Full Day Hansard Transcript (Legislative Assembly, 20 October 1999, Corrected Copy)

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

Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.

Mr Speaker announced, pursuant to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, receipt of the report entitled "Investigation into Sydney Ferries: Dishonest creation and use of ‘live’ tickets by former staff of Sydney Ferries at Manly Wharf from 1994 to 1997", dated October 1999.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr IEMMA (Lakemba - Minister for Public Works and Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Citizenship), on behalf of Mr Carr [10.01 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Election Funding Act 1981 was introduced by the Government during the Wran premiership to ensure that our political system became fairer, more accountable and one that would not be accessed just by the rich. It was part of a series of landmark reforms to our electoral system that enshrined the principles of fairness and equity in our electoral system and electoral laws and came after a series of changes.

It is important that that background be placed on the record because at the time they were landmark changes to electoral laws across the country. For example, the Wran Government firstly provided for a fully democratically elected upper House, which until the changes did not exist in this State but had changed with earlier changes to our electoral system. Secondly, the Wran Government introduced electoral fairness in our electoral system, by enshrining the principle of one vote one value in State elections in the set of legislative arrangements that govern the New South Wales electoral system.

It was the Wran Government that abolished the discredited zonal system that led to gross malapportionment of electorates in New South Wales. Then came the principle that elections and funding for elections should not be open just to those who had the resources - the powerful, the rich and the wealthy - but should also allow ordinary people to contest elections, hence the funding arrangements that were introduced in 1981.

This landmark scheme met with fierce opposition and criticism from sections of the media and was opposed vigorously at the time by the then Opposition, which saw it as an attempt to rort the electoral system rather than open up the electoral system to participation by people who did not come from wealthy backgrounds and who did not have access to large amounts of funds from large corporations.

The Election Funding Act, introduced in 1981, gives all candidates and parties who have community support the funding to assist in their election campaigns, which was an important principle to enshrine in the New South Wales electoral system. It established a Central Fund to fund parties running in the Legislative Council and a Constituency Fund to fund candidates for the Legislative Assembly. The amount of funding distributed to the parties and the candidates depended upon their level of electoral support - an important principle. Neville Wran said in his second reading speech to that bill:

It should be emphasized that the voters will determine the distribution of funds by the way they cast their votes. This is a thoroughly democratic measure, designed to enhance the democracy.

The amount paid out of the Central Fund and the Constituency Fund is based upon electoral support. The amount that goes into the funds is calculated differently. When combined with our system of fixed terms, it has created the problem that this amendment will fix. The formula requires a calculation to be made by reference to the number of voters and the number of years between elections. Any additional fraction of a year is to be treated as one year.

Page 1636

The Election Funding Act was enacted well before the introduction of fixed four-year terms in New South Wales. It was never anticipated that the period between the return of the writs for two consecutive elections could exceed four years by a few days. The more likely scenario was that the Government would run just short of its term, in which case it should not be limited to funding only for the completed years. However, now that fixed four-year terms have been introduced, there will be times when the period between the issue of the writs for the current and previous elections will run just over four years. In these circumstances it is inappropriate that five years worth of funding be provided to political parties.

This bill will correct this drafting anomaly by putting an absolute ceiling on funding so that it can be calculated in relation to no more than four years between elections. The bill also makes the relationship between time periods and funding more accurate by measuring the funding according to the number of months between the return of writs or elections rather than the number of years. While the advent of fixed four-year terms makes this amendment less important, the Constitution still provides limited circumstances in which an election can be held early. In such cases election funding will be more accurately calculated because it will be measured in relation to the number of months between the return of the writs for the current and previous elections.

This bill is necessary to increase the transparency of electoral funding and to ensure that funding anomalies do not occur in the future, hence continuing the strong tradition established by Neville Wran back in the 1970s and early 1980s of transparency, accessibility and accountability in our electoral system, whether it be the voting process, the process of distributing electorates or the method of voting. The final plank in this series of historic reforms is changes to funding arrangements. An even more important principle for the introduction of public funding is not only to tighten arrangements to avoid anomalies such as occurred at the last election but to eliminate all anomalies.

For example, at the Federal level, the Foundation for Free Enterprise attracts significant sums of corporate donations that find their way back to the Federal Liberal Party for use in election campaigns, and the Greenfields Foundation and the 500 Club are able to exploit anomalies in existing Federal electoral funding legislation so that a large amount of corporate money finds its way back to those organisations. Now that Victoria has a Labor Government we will see whether there will still be 500 prominent members of that club.

Front organisations are set up to avoid public scrutiny of funding of election candidates and political parties. Our system is designed to ensure scrutiny. I fully support the amending bill as it will remove anomalies. I acknowledge, however, that this measure has been introduced on the back of the foundation principle established by Neville Wran for equity and fairness in our electoral system.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr R. H. L. Smith.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr YEADON (Granville - Minister for Information Technology, Minister for Energy, Minister for Forestry, and Minister for Western Sydney) [10.06 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

This bill amends certain parts of the Real Property Act 1900 and the Conveyancing Act 1919. Principally, it deals with notice as to the severance of joint tenancies, boundary determinations by the Registrar-General, certificates of title, caveats and easements. In all, there are some 10 areas that are addressed in this bill. The amendments are the result of an ongoing and continuous process of review of the Real Property Act and the Conveyancing Act.

The review process is intended to increase the effectiveness of these Acts, to make their administration more efficient and to improve the system of conveyancing and land transaction in this State. The first group of amendments concerns joint tenancies and, in particular, notice as to the severance of a joint tenancy. The amendments arise from the practical experience that has been gained in implementing a series of recommendations that were made by the Law Reform Commission on this topic.

The recommendations were introduced two years ago, through the Real Property and Conveyancing Amendment Act 1997. The main thrust of the changes was to make severance of joint tenancies quicker, easier and more certain. As honourable members would know, land can be owned with another person as either joint tenant or tenant in common. The major difference between the
Page 1637
two is the rule of survivorship, which only applies to joint tenancies.

When a joint tenant dies, his or her interest automatically goes to the survivor. This is commonly the case with husbands and wives. The land of tenants in common, on the other hand, is inherited in accordance with their wills. The common law allows one joint tenant to sever the joint tenancy unilaterally. After severance, a tenancy in common comes into place. However, as the Law Reform Commission noted, there is no obligation under the common law for a severing joint tenant to tell the other joint tenant about the severance. In the past, this has caused problems.

To overcome this deficiency, section 97 of the Real Property Act was introduced in 1997. Subsection 5 of section 97 imposed a positive obligation on the Registrar-General to inform the non-severing joint tenant that the severance was about to occur. Experience in implementing this provision has shown that it is unnecessary to serve a notice in every instance. The following cases illustrate instances in which notice is superfluous.

A and B are joint tenants. They obtain an order of the Supreme Court to sever their joint tenancy. B signs the request for the Registrar-General to give effect to the order. C and D are joint tenants. C witnesses D’s signature on the dealing that severs the joint tenancy. F and G are joint tenants. F provides an acknowledgment that she is aware that G has signed a dealing severing the joint tenancy. Furthermore, there are the cases of bankruptcy and sales by the Sheriff when the severance comes about by the force of the law or in a very public way. In these cases, it can reasonably be assumed that the severance has come to the notice of all the joint tenants.

The statutory requirement to send notice in cases of this kind imposes needless additional costs on both the parties and the Registrar-General. It also delays registration by at least 30 days, this being the notice period. Overall, serving unnecessary notices has a detrimental effect on conveyancing and land transactions in this State. To overcome this problem, the bill will amend section 97 to provide for a number of exceptions. The Registrar-General will not be required to serve notice on non-severing joint tenants when it is clear that the non-severing joint tenant is, or will become, aware of the act of severance.

Specifically, the Registrar-General will not have to serve notice of severance in cases of bankruptcy applications; of orders of court, where the joint tenants are parties to the court proceedings; of sales by the Sheriff of the interest of one joint tenant; of dealings that are intended to sever the joint tenancy, where the non-severing joint tenant witnesses the dealings; and acknowledgments of the severance by the non-severing joint tenant where he or she has received independent legal advice.

Another matter concerning notice of severance of joint tenancy that is addressed in this bill is notice to the person who severs the joint tenancy. The provisions of section 97 (5) that oblige the Registrar-General to serve notice of severance on all joint tenants also relieve him of the obligation to serve notice on the joint tenant who lodges the dealing that severs the joint tenancy. The purpose of this exclusion is to avoid the needless notification of the person who has brought about the severance and who thus has actual knowledge of it.

However, the wording of the exclusion in section 97 (5) does not completely achieve its aims. In its current form it links the exclusion to the person who has lodged the dealing at the Land Titles Office rather than the person who has signed it. This wording fails to cover many instances. For example, under the current wording, the Registrar-General is still obliged to serve notice on the severing joint tenant in cases where the severing joint tenant has used a law firm or law stationer to lodge the dealing at the Land Titles Office, there is more than one severing joint tenant but only one of them has attended to the lodgment of the dealing, or the severing joint tenant passes on the dealing to a third party and the third party attends to lodging it at the Land Titles Office.

Serving notice on the severing joint tenant in these cases is clearly not the intention of the exclusion in section 97. But under the current wording, the Registrar-General must serve notice. Serving notice needlessly delays registration of the dealing and adds to the cost of processing it. To overcome the unsatisfactory wording of the exception and to properly reflect the intention behind the words, this bill amends section 97 (5) to provide that the Registrar-General is not obliged to serve notice of the severance on the joint tenant who brings about the severance.

The third aspect of severance of joint tenancies that the bill addresses is the point at which severance occurs. This is largely a technical issue and it arises from the drafting of the 1997 amendments. The way in which section 97 is expressed has given rise to two interpretations as to the point at which severance takes place. Contrary to the intention of the original amendments, it has been
Page 1638
suggested that the severance takes place when the person signs the dealing rather than at the point of registration of that dealing.

It is a fundamental principle of the Torrens system that dealings are not effective until they are registered. The wording of section 97 that allows this contrary interpretation is therefore inconsistent with the rest of the Real Property Act. This amendment will clarify the terms of section 97 so as to make it clear that a unilateral severance of joint tenancy takes effect on registration of the dealing and not before.

The second major topic covered by this bill is boundary determinations made by the Registrar-General. Part 14A of the Real Property Act allows the Registrar-General to make investigations and determinations as to the location of boundaries that are in dispute. This facility was introduced in 1989 as an alternative to Supreme Court litigation. It has been very successful in providing a cheap, quick and simple way to settle disputes.

The amendments in this bill do three things in relation to the boundary determination provisions of the Real Property Act. Firstly, they extend the operation of this service to cover common law title land. Secondly, they allow the Registrar-General to call for a plan showing the location of the boundary. Thirdly, they alter the appeal procedure so that the Registrar-General will be a respondent to an appeal rather than the applicant, as is currently the case. As a result of these amendments, it is expected that the boundary determination facility will be more widely available, more useful and more economical.

The next amendment concerns the recovery of certificates of title. This amendment expands the current provision of the Real Property Act that allows the Supreme Court to deal with certificates of title that are wrongfully retained by others. It will ensure that the facility can be used in a wider number of circumstances. This, in turn, will make the facility more useful to landowners.

Caveats are the fourth major topic covered by these amendments. In particular, this bill addresses the question of when a caveat lapses after an order of court extending it has expired. The amendment will make it clear that a caveat that has been extended by an order of court will lapse when the time specified in the order of court expires. The amendment also deals with the situation where a caveat has been extended until further order of the court but the proceedings are finalised without making an express order as to the caveat.

Under new section 74LA, the person seeking to lapse the caveat will no longer have to repeat the lapsing process. This will save time and money. The amendment presents no disadvantage to the person who lodged the caveat. This is because it will only apply after that person has had a full and proper opportunity to establish his or her claim before the Supreme Court but has failed to do so or the court has dealt with the dispute in some other way.

The next amendment concerns errors in the register established and maintained under the Real Property Act. This is the register that shows land ownership and interests that affect land, such as leases and mortgages. New section 12 (1) (d1) will allow the Registrar-General to correct errors by a very simple means, in cases where transfers containing the wrong references to title have been registered. Errors of this kind are not uncommon, particularly in strata schemes. People sometimes purchase and occupy a lot but they later find that the lots were wrongly numbered. As a consequence, the reference on their certificate of title, which is based on the lot number, is that of someone else’s lot.

The current procedure for rectifying this problem is for each of the owners of the different lots to transfer his or her title to the other owner, discharge his or her mortgage and register a replacement mortgage. Under the new provision, all the documentation, legal costs and delay will be avoided. Upon lodgment of a request by each of the owners bearing the approval of their mortgagees, the Registrar-General will rectify the problem by simply amending the lot numbers on the relevant plan of subdivision and then noting this fact in the register.

The second-last major topic covered by this bill concerns the word "insolvent" as it appears in the Real Property Act. This word is used in conjunction with the word "bankrupt" and has the same meaning as "bankrupt". The reason that the Real Property Act uses the word "insolvent" is historical. When the original Real Property Act was drafted last century, people did not become bankrupt. Rather, they became "insolvent" pursuant to the Insolvency Act of 1841. The word "insolvent" has been carried forward despite the fact that the Insolvency Act was abolished last century. This amendment will remove the word "insolvent" to reflect the change in terminology.

Finally, the bill makes some amendments by way of statute law revision. It clarifies various points concerning easements, covenants and the lapsing of cautions. It also replaces some outdated references to the Archives Act that appear in the
Page 1639
Real Property Act. Although not lengthy, the bill contains a variety of provisions that will make conveyancing more effective and less expensive. I commend it to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr D. L. Page.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr WATKINS (Ryde - Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister for Sport and Recreation) [10.27 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The object of the Price Exploitation Code (New South Wales) Bill is to enact legislation that will give effect in New South Wales to the New Tax System Price Exploitation Code of the Commonwealth. The code was created by the Commonwealth’s A New Tax System (Trade Practices Amendment) Act 1999. It gives the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [ACCC] transitional powers to monitor and prosecute government services tax [GST] price exploitation.

Price exploitation may occur when a business does not pass on to consumers a price drop due to the removal of indirect taxes, or when a price is increased beyond the impact of the GST. The ACCC has released guidelines on when prices will be considered to be unreasonably high. Due to the constitutional split, the ACCC’s powers do not cover exploitation by individuals or unincorporated bodies such as partnerships. Accordingly, under the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Reform of Commonwealth-State Financial Relations, all jurisdictions agreed to refer powers to the ACCC to give it full coverage for price exploitation compliance. The bill provides the mechanism for referral.

The Price Exploitation Code (New South Wales) Bill will enable the ACCC to exercise its functions under the Price Exploitation Code in New South Wales. It will also enable Commonwealth laws to be applied to offences under the New South Wales code. Consequential amendments are proposed to the Federal Courts (State Jurisdiction) Act 1999 in order to overcome certain jurisdictional cross-vesting restraints arising from the Re Wakim; Ex parte McNally High Court decision which determined that State legislation cannot confer jurisdiction on Federal courts.

The amendments protect a Federal court’s power to exercise jurisdiction arising under State legislation to the extent to which a Federal court can validly exercise such jurisdiction. They also ensure that relevant State legislation does not attempt to confer jurisdiction on a Federal court. These amendments correct a cross-vesting problem beyond the issues specific to the Price Exploitation Code.

It is also intended that regulations made under the Federal Courts (State Jurisdiction) Act 1999 will confirm jurisdiction on the Supreme Court and provide for references in the Commonwealth legislation to the Federal Court to be construed as references to the Supreme Court. The New South Wales Government is keen to do everything possible to help ensure that consumers are not disadvantaged by unscrupulous traders who seek to benefit from uncertainty in the lead-up to the start of the goods and services tax. The Price Exploitation Code (New South Wales) Bill is an important step in this process. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr R. H. L. Smith.

Motion by Mr Face agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow the consideration during Government business at this sitting of the resumption of the adjourned debate on the motion for urgent consideration standing in the name of the member for Miranda.

Debate resumed from 19 October.

Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [10.31 a.m.]: I am delighted to be able to participate in this debate in support of the motion moved by the honourable member for Miranda. Although, understandably, the honourable member for Miranda spoke about the Kirrawee branch of Westpac bank it should not be thought that concern about banking services relates purely to that part of Sydney. As a number of other speakers in the debate have established, these issues concern not only the people of Sydney but people from all over New South Wales. They are certainly issues of concern in my electorate.

Page 1640

My constituents have frequently expressed their views to me about the outrageous behaviour of banks in this country - their contempt for ordinary people, their regard only for private profit, and their complete disregard of and contempt for the public interest and the rights of consumers. In addition to those general concerns of my constituents, a number of specific concerns relate to my electorate. There is no doubt that the behaviour of banks has adversely impacted on people who live in south-western Sydney and in Liverpool. A number of bank mergers have resulted in that awful euphemism the "rationalisation" of banking services.

The centre of Liverpool now has far fewer bank branches than it had previously. The merger of the Advance and St George banks removed a number of branches, and a number of other bank branches, such as State Bank branches, have closed. Branches that remain open in Liverpool have increasingly long queues of clients because banks are far more interested in making money than they are in providing services. One cannot open a bank account at one of a number of banks without first making an appointment.

Then, of course, there is the ever-present problem of increasing bank fees. Earlier this year a constituent of mine, a person of Greek background, came to me with a problem about bank fees with the Commonwealth Bank. Although he has lived in this country for many years and has made a significant contribution to our society, he does not have English skills on a par with other people, such as myself: I am trained as a lawyer. He came to me for assistance. I approached the bank to try to get an explanation about the extra bank fees on his account.

The best the bank could do was to tell me, as the local member, to take a running jump, and that I had no business interfering on behalf of my constituent with the bank. The attitude of the bank confirmed all the things my constituent was saying about the arrogance and the pomposity of the bank: it really does not care about ordinary people or my constituent who was simply trying to get some answers about whether the fees he was being charged were correct. It is a sad indictment on the way in which banks are currently operating that such a situation can occur.

What has surprised me most in the course of this debate is the long and strong tradition of suspicion of banks in this country. Perhaps the banks believe they are in such a secure position that they cannot be challenged, that the longstanding scepticism and distrust of them will be ignored and no-one will take these seriously. It is interesting to note the number of people who have come to me in my electorate and said that the great right wing Labor leader Ben Chifley was absolutely right, and that banks should have been nationalised a number of decades ago. It is still a very strong feeling within sections of my community. In October 1947 in the second reading speech by Ben Chiefly in support of the banking bill for the nationalisation of banking in Australia that view was strongly represented when he said:

The Labor Party has maintained for many years that, since the influence of money is so great, the entire monetary and banking system should be controlled by public authorities responsible through the government and Parliament to the nation. On this principle the Labor Party has held further that, since private banks are conducted primarily for profit and therefore follow policies which in important respects run counter to the public interest, their business should be transferred to public ownership. For this view the strongest reasons can be stated.

It is interesting to note that in educated and elite political circles that sort of philosophy and policy is no longer taken seriously. But it is equally interesting to note that among many of my constituents it is taken seriously. They say that if the banks are not prepared to be responsible, if they are not prepared to put the interests of ordinary people ahead of their profit lines, perhaps the sorts of things that Ben Chifley talked about 50 years ago should be talked about once again. If the banks continue to behave in the fashion in which they have, they will simply inflame that debate and they will have only themselves to blame when people call for their ownership to be transferred into the hands of the State.

Mr MOSS (Canterbury - Parliamentary Secretary) [10.36 a.m.]: This is my third speech in this House relating to bank closures. Three years ago, when a number of branches were closing in my electorate, I raised this matter. I think I was the first member to speak about it. Bank closures continue to occur. I live in an area that probably could be regarded as economically disadvantaged. For that reason banks probably honed in on Canterbury in the very early days. I am not surprised at this latest announcement that Westpac is to close 80-odd branches. It is important that we, as parliamentarians, maintain our opposition to the wholesale denigration of bank services resulting from bank closures.

Despite huge profits, bank branches are continuing to close in the interests of greater profits, and it appears that no consideration whatsoever is given to the small, ordinary customer, particularly the elderly and the disadvantaged. I am often reminded how difficult it must be for blind people to
Page 1641
access automatic teller machines [ATMs]. All members of Parliament know that the elderly have tremendous problems coping with modern-day technology. Probably every one of us has had the experience of elderly people trying to communicate with us by leaving messages on our answering machines.

Elderly people become particularly confused with this sort of technology. If elderly people cannot cope with an answering machine, how will they deal with ATMs and phone banking. It is a nonsense for the banks to claim that despite closures they are improving services by the availability of electronic advantages. They are not advantages at all. One cannot deposit cash over the phone, one cannot pay most bills through ATMs, one cannot cash a cheque through an ATM, and one cannot nominate the denomination of bills to be withdrawn through an ATM. Services will continue to deteriorate so long as banks continue to close.

It is interesting to consider the position of Westpac in this phase of the debate because, as we all heard at the weekend, it is to close some 80 of its branches. Two of those are in the Canterbury electorate, one in Earlwood and one in Croydon Park. It is not unusual for that bank to close branches in this electorate. I think the very first bank to close in the Canterbury electorate was Westpac Canterbury branch some years ago. In all, over the years, 10 bank branches in the Canterbury electorate have closed - in just one metropolitan electorate. Five of those branches were Commonwealth Bank branches and two were ANZ Bank branches.

Including the closure of the Canterbury branch some years ago and the two branches now scheduled to close, that makes a total of three Westpac branches in the Canterbury electorate. As I said, it is not surprising that the Canterbury electorate is targeted for bank closures because it is an economically disadvantaged area. However, when it comes to profits, the banks tend to distort the facts. One habit of the Commonwealth Bank in particular is to annex the accounts of smaller branches to larger neighbouring branches.

When the Commonwealth Bank is about to close a small branch it argues that that branch has insufficient customers and/or profits. However, the patronage of that branch can be at the same level that it was in the past or at an even greater level. It is merely the fact that the accounts of the smaller branch, through the bank’s own doing, have been transferred to another, larger branch. The banks are heard to argue, "There is insufficient business from this particular branch and we have got to close it." That is a complete distortion of the facts. It is one of the cunning tricks that banks employ to justify branch closures.

These days the banks appear to be concerned only with investments and loan allocations, and with large accounts. Their charges continue to rise despite cuts in services and massive profits. Ordinary people and small investors these days must put up with a reduction in staff who handle over-the-counter transactions or inquiries. Customers must wait in longer and longer queues. It is not unusual for people to spend their entire lunchbreaks in metropolitan branches waiting to be served. Bank customers are putting up with higher charges and lower interest rates on their savings. For those reasons I wholeheartedly support the motion and its condemnation of this ruthless campaign of the banks, and particularly the recent announcement of Westpac to scrap 80 of its branches.

Mr KERR (Cronulla) [10.41 a.m.]: In speaking to the motion moved by the honourable member for Miranda I might say at the outset that the Kirrawee branch closure needs to be explained by the bank. Kirrawee was a very active branch. It served not only residents who maintained accounts with the branch but also a large industrial area and therefore the branch maintained many large accounts. Parking at the Kirrawee branch was particularly good, a factor that attracted residents and businesses from outside the normal area that a branch would be expected to serve.

I was interested in what the honourable member for Miranda had to say about the Commonwealth Bank and the services that it used to provide in the local community. He could have added the Rural Bank, subsequently the State Bank, which provided funding to farmers. What the honourable member did not say was that the Coalition, in government federally, between 1949 and 1972, when it had the numbers, again when it had the numbers at times in the Senate between 1972 and 1975, and also between 1975 to 1983, ensured that the Commonwealth Bank remained in public ownership.

The Commonwealth Bank was partially privatised under the Keating and Hawke governments. Then it was privatised wholly under the Keating and Hawke governments. Of course, that was only after the obligatory assurances that that would never be done by the Labor Party. Those assurances came from both the Prime Minister and the Treasurer at that time.

Page 1642

Mrs Grusovin: Don’t tell me your mob wouldn’t have moved to do it.

Mr KERR: I have just been telling the House the history. The Coalition was in government for 23 years on one occasion and for seven years after that, and it did not privatise the Commonwealth Bank. The record speaks for itself. It is worth recalling what was said by Labor Senator John Button:

There was a world bank study recently and what it says, in effect, is that you should deregulate your labour market first. Second, you reduce protection. And third, you free up your financial sector. That’s exactly the opposite way to Australia in the 1980s.

Did any Labor member of this House or any Labor councillor in the shire stand up at Labor Party conferences to speak against privatisation of the Commonwealth Bank? It would have been very difficult to do so because Labor governments in South Australia and Victoria -

Mrs Grusovin: You would not have been there.

Mr KERR: I was not invited. It would have been difficult for Labor supporters to speak out against privatisation because the Labor governments of South Australia and Victoria bankrupted their State banks. That meant that pensioners, shopkeepers and other small business proprietors, whether they used their banks or not, had to pay out that debt. That is why State and Federal governments got out of banking. That is why the argument about public ownership of banks was discredited. It was discredited by the Cain, Kirner and Bannon governments, not by any Liberal Government. In answer to the earlier interjection, I might state that no bank was privatised by a non-Labor government in any State in the Commonwealth. That is a matter of record.

Mr Martin: What about the State Bank of New South Wales, now the Colonial State Bank?

Mr KERR: That was done only after Labor trailblazed that area, and it was done with the support of Labor.

Mrs Grusovin: It was not a good business deal either, was it?

Mr KERR: It was the best deal available, and it was a better deal than Labor offered to the people of this State. But, due to time limits, I must continue with what I was saying. Pensioners, small business and voluntary associations are getting a very raw deal. Calling our fellow Australians who happen to be senior bank officials "Gordon Geckos" will not help anything. We must realise that we are not simply bankers and customers in an impersonal marketplace. We are not individuals stranded in helpless isolation. We are human beings and part of a community, with obligations to one another. The banks must recognise that. They should commence their studies by consulting the various groups that are being disadvantaged at the moment.

Alternatively, we could put a bit of rationalism into economic rationalism and set up competition through local bodies, such as local government, and use bank officers who are losing their jobs and might be prepared to volunteer to provide services to set up rivals to the banks, in the same way as that is being done with home loan institutions, co-operatives and credit unions. They could be part of the solution to the problem or provide competition at the coalface because, after all, there is a sense of community. As I say, name-calling will provide only a little relief, and that will be but temporary. We need a more permanent solution to these problems than is put forward in the motion. That solution can be arrived at if we enlist the aid of the banking industry.

Mrs GRUSOVIN (Heffron) [10.46 a.m.]: I support this timely motion moved by the honourable member for Miranda. My electorate has been particularly disadvantaged by bank closures over the years. The Commonwealth Bank, the State Bank and St George Bank closed branches, and now Westpac is to close a large number of branches. The honourable member for Cronulla spoke about deregulation. We might debate that issue in the not too distant future when discussing the privatisation of Telstra by the Federal Coalition Government. That privatisation is being vigorously pursued. Unfortunately, that too will come back to haunt us.

With deregulation should go a sense of social responsibility. However, the banks are pretty touchy about politicians raising these matters in this House. Honourable members should ready themselves to receive letters from the Commonwealth Bank after this week; this is not the first time this matter has been debated in this House. In October 1998, following vigorous debate about the lack of responsibility of banks, the Commonwealth Bank in particular sent out letters. I received a letter shortly after that debate, on 20 October 1998. It stated:

Dear Mrs Grusovin

Unfair criticisms were made of the Commonwealth Bank, in the Legislative Assembly last week, which cannot go unanswered.

Page 1643

The letter clearly outlined the priorities of the banks. The letter went on to say:

An approach to banking centred solely upon bricks and mortar, however, would not be meeting customers needs for flexible, convenient and accessible banking services. The Bank has invested heavily in new and alternative means of banking including automated teller machines (ATMs), EFTPOS, telephone and internet banking.

The letter goes on to state:

The popularity of these newer self-service channels can be gauged by the fact that over 70% of all transactions are now conducted electronically.

Of course they are, because one cannot find a bank. But what about the elderly? I want to refer to the Waterloo community, a disadvantaged community in my electorate that was mentioned in today’s report on disadvantaged communities in New South Wales, and the commitments made by the Commonwealth Bank to provide services to that suburb. In the letter the Commonwealth Bank said:

The Bank always ensures that there are alternative arrangements in place to meet the needs of customers who rely on face-to-face service -

that is the elderly, disabled and disadvantaged -

through either Australia Post or a private agency. Most of those agents find that their own businesses grow in viability once we close and that the service they provide keeps people in the centre.

What a load of rubbish! The Commonwealth Bank sent its services in Waterloo to Australia Post but did not provide security arrangements at that post office and subsequently the Australia Post branch at Waterloo also closed. There is now no banking or post office facility in Waterloo. Australia Post has said that residents can go to Redfern Post Office, which is the closest post office. However, on pension days many elderly people are queued out on the street because they cannot fit into the heritage building that houses Redfern Post Office.

Australia Post has said that a new post office will open at Surry Hills, but that is a 25-minute walk. Security problems exist in some of those areas. It is all very well to suggest that the elderly can do their banking by way of ATMs. Honourable members should consider the difficulties that would be experienced by their parent or grandparent if they were trying to insert a plastic card into a machine while holding a handbag over their shoulder for fear of being mugged. Such attacks happen in prosperous as well as disadvantaged areas, yet the elderly are expected to cope with that.

Reference has been made to telephone banking services. Banks place no value on the time of their customers, who have wait on the phone for 10, 15 or 30 minutes trying to obtain a response. I wonder how many honourable members in this Chamber are quick-witted enough to hear the first instruction on which button to press or how many have had to redial because of uncertainty, thereby entailing another call and more time wasted. The bank’s actions are reprehensible. In its letter the Commonwealth Bank said that it has a responsibility to provide a reasonable return to its shareholders, including institutional investors on behalf of millions of other participants in superannuation funds. This is all about money; it is not about Australian society and a responsibility that the banks should carry.

Mr ROZZOLI: (Hawkesbury) [10.51 a.m.]: I welcome this opportunity to make a contribution to debate on the motion and indicate my general support for the thrust of the motion, although there are some weaknesses in its structure, in particular, paragraph (4), which states:

(4) supports the New South Wales Minister for Fair Trading’s plan to impose minimum standards on bank licences requiring them to supply at least a minimum level of banking services to the community.

That really begs the question of what is regarded as minimum services because the banks would suggest they are providing maximum services through the reconfiguration of trading pattern. Whilst the intent is reasonable, the motion falls far short of being effective. I am greatly concerned at the deterioration in banking services and the closure of bank branches that have taken place in my electorate, as they have in every electorate. The failure of the banks to provide services for individual customers is serious enough, but a major problem is that the closure of a banking facility may result in large centres, such as North Richmond, being without a banking facility, which has a deleterious effect on the overall economic structure of the community from which the bank was taken.

Banks are integral to commercial enterprise and the further a banking institution is placed from an active area of trading, the more difficult it is to trade in those areas. Bank closures result in a deterioration in personal banking services but they also have a flow-on effect that causes a decline in the types of businesses that may operate. Thus there is a de-escalation of commercial activity. It may well promote increased activity in the areas that retain banks, but it weakens the overall network of trading facilities available to the community. Nowhere is that more evident than in rural areas, where the bank is often the linchpin of the town’s
Page 1644
commercial existence. Once banking facilities are removed, businesses are without support and have no option but to close trading in that town and move closer to a banking facility.

Unfortunately, we live in a commercial world and banks, which are private firms, have the right to structure their business functions to suit their needs and those of their shareholders. But all good businesses have a corporate responsibility to the community they serve. It is not just a matter of making money or providing returns to shareholders, important though that might be. They have a corporate responsibility, which in the long term will reward shareholders by maintaining the economic viability of the company. I fear that once that corporate responsibility is sacrificed to a money-making machine, it is likely that the money-making machine will fall because it has no substance, identity or place and will be swallowed up by larger companies and further rationalisation.

If at the end of the day the company is no longer a viable financial operation, it will close down in favour of some other form of commercial enterprise with which shareholders or directors wish to invest. Serious matters are raised in this debate. I am not certain that the form of debate the Government has chosen is satisfactory because it allows honourable members only five minutes in which to speak. This does not provide an opportunity for honourable members to probe into the issue, but to merely pass comment. In general I support the motion but I would welcome at some stage a much more in-depth and probing debate on a subject that is immensely critical to this State and the other States and Territories of the Commonwealth.

Mr MARTIN (Bathurst) [10.57 a.m.]: I support the motion for urgent consideration moved by the honourable member for Miranda. It is a four-part motion, the fourth part being the sting in the tail, which states:

(4) supports the New South Wales Minister for Fair Trading’s plan to impose minimum standards on bank licences requiring them to supply at least a minimum level of banking services to the community.

This is very important and it is role of the Federal Government to enforce those standards. This debate is not new. We are all aware of what is happening to traditional banking services throughout New South Wales. Pressure must be brought to bear on the banks, which should not be allowed to just dictate to the market. We live in a hard commercial world but banks are central to many of our communities. They are the linchpin in attracting business and enterprise to country towns, in particular. It is very important that honourable members support this motion, in particular paragraph (4), to bring pressure on the Federal Government and the Prime Minister to do something about it.

Legislation of the type referred to in the motion has been introduced in the United States of America, the bastion of free enterprise and deregulation. There had to be a reason why legislation was introduced in America which parallels the reason why legislation is needed in Australia. The Prime Minister recently placed on the record his belief that the banks have a community responsibility. He did not say that he will do anything about it, but at least he made that acknowledgment. To his credit, he has been prepared to look after the four-pillar system of banks and not allow proposed mergers.

Westpac, which has been the subject of much criticism during this debate, has a fervent desire to merge with the National Australia Bank. Honourable members can just imagine the colossal financial organisation that would be created if that happened and, of course, the number of bank branches would be just about halved. It is very important during this debate to bring pressure on the Federal Government to enact legislation that imposes some obligations on banks.

I am happy to acknowledge bipartisan support in relation to this matter. Recently I signed a letter, as a Labor member of Parliament, with two members of the National Party in this House, namely, the honourable member for Ballina and the honourable member for Burrinjuck. We wrote to David Morgan, the Managing Director of Westpac, asking him to refrain from the action that the bank has announced.

In my electorate Westpac has announced closures of branches at Oberon, Blayney and, more recently, Rylstone. It is difficult to imagine why the decision was made in relation to a town such as Oberon, which is the centre of a very vibrant community and a large and active timber industry. It is one of the few country towns that has really got a spurt on in recent years.

Mr Windsor: It was because of the former member.

Mr MARTIN: It would have to have been the work of the former member. I cannot claim credit for that. It is important, however, to focus on the fact that many of the reasons given by banks for the closures have nothing to do with the decline in
Page 1645
patronage or the number of people who come through the door. It is a deliberate policy by the banks to force people to accept electronic banking. The closure of the last bank in Rylstone will have a big impact on a community of its size.

When that community loses the bank that has been part of the community’s fabric for years, people will be forced to go to an agency where they will have no privacy, will not be able to obtain balances, and will be faced with security problems. The bank’s claim that the agencies are doing a job that people are happy with is another falsehood that is being circulated. The honourable member for Burrinjuck said earlier in this debate that a rally was held recently in her electorate when branches at Harden and Crookwell were closed. The people rallied and said that they did not want those closures. That totally rejects the bank’s claim that 80 per cent of people are happy with the new changes. The people are not happy. I urge honourable members to support the motion.

Mr WINDSOR (Tamworth) [11.02 a.m.]: I will speak basically in support of the general thrust of the motion, although I am concerned about paragraph (4) and how the New South Wales Government can have any jurisdiction over the limitation and licensing of banks. The debate on this motion is a classic indication that until these sorts of issues impact on the city they are not significant to the Parliament. The honourable member for Bathurst and others previously referred to the removal of banking services, which has had an impact on country communities for many years.

Suddenly in the last six months the rationalisation and centralisation process that banks and other institutions - not the least of which are governments - have undertaken has arrived in city areas and is suddenly being recognised as a great trauma. The closure of services has been going on in country areas for some years and has had a detrimental impact on the social infrastructure of country communities. Werris Creek, a small township close to where I live, used to have branches of two banks. It now has none at all, but it has a very active credit union.

In the sense of meeting the daily banking needs of the populace, I suggest, in concurrence with the comments made earlier by the honourable member for Cronulla, that it might be time to lend support to the credit union movement and other movements which provide the necessary services. There is a degree of hypocrisy inherent in this motion, which relates to the closure of services provided to country and city communities. In country communities in particular many others services are being confronted by closure.

I know that some honourable members, in particular Country Labor members, are interested in competitive tendering for local government functions, which is an issue that is currently being debated in Parliament. Although honourable members are legitimately concerned about the closure of banking services in our communities they cannot do much about it because it is a commercial activity. All the government-owned banks have been sold. The banks are owned by commercial entities and, in my view, they have the right to open or close and do whatever they like. At the moment, their decisions are a fait accompli.

Local councils that are involved in the maintenance of the State’s roads are held to their responsibilities by the State Government. The competitive tendering policy that relates to road maintenance is an area in which this Parliament can - and should, in my view - actively express its concern about the removal of services. If competitive tendering is allowed to take place in country communities, there is no doubt that it will put at risk the viability of some country communities.

During this debate a great deal of time has been spent discussing the social infrastructure effect of the removal of banking services. The competitive tendering policy is a Government-driven policy being implemented by the Minister for Transport. It will remove services which are much more important than banking services. Their removal will result in the demise of councils and, consequently, the demise of the social infrastructure of country communities. That is why I say there is a degree of hypocrisy inherent in this motion.

If members are prepared to take a bipartisan approach in relation to the closure of banking services, they should also be prepared to adopt a bipartisan approach to the conservation of social infrastructure in local government areas by allowing local council authorities to retain the maintenance of roads. In conclusion, I reiterate that instead of bashing the banks, honourable members should take a close look at what members of Parliament and individual members of the community can do to foster the credit union movement.

Mr MILLS (Wallsend) [11.07 a.m.]: I am pleased to support the motion moved by the honourable member for Miranda and remind the House that the motion before the House is in four parts. It calls on the Commonwealth Bank, Westpac
Page 1646
and other major banks to drop their plans to shed jobs and close branches in suburban, regional and city areas of New South Wales and to maintain their current level of services. It also notes the importance of face-to-face services and supports the Minister’s plan to impose minimum standards on bank licences.

Many honourable members who preceded me in this debate have referred to what I describe as the depersonalisation of banking services during the past decade, which has met with very strong community opposition. Politicians of all parties as well as trade union and community representatives have expressed their objections in arguments against the process because of the adverse impact on people in the community, yet the process continues.

A small change in approach has occurred. For example, over the last couple of years in the Hunter region, between three to eight weeks before a decision takes effect the banks notify community leaders and other members of the local community of their intention to close a branch. There is really no change to the outcomes even though the banks have taken that face-saving approach. Branches that nominate to close do so. I have not heard of one bank that has changed its mind.

This debate can put moral pressure on the banks, and it is worth trying to persuade them to think about ways to better exercise their corporate responsibilities. I will now refer to some bank branches that have closed in the Wallsend electorate in recent times. In January 1998 I was notified by the Commonwealth Bank that it would close its Edgeworth branch in February of that year. The bank’s letter stated:

As you would realise, the Bank is a commercial organisation which cannot ignore situations where its costs of operation are not covered by the nature and level of activity in the location concerned.

The letter advised of nearby branch locations: the nearest was three kilometres away, the next was five kilometres away and another was six kilometres away. The Commonwealth Bank said that 30 per cent of its services require face-to-face customer interaction. Thirty per cent of the people who banked at Edgeworth now have to travel to another location. Many of them live in a large retirement village near Edgeworth.

The local elderly people would catch a bus from the retirement village to the local shopping centre but now they have to travel further to do their banking. Because the buses take them to a larger nearby centre, that has had an adverse effect on businesses in the local shopping centre. That effect can be measured, as other honourable members have said. That is an example of a shopping centre in my electorate being disadvantaged because of the closure of a bank branch.

Protests, objections and arguments have been ignored. Rural and suburban areas are adversely impacted upon by the closure of bank branches. For example, the Lambton branch of the Commonwealth Bank closed in August last year. The Lambton Chamber of Commerce organised protest meetings and, as part of its delegation, I spoke to the regional Commonwealth Bank manager about that closure. We were heard, but were told that nothing could be done to change the bank’s mind. The manager said that the branch would be closed, and he wished us well.

The local business people said that small traders, particularly nick-nack shops, need to be able to do their banking in person without travelling far from their businesses. If they had to drive three kilometres, they would have to close their shops for three-quarters of an hour. Transferring the banking facility to the local newsagent, which is what happened at Lambton, had an adverse impact on small business. However, the Newcastle Permanent Building Society has benefited from many businesses in Lambton.

At the end of July this year the area manager of the National Australia Bank gave me advance warning that its branch in Wallsend would soon close. He said that there was declining business traffic and therefore the bank would retreat to Jesmond, three kilometres away. I asked him what the community could do to change the bank’s mind, and he replied, "Nothing. The decision has been taken; it is not viable." When will the banks learn that they are taking decisions that reduce services to customers in regional areas? When will an economic value be placed on genuine customer service? These uncaring and dismissive approaches should be rejected.

Mr MAGUIRE (Wagga Wagga) [11.12 a.m.]: I support the broad thrust of the motion, although I also have some concerns about paragraph (4). I represent a rural electorate but I share the concerns of many of our city counterparts. We have been going through this rationalisation process for a number of years. I am pleased at the response of our city counterparts who are experiencing the same problems that we have.

Some years ago the State Bank went on a rationalisation program and sold off all its buildings in small country towns and centres, with a small
Page 1647
lease-back of three to five years. Those buildings were quickly snapped up and, after the lease expired, all the purchasers were left with a building that was absolutely useless, because services had been withdrawn. Westpac has embarked on a program to close up to 80 branches and shave up to 3,000 staff, which is distressing to the residents of rural areas, especially those in my electorate.

In the Wagga Wagga region there are small centres with a large proportion of elderly people who have no way to get to the nearest town to access banking facilities. In some towns where banks are represented by two or three branches, one branch has decided to close or withdraw. I suggest that if a bank - perhaps one of the big four - wants to walk away from a town which has a banking option, people should consider transferring their banking business to another bank rather than transferring it to a credit union or raising money to start a community banking system, with its inherent responsibilities. That would help the other bank to trade better.

The banks maintain that the figures indicate that customers are not passing through their doors. Honourable members have spoken about the ways in which banks achieve those figures; that is, by transferring business or by using electronic banking, which then lowers the number of people who pass through their doors. The smaller towns should approach the bank down the road, take all their business en masse, and show support for that bank rather than introduce alternatives, which can sometimes prove to be difficult.

Mr Ashton: It has probably closed, too.

Mr MAGUIRE: In most towns there is competition and that will be one way of solving the problem. But it is not only banks that are rationalising services. Recently, the honourable member for Tamworth spoke about the impact of competitive tendering on rural centres. In 1995 in Wagga Wagga the education department undertook a rationalisation process, a government-initiated program, which cost the city 110 jobs. Once again rationalisation and economics has cost our town.

In general I agree with the motion but I share the concerns of all honourable members who have spoken today. Banks are the centre, the focus, of towns, especially smaller towns. Once the banking service is lost the community must travel to the nearest centre. One honourable member said that members of his local community had to travel about three kilometres to a bank. In my electorate the community has to travel between 30 kilometres and 100 kilometres to get to a bank.

Honourable members have spoken about talking to their local banks and receiving no response. I am interested in outcomes, because the smaller centres rely on banks, which are the central point of towns; we cannot afford to lose any more. I have spoken to David Morgan about the economics of bank closures. I understand that banks have responsibilities to their shareholders but they also have a social responsibility. I will certainly work with representatives of Westpac towards achieving a responsible outcome for the towns in my region.

Mr NEWELL (Tweed) [11.17 a.m.]: I support the motion moved by the honourable member for Miranda. I will now respond to comments made by the honourable member for Wagga Wagga and the honourable member for Tamworth about their cautious support for paragraph (4) of the motion. I am more than delighted to support paragraph (4) because of the necessity to maintain services in rural and regional New South Wales. Banks operate with licences issued by the Government to provide services to the whole of New South Wales.

At the moment we are confusing the issue with corporatisation and shareholders’ profits. We make excuses and allow those services to be withdrawn. A number of other authorities, particularly Federal Government organisations such as Telstra and Australia Post, were once owned by the Australian people. They have community service obligations to provide services to everybody in Australia. Obviously the difference is that those organisations were owned by the taxpayers. Their community service obligations have been maintained.

When banks were established some 150 years ago their licences depended on them providing services to the whole of New South Wales. Banks have grown and become national and multinational corporations and hide behind the need to provide a return to shareholders. They have completely lost sight of the fact that they have an obligation to the community. That is why I support strongly paragraph (4) of this motion.

The honourable member for Tamworth referred to competitive tendering and the honourable member for Wagga Wagga raised the issue of education. Education services in Wagga Wagga have not been reduced. We judge education not on the way it is administered but on how it is provided in schools. We can debate competitive tendering and the way education is administered, but taxpayers have to get the best bank for their dollar, and they should be concerned about the administration, not the services.

Page 1648

At one time bank managers were treated like doctors and priests. That is no longer the case. Banks used to be part of the community; they served the community and held a privileged status because they were given a licence to operate, and that respect was reciprocated. Other professions, such as doctors, lawyers and many different agents operated in a similar way. However, while most of the latter group are still small traders, banks have evolved into national and multinational corporations, which hide their economic rationalist decisions behind the need to maximise shareholders’ returns. If banks had to operate under licence the community would benefit. If services are restricted and provided under licence, the Government must have a say in community service obligations. That is why this motion is so important.

It is not only banks that might be interested in this debate: I have referred to doctors and lawyers. I do not believe that governments should impose regulations on people who are privileged to work within our community, but obligations should be imposed on them by the Australian Medical Association or a similar body to ensure that facilities and services are provided throughout New South Wales and Australia, and that they cannot operate purely for profit in an area where they can maximise their returns.

Mr McGRANE (Dubbo) [11.22 a.m.]: I support the motion of the honourable member for Miranda not to bash the banks as it makes the public aware of the problems experienced in all State electorates. Some 2½ years ago the bank in the small village of Trangie, which was then in the electorate of Dubbo, was threatened with closure. Members of that community, who wanted to retain the bank, had the support of people from the entire Dubbo area.

It was argued that they needed the bank to service the ongoing development of Trangie. Ultimately the bank closed, but a credit union moved in and now provides services to that area. At that time Trangie and a number of other places were on their own; they did not get much support from the city. The rationalisation of the various banks began in country areas because they were easy pickings, but thank God it has now moved to the city areas and all members of Parliament are taking notice.

The banks admit that the way they have gone about closing branches in rural New South Wales has been very poor. They say they now take a more rational and humane approach to closures. We must consider the future. Banks are free-enterprise operations. They are outside parliamentary and government control as to where they do and do not operate. Although there are many controls over banks, I have some hesitation in supporting paragraph (4) of the motion, because that is a Federal Government matter.

What is good for the goose should be good for the gander. If this Government wants to implement paragraph (4) it should look at its own trading entities, such as State Rail. If the same rationalisation had been used in regard to State Rail we would not have had such a large number of job losses throughout regional New South Wales. What is happening in the banking industry is a major concern to all communities. We have to work with the banking industry and local government and take a more rational approach to banking.

We cannot stop the tide, we cannot go back to the good old days when we had a number of banks in our communities. The bank staff played a great part in those communities, because they were involved in various sporting and charity organisations. Those days have gone, not only in Australia but throughout the world. We have to make sure that the banking industry works with the community it serves to ensure that its clients and shareholders get a fair go, and that we get a better banking system in New South Wales. That is why I support the motion.

Mr W. D. SMITH (South Coast) [11.27 a.m.]: Regional communities are destined yet again to feel the sweep of corporate housekeeping, if the reported plans by Westpac to close about 80 branches across the State goes ahead. We all know that banking in Australia has changed radically in the past 15 years. Some of the changes have been embraced, particularly in the cities, where convenience is the ultimate in business conventions.

However, banks must acknowledge that rural and regional communities, particularly small towns far from the cities, do not have the same needs, priorities and demands for banking services as city communities. The local bank was once the centre of the town. The bank manager was well known and generally highly respected. The locals tended to venerate the banking authority, and it was a stable and almost sanctified part of the community. But that is no longer the case. We certainly cannot go back to those days - and nor do we necessarily want to.

These days people are far more cynical about the banking industry, especially after the follies of the investment and loan schemes of the 1980s. The
Page 1649
age-old platitude that is still circulating is that country people are just too slow to embrace change and that they are unwilling to change. But that is just plain nonsense and completely overlooks the invariable intrepidness of country communities. On the contrary, people are adopting banking and financial practices according to need, more so than trend. That need of country people is being discounted; it is being ignored by banks. Generally speaking, people in the country still prefer face-to-face contact for service, particularly senior members of the community and the elderly, especially when it involves paying bills, banking or taking out loans. They want good service, friendly advice and courteous discussion of their financial matters.

It can be extremely difficult for some people to explain their situation over the telephone, let alone keep up with some of the information and technology changes. According to a survey reported in the newsletter of the Centre for Australian Financial Institutions - the survey related to the impact of bank branch closures on rural communities - the impact of branch closures on rural communities is heavy. The report suggests that communities may suffer reduced local spending, a decline in financial investment and a loss of community confidence. The newsletter states in part:

. . . permanent change in spending patterns by individuals away from their local communities and towards larger towns spells death to local businesses, local services and local communities.

Businesses cannot survive without turnover and, as businesses retreat from local areas, so too will public sector services.

That is a grim picture of the effects of branch closures on communities. I would not like to think that our major banks want rural communities to suffer, given the likely extent of the investments that those institutions have made in rural communities one way or another. Yet the accelerated pace of change in banking over the past 10 years demands consideration for those communities, which invariably are the last on the list to be properly informed of changes. Westpac is aware of that situation. In a press statement released on 3 September Westpac’s Managing Director, David Morgan, said:

We stand by our commitment that wherever we currently have a face-to-face presence in regional Australia, our intention is to maintain it with either an existing branch or a new in-store branch.

It would be a terrible shame for regional communities if Westpac branches suffered from cutbacks in staff. No-one wants a bank branch to close. Bank branches in country New South Wales form an integral part of the fabric of country communities. I know that bank staff provide a valuable service, particularly to those who depend on face-to-face contact for their banking needs. Bank staff are helpful, friendly and polite to clients. We cannot afford to lose that kind of service, which is greatly appreciated by families in rural and regional areas. It concerns me greatly that some of these people could lose their jobs if Westpac decides to go ahead with its reported restructuring plan.

If banking services are shifted to retail outlets such as pharmacies or newsagencies, will banking staff be employed in those stores? How many branch workers will find their careers in banking coming to an end? In regional areas local bank branches can play a pivotal role in connecting communities to ever-growing financial and business networks and keeping clients up to date with changes. It is important to recognise that others are entitled to have some choice in the way in which they do their banking. They should not be excluded from the network simply because they do not suit the market model. I commend the honourable member for Miranda for raising this matter by way an urgent motion.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Stewart.

Motion by Mr Stewart agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow the consideration during Government business at this sitting of the matter of public importance given yesterday by the Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism.

Ms NORI (Port Jackson - Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism) [11.35 p.m.]: Recently a quiet social revolution has been occurring. I am pleased to say that the Government has ensured that it has policies in place to recognise the changes brought about by that revolution and to make the most of them. The major change I am talking about is the fact that women now own 35 per cent of small businesses and about 41 per cent of those businesses employ others. When the businesses that women jointly own are added it emerges that women are involved in 60 per cent of small businesses. The Government knows that
Page 1650
supporting women in business makes good economic sense. That is because the support provided by the Government translates into the creation of jobs and economic growth for local communities and for New South Wales. In fact, the small business sector is creating 60 per cent of all new jobs.

Research suggests that women in small business are responsible for 10 to 15 per cent of Australia’s private sector gross domestic product and about 20 per cent of net job creation. With women now entering small businesses at three times the rate of men, there is every reason to identify the growth in small businesses owned by women as a business development priority. To that end, the Carr Government has committed an extra $1 million in funding over the next four years to support programs and services for women in business. That additional funding will complement funding for the Women in Business Mentor program, which has already proved highly effective.

The New South Wales Women in Business mentor program has been a success story since its inception in 1995. Women who take part in the program continue to experience the benefits for up to 12 months after their formal participation finishes. But preliminary results from recently completed programs indicate that the majority of mentorees have already experienced an increase in turnover and raised levels of business skills before they even finish the course. Feedback from the 1998 Sydney program indicated that 75 per cent of participants increased their annual turnover in the six months to the end of the program and that 43 per cent of mentorees increased the number of employees in their business, which means more jobs.

I am pleased to say that the Government has been able to expand the program to regional New South Wales with great success. That program has received an enthusiastic reception. Women who own and manage small businesses in regional areas play a particularly significant role in contributing to their local economies. A recent study by Flinders University in South Australia found that women are involved in the ownership and management of around 70 per cent of small businesses in regional and rural areas. I recently attended graduation ceremonies for inaugural programs in the Hunter, New England, the north-west and the Northern Rivers regions. There are many individual success stories from the Women in Business mentor program since it started which provide testament to the impact of that program.

Maree Lowe from ASI Solutions, and a mentor on the Sydney program, was recently announced as the 1999 New South Wales Telstra Businesswomen of the Year. Elizabeth Ball from Definite Article Pty Ltd, who participated in the Sydney program, has reported a five-fold increase in new clients, 37 per cent more income and four times as many articles accepted during the time she spent on the Women in Business mentor program. Roe Ritchie from Wildbite in the Northern Rivers region has expanded her business and is negotiating for a large contract to supply her product to a major retail outlet in Sydney. Christina Watt of Heaven Scent Bridal Salon in the Hunter region has had a threefold shopfront expansion. Christine Brereton from Echidna Manufacturing Industries is negotiating to export her product to the United States. Natalie Wibberley from Epps Engineering in Tamworth has gained the confidence from the program that was needed to expand her client base and increase sales.

I could go on, but those are only some of the individual examples of the results derived from the Government’s support for women in business. Those examples show the eagerness and ability of women who have started their own businesses to go that one step further to acquire the skills for success and expansion. In recognition of how much can be achieved by women in small business, the Government is building on existing successes by expanding the Women in Business mentor program into a comprehensive Women in Business program. The expanded service will be available in both metropolitan and, importantly, regional areas.

Part of that expansion will result in additional areas being serviced by the mentor program. Recently expressions of interest to deliver the program were called for and I expect that the large number of responses will result in new programs in many parts of the State by early next year. In recognition of the contribution made by women in small business in regional and rural New South Wales, the Department of State and Regional Development will develop a model to offer mentoring and ongoing network support in these areas. It will cover places including Wagga Wagga, Illawarra, Broken Hill, Murwillumbah, Albury and Dubbo.

An additional position to manage the delivery of those initiatives has been created within the department. The Government, through the department, has also introduced a series of free workshops on practical business issues for women in business. Since May 1999 eight business workshops have been provided to more than 250 women on topics such as e-commerce, marketing, exporting and becoming an employer. A free workshop on marketing for small business will be offered to
Page 1651
business women in the Hunter in November, demonstrating the Government’s ongoing commitment to supporting the growth of regional businesses.

Another significant area of small business is the home-based business sector. A recent report released by the Yellow Pages Small Business Index found that 30 per cent of small businesses operate from the home. Studies have shown also that more than half the women who operate small businesses operate them from home. It appears that this occurs for a number of reasons. The obvious ones are lifestyle choices, which often relate to family responsibilities, the phase the business is in, or whether the business, by its nature, lends itself to a home base. But we want to know more precisely about this important area and how best women operating those home-based businesses can be assisted.

During this term the Government will conduct one of the first surveys of home-based businesses in New South Wales so that their nature and how they should be supported can be better understood. One of the first steps will be to develop an interactive Internet service that will help home-based business owners exchange information, build business networks and receive regular information updates via an electronic bulletin board. We all know this will be important because when working from home there is a tendency or possibility of becoming too isolated. Fortunately, with modern technology - the Internet and so on - we should be able to address that problem.

We expect that during the next four years these initiatives will assist an additional 1,000 women, and that is in addition to more than 460 women who have already participated and received assistance through the mentor program. It is the Government’s firm belief, and mine as the responsible Minister, that this sort of targeted and cost-effective assistance will contribute to a more dynamic and significant small business sector. As a Government we recognise the role of women in business. That is why I was proud, even as Parliamentary Secretary, to be able to ensure that half the people on the board of the Small Business Development Corporation [SBDC], the body that advises the Government and me as the Minister on issues affecting small business, were women, including the chair, who is the internationally acclaimed fashion designer Collette Dinnigan.

I commend Collette for her sense of public responsibility in taking time out from her ever-expanding business to chair the board of the SBDC and share her expertise in small business. All the women on the board of the SBDC are successful small business owners and each is keen to assist this important sector of the community. They have also taken a great deal of effort to make sure the board goes regional so that regional centres have access to the corporation. Meetings have taken place in Wollongong, Armidale, Parramatta and Newcastle.

At the recent New England north-west Women in Business mentor program graduation in Tamworth, which I had the special pleasure of attending, the guest speaker was Bobbi Ballas, who is based in Armidale. Her experiences, which she passed on to the graduates at the ceremony, were poignant, cogent and important. I thank Bobbi for her continued enthusiasm and support of the SBDC. I conclude by saying that we will make sure that economic growth continues in this dynamic sector, which is led by women, by expanding the Women in Business program, by the activities of the SBDC and by our range of small business assistance programs.

Ms HODGKINSON (Burrinjuck) [11.44 a.m.]: I am pleased to speak to the matter of public importance relating to the role of women in small business in New South Wales. As a former small business retailer I certainly understand and empathise with the needs of women who operate and are partners in small businesses across New South Wales. No doubt those businesses are a major source of employment, particularly in country regions. I have been an owner-operator of two small business outlets, each related to the other, in the country towns of Yass and Bowral. As the Minister has pointed out, the Government certainly can do a great deal to encourage small business growth and development and, therefore, job creation.

In February 1997 there were 130,000 female small business operators in New South Wales. According to a characteristics of small business survey conducted in February 1997 and provided to me by the Office of Small Business, of the 1.3 million small business operators across Australia, 849,600 or 65 per cent were male and 462,300 or 35 per cent were female. Between February 1995 and February 1997 the number of female operators increased by 38,000 or 9 per cent, while the number of male operators increased by 21,000 or 2.6 per cent. Those figures demonstrate that over the last couple of years there have been enormous increases in the number of women operating small businesses across this State and, indeed, this country.

As I mentioned earlier, I am a small business operator. In 1989 my family developed a retail outlet as an extension of our merino stud family farm. At
Page 1652
that time many farmers in our line of business, the wool business, were looking to value add to their properties, particularly as it was at the beginning of the recession. We were all looking at ways of increasing the bottom line, given that wool had dropped right out of the market. That family business continues today. It is now owned and operated by my mother and we are looking forward to holding the tenth anniversary of the business on 11 November.

We have been conscious of the necessity of moving with trade patterns and have now developed a mail order service. The Minister has pointed out that Internet selling to worldwide markets has an enormous future. I agree with her. That is something that the former Deputy Prime Minister, Tim Fischer, was particularly interested in and I believe it relates particularly to women. As the Minister pointed out, women of the future will look to increase their income more and more through home-based businesses. We must be there to give them every possible support and encourage them to use the Internet and email to the best of their ability.

Five generations ago my family established a retail store in Goulburn called Rogers Department Store. That store grew to become a major retail outlet through sheer family persistence and hard work. Today that store remains as one of Goulburn’s central business district landmarks. As a female in small business I have been part of many employment groups, and I take this opportunity to commend the work of such groups as the State Chamber of Commerce, and particularly Margie Osmond; local chambers of commerce throughout my electorate at Goulburn, Yass and Tumut; the Retail Traders Association, which is always there for women in small business when needed; and particularly the Employers Federation, of which I was a member for some years. Gary Brack from that association has worked hard to encourage women in small business.

Over recent decades there has been a strong growth in female participation in the small businesses I have outlined. However it has been particularly noticeable on family farms. Much growth in the farm population over recent years can be attributed to women declaring themselves as fully fledged partners in the operation of family farms. An article in the Land of 14 October stated:

. . . women represented 32 per cent of Australia’s farm workforce (70,000 women defined themselves as farmers or farm managers) and contributed at least 80pc of the income derived from off-farm work.

It is highly appropriate that last Friday World Rural Women’s Day recognised the role of women in family farm business not only in my electorate of Burrinjuck and across country New South Wales, but worldwide. I was encouraged to note that the Executive Director of the National Farmers Federation, Dr Wendy Craik, made it clear that she has never felt disadvantaged because of her gender. It is important in the 1990s that women should not feel disadvantaged because of their gender. I certainly did not feel disadvantaged because of my gender when I entered politics, and in that regard I commend the National Party for encouraging women to enter politics. Once again country areas are pioneering women’s affairs. Our challenge now is to boost the representation of women across supporting organisations. The editorial in last week’s issue of the Land stated:

World Rural Women’s Day provides an ideal opportunity for reflection on the crucial role farm women are playing in keeping Australian agriculture afloat.

They provide the thread that keeps many farming families from completely unravelling. Their contribution to their families, local communities and rural economy cannot be emphasised too much.

Farming women work just as many hours as farming men. Many are earning precious off-farm income to protect the living standards of thousands of rural families. Without their income, and the time they spend working on farms, many farm children would be living in third world conditions . . .

Clearly there are many women more than capable of performing effectively around the board tables of agriculture’s key bodies and companies. So, why aren’t we seeing more women in these high-profile roles? Why are we ignoring such a rich resource?

Many women are also good communicators, and many of agriculture’s biggest problems would be diluted significantly through better communication, particularly at farm level.

I hear rural women who are working so hard at their family farm businesses calling out their support. We must encourage more women to go into business. Even though agriculture has broken down many barriers to women participating directly in and at the forefront of these small businesses, so much more can be done across all sectors of business. We need to encourage women to enter small businesses and grow within them. As the member for Burrinjuck I encourage our small business operators to access government services by using the New South Wales small business Internet web site. I urge the Government to target women more effectively in the provision of advice and support and to establish a network of after-hours discussion and support groups.

I am currently in the throes of organising a Southern Tablelands breakfast club in my electorate. That club will effectively be a networking forum.
Page 1653
Such a forum exists in the Southern Highlands. I attended its first meeting in 1993 or 1994. It has been enormously successful and provides a common thread for women in small business in the area; they can network amongst themselves. The forum enhances their self-esteem. We need help from the Government to clear away any obstacles that will prevent an increase in the number of women in small business. Payroll tax in New South Wales is far too high and is a barrier to business growth. Recently the rate in New South Wales was shaved to 6.4 per cent, but it still remains uncompetitive when compared with the rate of 4.9 per cent in Queensland, which was announced in the budget last month.

In 1995 Treasurer Egan gave himself a four-year target to cut payroll tax in New South Wales to 5 per cent, but he has failed. New South Wales now collects $3.6 billion in payroll tax. In 1994-95 it was $2.7 billion. As honourable members can see, the figure is rapidly escalating. Another major disincentive for women entering small business is the cost of the handover of businesses to future generations. I propose the abolition of stamp duty on intergenerational transfers of small family businesses. That would provide an enormous incentive to women operating small businesses, who often develop assets and equity at the expense of cash in hand.

Another major disincentive is workers compensation. Employee on-costs are a huge disincentive to the growth of small business. We must reduce workers compensation premiums, which pose an immense burden on small and rural-related industries. Women operating small businesses deserve strong support. I am encouraged by the number of women entering local government, particularly within my electorate. Many women were elected to local government in the recent elections. I am also encouraged by women in community development groups such as the Batlow Development League, which recently lobbied, hopefully successfully, for a multipurpose service.

Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle - Parliamentary Secretary) [11.54 a.m.]: I note that the honourable member for Burrinjuck, the Acting-Speaker, the Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads and the Minister for Small Business are women. That may encourage the young women from Singleton High School who are in the gallery to enter politics. On the other hand, they may wish to become involved with small business. Last month I was pleased to attend the inaugural graduation ceremony of businesswomen from the Hunter Women in Business mentor program, which was held at Bella Vista in Mayfield. The ceremony involved 40 women and was also attended by the Minister for Small Business.

One could not get a better model of business participation than the mentor program. The program made me realise that women in business often work in a collaborative and inclusive model. That was evidenced by the attendance at the graduation of the mentors with their charges. The mentors demonstrated support throughout the business program and their genuine sense of ongoing commitment to their charges was evident. During the mentor program the trainees developed not only a whole range of business skills but also the networking skills that are so important in modern business. The Internet is important, but so is the knowledge that one has a mentor in the business community who is willing to work through the project.

Many of the women were working in home-based industries, which made the link with their mentors all the more important. I acknowledge the contribution to the program of Austraining and the Power Business College, which provided professional administration. Sponsors of the program included Westpac, the Hunter Business Enterprise Centre, Radio 2HD and the Hunter Economic Development Board. Jane Stacey was the facilitator of the program. I congratulate her on her infectious enthusiasm, which was evident on the day of the graduation. Everyone who participated in the program picked up on that enthusiasm.

I also congratulate the mentors on their preparedness to make available their time and expertise to the women in the program, as well as running their businesses. There has been a fundamental shift in the business sector. Women now own or jointly own 60 per cent of all small business in New South Wales. That is the private sector. The program fairly and squarely deals with the needs of women in business, and picks up on the changes that occur within the business community.

One of the successful businesses was Echidna Manufacturing, which is run by Christine Brereton. That business has developed a unique soil aerating system and is negotiating for its manufacture and export. Austraining and Power Business College, two successful education providers in the Hunter and across New South Wales, both have female business leaders. It is significant that both women have been critically involved in the development of the Internet program, which is an education business cluster now operating within Newcastle and the Hunter Valley.

Page 1654

Clearly, the Women in Business program is extremely important in Newcastle and the Hunter, and I congratulate the Minister on her involvement. The Women in Business program provided by the New South Wales Government through the New South Wales Department of State and Regional Development also continues to provide women with access to a range of information and initiatives such as this launch. I thank the Minister for that opportunity. [Time expired.]

Ms NORI (Port Jackson - Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism) [11.59 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions to this debate. Many more roles have been added to women’s lives in the past 25 years. It was almost inconceivable 40 years ago for women to combine careers as business leaders, parliamentarians and key community decision makers with being partners, mothers and providers for their families. Yet today women make up 43 per cent of the work force. Women head major corporations, more and more are becoming Government Ministers and members of Parliament, and women are determining the destiny of their communities in a variety of ways.

The figures on women in business are quite outstanding. Women now own or jointly own 60 per cent of small business in this State. These are great achievements and although we can rejoice in these outcomes, realistically women still need to be superwomen to juggle life’s demands. Whether women are running a business, a farm or are in politics, most still do the lion’s share of domestic work. I will now provide a raft of statistics that do not particularly please me so, gentlemen, please take note. These figures paint a picture of a working woman’s life. Women in full-time employment undertake 76 per cent of the physical caring for children, 75 per cent of the cooking, 90 per cent of the laundry and 84 per cent of the cleaning.

The figures for women who own and manage a small business are particularly interesting. The majority of women in small business are married with children of a relatively young age. About one-third of women in small business spend more than 50 hours a week in the business yet almost 90 per cent with dependent children are the prime care givers. Fifty per cent of all women operating small businesses have sole responsibility for domestic work in the home. Those statistics are from a 1996 study conducted by Flinders University.

There may be good and cogent reasons why these women are so overburdened with housework and are still running a business. It could be that they are on their own, although most appear to have been married. It could be that their partners also have extremely important and responsible jobs. However, I sincerely hope that it is not a case of the boys letting the women down again. I send a message to men who partner women in small business: Just remember the important job that your wife or partner is doing. It may be even more important than what you are doing. She is out there creating jobs so maybe you could make a great contribution to the jobs growth of this State by occasionally doing a bit of housework.

I am sure that none of the gentlemen on either side of this Chamber are guilty of the sins that I have just expounded. The multiple roles of women in business mean that often, to put it mildly, they have complex and acute demands on their time. This makes their achievements all the more remarkable and although their primary motivation may be to secure the economic wellbeing of their families and lead a fulfilling working life, at the same time they are important to Government because new jobs and wealth creation in the community are what government is all about. That is why the Government is expanding the Women in Business program and measures are in place across government to work with women.

What the Government offers to women in small business does not stop with the assistance offered through the Women in Business program. Women of course have access to the full range of small business assistance programs and the Government is demonstrating an intelligent and strategic approach to small business service provision and development through its range of programs and services. The provision of appropriate information to men or women who wish to start or expand a business is extremely important in ensuring business success.

The Government also acknowledges that high growth, small- to medium-size businesses play a critical role in the State’s economic wellbeing and growth. That is why the Government has promoted the high growth business program. So far 13 forums have been held for high growth businesses and from these forums the Government has developed the $17 million New South Wales high growth business program designed to expedite growth for export capable and innovative small businesses.

Discussion concluded.

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr CRITTENDEN (Wyong - Parliamentary Secretary) [12.05 p.m.]: This is a most timely motion because traditional banking services are
Page 1655
important mainstays of the community. It is interesting to note that the honourable member for Murrumbidgee, who moved a competing motion for urgent consideration yesterday, has not spoken in the debate because when the major banks pulled their branches out of Coleambally that community considered that it did not have an appropriate banking structure. Bendigo Bank, a regional bank in Victoria, in collaboration with the Coleambally community, formed a company structure guaranteed by several citizens and organisations in the Coleambally community, and as a consequence the Coleambally Community Bank was formed.

The bank employs five staff, provides domestic and business banking services and is a focus for that community. In addition, half of the profits from banking there are retained in the town and the other half goes to the Bendigo Bank. The partnership is working well for the community and I had hoped that members of the National Party would take an interest similar to that taken by many Country Labor members who have spoken in this debate and examine this model and others to cater to the needs of country New South Wales. The full brunt of what Westpac has done is set out in an article in the Australian Financial Review of 16 October by Ivor Ries, with obvious involvement from David Morgan, Managing Director of Westpac. The figures are disturbing but the article gets to the nub of the problem. It stated:

Morgan [declared] that he’ll retire 3,000 workers and shrink 200 rural branches to slash at least $300 million from the bank’s $3 billion cost base . . . Most of Morgan’s $300 million cost target will come from staff reductions and rural branch downsizing.

Quite clearly, that will take a lot of money out of circulation in country areas and that is why rural communities are most upset. Other parts of the article also cause concern. An example is given by Ries that is obviously based on information provided by Westpac. The article states:

. . . five State-based business loan processing centres will be reduced to two (in Melbourne and Sydney) and 11 separate call centres will be reduced to four or five over the next two years.

With the reduction in the number of call centres, the banks will be reducing the whole business loan process operation. They have not even looked at the possibility of locating these facilities in regional areas throughout New South Wales and the rest of Australia. Many country areas where there might have been a call centre will not only miss out on a branch structure in local towns but also call centres, which represents a pretty critical loss of service and employment opportunities to regional centres in New South Wales.

Mr TORBAY (Northern Tablelands) [12.10 p.m.]: I am pleased to debate an issue that deals with the minimum level of services provided to communities. This issue has been debated by many people in regional New South Wales over a considerable period. I acknowledge the efforts of the honourable member for Tamworth and more recently the honourable member for Dubbo in drawing attention to this issue. This motion deserves broad support. I, in common with the member for Tamworth, have some difficulty with paragraph (4), which is totally open to interpretation. That part of the motion highlights the political nature of the intent of the motion to shift blame from one government to another.

I believe that if the thrust of the motion is intended to deal with the minimum level of service provided to communities that is a matter that governments would be well served to take on board themselves. It is not necessary to examine which side of politics has taken the rationalisation process most to heart, because it has cut across all political parties and all levels of government. I remind this particular New South Wales Government of the rationalisation that occurred in the power industry in regional New South Wales as well as in many other areas such as forestry.

The rationalisation of government services has had a big impact on regional New South Wales. While honourable members may look closely at banks and the impact on country communities of the rationalisation of banking services, they should also consider minimum levels of service provided by government. One would not have to look beyond Coalition Government rationalisation of the provision of health services, which is ongoing and has resulted in the closure of hospitals in regional communities, for examples of what I am talking about.

Honourable members can throw rocks on the roofs of the banks and continue to get on the political bandwagon by saying, "Isn’t this dreadful for regional communities", but the issue really cuts across more than banks and other private sector organisations. Minimum levels of service are something for which regional communities have been fighting over a considerable period. I would like to see bipartisan support for a decade of commitment to statewide planning of regional services in New South Wales that really pushes something about which honourable members of this Parliament can have considerable influence.

Page 1656

Although I agree with the broad thrust of the motion, it really is a symbolic gesture. In saying that Westpac and other major banks need to look at the social impact of rationalisation and their responsibilities from a social perspective to communities across New South Wales, we should apply the same principles to ourselves. As I mentioned earlier, the honourable member for Tamworth has been pushing that line for a considerable period. I join with him in a call for governments of both political persuasions at State and Federal level, as well as politicians from all political parties, to consider instituting a decade of bipartisan commitment to statewide planning.

If that were to happen, while we continue to raise concerns about the private sector and organisations that rationalise services from time to time, we might also look at government services in the same light to make sure that the provision of minimum levels of service takes into account factors such as employment opportunities in the area and flow-on effects. I highlight concerns in my electorate in relation to NorthPower rationalisation and the concerns that are felt in relation to the provision of health services. Having expressed my views on health services rationalisation, I also acknowledge that corrective action has been taken. In that regard, I acknowledge the efforts made by the Minister for Health.

It is important to be aware that regional communities want police officers and doctors as part of the provision of a minimum level of service. I acknowledge that banks have been rationalising, but I also recognise that governments have been doing so. Country members of Parliament have been raising the issue for a considerable time. Regrettably, their efforts have not crystallised into a genuine policy of statewide planning. Although I am very concerned that the banks seem to have lost their focus on their social obligations to communities, I have to say that I would certainly like to see governments of all political persuasions and at all levels address the minimum level of service issue so that honourable members can be less hypocritical when these matters are debated in Parliament.

Mr BARTLETT (Port Stephens) [12.15 p.m.]: It is pleasing to see in the public gallery young people from Cessnock who are attending Parliament in company with the honourable member for Cessnock. I welcome them and hope they enjoy the debate. I do not intend to speak specifically about any bank closure in my electorate; rather, I will try to sum up the way in which the debate has proceeded over the last couple of days. What honourable members are really talking about is the ugly face of competition. It is possible to have competition that delivers good services to people, but debate on this motion centres on the idea of ugly competition in Australia and the effects of competition as they are being felt throughout New South Wales and the rest of Australia.

The reality is that bank staff in the rural areas of Australia and in the city are expendable, and that is the bottom line. Moreover, customers are also expendable. Banks do not need customers any more so banks can walk away from towns and country areas leaving the problems besetting local communities which honourable members who preceded me in this debate have described. Obviously the criterion is profit. Institutions cannot expect loyalty from their staff and their customers if they operate only in accordance with the bottom line of profit when dealing with country, regional and, more recently, city areas. Loyalty in all institutions is under threat currently.

It may seem strange that the member for Port Stephens, a boy from Newcastle, actually wants to draw an analogy between the rationalisation of banking services and what has happened with South Sydney Leagues Club. The reaction to banking services is really the same as the feeling many people have expressed about South Sydney. The bigger picture is the treatment which people who live in country and regional areas of New South Wales have had to deal with during the past 10 or 15 years. The reason I am a member of Country Labor and currently working for those areas is that no-one ever seems to consider the social aspects of the ugly side of competition.

The problem confronting South Sydney is that the biggest media proprietors in the country, Murdoch and Packer, have decided to divide the spoils in the best interests of what used to be Australian Rugby League. It seems to me that the voice of Rugby League in New South Wales was not enough to prevent the underlying competition from coming through. The criteria were set and, unfortunately, South Sydney did not meet the criteria so it was dropped off the register. All that needs to be done in future is establish a new set of criteria, ignore tradition, emotion, dedication, loyalty and trust, and other clubs such as Newcastle Rugby League’s Knights could be given the flick just as easily as South Sydney was given the flick.

If there is no loyalty, the relationship breaks both ways. Country Labor is obviously moving towards rejecting the hard and ugly economic rationalism that has been apparent throughout the
Page 1657
bush for the past ten years. That is not to say that no-one is interested in providing better services at a more competitive cost. However, the pure hardline economic rationalism that is around today is out of favour with Country Labor.

The people of Port Stephens resent what is happening to South Sydney and to banks in the name of someone else’s profits. Every person to whom I have spoken in Port Stephens is resentful of what is happening to South Sydney; there is absolutely no support for what is happening to South Sydney, or for the banks. That is the way that country New South Wales has been feeling for a decade. It leaves a bad taste in one’s mouth and a feeling of hopelessness in one’s stomach.

I turn now to the ugly face of competition, which is like a 100 metre running race; what you get is one winner and lots of losers. The losers are told not to worry, what counts is how one plays the game. Try to tell South Sydney that! All their traditions have gone out the window. We have competition in business and competition in schools, but the way that the education system is set up there are a few winners and many losers. The Drug Summit clearly indicated that children need to feel they are accepted, that they belong, and must have a high level of self-esteem in order to combat the taking of drugs which, it is claimed, make one feel good. By the time children reach high school age, they well know where they come in the pecking order. [Time expired.]

Mr ASHTON (East Hills) [12.20 p.m.]: The number of honourable members from both sides of the House who have spoken against bank closures announced by the Westpac Banking Corporation must be an indication to Westpac and to the "big four" banks, that they have lost the public relations debate absolutely. One after the other, members from both sides of this House have documented bank closures in their electorates and none has supported those closures. The honourable member for Cronulla acted as an apologist for the Coalition on banking matters.

When I applied to the Commonwealth Bank for my first loan in the mid-1970s I was knocked back, because Malcolm Fraser, then Prime Minister, had, overnight, doubled the amount one needed to have in one’s account before a loan could be granted. That meant that people like me who were young and trying to get their first loan were completely ruled out. Yet I had banked with the Commonwealth Bank since kindergarten. I was one of the kiddies who put 20¢ in the bank at school every week for about ten years. What thanks did I get for that when I went to the big bank for a loan? I was told not to bother, to go somewhere else. So I did, I went to the St George Building Society, which gave me a loan that I have appreciated ever since.

Bank closures across Australia have become a national disgrace. Perhaps a few years ago there was a case for the closure of the odd branch here or there, due to high rent, poor location, lack of size or superfluous space. But no longer; today, banks are closing to inflate the profits of shareholders. Banks in Australia continue to announce profits that would match the size of the gross domestic product of some small countries. The profits they are making are of Shylock proportions.

In the past three or four years a number of banks in my electorate have been closed. In Panania, the State Colonial Bank closed; in Revesby south, the very large State Colonial Bank closed and moved operations to a virtual shopfront branch on the other side of the railway line. Branches have closed in Padstow, and in East Hills the Commonwealth and State banks closed years earlier than the beginning of the bank closure race. They were bulldozed to make way for the railway line extension to Holsworthy - which was not unreasonable.

Now when I go into banks there is always a long queue, and staff have admitted to me that they are treading water and trying to keep up with the demand. Like most customers I would prefer to deal with a staff member, rather than a machine. Nothing offends me more than a voice on the end of the telephone saying, "Your call is important to us, we will be with you soon. Push button one" - or push button two, or three, or four. If I do not know what to do, I am instructed to push button five to speak to an operator.

[Interruption]

I am amazed when I finally get to speak to someone. I prefer to deal with people in banks. I am surprised that the honourable member for Port Macquarie has interjected, because this issue is more important to country and regional New South Wales than it is to Sydney. I can go to a bank on the other side of Revesby, but he cannot go from Port Macquarie to Wauchope or Lismore to do his banking. I take that back! It is the court jester from Coffs Harbour who interjected. I did not mean to defame the honourable member for Port Macquarie. It does not matter. The faces are different but the issues are the same in both electorates.

Mr Fraser: That is how much you know about the bush.

Page 1658

Mr ASHTON: Maybe that is because the honourable member for Coffs Harbour does not make much of an impression. Along with most customers I prefer to deal with people, because not everyone can remember their personal identification number [PIN] to access automatic teller machines [ATMs]. If I cannot remember who is the member for Port Macquarie or Coffs Harbour, how can I remember my PIN number? The terms "rationalisation", "more efficiency", "stakeholders", and "upgrading services", all mean the same to me. They mean sacking people and replacing them with machines. Has a bank manager or a general manager ever queued at an ATM? I will bet they have not. They would get their personal assistants to do their banking for them. Ordinary Australians cannot expect anything like that service.

Today an inquiry is to be held into the alleged payment, or "cash for comment", that has embroiled some radio personalities and which arose because of the outing of an arrangement that the Australian banks sought to have to put a gloss on their activities before the people. Today’s debate is perhaps the community’s chance to tell the whole story. I remind honourable members that what we want in the suburbs, in the bush and in regional areas such as that allegedly represented by the honourable member for Coffs Harbour, is more banks for our buck. I commend the motion to the House.

Mr STEWART (Bankstown - Parliamentary Secretary) [12.25 p.m.]: I strongly support the urgency motion moved by the honourable member for Miranda. In doing so I clarify that today we are talking about the position that banks had in regard to their customers and how that position has changed. I acknowledge and support the bipartisan spirit of this motion. However, I point out that some members of the Opposition spoke about the laissez-faire policies that banks have and how they have allowed market forces to dictate outcomes. To a large degree banks are dictated to by their shareholders, but they also have a social responsibility.

In the past several years that social responsibility has been totally mitigated by banks which have treated their customers, the general Australian population, with absolute contempt and have deserted their traditional customer base in the pursuit of rationalisation gone mad. The latest headlines about bank closures indicate that Westpac Banking Corporation will close 80-odd branches, mostly in underprivileged regional country areas which deserve and need the infrastructure of a banking service. People will have to travel many miles to utilise a service elsewhere, but that does not stop the banks in their contemptuous approach to this laissez-faire market rationality.

The banks do not care about people. That is perplexing, given that the major banks have been strongly supported by people. Last October in this House strong concern was expressed by the Carr Government about closures that had occurred mainly in branches of the Commonwealth Bank in metropolitan Sydney and some regional areas. During that debate we heard that 190 New South Wales banks had closed down in the previous financial year. New South Wales experienced more branch closures than any other State.

That was an issue of great concern. In my local area the closure of Commonwealth Bank branches at Greenacre and Yagoona has had a devastating effect on the local shopping precincts and also on the community. Banks have to recognise that apart from pursuing a profit they have a solid infrastructure within a community. Often banks are the nucleus, the heart, of the business community. When that heart is taken out, the body dies.

The removal of Commonwealth Bank branches from Greenacre and Yagoona in October last year was done in a callous manner. Local residents, shopkeepers and even employees of the bank were given only a couple of weeks notice. As member for Lakemba I was part of a delegation which met with Mr Dick Perkins, the New South Wales Customer Service Manager for the Commonwealth Bank. That delegation included also Doug Shedden, former member for Bankstown; Michael Hatton, the Federal member for Blaxland; the mayor of Bankstown; a number of Bankstown councillors and other officials.

Dick Perkins listened to us for half an hour, then smiled and said that the decision had been made. He told us we would retain our Commonwealth Bank automatic teller machine at Greenacre, but he could not guarantee the same at Yagoona. The ATM was removed, without any notification, at 11.00 p.m. one evening just prior to Christmas, when it was most needed. That is the sort of stealth with which the Commonwealth Bank conducts its business activities. That is a matter of great concern to the local community. The Commonwealth Bank has made a profit of $1.9 billion, yet it continues to close branches, and jobs are being lost.

The same sort of thing is occurring with Westpac, which plans to cut 3,000 jobs. I commend the Minister for Fair Trading on the special plan that he has put to the Federal Government. I urge the Federal Government, and particularly the Minister
Page 1659
for Financial Services and Regulation, Joe Hockey, to consider the plan, which simply asks for a specified level of banking services in rural and remote areas, a guaranteed level of face-to-face services, and a set number of transactions for people who receive government pensions and benefits. The Government is strongly supporting the people of New South Wales in that endeavour.

Mr GEORGE (Lismore) [12.30 p.m.]: Like every other member in this House I wish to voice my concerns about what is happening in rural New South Wales and in particular in the electorate of Lismore. I do not agree with the steps taken by the major banks, because they are cutting back on face-to-face services. Businesses have been built on that service, and to cut the number of branches in New South Wales is totally unacceptable.

Already Westpac has closed one branch at Kyogle, in my electorate. The Commonwealth and Westpac banks in my home town of Casino have also made cutbacks in staff numbers and have more or less regionalised their services to the city of Lismore. People are finding this very difficult to accept. However, it is typical of what is happening in New South Wales, not only with banks but also with government departments, both State and Federal. We are continually bombarded with cutbacks. Regional services are being taken out of our areas.

The honourable member for East Hills said that when we ring a government department or a bank today a voice tells us to press button one, two, three, four or five. But that is not the problem. The real problem is having to wait half an hour or an hour to get an answer. My electorate has lost many government services. Currently we face cutbacks in the forestry industry. Lismore was built on the timber industry, and these cutbacks have created a lot of heartache.

Only 12 months ago the Minister for Forestry opened a regional office in my home town of Casino. It has now been rationalised and jobs have been lost. Those highly paid jobs have been transferred to Coffs Harbour. That is typical of what is happening in country areas, and banks are following government departments. I am concerned that these moves by government departments and banks are dollar driven.

I hope that does not inflate the Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong areas. Those services are needed in rural New South Wales. My National Party colleagues and I have already had a meeting with Westpac. Unfortunately, we have not been successful but we will continue to lobby that bank and the Commonwealth Bank. All the major banks are involved in this, but those two have caused the greatest concern in my electorate of Lismore.

Debated adjourned on motion by Mr Anderson.

Debate resumed from 22 September.

Mr SLACK-SMITH (Barwon) [12.36 p.m.]: The Meat Industry Amendment Bill amends an oversight in the drafting of the Meat Industry Amendment Act 1998. The meat industry in New South Wales is the second-largest export earner in New South Wales, exceeded only by the income from the wool industry. The red meat industry in New South Wales encompasses the sheep, cattle and goat industries. It has a vast economic effect on New South Wales, because it is dispersed over the entire area of New South Wales - from my electorate of Barwon in the north-west, west to the Murray-Darling, to the coast and all over the State.

The red meat industry is a very important industry and contributes greatly to home consumption as well as to export. Controls and regulations must be in place to ensure that our customers and consumers - and our customers are always right - can be absolutely confident that what they are purchasing is exactly what they want. Some consumers from overseas specifically purchase a product because they know it is clean, it is green and it has been handled properly so they can use it with absolute safety.

This bill simply amends an oversight that occurred in the drafting of the Meat Industry Amendment Act. That Act constituted the board of the Meat Industry Authority so it had more representatives of the sectors in the meat industry for which the authority is responsible. At the moment the board consists of 13 members. A report in June 1994 recommended that it be changed. Previously the rules stated that a member of a trade union organisation must be on the board.

Up until now that member has done a remarkably good job. However, he also represents consumers of our product in New South Wales. The Minister of the day might decide that someone else can better represent consumers. That person may be a member of a trade union, but I do not believe that the legislation should include specific criteria or
Page 1660
discriminatory provisions requiring that representative to be a member of a trade union.

People in the Australian Consumers Association and other organisations may be in a position to better represent consumers. I said earlier that the consumer is always right. If the consumer does not want to buy our product we want to know why. We require a group of people with expertise in the industry - meat industry processes - and a knowledge of consumers to ensure that our red meat, which comprises sheep, cattle and goats, is the best in the world. The Opposition supports this bill.

Mr ANDERSON (Londonderry) [12.42 p.m.]: I support the amendments in the Meat Industry Amendment Bill proposed by the Minister for Agriculture. The bill will establish Safe Food Production New South Wales - to be termed Safe Food - as a major step towards the ultimate goal of a single New South Wales agency responsible for food safety. When it is fully implemented Safe Food will be responsible for the safe production, processing and wholesale distribution of foods for human consumption right from the paddock or the ocean to the door of the retail shop.

Safe Food will also cover retail premises where raw meat is further processed, such as butcher shops and supermarket meat departments. New South Wales Health and the Department of Local Government will continue to cover the retail and food service sectors until a comprehensive food safety authority is established, probably in the next few years. In August 2000 Safe Food will take over the functions of the New South Wales Meat Industry Authority, which will become Safe Food’s meat division.

These sorts of things have not happened just at the stroke of a pen by the Government or by bureaucracy; a great deal of consultation has occurred with industries. Industries are very supportive of this program. Earlier the honourable member for Barwon said that the New South Wales meat industry was the best in the world. It is the best in the world. The ongoing development of these processes will continue to make it the best industry in the world. Not long ago over 2,000 delegates from around the world attended a conference in Sydney to examine the processes that are being implemented by this Government.

New South Wales is leading the world - it is certainly the leading State in the Commonwealth - in the development of these processes. We have a record of which we can be proud, a record which we want to maintain. The food safety schemes that are being implemented are all for the benefit of consumers. Food safety schemes will be developed in consultation with other relevant industry sectors, and each food safety scheme will be introduced as a regulation under the Act.

That will ensure that new regulatory requirements are imposed on food industries after the preparation of a regulatory impact statement, which will include a cost-benefit analysis, industry and consumer consultation based on the regulatory impact statement, and government and parliamentary scrutiny of that regulation. Many safeguards are being built into the legislation to protect all those involved. Food safety schemes, which will be based on risk assessment, will ensure compliance with applicable national standards, including the hazard analysis and critical control point national food safety standard likely to be implemented in the year 2000.

Many things have happened which have resulted in the inclusion in this legislation of a number of provisions. However, that has all been done in partnership. In August 1998 a report to the Commonwealth-State review of food regulation emphasised the need for governments to work in partnership with the food industry and with consumers to improve Australia’s food safety system. That has happened. Industry has been an integral part of all the negotiations with the relevant departments, and those partnerships are bearing fruit. We now have something that we are proud of; something that we will continue to pursue to ensure that we maintain our high standards. As I mentioned earlier, people from around the world are coming to New South Wales to see how we are doing it - which is certainly a feather in our cap. I commend the bill.

Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt - Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation) [12.46 p.m.], in reply: I thank the shadow minister for agriculture and the honourable member for Londonderry for their support for the bill. Referring to the contribution of the shadow minister, I am happy that the Opposition has supported the bill. It should have no objection to it.

When we were dealing with the Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, the Opposition and some crossbench members in the upper House expressed concerned about the wording in the bill relating to a consumer representative. Concern was expressed then about the fact that a consumer representative had to be a member of a trade union. I said in my second reading speech that a consumer representative has long been part of the constitution
Page 1661
of the board. Section 45 of the Meat Industry Act 1978 contains the following words:

. . . one who shall be a member of a trade union, shall be appointed as a representative of consumers of abattoir meat and processed meat.

Historically, that is why a reference to the trade union was included in the new safe food production legislation and the Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill and that provision resulted in opposition from the Coalition and some crossbench members in the Legislative Council. The Government believes that, whilst there is no problem in the original wording of the bill, it is not worth dying in a ditch over it.

The amendments to this legislation will ensure that the consumer representative does not have to be a member of a trade union. I believe that it is a matter that should be addressed by the Minister and the government of the day. They should be responsible for making the changes outlined to the House by the shadow minister for agriculture. I acknowledge the shadow minister’s praise for the red meat industry. Both he and the Government are happy that in recent years the meat industry has seen an improvement in its stocks, as opposed to the wool industry, which is still experiencing many difficulties.

I am sure that the shadow minister was happy to see the progress being made in the meat industry in the last week or so. The shadow minister and I went to Darling Harbour last week to see the implementation of new grading systems for the meat industry, which I am sure will give consumers a much greater choice and raise their awareness as to the quality of the products that they are buying. I compliment the industry on the work it is doing in that regard.

I refer to the comments made by the honourable member for Londonderry and I thank him for his support. I recognise that New South Wales is leading this country and most parts of the world in its introduction of a safe food authority. We are now placing an emphasis on the way in which these authorities work when they are servicing various agricultural industries. I thank the Opposition and other honourable members for their support for this legislation. I commend the bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.

[Mr Acting-Speaker (Mr Mills) left the chair at 12.50 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]

Mr CARR: In the absence of the Minister for Health I will answer questions on his behalf.

[During notices of motions]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chair has serious doubts about whether the notice of motion being given by the Leader of the National Party is in order. I am sure he is aware of my previous warnings in relation to both the length and content of notices of motions. I will allow him to edit the motion and I will probably accept it in limited form. It will not be necessary for the Leader of the National Party to read the notice again.

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

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 Fraser, Mr George, Mr Slack-Smith, Mr Souris and Mr R. W. Turner.

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

Page 1662

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.

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

Petition praying that the provision of quality public vocational education be maintained at Sydney Institute of Technology, received from Dr Refshauge.

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.

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

Petition praying that any proposal for an international airport on Kooragang Island be opposed, received from Mr Mills.

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 Belvoir Street, Surry Hills, received from Ms Moore.

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

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

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 Aboriginal Land Council, be purchased and preserved as a national park, received from Mr Humpherson.

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

Page 1663

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

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

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

Petition praying for opposition to the closure of the Kempsey Greyhound Club and track, received from Mr Stoner.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I draw the attention of members to the presence in the gallery of the Hon. Ross Free, a former Minister for Education, and the Hon. David Beddall, a former Minister for Resources. I welcome them to the Parliament. I welcome also His Grace Bishop Issam Darwiche, the Bishop of the Melkite Catholic Eparahy of Australia. Also present in the gallery are the mayors of Wagga Wagga, Dubbo and Tamworth. Among their number is Gerry Peacocke, a former member of this House who is now the Mayor of Dubbo. I understand that his first act after being elected mayor was to ban smoking in the council chamber.

General business notice of motion No. 1 lapsed.

Mr NAGLE (Auburn) [2.30 p.m.]: I move:

That the General Business Notice of Motion (General Notice) given by the member for Auburn this day (Military force for service in South Africa) have precedence on Thursday 21 October.

The Anglo-Boer War was debated in the New South Wales colonial Legislative Assembly from 17 to 20 October 1899. For 24 hours over those four days the New South Wales Legislative Assembly debated whether to send colonial troops to the Anglo-Boer War.

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

Mr NAGLE: The debate a century ago was notable for three reasons: New South Wales was the last Australian colony to commit forces to the Anglo-Boer War; it was the only colonial Parliament to seriously debate the issue; and no fewer than four future Australian Prime Ministers and six Premiers contributed to the debate in the Legislative Assembly. The three most vehement opponents to the sending of troops to the Anglo-Boer War were Labor’s William Morris Hughes, William Arthur Holman and Arthur Griffith - all three would leave the Labor Party 16 years later because of their support for conscription.

A century ago this week that lengthy and acrimonious debate took place in the New South Wales Legislative Assembly Chamber. In almost 24 hours of speeches the Parliament debated vehemently this important issue. Although all six Australian colonies sent 16,000 troops to the war, only this Parliament seriously debated the issue. As I said earlier, contributing to debate were four future Prime Ministers, namely, Barton, Reid, Cook and Hughes, and six Premiers, namely, Lyne, See, Waddell, Carruthers, McGowen and Holman. This is an important issue because for the first time in our history Australian soldiers - men - were sent off to a foreign land to fight. It was the beginning of the Anzac. The Opposition may not be interested but this issue is important for the people of New South Wales.

The debate took place even though at the time the colony was preoccupied with other issues: there was a hung Parliament led by the Labor Party, and in the middle of September of that year the Reid Government lost the confidence of the Parliament and was replaced by the Lyne administration. Parliament was in recess at the end of September when the Imperial Government asked for troops, and as a consequence, on 17 October, Premier Lyne moved a motion to equip a force for South Africa. There is something strangely familiar about all this. The debate was expected to be over that evening but almost 24 hours of speeches followed. The debate was not to follow the loose, party lines approach of the day; it went in every direction. The motion was carried in the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council passed a similar motion without dissent. [Time expired.]

Page 1664

Question - That the motion be agreed to - put.

The House divided.

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

Mr Armstrong Mr O’Farrell
Mr Barr Mr D. L. Page
Mr Brogden Mr Piccoli
Mrs Chikarovski Mr Richardson
Mr Debnam Mr Rozzoli
Mr George Ms Seaton
Mr Glachan Mrs Skinner
Mr Hartcher Mr Slack-Smith
Mr Hazzard Mr Souris
Ms Hodgkinson Mr 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 Markham Mr Collins

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: My question is directed to the Minister for the Olympics. Will the Minister confirm that all premium seats for the 1,500 metres swimming final were allocated before the first ballot for Olympics tickets? How many of those tickets were set aside for his exclusive executive package programs? Why was this information kept secret from the public?

Mr KNIGHT: As I told the House yesterday, subject to the agreement of the majority of the board the relevant information will be released tomorrow.

Mr GREENE: My question without notice is to the Minister for Fair Trading. What is the Government doing to help families who are buying a home to get a better deal?

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

Mr WATKINS: Buying a home is the biggest financial decision that most Australians will make. It is a commitment that is made by families across the country which can last for 30 years or more. The most recent figures show that more than two million Australians are currently paying off their homes. They are working hard to fulfil the great Australian dream - to provide greater security for themselves and their families.

Home buyers deserve to have all the information they need to get the best deal. Indeed, to get the best deal families needs to shop around. But to be able to shop around they need to be able to compare like with like and to be provided with information which tells them the true mortgage rate they will pay, depending on which financial institution they choose. Under current laws, this is not what the consumer gets. The maze of confusing fees and charges makes it very difficult for consumers to accurately compare one financial institution’s interest rate with another.

With the proliferation of so-called honeymoon rates, offset arrangements and other mortgage products, it is even harder for consumers to know what they are getting. That is why I am pleased to announce today that New South Wales will give consumers what they want. New South Wales will introduce truth in mortgages laws which make it compulsory for financial institutions to publish and
Page 1665
advertise comparison rates which take into account all the fees and charges that apply to a loan.

The comparison rates will be a better indicator than the current interest rates, because all financial institutions will be forced to disclose the true cost of their loans. That will promote real competition between financial institutions. These practices are already used in the United States of America, the United Kingdom and certain parts of Europe. This plan is not only about providing consumers with better information. It is also about helping home buyers save thousands of dollars over the term of their loan - a lifetime.

Under current rules, a bank may advertise a low interest rate but the fees and charges associated with that loan may make the true cost very high, whereas another bank may advertise a high interest rate but the fees and charges may be low. In the current environment high fees and charges can often mean that the interest rate is up to 1.5 per cent higher than that advertised by a bank. However, home owners may not know that. Some examples make the potential savings very clear. While a bank’s advertised interest rate may be 5.49 per cent, in reality fees and charges may push it as high as 6.75 per cent.

For argument’s sake, on a $100,000 mortgage a family could be paying up to $77 more per month than it would if the real interest rate was 5.49 per cent. That is roughly $23,000 over the term of a 25-year loan that a family may not be aware of when it signs up for that loan. Of course, most families borrow much more than $100,000, so the hidden costs are much higher. The Carr Government believes that families have a right to know the potential savings they could make if they knew the true cost of their loans. I know that many of the larger banks oppose the introduction of truth in mortgages and have said so publicly.

At a time when bank fees are rising, bank employees are being sacked, branches are closing and profits are going through the roof, banks argue that consumers will be confused if this proposal is implemented. I say that that is rubbish, and so does the Australian Consumers Association. Indeed, the association and some of the newer non-bank institutions have urged the Government to take this step. Unlike some of the giant banks, they believe that consumers deserve to have all the information they need to make an informed choice and perhaps save many thousands of dollars.

At the recent ministerial council meeting in Hobart I urged my colleagues to agree to the immediate introduction of mandatory comparison rates. Under the uniform consumer credit code those rates, which are also known as average annualised percentage rates, are optional. The ministerial council currently has before it a recommendation to require the disclosure of a mandatory comparison rate to consumers for all fixed-term credit contracts, including home loans. Despite fierce opposition from the Commonwealth Minister, Joe Hockey, Queensland and Tasmania agree that the time has come to make comparison rates compulsory. I put the other jurisdictions on notice: New South Wales intends to make comparison rates compulsory whether they agree or not.

I am setting up a working group comprising representatives of the Department of Fair Trading, the New South Wales Treasury, the Cabinet Office, the Australian Consumers Association and financial institutions to put together a legislative proposal. I envisage that the new laws will be ready for introduction early next year. A comparison rate will mean that consumers have an effective and easy means of getting the best deal. It will mean that consumers will know the real cost of a loan before they take it out, and that families will be able to save thousands of dollars and realise their dreams of home ownership sooner.

Mr SOURIS: My question is directed to the Minister for the Olympics. Will the Minister tell the House how many of the first-class tickets reserved through his secret premium package to popular events such as the opening ceremony and the swimming finals will be on offer to people in rural and regional New South Wales, or are they available only to a select few in Sydney?

Mr KNIGHT: The premium packages marketed by the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games are not limited by any geographic qualifications.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will remain silent.

Mr NEWELL: My question without notice is to the Minister for Roads. How is the Government improving regional roads?

Mr SCULLY: I commend the honourable member for his interest in rural and country roads.

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

Page 1666

Mr SCULLY: Good roads are the lifeblood of the transport network, particularly in country New South Wales. Members of Parliament, especially those on this side of the House, and occasionally members on the other side of the House, have emphasised to me the importance of upgrading roads in their local communities. The roads budget for 1999-2000 is $2.26 billion.

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

Mr SCULLY: The Government is building better and safer roads, and reducing travel times. That is good for families, for business and for freight operators. Members on this side of the House would be familiar with some of the Government’s large projects. The Eastern Distributor will be opened before Christmas, on 19 December in fact. The Bulahdelah to Coolongolook freeway will be opened on Sunday, and I invite all my colleagues who have an interest in this freeway, particular those from the Hunter, to be involved in the opening. It will be an exciting day for the people of Newcastle and the wider Hunter region. The freeway will make an enormous difference to people who use that part of the road network.

Local roads are equally as important to scores of communities across the State. Our resident poet, the honourable member for Barwon, is familiar with the Moree to Mungindi road, which is in his electorate. The honourable member for Murray-Darling knows about the resealing of the Cobb Highway, for which the Government has committed significant funds. Regional roads are a vital link between the road networks. There are 18,400 kilometres of regional roads and it is the responsibility of councils, in partnership with government, to maintain them.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the Deputy Leader of the Opposition on two calls to order.

Mr SCULLY: Last year in the Action for Transport program the Government confirmed its commitment to maintaining that partnership with local government for rebuilding, enhancing and improving the regional road network. I am pleased to announce that this year more than $117 million will be invested in regional roads from State Government funds. I am sure that Country Labor will be very pleased with the specific allocations.

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

Mr SCULLY: The vast majority of funding has been allocated to rural and regional areas.

[Interruption]

The Leader of the National Party does not appreciate that the primary responsibility of the State Government is to maintain State roads and that this is a special grant to enable local government to maintain its roads. The vast majority of investment will be, of course, on State arterial roads. They are local government roads, Bozo!

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

Mr SCULLY: Of the $117 million the Government is committing to assist councils in fulfilling their responsibilities on roads, $71.8 million is for block grant funding. Approximately 130 councils will take advantage of that block grant funding. In addition, $10.9 million will be spent on traffic facilities and $15 million on 3 x 3 fuel levy funding.

Mr Hazzard: Point of order -

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Wakehurst will resume his seat.

Mr Hazzard: I am trying to take a point of order.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member will resume his seat.

Mr SCULLY: The question is often asked how much of the 3 x 3 levy is used on country and regional New South Wales roads.

Mr Hazzard: Point of order: For the past 5½ minutes the Minister has been addressing his answer to the public gallery.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I uphold the point of order. The member for Wakehurst will resume his seat.

Mr SCULLY: I am pleased to inform the House of the allocations by the Government, region by region, to rural New South Wales. Country Labor will be particularly interested in these allocations. Western New South Wales will receive $28 million.

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

Mr SCULLY: The Hunter region will receive $13.7 million. Honourable members will be interested to hear that northern New South Wales will receive $23.6 million from the regional and block grant program. South-western New South Wales - and I know the people of Monaro and Burrinjuck will appreciate this - will receive $29.9 million.

Page 1667

Mr Hazzard: Point of order: To be reasonable, there is too much noise in the Chamber and the Minister probably did not hear your direction that he should address the Chair.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! No point of order is involved. The member for Wakehurst will resume his seat.

Mr SCULLY: It is important that the House hears where taxpayers’ money will go in regional New South Wales. The Hunter region will get $13.7 million. The southern region of New South Wales will get $12.7 million, and the Sydney region will receive $17.4 million. That is not all. There is also a repair program. The Government is committing $20 million which will assist councils to improve regional roads which are prioritised by a collection of councils who meet with the Roads and Traffic Authority and set priorities. Those allocations will be set over the next few weeks. I can give an example of the typical program that will be assisted as a result of that $20 million. The honourable member for Tweed will be familiar with this project. The Government has committed $203,000 to a repair project on the Kyogle to Murwillumbah Road.

Mr Armstrong: It is long overdue.

Mr SCULLY: How about a "Thank you" press release! That will widen five kilometres of road between Byangum and Uki and will improve the surface of the road, delivering better driving conditions, reduced travelling times and safer journeys. That is only one example of the Government’s commitment to country and regional New South Wales.

Mr OAKESHOTT: My question is directed to the Minister for the Olympics. Unless full details are released, how can the Minister guarantee that expensive, first-class tickets being offered for sale privately by clubs and private companies are all part of the secret premium package programs rather than any black market ticket program being siphoned off from overseas?

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

Mr KNIGHT: Isn’t it significant that in the past few days everyone from the Opposition is asking questions about the Olympics except the honourable member for Lachlan, who served on the SOCOG board for a number of years, and the honourable member for Gosford, who is now on the board?

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

Mr KNIGHT: Both of these members know the gist of the premium package program.

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

Mr KNIGHT: There are two reasons why we will not release the names of the individuals who have bought premium package tickets.

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

Mr KNIGHT: The first reason is that it would compromise the marketing program. If people know they are to be named in the newspapers, in Parliament or in the media, how likely is it they will front up and buy those premium packages?

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

Mr KNIGHT: There are three possible consequences of them not purchasing those premium packages. First, SOCOG could find another source of revenue, and I would be very happy if some member of the Opposition could indicate what that source of revenue would be. Second, SOCOG could cut tens of millions of dollars from the quality of the Games through expenditure cuts. Perhaps that is the policy of the Leader of the Opposition: she would like the Olympic Games to be degraded because she will not be able to go to the Olympic Games as Premier. Third, we could go into deficit and ask the taxpayers of New South Wales to fund the difference.

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

Mr KNIGHT: That is the first reason we should not name or out the individuals who buy premium packages. The second reason is that people are entitled to some privacy. Why stop at the premium packages? Why not out those who can afford A-class tickets rather than people who can afford B-class, C-class or D-class tickets? Why not name the people from the sporting clubs around the nation who applied for sports passes at a premium rate? Why not name the people who bought the gold passes to the stadium that were left over? They are unconscionable things to talk about doing to the Australian public and we will not be party to that.

Page 1668

Mr MILLS: My question is to the Premier. What is the Government doing to help disadvantaged communities in New South Wales?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! A number of members have been called to order two or three times. I will have no compunction in asking the Serjeant-at-Arms to remove members if they continue to interject as they did during the answer of the Minister for the Olympics to the previous question.

Mr CARR: The Vinson report, which was released today, found that communities in the Lake Macquarie and Newcastle areas and in the State’s north-west and North Coast regions need our help. The report found that the 30 most disadvantaged New South Wales and Victorian communities have 4¼ times more child abuse, ask for 3¼ times more emergency assistance, have three times their share of court convictions and long-term unemployment, twice their share of low income households and a little under 1½ times their share of children who leave school before they are 15 years of age. Those indicators should concern all members of the House. The figures are grim. The Government, and specifically my colleagues from Country Labor, are working with families in those communities.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Oxley has been called to order on two occasions, and I have issued a warning to those members who have been called to order on more than one occasion. I ask the Serjeant-at-Arms to remove him from the House.

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

Mr Scully: Serves you right.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Members on my right will refrain from commenting.

Mr CARR: Members opposite groan at any mention of Country Labor, but the State Chamber of Commerce conducted a survey of the attitude of 650 regional businesses. The survey showed that during the past nine months satisfaction with the State Government has increased from 18 per cent to 32 per cent but there has been a decrease in satisfaction with the Liberal Party from 27 per cent to 11 per cent and with the National Party from 23 per cent to 21 per cent. In other words, country businesses - no bastion of Labor support - endorse this side of politics, and all because of the work of Country Labor.

Mr Brogden: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The Premier was asked a question about poverty in this State. This is not an opportunity for him to quote his own so-called political achievements. I ask you to bring him back to the question.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the member for Pittwater had been paying attention he would have realised that the Premier was responding to interjections from those on my left.

Mr CARR: The Government is spending $54 million to give families in distress vital assistance through its Families First program, which was conceived and introduced by the Government. The first programs are already up and running on the North Coast and staff appointments in the Hunter will begin during the next two weeks. The Government has increased spending on community nurses in rural and regional New South Wales by $1.5 million and brought in new regulations to encourage doctors to practise in the bush.

[Interruption]

The honourable member for Port Macquarie thinks that is a joke. Because of what this Government has done country towns and communities in this State have doctors for the first time. They did not have doctors before. The Government has changed all that and those towns and communities now have doctors. The people in the bush never had doctors when the Coalition was in government. What a disgrace! People in the bush now have doctors.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The actions of the member for Port Macquarie invite me to direct that he be removed from the Chamber. He will remain silent.

Mr CARR: No wonder the Dubbo Liberal says:

Country Labor, essentially a ginger lobby group for country-based ALP parliamentarians, has so far been a public relations master stroke for the ALP.

That is what the Dubbo Liberal said, for goodness’ sake! Thirty-three new country doctors have been appointed, and that figure includes five appointments in the past two weeks alone. Our program is working. The Government introduced it, and country communities now have doctors as a result of our initiative. By the way, the Government is also delivering 108 extra ambulance officers to work in rural and regional stations.

[Interruption]

Page 1669

The lazy members opposite should do something about it. I have had no representations from them on that subject.

[Interruption]

Listen to the splutterbrains opposite! No wonder they are out in the corridors predicting a leadership challenge or, indeed, a leadership resignation on Thursday. We await that with interest. The New South Wales Government is spending more than $500,000 on another interesting program to help country communities. That is the Schools as Communities Centres program, which will help families with young children get the support they need and deserve.

I remind members about the Reading Recovery program. The Government introduced that program. We went to the people at the last election and spoke about it. I have news for Opposition members. The people endorsed it at the election on 27 March. As a result of the last election, part of the learning for Opposition members ought to be reading my policy speech. This is all in it; it is all spelled out for them. I am here to help Opposition members upgrade their performance.

Mr O’Doherty: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. It is not relevant for the Premier to mislead the House. The Premier should know that the Reading Recovery program was introduced by Virginia Chadwick during the term of the Fahey Government.

Mr CARR: More than 360 country schools now have the Reading Recovery program; none of them had it under the Coalition. Next year that number of schools will to more than 380 as Labor’s program - encouraged, supported and nurtured by Country Labor members - continues. The community of Windale, which is in the Lake Macquarie area, tops the disadvantaged list in the Vinson report.

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

Mr CARR: The Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development has been working closely with the people of that community. He has worked with local families and the Department of Housing to have their backyards made more private, thus lowering the level of tension in the area. Late last year, following a complaint from a local woman, a community safety audit was held with the assistance of locals and the police. Simple improvements, like the introduction of better street lighting, has helped to address community concerns. That is practical crime prevention. The Minister is in regular contact with the local Anglican priest in the area to help people on a case-by-case basis.

Today I announce the commencement of a Hunter community renewal scheme, which will involve all government agencies. Working with the locals, they will examine ways of improving the physical environment, social and welfare services and training and job opportunities. There was a positive reaction in the Hunter overnight and in this morning’s media to my announcement yesterday about Protech Steel Pty Ltd. People regard that as a practical measure, a government making available excellent industrial land on Kooragang Island to the proponents of this $1.8 billion steel mill proposition.

The reaction in the Newcastle Herald was particularly positive. We will continue to work on that, I hope with the support of all honourable members. However, I do not believe there is anyone from the Hunter Valley on the other side of the Chamber, so the major endeavour will of necessity be on this side of the House. Isn’t it interesting? Regional New South Wales is deserting the Opposition. The country mayors who are sitting in the gallery today are not here to meet with Opposition members; they are here to have afternoon tea with me. My door is always open for Mr Peacocke, the Mayor of Dubbo.

Any mayor of Dubbo is a friend of mine - by definition, ex officio - because the Labor Party is the party of country New South Wales. It is the voice of those communities. It is the party that gave them extra ambulance officers. It found doctors for towns that never had doctors in the past. The Government has never closed a country hospital. The Government has reopened rail lines for country communities that were closed by the Coalition. We are investigating the opening of more closed and abandoned rural rail lines and, in that endeavour, we have the co-operation of the excellent Independent members from country New South Wales, who are always keeping us on our toes with their constructive criticism and their good ideas. That is the kind of Government we are.

The scheme that I am talking about will formalise the links that the excellent Minister Assisting the Premier on the Hunter has already forged with locals, the council and community and religious groups. Staff will be recruited before Christmas and the scheme will be expanded over the next five years to include other communities in the region. A creative partnership with the community is the only way forward to meet the social challenges
Page 1670
highlighted by Professor Vinson. The people of New South Wales expect their governments - Federal, State and local - to do all they can to give everyone a fair go and to provide special assistance to those in need. At the end of the day we must all work to ensure that those towns and suburbs doing it tough get their fair share, as well as our support, to lift their prospects.

Mr TORBAY: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation. When will the people of country New South Wales receive details of their involvement in national Water Week?

Mr AMERY: I suppose it is fair to say that the Water Week program has been reasonably well publicised around rural New South Wales. The program is also receiving quite considerable publicity mainly through local newspaper lift-outs and the like, but I suppose not all honourable members have been able to obtain up-to-date information on what is happening with the Water Week program, which commenced in 1993. The short answer is that the New South Wales Government is actively involved in supporting Water Week, which of course occurs this week.

The question from the honourable member for Northern Tablelands is topical and relevant to what is happening in his electorate. In my recent visits to his electorate I noted that not only people from the university, Landcare groups and so on were involved with the program, but the people in the local community and schools in Armidale are also very much involved with Water Week and Landcare projects. Indeed, one Armidale high school has on display a model Landcare project, which is a credit to the school and demonstrates leadership from all of these projects around the State.

[Interruption]

The honourable member for Northern Tablelands is a little more on the ball than the honourable member for Barwon! Today he gave notice of a motion asking me to explain why I have not introduced legislation for a national livestock identification scheme 10 minutes after I gave notice of the proposed introduction of the bill! He really is on the ball! Water Week was officially launched on 17 October with a Canoe Discovery Tour on Penrith Lakes. This was held at the Sydney International Regatta Centre, one of the official Olympics sites. Until 23 October many more events will be held to mark this special event.

Throughout New South Wales today schoolchildren in years 5 to 8 are taking part in the annual spring water bug survey. Students go to their local waterways and monitor the presence of water bugs. This work is a good indication of river health, and all the information is put together on a special Internet web site. About 400 schools across the State are currently taking part in the survey and numbers of participating schools increase steadily every year. The Department of Land and Water Conservation [DLWC] has also produced some information and resource kits for teachers to help them structure classroom activities that focus on the value of water resources.

High schools in the Tamworth area are putting together a moving art mural display that depicts the importance of water usage in the Namoi, Gwydir and Macintyre catchments. Mildura West Public School, in conjunction with the Mallee Catchment Authority, hosted the 1999 Young People’s River Health Conference over the past few days. Tomorrow the James Joyce Foundation is holding the 1999 Anna Livia Awards at the Sydney Opera House. This event is open to high school students throughout New South Wales and asks them to compose a piece of music that is inspired by their local rivers. The honourable member for Barwon may be able to help them with that one!

Staff from the Department of Land and Water Conservation are also actively involved with this program. They are holding a number of open days, tours and wall walks on DLWC operated dams such as Copeton, Pindari and Windamere. River rallies will also be held in Quirindi, Inverell, Tenterfield and Dubbo to provide school groups and the wider community with information about their local rivers, and perhaps a barbecue or social gathering may be held to round off the day.

This Friday the department will host an information forum at the University of New South Wales. The deputy director-general, Susan Kemp, will present the Rivercare 2000 and New South Wales Landcare Awards. In Wagga Wagga the Salt Action group is holding a dry land salinity bus tour of the area today and tomorrow. More than 80 local councils across the State are getting involved in Water Week, including Armidale, which is in the electorate of the honourable member for Northern Tablelands.

The Clarence River County Council is holding water efficiency workshops and councils on the North Coast are holding their annual Water Week consumption competition. Local councils in the region compete to see which council can lower its
Page 1671
water consumption rate the most. Through these activities and many like them the Department of Land and Water Conservation is working to promote awareness of good water management.

The department is working in partnership with the community and other government agencies on a range of programs. If the honourable member for Northern Tablelands would like more information, I have a number of information kits in my office. He may contact me or my office after question time and we will give him full details of the program around New South Wales. I thank him for this very important question.

Mr BLACK: My question without notice is to the Minister for Community Services. How is the Government helping country families provide child care in rural and regional areas?

Mrs LO PO’: No member is more in touch with communities in the country than the honourable member for Murray-Darling. Every parent deserves access to good quality flexible child care, no matter where they live. This is particularly so in remote parts of the State. I have first-hand accounts from country parents, many of whom have had to travel many kilometres to access their closest child care service. This has put enormous pressure on country families, especially during busy harvesting periods when one parent is forced to stay at home while the other works on the farm.

In other circumstances parents are forced to take their children with them while they work, exposing them to serious risk of injury from heavy machinery. I know my Country Labor colleagues will agree with me that country families deserve their fair share of support and resources. To do that we are bringing mobile child care to families in remote areas. I can inform the House of a new service now up and running in rural New South Wales that is making a real difference to the lives of families in the bush.

Trained early childhood staff will travel up to 150 kilometres from a base in Hay, in the Riverina-Murray area, to provide families with much-needed child care during busy shearing and harvesting periods. This will allow both parents to work on the farm during periods of peak activity reassured in the knowledge that their children are well cared for. Husbands and wives, mums and dads, will now be able to work together during harvest and sheep shearing seasons. The travelling child care service can care for up to 10 children on one farm or 20 in a public venue such as community centres at any one time. It can even provide overnight care in special circumstances.

Perhaps the best part of this service is the important role it will play for isolated parents. A young mother living many kilometres from her closest next-door neighbour and hours from her family or friends faces special challenges. This service shows that this Government is determined to see that all families in New South Wales have access to high quality child care services that can be tailored to meet their needs. Whether a family lives in Hornsby or Hay, Campbelltown or Cobar, Manly or Moree, the Government understands the needs and services required by every family.

This Government understands that all families need their fair share of services. Since coming to government we have spent more than $6 million extra on flexible child care in rural and remote parts of the State. That is on top of $30 million allocated every year to more than 600 services in rural areas. Extra funding of $250,000 has already been approved to boost up to 30 mobile services operating in rural and remote areas. In addition to this boost to mobile child care services we are making preschool services more affordable for country families.

I know that my Country Labor colleagues will be delighted to hear that up to 7,500 families will benefit from the extra half million dollars from some 260 rural preschool services to further reduce fees for families on low incomes. I would like to thank Country Labor members of Parliament for their hard work in ensuring that country New South Wales gets its fair share of child care services.

Mr TINK: My question is to the Minister for Police. Why did he sign the new multimillion dollar salary package for the Commissioner of Police on 8 February when the Statutory and Other Officers Remuneration Tribunal did not set the commissioner’s salary level until the following day, 9 February, as evidenced in these documents?

Mr WHELAN: This matter has been canvassed for some considerable time, leading to the commissioner issuing a statement recently. I refer the honourable member for Epping to the commissioner’s statement, and to all the other public statements that have been made in relation to the commissioner.

Page 1672

Mr TINK: I ask a supplementary question. Why did the Minister’s office mislead the media on 9 March, the day after the writs were issued for the State election, by stating that the Minister had nothing to do with the salary negotiation?

Mr WHELAN: I refer the honourable member to my previous answer. I repeat what I said yesterday for the benefit of the honourable member for Epping. It is very important. The Commissioner of Police has a very difficult job. It was a difficult job when the Coalition was in office and we had police commissioners Griffiths and Pickering, and other luminaries of that nature. But we have changed the culture of the New South Wales Police Service as a result of the royal commission.

When we selected the Commissioner of Police we undoubtedly selected the best man for the job. I would say unequivocally that we have exceptional value for the commissioner’s salary, which the honourable member seems to have such a passionate interest in. One day I would like to hear him say that the commissioner enjoys his confidence and that he will support the commissioner in the reform process in New South Wales and not make the same mistake the Coalition made when in government of not supporting the royal commissioner. He should now support the Commissioner of Police.

Questions without notice concluded.

Mr WOODS (Clarence - Minister for Local Government, Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs) [3.33 p.m.]: This motion is urgent because it concerns an issue that could prove to be a matter of life or death in country New South Wales. Nothing should be more urgent or important to members of this House than the health and welfare of its citizens. The announcement by Telstra that it intends to close its pager service, the lifeline of country doctors and emergency services, is a life-threatening act.

It is urgent to debate the motion in this House today because such an act is preventable. It is urgent to debate the motion in this House today because Telstra must be made aware of the outrage in country New South Wales. It is urgent to debate this motion today so that the Federal Government, as Telstra’s 51 per cent shareholder, can stop this plan before it comes into effect. But, most importantly, the motion is urgent for country doctors and rural emergency services who need the pager service to help save lives in country New South Wales.

Mr J. H. TURNER (Myall Lakes - Deputy Leader of the National Party) [3.34 p.m.]: My motion urging a moratorium on compulsory competitive tendering [CCT] - at least until the Standing Committee on State Development, chaired by the Hon. A. B. Kelly in the other place, has completed a social impact study into the social and economic problems for country New South Wales as a result of CCT - is most urgent because CCT will have the most devastating effect on country New South Wales that has ever been seen. Mr Kelly has advised the Minister that it will take at least 12 months to complete the study. More importantly, we need to debate this matter because Country Labor is stillborn.

Country Labor is faced with a dilemma. This is one of the most important issues for country New South Wales that has ever confronted the Labor Party, yet Country Labor has walked away from it. The motion is urgent because we need to know why the arrogant Minister for the city rolled Country Labor members in caucus, and said that he intended to continue to implement the policy. We need to know urgently why this arrogant city-based Minister rolled the former Minister for Local Government, the honourable member for Coogee, and told him that the matter would continue when the honourable member for Coogee warned him that in 2003 when Labor goes to the polls it will rue its decision not to dump CCT.

It is urgent that we know why Country Labor failed the first big test it faced. We need to tell Country Labor to get rid of its signs and save money on its registration because if it cannot be successful on this fundamental matter, it will not be successful in respect of anything. Country Labor is impotent and we should be told why it was so impotent in regard to this matter. We need to know why Country Labor cannot implement country policy. The Labor Party policy on CCT, which is therefore Country Labor policy because they are indistinguishable, clearly states:

NSW Labor rejects compulsory competitive tendering (CCT) in local government . . . when CCT significantly reduces employment levels in local government. This is particularly relevant in rural and remote areas where councils are significant employers and the economic viability of many country towns are dependent upon the council work force.

That is Labor Party policy, but Country Labor has walked away from that policy rather than face up to this arrogant city-based Minister. We also need to know why the Minister for Local Government has added his voice to the statement that the Minister for Roads is against country policy. On 20 October the Minister for Local Government said:

Page 1673

Yes NSW Labor Party Policy does reject a Compulsory Competitive Tendering in Local Government.

The Labor Party needs this debate more than the Coalition does, to try to sort out where it is going. But we also need to know why the Government has refused to assist the Municipal Employees Union [MEU] in this matter. Members of the Coalition were certainly out there with the MEU - we stood shoulder to shoulder on the truck with its members - but we did not see a Labor Party person anywhere. A letter written by the Premier to the MEU prior to the election said:

The Government ruled out compulsory competitive tendering for Local Government before the election so it would be a disgrace to see it introduced by the backdoor via forced tendering of roadworks.

This House needs information on the table as to why the Government has dishonoured not only its policy but its undertaking to the MEU and the Australian Workers Union [AWU]. We also need to know why Country Labor walked away from the State Australian Labor Party conference, which voted for the inclusion of a proper reference of the social impact of CCT in the terms of reference forwarded to the Kelly committee.

We need to know why Country Labor is so impotent and cannot deal with a matter as simple and as basic as ruling out CCT, which will have an incredible effect on country New South Wales. We want an explanation from the Minister as to why he is riding roughshod over country New South Wales, why he is riding roughshod over Country Labor and why he is determined to introduce CCT come hell or high water.

The Premier should be made aware of this information as well because he is having afternoon tea with mayors from country councils, who are here because they want the answers that cannot be provided by Country Labor or the Labor Party as to why compulsory competitive tendering [CTT] is being inflicted upon them by this arrogant, city-based mud roads Minister, who is riding roughshod over country New South Wales. Country Labor has demonstrated that it is useless in country and rural New South Wales.

Question - That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Clarence be proceeded with - agreed to.

Mr WOODS (Clarence - Minister for Local Government, Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs) [3.40 p.m.]: I move:

That this House:

(1) expresses its alarm at Telstra’s decision to axe pager services from midnight on 30 June 2000;

(2) calls on the Federal Government to stop Telstra from carrying out its plan; and

(3) notes the life-threatening impact the withdrawal of this service, from country doctors and rural emergency services, will have on country areas.

Telstra’s decision to axe its pager service is a matter of urgency because it involves protecting and saving lives. Telstra informed its pager service customers that the service would not be sold but would simply be axed from midnight on 30 June 2000. In a letter addressed to its pager customers on 17 September Telstra wrote:

In July last year we advised you that negotiations were under way to sell Telstra’s paging business. These negotiations have now ceased and the intended sale will not be proceeding.

As a result, and following a thorough review of all available alternatives, Telstra has decided to close down its paging business, effective from midnight June 30, 2000.

Telstra says it naturally regrets any inconvenience that may be experienced as a result of its decision. Telstra further said that it "will make every effort to assist with your transition to another paging service or Telstra digital mobile service." This is an alarming decision by Telstra. It obviously wants to push people into using the digital mobile service but that service provides much less coverage than the present paging service. Telstra promises its customers that it will help in the transition period but that will not achieve anything because the end result is far inferior to the current pager system that many people enjoy.

What will happen in June next year when the pager service is turned off? A doctor may be travelling in an area not covered by the new system. How will the base hospital relay the message that the doctor must attend the hospital straightaway for emergency surgery? This is not good enough. It is risky and dangerous, and it could put lives at risk. It is difficult to say how many pager users will be affected, particularly in rural areas, because Telstra cannot tell us. However, it has said that it has 20,000 users in emergency services such as the Rural Fire Service and the State Emergency Service. My office has been in touch with Telstra, which said it would work with the emergency services to find alternatives.

Telstra said that the reason for shutting down the service was because of the move to digital technology. However, I am advised that the pager
Page 1674
service uses a different spectrum to analogue mobile phones and, whilst co-located in many areas, is independent of analogue mobile phone services. In other words, if Telstra wanted to keep the pager service but shut down its analogue mobile phone service, that would be possible. It seems that boardroom profits have overtaken the interests of country people once again. What of these so-called alternatives Telstra has promised to find? Where is the guarantee that the service will provide pager users with the same level of service and coverage when Telstra flicks the switch next June?

There is no guarantee because the proposed service will cover a smaller area. The city has other providers which enable doctors and emergency workers to effectively use a paging system, but where does that leave users in rural and regional parts of New South Wales and Australia? Telstra has pulled out of the sale without giving any reasons. In fact, the only explanation must be the dollar or maintaining its monopoly. I have been told that other paging services are trialling their products in rural areas. I applaud their efforts because they are doing this without the advantage of Telstra’s infrastructure.

However, the results so far are not encouraging. If these services go ahead, the providers will not have the network to provide similar coverage to that of Telstra. The matter was first raised with me by Dr Tyson, a doctor from Grafton Base Hospital and President of the Medical Staff Council. I have met with him and, frankly, he is very concerned. Dr Tyson said that he and other hospital workers at Grafton Base Hospital rely on the coverage that only the Telstra pager service can provide. He said:

This decision could affect not just doctors but any emergency service workers like the Rural Fire Service and ambulance workers.

He told my office that Telstra should give a guarantee that people’s lives will not be put at risk because of the closure of this service. He said this issue relates to all of Australia because digital coverage is not up to scratch, particularly in rural areas. He further said:

What this is about is Telstra’s plans to push its new digital mobile network in rural Australia.

However, that is not a viable alternative for people such as doctors and emergency workers. Dr Tyson stated:

It could risk people’s lives if we don’t have an adequate alternative.

Telstra cannot provide an adequate alternative yet it still intends to close down the service. That is the real urgency. Telstra’s decision may be based on commercial realities or technological advances, but this does not change the fundamental point. Telstra has an obligation to ensure that comparable communications coverage will be available in June, which is only eight months away, or it should maintain the current system until a comparable system is put in place. Digital mobiles are not the answer because they do not cover the same area.

We have heard much in the past few years about Telstra and the universal service obligation [USO]. I read a copy of that document and found it very interesting. The USO talks about ensuring equity of service for standard telephones, payphones and prescribed carriage services. But pager services or related Telstra products are not listed in the USO. Telstra could argue that it is a commercial decision and therefore it does not have an obligation to provide the service because it is not part of the written USO. However, Telstra has an obligation to people living in rural and regional Australia. We keep hearing that refrain from Canberra. Where is the social responsibility that the Carr Labor Government calls on the corporate world to display?

Only yesterday we reminded the banks that there is more to their business than just the profit line. There is a social responsibility to provide a level of service to customers, particularly in rural and regional areas. Action should be taken in the national and State interest, rather than Telstra just looking at the bottom line. I remind the House that the National Party has lost all credibility on this issue. Only this week National Party leader and Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson indicated that the National Party was prepared to support the full privatisation of Telstra irrespective of whether an inquiry into Telstra’s service levels was held.

That flies in the face of the Coalition’s election commitment in 1998 that no more than 49.9 per cent of Telstra would be sold off prior to an independent inquiry into service levels, particularly in rural and regional Australia. This demonstrates to the people of rural and regional Australia that the National Party once again has rolled over to the Liberal Party. Why has only the Carr Labor Government raised this serious issue. Why is the National Party in Canberra not storming the office of Senator Alston for an answer?

I invite National Party members to join me in asking Senator Alston to direct Telstra to give a guarantee that its axing of the pager service will not put lives in the bush at risk. We are all aware that
Page 1675
the Howard Government has failed in its commitment to improve Telstra’s performance in the bush. The Federal Government promises tougher sanctions and tougher penalties, but provides nothing. The Federal Government says that Telstra has obligations, but it has failed to act to ensure that Telstra carries out those obligations.

The Federal Government sold out country people when it privatised Telstra. It promised the world, including a great deal of spending in regional areas to overcome Telstra’s problems in the bush. Great loads of money was promised in electorates of crucial Independents, but Telstra is still failing its customers in the bush. Telstra’s obligations are to provide equal service and protect lives. That applies to everyone - not only those who live in Sydney but also those who live in Tweed Heads, Broken Hill and Bega. A universal service obligation is Telstra’s contract with its customers. Surely, even if it is not written, the pager service falls into the category of a universal service obligation.

Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan) [3.50 p.m.]: At the outset I ask the Minister whether he has the full support of all members of the Australian Labor Party, including the so-called Country Labor faction. I note with interest that if a division is called in this matter, a number of Labor Party members would have to disqualify themselves from voting because they have declared in the Pecuniary Interests Register a legal and financial interest in Telstra.

I raise this issue early in my speech to allow the Minister time to speak with Government members who hold shares, as evidenced by entries in the Pecuniary Interests Register. I would not like honourable members to be compromised or to be involved in trouble with you, Mr Speaker, or with the House if they were to vote on a matter in which they clearly have a financial interest. By condemning Telstra and the services it provides, the Minister has actually placed some of the members of his own party in a somewhat difficult position.

Having said that, may I also say that there is no doubt that the Minister was correct when he referred to the benefits provided by the paging service. Although I am using a very rough rule of thumb, my recollection is that pagers were probably the first of the new high-tech communications equipment used in country and city areas approximately 20 years ago. As all honourable members would know, there are three communications systems available: the digital system; the analogue system, which was the first mass communications mobile network incorporating very limited use of satellite technology; and, as at October 1999, the code division multiple access system [CDMA] which is being introduced in some areas of the State.

Telstra has announced those areas, produced maps and provided opportunities for briefings. That system will be phased in over the next 12 months throughout New South Wales and, at the same time, the analogue system will be phased out. Recently I had the opportunity to trial a CDMA handset for approximately seven days, and I found it quite satisfactory. Telstra claims that it will cover approximately the same area as the analogue system, and believes that CDMA may be more effective than other systems in open country.

Despite the limited time that I had available for the trial, I would agree with that statement. To some extent I can see where Telstra is coming from in wanting to replace its pager service with a paging service connected to the CDMA. I tried the CDMA a couple of times and I can assure the Minister that it works when receiving and sending messages, but I acknowledge that my experience is limited to a very short trial. It is a fact of life that all people have become used to technology.

Earlier I referred to the commencement of the technological age 20 years ago. While I recognise that people communicated with each other prior to that, there is no doubt that members of the private community, parents and doctors are all greatly dependent upon innovative communication equipment. The providers of communication services have a responsibility to ensure that the expectations they have created are satisfied by the delivery of and access to the new technologies on an ongoing basis. It is neither fair and sensible nor is it right for major operators to introduce technological services and operate on a hot and cold basis.

There must be a continuing, if not escalating, level of efficiency in the provision of these types of services. As the Minister said, Telstra has indicated that there will be other service providers, such as Link Telecommunications, which will provide specialist message and call centre solutions as well as comparable paging services for those customers who wish to transfer to an alternative provider. Link has in excess of 30 years experience in the paging industry and operates a nationwide call centre and paging network.

If I remember correctly, when I was the Leader of the National Party I had one or two Link pagers, and there is little difference between them and the pagers provided by Telstra. All I know is that they certainly cost a fair amount of money. It is
Page 1676
fair to say that Telstra has given some undertakings to assist in the transfer process and in ensuring that its customers experience minimal disruption, should they choose to retain a paging service. I believe it is incumbent upon Telstra to make it very clear how it proposes to give that assistance. Telstra should spell out the time frame, the costs and the mechanics of making that change.

A consideration of Telstra services reminds me of the old story of the 90-year-old Irishman who was interviewed on his ninetieth birthday. The interviewer asked him, "I suppose you have seen many changes, Patrick?", and he replied, "That I have, that I have. And I have opposed every one of them!" There is something of that attitude towards many things that are new in this day and age. It should be remembered that change is inevitable. Telstra services in the last 30 years or so have gone from the horse-and-buggy age to one of the most advanced in the world, so we are told. I suspect that is one of the reasons why Australians have become the world’s biggest users of mobile telephones.

Australians have a penchant for adapting to new technology. Australia as a nation really took to fax machines and, on a per capita basis, was the greatest user in the world. Now Australians are the greatest users of mobile telephones, which is relevant to a consideration of the difficulties related to distance that are experienced in this country. Australia is a heavily urbanised nation in a very small percentage of the land mass. Telstra advises that, so far as the provision of mobile telephone services are concerned, it is servicing 92 per cent of the population.

However, Telstra may be fudging the figures because 92 per cent of the population lives in approximately 8 per cent of the land mass. That means that 92 per cent of the land mass is simply not getting the same level of service as is provided in urbanised areas. I am sure that all honourable members understand about the use of figures. In this House from time to time members use figures to suit a particular argument.

There is no doubt that Telstra mobile phones and pagers are tools of mass communication but they are not necessarily available to the entire land mass. If any changes are proposed, I want an equality of service for the land mass throughout Australia, particularly if the Government intends to decentralise development and promote a greater spread of the population to make better use of underutilised infrastructure resources that exist in country towns throughout New South Wales.

The Minister is responsible for decentralisation, regional planning and development. He is probably desirous of attracting greater numbers of people to country areas but he has had very little success at this stage - as a matter of fact, there is no evidence of success at all. If he wishes to succeed, he will have to ensure equality by providing to country subscribers a uniform standard of telecommunication services at costs comparable with those paid by businesses, bureaucracies and public service organisations in metropolitan areas.

The Minister will have to do that if he wishes to successfully explain why departments are being moved en bloc into country areas as quickly as within this financial year to provide a better distribution of taxpayer funds and business activity throughout rural New South Wales. The subject matter of the motion moved by the Minister is certainly important. The Opposition believes that Telstra has a responsibility to provide more information on how it will ensure the provision of a service that is equivalent to the existing pager service and how it will enhance or improve service delivery in the future.

The Government has a responsibility to ensure that 92 per cent of the land mass that does not currently have equality of service is provided with an improved service as the proposed changes are implemented during the next 12 months. In conclusion, I reiterate my suggestion that if a division is called on this motion some members may have difficulty entering this Chamber in the light of their declared pecuniary interests in Telstra.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Lachlan has suggested that members who hold shares in Telstra may be precluded from voting in any division on the motion with which the House is dealing. I draw the attention of the House to what was said by Speaker Levy and Speaker Kelly, who ruled that a personal interest disqualifies a member from voting only if it is a direct pecuniary interest separately belonging to the member and is not held in common with Her Majesty’s subjects or as a matter of State policy. Those remarks would apply to Telstra, an organisation which is partly owned by the Federal Government and in which 49 per cent of the shares are held by subjects of Her Majesty other than members of this Parliament. I propose to follow the rulings to which I have referred.

Mr NEWELL (Tweed) [4.00 p.m.]: Mr Speaker, thank you for taking the trouble to give that thorough and learned refutation of what the
Page 1677
honourable member for Lachlan said regarding members holding shares who may vote in a division on this motion. Your ruling would also apply to members on both sides of the House who own farms, or, as the honourable member for Lachlan argued, owned rural properties, and are involved in divisions. Again Country Labor members condemn the actions of Telstra and again Opposition members are using mealy-mouthed words to cover their actions in not standing up for country areas - they stand up for the big end of town, as usual.

This time the issue is the winding up of pager services in country areas. That technology will soon be available only in the city, and not in country areas. I emphasise that fact, because technology is not being wound back across the State but only in country areas, which will miss out. What remains constant in this debate is Telstra’s performance in country areas. Make no mistake, Telstra has abandoned country people. It has treated the people of regional and rural New South Wales like second-class citizens. The pager issue is but one of the first in a raft of country service cuts; it is the new Telstra at work. The privatisation of Telstra was something that members on this side of the House opposed in both its first and second stages. We knew the dreadful consequences for country people: the level of service would fall dramatically.

A privatised Telstra, whether 33 per cent or 49 per cent, has to be accountable to shareholders. Its obligation to regional areas was always going to take a back seat. This debate is similar to that held this morning regarding the maintaining of service obligations by banks in country areas. What has the Federal Government done to help country people during the privatisation process? During the privatisation of the first 33 per cent of Telstra, as a sweetener, there was a much-hyped $250 million regional telecommunications infrastructure fund. If the Federal Government was so confident that Telstra was going to continue to look after the interests of country people, why would it need to promise such a fund in the first place?

How much of the $250 million regional fund found its way to Australia’s most populous state, New South Wales? It was $37 million, out of $250 million! That is all; not even 15 per cent. To get the sale through the Senate, the Federal Government sold the interests of country New South Wales down the river, because it needed the support of Tasmanian Senator Brian Harradine. That is how much the Nationals and Liberals care for country people; he sold out their interests in a second. Things will only get worse for people in country New South Wales. The Federal Government claims that it will somehow look after country people, and somehow it will make Telstra obligated. Let us get this clear: A fully privatised Telstra - a policy that the Federal Government craves and members opposite support - will be totally beholden to its shareholders. One need look no further than the track record of banks to see what path Telstra will go down in country New South Wales.

Last week Westpac announced more closures. A whopping 206 branches will be shut down in regional and rural New South Wales and Queensland. In contrast, the Government is investing in regional telecommunications infrastructure. My electorate of Tweed has been part of a call centre attraction strategy. This program was designed to get private investors on board in establishing call centres in country areas. Call centres currently employ 30,000 people in New South Wales and the industry is growing at more than 20 per cent per year. Thanks to the State Government, Tweed Heads is now in the race to secure investment and jobs in one of Australia’s fastest growing sectors. Those regional outlets with 40 to 60 positions create over 100 jobs when shift work is taken into consideration.

The State Government is investing in country New South Wales while the Federal Government is walking away from it and is abandoning country people. Country businesses are responding with record levels of confidence in the Carr Government. I commend the Minister for Local Government, Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs on that investment. Telstra’s winding up of country pager services is a disgrace and is extremely dangerous. For instance, anyone wanting to page a country doctor will not be able to do so. Doctors have referred to this scenario as potentially life threatening. Country Labor will continue to push for better services while those opposite sit and do nothing.

Mr PICCOLI (Murrumbidgee) [4.05 p.m.]: I shall point out a few astounding examples of hypocrisy. When Bob Hawke and Paul Keating were in charge, the Federal Government privatised the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. The situation with Telstra is similar. The Commonwealth Bank has not done any favours to rural and regional New South Wales, or Australia, as was alluded to by the honourable member for Tweed. Whilst the country has seen a great deal of rationalisation and privatisation, the Labor Party has certainly been guilty of more than the Coalition. The same situation occurred with Qantas.

Last night this House held a significant debate about the Snowy Hydro scheme and the
Page 1678
Government’s wish to provide a competitive and fully commercial return to that scheme, which is still owned by the Government. Telstra is now 49 per cent privatised, and there is surely a parallel argument there. I would appreciate it if the Labor Party would raise concerns in relation to Snowy Hydro at its next meeting. Communication services in country New South Wales are of great concern. A few years ago Paul Keating signed off on the end of analogue services, which has been a most significant issue in regional New South Wales.

To the credit of the Federal Coalition it has had to spend money for the code division multiple access [CDMA] system to be operational in the near future. Because of the actions of Paul Keating, the Federal Government has spent millions of dollars it would not otherwise have needed to spend - money that could have been spent in other areas. I hope that the honourable member for Tweed remembers that when he is a Federal member and argues against removal of the analogue service. Whilst the socialists opposite have bleated about the privatisation of Telstra and what a terrible thing it is, what about the rest of the community? Honourable members representing the electorates of Peats, Keira, Miranda, Menai, Coogee and Fairfield, all Labor members, have relatively significant interests in Telstra.

Is it such a terrible thing for Telstra to be privatised? Members on the other side of this House have taken the opportunity to profit from that privatisation. Please spare me their hypocrisy. Through correspondence Telstra has assured people that there will be no significant impact following the removal of the pager service. Perhaps it is a little unfortunate that some restructuring will have to be done, but that is the nature of many services that have declined in the past few years. I point out also that Telstra and the banks are doing that but, perhaps more importantly, the State Government is doing it. Hundreds of jobs have been lost in rural and regional New South Wales. Debate is taking place about the cutting of jobs and services. If the Government is so concerned it should cut fewer jobs.

Mr BLACK (Murray-Darling) [4.09 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Murrumbidgee for revisiting the events of last night. The events of last night included a disgraceful contribution by the temporary Leader of the National Party and an even more disgraceful contribution from the sacked Leader of the National Party. I note that today the Leader of the National Party has not contributed to the debate and the sacked Leader of the National Party has left the Chamber.

Mr Piccoli: Your leader is not here either.

Mr BLACK: This is Country Labor. I also noted today the very interesting news over the airways down south that I am being attacked because I opposed the payback being extended from one year to five years. I am trying to get rid of the payback completely and the National Party is trying to enshrine it for five years instead of one year. What a remarkable performance from the former agrarian socialists, the former Country Party. How far the National Party is removed from the principles of the old Country Party! The actions of the National Party are all but incomprehensible. In 1996, when the first tranche of Telstra was about to be floated, Senator Alston, the Federal Minister for Communications and the Arts, said:

. . . real economic gains, real consumer benefits, lower prices and a higher quality of service . . . that is what you get in spades from privatisation.

On 28 September this year the National Party spokesman, Peter McGauran, said we should not "confuse ownership with levels of service". What a cave in, what a confession about what is happening in the bush! I have been advised by the Hay Shire Council that a constituent of the honourable member for Murrumbidgee travelled to Booragul to fix a problem for Telstra. Sadly I became aware last week, while travelling in the northern part of my electorate, that technicians were sent from Broken Hill to Bourke - 533 kilometres one way - to fix a phone.

Last week at a council meeting I was informed that someone was sent from Parkes to a property at Tottenham to fix one phone, and that person had to make a phone call at five o’clock to ask for overtime to drive back. The honourable member for Murrumbidgee cannot deny that is happening. It is happening and it is a disgrace. It is also a disgrace that the National Party is backing the Liberals in this madness to flog off Telstra. It is a straight sell-off of the bush.

The sacked Leader of the National Party asked a question about analogue phones. He wants to bring in CDMAs. When we look at the maps to see the area that analogue phones cover and the area that the new CDMAs cover, Wentworth is in the middle. Wentworth will lose its current mobile service, because it is analogue, in the name of progress. That is what the National Party is standing up for and what Country Labor is opposing.

Mr WOODS (Clarence - Minister for Local Government, Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs) [4.14 p.m.], in reply:
Page 1679
Telstra may argue that its pager service is not part of its personal service obligation. The National Party and the Opposition may argue that this is about privatisation. That is a shame, because the issue is too important. It is too simple to say this is commercial reality. Doctors, firefighters, ambulance workers, nurses and other health practitioners need guarantees about this.

They are saving and protecting lives and the last thing they need to worry about is whether they can get a call if they are in a particular geographical place. They have to get the calls in time and Telstra has to guarantee they do get those calls because they could be a matter of life and death. I call on the Federal Government and Telstra to immediately review the decision to axe the pager service and put country people’s minds at ease until they can guarantee that an equal service will be put in place. We will stand side by side with the country people.

Country Labor will be there with them. The issue was raised by a country doctor, and that doctor has real concerns. He is concerned about the welfare of the patients he treats. He is concerned about the effect this commercial decision will have on his ability to do his job. He is concerned that this is simply an attempt to convert him to a new service, which has a reduced ability to provide. At what price will that service come? He came to the Government for help and that is why Country Labor is pleased to heed his call and help him.

We want Telstra and the Federal Government to listen. We want them to listen to Dr Tyson and other concerned doctors. We want them to listen to the ambulance workers and firefighters, who have a job to do. All they want is a guarantee that they can carry out the job, and that they deserve. Telstra must realise that this decision could jeopardise lives in the country. It must maintain the service until the digital service has the same coverage in country areas. The outcomes will be far better and less deadly if Telstra heeds this call.

I thank honourable members for participating in this matter of urgency. Let us forget about privatisation and all those side issues. This is about life and death, about the provision of emergency services at a time of crisis in country areas. Government members are committed to the needs of country people. We have a philosophy that they deserve their fair share of services. That is why this issue is so important. It relates to delivering a fair share in what could be critical times. I urge Telstra to reconsider.

This is not only an issue for Telstra, it is an issue for the Howard Government, which continues to scoff at country people. If it thought about this for one minute it would realise that it should not close the pager service until an equally effective service is provided. Members opposite are reasonable and if they thought about it they would realise that the service should not close until an equal digital scheme is provided. It is evident that lives will be threatened.

Only last week the Federal Leader of the National Party realised the need for Federal involvement in regional development. People in the country will now ask whether he can achieve that. The admission by the Minister that strategic action is needed in the bush is a dramatic departure from the Howard-Costello policy of free market rule. People are asking why this is happening. That Government has not taken the hard policy decisions. It speaks about it but it is not written in policy as it is with this Government.

I am not confident that John Anderson can deliver on this or on any other issue about which he speaks, much as I would like him to be successful. I am sure that that is the feeling in country New South Wales. He has already backed away from an election commitment to hold an inquiry into the privatisation of Telstra. What is he afraid of? Is he afraid that an independent inquiry will reveal what country people have known for the past three years, that Telstra and the National Party have failed them in the bush?

Motion agreed to.

Mrs SKINNER (North Shore) [4.21 p.m.]: Since July this year, after the release of the State budget, many nurses and doctors have spoken out about problems relating to our health system. I have been highlighting those problems for the past 4½ years. Those health professionals have confirmed Coalition claims that the root of the problems in our health system is financial mismanagement on the part of the Carr Government. With the Carr Government’s budget providing no additional funding for health in the coming year, the problems about which these doctors have talked will get even worse. Indeed, that is proving to be the case.

After a great deal of media attention in the early winter months, the Minister for Health, the
Page 1680
Hon. Craig Knowles, eventually made a commitment to maintain front-line hospital services. He was speaking specifically after an outcry in relation to services in western Sydney hospitals. He announced at the time that $42 million, which was to be found through administrative savings, would be injected into front-line health services. If $42 million has been shifted from administration to clinical services, it has done nothing to improve services in our hospitals.

I am intrigued as to how the Minister expects any of us to believe that $42 million has been shifted from administration to clinical services when he is so secretive about everything to do with funding in our hospitals. As I have said, there has been no improvement to the services in our hospitals. In fact, hospitals are still having to look at measures to cut back on their expenditure because there has been no growth in real terms in the health budget this year. For example, more patients are waiting longer for elective surgery. People are waiting longer to get into emergency departments and for other allied health services such as dental care and physiotherapy. I notice that the honourable member for Heathcote laughed at my reference to dental care.

Mr McManus: It is a Federal matter.

Mrs SKINNER: The State Coalition made a commitment to increase funding for dental health by $32 million prior to the election. The Carr Government snubbed its nose at the 120,000 people in this State who are waiting for dental care. The Government has a responsibility to patients in western Sydney and throughout the State and it has let them down. The situation is much worse at Westmead Hospital, which is a good example of the arrogance and hypocrisy of the Government. In July one doctor at Westmead referred to that hospital as being held together with string, chewing gum, band-aids and baling wire. From conversations I have had with that doctor and other senior doctors at the hospital I now understand that, despite the Minister’s commitment that there will be no loss of front-line services, Westmead will have 70 fewer beds than it did a few months ago, that is, at the time of the State election.

In addition, there are now plans to close the 16-bed adolescent ward at Westmead Hospital, a world-class facility that treats young people with conditions such as anorexia. The closure of that ward, which has been built up over 16 years, will affect young people right across New South Wales who suffer from anorexia. It is the only specialist unit of its kind in a public facility. At the moment it treats 800 in-patients, plus an additional 120 out-patients each month. The Health Department claims that the ward will be closed only temporarily while it is being refurbished. However, specialists in the ward have told me that the unit will not be reopened. In 1996 the former Minister for Health, Andrew Refshauge, stated in this House:

Eating disorders kill and are on the rise. There are approximately 400 new cases of anorexia per year in New South Wales and as many as 7,500 sufferers at one time.

He went on to say:

There are now specialist units in our major hospitals given over to the treatment of teenagers determined to starve or binge themselves to death.

The closure of this ward makes a mockery of the Carr Government’s commitment to young people who suffer from eating disorders. There are other planned closures of adolescent wards. Doctors at Nepean Hospital have told me that the adolescent ward and the birthing unit proposed for the new building to be opened by the Minister - dare I say with great fanfare - later this year will not proceed. So adolescents and young people in Westmead are being let down by the Government. The facility to be included in the new building for mothers and children will now not proceed. Australian Labor Party candidates who promised those services during the election campaign should be calling on the Minister for Health to ensure that the promised services are delivered.

Other issues at Nepean Hospital include the lack of an increase in recurrent funding to open the new hospital building, the 26 additional beds promised will not open, the 23 beds which are currently closed due to renovations will not reopen, the $1 million promised for drug and alcohol treatment has not resulted in the opening of any new beds, and the hospital has received less than half of the $1 million promised for the intensive care unit. Honourable members will remember a short time ago the outcry of nurses at the New Children’s Hospital, which is also serving the west, because of plans by that hospital to close the babies and toddlers wards. That closure was forestalled. There is a three-month moratorium on plans to close that facility after nurses threatened to take industrial action. The General Secretary of the Nurses Association, Sandra Moait, is quoted in the Daily Telegraph on 13 September as saying that the nurses were stunned when they learned of the proposal. She is also reported as saying that relocating those beds to other wards would severely downgrade the care given to toddlers and babies.

Page 1681

That is exactly what will happen when the adolescent ward at Westmead is closed. The closure represents a downgrading of services to people who need that specialist care. There has been a great deal of local concern about the Government’s future plans for Auburn hospital. The Western Integrated Network Strategy revealed five proposals for Auburn hospital. Three of the options were to close the hospital altogether. All five options recommended closing the emergency department and downgrading the hospital to the performance of day surgery only. The Health Department has denied my freedom of information requests to access minutes relating to the discussion of these issues. The Minister says that the hospital will not close. I want an assurance from the Minister that the hospital will not be downgraded and that none of the services that it currently provides to the local community will be lost.

Bankstown-Lidcombe hospital is another local facility serving western Sydney. I am deeply concerned about the recent announcement that Bankstown-Lidcombe hospital is being forced to close a 28-bed ward because of budget constraints. Slashing bed numbers means that hospital waiting lists will continue to increase and more pressure will be placed on an already overcrowded emergency department. The Minister’s response to a question about plans to cut hospital bed numbers was that the closure of beds at any hospital is good bed management. If that is what the Minister thinks, he should explain to all the people on hospital waiting lists what he is intending do for them. He must explain what his idea of good bed management means to the 48,000 people who are currently waiting for elective surgery in our hospitals.

Waiting lists for elective surgery across the State have increased by nearly 3,500 in the three months since the Hon. Craig Knowles became the Minister for Health. The increases are particularly high for western Sydney hospitals. For example, the number of people waiting for surgery at Bankstown-Lidcombe hospital increased from 1,167 in March 1999 to 1,342 in June 1999, an increase of 175 patients, and the number of people waiting for surgery at Auburn increased from 452 patients in March 1999 to 760 in June 1999. In Macarthur - the Camden and Campbelltown area - the numbers have increased from 1,220 to 1,350; at Westmead, from 1,894 to 2,042; at Nepean, from 1,922 to 2,057; at Liverpool, from 1,549 to 1,715; and at the New Children’s Hospital, from 1,508 to 1,576.

We do not know how many more people have been forced onto waiting lists since June because the Minister has failed to release those figures. However, going on past performances those figures will not be made public until the day before I am due to get them under freedom of information provisions, and I predict confidently that they will not be an improvement. The Minister can no longer bury his head in the sand and hope that the announcement of reviews, committees and inquiries will divert public scrutiny from the impact of the cuts he is forcing on hospitals. It is time for the Minister to stop playing politics and to start acting like a real health Minister and fix the hospital crisis in the State, particularly for the population growth areas like western Sydney.

Mr McMANUS (Heathcote - Parliamentary Secretary) [4.30 p.m.]: It is obvious the Opposition has failed dismally in the bush because suddenly it once again targets western Sydney. If one examines the results of the last election, it is obvious why the Labor Party is in government: the people of western Sydney believe in the Government and do not accept the Opposition’s lies. Let me tell the House the truth of the matter. Funding for health in western Sydney for 1999-2000 is in excess of $1.1 billion. That is an increase of 46 per cent since 1994-95. In this financial year almost $100 million has been allocated for capital works in western Sydney, including facilities at Camden, Campbelltown, Blacktown, Blue Mountains, Penrith and Westmead.

That is despite the Federal Government’s cuts, which have meant a direct loss of more than $500 million to the New South Wales health system. The shadow minister mentioned that that includes the abolition of funding for the Commonwealth dental program. It also includes an effective cut of $59 million in funding for western Sydney as a result of the Federal Government’s failure to compensate the States for the decline in private health insurance rates. Funding for new and upgraded hospitals, specialised cancer services, women’s health and other services is making it easier for people from western Sydney to obtain health care without having to travel long distances. Under the Carr Labor Government western Sydney health services will continue to expand to keep up with the population growth of the area, which will be half of the total population of Sydney in future decades.

Today the number of patients being treated has increased by 30,000 per annum over the number treated under the previous Coalition Government. Nepean Hospital now has specialised cancer units, palliative care is available at Mount Druitt hospital, and cardiac surgery is performed at Liverpool Hospital. We have had a major investment in Liverpool and Nepean hospitals, overseen the transfer of the New Children’s Hospital to Westmead
Page 1682
and commenced the redevelopment of Mount Druitt and Blacktown hospitals. The Government has provided record funding of more than $1 billion per annum for hospital and health facilities and services across western Sydney.

Westmead Hospital admits more than 58,000 patients each here. It now receives 22 per cent more in funding than was provided by the previous Coalition Government. We have increased the funding by 22 per cent over that provided by the same members who are screaming at us. A refurbished emergency department and a second cardiac catheter laboratory give patients access to better and faster treatment locally. The Carr Labor Government installed a new linear accelerator at Westmead. The New Children’s Hospital, which moved from Camperdown to Westmead now receives $100 million in funding per annum. The hospital treats more than 28,000 children each year in Sydney’s west rather than requiring them to travel to Sydney for treatment.

The New Children’s Hospital also employs 11 per cent more staff and receives 54 per cent more in funding under the Carr Labor Government compared to the previous Coalition Government. The Kidsnet telephone service at Westmead Hospital helps parents with sick children assess what medical care or services are needed for their children. The new facilities are providing services such as liver transplant and facial reconstruction surgery, which were previously unavailable.

Ms Seaton: How do they rate in Bulli?

Mr McMANUS: I would like to talk to you about your area. You are a disgrace to the people in your region. I have had a look at the local hospital. You are a disgrace and the members before you were also a disgrace. Cardiothoracic surgery is available for the first time in south-west Sydney following a major upgrade of Liverpool Hospital. A total of 600 patients have now been treated in Sydney’s west - close to their homes, near family and friends - rather than having to travel to Sydney for surgery.

Under the Carr Labor Government Liverpool Hospital admits an extra 12,000 patients each year, an increase of 37 per cent. It employs more staff, an increase of 43 per cent, and it receives more funding, an increase of 66 per cent, compared to the previous Coalition Government. There is a pattern in all of this compared to the way things were under the Coalition. The honourable member for North Shore behaved disgracefully the last time we met face to face in a debate and she is a disgrace now. A second linear accelerator was commissioned for Liverpool Hospital in 1995 and now provides improved cancer care for patients of Sydney’s south-west. Liverpool’s Cancer Therapy Centre provides comprehensive services in specialised oncology, breast cancer, lymphoma and gynaecological cancer. Nepean Hospital, which has been mentioned earlier, has been redeveloped into a major referral and teaching hospital under Labor.

Mrs Skinner: By the Coalition.

Mr McMANUS: The Coalition has not been in power for some time. How can the Coalition take credit for that? The Coalition has not been here. The people do not want the Coalition in New South Wales. Under Labor, Nepean Hospital admits nearly 9,000 extra patients each year, an increase of 36 per cent. It employs more staff, an increase of 35 per cent, and it receives more funding, an increase of 89 per cent, compared with the state of affairs under the Coalition Government. Once again I am becoming repetitious but these are the facts. The new four-storey $40 million building to provide health services to women and children at Nepean Hospital is almost complete and will provide neonatal intensive care services, a birthing centre and new wards.

The new Cancer Care Centre at Nepean Hospital was built at a cost of $11 million and provides comprehensive cancer care, including surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and palliative care services. More than 1,200 cancer patients will receive care close to their homes, near their families and friends in Sydney’s west rather than having to travel once again to Sydney for surgery, as they had to under the administration of the people on the other side of the House. Other new services at Nepean Hospital include increased surgery, improved cardiac and reproductive health services, improved diagnostics and oncology, a new pain management clinic and a $1.3 million CT scanner to help deliver faster diagnoses of illnesses and injuries.

The new $3.3 million detoxification unit at Fairfield Hospital is being built to treat drug users as part of the Carr Labor Government’s commitment to tackling the drug problem. The $7 million upgrade of the Blue Mountains hospital is providing better care for local residents with its new accident and emergency unit, operating theatre, ambulatory care centre and relocated pathology unit. The expansion of services in the Macarthur network has commenced with the commitment of $85 million for the redevelopment and refurbishment of Campbelltown and Camden hospitals, along with additional community health facilities.

Page 1683

The redevelopment of the Blacktown and Mount Druitt hospitals into state-of-the-art health facilities has begun at a cost of $96 million. Wards have been upgraded and a new community health centre and palliative care unit have been built at Mount Druitt hospital. I have to say that this is the most ridiculous matter of public importance I have heard of since I have been in this place! The old Bankstown Hospital has been replaced with a new $77 million hospital that features state-of-the-art technology and ultra-modern design to provide more and better services to the people of the area. Auburn hospital has expanded services in ambulatory care and women’s health, and has developed better services to target its ethnically diverse local community.

Mrs Skinner: Who wrote this?

Mr McMANUS: The honourable member for North Shore does not like it but she is going to hear it. Four new community health centres costing $7 million have opened at Penrith, Cranebrook, Springwood and St Clair, providing health education and prevention, women’s health services, drug and alcohol counselling, and nursing and allied services. The new Wollondilly Community Health Centre at Tahmoor has been completed. How is the Southern Highlands electorate going now? Since 1995 there has been good news from the Carr Government for drug and alcohol services in western Sydney. The Ted Noffs Foundation was awarded the tender for the construction of a 12-bed Youth Drug Rehabilitation Centre worth $900,000.

Ms Seaton: There is no dentist in Bowral.

Mr McMANUS: I was down at Bowral. I opened the community health centre.

Ms Seaton: There is no dentist.

Mr McMANUS: Bowral had a dentist when I was there. What have you done with him? You must be a lousy member of Parliament if you cannot control the dentist in your region. We are not completely finished in Bowral. We have plans. The Government is delivering on the commitments it made in the election campaign and it is putting its plans into action. The stage two development of Nepean Hospital and the opening of the new four-storey, $40 million building to provide women’s and children’s health services and neonatal intensive care services -

Mrs Skinner: It doesn’t have a birthing centre.

Mr McMANUS: A birthing centre and new wards for the Penrith area are on time for opening in January.

Mrs Skinner: No birthing centre. You have been misled.

Mr McMANUS: The Government is completing the $85 million redevelopment and refurbishment of Campbelltown and Camden hospitals as part of the Carr Labor Government’s MacArthur health network. That plan will allow for a range of improvements, including an additional 11,500 admissions per year. [Time expired.]

Ms SEATON (Southern Highlands) [4.40 pm]: Health services in western Sydney are at crisis point. They are impacting adversely on people in my electorate and in south-west Sydney. The honourable member for Heathcote spoke about the Tahmoor Medical Centre, which is virtually empty. I want a specialist medical centre that will be a magnet for other general practitioners and will stop the exodus of people from my area to access medical services elsewhere. At that point there are very slim pickings. Very often my constituents cannot find those services when they need them.

The honourable member for Heathcote spoke about the much-needed Bowral community centre. But we still have no senior dentist after months of waiting, after the health service has tried for months to attract someone to a system that most dentists know pays poorly and, therefore, has no incentive to join it. There is a great deal of evidence in my electorate this week of the abject failure of the Government, and that evidence comes in the wake of other examples. A huge proportion of Southern Highlands residents have to travel out of the area for treatment, and still they cannot get it. In the public health system we lack local ophthalmology, renal services, cancer services and geriatric services.

Recently a mother from Wollondilly waited 11 hours in Campbelltown Hospital with her daughter to be told that her daughter needed to change her diet. When another doctor looked at the child she was listed for surgery for a serious condition. This week there was another major breakdown in the health services on which those in my area rely. In detailing this example I will not mention the names of those concerned because of the sensitivity of the situation, and I am sure honourable members will respect that. The incident involves a family in a great deal of distress. A woman with a severe alcohol dependency problem appeared in a Local Court in my area. She was declared an inebriate and
Page 1684
ordered by the magistrate to spend three months at the Cumberland Hospital at Westmead.

Mrs Skinner: Court ordered.

Ms SEATON: Absolutely. It was a court-ordered admission. The woman’s family, upon contacting the hospital, was told that she was out of area and therefore the admission would not be accepted. There is nowhere else she could have gone. There is no facility in my area to help people with drug and alcohol problems. She had no choice but to go out of area, but when she went to Cumberland Hospital she was told that she could not be accepted because she was out of area. It is an absolute disgrace. The family was put under a great deal of stress and the woman experienced a further episode of distress. An officer of the court also contacted Westmead Hospital, but without success.

Not even the court could persuade the hospital to take her. The family also contacted Rozelle Hospital, the Chisholm Ross Hospital at Goulburn and Waratah House at Campbelltown. These institutions would not accept the admission. The family also contacted a detoxification facility at Fairfield, which refused the admission because it was not voluntary. There are no facilities in the Southern Highlands. This woman had no choice but to go out of area. My office staff - and I acknowledge the help they gave the family and I thank them for it - spent a good deal of yesterday afternoon on the phone on behalf of this family trying to find a place for this woman.

In the meantime the woman concerned got herself into an even more desperate situation. Apparently she used some more alcohol to try to help her cope with the situation. The family was in absolutely desperate straits. It had gone through the drama of a court appearance and now it was going through the drama of having to fight to get the woman into a western Sydney health facility, as had been ordered by the court. Eventually we had a breakthrough. But if that family had not had the presence of mind to contact my office what would have happened? It would have been another statistic, another example of unmet need. Who knows what would have happened to the woman concerned.

What would have happened if my staff had not put an entire afternoon into chasing around to find her a place to meet her needs. We all heard the Premier talk in this place during the Drug Summit about detoxification facilities, rehabilitation and residential detoxification facilities. The Premier has done nothing. He has not committed to treble the funding for detoxification facilities that everyone who attended the Drug Summit accepted. He has not tripled the budget. This situation is not acceptable. I will not tolerate it on behalf of residents in my electorate.

Mrs SKINNER (North Shore) [4.45 p.m.], in reply: I thank my colleague the honourable member for Southern Highlands for providing the human face of the lack of resources in our health system. Yesterday I spoke with her at length about the effort her staff had put into trying to find a bed for the woman to whom she referred. I am surprised that my colleagues on the opposite side of the Chamber would laugh at the plight of a woman who has been ordered by the court to receive hospital attention, but the hospital refuses to deliver it.

It is extraordinary that members of this House, regardless of their political persuasion, would think it is acceptable for a hospital not to honour a court order directing that a patient in desperate need of treatment be admitted. Nothing that has been said by the honourable for Heathcote changes my view that health services in western Sydney are in dire straits. I was astonished to hear the honourable member for Heathcote claim that this was not a matter of public importance. The topic of the debate is health services in western Sydney, and he does not think it should be debated.

Mr McManus: You flew over it. You have never been there.

Mrs SKINNER: I can assure the honourable member for Heathcote that about two months ago I visited Westmead Hospital three times in about three weeks. I was taken on a full tour of the hospital.

Mr McManus: It’s about time you got there. It has taken you seven years.

Mrs SKINNER: I helped establish the adolescent health facility in the western Sydney area, and I spoke to workers from the facility today. They thanked me very much for the interest the Coalition has shown.

Mr McManus: Why didn’t you put your money into it when you had the chance?

Mrs SKINNER: In fact, we established the adolescent health research unit in western Sydney.

Mr McManus: You ran the place down.

Mrs SKINNER: You forget that I have a long history in the delivery of health services for young people. If the honourable member for
Page 1685
Heathcote were to look closely at the speech notes provided by the Minister he would realise that the wool is being pulled over his eyes. He should look, for example, at his comments about the birthing centre at Nepean. If the honourable member had been to Nepean Hospital on numerous occasions, as I have -

Mr McManus: I’ve been there. Last week I was there.

Mrs SKINNER: Was the honourable member in the birthing centre?

Mr McManus: I was at Westmead last week.

Mrs SKINNER: I can assure the honourable member that there is are no such thing as the birthing centre. It has been dropped from the plans because the Government has failed to provide recurrent resources to enable it to open. All he need do is speak to the doctors at Nepean Hospital who run the facility. There is no such thing as a birthing centre for Nepean now. The plans had to be dropped because there is not enough recurrent funding. When honourable members come into this place with speeches prepared for somebody else I recommend that they check the validity of their information to save embarrassment. It is quite simple: I will send a copy of all the speeches on this topic made in this Chamber to doctors in the west and ask them to comment on the veracity of what has been said.

The other issue I wish to raise is the Coalition’s commitment to health services in western Sydney. If the Minister thinks for one minute that the people of New South Wales will now accept a revised version of history that suggests that the Carr Government built the new Children’s Hospital at Westmead he is sadly mistaken. Everyone knows that was an initiative of the former Coalition Government, as was the upgrading of Nepean Hospital to tertiary level and the rebuilding of Liverpool Hospital, which opened shortly after the change of government. However, there was a delay because doctors at that hospital threatened industrial action because the Carr Government refused to provide additional recurrent funding to enable any new services. I am afraid this will be the fate also of the new facility at Nepean. Not only will there be fewer resources but the provisions that were part of the new mothers and children wing at Nepean Hospital will not now be available.

Mr McManus: Tell us about your policies and your commitments.

Mrs SKINNER: I would be delighted to tell you about my policy but, better still, you could read about it on the Internet. It is still there, along with most of the third party endorsements. I am very happy to give you a copy of them.

Mr McManus: Third party endorsements!

Mrs SKINNER: Yes, organisations such as the Cancer Council, the Heart Foundation and the AIDS Council have endorsed my policy. One of the Coalition’s policies was to increase recurrent funding to western Sydney by $100 million each and every year. That is what western Sydney hospitals need. The Minister should put his money where his mouth is and give a commitment to the people of the west.

Discussion concluded.

Debate resumed from 22 September.

Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [4.51 p.m.]: The Opposition does not oppose the Law Enforcement and National Security (Assumed Identities) Amendment (Corrective Services) Bill but wishes to put on record some concerns about the bill. The Minister for Police in his second reading speech spoke of the need for the introduction of this bill. Essentially he argued that officers of the Department of Corrective Services who were within the State Investigative and Security Group [SISG] undertook such activities in their investigations that would require them in certain instances to be entitled to assumed identities.

The SISG is under the direction of the assistant commissioner, Mr Ron Woodham, and has been for some time. It undertakes investigations in relation to inmates across a whole spectrum of alleged serious misconduct. The SISG works in a similar way to certain units within the Police Service and certain groups within agencies such as the Independent Commission Against Corruption. It certainly has an investigative role and in certain instances the use of assumed identities may well be of assistance.

I understand that, notwithstanding the fact that the bill has only just been introduced into this House, for some years the SISG has operated in a way that permits officers to have assumed identities. The Minister did not make any mention of how they had managed to achieve that thus far, but nevertheless this bill seeks to ratify or endorse the
Page 1686
activities that have gone on to date. Under the Carr Labor Government the prison population increased from just over 5,000 in 1995 to more than 7,500 in the past few months, resulting in increased potential for the commission of a range of offences within prisons. Many would be drug-related offences and many would relate to the importation of drugs both within and without the prison system.

Of course, other serious offences can be organised from within gaols and correctional facilities. The Government has made a number of attempts, in direct response to calls by the Coalition, to sharpen its act in providing measures in an effort to prevent inmates from carrying out criminal activity. In 1995 when I was the shadow minister for corrective services I pointed out to the Government, through press releases and correspondence, that there were no checks on visitors to inmates in New South Wales prisons, and in other facilities the checks on visitors were hopeless.

People with criminal records could visit inmates, something that still occurs under the current system, although I acknowledge that the system has improved. Measures are now in place at the new Silverwater complex to check visitors but, nevertheless, most of the action taken by the Government thus far has been in response to Coalition calls rather than proactive. This bill is probably the only proactive initiative of the Carr Government in the past five years to address security issues and it comes at a time when ICAC has handed down a number of reports indicating that major problems still exist within the New South Wales prison system.

The third report tabled in June is entitled "Investigation into the Department of Corrective Services: Betrayal of Trust: The activities of two correctional officers". The earlier two reports were tabled in the preceding months. The reports stated that the Department of Corrective Services has been working quite well with ICAC to try to address some of the shortcomings of the procedures in place within the Department of Corrective Services for the betterment of the culture within Corrective Services.

The bill is an interesting move by the Carr Government, bearing in mind that the Government came to office in 1995 with a policy that was not perhaps all that well thought out. At that time Labor was not expecting to win the 1995 election. The 1995 policy document of the Labor Party required the Government to do certain things to impose better checks and balances within Corrective Services. I will return in a moment to the initiative proposed in the Labor Party policy document. It is interesting that this bill relating to assumed identities for the SISG seems to have been drafted without any new checks and balances to ensure that the system is not abused.

We know from recent ICAC reports that there is abuse of processes and procedures within the Department of Corrective Services. The Government acknowledged that some years ago but failed to act to ensure that within the Department of Corrective Services those procedures are improved to the point where the public can rely on the correct processes being undertaken within the department. The Minister’s assertions during the second reading speech indicate that he was exploring the need for assumed identities. The Minister stated:

The Royal Commission into the New South Wales Police Service recognised that the use of assumed identities is essential to the success of some types of investigations, including, but not restricted to, undercover operations.

That is certainly true. To the extent that corrections institutions have to address the same issues, and perhaps contain even more skilled exponents of criminality, there is clearly an argument that the provision of assumed identities is a reasonable course of action for corrective services officers, particularly the SISG. The Minister for Police went on to state:

The royal commission final report also pointed to the need for greater accountability in response to demands from the courts who are more actively scrutinising evidence presented and the methods used to obtain it.

The Minister was addressing the evidentiary aspects. We do not dispute that much greater scrutiny is needed of activities of agencies that have a right to behave in a way which the average person would consider to be outside the norm - for example, using assumed identities. In spite of the range of problems within the Department of Corrective Services, some of which have been highlighted in a report of the Independent Commission Against Corruption [ICAC], the Government has still failed to address one of its own fundamental 1995 election promises. In 1995 the Government promised that it would establish an inspector general’s position in Corrective Services. In a wonderful display of the Government’s support for its own actions, the Minister for Corrective Services came into this Chamber on 23 April 1997 and stated with a flourish:

The creation of the office of inspector-general honours another of the Government’s election promises.

Page 1687

In what must be regarded as an interesting speech, bearing in mind the Government’s failure to make the appointment during the previous two years, the Minister went on to state:

It is imperative that the New South Wales correctional system be equipped with a comprehensive complaint-handling system which is both efficient and effective in order to maintain public confidence in the way our correctional centres are being managed.

Despite this so-called honouring of an election promise by the passing of legislation, and despite undertakings given by the Minister for Corrective Services in his second reading speech that an inspector general "will also enter into arrangements with the Independent Commission Against Corruption regarding the handling of matters that involve possible misconduct by an officer of the Department of Corrective Services", indicating that the Minister had already recognised that officers in the Department of Corrective Services may well have been engaging in inappropriate illegal conduct, nothing has been done. The report to which I refer was published in June 1999. The Minister has had the benefit of approximately five years experience in the corrective services portfolio, so he should have known all about it. The report is entitled, "Investigation into the Department of Corrective Services Third Report: Betrayal of Trust: The activities of two correctional officers" and it contained damning statements about what is wrong with the Department of Corrective Services.

Mr Debus: It is the only prison system in the world that has a corrupt officer!

Mr HAZZARD: Under the Minister’s handling, the number of corrupt officers has increased because he has failed to take the appropriate action that he promised to take. He took the credit and now he must take the blame, and it is fair that he should do so. The Minister should explain why he has failed to do what he said he would do. The Minister suggested that it might be the only system with corrupt officers. Of course, that is not so. However, the number of corrupt officers is possibly on the increase because of the Minister’s failure to carry out the Government’s policy that was not opposed by the Opposition.

In April 1997 in this House the Minister made sure that the world - particularly the people of New South Wales - knew that this State would have an inspector general, and that matters would improve in the handling of corrective services. The Minister indicated that the Government would introduce accountability, and checks and balances. The Minister gave people the hope of a better culture existing within corrective services. However, two years later, the ICAC report shows that there is not a better culture in existence at all. I read from the ICAC report at page 86 where the commissioner stated:

Maintaining the integrity of correctional work requires a healthy corporate culture and the support of all employees, who must set a good example to inmates, to each other and the community. The culture needs to be intolerant of any employee who lacks personal integrity and whose personal goals are inconsistent with the Department’s corporate mission.

The commissioner also went on to state at page 87:

However, eradicating corruption that is uncovered, while difficult, is still only half the battle. The Department also needs to change the climate in which corruption has occurred.

What has the Minister done? One could almost say that the level of corruption that has been displayed by the Minister and by this Government would encourage corruption within the department. I say that because the Minister said in this House, in conjunction with other Government members, that the Government would change the culture by very quickly appointing an inspector general. That happened in April 1997 and, for the information of the House, it is now 20 October 1999. I ask the Minister: What happened to the appointment of the inspector general?

Mr Debus: That is beside the point that you are making.

Mr HAZZARD: That is the best that the Minister can offer as a reply. He cannot say that he has complied with what he saw as an essential component in changing the culture within the Department of Corrective Services. This indicates a systemic failure by the Government. This Government is arrogant and prepared to ignore its own legislation. The Act was proclaimed on 30 October 1998 and it took 18 months for anything to occur. Now, but for ten days, another 12 months has elapsed. The Government has introduced a bill that will confer greater powers on Corrective Services officers but fails to address the systemic issues of corruption and the way in which Corrective Services officers go about their work.

I wonder why that would be the case. I suggest to the House that the Minister and the Carr Government do not actually want the public to know any more than they need to know. They provide information on a need-to-know basis about what is going on in Corrective Services and that is an appalling indictment on a Government that has reached the stage of stupidity. It has gone past being just arrogant and is now being arrogant and stupid
Page 1688
because it is not in the best interests of the community to deny the appointment of an inspector general.

The Opposition wants to know why this Government is prepared to confer extensive new powers on the SISG but has failed to deliver on its fundamental promise to this House and to the community to introduce measures of accountability that, if properly implemented, would have guaranteed or at least given hope that there would be checks and balances in place within Corrective Services. I acknowledge that other agencies have a modest role in checking the activities of Corrective Services. I have already referred to ICAC having undertaken some very worthwhile investigations into the activities of various sections of the Department of Corrective Services, but that fails to address the fundamental issue of this Government’s failure to act in accordance with a promise given to this House and to the people of New South Wales that there would be greater scrutiny, greater accountability, better mechanisms, and improved processes for people to actually have their complaints heard; and an investigation undertaken of issues within the Department of Corrective Services.

For that reason, and because the people of New South Wales would demand of the Opposition that it do so, we demand that the Government carry through on its promise of accountability. I will not waste the time of the Legislative Assembly by moving an amendment, because historically such amendments are rarely agreed to. In the period after I was appointed shadow minister, the Minister for Corrective Services did agree to the odd amendment. He deserves credit in that regard, more so than the majority of his colleagues whose level of arrogance defies imagination. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that unless it is obvious that an amendment would be agreed to by all parties, the Minister would not agree with it. Nor would he agree with our proposed amendment in this instance.

The Coalition will move an amendment in the upper House. The Minister might as well talk to us, because the crossbenchers are in agreement with our amendment. The crossbench and the Coalition want to see an inspector-general appointed; we want a guarantee of integrity as far as is practicable in the Department of Corrective Services. This legislation will not see the light of day until the Minister gives a guarantee to the Coalition by appointing an inspector-general. An amendment will be moved by either the Coalition or a crossbench member, such as the Hon. Richard Jones, whose concerns are identical to ours.

The Coalition will either support the crossbench in its endeavours or will collaboratively ensure that the crossbench is fully briefed on our proposal. No additional powers will be granted to the Department of Corrective Services until the Minister appoints an inspector-general. The Coalition proposes to move an amendment requiring that this legislation be not proclaimed until the inspector-general’s position is filled; until the Minister has honoured his April 1997 commitment to the House; until he has honoured his 1995 election pledge; and until he has given the people an inspector-general who can investigate and guarantee improvement to the processes and integrity within Corrective Services. If the Minister fails to address those issues, the people could draw some solid conclusions about why the Minister does not want to provide what he said, initially, was necessary. On 23 April 1997 the Minister said:

It is imperative that the New South Wales correctional system be equipped with a comprehensive complaint-handling system which is both efficient and effective in order to maintain public confidence in the way our correctional centres are being managed.

On behalf of the people of New South Wales the Opposition is asking the Minister to honour his commitment. The Opposition will support the bill, although we have some concerns about Corrective Services officers having access to assumed identities in certain circumstances. We will support the bill if we are assured that someone is keeping a check on it. The Police Service has the Police Integrity Commission. The Minister should ensure that his promise is kept. I do not dispute that the Minister is generally perceived as being more honourable than most of his colleagues, who are tarred with the brush of arrogance, stupidity, superciliousness and self-interest.

The Minister should now step away from his colleagues and honour the promises he made to the people of New South Wales. I remind him that only 10 per cent of inmates undergo a urinalysis test each week; the Opposition wants to know why. Approximately 90 per cent of inmates have drug problems and maybe the inspector-general can tell us why that is so. Why has the Minister allowed those situations to continue? Why is the Minister continuing to allow the officers to get away with that? The Opposition will not oppose the legislation, but has serious questions to ask about why the Minister failed to introduce his promised system of integrity.

Where is the inspector-general? Have the advertisements been placed? If so, why has no-one been appointed? Those simple questions have
Page 1689
brought the Minister and his legislation unstuck. Until the Opposition is satisfied with the answers, and until the Minister honours those obligations, the crossbench and the Coalition will take steps in the other place to ensure that the legislation sits on the backburner. The Carr Government must step down from its arrogant platform and honour its promises. The appointment of an inspector-general will provide accountability and checks and balances in Corrective Services.

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.

Mr O’FARRELL (Ku-ring-gai - Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [5.15 p.m.]: Yesterday I visited the Community and Road Education Scheme [CARES] at the former St Ives police driver training centre in the electorate of Davidson. I observed students from West Pymble Public School as they were taken through their paces at the centre by police officers. In 1991 CARES was established by the former Coalition Government at Prospect, where it continues to operate, to better educate school-age children between nine and 13 years, about road rules, their importance for traffic safety, and the traumatic consequences of failing to observe road rules.

Principally, the program involves encouraging students in the safe use of bicycles. The program is supervised by police officers who take students through an assessment period in a classroom and show them a video. Students are then put on bicycles and sent around a simulated traffic area. The very high road trauma rate for young people is the motivation for conducting this road safety education program in the school system. At the start of the program, the road trauma rate was that one in six young people would be involved in a life-threatening accident at some time between the ages of 12 and 25, with young males in the 17- to 20-year age group having about 3½ times more involvement in accidents.

Clearly, this program is worthwhile and should be supported. I visited the program in the company of Jim Higgins, the principal of West Pymble Public School; Kerry Frost, the President of the West Pymble Parents and Citizens Association; approximately 100 students from years 4 and 6; Peter Wilkinson, Chairman of the Ku-ring-gai Police and Community Safety Committee; and John Watts, Chairman of the Road Safety Sub-committee.

It was indicated to me that during the period immediately before and after the Olympic Games police officers will be removed from that facility. I have no quarrel with police not being present at the facility during the two weeks of the Olympic Games and the two weeks of the Paralympic Games, if necessary. However, I suspect that what I observed yesterday is something that my country colleagues know about, that is the denuding of local police services in country areas during the Olympics. I am told that CARES at St Ives will be closed for three months over the Olympics period, and I do not understand why. During that period 60 school visits to the centre, and more than 5,000 students, will be denied this important road safety education in relation to bicycles.

I can understand why the facility must be closed during the Olympic Games, which coincide with extended school holidays next year. However, I do not believe it should be closed for as long as the Government has proposed. As evidenced by its success, the program educates young people about road safety generally, and, more importantly, children from nine to 13 years of age about bicycle safety. It is far too important to deny almost 5,000 students access to this scheme.

The program at St Ives caters for schools across Sydney, and as far away as the Cronulla and Sutherland shire - which raises the issue that most care facilities are in the west of Sydney or at St Ives. There is no care facility in the Liverpool electorate of Mr Acting-Speaker, although I understand that either the Lions Club or Rotary runs a similar scheme there. There is none servicing schools in the Sutherland shire, from which area there is a huge demand on the services of the St Ives facility.

Clearly, there is a need on a bipartisan basis to extend this scheme to the whole of Sydney. There is a need for it in southern Sydney, south-western Sydney and even the eastern suburbs, although the bicycles might be more expensive there. Ku-ring-gai local area command, headed by Superintendent Alan Clarke - who does a terrific job - provides the funding and two police officers for the program, which impacts on policing across the area command. This scheme is too important to be done on that ad hoc basis.

Page 1690

CARES St Ives is charged $50,000 rent for the facility. That money does not find its way back to Ku-ring-gai local area command. This nonsense ought to be stopped. The scheme ought to continue and be given every support by the Government.

Mr GREENE (Georges River) [5.20 p.m.]: I take the opportunity to praise the work of Oatley Lions Club. Last Saturday I had the pleasure of attending the twenty-third annual Oatley Festival, a tremendous community event organised by the dedicated and hard-working members of Oatley Lions. The festival was opened by the new Mayor of Hurstville, Councillor Philip Sansom, who was in attendance with his wife and sons. The festival had more than 100 stallholders, including representatives of scouts, local schools, Oatley Caring Centre, Neighbourhood Watch, State Emergency Services and St John Ambulance. An event such as this gives groups the opportunity to reinforce and increase their community profile, as well as raise much-needed income.

It has been estimated that more than $35,000 was raised on Saturday for these community organisations. Oatley Lions Club raised $7,500, which will be put towards this year’s projects. These include the building of a multipurpose community room at Oatley Public School for after-hours school care, the Hope for the Children Foundation, part of the St George family network, Oatley Caring Centre and Bezzina House, a cancer care lodge at Kogarah.

After happily losing my money on the chocolate wheel, I moved amongst the stallholders and caught up with many friends who, like me, were enjoying the fun of the fair. I was particularly pleased to see Alan Convery, President of Hurstville Rotary, selling raffle tickets for a car, which was provided by well-known local identity and generous businessman Ferdie Dominelli of Dominelli Ford. The funds from this raffle will be donated to the Hope for the Children Foundation.

I was also pleased to see Senior Sergeant Rick Simpson of Hurstville local area command, who was in attendance with two officers from the bike patrol. It was the third occasion within the week that I had seen Senior Sergeant Simpson, which indicates the enormous effort our local police devote to community relations. It can only be of benefit to the community and the police. The officers received plenty of inquiries as they happily distributed stickers and posters.

The diverse entertainment at the festival ranged from old McDonald’s farmyard to the Georges River concert band, a haunted castle and the ever-popular face painting, and plenty of other amusements were thrown in to keep the crowd of all ages entertained. I was particularly pleased to be in attendance during the performance by the Marist College Penshurst band. Having been a student and teacher at the school, and now with a son in year 10, it was a pleasure to hear the boys perform. School principal, Brother Neil O’Leary, ensured that the boys looked the part, and music teacher, Mrs Elizabeth Ford, made certain they sounded the part.

Oatley Festival is a community event that brings people together. Obviously, it provides the opportunity for local organisations to raise money. As importantly, it promotes involvement and social awareness. The same can be said about the Lugarno Lions Spring Fair, which is held annually at Gannons Park. Again this year I attended that event with my family, and the same spirit that existed at Oatley on Saturday was evident at the fair in September. I look forward to joining the Lugarno Lions again this Saturday evening at its annual night golf event.

In highlighting the Oatley Festival, I congratulate Oatley Lions on its overall endeavours in making the community of Oatley and surrounding areas a better place. Last year President Bryan Pirie and the club’s 35 members, both men and women, raised $23,000 for local projects. This year it hopes to raise $20,000 for the Oatley primary school out- of-hours school care and other local groups. Although this is a major commitment, I have no doubt that with the people involved this target will not be beyond reach.

It is important to highlight the enormous goodwill that exists within our community, not only in groups such as the Lions Club and Rotary. Many individuals voluntarily undertake an enormous amount of work in their community through functions such as the Oatley Festival, Lugarno Lions Spring Fair and Hope for the Children Foundation. All these community organisations provide significant support within our community. It is timely for each of us as members of Parliament to think about the enormous work that is done by these groups and sincerely thank them on behalf of our local communities and the community in general. Without them we would be a lot worse off.

Mr FRASER (Coffs Harbour) [5.25 p.m.]: I again bring to the attention of the House - I have
Page 1691
previously raised this matter with the Minister for Health - the dilemma of the health budget of Coffs Harbour Base Hospital. Last week the budget for Coffs Harbour Base Hospital was finally handed down by the Mid North Coast Area Health Service. The Minister allocated the health budget in Parliament in May and it was then distributed throughout the mid North Coast. It has taken five months to inform Coffs Harbour Base Hospital of an increase in its budget. However, the increase will barely cover a rise in staff wages. In fact, there will be no increase; it will mean a 15 percent cut to hospital services. An article in the local paper, interviewing Dr Philip Houlton of Coffs Harbour Base Hospital, said:

Dr Houlton attended the recent Board meeting held to discuss the budget and said the Board would implement a number of cost-saving strategies from November 1.

These measures include the cessation of all non-urgent surgery for the next nine months, all casual staff would be stood down for the next nine months, an unspecified number of beds would be closed at Coffs Harbour Base Hospital and 10 beds at Macksville, and that waiting lists would be shut down with a line drawn under the last entry from November 1.

"If you have surgery which is not urgent, such as varicose veins, grumbling gall bladder, hernia, hysterectomy, then there are no plans for you to have this done in Coffs Harbour" Dr Houlton said.

What an absolute disgrace! It is an abrogation of the Government’s obligation to the people of Coffs Harbour. An apologist in the form of Mrs Edith Hall, a Labor Party member and now chair of the Mid North Coast Hospital Board, was also interviewed. The article continued:

Mrs Hall said the cost containment strategies were implemented because the health service expenditure had exceeded budget in previous years.

Coffs Harbour Base Hospital was $2.5 million over budget. It had not even made up that shortfall and the level of service it attained last year, having been the most efficient hospital in New South Wales, will have to be reduced. The article continued further:

She said elective surgery would continue but at a reduced level based on priorities determined by doctors.

Level one and two urgent cases will continue and other less urgent cases will be prioritised, Mrs Hall said.

Mrs Hall said no ban had been placed on casual staff and that no beds would be closed, although an area in the maternity unit previously used for non-maternity patients would now be used for medical records storage.

Adding the seven beds from last year, under this Government 11 beds at the Coffs Harbour hospital, in one of the fastest growing areas on the North Coast, have been closed. Yet the Minister for Health says Coffs Harbour is better off - 11 beds are closed and surgery is wiped but he says Coffs Harbour is better off! The Minister is quoted in the Coffs Harbour Advocate as saying that Coffs Harbour is better off. He says that under this Government the budget allocation has increased. The article went on:

As a percentage of the total health service budget across the State, the MNCAHS now receives 24 per cent . . .

If someone tells a half-truth, it is a half-lie. I suggest there is more than a half-lie in what the Minister for Health is telling us. According to the article, Dr Houlton responded by saying:

We have been told to reduce our surgical activity by 20 cases a week, or 80 cases a month . . .

Now our current elective or non-urgent surgery case load is 75 cases a month. Simple maths will tell you that if we are told to cutback by 80 cases a month and we are currently only performing 75 cases a month then there will be no elective surgery . . .

People should understand that if someone has lymphoma, a cancer which is terminal, and needs lymph glands to be taken out, that is classed as elective surgery. Surgery could prolong their lives but because they have terminal cancer it is deemed to be elective. They would be unable to access that sort of operation at Coffs Harbour Base Hospital. That is an absolute disgrace. I have asked the Minister to meet with me and the doctors from Coffs Harbour. I have not heard from him. I sent him an urgent fax. He is not in Parliament today; he does not wish to discuss it. I leave the House with this thought: A hospital committee set out by this Minister has been round the State and the chairman of the committee has said this week that several country hospitals are being held together by the paint on the walls. It is the dust between the paint and the walls that is holding the Coffs Harbour Base Hospital together. Even the cleaners have been sacked. [Time expired.]

Mr PRICE (Maitland) [5.30 p.m.]: I wish to advise the House of the successful meeting of the World Scout Foundation in Sydney over the past weekend in the presence of the honorary president, His Majesty King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden. The meetings and functions were chaired by Mr Howard Kilroy of the Republic of Ireland, in the presence of the New South Wales Chief Commissioner for Scouts, David Kinchin, and the Australian Chief Commissioner for Scouts, Mr William Wells. Members of the World Scout Foundation are very philanthropic. They provide funds from their own
Page 1692
resources to facilitate the spread of youth work worldwide, particularly scouting, with an emphasis on Third World countries. They meet in different countries several times a year, and the King of Sweden has been pleased to be their president for some time.

The organisation was brought to Australia by the Australian international commissioner, Mr Geoff Lee from Sydney. They were able to induct into the movement a very impressive group of people from Australia. People such as Dick Smith and his wife were made members during a presentation dinner on the Saturday night. On the Sunday morning the King and members of the international group visited the Olympic site, travelling by ferry from Circular Quay. They were suitably impressed by what they saw, by the organisation of the Olympic committee, and by the organisation of the scout movement in putting the whole thing together and providing a venue for their meeting and entertainment over the weekend.

The royal party and others also visited a number of scouting sites on the Saturday, including Cataract scout camp, which was the venue for the world jamboree in 1988. Later on the Sunday there was a reception at Government House for leading officials of the organisation. The Governor and his wife were most gracious. Of course the Governor met the group in his capacity as Chief Scout of New South Wales, a role he fulfils very well, and the organisation is very pleased with his association. Later that night a royal gala concert was held at the Opera House. This provided entertainment for everyone and was a further opportunity for fundraising. Most of the artists were young. In fact, one of the tenors was from my electorate of Maitland.

It was interesting to see one of the locals performing on stage as an opera singer of some note at such a young age. Likewise, the principal violinist was a young lady from Newcastle who was equally very well received and who is now the lead violinist in the Australian Opera and Australian Ballet orchestra. Monday brought the event to a conclusion. A business luncheon was attended by the Minister for Community Services and a number of other members of this House, including the honourable member for Canterbury in his capacity as the secretary of the Baden Powell Guild branch of the New South Wales Parliament.

It was an excellent weekend. It was a great presentation for scouting nationally and world wide. It will provide significant funds for underdeveloped countries and a great impetus for people who are financially able to make contributions to a worldwide and worthwhile organisation which has been in existence for many years in more than 150 countries and has a membership well in excess of 25 million young people. The organisation has gone through a time of reduced membership in Australia. However, membership has stabilised and is starting to rise, and the organisation will continue to be of great benefit to our community.

Mr HUMPHERSON (Davidson) [5.35 p.m.]: I want to update the House about the land on Mona Vale Road, Terrey Hills, that is owned by the Aboriginal land council. Warringah Council has actively supported preservation of the land. I give my thanks to the Mayor, Peter Moxham, the General Manager, Dennis Smith, Monica Borroni and councillors Phil Coleman and Julie Sutton, all of whom have been very active in seeking to find a long-term solution to preserve the land from development and/or clearing and to create an international park. I acknowledge the active support of the Mayor of Ku-ring-gai, Tony Hall, who was very active, along with councillor Julie Sutton, in supporting two public rallies on the site.

Warringah Council has called for a report to assess the environmental characteristics of the land. That report ought to be tabled at council on 26 October - next Tuesday. Hopefully emanating from that report will be an application to the Federal Government through the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Senator Hill, to seek Federal funding in some form for acquisition of the land. I acknowledge that the Aboriginal land council responded to the very strong public concern about the sale of the land and withdrew the land from sale to allow a number of options to be pursued. Naturally, I expressed strong disquiet about the actions of the land council up to that point, but I would be disingenuous not to acknowledge that the land council was prepared to respond to community concern and withdraw the land from sale.

Warringah Council has also kept the land council up to date on its progress. The State Minister for the Environment was good enough in the earlier stages to indicate that the Government was prepared to exchange for the Aboriginal land some land owned by the National Parks and Wildlife Service at Cottage Point which has low conservation value. The land council refused. It expressed a number of reservations about doing that. I ask the Minister today to consider another avenue - and I have asked the council to pursue this. The Minister could transfer the Cottage Point land to Warringah
Page 1693
Council on the condition that it sells the land and uses the revenue from the sale to acquire the council land along Mona Vale Road. Following that, the land could be transferred back to the National Parks and Wildlife Service and be integrated into the national park.

Naturally, any surplus from the sale of the Cottage Point land would be transferred back to the National Parks and Wildlife Service. The council may need to cover the period between the acquisition of the Aboriginal land council land and sale of the Cottage Point land, owned by the National Parks and Wildlife Service, with a loan. I hope that the Minister for the Environment and the Minister for Local Government will assist Warringah Council if it is prepared to pursue that course.

The Council may not consider that option unless the Minister for the Environment is prepared to sanction the same. The Minister has been prepared to put the Cottage Point land on the negotiating table, but this particular option and related steps have not been fully considered. I ask the Minister to consider this option as a matter of some urgency and give Warringah Council an opportunity to solve the problem in that way.

Finally, I pay tribute to the very active Save Mona Vale Road Corridor Committee, which is representative of the community in trying to achieve preservation of the land. I pay tribute also to Nancy Woods, from Terrey Hills, who spoke at the last rally. She is a member of the Aboriginal land council and a member of the Aboriginal community. She spoke strongly in favour of preservation of the land and, as a local, fully recognised the representative views of the Warringah residents that it ought to be preserved.

Mr HICKEY (Cessnock) [5.40 p.m.]: I wish to speak about traffic in my electorate and in particular heavy vehicle movements in Vincent Street, the main street of Cessnock. Vincent Street has been used as a heavy vehicle arterial road for as long as I can remember. This issue will not be removed from my agenda until the promised bypass is constructed. The council is very keen for that bypass to be built. I have sighted correspondence dating back to the 1980s regarding the town’s displeasure and discomfort as a result of 9,000 vehicle movements through the middle of the town, including 2,000 heavy vehicles.

I believe that the Federal Government, through the office of the Hon. John Anderson, is responsible for allocating the funding required for the F3 bypass of Cessnock, more commonly known as the Kurri Kurri corridor. This issue has been placed on hold for too long and the city of Cessnock continues to suffer disruption because of heavy vehicles using Cessnock township as the main route north. I understand that the environmental impact statement for this project was completed as far back as 1994, and that investigations regarding the best possible route have been completed for some time.

The Kurri Kurri corridor of the F3 meets the following objectives set down by the Federal Government in 1993. First, it will provide a high-standard, efficient, long-term road transport link between the Sydney to Newcastle freeway and the New England Highway west of Maitland. Second, it will reduce the conflict between local traffic and heavy vehicles in the Cessnock local government area. Third, it will enhance the contribution of the Maitland and Newcastle port industrial areas to the mid-Hunter economy. Finally, it will improve the connections for businesses and social activities between the lower Hunter, Newcastle, Sydney and metropolitan centres.

I draw to the attention of the House the fact that the predominant traffic movements in the lower Hunter are between major centres including Newcastle, Lake Macquarie, Maitland, Cessnock and Kurri Kurri. The majority of traffic on the freeway at the Freemans Waterhole interchange travels onto the Pacific Highway north of Hexham. That equates to 60 per cent of traffic movements, and 17 per cent travels to Maitland via Kurri Kurri and west of Branxton via Cessnock.

In 1993 the Cessnock central business district had 9,000 traffic movements per day, a large percentage of which were heavy transport vehicles. The Roads and Traffic Authority at that time estimated that a bypass would reduce heavy vehicle movements on Route 220 - that is Vincent Street, the main shopping street - by approximately 2,000 heavy vehicles.

I demand that the Federal Government, through Minister Anderson’s department, allocate the funds required in the next budget to ensure that the Cessnock community receives the bypass that has been promised by Federal governments for the last 10 years. Until that happens, the Cessnock community has limited capacity for growth in the Cessnock central business district as trucks rattle the foundations of the buildings. The pollution caused by the heavy vehicles is at best unpleasant and at worst unhealthy.

Page 1694

Local residents deserve much better. They deserve the right to feel safe and to know that their children can go to the local shopping centre without fearing the traffic. Elderly people who drive motor vehicles are intimidated by the heavy vehicles in the centre of their community; they deserve much better. The Federal Government has a major share in the responsibility of fixing this issue as the benefits will flow on to all electorates along the New England Highway and to residents of Maitland, Kurri Kurri, Cessnock, Branxton, Singleton and all other communities that utilise the route.

The Deputy Leader of the National Party will testify that he has argued on many occasions in this Chamber about the need for the bypass. This should be a bipartisan issue. I call on my colleague the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads to assist me in my endeavours and demands to ensure Federal Government funds for this much-needed bypass.

Mr FACE (Charlestown - Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development) [5.45 p.m.]: The vexed problem raised by the honourable member for Cessnock has been around for years and has been shoved from government to government of both political persuasions. Quite frankly, it is about time somebody made a decision. The people of Cessnock have a valid concern. Vincent Street traffic has become chaotic, and affects an area that is burgeoning with tourism.

This matter also affects what happens in the upper Hunter. Recently I spoke to representatives of Muswellbrook Shire Council, as I have spoken to all councils in the area since the local government elections. Apparently Minister Anderson has come to some agreement with Muswellbrook council about the bypass. A bypass is needed to provide relief not only to Vincent Street but to the whole of Cessnock. Cessnock and the smaller villages of Paxton, Millfield and Illalong are now visited by many Sydneysiders. People are buying weekenders in which to spend quiet moments. Senator Tierney marches up and down the length and breadth of the valley when there is good news but is conspicuous by his absence when certain things are discussed.

Recently, during discussions with Cessnock council about a range of matters that impact on the State, I suggested, as Minister assisting the Premier on Hunter Development, that Senator Tierney should be asked to speak to the council in a sensible bipartisan way to determine whether money can be made available for the very important work in Cessnock. The State has now made money available for a feasibility study and we should get on with the job of making the lives of the people of Cessnock a little bit easier.

Mr J. H. TURNER (Myall Lakes - Deputy Leader of the National Party) [5.47 p.m.]: What I am about to say in relation to the Black Head Surf Lifesaving Club in my electorate probably applies to all the surf clubs in my electorate and possibly along the New South Wales coast. Black Head Surf Life Saving Club has written to me in relation to funding. All surf clubs have difficulty with funding, particularly those as remote as the Black Head Surf Life Saving Club.

I am proud to be a patron of that club, which this year is celebrating its seventy-fifth anniversary of service to the community. I am proud of its achievements. Because of its geographical location, the club draws its membership from a far-reaching area including Black Head, Red Head, Diamond Beach, Failford, Nabiac, Possum Brush, Krambach, Wallabi Point, Taree and Wingham. Over the past 75 years it has been traditional for the club to draw its membership from those areas, but it is now finding that it is more difficult to do so.

The club owns and maintains its premises, which are located on a very beautiful site, but that is proving to be a significant drain on its ability to function. The club, which provides for a unique lifestyle, ensures that the beach is safe and enjoyable at all times. Use of that beach varies, depending on the season. It is a popular beach during the summer season, when many people visit the area. The club, which does not want to take funding away from other organisations, provides a year-round service for the advantage of those who are not necessarily members of the club, unlike other sports clubs, which tend to provide services only for their members.

The club has a proud history of promoting its junior members. It trains between 80 and 130 nippers each Sunday morning during the season; it has 70 patrolling members in the senior club; and it also has about 80 associate members. As I said earlier, the club has been carrying out this community service for the past 75 years. The club contacted me to determine whether any funding could be made available to it to assist it in performing its day-to-day operations. At present a
Page 1695
central body distributes funding to surf life saving clubs, which is working fairly well.

The club has been the recipient of some sport and recreational capital assistance grants, which have greatly improved its facilities. Nevertheless, in this modern era, additional costs can be incurred for maintaining and operating things like rubber ducks. Some clubs use volunteer labour to assist them in their day-to-day operation and maintenance of rubber ducks, engines and other equipment. As I said earlier, that might not be unique to the Black Head Surf Life Saving Club. Surf life saving clubs might have to consider a new funding regime as more modern technology comes on board. Black Head Surf Life Saving Club asked me to highlight its plight. It stated in a letter to me:

. . . I would appreciate any advice you could provide, to assist the club with regards to applying for grants or special funding which could be made available to ensure the club is able to continue to provide the high quality of service to the community throughout the current and future seasons.

This Government, or any other organisation, might be able to help Black Head Surf Life Saving Club and some of the more remote clubs. Honourable members should bear in mind that all clubs become a little tough as they become more remote. It is more difficult to get members and to raise funds in smaller communities. A raffle organised in a community such as Black Head would not raise the same amount of money as would a raffle in Newcastle or an area in Sydney.

I said earlier that I am proud to be a patron of the club. I commend it for its magnificent service over the past 75 years. We must ensure that it receives adequate funding to enable it to continue, over the next 75 years or more, to provide those valuable and important services not only for the people of that area but also for the many tourists who visit that beautiful part of New South Wales.

Mr FACE (Charlestown - Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development) [5.52 p.m.]: I commend the honourable member for Myall Lakes for his contribution tonight and I thank him, the honourable member for Coffs Harbour and other honourable members for the mature way in which they supported recent amendments to legislation that will assist surf life saving clubs to hold their traditional coldies. I am happy to inform the House that those functions are now legal.

I attended one of those functions on Sunday night. It is nice to be able to attend a function of that sort that is not legal. Attending that legal function on Sunday night took a bit of fun out of the event. No club would be affected more than the club in the electorate of the honourable member for Myall Lakes. Many holiday-makers who travel in caravans spend time over the Christmas period in the Myall Lakes electorate. The holding of these functions is one of the ways in which clubs can make a few bob and it does not do anyone any harm.

I wish to refer to a matter that has been raised in the last few days. Someone is peddling mischief or is misunderstanding something. It has been suggested that the Government or someone in my department is going to remove the charitable status from surf life saving clubs. I have received two letters concerning this problem, which has emerged only in the Illawarra area. I am one of the fiercest defenders of surf life saving clubs, having been a member of such a club for the past 38 years.

I can inform honourable members that there are no plans afoot to take away that status. People may have become confused because when this charitable status was introduced, category one of the community fund associated with licensed clubs was not available. I have now rectified that problem to enable clubs to comply with that provision. Only the other day the Belmont 16-footers club made available a beach trike with a surfboard for that purpose. I will undertake to inform all honourable members of events so that they can equally inform surf clubs in their electorates about these matters. Money is badly needed for surf life saving clubs in our State.

Mr ASHTON (East Hills) [5.54 p.m.]: Tonight I speak about a joint emergency services medals and award presentation I attended at Hurstville civic centre last Monday. Those awards included national medals, deputy commissioner’s commendations, region citations, certificates of appreciation and long service awards. Deputy Commissioner Ken Moroney, Specialist Operations, was an honoured guest at this function. I place on record my appreciation to those who were presented with awards - those in our police, ambulance and fire services who do outstanding and long service for the people of New South Wales.

I also congratulate the Georges River commander, Ike Ellis, and his staff, for the success of the function and for their dedicated service to the people of the Georges River region. I place on record my community’s appreciation to the
Page 1696
Bankstown local area commander, Mr Dave Madden; the executive officer, Warren Atkinson; and the team of officers and staff for their continued diligence in making the East Hills electorate a safe area in which to live. On those occasions that I have had to call on their support I have received it expeditiously.

My congratulations also go to Detective Sergeant Phillip Burchardt, Senior Constable Rodney Henderson, Detective Sergeant James Johnson and Ms Helen McWaite on receiving their awards. A very special award - the Peter Stuckey Mitchell award - went to Detective Sergeant Allan Sicard from Bankstown for excellence in police work, for leadership in Operation Helvetia, for solving a double murder in Allum Street, Bankstown, and for the flow-on effects which led to numerous arrests of persons in that area who committed many serious offences.

I also congratulate Detective Senior Constable Anthony Agnew. I particularly acknowledge the role played in apprehending an offender in a distressing series of attempted assaults on young children in the Revesby-Panania area. Several attacks occurred outside and inside my daughter’s school. I recognise the role played by constables Luca Altamura and Gillian Sparkes of the Bankstown area command in apprehending this offender. Constable Brooke Notley of the Sutherland command also received a special citation. Both of the latter police officers were former students of mine. I was especially proud to see them receive their awards and to acknowledge them in this Parliament.

I and other official guests, including honourable members representing the electorates of Georges River, Kogarah, Menai, Rockdale and Miranda, were particularly proud of those ordinary members of our community who received a range of awards for assistance to police and ambulance officers, often in life-threatening circumstances. Mr Peter Bleeck, Mr Paul Depena and Mr Christopher Gregory received Georges River region certificates for their actions in apprehending a bank robber at the National Australia Bank in Revesby. Mr Depena was also a former student at Picnic Point High School.

Many of our young people are doing worthwhile things that perhaps parliamentarians do not always recognise. On the day in question, many ordinary citizens received recognition for extraordinary acts in assisting our service personnel. I place on record the appreciation of this community and the Parliament to those who received awards. It has been said by so many that it is best not to get involved, but that is not an Australian idea. Part of our tradition is to get involved - to help somebody in need. In France there is a law - the Good Samaritan Act - which provides that people have to help anyone who is in trouble. In Australia, and certainly in America, it would be best for people to run 100 miles.

The people who received these awards were not modern-day rambos; they were ordinary people doing extraordinary things. We do not want to ask people to place themselves in dangerous situations involving confrontations with potentially dangerous criminals. Often the notion of helping someone in need is instinctive and mateship perhaps at its highest level. As an aside, it is doubtful whether there will be any great need to give awards to people who stop bank robberies in the future because there will be no banks to rob.

All the honoured guests at the award ceremony, including Mrs Cusumano, whose husband was murdered in tragic circumstances in a computer shop some years ago, and the families of those who received awards, were struck not so much by the fact that these people were receiving awards or that we were acknowledging them in a sense, but by the fact that these were ordinary people. I will never forget two young fellows who were awarded for helping to stop a robbery. When they got up to receive their awards one of the young blokes saluted Commander Ike Ellis. It was an innocent action but it brought the house down, because this bloke had done something wonderful in helping to stop an assault. I place on record the support of the community and of the Parliament for all those in the community who did so much to help our people in service.

Mr O’DOHERTY (Hornsby) [5.59 p.m.]: I wish to refer to the issue of rail services to constituents in the electorate of Hornsby, particularly the rail service provided to the residents of Cowan. It is probably true to say that politicians in this place like to be proved right. On this occasion it gives me no pleasure to say that a prediction I made a few months ago has been proved right by practice. Cowan station does not have any full-time staff; occasionally a staff member from Berowra empties the waste bins and sweeps the platform at Cowan station. The Government dispensed with the staff at Cowan station, an action that has caused great concern to the residents of Cowan.

A few months ago the large ticket machine at Cowan station was replaced. Cowan station formerly
Page 1697
had a large ticket machine which enabled constituents to purchase a rail ticket to any station on the network, use notes to purchase tickets and purchase weekly tickets. However, in July the large machine was replaced by a smaller machine, a cut-down version, which does not accept notes for the purchase of rail tickets. Commuters are able to purchase tickets only with coins. It dispenses tickets to selected stations, but not to every station on the network, and passengers are not able to purchase weekly tickets.

The irony of all this is that Cowan is a rail town. Cowan Station exists only because it is the place where the Sydney metropolitan rail service finished in years gone by, before passengers moved to other rail services. Cowan is still regarded by CityRail as the end of the metropolitan network, but these days Cowan is CityRail’s forgotten town. When the large machine was replaced by the smaller machine - the large machine having been the rationale for the removal of staff - I went to Cowan Station with some of my constituents and I expressed great concern that my constituents would be disadvantaged by what was happening.

Because of the particular nature of the Cowan community - that is, its public spirit - many people are rail commuters, and many like to purchase weekly rail tickets. However, that facility has been denied them. In July I said, "Mark my words, people will be fined because they cannot purchase their weekly ticket at Cowan." I said that people would be fined for travelling without a ticket because they could not purchase a weekly ticket at the beginning of their rail journey. That is exactly what has happened to one of my constituents who has written to me.

Bearing in mind privacy considerations I will refer to my constituent as Mr G of Pacific Highway, Cowan. I have written to the Minister for Transport about Mr G’s plight. In raising this matter, I plead with the Minister, firstly, to exempt Mr G from payment of the $100 fine levied by CityRail and, secondly, at the very least to reinstate a large full-service ticketing machine for Cowan. Mr G’s letter stated:

I travel by train daily from Cowan and since the new, small ticketing machine was suddenly put in at Cowan Station in July this year, I have purchased my weekly tickets at my destination station without trouble until this occasion.

This occasion was 5 October when Mr G was stopped at Wynyard Station and issued with an infringement notice by an officious State Rail Authority staff member. In the past Mr G has been told that because he cannot purchase his weekly ticket at Cowan he may travel to Wynyard Station and purchase his ticket there. Honourable members should understand that Mr G must produce enough coins from his pocket to purchase a single ticket to Wynyard because the machine does not accept notes. For many weeks since July Mr G has been travelling to Wynyard and purchasing his weekly ticket there. He approaches the barrier and explains that he cannot buy his weekly ticket at Cowan because there is only a small ticket machine on the station platform.

As soon as Mr G arrives at Wynyard Station he goes to the ticket office to purchase his weekly ticket. Finally, in October, Mr G was fined $100 simply because the Government removed the large ticket machine at Cowan. That is the prediction I made in July and it gives me no pleasure to say that I was right. I ask the Minister for Transport to heed the genuine cases of the people of Cowan who like travelling by train, buying weekly tickets and buying a ticket to any destination, not merely the selected destinations provided for on the small ticket machine. Cowan is part of the Sydney metropolitan area and its commuters deserve a fair go. I ask that Mr G be excused from payment of this fine and that the small ticket machine be replaced with a full-service ticket machine such as the one the community and I called for in July of this year.

Mr W. D. SMITH (South Coast) [6.04 p.m.]: I raise the issue of the southern comprehensive regional forest assessment process and its impact on the South Coast. At the end of the last session the honourable member for Bega criticised the Wilderness Act as flawed, and opposed further wilderness declarations. First, it is highly unlikely that anything qualifies for wilderness declaration. I would go so far as to suggest that the honourable member has not looked closely at the southern comprehensive regional assessment [CRA] process. If he had he would have noticed that fire management and pest control are in fact included in the process.

The assessment process has been going on for nearly four years, with the assessment team taking comments and submissions from all stakeholders, including timber workers, regional State forests, the National Parks and Wildlife Service, conservationists and land-holders, as well as environmental experts. Honourable members would be aware that the aims of the process include the need to resolve existing land use conflicts in respect of public forest areas and the need to ensure that the economic, social, cultural and environmental values of forests are assessed.

Page 1698

The aim of the CRA is not to lock up the forests and prevent access by the community. On the contrary, it is to determine a fair balance between the needs of natural environments and the economic needs of communities. It does not take a genius to understand that this balance is essential for a healthy society. The honourable member for Bega fails to understand that the process is not dominated by one minority group pushing its own ends; all possible aspects are being considered so that we have areas of national parks, designated State-managed forests and areas for recreation.

We can no longer continue haphazardly wearing down our natural environment for the sake of self-interest. There must be a balance. I find the honourable member’s rationale for criticising the Wilderness Act somewhat illogical. If we were to allow all our forests to be open to the kinds of recreational activities he suggests, such as horseriding, trail bike riding and four-wheel drive vehicles, what would happen to these environments over time? As if we did not already know - they would be destroyed! That is why, for nearly 30 years, we have become more conscious of the damaging effects of people unintentionally but systematically tearing up the natural environment.

It is why the State Government, since its election to office in 1995, has introduced more effective policies for determining a more workable balance between the natural environment and community infrastructure. It would not have been necessary to introduce Acts and regulations if society on the whole had been considerate of the environment. But history has repeatedly shown that it is not. We can no longer afford to fell trees willy-nilly for the sake of profit. We can no longer clear hectare upon hectare of land for the sake of residential development. We can no longer allow every weekend adventurer to tear up bushland wherever he chooses for the sake of self-interest. There must be a balance.

This assessment process does just that. Any areas designated as national parks will be determined in the interests of the environment and its conservation and preservation. Any areas set aside for the timber industry will be on the basis of strict regulations under the jurisdiction of State Forests. No-one is saying, "Stop the timber industry", and no-one is saying that every bush site is off limits to human access.

The honourable member for Bega insults all those who work in the business of protecting the forests and environment when he suggests that because of the will of minority groups our bush is further threatened by feral animals and fire hazards. What nonsense! We have projects managed by State Forests, the Rural Lands Protection Board, the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the Environment Protection Authority, not to mention numerous volunteer and privately sponsored organisations attending to the care of the environment. Urban sprawl is an unsightly social negative in my electorate. On occasions subdivisions will spring up in the middle of nowhere.

Land is cleared and all but a few token trees are left standing. Great stretches of farmland are turned into tightly packed residential areas. This urban sprawl is snaking its way along the South Coast of New South Wales and we accept it, often without protest. Yet, when a carefully structured scheme is initiated by government to determine and set aside areas of wilderness for preservation, it becomes a major furore with the end of the world as we know it mentality. Private land cannot be declared wilderness without consent. Land that has been exceedingly disturbed is less likely for declaration. The assessment process seeks balance in a rational fashion. I commend Minister Yeadon for his thorough and patient approach to an issue that will affect this and future generations.

Mr ROZZOLI: (Hawkesbury) [6.09 p.m.]: The International River Symposium was held recently in Brisbane. I draw the attention of this House to a conference held in another State because two major river management organisations in this State - the Murray-Darling Basin Authority and the Hawkesbury-Nepean Catchment Management Trust - were well featured at the symposium. This was the second symposium of its kind to be held and this year 10 river management systems cases were studied, six from overseas and four from Australia. The Hawkesbury-Nepean Catchment Management Trust, of which I am proud to be the deputy chairman, not only featured in the symposium program but also was a nomination for the international river prize that is sponsored as part of the symposium and carries a $100,000 prize.

The Hawkesbury trust reached the last six nominations to be considered for the prize. That was a remarkable achievement because it was by far the youngest organisation of its kind to get that far in the process. It was a tribute to all those who have worked for the Hawkesbury-Nepean Catchment Management Trust since its inception six years ago. The trust has a small but dedicated staff and is supported by a number of part-time trustees, of which I am one, and a huge number of volunteers
Page 1699
who work on a large range of programs, whether it be catchment management committees, revegetation committees, bank stabilisation committees, Land Care groups, school groups, Streamwatch and so on. We estimate that between 4,000 and 5,000 volunteers now assist in the rehabilitation and maintenance of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system.

One of the notable features in the many presentations at the conference was that community involvement seems to be an essential factor in successful river management programs. This was evident whether it was the Mersey Basin campaign - the ultimate symposium prize winner and, of course, is in the Liverpool area of England - which cleaned up a hugely polluted waterway; the Thames, which is well known for its rehabilitation; the Rhine River; the Meewasin River in Canada; or Chesapeake Bay in the United States of America. All of those rivers featured strong community involvement. A significant feature in the presentations was the identification of species rehabilitation. Most river managers found that to focus community attention and make people look at the river was necessary to identify a particular species that was typical of that river system.

For example, in the Rhine it was salmon. The managers of the Rhine said that they felt an indication of success in cleaning the river would be the reintroduction of salmon into the system. They were certainly successful in reintroducing salmon to that river system, though certainly not in the same quantities as many years ago. They will continue to work on that reintroduction as it is a strong indication of success. With the Thames River it was the reintroduction of the otter to the river system. In Chesapeake Bay it was the reintroduction or redevelopment of stocks of stripe bass. Getting the community to look at assets that are right on its doorstep is an important part of bringing together community ownership and the culture change necessary to make meaningfully environmental change. I commend to members of this House the proceedings of that international conference.

Mr BROWN (Kiama) [6.14 pm]: I did not conclude my speech yesterday during the urgency debate discussing bank closures, and I have a number of issues on that topic to bring to the attention of the House regarding rural areas of this State. I brought to the attention of the House -

Mr Rozzoli: Point of order: I hesitate to do this to the honourable member, but it is expressly against the standing orders of this House to continue a debate through the medium of a private member’s statement, otherwise the process will get completely out of hand. The honourable member has indicated that he wishes to continue his speech from another debate. As such, it is completely out of order as a private member’s statement.

Ms Meagher: On the point of order: I have spoken to the honourable member and although he commenced his remarks by referring to rural areas, he is in fact a member from a regional area and will be referring to closures specifically in his electorate.

Madam ACTING-SPEAKER (Mrs Beamer): Order! I will allow the member for Kiama to continue. However, if he continues the speech he made yesterday I will ask him to resume his seat.

Mr BROWN: I shall specifically refer to areas within my electorate of Kiama. It is a shame that members opposite do not want to hear about some of the issues that face Kiama constituents and small businesses. The Kiama electorate does not have many share investors, currency speculators and the like, yet the local community has serious concerns about the closure of bank branches. There are no share investors or options traders in Warilla, which is in the northern part of the Kiama electorate, but another bank branch has closed in that area. Most of the people who live in Warilla are decent, hard-working Australians who are either employees or own and run a small business within the Illawarra region. These people have told me that they are not benefiting from the massive profits banks make; they are being inconvenienced by bank closures.

Only this morning I was talking to people in Gerringong about their concerns after the closure of the Commonwealth Bank three years ago. Rumours abound that other banks could close in Gerringong, including the ANZ Bank. The people of Gerringong have found that one of the problems they face with bank closures is travelling to a larger commercial centre, such as Kiama or Shellharbour Square, to do their banking. Shopkeepers in Gerringong have said that due to that bank closure they have noticed that local shopping habits have changed; many locals now shop at larger centres where they can do their banking as well as their shopping.

Today I spoke to the publican in Jamberoo and to ABC regional radio. I was told that the ANZ
Page 1700
branch, which was the last bank in the town, closed about 12 months ago. There are a number of small businesses in this lovely historic town. They need a vault to store their cash rather than telephone banking or an automatic teller machine [ATM]. In Robertson the branch has not moved out; there is no branch in the town. There is not even an ATM. Today I did further research on the American community reinvestment Act. I hope to report to the people of the electorate on this very soon.

Another issue I bring to the attention of the House is roads within the Kiama electorate. A delegation which included the Federal member for Gilmore and the Mayor of Kiama went to Canberra to talk to the Federal Minister for Transport and Regional Services, the Hon. John Anderson, regarding funding for roads south of Gerringong on the Princes Highway. We have been happy with the commitment that the State Government has made to roads in the electorate but it is about time the Federal Government threw money into rural roads in the region.

We have asked the Federal Minister to match dollar for dollar the $380 million that the State Government has provided for roads within the electorate of Kiama. In Canberra we were told that there was no funding to make the Princes Highway a road of national importance, a RONI, but some black spot funding or bridge fundings would be made available. The Mayor of Kiama, Councillor Joyce Wheatley, the Federal member for Gilmore and I will make further representations to the Federal Government to ensure that our roads are safe for the motorists who travel on them.

Mr R. W. TURNER (Orange) [6.19 p.m.]: Tomorrow will be the start of the forty-eighth national field days at Borenore, just outside Orange. I pre-empt the success of the field days by congratulating the voluntary committee of farmers in the district. I am sure the forty-eighth Australian national field days will be highly successful. I note that the guest exhibitor this year is the New South Wales Rural Fire Service, which will exhibit in the BHP pavilion. At noon tomorrow Commissioner Phil Koperberg will perform the official opening. His attendance almost coincides with the start of the 1999 bushfire season. The fire service display will highlight the safety of firefighters across the State’s 2,400 brigades and 143 local government areas. It is highly significant that this year the field days have been moved forward three weeks from November to 21 to 23 October.

One of the contributing factors is the emergence of canola as a major crop throughout the central western region. It was necessary to consider the harvesting time for this crop. It is hoped that the October date will enable those committed to growing canola to leave their properties to visit the field days. This year emphasis will be put on machinery demonstrations - from the humble windmill and two-horsepower pumps right through to 500-horsepower tractors and half-million-dollar trucks and headers. The Borenore site, 16 kilometres west of Orange, totals 1,888 hectares. Other features of the field days will be sheep and wool displays. There are low wool prices because of the cloud of ovine Johne’s disease. There will also be an increase in beef cattle exhibits. This year bookings for sites represent 91 per cent of available exhibitor space, and the organisers are confident of reaching 100 per cent before the field days start.

At present 483 exhibitors and 624 individual companies are expected to be represented. Voluntary organisations will provide food and drink, raising valuable dollars for local charities. This is a vital part of the field days. This year for the first time there will be a district exhibit. Condobolin will have the honour. It will highlight on-farm machinery and component modifications. The Condobolin area is conducting a trial to help drought proof the district. Local farmer groups will work with the Department of Land and Water Conservation to set up water supply schemes to the north and south of Condobolin. The progress of this multimillion-dollar domestic and livestock water supply program will be on display. In 1998 34,000 people attended the national field days and it is expected that because this year the field days will be held earlier that figure will be exceeded.

All accommodation within 60 kilometres of Orange has been booked, and that will provide an economic lift to the district and boost tourism. The Australian national field days will be the last lot of judgings in the competition for the Land and GrainCorp farm inventor of the year, which carries a total of $44,000 in cash and prizes. The main criterion for an invention is that it must have an on-farm application, but otherwise there are few restrictions. Australian national field days - along with Henty, AgQuip at Gunnedah, the Mudgee small farm field days and other smaller farm field days - help to keep farmers in touch with what is going on with innovations and new machinery and gives those not involved with farming an idea of what farmers are facing. [Time expired.]

Page 1701

Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [6.24 p.m.]: I draw to the attention of the House the prominence of and some of the activities of the South American community within my electorate and within south-western Sydney generally. I recently had the honour and pleasure of attending several national and independence day ceremonies for several of the South American communities. The Uruguayan Independence Day dinner was organised by and held at the Uruguayan Social and Sporting Club on 21 August. I addressed the club members present, as did the Ambassador of Uruguay, His Excellency Señor Pablo Sader, Consul-General Estevez and the president of the club, Mr Gerardo Rodriguez. The Uruguayan club is located in Whitford Road, Hinchinbrook. I was present at the official opening of the club by the Premier and it is of some pleasure to me that the relationship I have developed with the club has been maintained over a number of years.

On Sunday 29 August I attended another Uruguayan Independence Day function. The event, which was at the Fairfield showground, was organised by Uruguayos Unidos. As is traditional, it was a day-long function. Also present once again was the Ambassador, Señor Sader. Also present was Aldo Pennini, the ethnic affairs adviser to the Premier, and Cecilia Anthony, who is now a councillor on Liverpool City Council. Uruguay was colonised by Spain following the voyage of Columbus in 1492. For several centuries the Spanish empire encompassed Uruguay. In the first decade of the nineteenth century there were attempted reforms to the imperial structure. Changes in the metropolitan portion of the empire included intervention by Napoleon. Rebellions developed in South America but, with the defeat of Napoleon in the Iberian Peninsula in 1814, a reaction developed. There were struggles between royalists and revolutionaries and between centralists and federalists.

In Uruguay, then called Banda Oriental, there were also struggles with what was to be called Argentina. At that stage it was mainly a junta based in Buenos Aires. An army invaded from Brazil in 1816 and annexed Banda Oriental. In 1825 Uruguayan patriots roused part of the population against the alien government, with support from Buenos Aires. Hostilities then developed between Brazil and Buenos Aires. Eventually, in 1828 a treaty was signed whereby Brazil and Buenos Aries formally recognised Uruguay as an independent State, and thus the celebration of its independence.

On 19 September I was invited to attend a Chilean Independence Day festival at the Fairfield showground. This event was organised by the Colo Colo Club, a well-known and well-established club in our region. I attended the function together with the Chilean Ambassador to Australia, His Excellency Jorge Tarud, and Colo Colo Club President, Hector Sacapa. Also present were members of the Chilean consular community, including Vice Consul Lucia Salinas and Trade Commissioner Juan Bournas. The core of that event was well expressed to me in a letter the club wrote to me, which said in part:

The festival has become the community’s expression of cultural pride and harmony in Australia’s multicultural society.

The function included traditional Chilean entertainment, dancing, singing and food. On 26 September I attended another Chilean Independence Day function at the Fairfield showground. This was a National Day celebration organised by the Cobreloa Sporting and Social and Ethnic Club. Once again, there was a presence from the Chilean Consular Corps, this time the Chilean Consul-General, Jose Luis Ilabaca. Chilean National Day celebrates Chilean independence. Chilean independence from Spain was achieved also at the beginning of last century.

An army of the Andes under San Martin left the River Plate and traversed the Andes in February 1817. He engaged a royalist force at Chacabuco. His army then proceeded to the capital, Santiago. The Government was then proclaimed under a Chilean in San Martin’s army called the unlikely name of Bernardo O’Higgins. Independence was formally declared in February 1818. Liberation was substantially completed with a military victory at Maipu. These National Day events have a number of aspects of significance.

One is that it always pleases me to be able to attend functions that are a celebration of the fact that more than 170 years ago a group of people in the Southern Hemisphere decided that they wished to sever their links with a colonial monarchy on the other side of the world and develop a republican form of government. As I have said at a number of these events, my only regret is that Australia has still not followed that example, although many of my Latin-American constituents present suggested that they would have their say in November to try to change that situation. The events are also a significant celebration of Latin-American culture within an Australian context. They are a very real affirmation of the cultural diversity of south-west Sydney and an affirmation of the multicultural nature of our society. They are a celebration of everything that is good about south-west Sydney.

Mr BROGDEN (Pittwater) [6.29 p.m.]: On many occasions in the past 3½ years I have brought
Page 1702
to the attention of the House my concern about the lack of police numbers in the Pittwater community. On some occasions I have been extremely critical of decisions by the Government and the current Commissioner of Police to disband the control structure in favour of local area commands. I stand by my belief that there was no good management reason to disestablish the patrol structure, and there was certainly absolutely no criticism of that structure in the royal commission. However, the Government moved that way and in doing so created the northern beaches local area command and disestablished the Pittwater and Dee Why patrols.

In that process the majority of police were moved from Mona Vale police station to Dee Why police station. It is alleged that Mona Vale police station now operates 24 hours a day. It is little more than a shopfront police station that services some 55,000 people in the Pittwater local government area, and up into Terrey Hills and Duffys Forest, which closely follows the boundaries of the State seat of Pittwater. I remain very concerned about the capacity of police to stretch themselves from Brookvale to Palm Beach and up to Terrey Hills and Duffys Forest, and to provide an adequate police service. This is not a criticism of the police or the excellent, hard work they do. But it is a criticism of the management structure and the reduction in police numbers sustained in my community.

The technique used by the department has been very clever; it has not been to transfer police out of the northern beaches local area command. Every time somebody moves, every time somebody accepts a promotion or transfers to another area that person is not replaced. We see a slow but steady deterioration of policing services to the people of my community. The reason I bring this to the attention of the House today is that on Friday last, 15 October, I received correspondence from Mr Tom Wykoff, a resident of Captain Hunter Road, Bayview Heights. In correspondence he detailed the difficulty he had in receiving service from the northern beaches police. I discussed this matter with Mr Wykoff over the weekend, and he consented to me raising it in the House.

On Monday 11 October, between 11.05 a.m. and 11.30 a.m., his home was burgled. The theft was considerable. The burglars came through the kitchen window, removed money from the master bedroom, obtained a dolly from his garage above the study and used it to remove the 60-kilogram safe, wheeling it out along the balcony, through the pool area, over the lawn and onto a nature strip, leaving clear tyre tracks. Mr Wykoff is a businessman and, sadly, the safe contained many considerably important documents. He contacted police on the day and was advised that the fingerprint squad would be on hand as quickly as possible to examine the site. There was no assistance from the police on the Monday or the Tuesday.

On Wednesday 13 October Mr Wykoff called the northern beaches local police to be told that the police were unable to follow up the investigation at that time, and that they would contact him again. Mr Wykoff correctly left everything in its place so that the police could examine the crime scene. He did not hear from the police on Thursday 14 October. In frustration he wrote a detailed letter to the Commissioner of Police, a copy of which he sent to me last Friday. In response to that letter a detective finally visited his home last Saturday. But why did it take five full working days, nearly six days, for the police to respond to a very important matter and to investigate a reasonably serious crime? It is unacceptable that it took so long. It is unacceptable that police on the northern beaches do not have the resources, the time or the numbers to adequately respond to these sorts of dilemmas.

Yesterday I wrote to the Minister for Police, my local area commander and, most importantly, the Commissioner of Police. There has been a lot of talk in recent days about the salary package of the Commissioner of Police which, in total, is more than $2.5 million if he fulfils his five-year term. For $450,000 a year I would hope he would respond to this matter. I would like a meeting with the Commissioner of Police to discuss this matter. I would like him to respond to my correspondence; he normally hands it down the line. It is about time the commissioner took a definite interest in policing issues in the community of Pittwater.

Ms ANDREWS (Peats) [6.34 p.m.]: I bring to the attention of the House the fulfilment of yet another commitment to the Peats electorate by the Carr Labor Government, a new juvenile centre built at a cost of $23 million on the northern end of the Mount Penang site. The Frank Baxter Centre was officially opened on Saturday 9 October by the Minister for Juvenile Justice, Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth, and Minister Assisting the Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Carmel Tebbutt. The centre is named after an orphaned ward of the State and Central Coast identity who spent many years at the former Mount Penang Juvenile Justice Centre because in the 1920s there was nowhere else for him to go. At the opening a commemorative leaflet was distributed to guests. I
Page 1703
shall quote an extract from that publication which outlines the remarkable story of Frank Harold Baxter, who was born in 1913 and died in 1986:

Frank Baxter as an orphaned State ward was placed at Gosford Farm for boys. A gifted sportsman, Frank loved cricket and rugby, and represented the home in both games. At the age of 13 he played first grade cricket for Gosford.

He met Ron Evans on work release and later went into full-time employment on his farm after being released from care.

At the outbreak of World War II Frank enlisted in the AIF and fought in the Middle East and New Guinea. He was wounded during the Syrian campaign and contracted scrub typhus in New Guinea before being repatriated to Australia towards the end of the war.

Frank and his wife Gladys raised their family on the Somersby plateau on land gifted to him by Ron Evans.

Frank continued his Mt Penang association through junior and senior cricket, and also returned to the home to teach animal husbandry. He was a life member of the Gosford-Wyong District Cricket Association and manager of the Emus under 21 world touring side.

Frank Baxter was a man who rose above difficult circumstances. He maintained a heavy investment in youth throughout his years and always felt Mt Penang provided him with a strong foundation for his future life and a success.

A number of Frank’s relatives were special guests at the opening. A commemorative plaque of this auspicious occasion was presented by the Minister to Frank’s son Dick, who told those at the opening that his family felt honoured to have the centre named after his father who had been a fine example to young people. Although the records were hazy, the Minister said that Frank used to tell his children that he was at Mount Penang at the same time as the notorious Sydney identity Darcy Dugan.

The Minister informed guests that for more than 87 years the juvenile justice centre at Mount Penang had been an important part of the Central Coast community. It started off in 1911 as the Gosford Farm for Boys, and later became known as the Mount Penang Training School for Boys, the Mount Penang Juvenile Justice Centre, and was now the Frank Baxter Centre. Recently the Minister had the opportunity to congratulate a number of young detainees who received their Duke of Edinburgh Awards. Over a long period the rural fire brigades, surf life saving clubs, local sporting clubs and the Riding for the Disabled Association of Australia Inc. have all enjoyed close ties with the Mount Penang centre.

The Minister took the opportunity to thank all those organisations for giving young offenders the chance to give something back to their community whilst helping to build their self-esteem. The new centre will directly benefit the Central Coast community by providing up to 120 jobs and boosting the local economy with an injection of more than $10 million a year. The opening ceremony commenced with a dance segment by the Djuanjang dance group, which was introduced by Bev Simons, the executive officer of the Bungaree Corporation. The dance group is comprised of boys from the juvenile justice centre. The dancers commemorated the fact that the original occupants of the land on which the centre is located were the Darkinjung people.

The naming of a juvenile justice centre after a local identity was a break with tradition, and the Minister expressed the hope that Frank Baxter’s achievements would inspire all those who worked within the centre. The Director-General of Juvenile Justice, Mr Ken Buttrum, said that the new centre represented new directions within juvenile justice by ensuring that the recommendations in the 1996 Ombudsman’s report into juvenile justice centres were carried out. The Frank Baxter Centre formally made New South Wales a leader in accommodating juvenile offenders.

The centre was designed by architect Perumal Pedavoli to protect both the security of young detainees and the broader community. The centre was designed in such a fashion that the fence surrounding the new facilities is unobtrusive when viewed from the inside. When the trees planted both inside and outside the centre have matured, the fence will be even less obvious. Early works on the centre were undertaken by C. and W. Constructions, and the main works were undertaken by Richard Crookes Constructions, with supervision undertaken by the Department of Public Works and Services, Hunter-New England region. Both the architect and the builders are to be congratulated on a job well done. I take much pleasure in wishing the Frank Baxter Centre every success in the future.

Private members’ statements noted.

[Madam Acting-Speaker (Mrs Beamer) left the chair at 6.39 p.m. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m.]

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr PRICE (Maitland) [7.30 p.m.]: I support the motion for urgent consideration moved by the honourable member for Miranda in relation to the
Page 1704
demise of the banking structure in suburban, rural and provincial New South Wales. Both my former electorate of Waratah and my present electorate have experienced a number of bank branch closures. I shall briefly outline the closures that took place in my former electorate of Waratah. Two years ago the village of Beresfield had three bank branches but now it has none. The Commonwealth Bank branch closed first, then the ANZ branch and then the Westpac branch. The Commonwealth Bank branch closed in Waratah and in Jesmond, a large commercial centre where my office was located, the Westpac branch closed. Those branches closed within two years of each other.

Beresfield has one of the largest bowling clubs in the area and the closure of the bank branches has created a major dilemma for the club when banking its proceeds. Instead of being able to bank locally members of the club had the option to travel either 12 kilometres to East Maitland or 18 kilometres to Raymond Terrace. Both alternatives are unsatisfactory. That has put staff transporting the cash at considerable risk and has necessitated them having to carry a heavy weight some distance with only limited security. Fortunately, no major problem has arisen and other arrangements have been made to facilitate safe movement of the money. Nevertheless, that additional cost has had to be borne by a club struggling to maintain its solvency and meet its overdraft commitments.

In the Maitland electorate, Westpac closed its branch in Dungog a couple of months ago and the National Australia branch had already closed in Gresford. At this time there is no movement of banks at Maitland but the threat is ever present because of the banking industry putting pursuit of profit before service to the community. Normal savings bank operations have almost disappeared and people are told to go to building societies. In some places, such as country Victoria, banks have been purchased by local government, which is now operating small banking facilities quite successfully.

The major problem created by the closure of bank branches is the plight of pensioners, who are required to bank electronically. Pensioners like to talk to tellers and in some cases they may not talk to anyone else for days on end. That privilege has been denied to them. When they express concern they are advised to visit the local building society, and they are then required to prove their identity by amassing 100 points. Very few elderly pensioners in their seventies or eighties have valid passports or drivers’ licences. In many cases they do not have their birth certificates, and because many live in rented accommodation few have rate notices. These pensioners are totally disadvantaged. They are terrified that their cheques will not be paid into the bank every fortnight for them to draw on and that they will be unable to continue the lifestyle they currently enjoy. No provision has been made to address those concerns.

In some cases Commonwealth Bank officials have suggested that customers go to the local post office but in many cases local post offices, mainly those with franchises, do not want to be responsible for banking services. Some newsagents have tossed in their businesses because there is no profit in them undertaking the services of the State and Commonwealth banks. Again the community loses. The obscene profits that are being made by banks are of no relevance to the people in the street who are suffering, and there are far more of them than there are of those who gain the benefit of an income from alleged shareholdings. If the branch closures continue, the average man in the street will be disadvantaged without any alternate gain.

Mr BLACK (Murray-Darling) [7.35 p.m.]: I note that yet again not one member of the National Party is present in the Chamber when a matter of importance to the bush is being debated. I speak first of the recent Victorian election result, which resulted in significant swings in the bush against the Kennett Government. One must ask why the National Party in Victoria took such an obvious pounding. The example I wish to give is that which has been promoted by the Local Government Association of New South Wales in its endeavour to provide alternative banking facilities in this great State of New South Wales.

For reasons unknown, the former Premier of Victoria went on a witch-hunt. The Government carved up and amalgamated shires on a compulsory basis - not a voluntary basis, as was the case in New South Wales. Five shires were amalgamated into the Indigo shire. Before the amalgamation the worst performing shire had cash in the bank totalling more than $2 million, while the best performer had cash in the bank of more than $3 million. After amalgamation, the Indigo shire started in the red, with a debt of $7 million. Four towns in Victoria lost their administrative centres, workplaces and depots. As a consequence of that loss of employment the bank branches closed and in that one combined Victorian shire four communities are now struggling to survive.

I want to say a word in favour of the Bendigo Bank. Much has been said about the closure of Westpac and Commonwealth Bank branches but I assure the House that the Bendigo Bank has
Page 1705
provided considerable assistance to New South Wales. I acknowledge in the House a fellow from local government, the honourable member for Tamworth, who has been assiduous in pursuing that discussion. The Bendigo Bank, along with the people of the region, established a community bank in Wentworth after Westpac closed its branch and wrote off the debt of the services club of $4.6 million. How fascinating that Westpac can walk away, leave that community without banking services and only give the advice to bank in Mildura. That is good news for the people living in that area. Westpac walked away and the Bank of Bendigo walked in.

In the time left to me, I want to cite other examples of local government working assiduously to get a result in the provision of banking services. First I refer to the community of Ivanhoe, which could arguably be described as one of the most remote places in New South Wales. I do not propose to defend in this House a former Prime Minister of Australia. While not defending the decision in any way, the bottom line is that the Commonwealth Bank was sold and subsequently accepted no community service obligations. Ivanhoe, which is situated 193 kilometres from Menindee, was left without a bank. When the sheds are paid off at Ivanhoe, the people are paid with two cheques. One cheque is the type that the services club at Ivanhoe can handle and the other is a cheque that can be taken home to a wife. There is no bank. Another example is Moulamein, which is a magnificent community. The young adults have left and only the grandparents remain. They have been left without a bank. [Time expired.]

Mr COLLIER (Miranda) [7.40 p.m.], in reply: I thank all honourable members for their contributions to this debate. I have been told that 43 honourable members have participated in this debate - 43 members of Parliament who have said that their communities have had a gutful of bank closures. I understand this is the first debate on an urgency motion for many years that has extended over two days. Member after member brought the attention of this House to the effect of bank closures on their communities. They drew attention to job losses and hardship that these closures have imposed on families right across New South Wales, from suburban areas to the bush. They have referred to the problems encountered by elderly people who have been denied face-to-face banking services and who have to travel to another suburb or another town to get banking services. Honourable members have noted how elderly people have difficulty using a cold, uncompromising and dehumanising automatic teller machine [ATM].

Yesterday I referred to the Commonwealth Bank’s decision to shut the one and only bank in Kirrawee on 19 November. Kirrawee is situated in the Sutherland shire. Today at 3.15 p.m. I met with two officials from the Commonwealth Bank who were involved in the decision to shut down that Kirrawee branch. The Mayor of Sutherland, Councillor Ken McDonell, also attended. The meeting lasted for 90 minutes. At the meeting I expressed the concerns and fears of my constituents, including those of the shopkeepers, who told me that their businesses would be affected and that the Kirrawee shopping centre would die when the bank closed.

I told the Commonwealth Bank officials about the elderly who will suffer from the loss of the face-to-face services that they had relied on for 38 years in Kirrawee. I asked the officers whether the Kirrawee branch of the Commonwealth Bank was making a profit, and they refused to answer. Refused! I take their silence to be an admission that the branch is still returning a profit. They said that the decision to close the branch was based on transaction numbers, investments and home loans. However, the officers refused to confirm or deny that the branch processes approximately 100,000 transactions every year. That figure was provided to me by a person from the Commonwealth Bank.

The two officials went on to rubbish what the shopkeepers had seen with their very own eyes, namely, that the bank always had customers in it, there was always a queue and large numbers of pensioners used the bank. They refused to accept that closure of the only bank at Kirrawee would have a detrimental impact on business and employment in the suburb. The letter that was dropped into my office on 8 October announcing the closure stated that the decision was taken only after a thorough investigation of many factors. If there was an investigation undertaken, the staff of the Commonwealth Bank at Kirrawee did not know it was happening. The first they knew about it was when they were told that their jobs were going elsewhere after the close of business on 7 October.

I even asked those two officials about the number of pensioners and retirees who live in the area and those Commonwealth Bank officials could not tell me that one in five persons in the area is aged 55 years or over. So much for research! So much for investigation! I could not find one person - not one shopkeeper, one senior citizen or any other resident, man, woman or child - who was consulted about the possible closure of the bank. I asked the officers at the meeting whether they had consulted with the community before deciding to
Page 1706
shut the branch down. "No", they confessed. Obviously "Which bank" does not bother consulting with the community. On behalf of my constituents, I called on those officials at the meeting to leave the branch open. The answer was, "No! The decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into", we were told. The banks are inflexible, unprincipled and profit focused.

The Sutherland Shire Council is the Commonwealth Bank’s largest single customer in the area. Its annual financial arrangement is worth $115 million. Given the bank’s refusal to reverse its decision and its refusal to consult with the community, I called on the mayor to review the council’s relationship with the Commonwealth Bank. After all, it seems that the bank understands only one word and that is "profit". To his credit, the Mayor of Sutherland Shire, councillor Ken McDonell, informed the Commonwealth Bank officials that he would review the council’s relationship with the bank should it persist with its decision to close the Kirrawee branch. I left the meeting angry and disappointed for my constituents, who will suffer the effects of the bank’s closure. My constituents have given their loyalty to this one bank over 38 years and now find that their bank has turned its back on them. Honourable members may well ask: What price loyalty? I commend the motion to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Debate resumed from 21 September.

Mr D. L. PAGE (Ballina) [7.46 p.m.]: I lead for the Liberal and National parties in debate on the bill, which amends the Forestry Restructuring and Nature Conservation Act 1995 to extend to 30 June 2006 the period in which payments from the Environmental Trust Fund may be made under the provisions of the Act and to increase the limit on payments from the fund by $20 million to a total of $80 million to assist in forestry restructuring. The forest industry structural assistance package [FISAP] provides assistance for displaced workers, the businesses affected by the Government’s forestry policy and the loss of a resource which, in the case of the hardwood industry, is roughly half what it was in 1995 when the Carr Government was elected.
The Coalition has some reservations about the way in which FISAP operates. A number of people have contacted the Opposition and I am sure that they have also contacted the Minister because I have referred some of those matters to him. Some people have not received assistance under the FISAP package and are understandably aggrieved. The Coalition has opposed many aspects of forestry policy implemented by the Minister, as he would be aware, particularly in relation to its impact on timber-dependent towns and the flow-on effects to jobs in both the public and private sectors.

Although the Coalition strongly supports a sustainable timber industry, members of the Liberal and National parties would in no way want to stand in the way of the provision of an additional $20 million to the timber industry, forestry industry workers and businesses to allow adjustments in the implementation of policies of the current Government. In 1995 the Coalition expressed its very real concern about the use of funds from the Environmental Trust Fund for FISAP funding. Members of the Liberal and National parties have always believed that adjustment funding should come from the Consolidated Fund rather than from the Environmental Trust Fund.

The Environmental Trust Fund was set up by the Coalition Government in 1990. The purpose of the trust was to fund education, research and restoration and rehabilitation projects. The three trusts each received 10 per cent 20 per cent and 70 per cent respectively of the trade waste charges collected by Sydney Water at that time. The funds were invested by Treasury Corp and the income from investment distributed each year through the grants program. The Coalition believes that this was an excellent environmental initiative by the former Government and that the funds should not have been raided in 1995 by the Carr Government to finance the forest industry structural adjustment package to the tune of $60 million. Not only did the Labor Government raid the trust fund to finance FISAP; it also took an additional $50 million for the acquisition of new national parks and reserves, and a further $20.25 million for other environmental projects.

The result was that all routine grant programs of the Environmental Trust Fund were suspended from 1995 until the 2000-2001 financial year. Some smaller grants remained, but the Environmental Trust Fund should not have been raided in that manner. The money should have come from the Consolidated Fund. Since 1995 the Environmental Trust Fund has to all intents and purposes been gutted. However, the situation changed somewhat with the passing of the Environmental Trust Act last year which replaced the three trusts with a single
Page 1707
trust. The Act also replaced trade waste levies with a standing appropriation from the Consolidated Fund as the principal form of income for the trust.

That amount is $13.5 million, indexed annually. The effect of that annual allocation from the Consolidated Fund - and I have been assured that that will continue - will allow existing obligations to be met even with $20 million taken from the Environmental Trust Fund to enable FISAP to be extended until 2006. The Opposition’s concerns so far as the source of funding was concerned, as expressed in 1995, have now largely been addressed by the indexed allocation of $13.5 million from the Consolidated Fund.

If one adds up the capital expenditure of the $60 million FISAP funding, the $50 million for national parks and the $20 million for the extension to 2006, one sees that it totals $130 million. With the income that that would have generated when compared with the $13.5 million from the Consolidated Fund, it is fair to say that that is a reasonable trade off. Therefore, I do not have any difficulty with that.

In summary, despite the Opposition’s concerns about the Government’s forestry policies and their impact on timber-dependent communities, despite the concerns I mentioned earlier about the operations of FISAP, and despite our concerns about the Government’s ability to meet its wood supply agreements, which have been raised on a number of occasions in the medium and long term and I am sure will also be raised in the upper House by the Hon. Ian Cohen, the Coalition supports the extension of the $20 million assistance for the participants in the timber industry. Accordingly, the Coalition will not oppose this legislation despite concerns about the policy framework which made it necessary to provide this assistance in the first place.

Mr HUNTER (Lake Macquarie) [7.53 p.m.]: I am pleased to support the Forestry Restructuring and Conservation Amendment Bill. The amendments are essential to ensure access for the purpose of extending the Forestry Structural Adjustment program to 2006. In 1995 this Government initiated with the Commonwealth the $120 million forest industry structural adjustment package [FISAP] to assist workers and the native timber industry to manage the changes required to place the industry on a sustainable basis.

In essence, the New South Wales contribution to FISAP will assist workers to get new training and jobs, and will fund businesses to improve value adding and create new jobs. The program is indicative of the Government’s commitment to maintaining and enhancing employment opportunities in regional New South Wales. Since the inception of the FISAP to 30 June 1999, assistance to firms in the native timber industry has resulted in the creation of 170 new jobs and $50.5 million in investment.

Additionally, $20 million has been approved in worker assistance to 494 workers and $1.6 million in relation to 25 training initiatives funded under the New South Wales Forest Industry Training Strategy. As a result of the FISAP approvals, the industry is now achieving greater value from native timbers, including small logs that have previously been underused. Companies are working more efficiently and are using better equipment for processing and value adding, allowing them to enter more profitable markets, such as high quality flooring and furniture. By promoting higher value uses of timber, FISAP is also creating new, more interesting jobs and career opportunities in the industry.

Mr Fraser: The forest industry structural adjustment package.

Mr HUNTER: I prefer to use the abbreviation, thank you. Through worker assistance displaced workers are being helped to find these new jobs in the industry as well as jobs in other sectors. They also have the opportunity to get help to improve their skills and job prospects through training. Bruce Curtis is just one FISAP success story. Formerly a timber worker at Bonalbo, Bruce accessed training and relocation assistance from the Worker Assistance program. For people like Bruce that program has meant help with gaining employment and getting formal recognition for the skills they already have.

Bruce recently bought a new home with assistance from the Worker Assistance program. As he puts it, "These are opportunities I never dared to dream of - anyone who whinges about this deal has not got a firm grasp on reality." Other displaced workers have been helped to gain new jobs with State Forests and the National Parks and Wildlife Service. After being retrenched from Boral Gloucester, the FISAP helped Darren McGlashan move to Bulahdelah and into a job as a supervising forest officer with State Forests of New South Wales.

Darren received training in writing, computers, occupational health and safety and environmental awareness, helping to develop the skills he needed to take up his new career. This led to a job as a supervising forest officer with one of State Forests
Page 1708
district offices. Mark Hancock, formerly employed by a sawmill in Tenterfield, is now working with the National Parks and Wildlife Service in Kyogle and is using his FISAP training to assist in increasing his skills to further his career. Practical help such as this for timber workers is an important part of the Government’s innovative and unique program of structural adjustment in the native timber industry and shows our commitment to timber workers, their families and their communities.

The training strategy is another FISAP initiative. It was launched in July 1998 to strengthen the skills base in a restructured forest industry as it heads into the next millennium. The strategy is designed to better match workers’ skills to new opportunities in the timber industry, provide recognition for skills developed by workers on the job and give displaced workers the skills to successfully make the transition to new jobs. Grant funding has already been provided for a wide range of initiatives including statewide initiatives such as the Log Grading and Segregation program, training to recognise and upgrade the skills of workers and funding for the development of enterprise training plans by forest industry employers.

All stakeholders have welcomed this Government’s commitment to training. Passage of this bill will ensure FISAP continues to have a major role in promoting private investment and training in the native timber industry, in generating sustainable and better-skilled employment opportunities in rural communities and in encouraging greater value adding and productivity in this industry. The shadow minister mentioned the Government accessing the Environmental Trust Funds in 1995 to fund the restructuring of the forest industry. He criticised the use of those funds. I thought that the package that the Government came up with in 1995 was quite a good one, because an allocation from the Environmental Trust Funds went to the lead remediation program in the north Lake Macquarie area, in the electorates of Lake Macquarie and Wallsend.

It is important to the people of my electorate and to all the people of north Lake Macquarie that the project goes ahead. I would point out to the shadow minister that it was a worthy project for the Environmental Trust Funds. The health of children in north Lake Macquarie is very important. The Government is rehabilitating the area and remediating the site. The Environmental Trust Funds are very useful indeed. The Government is doing a good job not only in forestry but also in the north Lake Macquarie area. I fully support the bill and commend it to the House.

Mr FRASER (Coffs Harbour) [7.59 p.m.]: I support the legislation. This is the first opportunity we have had to bring the forest industry structural adjustment package [FISAP] before Parliament, in order to examine the process thus far and assess how it has affected regional New South Wales, especially the Coffs Harbour electorate and the North Coast. The forest industry structural adjustment package was established to counteract a flawed policy of this Government that we were not logging our forests at a sustainable level. Productive forests that were logged on a 1 per cent yield were closed and became national parks. They were too good to be forests even though they had been logged sustainably for more than 100 years.

The 80-year-old box trees in Wild Cattle Creek are a typical example. Col Dorber showed the present Minister photographic proof when he was in opposition, but the photographs have now disappeared. A deal was done with the industry and the unions to massage this package through. Country New South Wales has lost badly. The value adding referred to by the Minister and the honourable member for Lake Macquarie was in the industry prior to this Government coming to office. The Minister may laugh. I have walked through the Notaras mill, the Hurfords mill and the Pidcock mill, all of which had timber improvements and value adding in train. All they wanted was log security. With deserved funding from the Government they have put in place what they wanted, but they have no log security.

Hurfords is getting timber from the Central Coast and Bulahdelah. It is being trucked in and subsidised by the Federal Government to the tune of $5 million under this FISAP package. Timber is being shipped all over the State and local jobs are disappearing, as they have disappeared in Dorrigo and Kempsey, and as they will disappear in Armidale and Walcha. A deal has been done by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [CFMEU] and the Forest Products Association [FPA] for their own survival. I do not blame them. I may disagree with Gavin Hillier and I may disagree with Col Dorber but I do not blame them: they are fighting for survival.

On 28 July a $15 million training package was announced. I wrote to the Auditor-General about it. The Timber and Related Allied Industries New South Wales [TRAIN] was set up in accordance with a memorandum of understanding with the Forest Industry Advisory Committee. It was outside the scope of the Auditor-General - either State or Federal - to audit. I want to know what happened to the $15 million. Former CFMEU representatives
Page 1709
now work for TRAIN in the bush. All they have done is transfer their employment. The CFMEU forestry section is paid by the Government out of the $15 million. The CFMEU office in Sydney has been sublet to TRAIN.

Mr Windsor: Who?

Mr FRASER: TRAIN, the training organisation run by Hillier and Dorber. All this is coming out of the $15 million that is supposed to go to the workers. Les Witchard, a little contractor from my area who is now living in a caravan park and trying to make money out of one truck because he had to sell the other, applied 2½ years ago for an exit package. He had to sell his home - he lost the lot because FISAP and the people who were supposed to be helping him failed to give him any help. He made that application to Grafton on three separate occasions, but he has not been paid. Vern Brazel has been in the timber industry for 50 years. He was in my office last week. He is now suffering from leukemia, so he is not in the best of health. He has been trying to get a settlement out of the Government for a couple of years. Where is his money?

Gavin Hillier got his money, Col Dorber got his money, and the union has been well paid with $15 million. Vern Brazel does not have a cracker. Neither has Les Witchard. Those two people were operating sustainably within the industry and they are now on the sidewalk, forgotten by the Government. The excuse given to them by former union employees now employed by TRAIN is that the Federal Government has dipped out on the package. Why the has the Federal Government dipped out on the package? Is it because it has no faith in the regional forest agreement? If that is the reason it certainly has just cause. Areas have been overreserved. Subspecies were put into areas on the North Coast until the Greens gained total control of the National Parks and Wildlife Service.

At one stage I met with one of the foresters. The Richmond Range was coloured yellow on the maps. I asked him how much of that he would get back and he said he would get it all. It is now a national park. The Bellinger River State Forest is now a national park. These areas have been productive timber land for 100 years. I ask the Minister to give me a public guarantee that timber will be taken out of Whian Whian. He knows timber will not be taken out of Whian Whian. Hurfords and others who are waiting on that timber will not get it. Where is the report on FISAP the Minister was supposed to table in this House in June?

The prior report mentioned a $4 million pay out to a company. I am not sure what company it is, so I will not name it in the House tonight. A $4 million value-adding package was given to that company - I think I know which company it is - and when the information comes to hand we will debate it in the House. One man on the North Coast told me that he was asked by the Minister to take over the industry that was given a $4 million subsidy. He said it was not feasible. I will name that mill in this House. The shadow minister knows which one it is. The business is not viable because of the lack of supply of logs. It was given $4 million to prop it up prior to an election. The Minister may shake his head, but he should table the report.

Mr Yeadon: Nine months after the election it is still there.

Mr FRASER: With a $4 million subsidy, why would it not be there?

Mr Yeadon: Don’t you think we should support industry in your area on the North Coast?

Mr FRASER: I made allegations. The Minister knows what they are and Col Dorber knows what they are. Col does not agree with me. That is fine, but I am sticking up for my people, the people who worked hard and put their lives and souls into this industry. The Government has put those people out of work. The Government has implemented policies that mean they will not survive. Why is it that Vern Brazel cannot get a cracker? Because he was not a member of the FPA and he was not supporting Government policy. The Minister should put those reports on the table. I will make my information available when the business that received the $4 million subsidy falls over and when the Minister’s report is available, so that I do not embarrass anyone prematurely. The Department of Primary Industries and Energy found that my complaints were legitimate.

Mr Yeadon: Point of order: The outcome of the report that the honourable member refers to did not vindicate his allegation. He is misleading the House with that statement.

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

Mr FRASER: That is a public report and it is available. The last report that was tabled in this place states that conditions relating to the manner in which money was handed out to certain industries were changed.

Page 1710

I believe - and I know that I am right - that money was handed to some industries on certain criteria. I wish I had an hour or more to talk about this report as all the matters to which I have referred are contained in it. If people were granted money and they failed to meet certain criteria their applications went back to the forest industry structural adjustment package [FISAP] and the criteria were changed after the grants had been allocated. Those people were given money retrospectively. I am not saying that those people do not deserve the money, but someone keeps moving the goal posts. Dozens of people like the Vern Brazels and Les Witchards of this world have not benefited or received the money that they want.

However, other people, for example, members of the Forest Products Association and members of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, have benefited improperly because of the guidelines at the time. I make no bones about paying out those members. I support the $20 million allocation to industry to help those people. However, at the end of the day all we are seeing is smoke and mirrors. We are not seeing a true restructuring of the industry and we are not seeing anything of value for the community. We are seeing value adding, but that was already in place. I commend the Notaras and the Hurfords. Prior to the 1995 election the Minister did not visit Hurfords’ Mill, as I did, and he did not walk over to Lexie Hurford and say, "We will put a kiln here, but if we do not get wood security we will not."

Mr Yeadon: What did your Government provide? Wood security?

Mr FRASER: The Government has provided wood security, but will these people get any timber from Whian Whian?

Mr Yeadon: They have a 20-year wood supply. What did you give them?

Mr FRASER: I doubt whether they will get any timber from Whian Whian.

Mr Yeadon: You should face reality.

Mr FRASER: As a government we did the wrong thing by those people. We should have signed off on a long-term wood agreement. If we had done that the Minister would not have been able to lock up these forests and turn them into national parks, which is what he has now done. We would now have a sustainable industry supporting more people than it is at present.

Mr Yeadon: It is sustainable now.

Mr FRASER: It is sustainable now because jobs have been lost in that area. [Extension of time agreed to.]

Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! Although I have extended some latitude to the member for Coffs Harbour, I remind him that he is not speaking to a report. He should direct his remarks to the amendments in the bill.

Mr FRASER: Mr Deputy-Speaker, I heard what you said, but I am referring to the whole concept. FISAP needs the additional $20 million because of what has gone on.

Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I am not directing the member not to refer to the report. I am merely reminding him that he should deal with the amendments contained in the bill.

Mr FRASER: The report relating to FISAP was picked up by the Commonwealth Government. The State Auditor-General, the Commonwealth Auditor-General and the DPIE have not been able to get past quasi-autonomous non-government organisations such as the Timber and Related Allied Industries New South Wales where I believe there has been maladministration. If the Minister does not believe that there has been maladministration he should talk to the directors of TRAIN who also happen to be directors on the Forest Industry Structural Adjustment Committee. They hand out money. They put forward a proposal on which they do not vote and that money goes to TRAIN and to the directors. That is wrong. Two people should not be able to advise a committee on whether or not it should give money to a body that has been contracted under a memorandum of understanding - a body that has a member of the Government or a government employee on the board, yet it still has not been audited.

This whole matter is worrying me. The Minister must come clean. He must tell us what is going on. He should give the Vern Brazels and Les Witchards of this world some money. A fellow by the name of Grey, a forestry employee, was given what he believed to be a permanent job with national parks under this package. He thought he had a future. He was stepping out of forestry and going into national parks. Mr Grey, who had a 12-month contract, has now found that he is on the scrap heap and he will get nothing. So the promises made by TRAIN, FISAP and all these other enclaves within the package have not been delivered
Page 1711
to Mr Grey or to Vern Brazel. I challenge the Minister to give this man who is dying some money.

Mr Yeadon: He is not entitled to it.

Mr FRASER: The Minister says that Mr Brazel is not entitled to any money. This package was developed for the Vern Brazels of this world. This man, who is dying, is entitled to his money. He meets the criteria. The only criteria that he does not meet is that he is not a member of the FPA and he is not a mate of Hillier. The Minister is culpable in this regard.

Mr Yeadon: As much as I would like to, I cannot give him money because he is dying.

Mr FRASER: The Minister promised him money but when he submitted his application the goal posts were shifted. Les Witchard, who lost his house and everything else, is living in a caravan park in Moree. The Minister promised him money. Those former union employees were told by TRAIN officers, "We will advance your application." He has submitted three applications and he has not received one scrap of paper from the Minister. He has lost his house, he is living in a caravan and he is going from job to job. But the Minister, who is in the Chamber, said that these people are not entitled to any money. Mr Grey, who was given a job and who expected long-term security was employed for only 12 months. And the Minister sits in the Chamber, like a goldfish, with his arms folded. God almighty! The Minister will be damned for what he has done to these people.

This package is not working. The $20 million should be given to those who need it. The Minister should ensure that the regional forest agreement is right. He should ensure that these people have the 20-year security that the Minister claims is there. I know that it is not. In another five years the Minister will be saying, "We need to raid funds again. We now have to compensate people to whom we gave long-term wood supply agreements as there is no timber." There will be pulpwood. The forests at the back of my home have been overcut and cut too early.

Mr Yeadon: Under you.

Mr FRASER: That occurred in the last 12 months under this Minister.

Mr Yeadon: It has happened because you have taken all the decent timber.

Mr FRASER: This Government has taken all the timber. These logs are not even going to fatten. The Minister should talk to the forest people and ask them whether or not they are prepared to tell him honestly what is going on. It is all Yes, Minister stuff. I am disappointed because I know the bush and there is timber in my electorate. The Minister should have a look at Wild Cattle Creek; he should go to Whian Whian and tell me whether people will ever get a stick of timber out of that area because of the deals that have been done behind closed doors.

Will what is left of Chaelundi be logged? The sustainable timber in that area could have been cut in a one-in-100-year operation. The Minister has caved in to his mates. He has given Gavin Hillier and the rest of these people cheques to buy their silence. That is sad. Gavin Hillier deserves his job as much as Col Dorber does but, at the end of the day, the Minister has caused this industry to implode. We have lost a good, value-adding industry and the Vern Brazels and Les Witchards and I will damn the Minister for that. The Minister sits in the Chamber shrugging his shoulders. I believe in my electorate and in my people.

The Minister sits in his cozy office and he consigns these people to the dole queue. Every time he visits Coffs Harbour he says, "We will open the land and water issue, but do not raise the forestry issue." The Minister is scared of that issue. People are hurting. I will take to Vern Brazel the message that the Minister gave me tonight in this House, that he is not entitled to any money. I will make sure that the Sydney Morning Herald and the Minister’s mate John Laws gets hold of that message. The name of Kim the goldfish Yeadon will be on the front pages of every newspaper. The Minister is attempting to ensure that people who have worked in a sustainable industry all their lives will have no future.

The Minister has written them off. That saddens, angers and hurts me and all those affected in this industry. Whilst I support this allocation of $20 million, I damn the Minister and his Government for what they have done to small people in regional New South Wales. It will come back to bite the Minister. He can sit in the Chamber and crow and say, "Look at the timber seats we have won." The Government did not win South Coast, Ballina or Lismore. The Minister for Local Government, the Hon. Harry Woods, hung onto his seat with a 19 per cent swing against him.

Page 1712

Mr D. L. Page: Or Tamworth.

Mr FRASER: The Government did not win the seat of Tamworth. There is timber in the electorate of Ballina. A $4 million industry is located in the honourable member’s electorate and Government members should have a fair idea of where it is located.

Mr D. L. Page: Walcha.

Mr FRASER: Exactly. The Minister should tell people in that area what he has done. The Minister should get this right. He should give the $20 million to the people who need it. The Minister, who is receiving a fat salary, sits behind a nice timber desk in a timber-panelled office. I do not know what his future might be, but I would like him to ensure that these people to whom I have referred tonight have a future.

Mr Yeadon: I have.

Mr FRASER: The Minister has not.

Mr HICKEY (Cessnock) [8.19 p.m.]: I am pleased to support the Forestry Restructuring and Nature Conservation Amendment Bill. As a consequence of the regional forestry assessment process and forestry agreement decisions for the Eden and north-east regions, the nature and extent of the State’s future native timber resource is now more clearly defined. This has allowed the Government to deliver vastly improved security of access to the native timber industry through a 20-year wood supply agreement. That is something the last speaker should think about.

The agreement has provided also a clearer picture of the extent of restructuring required within the industry - something no other Government has done - and the level of funding that will be required to make the Government’s commitment to assist workers and the industry to make necessary structural changes. After listening to the last speaker, we should realise that things in the bush are not all peaches and cream; that is our past rather than our future. This Government is trying to implement changes that will give us some surety for the future.

The assessment process and extensive consultations with the industry that preceded the decisions on the Eden and upper and lower north-east forest agreements indicated a need for increase in the overall level of assistance to be provided through the forest industry structural assistance package [FISAP] to workers and the industry. Accordingly, an additional $20 million has been allocated to FISAP to enable the Government to meet its commitment to assist workers and businesses in the industry to adjust. This level of funding is required to complete the restructuring process of the native timber industry.

FISAP funds will be used to promote private investment and training in the native timber industry, generate sustainable and better skilled employment opportunities in rural communities, and encourage greater value adding and productivity in this important industry. The Government has recognised also from experience through implementing the FISAP that the restructuring process within the industry occurs over a considerable period following decisions on the resource allocation. Timber businesses typically need to undertake a feasibility assessment for new investments as well as business planning to reposition their enterprises within the industry.

The introduction of new value-added processes, retraining of workers and developing new market outlets takes time. It will not happen overnight and is often staged over a number of years. To ensure that industry and timber workers have enough time to adjust to these changes the Government has decided to extend FISAP to 2006. As a result of these changes the Forestry Restructuring and Nature Conservation Act has required amendment to increase from $60 million to $80 million the payments for forest restructuring and to extend FISAP from 30 June 2001 to 30 June 2006. This Government is committed to implementing those changes. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr WINDSOR (Tamworth) [8.23 p.m.]: With no divisions to be called during this debate, I do not believe anyone will not support the Forestry Restructuring and Nature Conservation Amendment Bill. The honourable member for Coffs Harbour made some interesting points, not the least of which was that when policy change takes place in the restructure of an industry, people are involved in that industry. It is all very well for us in this place to talk about policy change. Nobody would deny that policy changes have to take place, but at the end of the day it is the way the policy relates to the people on the ground.

Though the honourable member for Coffs Harbour was quite emotional about the issue, he has been close to it for many years. If the Minister could listen to some of the issues raised about individuals involved in the process, there may be room for the department to assist some people. Restructuring is about policy changes. Whether we
Page 1713
agree or disagree with the FISAP arrangements and the restructuring of the timber industry, it is a fait accompli. It is happening and will happen in the future. I do not believe anybody would refuse an expansion of $20 million funding to the timber industry.

I do not want to get into the history of the debate and whether it was right or wrong at the particular time, but I agreed with some interjections during the debate about the sustainability of some of the remaining areas. However, the future will tell the story. I should like to take advantage of this debate to talk about restructuring generally. Rightly or wrongly, the Government has agreed to consider restructuring an industry in which, in its view, there has been a scarce and non-sustainable resource. The Government agreed originally to put $60 million into that restructure package.

This amendment bill will add another $20 million to assist in the restructuring of that industry. This is not the only resource in New South Wales that is looking down the barrel of restructuring. It is not the only resource that is unsustainable in the long term, and it is not the only resource that will impact on individuals that deal with other resources in this State. I refer particularly to circumstances occurring in my electorate at the moment and which will occur over the next 12 months. I ask the Government to look closely at how it became involved in restructuring the irrigation industry and its water resource.

It has been determined that in certain areas the extraction rates of underground water are unsustainable. The current Government has determined that in its view the extraction rates of timber were unsustainable for the industry. The Minister for Forestry and the Minister for Land and Water Conservation were in Tamworth recently and opened successful packages for farm forestry. They would be aware of the problems in the Gunnedah area on the Liverpool Plains and the Breeza Plain, and also of the extraction rates over many years of the underground water resource across that plain. I am sure the shadow minister would be aware also that that plain contains some of the most fertile land, not only in New South Wales but in the world.

Certain environmental problems occur from time to time. The farming community has learned to deal with those problems and has been positive in attempting to address particular problems of that nature. One recent problem was that the water extraction rates from zones three and eight were unsustainable. I do not believe that anyone in the farming community would argue that those extraction rates can be sustained into the future. At some future time sustaining those extraction rates will reach its limit and the result will be like a collision with a brick wall.

Some people would argue that the percentages the Department of Land and Water Conservation puts on available water and sustainable rates would be varied. No-one would deny that percentages in the timber industry or the resources able to be delivered to that industry under 20-year contracts would need to be restructured. There was much argument about assessments of that resource taking place. It is easy to assess a log of timber as it is visual to the assessor and can be tampered with politically by various individuals.

I am not accusing the Minister of doing that, but there was a degree of conjecture about the amount of timber that was available, and what was available as a sustainable resource into the future. It is more difficult to do that with underground water. The department is using as much technology as it can to assess what is happening underground so that a sustainable program can be put in place for the future. People who live on that land have been granted licences by the government of the day, the Coalition or the Labor Party, to irrigate water from a resource underneath that land. The process is similar to the granting of extraction rates of timber over a period of time. It has been said that under the forestry industry structural assistance package there could be a problem with sustainability of the 20-year contracts.

Mr R. H. L. Smith: They have been locking it up, mate. You are missing the point.

Mr WINDSOR: No, I am not missing the point at all. Is a compensation package available to the people affected if the timber industry restructure is not sustainable within the 20 years? I say this to those who are extracting water on the Breeza Plain: Will the Government view this scarce resource - water - in a similar way to the way in which it viewed the forestry resource? I will not get into an argument with the honourable member for Bega, who seems to be a bit offshore at the moment.

Mr R. H. L. Smith: We are debating the forestry bill, but you are talking about water.

Mr WINDSOR: Politics is about policy.

Mr R. H. L. Smith: No, politics is about debating the bill that is in front of you.

Page 1714

Mr WINDSOR: If the honourable member for Bega would like to take a point of order, he should go ahead and do so. Given that the Government has decided to compensate those in the forestry industry, does the Government have the same view about people who have been given licences over many years by various governments to extract water from underground aquifers. Will the Government adopt a similar policy for those affected by the policy change?

As the honourable member for Coffs Harbour said, some individuals will be affected by other resource problems within the State. The farming community that will be asked to bear the burden of extraction rates of water in this case will not be able to bear it financially. Given that there has to be a change, and the farming community recognises that, it is incumbent on the Government to compensate individuals for any damage they suffer.

Mr YEADON (Granville - Minister for Information Technology, Minister for Energy, Minister for Forestry, and Minister for Western Sydney) [8.33 p.m.], in reply: I thank the honourable members representing the electorates of Ballina, Lake Macquarie, Coffs Harbour, Cessnock and Tamworth for their contributions to the debate. The honourable member for Ballina led on behalf of the Opposition, and indicated that the Opposition would support the legislation.

It is fair to say that the general theme that emerged throughout the debate was that all honourable members and political parties are in favour of the objectives of the bill, which are to extend the FISAP package to 2006 and contribute an additional $20 million to the fund from the Environmental Trusts. Members of the Opposition particularly expressed various levels of reservation and the honourable member for Coffs Harbour expressed outright hostility about the legislation.

As the Minister I have to ask how honourable members, such as those on the other side of the House, are able to support fully the objectives of the bill, but then say that everything else associated with it is either wrong or a disaster. I know that it is not a disaster and that they are simply playing politics. The truth is revealed in the fact that they support the package. If they did not really support the package they would argue and vote against it. The honourable member for Ballina indicated that he had reservations about people not receiving assistance and the honourable member for Coffs Harbour, in a very emotional way, also spoke about people not receiving assistance.

The honourable member for Tamworth very genuinely indicated that he would like to see the honourable member for Coffs Harbour better informed by the Government about people who had not received assistance. I can say with equal genuineness that I have provided all of the information I can possibly provide through State Forests or my office to the honourable member for Coffs Harbour about the various people to whom he referred. We have a set of guidelines for FISAP that have been modified over time. They were not developed by the New South Wales Government only, but they were developed and modified over time with the other key player in this process. When the other side is sprouting its rhetoric and its disaster scenarios it fails to recognise that the party in government in Canberra and the other party to this equation -

Mr R. H. L. Smith: Here we go again, the blame game.

Mr YEADON: It is not a blame game at all. I am simply giving an explanation. If the honourable member wants to listen, he will hear the explanation. There is another partner in the process called the Federal Government. It was a Federal Labor Government with whom we agreed at the outset of the process to put up $60 million each. Much to the credit of the Howard Government, when it came to office it clearly indicated ongoing support for the program and commitment of the $60 million that was committed by the previous Federal Labor Government. Things went along well while Minister Anderson had responsibility in the Federal Government for this area.

It was while working with Minister Anderson that we modified the guidelines in relation to eligibility for workers. We did not take an inflexible view about assistance to the industry and workers, but rather we assessed the implementation of the package and the policy as it was rolled out. Where necessary and appropriate we modified the guidelines to better target and more effectively assist the industry and workers. What honourable members opposite must understand is that I have no unilateral ability to modify those guidelines; they were modified in conjunction with the Federal Government and the appropriate Minister.

They were all ticked off. The approach we took to the allocation of funding was that the New South Wales Government would address the worker assistance component of the policy and the Federal Government would fund the business exit and business assistance component of the package. That
Page 1715
has been the case all the way through the process. It is most unfortunate that in the lead-up to the last State election and the arrival of Mr Wilson Tuckey as the Minister for Forestry -

Mr Orkopoulos: What a disaster!

Mr YEADON: It has been a disaster for the forestry industry not only in New South Wales but nationally. Western Australia probably exemplifies the disaster that Mr Tuckey has been. I am delighted that since the State election the Government has worked constructively with the Federal Government and Minister Tuckey. Subsequent to the State election the Government signed off on the south-east regional forest agreement, which was signed also by the Federal Government.

Mr Windsor: It’s lucky that you got the export licences.

Mr YEADON: That will be an issue for the Federal Government.

Mr Windsor: You and I know that is where the pressure is coming from.

Mr YEADON: No, you and I know where the pressure is - the Australian Capital Territory. We are within a hair’s breath of signing regional forest agreements with the Federal Government for the upper and lower north-east forests, and one of the partners in that co-operative relationship in Canberra is from the same party as a number of members opposite, particularly those who are strident in their criticism of this process.

The people identified by the honourable member for Coffs Harbour are simply not eligible for funding under the agreed guidelines between the State and Federal governments, and I am in no position to simply hand out money to people. I acknowledge that people have burdens in their lives and I sympathise with them, but I cannot just hand out taxpayers’ money. They must fulfil the guidelines. Any appeal by workers as to funding eligibility under the guidelines is ultimately deliberated upon by both the Federal and State Ministers and unanimity reached.

Mr D. L. Page: Ministers or bureaucrats?

Mr YEADON: If the bureaucrats cannot work out the matter on the appeal assessments, the matter is referred to the State and Federal Ministers. The honourable member for Coffs Harbour can carry on about these issues as long as he likes but his party plays as big a part in the decision process as this Government. As he quite rightly pointed out, as a result of his allegations and those of others in the community, the Federal Government, under Minister Anderson, investigated the conduct of the forest industry structural assessment package funding.

That investigation turned on statements or allegations that related to issues outside government rather than within government. The investigation was initiated by Minister Anderson to deal with perception. The investigation determined that the allegations were unfounded. A number of findings in the report suggested that people may have said things that should not have been said or that gave the wrong impression, but at the end of the day allegations of misappropriation of money were found to be without substance.

The Federal Minister at the time was well aware of those findings because he was equally involved in the process. One of the people identified by the honourable member for Coffs Harbour, Vern Brazel, applied for business assistance, which is in the Federal Government funding arena. In the first instance the Federal Government makes the decisions. Although the honourable member emotionally accused me of not providing appropriate money to Mr Vern Brazel, that decision was made by the Federal Government, not by the State Government.

I acknowledge, as I am sure the honourable member for Tamworth does, that the honourable member for Coffs Harbour has been involved in this issue for a long time. The implementation and success of the Government’s policy have unfortunately clouded his view on many issues. He referred to Brinos Notaras and Lexie Hurford, members of the Forest Products Association who openly support the Labor Government and its policies. They have undertaken substantial value adding in their operations on the North Coast. They are delighted with the situation on the North Coast because they now have a future.

The honourable member for Coffs Harbour said he visited the Hurford mill prior to the 1995 election, and I have no reason to doubt that is so, and that Lexie Hurford, who is an astute and committed business person and sawmiller, outlined her aspirations for the future development of the business. She has a great vision of the industry’s future and what it needs to do. Lexie Hurford’s aspirations are now a reality, because of wood security, as referred to by the honourable member for Coffs Harbour. Prior to the 1995 election she told him of her aspirations, but she could not fulfil them because she did not have wood security. She
Page 1716
now has a 20-year wood security and has been able to go to her bank -

Mr D. L. Page: Wind it up.

Mr YEADON: I am not going to wind it up; I want to put these matters on the record. The Opposition denies that major positive change has taken place in the forestry and sawmilling industries, which will enable the industry to remain healthy into the future and will underpin regional economies. Honourable members opposite purport to work towards that end and to aspire to represent those people.

However, their actions belie their rhetoric; the opposite is the case. The Federal Government temporarily withdrew $40 million of the $60 million from the process prior to the 1999 election. It spent only $20 million and despite returning to the process and signing off on the south-east regional forest agreement, it has not recommitted the money. Therefore, I will not accept criticism from Liberal Party and National Party members about providing assistance and a future for the timber industry.

If members opposite want to make an impact in this area and are as concerned about their constituents, their local economy and their local sawmilling industry as they purport to be in this House, they would be doing something about the Federal Government walking off with $40 million. The Federal Government has not brought back that money, despite the fact that it has re-entered the process in every other way.

Mr D. L. Page: Because you went ahead without the Commonwealth on a regional forest assessment [RFA]. That is why they withdrew the money.

Mr YEADON: The Federal Government signed the RFA subsequent to the 1999 election. My advice to members opposite is that they should learn a little bit about this issue before they comment.

Mr D. L. Page: What an arrogant fellow!

Mr YEADON: The issue is not arrogance but incompetence when it comes to the Opposition.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Mills): Order! There is too much interjection.

Mr YEADON: The member for Ballina lamented the fact that funds from the Environmental Trust Fund had been accessed, and he outlined a range of categories that were open to funding. The final category that he mentioned, which was restoration and rehabilitation, goes very much to the heart of the hardwood forestry industry in New South Wales. That is why it was thought appropriate to access the Environmental Trust Fund to deal with this issue. Doing so certainly allowed for very extensive environmental conservation, which was appropriate, and it also allowed for major assistance to be provided to the industry and to the constituents of many honourable members opposite.

It is all very well for the honourable member for Ballina to say that funds should have been taken from the Consolidated Fund, but that is just a little bit too cute by half. If members were to examine the conduct of every other State Government under the National Forest Policy Statement, they would realise that it is only the New South Wales Government, in conjunction with the Federal Government, that has come forward to provide financial assistance. The other States have simply shown people the door in a major restructuring and have provided no assistance at all. I ask members opposite to be fair about this. Without having access to the Environmental Trust Fund, there would have been no assistance.

Apart from that, the priorities of the Environmental Trust Fund are being maintained in areas where it is appropriate to do so. The honourable member for Lake Macquarie accurately identified the lead remediation work that was undertaken in his electorate and in the electorate of Wallsend. This amending bill continues the support that the State Government has provided to the forestry industry since the introduction of its reform program in 1995. I reiterate that New South Wales is the only State that is providing that type of assistance to the industry and its workers. I would have thought that that would have been acknowledged by the Opposition.

The fact is that virtually all the groups in the community with any knowledge of or contact with the forestry industry, the sawmilling industry or the hardwood industry have acknowledged the benefits of this Government’s policy. The only people who have not done so are members of the Opposition. The only conclusion that can be drawn from that is the obvious one: members of the Opposition continue to play politics and continue their rhetoric, despite the fact that they lost control of this issue a long time ago - and for very good reason, which is embodied in the story about Lexie Hurford and where she has gone with her business since the Government came to office.

I conclude by addressing the issue raised by the member for Tamworth, namely, the general issue
Page 1717
of restructuring resource-based industries where there are resource scarcities and the need to deal with very difficult allocation issues. I do not have responsibility for water resources, which was one particular matter that the honourable member raised, so it is probably not appropriate for me to comment on that. The Minister for Land and Water Conservation is dealing with that issue very effectively. I am able to say, however, as the former Minister for Land and Water Conservation, that the agenda for the reform process was to use market mechanisms to deal with allocation issues, such as how to transfer from sleepers to people who are active.

I know that that does not go directly to the issue of completion of the aquifer but, clearly, there will be some difficult issues surrounding natural resources such as water, which will not be the only difficult issue to resolve in the future. If the honourable member for Tamworth examines the track record of the Government in contrast to that of other governments throughout Australia in dealing with resource industry reform programs, he will see that this Government’s achievements are on the record. The results are there to be seen by all who are involved in the New South Wales hardwood timber industry. If honourable members doubt that, they should talk to industry representatives and not to representatives of the Forest Products Association or anyone else. My advice is to talk to people at ground level, as I do. They will tell the honourable member for Tamworth that Labor is their lifeblood. I commend the bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains - Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [8.56 p.m.], in reply: At the outset, I make some observations on the role of the Security and Investigations Branch of the Department of Corrective Services. I will also respond to some of the issues raised by the honourable member for Wakehurst. The Security and Investigations Branch of the Department of Corrective Services undertakes investigations of serious misconduct by inmates, including escape plans and attempts to smuggle drugs into prisons. It undertakes surveillance of inmates who are on work release or day leave when there is reason to suspect that those inmates may be breaching the conditions of their leave.

Reports on persons other than inmates would occur in circumstances where, for example, an inmate is engaged in an activity such as trafficking in drugs in collusion with a staff member. In that case, any report would necessarily involve an examination of the conduct of both parties, not only the inmate. I believe it is important to make those circumstances clear to avoid any misapprehension on the part of the House or the public. The Security and Investigations Branch reports directly to the Commissioner of Corrective Services at a fortnightly meeting which is also attended by the Director of the Professional Standards Branch, who is a lawyer, and a senior seconded police officer, who is in charge of investigating allegations of criminal conduct within the prison system.

As a result of a longstanding protocol recommended by the Independent Commission Against Corruption [ICAC] which is designed to keep investigations and operations separate, operational staff do not attend this meeting. The State Investigative and Security Group [SISG] has been involved in joint operations with police, especially the seconded police of the Corrective Services Investigation Unit. As a result of these operations, since the beginning of 1998 no less than 276 charges, summonses and court attendance notices have been issued against inmates and visitors for offences involving the attempted importation of drugs and drug equipment into correctional centres.

The SISG has undertaken joint operations with the ICAC to enable the investigation of corrupt conduct. For example, when a drug and alcohol worker was suspected of an improper relationship with an inmate at Long Bay, video surveillance obtained by the SISG was provided to ICAC and resulted in the corrupt activity of the worker being exposed. It is also the primary internal affairs investigative body within the department and investigates disciplinary matters of a serious nature but which do not amount to criminal conduct. The SISG is subject to all legislation which regulates the conduct of any correctional officer, including the Correctional Centres Act and associated regulations as well as the Public Sector Management Act.

Page 1718

Their conduct is subject to the scrutiny of external accountability bodies such as the Ombudsman and the ICAC and all the safeguards in various legislation such as the Listening Devices Act and the Telecommunications Interception Act. I emphasise that the charter of the SISG, as well as its standard operating procedures, have been subject to scrutiny by the ICAC. SISG officers have been trained by the Australian Federal Police and undergo ongoing training with the New South Wales Police Service. The point of the legal changes proposed in the bill, of which the honourable member for Wakehurst seemed entirely oblivious, is to make the SISG more accountable and subject it to a regulatory regime.

The legislation provides for the authorisation of relevant documentation for the acquisition of assumed identities for use by law enforcement and national security officers in the course of their duties. It arises as a result of a recommendation by the Wood royal commission that the ad hoc and unregulated assumption of identities that occurred in the past presented dangers of both accountability and officer safety. The SISG had engaged in joint operations with the Police Service, the National Crime Authority and the ICAC. Without status under the Act, SISG officers could not participate in such operations without risking either their lives or the lives of officers from other agencies. Without the participation of the SISG many operations involving prisons would not be effective. It is evident, therefore, that we had to make this legislative correction.

Operations such as the combined operation which foiled an attempt by Ivan Milat and George Savvas to escape from Maitland gaol would have been impossible without this group. As another example, a number of years ago a work release inmate was suspected of drug-related activity and various forms of white collar fraud using companies owned by that inmate. The inmate had a close confederate who worked in the Roads and Traffic Authority [RTA]. I emphasise that this matter has been successfully wound up and the offenders apprehended. SISG operatives obtained car registration under the name of a fictional photographic company and were able to tail the inmate and obtain proof of his activities. If that car had been registered to the Department of Corrective Services, the inmate’s confederate within the RTA would have been able to run checks on the licence plate and thus discover that he was under surveillance, thereby endangering staff and the operation.

I remind the House that by way of safeguard provision under this legislation, the chief executive officer must ensure that a record is kept of all approvals given, including sufficient details to create an audit trail. Records must be independently audited every 12 months. The Act also requires certain information to be reported in an agency’s annual report. Officers found to be misusing an assumed identity are subject to the agency’s internal disciplinary system and, depending on the nature of the misuse, may be liable to criminal prosecution.

I turn now to some of the grandiloquent claims made earlier in the evening by the honourable member for Wakehurst. I will not detain the House by spending much time at all on his extraordinary claims that he and, even more incredibly, his successor as Opposition spokesman for corrective services during the last Parliament actually drove the process of reform in the prison system. The briefest and most cursory examination of Hansard will show the absurdity of that proposition. It is important, however, that I respond to the proposition that the Department of Corrective Services is, as the honourable member seemed to indicate, riddled with corruption. That claim is absurd. For three years the ICAC has been conducting a most rigorous and searching analysis of the conduct of the department. Any claim of corruption, any allegation, has been referred to the ICAC for analysis. Indeed, if inmates or other people have made allegations to me, I have arranged for them to be referred.

Mr Hazzard: Point of order: The Minister is misleading the House. I did not make allegations of gross corruption in the Department of Corrective Services. I pointed out that there had been a number of ICAC reports, and that was all.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Mills): Order! Allegations of misleading the House should not be the subject of a point of order.

Mr Hazzard: Hopefully the Minister will now address the issue of the appointment of the inspector-general.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wakehurst should make such allegations by way of substantive motion. There is no point of order.

Mr Hazzard: The Minister should answer the question, he has had three hours to think about it. He has had dinner.

Page 1719

Mr DEBUS: And you have had a lot to drink. If inmates or other persons had made that sort of allegation to me, I would have arranged for them to be referred to ICAC forthwith. [Quorum formed.]

Mr Hazzard: Point of order: I am encouraged by the number of members who have appeared out of the woodwork. I ask the Minister, who does not normally behave as he just did, to withdraw his allegation or assertion. He knows it to be untrue and it was not in keeping with his normal character. I ask him to withdraw it and keep this debate on a level footing.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! Did the honourable member for Wakehurst find the words of the Minister objectionable?

Mr Hazzard: I found it objectionable that the Minister would make the assertion about me that he just made, yes, and I ask him to withdraw it.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Do you find that offensive?

Mr Hazzard: Yes, I do.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: The member finds the words offensive. I ask you to withdraw them.

Mr DEBUS: Yes, I withdraw them. A few individual cases of corruption amongst officers have been uncovered. They have been uncovered, fully investigated and prompt action has been taken. Those officers are no longer with the department. On the whole, considering the enormous challenges in any correctional environment, the prison system has come through with very few black marks after three years of persistent and systematic oversight by the ICAC. Of course, there is no room for complacency, but to date those reports have re-enforced my belief that the vast majority of prison officers are hard-working men and women who would find corrupt activity appalling.

Those cases that have been the subject of findings by the ICAC have been investigated by the surveillance team of the SISG. I do not think the honourable member for Wakehurst would seriously think that ICAC would risk using the surveillance staff of the SISG if it had the slightest suspicion about their integrity. Commissioner O’Keefe has gone out of his way to acknowledge the assistance and co-operation given to him by my office, by the commissioner and by the investigation unit of the Department of Corrective Services. One might investigate the credibility of the proposition made by the honourable member for Wakehurst, which seemed to be that the lack of an inspector-general had interfered with the fight against corruption. It has not.

The agency that investigates corruption and which has the statutory function in this respect is the Independent Commission Against Corruption. If I, my office, the commissioner, the inspector-general or, indeed, the Ombudsman receives a complaint raising a reasonable suspicion of corruption as defined by the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act, all those people have a statutory obligation to refer it to the ICAC for assessment, and investigation if the commission so chooses. To make it perfectly clear, the inspector-general will resolve complaints, improve complaint handling within the department and make recommendations for systemic administrative improvement. The inspector-general will not undertake investigations into corruption. That is the work of the ICAC. The fight against corruption has been vigorously pursued, and that will continue. The process of recruiting the inspector-general has been a long and laborious one.

Mr Hazzard: Now we get around to the facts. Tell us more.

Mr DEBUS: I will keep on saying what I intend to say however many times you interject. Recruitment consultants Morgan and Banks have conducted recruitment and advertising campaigns. After the first such campaign - that is to say, when we went through all the ordinary administrative steps necessary to recruit a relatively high-level official - a panel including the present Ombudsman,indeed, the proposed new ICAC commissioner, Irene Moss, delivered a report to me indicating that no appointment should be made from that round of applicants. A second campaign was commenced and further interviews conducted following the recent Drug Summit. The independent panel having conducted further interviews, I am pleased to be able to inform the House that in recent weeks I received a recommendation from that independent panel.

A recommendation for the appointment of an inspector-general was made, and I am able to inform the House that that recommendation is undergoing the arcane processing systems of the central agencies of the Government. I expect an announcement to be made at some relatively early date. Following his words tonight no doubt the honourable member for Wakehurst will applaud the appointment of an
Page 1720
inspector-general, and I look forward to a considerable degree of bipartisanship when the inspector-general commences work. If the honourable member doubts my account, I invite him to speak to the appointee at the appropriate moment in the near future.

Mr Hazzard: When can I do that?

Mr DEBUS: The honourable member can ask this person when he or she is appointed. The appointment of the inspector-general could not be more timely. Commissioner O’Keefe of the ICAC has made no secret of the fact that as his term of appointment concludes he intends to release reports of a number of outstanding investigations, some of which arose from inquiries within the Department of Corrective Services. When those reports are concluded they will no doubt include a number of recommendations for systemic administrative reform and will suggest future directions for change.

The appointment of an inspector-general means that the changes can be bedded down and the process of ongoing reform can continue. Although this may not be strictly within the leave of the bill, I say again that the inspector-general will resolve complaints. He or she will improve complaint handling in the department, make recommendations of a systemic nature, and not investigate day-to-day corruption as such. With those remarks, I commend the bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Mills): I report the receipt of the following message from the Legislative Council:

MR SPEAKER

The Legislative Council desires to inform the Legislative Assembly that on Thursday 9 September 1999 in accordance with section 5 (1) (a) of the Regulation Review Act 1987 Mr Malcolm Jones was appointed to serve on the Regulation Review Committee as a Member of the Legislative Council

Legislative Council Meredith Burgmann
20 October 1999 President

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield - Minister for Police) [9.17 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Government is pleased to introduce the Drug Court Amendment Bill. The Government established the first Drug Court in Australia earlier this year. The Drug Court seeks to intensively supervise and manage offenders out of crime. It is an exciting new crime prevention initiative which targets drug dependent offenders who, honourable members will appreciate, are responsible for many crimes in New South Wales. The Drug Court program is a bold attempt to break that cycle. The bill represents the Government’s ongoing commitment to this innovative program. It is brought before the House as a result of the experiences of the Drug Court in its first six months of operation.

Honourable members will be aware that the legislation established a new court with unique jurisdiction. Drug Court programs involve intensive judicial supervision and case management of offenders, and such programs depend on intensive expanded treatment, rehabilitation programs and options. The Drug Court has identified a number of areas that require amendment to finetune the mechanisms for dealing with drug offenders. The main purpose of the bill is to make miscellaneous amendments to the Drug Court Act. With one exception, these amendments are essentially of a machinery nature. They will not affect the philosophy or approach of the Drug Court programs.

I turn first to the substantive amendment. New Section 8A is an important amendment. The Drug Court has requested the power to make an order for the court to hold in custody for seven days an offender who has technically breached his treatment plan or where treatment breaks down through no fault of his own. This will allow detoxification and/or reassessment for the purpose of a possible variation of the drug offender’s program. It will only be possible to exercise the power where the offender consents and there is no suitable treatment facility available in the community. Section 5 will be amended to change the definition of "eligible person" to exclude situations where imprisonment is simply a possibility or where imprisonment would be considered by way of periodic or home detention.
There is a concern that the current threshold does not carefully delineate the class of persons the
Page 1721
Drug Court is trying to capture. The Drug Court is a tough option which works best when the threat of full-time imprisonment provides an obvious and powerful incentive for an offender to remain involved in the program. The amendments will also make clear that the Drug Court is empowered to decline to accept a referral. The Drug Court should have the power not to accept a referral when there are not sufficient facilities for placing people in, say, overnight beds for detoxification, or when a person does not live within the geographical bounds of the pilot program. New provisions will also allow the Drug Court to sentence a person against whom a finding of guilt has already been made.

This amendment will increase the flexibility of the Drug Court to sentence a person against whom such a finding has already been made, for example, when a person is convicted in absentia or when a person is appealing to the District Court against a sentence imposed by the Local Court. An amendment to section 7 will allow the Drug Court to delay for 14 days the conditions to be imposed on a person and the order suspending his or her sentence. The Drug Court considers that this amendment is necessary to allow for the person to take time to reflect on whether he or she wants to be involved in the Drug Court program and to permit further stabilisation before his or her release into the community or to a residential rehabilitation establishment.

The Drug Court may convict and sentence an offender for a range of other offences, apart from those in respect of which he or she has been referred. An amendment will make clear that these matters can also be suspended to form part of the suspended sentence. This will allow for more efficient disposition of matters and give greater substance to the carrot-and-stick philosophy of the Drug Court as offenders will have a suspended sentence and thus a greater incentive to stay with the program.

An amendment to section 8 will allow all matters to be kept together when a person, who does not consent to being dealt with by the Drug Court or is not accepted, has referrals from more than one court. This assessment will provide that the Drug Court is to refer the person back to the referring court or such other Local Court or District Court as the Drug Court considers appropriate. This amendment will facilitate the more expeditious handling of matters against the defendant. An amendment to section 14 will enable the registrar to issue arrest warrants.

This amendment will allow the registrar or his or her delegate to issue a warrant for the arrest of a participant if the registrar suspects that he or she has failed to comply with the program. Amendments to the Periodic Detention of Prisoners Act 1981 will allow the Drug Court to suspend periodic detention orders in place when the Drug Court imposes a suspended sentence on an offender. Some offenders are prevented from entering the Drug Court program by virtue of certain provisions in the Periodic Detention of Prisoners Act 1981.

Specifically, section 24 operates in such a way for offenders who are subject to periodic detention orders when that offender comes before the Drug Court. For prisoners sentenced to more than one month, periodic detention orders must be cancelled and the original sentence served by way of full-time gaol. The Drug Court does not presently have the power to suspend the sentence of periodic detention imposed by the original court. I believe that these amendments will greatly aid the Drug Court to more effectively deal with the matters at hand. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr R. H. L. Smith.