lease but nevertheless as a registered strata scheme with a leasehold title.

For that reason alone the Opposition believes that this is worthy legislation. The bill canvasses a number of matters that are incidental to being able to strata title a leasehold estate. The only question I pose is whether the fee simple remains with the registered proprietor who may then subdivide and ultimately issue leasehold titles by way of the strata scheme. If that is so, I ask the Minister to explain where the lease document links with the title that will be issued. The honourable member for Ballina alluded to the issue when he inquired whether there would be any restriction on the duration of the lease.

Page 1105

I ask the Minister how the leasehold title that will issue, which I assume will be a folio identifier, will be linked with the leasehold interest. The legislation simply refers in the head note to there usually being long-term leases. There must be a separate lease instrument that relates to the leasehold title. I may be wrong, but I assume that is in the form of a memorandum that is lodged over the whole of the estate or the title to the land that is being subdivided. Alternatively, there could be separate leases relating to each unit of the strata title development.

I am fascinated to know the mechanism that is provided for that purpose. Though the Opposition supports the bill, curiosity has got the better of me. I wonder what are the advantages of having this arrangement with a leasehold strata title compared to having a normal strata title development whereby the proprietors are the owners of the fee simple and then the owner of the fee simple gives someone a long-term lease. No doubt the Minister’s specialist advisers can respond. The Opposition supports the bill as it believes that in regard to retirement villages in particular it will be advantageous to have some form of strata title when there is a licence to occupy. I have probably answered my first query. The Opposition supports the bill.

Mr YEADON (Granville - Minister for Information Technology, Minister for Energy, Minister for Forestry, and Minister for Western Sydney) [8.28 p.m.], in reply: I thank the honourable member for Ballina and the honourable member for Baulkham Hills for their contributions to the debate. I welcome the acknowledgment by the honourable member for Ballina, who led for the Opposition, that the Opposition will not oppose this amending legislation. As I said in my second reading speech, this measure places government and non-government landowners in an equal position and removes a bias that existed previously in favour of government landowners so that a more equitable situation will apply for those in the private sector. The honourable members raised an issue regarding the time and nature of the lease.

As the honourable member for Ballina said, there is no time limit on the lease. Clearly it would be in the longer term rather than in the shorter term, otherwise people would simply take out a rental lease, probably for about 99 years. The lease strata title can be traded, so that if I were the original purchaser of the strata title lease which was for 99 years and I occupied it for 50 years and then sold it, obviously the purchaser would know that the remaining life of the lease was of the order of 49 years. The purchaser of the strata lease has consumer protection. A person who buys a leasehold strata lot buys an interest in land and, accordingly, the normal consumer protection measures that apply to land that is purchased also apply when a leasehold strata lot is purchased.

The consumer protection measures are set out in part 4 of the Conveyancing Act of 1919 and also in the Conveyancing (Sale of Land) Regulation 1995. They are as follows: a five-day cooling-off period where the property in question is residential; compulsory attachment of documents to the contract for sale, such as council zoning certificates, a drainage diagram, a title search of the lot, a title search of the common property and also compulsory warranty by the vendor as to the property not being affected by any proposal by bodies such as the Roads and Traffic Authority, State Rail Authority and electricity authorities. The vendor also warrants that the lessor has not served a notice on the vendor alleging a breach of a term or condition of the lease of the lot.

Furthermore, purchasers of leasehold strata lots will have access to the Strata Schemes Commissioner for the purpose of resolving disputes within the strata scheme. Finally, in answer to the question posed by the honourable member for Baulkham Hills, the advantage gained from having a leasehold strata lot arrangement rather than a straight lease - which in common terms would be renting a property - is the longer time frame to enter into that leasehold strata lot arrangement, for example 99 years. The other key factor is that, because those leaseholders have an interest in the land, they are therefore able to form a body corporate to govern the common areas of the lease arrangement.

If one has a straight lease in a rental sense then the landlord or proprietor controls it. One has the benefit of people being under a lease arrangement, but almost having ownership in terms of their contribution to the common areas and so forth through the body corporate. That is the main underlying objective. As I said in my second reading speech, this bill will now allow privately owned land to be developed in a way that was not previously available to them but was available to the Government.

It will therefore facilitate the development of sites that previously have not been developed because the owner has been unwilling to part with any of its freehold interest in the land. This bill removes the bias that has operated in favour of government and makes it available to all land-holders. I commend the bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time and passed through the remaining stages.

Page 1106

Debate resumed from 14 September.

Mr BROGDEN (Pittwater) [8.32 p.m.]: I lead for the Opposition on the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust Amendment Bill. I do so on behalf of the honourable member for Southern Highlands, who has carriage of this bill on behalf of the Opposition, but is on leave. This bill seeks to extend the length of leases of trust lands, for terms in excess of the eight years to which such leases are currently limited, to a maximum of 10 years, to provide better certainty and a better return to lessees of restaurants and cafes.

Further, it will enable the trust to grant licences and easements for the same purposes as it may grant leases, with a view to making administrative arrangements more consistent. New activities on trust lands have emerged since the original Act. Specifically this bill deals with the Domain Parking Station which has a lease with South Sydney Council that is due to expire in 2008. The bill deals with the redundant World War II oil storage tank in Lincoln Crescent.

The bill also deals with the land bridge over the Eastern Distributor which, according to legislation, requires a 50-year lease with the Roads and Traffic Authority for use of land where the land bridge rests, and a sublease with Airport Motorways to ensure that the trust has no financial responsibility for the physical structure. The bill specifically will assist Sydney City Council with redevelopment of the Andrew "Boy" Charlton pool and a lease may be needed for subsurface supports. Finally, the bill deals with the long-term lease with Sydney City Council of Cook and Phillip Park to include the slight realignment of St Marys Road.

The honourable member for Southern Highlands is grateful for the advice she received from Meryl McCraken, Director, Corporate Services at the trust who provided some background with respect to the development of these amendments. She made it clear to the Opposition that the trust has asked for the amendments to improve certainty of lease arrangement with bodies such as Sydney City Council. However, the Minister did not in his second reading speech refer to, and the bill does not specify in detail, the opening that has been created which would involve his discretion for virtually any commercial lease, or redevelopment of trust lands.

Section 20 opens the door wide to the worst excesses that this Premier could imagine for his own vision for Sydney. The section in the existing Act which he seeks to amend at least sets a limit or framework for the types of leases the trust may be expected to enter into, whereas the old Act specifically says "such as a restaurant". This bill imposes no such limits. Anything that the Premier imagines could come to fruition with the Minister’s approval.

That is the same vision honourable members have already witnessed at the Sydney Conservatorium of Music. In this case the Premier has ruined one of our oldest, finest, most historic buildings. He has destroyed the remaining fragment of an historic roadway. He has allowed a huge hole to be dug in the Royal Botanic Gardens, and it is a travesty that he has personally endorsed the construction of a new building on the site of the heritage Francis Greenway building.

What might the Premier think up next for the rest of the Domain and the Royal Botanic Gardens? The Premier will not think twice about leasing out the Domain for the permanent construction of performance facilities. For instance, there will probably be a "Bob Carr" wing of the Art Gallery of New South Wales with his own design spreading across the Eastern Distributor bridge, perhaps with an avenue of statues in the Premier’s own likeness!

The Premier cannot be trusted to protect open space or heritage. The Premier will use this amendment to drive trucks through gaping holes in the little protection remaining for some of Sydney’s best loved open space; spaces where city workers and residents jog, picnic, walk and enjoy our precious harbour foreshores. The bill will permit the Minister to grant easements, leases and licences on any part of trust land, including everything from freeways to entertainment complexes. Is this the opening of the door to build permanent seating for outdoor Sydney Festival activities at the bottom of Queen Elizabeth steps?

We could have a helipad on the Domain car park roof or a permanent sound shell in the Domain. What can the Minister tell us about proposals to build such a sound shell near the Domain car park? Would this legislation enable that to happen? During the years of the Fahey Government, there was a proposal to extend the Royal Botanic Garden Visitors Centre for botanical and public education purposes. By any means that was a proposal well within the normal scope of activities of the Royal Botanic Gardens, to be funded by private donations.

Page 1107

On 8 August 1993 the Sun-Herald stated "Bob Carr is seeking the support of Independent MPs to legislate to stop the building and preserve open space." Indeed, an interim green ban was placed on the project by the New South Wales Trades and Labor Council. On 1 August 1993 the Sun-Herald quoted the Premier - at that time Leader of the Opposition as follows:

they are getting away with murder down there and I want to stop it in Parliament.

Whilst the Opposition does not object to the principles of proposed sections 20A and 20B, it fully understands the need to improve the leasing arrangements so that those who seek to supply appropriate services, such as restaurants and the proposals for the World War II oil tanks, have a commercial and financial framework in which to work that will give both the trust and the proponents certainty. More importantly, it will allow the best possible proposal to come forward that will meet remediation and landscaping requirements, and create the best possible and highest-quality outcome for residents and visitors.

The Opposition is concerned that whilst a restaurant or a cafe can get an extension of lease from eight to 10 years, everything else is for 50 years. What else, apart from the features listed in the Minister’s second reading speech, will in the future have a 50-year lease approved? To this end the Coalition will, in the Legislative Council, move an amendment in the following terms:

Schedule 1, Section 20(2) omit the words "after 4" and replace them with "any purpose consistent with the objects of the trust and which promote the advancement of the environment and the provision of recreational open space for the people of New South Wales.

This is to replace the words in the bill, which read "for any commercial or other purpose that is not prejudicial to the objects of the trust". The Opposition believes that the wording of the bill does not give enough guidance to the trustees and to the Minister, and does not provide enough protection to the Royal Botanic Gardens and The Domain to ensure that inappropriate developments cannot take place in the future - especially with 50-year leases, which would prejudice the role of this legislation and the public interest. The honourable member for Bligh will move amendments to force greater public consultation.

Although the honourable member for Bligh has only just handed me the amendments designed to provide more consultation with the people of Sydney and in particular the people of her community, I am confident that the Opposition will support them. The Opposition would like the Minister to state the extent and footprint of the Andrew "Boy" Charlton pool redevelopment. Will it exceed its current shape and size? We do not want the redevelopment of the pool to significantly impact on the area around the current pool development, or to encroach into any surrounding landscape.

We seek a guarantee from the Minister that the pool design which won the architectural design run by the Sydney City Council will not be overturned. What exactly does he mean by redevelopment remaining "substantially" within the current footprint? How much will it be substantially outside the current footprint? Another feature of the bill is its retrospectivity by stealth that will allow some of the very embarrassing outstanding business between the Lord Mayor of Sydney and the Carr Government to be cleaned up. The Lord Mayor of Sydney has a well-established record of cleaning up his mistakes after the event.

Between July and October the council made two development applications [DAs] to itself for kiosks and telephone towers on city streets. Tenders were called, contracts were issued and two development applications were called for, again stipulating two advertising panels. But when they were built they had three advertising panels. Long bus shelters have single-sided advertising panels. In March 1999 Lord Mayor Sartor put a section 96 DA on exhibition to retrospectively approve the additional panel per street kiosk, double-sided advertising panels on long bus shelters and double-sided advertising panels on telephone billboards. Now the same thing is happening: the Carr Government is helping the Lord Mayor clean up their joint mistakes.

It is purely retrospective legislation so far as the Cook and Phillip Park development is concerned. The footbridge that connects the park with Woolloomooloo now needs this bill to put in place formal lease arrangements with the trust that should have been attended to before the footbridge was built. This is just bad management and disregard for proper process. Further arrogance of this Government is evident in proposed section 20A (3). The only person with whom the Minister is obliged to consult is the Treasurer of New South Wales.

There is no mention of the community or the residents near trust areas or future residents of the Woolloomooloo housing project. The case in point is what might emerge in the expressions of interest for the old oil installations in Lincoln Crescent. This has been the site of some housing unit construction and
Page 1108
the new amendment does not oblige the Minister to consult with existing or future residents of the Woolloomooloo housing project. Neither is he required to consult with local residents about whatever might be in store for the redevelopment of the Domain car park.

Ms Moore: I will move to amend that.

Mr BROGDEN: The amendment of the honourable member for Bligh will seek greater public consultation in relation to those areas. The Opposition is not opposed to creating longer-term financial certainty and frameworks in which quality facilities and good outcomes can be created for the trust and the lands it manages for all of us. We do not approve in principle of retrospective legislation and want to ensure that the Minister is aware that we see much of this legislation for what it actually is - a fix-up job for its own bad management and to fix Frank Sartor’s mistakes. There must be limits to the excesses of this Government’s desire to infringe on public space, to damage and compromise historic buildings, and to allow gradual encroachments onto public open space.

As I said, the Coalition will not propose amendments in the Legislative Assembly but we foreshadow the moving of an amendment in the Legislative Council in relation to the powers of the trust to lease land. We will look favourably upon the amendment to be moved by the honourable member for Bligh. I trust that she will facilitate the moving of such an amendment in the Legislative Council, where it will be supported by the Coalition. We approach this bill with great concern about the sweeping powers it provides the Minister with, the lack of consultation and the broad range in which -

Mr Debus: You are just reading what the honourable member for Southern Highlands wrote for you. You do not really know what the bill says.

Mr BROGDEN: As opposed to the speech that has been written for the Minister by his bureaucrats. The Opposition will support the bill with amendments.

Ms MOORE (Bligh) [8.46 p.m.]: If only the principles and sentiments expressed in opposition were carried out in government. I supported the then Leader of the Opposition in his stand in relation to the Botanic Gardens in 1993 and I support the sentiments expressed by the honourable member for Pittwater in the speech he just gave. I would like to think that he might carry them into government when he reaches that point.

Mr Ashton: He will be an old man when that happens.

Ms MOORE: I do not know what age he will be; all I am saying is that it is a great pity that the sentiments expressed in opposition are not carried over into government. I would like the Minister to consider that. It would seem that the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust Amendment Bill shows that the Government has learnt very little from the outrageously inappropriate proposal to build a McDonald’s restaurant on Moore Park, despite the Premier’s very appropriate attack on the Opposition just last week in relation to the development. That issue relates very much to what is being proposed for the Botanic Gardens.

In 1995 the Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust entered into a secret agreement with Gameplan Sport and Leisure with the full support of the then Liberal Minister, Chris Hartcher, to further alienate and commercialise our precious inner-city parkland. The trust, instead of fulfilling its primary responsibility to protect the park, acted without community consultation to allow a development that would degrade the park, damage its heritage and escalate garbage pollution, vandalism, traffic and parking problems. As soon as the community found out about the secret agreement there was an enormous public outcry. As the Premier appropriately pointed out last week, the secret agreement was just before the 1995 election.

The local council and new State Government quickly spoke out condemning the proposal. Since the subsequent plans of the Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust for the area exclude the construction of a takeaway restaurant, it is clear that the trust also realised that the proposal is totally unacceptable. Yet now we are saddled with a Court of Appeal decision that the development is permissible as refreshment rooms on the parkland. We are saddled with an agreement made by a former trust with a former director by a former environment Minister under a former Government for 20 years for a development no-one wants which would be thrown out if it were proposed today. Yet South Sydney Council, the consent authority, argues that it cannot refuse the development, and the Premier claims that the Government could face significant compensation if it does not abide by the agreement.

The Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust Amendment Bill opens the way for the same type of unacceptable, inappropriate development to be dumped in the Botanic Gardens for up to 50 years
Page 1109
following secret negotiations with no community input. This bill provides the Royal Botanic Gardens and the Domain Trust with the ability to enter into a lease, easement or licence for an eight-year period on any part of the trust’s lands for any commercial or other purpose that is not prejudicial to the objects of the trust. It will provide for leases on a restaurant or cafe for up to 10 years. Worse still, it allows a trust to enter into a 50-year lease on certain lands, including the Domain parking station, the fuel oil installations, the Eastern Distributor land bridge, the Andrew "Boy" Charlton pool, and the land subject to the Cook and Phillip Park redevelopment.

Before entering into these leases there is no requirement for the trust to consult the community or to provide the public with the opportunity to assess whether the proposed lease or licence is appropriate. Instead, this bill leaves open the possibility of a secret agreement, binding for 50 years, with only the Minister and the Treasurer to be informed before it is too late. As the current threat to Moore Park shows, this is not an adequate way to protect the Royal Botanic Gardens or the Domain.

According to the trust, the opportunity for public comment on proposed developments is during the development application phase - a process that has failed to protect Moore Park from the threat of a McDonald’s takeaway restaurant. I put it to the Minister that the community should be involved at the concept stage - not late in the day when there is no effect, other than fiddling at the edges or coming up with development conditions that might limit the damage. Of course, that is what South Sydney Council is being forced to do now.

There should not be any development on public land without public exposure, particularly for leases which will continue after most of us are dead. We are talking here about the legacy we will leave for future generations; we are talking about the Royal Botanic Gardens. Long commercial leases on public land must be put on the table for the community to see before any contract is signed. The redundant Department of Defence oil-storage facility next to Lincoln Crescent is currently subject to expressions of interest for its adaptive reuse. The trust has told me that it is quite close to making a decision about a use for this facility, despite the fact that the community of Woolloomooloo has no information whatsoever on what that use will be. I am told that the Treasurer sees this as an income-generating use which needs his approval; and likewise the Botanic Gardens.

This is use of public land that must have public approval. Park users must have a say in whether they would like to see this land used for educational, recreational, cultural or commercial purposes, or whether they want to see it reclaimed as parkland to meet the needs of the inner city’s increasing population. The residents of increasingly densely populated Woolloomooloo must consider proposals that could profoundly affect traffic, parking and amenity near their homes.

The Government described the Domain parking station provisions as housekeeping in anticipation of the expiry of the current 50-year lease under the separate Domain Leasing Act 1961. The trust has told me that it realises that the Domain is degraded, but that South Sydney Council is not supportive of renegotiating the maintenance agreement. So the community is left with a degraded parkland surface. Work needed on the parkland is obstructed by an out-of-date 45-year-old lease. With the current lease coming to an end, we are about to see a rush for proposals for the area.

There are persistent reports of proposals for retail and commercial development along Sir John Young Crescent, a bus lay-over or even a music bowl. There must be community involvement in the future of the area through an open and accountable planning process. We must not be burdened with another lease that fails to meet the needs of our parklands long after we are dead. Concerning the proposed 50-year lease for the land bridge, the Andrew "Boy" Charlton pool and Cook and Phillip Park, the community must be given the opportunity to assess whether they are appropriate, necessary and beneficial.

Our public land is being eaten up bit by bit. It is time for legislation that guarantees an end to commercialising, alienating, building on, burrowing under and overshadowing our vital inner-city parklands. The trust that is meant to be protecting our public parkland is increasingly going into a huddle with developers - that is what we saw at Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust - without any reference to the public. It is time to stop using commercial in confidence agreements to exclude the community, and interfering with open, accountable government.

The increasing pressure from the Government on trusts to generate more and more revenue prevents them from preserving their parklands and creates a culture whereby parks are bled for every cent by turning them into circuses, theatres, car parks or dust bowls. We must challenge this culture before it is too late. I cannot support this bill without a clear legislative requirement that the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust be totally open
Page 1110
with all proposals so that the public can be informed and involved before commitments are made.

I call on the Government to amend this legislation and support the amendments that I am putting before the House tonight, to give the public the same right of consultation accorded to the Treasurer by proposed section 20A subsections (3), (4) and (5) - and I foreshadow that I will move amendments accordingly in Committee - to require the trust to publicly advertise, with at least a 28-day notification period, any proposed use of land concerned under a future lease, licence or easement; require the trust to publicly advertise and make available the terms and conditions of any proposed lease, licence or easement at least 28 days in advance of its signing; and require the trust to make all signed lease, licence and easement documentation publicly available.

These are reasonable and responsible amendments that would assure accountability and protection of this very precious resource, which we are guardians of for this short period and which we will pass on to future generations. I call upon the Government to implement similar provisions for all parkland trusts, particularly the Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust after our appalling experience over the McDonald’s issue. I ask the Government to publicly release all documentation related to that disastrous proposal for a McDonald’s takeaway restaurant on Moore Park.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains - Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [8.57 p.m.], in reply: I think there is a fundamental misconception on the part of both the honourable member for Pittwater and the honourable member for Bligh concerning this housekeeping bill. One would never guess, from the addresses they had made to this House, that the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust is unable to undertake any building or rebuilding without the approval of the Heritage Office and a development application, together with the attendant public consultation that is involved.

This bill does not confer on the Government any sweeping power. It provides for five specific leases that will, if agreed to in the bill, apply for 50 years. The general limit on leases that may be agreed to by the trust remains at eight years. There is no loss of green space implied by this bill. The Andrew "Boy" Charlton pool remains within its current footprint. The land bridge beside the Art Gallery has actually increased the amount of green space in the Domain. The Cook and Phillip Park lease has no net impact on green space; indeed, it improves access between the park and the Domain.

The oil storage facility development will involve an enhancement of the landscape above the storage, and the cost of that landscape enhancement will be borne by the lessee. The Domain parking station will retain the lawn on its roof. There is no proposal for a music bowl under consideration by the trust. There is no provision for any restaurant having a lease of more than 10 years, and those leases are subject to development application and subsequent public consultation. It must be emphasised that leases, licences and easements granted by the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust apply to access over the site, to sub-services to events that take place in the gardens or in the Domain.

They do not affect the appearance of the gardens or the Domain; they do not affect the look or feel of the gardens of the Domain; and they do not encroach on the existing public open space in the gardens and in the Domain. I find it a little surprising that anybody might imply that the present trust would approve an event that would in some way or other compromise the quality of the gardens or the Domain.

It is obvious from what I have said that the Government cannot accept the amendment that the honourable member for Bligh has circulated and intends to move in Committee. Indeed, the gardens trust could not manage the activities and program of events if the amendment were to be accepted. The trust often must respond to requests for community events to take place at short notice. For instance, more than 700 wedding bookings are accepted for the gardens every year. In fact, as the honourable member for Bligh suggests, the advertising of those bookings, apart from its impracticality, seems to me to suggest a significant invasion of privacy. A great many cultural activities such as theatre productions remain commercial in confidence until just prior to their promotion.

It is worth mentioning that the gardens trust constantly monitors the responses of its customers to the uses of its site. Those responses are overwhelming and convincing: 80 per cent of people surveyed following summer 1999 events confirmed that they considered the role of the gardens to be a space for recreation; 80 per cent of customers considered that the Domain had a major role for outdoor events; 79 per cent of customers considered the Domain had a major role for community events or activities; and 99 per cent of the audience surveyed at the open-air cinema in 1998-99 rated the
Page 1111
entertainment experience as being good, very good, or excellent.

The gardens trust also closely monitors complaints. In 1998-99 the only complaints about outdoor events related to some difficulties following a performance called "Mozart by Moonlight", after which there was some degree of conflict or noise in other places. The virtual sell-outs of crowds for the entire 1999 summer season of events confirms that public demand and enjoyment are at their peak; they are as high as they have ever been. But the amendment to be moved by the honourable member for Bligh would put a stop to all that; we just could not do it under the amendment.

The bill before the House introduces no sweeping powers. All the twittering by the honourable member for Pittwater about what the Premier possibly might do ignores the precise circumstance that this bill provides for five specific leases to exist over 50 years, and there is evidently perfectly good justification for each of those. There can be, I repeat, no building or rebuilding within the precinct of the gardens and the Domain without the approval of the Heritage Office and without a development application and the public consultation that is of necessity associated with it. There is every good reason for the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust to ask the Government to make these merely housekeeping changes that are necessary to continue to conduct an effective and efficient administration of these two exceedingly important public areas. No reason whatsoever is provided by any of the honourable members who spoke to the bill to persuade the Government that its provisions should in any way be amended.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Schedule 1

Ms MOORE (Bligh) [9.06 p.m.]: I move:

Page 5, Schedule 1 [3]. Insert after line 31:

(6) The Trust must not grant:

(a) a lease of, or

(b) a licence for the use of, or

(c) an easement through, on or in,

any Trust lands unless it has given public notification of any proposed use of the land, and the terms and conditions of any proposed lease, licence or easement, in accordance with subsection (7).

(7) The Trust must publish a notice in a newspaper circulating generally in New South Wales:

(a) specifying any proposed use of Trust lands under a future lease, licence or easement, and

(b) summarising:

(i) the terms and conditions of any proposed lease, or licence for the use, of the land, and

(ii) the terms of any easement proposed to be granted through, on or in the land, and

(c) stating that a copy of the proposed lease, licence or grant of easement concerned may be inspected by the public at the offices of the Trust during ordinary business hours.

(8) The Trust:

(a) must make a copy of the proposed lease, licence or grant of easement available for public inspection in accordance with the notice, and

(b) must take into consideration any comments received within the period of 28 days after the notice is published, and

(c) must not grant any such lease, licence or easement until the expiry of that period.

(9) Any lease, licence or grant of easement granted in respect of any Trust lands after the commencement of this section is, while in force, to be made available for inspection by the public at the offices of the Trust during ordinary business hours.

I spoke at length in the second reading debate about why I would propose this simple and appropriate amendment, but I now summarise the reasons for doing so. I move the amendment because the Government should give the public the same right of consultation accorded the Treasurer. That is, it should require the trust publicly to advertise, giving at least a 28-day period of notification, regarding any proposed use of land under a future lease, licence or easement. It should require the trust to publicly advertise and make available the terms and conditions of any proposed lease, licence or easement at least 28 days in advance of its signing, and it should require the trust to make all signed lease, licence and easement documentation publicly available.

Page 1112

I move the amendment because of my real concerns about what might happen in the future. It possibly will not involve the Minister, the Government or this trust, but down the track it could involve another government, another Minister or another trust. I come to this debate with a worrying experience with the Centennial Park and Moore Park site involving the former Minister entering into a deed of agreement before the development application stage, and doing so before there was any public exhibition or public consultation. As a result, the Government and the community of Sydney are now burdened with an agreement that was entered into by that Minister, before the development application stage, regarding a McDonald’s outlet on Moore Park.

It would appear from the Minister’s behaviour that he is not concerned about that issue. I assure the Minister that an incredible number of people in Sydney are very concerned about the fact that a former Minister, a former government and a former trust agreed to a McDonald’s outlet being allowed on Moore Park. I remind the Minister that that is the site for the celebration of the centenary of Federation and that the Federal Government has given the State Government $11 million to enhance Grand Drive.

That is the sort of thing that we are dealing with in this bill. A future Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust could enter into a similar deed of agreement before the development application stage, before there was any consultation or any exhibition, and thereby burden future generations with an appalling legacy. I call upon the Government to agree to advertise, notify and inform the public about public land. We are the temporary custodians of this public land, and we should act responsibly in relation to it.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains - Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [9.09 p.m.]: The oil storage facility has been the subject of expressions of interest for adaptive reuse. The Department of Defence has remediated the old oil tanks to the satisfaction of an independent environmental auditor approved by the Environment Protection Authority. The Royal Botanic Gardens Trust is committed to a public use which is consistent with the objectives of the trust Act.

An important element of the reuse requirement is the enhancement of the landscape over the roof of the facility, which will have to be constructed to the satisfaction of the trust. I again point out to the honourable member for Bligh that the entire proposal will be subject to a development application. There is no possibility of reproducing the events involved with McDonald’s at Moore Park, about which she is justifiably concerned and distressed.

I point out again, nevertheless, that the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust could not effectively manage its business or conduct events and cultural activities with the imposition of conditions that are included in the amendment which the honourable member has moved. The Government recognises the concerns that the honourable member has expressed in general and in principle but disagrees with the specific measures she proposes to protect what she regards as matters of principle. We shall have measures in place in any event. As I have said, the Government will not agree to the amendment.

Ms MOORE (Bligh) [9.11 p.m.]: The very issue the Minister has raised about the redundant Department of Defence oil storage facility is an important point. The trust is close to choosing a use. However, the public, the people I represent in Woolloomooloo, and the thousands of people who use the Domain and the Royal Botanic Gardens have no information about the use. It may be an appropriate use. It may be used for recreational, educational or cultural purposes; it may have commercial purposes. Its eventual use may horrify the people of Woolloomooloo and the users of the Royal Botanic Gardens.

The Minister will reach the development application stage and may go down the same track as the former Minister for the Environment, Chris Hartcher. He may be preparing to sign a lease deed that he will not be able to get out of if there is an outcry at the development application stage, when the public will be informed for the first time. As I said, he may well be going down the same path as Chris Hartcher went down. That is the reason why the public and the community should be informed at the concept stage - before the development application stage, before the Minister signs off on any deed agreement that will be very costly to get out of. That is the very situation the Premier now says the current Government is in because of the actions of a previous Minister.

Mr BROGDEN (Pittwater) [9.13 p.m.]: The Opposition supports the simple and straightforward amendment moved by the honourable member for Bligh. The Government’s unwillingness to accept the
Page 1113
amendment shows a lack of flexibility and an unwillingness to engage in public consultation about publicly owned land. This is not merely some piece of land; it deserves more than the development application process. It is a piece of public land of special historic and environmental significance to every person in this State. It deserves more attention than that attracted by the average development application process. It deserves special attention.

The simple and straightforward amendment calls for the giving of 28 days notice in a public way, through newspaper advertising, of any proposed developments or concepts that the trust is considering. For the Minister to argue that 28 days would restrict the trust’s ability to operate its business is ludicrous. I note that the Minister said that one of the great roles the gardens fulfil is the hosting of weddings. Any wedding that does not have 28 days notice is a worry. If those who are about to be married cannot organise themselves in time to give 28 days notice to the trust, it would be a matter of great concern. It is ludicrous for the Minister to suggest that 28 days notice is too long and would involve too much public consultation for the trust to effectively operate its business.

Many of the festivals mentioned by the Minister are held at the same time every year in the same part of the parklands. It would be simple for the trust and its administrators to reach an understanding more than 28 days ahead of the necessary details for the undertaking of that process. The bill is more than housekeeping legislation. The Government has missed the opportunity provided in the bill to give greater surety to the community. There were many opportunities for the Government to tighten up the details of this bill to give greater surety to the community about exactly what functions will receive a 10-year lease or a 50-year lease.

As I said before, there is less concern from the Opposition, and indeed from the honourable member for Bligh, about an increase from eight to 10 years for the restaurant leases. That is not a matter of great concern. What is of great concern are 50-year leases granted by the Government. For the Minister to deny a simple amendment by the honourable member for Bligh requesting greater consultation indicates that the Government is arrogant and secretive. It does not want to consult with the community. It should take the opportunity to do some proper house cleaning on this legislation and open up the doors to greater consultation in the community.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains - Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [9.17 p.m.]: The honourable member for Pittwater is becoming confused. The 50-year leases apply for five specific purposes and nothing else.

Mr Brogden: We will see.

Mr DEBUS: What do you mean you will see? That is what the legislation says; it is quite specific. The amendment moved by the honourable member for Bligh is an attempt to have this notice given of every single conceivable activity in the Domain. When the administrators of the Royal Botanic Gardens and the Domain tell me they could not run their business if they had to do that, I am inclined to believe them. However, I point out that with a matter of greater overall planning significance - that is to say, the future use of the oil storage facility - it is inevitable that there will be 28 days after a development application is lodged for public discussion and consultation. I have no more to say. We now appear to be going around in ever-decreasing circles.

Ms MOORE (Bligh) [9.18 p.m.]: I want to say finally to the Minister that if it is a similar situation to Centennial Park and Moore Park -

Mr Debus: But it is not.

Ms MOORE: Under this bill it will be, because the development application will be too late. The Minister will have already signed off on a deed of agreement. The community and the city council will be able only to fiddle round the edges. The Minister is going down the same path as Chris Hartcher.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains - Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [9.19 p.m.]: This is positively the last time I will speak. I will not sign anything before the development application.

Question - That the amendment be agreed to - put.

The Committee divided.

Page 1114

Mr Barr Mr O’Farrell
Mr Brogden Mr D. L. Page
Mr Debnam Mr Piccoli
Mr George Mr Richardson
Mr Glachan Mr Rozzoli
Mr Hartcher Mrs Skinner
Mr Hazzard Mr Slack-Smith
Ms Hodgkinson Mrs Stoner
Mr Humpherson Mr Tink
Dr Kernohan Mr Torbay
Mr Kerr Mr J. H. Turner
Mr McGrane Mr R. W. Turner
Mr Maguire Mr Webb
Mr Merton Mr Windsor
Ms Moore Tellers,
Mr Oakeshott Mr Fraser
Mr O’Doherty Mr R. H. L. Smith

Mr Amery Mr McManus
Ms Andrews Mr Markham
Mr Aquilina Mr Martin
Mr Ashton Ms Meagher
Mr Bartlett Ms Megarrity
Mr Black Mr Nagle
Mr Brown Mr Newell
Ms Burton Ms Nori
Mr Campbell Mr Orkopoulos
Mr Collier Mr E. T. Page
Mr Crittenden Dr Refshauge
Mr Debus Mr Scully
Mr Face Mr W. D. Smith
Mr Gaudry Mr Stewart
Mr Greene Mr Tripodi
Mrs Grusovin Mr Watkins
Mr Hickey Mr Whelan
Mr Hunter Mr Woods
Mr Iemma Mr Yeadon
Mr Knowles Tellers,
Mrs Lo Po’ Mr Anderson
Mr Lynch Mr Thompson

Mr Armstrong Mr Gibson
Mrs Chikarovski Mr Knight
Mr Collins Ms Mills
Ms Seaton Mr Moss
Mr Souris Mr Saliba

Question resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Bill reported from Committee without amendment and passed through remaining stages.

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr SPEAKER: I welcome members of the Blacktown State Electoral Council, who will be interested in listening to the honourable member for Vaucluse.

Mr DEBNAM (Vaucluse) [9.30 p.m.]: I join you, Mr Speaker, in welcoming members of the Blacktown State Electoral Council [SEC]. If they stay for a while they will learn a little about this Government. There is a great deal to learn because it is a very secretive Government, and I shall be delighted to tell them a little about it. In addressing the Governor’s Speech, which was delivered on 7 September, I refer to two events that have occurred since that time, one being the East Timor operation and the other being the Victorian State election. I place on the record the support of my electorate for the troops who have landed in East Timor this week. Obviously they have our full support for their peacekeeping operations and for the delivery of humanitarian aid, which will get under way in the next 24 hours.

Another important task will be the collection of evidence for war crimes investigations. I understand that several hundred people will go to East Timor in the next few weeks for that purpose. I convey the full support of my constituents for their efforts and our best wishes to the families of the troops for a safe return. Obviously the East Timor operation will continue for at least a year or two. That will have a large impact on the Federal budget. Today it was estimated that the impact on the budget may be between $500 million and $1 billion. As a result of three years of prudent financial management by the Federal Government, the budget will be able to manage that financial shock.

All credit is due to Peter Costello and John Howard for putting Australia in the position to cope with delivering the peacekeeping operation and managing it without any great strain on the Federal budget. I contrast the record of the Federal Government with that of the Carr Government, which has been in office for four years. They have been prosperous years for the New South Wales Treasury. I note that Government members are already waving the white flag, but the Opposition will not yet accept it.

The Carr Government has had money rolling into Treasury coffers for four years and has had four years to position New South Wales for a rainy day, for that inevitable financial shock that will occur,
Page 1115
whether because of another huge demand from the honourable member for Tamworth or something more serious. All honourable members who have served in this place for a number of years realise that in the short- to medium-term some financial strain will be put on the State. But the State is ill positioned to cope with it because the Carr Government has spent every single penny that has come to Treasury in the past four years.

Treasury has raked in approximately $1 billion in additional tax revenues in each of those four years. If the Government had managed the revenue properly, it would have been well positioned to put some of that funding away to allow for a rainy day. Instead it has spent it all, and the State will pay for that down the track. The people of New South Wales will pay for it in two ways. The first is through increased taxes. That is why the budget papers this year and last year contained detailed information about the concessions that are given on all taxes throughout New South Wales, whether to pensioners, schoolchildren or others. If honourable members have not read Budget Paper No. 2, they should read the detailed chapter on taxation concessions.

Nothing is more certain that when the State’s revenue takes a downturn in the next year or two those doors will close and constituents will be screaming. The only reason those doors will close is that New South Wales has the worst Treasurer in Australia’s history. Not only is the Treasurer extremely pro-gambling, but he has failed to manage his colleagues in Cabinet and in caucus. Over the past four years he could have done a far better job than he has done. Over the next four years, as revenue turns down, obviously the budget will go into deficit and New South Wales will have difficulty managing in the foreseeable future. At present this State is at the top of the business cycle and should have been doing extremely well and saving for that rainy day. That has not been done.

The other point I make about the budget is that the forward estimates reveal that the New South Wales budget is underpinned by electricity revenue. Last year revenue from dividends and tax equivalents fell by 28 per cent. Treasurer Egan has budgeted for that to increase by 62 per cent in the next four years. That simply will not happen in a competitive market. In year four he has budgeted for revenue of $1 billion, which underwrites every announcement that the Minister for Roads makes each week, whether it is $250 million for cycleways or whatever. That is underpinned by the prospect of increased electricity revenue. That will not happen. The Government will have to wear the embarrassment of dealing with that position in the next few years. Nothing is more certain that there will be a downturn in revenue.

The second event I mention is the Victorian election. Undoubtedly the Carr Government has a number of lessons to learn from that election. The first relates simply to arrogance. Unquestionably Bob Carr is the most arrogant Premier the State has ever had. There is only one way for an arrogant person to go, and that is straight out the door. Clearly that is a message for this Government. Bob Carr can go out and continually apologise as much as he likes but that will not wash with the community. They have seen this man for what he is. The second lesson to be learned from the Victorian election is respect for our institutions, one of which is this Parliament.

I am sure that the members of the Blacktown SEC will realise that the Government has no respect for this institution. The House has been sitting for three weeks and in that period question time has gone out the window. Question time is an important part of the parliamentary process. The Government decided that because it had an overwhelming win at the last election, the winner would take all. As a consequence, question time is no longer important. On several occasions question time has been cancelled. If that happened in Canberra, one would not hear the end of it. It would be broadcast on television. So far the New South Wales Government has got away with it and the media have not focussed on the issue. Whenever the Government gets into trouble it simply cancels question time. If the Government thinks it is not in too much trouble, it simply defers question time from 2.15 p.m. until 5 o’clock or 6 o’clock in the evening. It has no respect for the institution of Parliament.

During question time members of the Opposition do not get any answers from the Ministers anyway, but what does one expect from this Government? The Opposition has asked whether the police Minister is investigating the bashing of the honourable member for Murray-Darling in Macquarie Street, but that question has not been answered. Law and order is vital to the community, yet when a member of Parliament is bashed up outside Parliament House the Government refuses to look into the matter. The honourable member for Murray-Darling has a very big problem.

The Government needs to learn very quickly about the need for respect for this Parliament. I doubt that it will because it certainly has a winner-take-all approach. The right-wing of the Australian Labor Party is stiff-arming everybody else. The
Page 1116
honourable member for Wollongong laughs because he knows that Ministers do answer some questions, but invariably they tell lies or incorrect answers.

Questions on notice and estimates committee hearings are not important to Ministers. Ministers simply bluff their way through them as it is not important for them to give information. It is all about secrecy in New South Wales. One of the lessons from Victoria is that the community will not wear secrecy. The community wants to know what a government is doing and it wants that government to be open and accountable. As the Leader of the Opposition said today, when 55 per cent of freedom of information applications are rejected by the Premier’s Department one knows that there is a problem that the Government is covering up.

The only end point to a cover-up is corruption. In the first instance maladministration and incompetence is tried to be covered up, but in the end over a number of years a climate conducive to corruption is created, and that is what is happening in New South Wales. Believe me, honourable members, the Opposition will get to the bottom of the secrecy. Ministers, as they have in the past few years, will again be on the bus to Redfern, one after the other. Maybe a bus should be hired and they can all be put on the bus at once. It will happen, mark my words.

I am not sure that the honourable member for Murray-Darling is awake, but I am talking to him. In the next few years the Ministers will be on that bus again and will be taken straight down to ICAC. They will be put through the mill again and the Opposition will find out exactly what they have been doing. The Australian Labor Party’s attack on this institution was never better evidenced than in the Labor caucus Tuesday two weeks ago when the Speaker was attacked for being unbiased; he was not protecting Labor Ministers.

Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The member for Vaucluse may care to direct his attention to the Governor’s Speech.

Mr DEBNAM: The Governor spoke about the good governance of New South Wales and about this Government’s programs for next year, and that is exactly what I am talking about and what the people of New South Wales want. They want a little respect for the institutions of New South Wales, one of which is Parliament. Another institution is the Audit Office. During the past few years this Government made personal attacks on Mr Tony Harris, who was the Auditor-General of this State for seven years. He served this State and its people with distinction.

Yet time and time again when the Auditor-General delivered a report with which this Government did not agree the simple response from the Carr Government was a personal attack on him. I suggest that a formal apology to Tony Harris is long overdue from this Government. I refer to a concern in Victoria about the outsourcing of the role of the Auditor-General. I put this Government on notice that I have no doubt that it is moving to do the same thing in this State. The Opposition and the people of New South Wales will not put up with it.

The Government will be called to account by the New South Wales community if it moves to outsource the function of the Auditor-General. The Carr Government had better start back-pedalling on that matter. I also put on the record that I am somewhat disturbed with the pre-emptive strikes on the ICAC by the Labor Party in the last fortnight. It is an incredible precedent, at a time of a change of commissioner at the ICAC, that this Government goes to great lengths in the media and in parliamentary committees to launch pre-emptive strikes on the ICAC.

There could be no bigger warning bell for the community of this State than when the Labor Party does that. The Opposition wanted in the Governor’s Speech and did not get open and accountable government. After four years of the Carr Government that is desperately needed. Open and accountable government is very important to our process and important to ongoing reform. Waste and corruption flourish in the absence of open government.

Our economy and community are based on a relationship of trust between the people and the Government, and that relationship needs to be rebuilt. The Government can move in just about every single portfolio to try to re-establish that trust because that is desperately needed. One area of that trust is payroll tax. Four years ago the Treasurer, in his first week as Treasurer, made a commitment to reduce payroll tax to 5 per cent by this year and, further, to reduce it to 4 per cent by 2000.

The Treasurer went to great lengths to make big play of the fact that he was going to deliver business tax cuts of about $1 billion in New South Wales, and for once he was giving us the right message, three days after his appointment. The Treasurer has betrayed employment prospects and businesses in New South Wales. Last week the Queensland Government delivered a budget which put on record a payroll tax rate of 4.9 per cent from July compared with 6.4 per cent in New South Wales.

Page 1117

Not only that, but the threshold in Queensland is $850,000 compared to our $600,000. The honourable member for Tweed, who is in the front line of the battle for jobs with Queensland, has been absolutely silent on behalf of his electorate while his electorate is being squeezed and is in the middle of a region with the highest unemployment rate in New South Wales - more than double the State average. He has betrayed his community and he ought to apologise at the first available opportunity.

The Treasurer admitted in the estimates committee that he had no Treasury estimate of the cost of the no-forced-redundancies agreements with unions, and that is a disgrace. It is a disgrace that Treasury has not costed that major policy of the Carr Government which honourable members know costs hundreds of millions of dollars in public service welfare. The Treasurer has also done absolutely nothing about bad debt and debtor management in four years despite report after report that said that there are hundreds of millions of dollars being wasted.

The Council on the Cost of Government delivered its December 1998 report and addressed huge savings, which, over a four-year term, could reach $1.4 billion. Last week the Treasurer admitted in an estimates committee that he had not read the report. He obviously had no intention of reading the report, and yet it details savings that this Government should have been pursuing for a long time.

I do not agree with much of the Government’s drug strategy. However, I note that naltrexone is providing real benefits in New South Wales. One of the difficulties is that it requires daily administration. For several years in the United States naltrexone pellets have been implanted. They provide effectiveness for up to 60 days. In the same way that two years ago we had to drag the Minister for Health kicking and screaming to consider the naltrexone question, I ask the new Minister for Health to urgently consider naltrexone implants. The aim is to have implants which are effective for 90 days. Implants are a very effective means of treating heroin addiction.

[Debate interrupted.]

Mr WHELAN: For the convenience of members I indicate that the debate on the Address-in-Reply to the Governor’s Speech will be concluded tomorrow, 23 September. It will not be necessary for the Legislative Assembly to sit on Friday 24 September. I thank honourable members who have availed themselves of the opportunity to speak on the debate on the two Mondays and the Friday when the House sat.

[Debate resumed.]

Mr FACE (Charlestown - Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development) [9.52 p.m.]: I congratulate Gordon Samuels on his opening of the Parliament. The Governor has brought a breath of fresh air to this State, and both he and his wife have made sterling efforts in presenting themselves throughout the State. I would like to dwell on a few matters concerning my Hunter development portfolio, especially to the upper Hunter, economic recovery, and restructuring of local mining and power industries.

We hear so much from the Opposition about what we are not achieving. Opposition members continue to attack the Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 Committee. They do not want it to be there because that would give them more opportunity to continue to spear the Government. As the Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development I have taken a keen interest in the upper Hunter. There are no easy answers. The upper Hunter region is a vast area covering five shires - Singleton, Muswellbrook, Merriwa, Scone and Murrurundi. It has experienced immense change in recent years.

Despite the recent setbacks I believe this period of transition - as I said about BHP in the lower Hunter today - will be an exciting era for the upper Hunter as it realises its potential and its capacity to move into the new and exciting industries in the restructuring period. But it needs assistance in this transition. I am pleased to say that the State Government has been willing and available to help, despite some of the setbacks. The Government has a strong commitment to the economic recovery of the region and will continue to support it.

Currently, several projects are under way aimed at further economic development in the upper Hunter. Many of the projects are co-ordinated by the Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 Committee, which was modelled on the Hunter 2000 Committee, which operates for the lower Hunter. The model is
Page 1118
different in that it is tailored to suit the needs, aims and objectives of the upper Hunter. I established the committee early last year to counter fallout from the restructuring of local mining and power industries. I recently announced continued funding from the New South Wales Government for the committee and for its project officer, Kathleen Oldman, as part of its strong commitment to the economic recovery of the region.

In the last 12 months the committee, which is made up of business, community and government representatives, has laid substantial groundwork to attract new investment and create sustainable jobs in the upper Hunter. As with the Beyond 2000 Committee in the lower Hunter, this has been achieved with the co-operation of a wide spectrum of people, in many cases from diverse political backgrounds. One of the great strengths of the Hunter is that we are able to get on with the job regardless of our place in the political spectrum - whether from business, unions, employers or the tiers of government.

The Hon. Milton Arthur Morris, the former honourable member for Maitland, has been active in both committees and he is in the Chamber tonight. Whilst we are on opposite sides of the political fence, the strength of our relationship is that we have been friends for many years. Many of the people I work with are people that I have grown up with. We are able to sit around the table and work objectively to achieve results for the betterment of the Hunter.

A major achievement of the Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 Committee has been the partnership developed between Macquarie Generation to rezone the land adjacent to Bayswater Power Station for industrial purposes. The honourable member for Upper Hunter is on the Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 Committee. Despite his efforts in the time of the previous Government, nobody could resolve the problem. That has happened in my time as Minister.

Several buffer zone sites surrounding power stations and mines have been identified as having great potential for the future industrial development of the upper Hunter. The sub-committee structure of the Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 Committee is different from the structure used in the lower Hunter when we were facing the problem of the closure of BHP steel making. The subcommittee has worked hard to attract new business to the area. It will soon launch a web site prospectus promoting the sites.

Negotiations are continuing in relation to the establishment of a magnesium smelter on one of the sites. Two companies are considering establishing magnesium sites. Each is looking at various sites and both are looking at the upper Hunter buffer zone. One is looking at a site in Victoria adjacent to the brown coal deposits at Yallourn. The other is looking in Tasmania. I put on record that the people of the Hunter will not be amused if the Federal Government spends $320 million on a natural gas pipeline across Bass Strait to prop up the economy of Tasmania. Frankly, I think Tasmania has had its fair share recently as a result of Harradine’s antics in the Senate. To see New South Wales suffer at the hands of the Federal Government, having in mind that when the 2,000 workers go out of BHP -

Mr Debnam: They paid for your payroll tax.

Mr FACE: This does not worry you out at Vaucluse. I suggest you get out of the House. You came in in high spirits last night and made no contribution. Get out of the House while you are in luck.

Mr Debnam: Point of order: I point out to the Minister that the Federal Government paid for his payroll tax reductions.

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

Mr FACE: If the Federal Government makes available between $300 million and $320 million for a natural gas pipeline to Tasmania at the expense of the Hunter it will mean that the magnesium smelters will not be placed in the Hunter. On the last day of this month, 30 September, 2,000 people will be walking out of BHP without a job. We have 12 per cent unemployment and the extra job losses will bring the figure to slightly over 14 per cent, which is double the national average. It would be a travesty of justice.

This site can accommodate these magnesium smelters. It is essential that the Federal Government adopts a sensible attitude to deal with this issue. Negotiations are continuing in relation to the establishment of the magnesium smelters. Meanwhile, work is progressing with the State Government and relevant local councils to investigate the development of a streamlined approval process along the lines of a process developed for the BHP steel river site.

One of the great challenges with western Tourle Street - later to become known as steel river - was to implement a development process, in co-operation with the various government agencies and the community, so that people who had
Page 1119
previously walked away from the Newcastle region because of the various bureaucratic processes they were subjected to would return to the area. This has been overcome by a 28-day approval scheme and the situation is now being adopted statewide. This is one of the things that has made steel river so successful.

Generally there has been encouraging development in the pursuit of possible users of the land. Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 has also provided direct support to the Aberdeen community and the Scone Shire Council in the wake of the Aberdeen Meatworks closure in April this year. The community was devastated by the closure of the abattoir, which left 400 people unemployed. The abattoir, which was owned by Australia Meat Holdings, had operated for 109 years as Aberdeen’s major employer.

Despite the Federal Government’s lack of support, other than tacit support, the State Government was quick to respond. To his credit, the Leader of the National Party used strong words about the way Australia Meat Holdings dismissed its workers. The company put the workers off for eight weeks saying that it was a consequence of the lack of available stock to kill. The company had absolutely no intention of reopening the abattoir. On the Friday preceding the Monday when the workers were due to return to work, the company told them that they no longer had jobs. In the many years I have been a member of this House I have not seen such a serious industrial situation or such irresponsibility.

I attended several meetings with the community, and political and union leaders after the closure and sought assistance from the Premier. I then announced a plan of action which included counselling and financial advice, a skills audit, and the involvement of the Department of State and Regional Development in working with the council to rejuvenate economy-using initiatives such as the Main Street program. I am pleased to report that the town of Aberdeen is fighting back with its own innovative community projects.

I was recently asked to return to Aberdeen to open Aberdeen Treasures, a second-hand shop staffed by volunteers, most of whom are displaced meatworkers. On the same day we also celebrated the reopening of the Aberdeen butcher shop, which closed four months ago on the same day as the meatworks closed. The shop was reopened by a husband, wife and son team, all former meatworkers. The son was finally able to complete his apprenticeship. The company not only closed down the meatworks, it made no arrangements for the continuation of the butcher shop, which was the only meat supply to the people of Aberdeen, which made it all the more scandalous.

The opening of Aberdeen Treasures and reopening of Aberdeen butchery symbolises the enterprise, imagination and fighting spirit of the people of Aberdeen. The closure of Aberdeen meatworks could have resulted in the demise of this small but important community. But instead of sitting back and accepting the prospect of long-term unemployment, the people of Aberdeen have rallied together to create their own opportunities. Aberdeen Treasures is already a resounding success. It provides interesting activity and socialising for displaced workers, new skills and training, as well as a great service to local shoppers. The project is good in the sense that the moneys that are derived from it go back into the community.

Other projects on the boil for Aberdeen involve the development of Scone airport, an equine stable complex, a national horse museum at the Scone Equine Centre, and a number of infrastructure projects. These projects are great examples of the community and government working together in partnership. The people of Aberdeen are working hard for their part, and I guarantee that the Government will fulfil its side of the partnership and continue to support this community.

Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 has also co-ordinated the formation of the Upper Hunter Exporters Network, which I launched last month. The network will assist local businesses to enter the export market. It will provide an ongoing forum for upper Hunter businesses to learn more about the export process, exchange ideas and, most importantly, receive support from the centre under the auspices of the Hunter Economic Development Council. The network will meet approximately eight times a year, with each meeting having an educational and open discussion component.

The Hunter Export Centre will use its contacts with private enterprise and organisations such as Austrade to arrange speakers on wide-ranging topics such as e-commerce, finance for export, marketing skills and growth strategies. Looking to the future and the diversification of industry in the upper Hunter, aquaculture has been identified as an industry with significant potential. Work is proceeding, in conjunction with the Premier’s Department, to create a more streamlined approval process for those wishing to enter the industry. While aquaculture is only in its early stages of development in Australia, all indications are that there are very real prospects in the longer term.

Page 1120

The upper Hunter is well poised to take advantage of this opportunity. Other initiatives in the planning stages in the upper Hunter include: Hunter Agritech, a centre for agricultural technology; and agribusiness clusters, which is the development of industry clusters and business networks focusing on agribusiness, including biotechnology, genetics, production, processing, packaging, distribution and marketing. Research into Asian vegetable production is further progressing and looking very positive. The upper Hunter has the infrastructure and resources to take advantage of this fast-growing industry, which was identified on both of the two trade missions I led during the last two years. In fact, during the latter part of October and early November I will visit mainland China, once again to lead a trade delegation from the Hunter.

The Department of State and Regional Development has provided funding to continue the work of New South Wales Agriculture’s lamb development team. The Scone-based New England Lamb Alliance has developed a new and innovative approach and quality product which could create improved employment opportunities and expansion of the upper Hunter meat industry - an interesting process in addressing the sophisticated marketplace in the Sydney metropolitan area. As can be seen, the Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 Committee and its project officer continue to be involved in many key areas relating to the economic development of the upper Hunter.

I believe that the future for the upper Hunter is bright, and I feel positive about its capacity to deal with its transition into new industries. I look forward to continuing my close association with upper Hunter councils, community organisations and business groups to ensure the future prosperity of this great region. A number of locations in the upper Hunter have been identified as being suitable for industrial development on land surrounding the power stations and mines in the upper Hunter. The buffer zone subcommittee of the Upper Hunter Beyond 2000 Committee has been working hard to attract new businesses to establish in these areas.

The subcommittee is strongly supported by Macquarie Generation, which has provided both physical and financial resources. For this reason, initial efforts are concentrated on the Bayswater Power Station buffer zone. Many of the by-products which were originally dumped have now been placed for sale at various locations throughout Australia. A web site promoting this land has been produced and will be launched shortly. Negotiations are continuing in relation to the establishment of a magnesium smelter.

I turn to the future of steel making in Newcastle. In March 1998, as a result of the interest from various firms in establishing steel mill operations in Newcastle, the Carr Labor Government convened a high-level whole-of-government committee to undertake studies and to enter into discussions with steel mill proponents to facilitate steel mill development at Newcastle. The committee is presently looking at four proposals which are in various stages of negotiation. In January this year Boulder Steel announced that it will undertake a detailed feasibility analysis for a site for a stainless steel making operation at steel river. The feasibility study is well under way and should be completed in a few months.

The other companies are still in negotiation stages and have not made a firm decision on whether they will set up a plant at Newcastle. I can assure honourable members that everything possible is being done to attract steel making firms to Newcastle. I believe that Australia will need a steel making capacity, and it will come in some form or other in the foreseeable future. A great deal of scepticism was expressed by the Opposition about my appointment as Minister Assisting the Premier on the Hunter. The Opposition claimed that that was a token gesture. I am disgusted by the continuing attack by the honourable member for Myall Lakes, witnessed again in the House this afternoon, that that was only a postbox position.

Labor has been committed to balanced regional development but, unlike the Opposition, recognises the special importance of the Hunter to this State’s economy. The Hunter is the most important region in this State in terms of mining, heavy industry, manufacturing, tourism and export of goods through the port of Newcastle. That is why the Government has a policy on the Hunter and is committed to increasing employment opportunities in the Hunter, broadening and deepening the economic skills base of the region, value-adding to existing industry, to the benefit of the region, State and nation, and facilitating a better distribution of the population to prevent continued urban sprawl and an associated reduction in the quality of life.

It is not my role to run a bureaucracy, although the Opposition has stated it would do so, with all the associated costs and duplication that that would entail. My role is to facilitate. But to facilitate does not mean that one has to have a bucket of money to distribute. If the Hunter had a budget allocation, I would need a bureaucracy to handle all the requests that would be received for grants. Then we would hear cries from all other regions of the State for similar treatment. And if there was a
Page 1121
Minister for every region of the State, we would not be able to find a Cabinet room to fit them all in. I hope that finally puts to rest the ravings of the Hon. Duncan Gay and others who have pursued that line in the past.

I facilitate and get involved in matters and, if questioned about a matter that involves government departments, I go to them, ensuring the use of existing resources. I believe the Hunter has a great future. I have encapsulated only a few matters in my speech. Knockers will come and go, but I have an optimistic outlook for the future of the region, because of the people who live there. The Government will co-operate with the region for the benefit of the Hunter. I commend the Address-in-Reply to the Governor’s Speech.

Mr THOMPSON (Rockdale) [10.11 p.m.]: His Excellency the Governor said in his Speech at the opening of the second session of the Fifty-second Parliament:

The program I now present on behalf of the Government advances its key objectives of economic growth, job creation, fairness, protection of the environment and financial responsibility.

The Government is also committed to building strong families and communities which have the capacity to support individuals, build resistance to the destructive impact of drugs and crime, and promote tolerance.

In its second term the Government reaffirms its commitment to meet fully its key responsibilities for health, education, transport and law enforcement.

These are fundamental issues for any Labor Government. The New South Wales Labor Party went to the people at the last election with a positive program and an already proud record on those bread and butter issues. On 27 March last the Carr Labor Government was returned with a substantially increased majority. The people’s affirmation of this Government was indeed lavish, and we are committed to continuing to deliver good policies and good government to all the people of New South Wales.

The Governor also thanked and congratulated all honourable members on their participation in the Drug Summit, which was held in May this year, a matter of only seven weeks after the State election and the return of the Government. Through that momentous week members of Parliament, drug experts, parents, former drug users and community leaders met to discuss and decide how best to tackle the drug problem. At the conclusion of the Drug Summit a communiqué was issued summarising the matters discussed and the strategies considered. Subsequently, in July, the Premier announced the Government plan of action to address the issues raised by the Drug Summit. The Premier, in his foreword to the plan of action document, said:

While accepting the Summit’s call to try new methods in the fight against drug abuse, I am determined not to worsen things.

This plan of action contains significant additional funding for new services and programs.

We will continue to improve our efforts to punish drug dealers by giving police the powers and resources they need.

We will do more to help drug users overcome their addiction.

We will do more to educate young people, parents and communities.

The NSW Government shares the community’s desire to eradicate drug abuse but recognises there are no simple solutions.

Containing the problem is a sensible first step.

I commend all honourable members of the House and all of the people who took part in the Drug Summit because it led to the adoption of some 20 principles and 172 recommendations. The Government is to be commended for the plan of action that was formulated from those recommendations. The plan of action covers the broad spectrum of issues raised in the Summit, and it has generally been well received in the community. Illicit drugs, and particularly hard drugs, are having a terrible effect on our society.

I think it is true to say that few families have not been affected in one way or another by drugs, and while we are naturally cautious about how we deal with the problem and how we go about it, the fact remains that people expect us, as their elected representatives, to take action to address the serious issues. It is simplistic to say, but is nonetheless true, that nobody has the definitive answers, there is no magic solution. But the people still expect their elected representatives to make real efforts on their behalf.

The Governor went on in his Speech to refer to the Government’s three-stage plan for more police and smarter policing. He indicated that an extra 150 detectives will be appointed to the Police Services Crime Agencies Command and that the Government will increase the number of front-line police by 2,100 by December 2003. The Police Assistance Line will be fully implemented within the next 12 months and, when fully operational, it will release an estimated equivalent of 500 full-time police officers from time-consuming administrative functions.

Page 1122

Victims of crime have not been overlooked by the Government, which will be working to provide even more protection and better support. A new Victims Support Fund, with an annual contribution of $500,000, will be funded from the sale of the assets of criminals. The greater part of the electorate of Rockdale falls within the Kogarah local area command. The benefits of more police and smarter policing are well and truly evident in my district, in the electorate of Rockdale.

Since the election of the Carr Labor Government the Kogarah local area command has doubled in strength, from 88 officers in 1995 to 175 officers in 1999. I have been particularly impressed by the work of the police, Rockdale City Council and the local community through the Community Safety Council. Through that initiative there is close co-operation between the police and the local community to identify problems and formulate strategies to address them. In effect, the Community Safety Council develops local solutions to local problems.

I should not let this occasion pass without putting on record my thanks and best wishes to Mr Garry Dobson, who was the local area commander until his recent promotion. During his time in our district Garry Dobson earned the respect and support of the community. He represented the new, reformed and smarter Police Service and gave sound and strong leadership to his enthusiastic and dedicated fellow officers. I thank him for his dedication, commitment and positive innovations to make our community safer for all.

Since coming to office in April 1995 the Carr Labor Government has given the New South Wales Police Service a total budget increase of almost 40 per cent. According to a departmental analysis of budget papers that were recently tabled by the police Minister in this House, Police Service funding has risen from $1.08 billion under the Coalition in 1994-95 to $1.51 billion in the 1999-2000 Carr Government budget. As the Minister put it, police funding has outstripped inflation by 300 per cent during his time as Minister.

Before I leave the subject of policing I should make some mention of the effectiveness of the illegal street racing legislation that the Government brought in a couple of years ago. Illegal drag races, burnouts and general hooning around in motor vehicles were real problems in my electorate, particularly in Ramsgate, Dolls Point and Kyeemagh. Local residents were harassed, intimidated, inconvenienced and sometimes endangered by these mindless individuals. Since police have been able to impound the cars, the problem has been greatly reduced. I compliment the police on the job they have done to curb the problem and for their ongoing attention to it. In his Speech to Parliament on 7 September the Governor said:

New South Wales now has the nation’s lowest unemployment.

As part of its post-2000 jobs plan, the Government will continue to work with industry and the community to attract major investments, undertake essential infrastructure projects and promote innovation to sustain economic development and jobs growth, including during the post-Olympics period.

The Government is committed to a continuation of jobs growth in New South Wales post-2000. While the Olympics construction and investment program is proceeding on time and on budget, the Government is also focussing on what will happen after the Olympics and into the next millennium. A great range of major projects are in the pipeline. The cross-city tunnel, which has recently been doubled in prospective length, will allow motorists to bypass 18 sets of traffic lights. That $400 million project is equivalent to 18 per cent of the Olympics capital works budget and will generate about 2,000 jobs.

The redevelopment of South Sydney, a $2 billion construction project, will result in massive job creation. That project is exciting. I compliment the Mayor of South Sydney, Vic Smith, and his team for the work they are doing in association with the project. That project alone is equal to 89 per cent of expenditure on the Olympics capital works. About 6,000 construction jobs and a further 20,000 jobs will flow from the redevelopment of the area. The Walsh Bay redevelopment, a $650 million private sector development, is equal to 29 per cent of the Olympics capital works budget. At the peak of construction it will provide more than 2,000 jobs. This litany of programs, which will encourage jobs growth, has been put in place by the Government.

The Visy pulp and paper mill at Tumut is a result of the Government’s hard work and intervention. The project, a $350 million investment, is providing real and worthwhile jobs in country New South Wales. Two weeks ago the Premier announced the start of construction for the Port Waratah coal loader expansion, a $345 million investment that will provide another 500 jobs during two years of construction activity. Boral’s employment and residential development at Greystanes, an investment of $600 million, represents 27 per cent of the Olympics capital works budget and will generate more than 10,000 jobs over the next 10 to 15 years. The redevelopment of wharves 9 and 10 at Darling Harbour is a
Page 1123
$750 million investment and represents 33 per cent of the Olympics capital works budget.

The Government is also undertaking great transport-related initiatives. If the Government is remembered in posterity for anything, it will be for the great innovations and strides it has made in public transport. The Parramatta to Chatswood rail link is a $1.4 billion investment and will generate 1,120 construction jobs. Construction will start next year and the project is due for completion in 2006. High-speed rail links to the Central Coast and the Illawarra are worth $796 million. The Central Coast link will generate 740 jobs. Work on that project is due to start in 2001 and finish in 2007. Construction of the Illawarra link will commence in 2007 and finish in 2010.

Bus-only transitways are to be built across western Sydney. The construction of 90 kilometres of transitways will generate 3,200 jobs and cost about $761 million. Major work on the Liverpool to Parramatta section has already started and is due to be completed in 2003. In my electorate of Rockdale the M5 East, a $750 million project, will generate 1,700 jobs. Construction is under way and the project is due for completion in 2002. These are all major projects, and I have not exhausted the list by any means. The people of New South Wales clearly want a government that plans for the future. Through the post-2000 jobs plan the Carr Labor Government is meeting their expectation.

His Excellency the Governor said that the Government has consistently affirmed its commitment to the reconciliation process. I was proud and privileged to attend the "Talkin’ Up Reconciliation" conference organised by the State Reconciliation Committee in Wollongong last month. The conference brought together members of the Aboriginal community, politicians, Government representatives and community organisations to discuss issues vital to the future of the reconciliation process in this country.
It is appropriate that the honourable member for Wollongong has come into the Chamber, because he was deeply involved in the organisation and conduct of the conference. The honourable member not only did himself proud through his efforts, he also did the Government, the Parliament and the people of New South Wales proud. In the convention brochure, Linda Burney, Chair of the New South Wales State Reconciliation Committee, said in an invitation:

The Convention occurs at a tremendously important time in our history. The nation is about to consider changes to the Australian Constitution, we are approaching the Centenary of Federation, our country will host the world during the Sydney Olympics and perhaps most importantly we are developing documents of reconciliation between Australia’s first peoples and those who came later.

The convention was a great success and a credit to all associated with it. I believe that Australians generally in overwhelming numbers are anxious for reconciliation to become a reality, a fact of life. We must all work together and do our best to ensure that happens. The Governor referred to many issues that are before the Government. I have referred to only a few, but as to each and every item addressed by His Excellency the Carr Labor Government has a proud story to tell, of past achievements and a positive program for the future.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr George.

The following bill was returned from the Legislative Council with amendments:

University of New South Wales (St George Campus) Bill