Mr Speaker (The Hon. J. H. Murray) took the chair at 2.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.

Assent to the following bills reported:

Courts Legislation Amendment Bill
State Emergency and Rescue Management Amendment Bill
Administrative Decisions Tribunal Legislation Amendment Bill
Intoxicated Persons Amendment Bill
Legal Profession Amendment (Complaints and Discipline) Bill
Supreme Court Amendment (Referral of Proceedings) Bill
Veterinary Surgeons Amendment Bill
Transport Administration Amendment (Parramatta Rail Link) Bill

Mr CARR: I advise honourable members that during the absence of the Minister for Health, who is in Timor, the Minister for Police will answer questions on his behalf.

Mr SPEAKER: I draw the attention of honourable members to the presence in the gallery of members of the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee of the Victorian Parliament.

Mr Aquilina tabled variations of the receipts and payments estimates and appropriations for 1999-2000, in terms of section 26 of the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, arising from the provision by the Commonwealth of specific purpose payments in excess of the amounts included in the State's receipts and payments estimates.

Petition praying that the Legislative Assembly will advocate for the retention of all vacant land in the area historically known as the Willoughby Paddocks and its development as public parkland for the enjoyment of the community, received from Mr Collins.

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 the installation of an acceptable system to address health risks associated with the discharge of sewage gases from the Northside Storage Tunnel, received from Mr Collins.

Petition praying that sufficient recurrent funding be allocated to Macksville and District Hospital to enable restoration of hospital services to the level that existed prior to cutbacks instituted by the Mid North Coast Area Health Service, received from Mr Stoner.

Petition praying that the House will initiate planning and construction of a suitable, fully funded hall to meet the needs of Cronulla South Public School community, received from Mr Kerr.

Petition praying for opposition to any funding cuts to TAFE, received from Ms Moore.

Petition expressing strong opposition to the proposed two-month extension of daylight saving, and praying that the House consider the adverse effect on rural families in New South Wales and take immediate steps to repeal the Standard Time Amendment Act, received from Ms Hodgkinson.

Petition praying that the Minister for Transport will direct CityRail to provide regular access from the South Coast rail line to the Airport rail link at Wolli Creek, received from Mr Campbell.

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

Petition praying that an additional signalised pedestrian crossing be installed on Oxford Street, Paddington, 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 air purification systems be installed on the Eastern Distributor and cross-city tunnel, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying that consideration be given to the permanent protection of old-growth forests and all other areas of high conservation value, and to the implementation of tree planting strategies, received from Ms Moore.

Petition praying for deregulation of the Department of Agriculture's current Ovine Johne's Disease program and its replacement with a fair and workable alternative to facilitate trade and alleviate the social issues crippling the New South Wales sheep industry, received from Ms Hodgkinson.

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 will 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.

Petitions praying that the House will seek the provision of a State-based assistance package to New South Wales dairy farmers, received from Mr Souris and Mr J. H. Turner.

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

Mr SPEAKER: In accordance with Standing Order 141 (5) I draw the attention of the House to the following unanswered question upon notice: No. 664, standing in the name of the Minister for Public Works and Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Citizenship.

Mr IEMMA: That answer was lodged today. I apologise for the delay.

Mr SPEAKER: I acknowledge the presence in the Speaker's gallery of the former member for the State electorate of Drummoyne and Federal electorate of Lowe, Michael Maher. I welcome him to the House.

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: My question is directed to the Minister for Transport.

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

Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: In light of comments by new rail boss, Ron Christie, that he was concerned rail maintenance executives had "taken their eye off the ball" over the past two to three years, why did the Minister sign off on bonuses of up to $32,000 for rail agency executives during that period?

Mr SCULLY: Who has taken their eye off the ball? Ron Christie's appointment was made about two weeks ago and has been universally well received.

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

Mr SCULLY: He is a railwayman of immense experience. I regard him as without peer in this country. If anyone can get to the bottom of this problem, it certainly will be Ron Christie. He was Deputy Chief Executive of State Rail in the 1980s.

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

Mr SCULLY: Already he is drawing a team together. I have been meeting with him regularly.

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

Mr SCULLY: He shares my concern that there needs to be better co-ordination and communication between the rail agencies. He has introduced a number of initiatives to ensure rail agencies are better focused on maintenance priorities in the lead-up to the Olympics and to ensure that everything is done that needs to be done to improve on-time running.

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

Mr SCULLY: In respect of performance bonuses, the Leader of the Opposition appears to be unaware that two of the organisations that are in the rail industry are State-owned corporations. The chief executive of one of those organisation commenced duty after 1 July 1999; the other received a bonus because the State-owned corporation's board deemed that it be so. I had no role in that. In respect of the other chief executive, the Leader of the Opposition would be well aware that 12 months ago CityRail had the best on-time running performance in 25 years. That position has deteriorated.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call honourable member for Oxley to order. I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time.

Mr SCULLY: In the 12 months prior to June last year on-time running was just under 93 per cent—the best on-time running in 25 years. The boards of at least two of the rail agencies decided to pay performance bonuses because the performance of the organisations was the best in a quarter of a century.

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

Mr SCULLY: For reasons not yet known, the performance of CityRail has deteriorated in the last six or seven months. It was quite appropriate that Ron Christie be appointed. He has been given full authority to get to the bottom of the problem and to put solutions in place.

Mr THOMPSON: My question is to the Premier. What is the latest information on New South Wales Government programs to help Aboriginal businesses create jobs and investment?

Mr CARR: Two weeks ago I informed the House about Aboriginal children achieving in literacy. It was very good and welcome news. Today there is another success story. However, let me first congratulate the Leader of the Opposition on being confirmed today as leader of her party. She would be conscious as I am at all times of the great honour of leading her side of politics in this Parliament. The Government set up the Aboriginal Business Development Program two years ago. Now a record 330 Aboriginal companies are listed on the Government's Aboriginal business database. Around the State Aboriginal people are forming businesses and going out and winning markets. At Mutawintji National Park near Broken Hill the local Aboriginal tour company hosts 3,500 to 4,000 visitors annually and employs five staff in peak season.

Another success story is Gavala, an Aboriginal education and cultural centre at Darling Harbour. After four years it has a turnover of $1.5 million. This weekend eight Aboriginal businesses will showcase their products at the Reed Gift Fair at Darling Harbour. Among them will be Red Earth Gallery from Dubbo, Classic Koori Designs from Coffs Harbour, and Shed Ceramics from Grafton. Across New South Wales Aboriginal businesses are starting up. We are funding Aboriginal enterprise development officers in Forbes, Kempsey, Wollongong, Newcastle, Casino, Armidale, Brewarrina and Parramatta. They have helped businesses and Aboriginal individuals with advice. Their work has led to the establishment of 30 Aboriginal businesses.

A Kempsey-based business, Booroongen Djugun Aboriginal Corporation, was named business of the year at the mid North Coast regional business awards. It comprises a 60-bed aged care centre and accredited training college in Kempsey. It employs 120 people, 60 per cent of whom are Aboriginal. In Mudgee Jonathon and Elisabeth Slottje have developed a tyre repair product called Tyreshield. It is used on cars, trucks, motorbikes and bicycles and is the preferred product for some of the world's top rally drivers. It is distributed not only in Australia; it has fledgling export markets in the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Japan and Thailand.

Mick Davis from Inverell has developed the innovative Davis Starlifter, a dual-purpose tool used to cut timber and remove and adjust fence posts. It has been snapped up at field days around the State by farmers, fencers, woodcutters, shire councils and fire services. In 1997 it won the title of farm invention of the year. In 1998 the Davis company became the first indigenous business to join the Australian Technology Showcase. In 1999 it won an Aboriginal business export award in our inaugural Aboriginal business awards.

Two years ago the Redfern Aboriginal Corporation became Sydney's first Aboriginal-owned construction company. From small beginnings as a work-for-the-dole scheme it has evolved into a successful construction company employing 45 Aboriginal people. The Olympic Co-ordination Authority gave it a start with a small contract on the equestrian centre. It has since won $1.1 million worth of work at Homebush Bay. It is currently doing building and landscaping work at the Millennium Parklands. It has a maintenance contract for Australian Technology Park. And last week it completed seven residential units at Seven Hills for the Department of Housing. One member of its staff, a man from Redfern, had been unemployed for 20 years. He secured a job at Redfern Aboriginal Corporation and received training in landscaping. He is now working full time.

Charles Stewart spent 20 years working in the cleaning industry. His goal was to form his own company and use the Olympics to create employment and training for Aboriginal people. Twenty Aboriginal people now work for Charles cleaning the Parramatta football stadium. Charles has been selected as head cleaning subcontractor at Homebush Bay. That means that there will be 150 short-term cleaning jobs for Aboriginal people during the Games. These are a few examples of Aboriginal entrepreneurs making their mark in business. From this Government they are receiving support, assistance and advise. This is another part of the overall Aboriginal story in Australia. Our goal is to see that Aboriginal Australians have every opportunity to go ahead, gaining the skills and confidence they need to create more employment.

Mr SOURIS: My question is directed to the Minister for Police. With more than 6,000 head of cattle worth in excess of $3 million having been stolen from New South Wales properties in the past year, and with only one specialist stock squad detective left to investigate stock thefts, why has the Minister allowed the rural crime wave to go unstemmed and the crime clear up rate to remain close to zero?

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

Mr WHELAN: Some weeks ago I advised the House that following a meeting between the Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation and members of the farming community the Government decided to take some very decisive action. We are working with the farming community on this specific issue. I do not have a copy of The Land, which reported very accurately, and I might say quite favourably, the response that the Government was seeking from the groups involved. I am very pleased that the Leader of the National Party should raise the issue of crime statistics because only this morning I was minded to look at crime statistics in view of radio stories about crime being out of control in New South Wales. I remind the honourable member that there is only one official bureau of crime statistics for the whole of New South Wales, for all crime in New South Wales, and that is the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. Its report is the only official document that relates to crime and crime trends in New South Wales. It is prepared and independently audited by the bureau of crime statistics here in New South Wales.

I will give a little snapshot of what is happening in crime in New South Wales. I will start with what the bureau director, Dr Don Weatherburn, said. He said that the latest statistics confirm that the downward trend in crime identified by the bureau in the middle of last year had continued, and that the downward trend had accelerated. Independent statistics from the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research show that offences of robbery with a firearm are down by 24 per cent; offences of robbery with a weapon other than a firearm are down by 20 per cent; offences of breaking and entering a dwelling are down by 10 per cent; offences of breaking and entering a non-dwelling are down by 7 per cent; motor vehicle theft offences are down by 11 per cent; sexual assault offences are down by 10 per cent; and indecent assault and other sexual offences are down by 16 per cent.

Mr Armstrong: Point of order: The question was specific. Whilst I appreciate the statistics the Minister has given, he has obviously forgotten to tell the House about stock theft, wool theft and property theft. Would the Minister mind giving the House the benefit of his extensive knowledge on these matters?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask the honourable member for Lachlan not to encourage the Minister.

Mr WHELAN: I said at the beginning of my answer that the matter of stock theft had been raised in the House on a previous occasion. At that time I gave the House a comprehensive answer. However, in view of the point of order that has been taken I repeat that crime perpetrated against primary producers is taken seriously by the Government. In March this year the pastoral and agricultural crime working party was formed to consider matters of stock theft, grain and wool theft and other forms of crime that particular affect primary producers. The working party consists of representatives from the New South Wales Farmers Association, the Police Service, the Ministry for Police and the office of the Minister for Agriculture. The working party is considering matters such as methods of stock identification, travelling stock statements, police training, legislation and crime prevention.

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

Mr WHELAN: A range of recommendations was made for consideration by the working party, including the compulsory identification of cattle, the issuing of penalty notices for trespassing on enclosed lands and modification to travelling stock statements. As a result of the discussions of the working party, the compulsory identification of cattle will be discussed at the upcoming annual meetings of rural lands protection boards and the New South Wales Farmers Association. I am encouraged by the collaborative approach taken by the working party.

Mr Armstrong: Point of order—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am sure the Minister is coming to the nub of his answer, if that is the point of order the honourable member for Lachlan seeks to take.

Mr WHELAN: The working party will deliver its findings to me in September. I am sure the honourable member for Lachlan will be here then, although he may be sitting in a different position. I look forward to him asking the question then.

Mr GAUDRY: My question without notice is to the Minister for Police. What is the latest information on the discussion paper dealing with the review of the Firearms Act 1996?

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

Mr WHELAN: The Carr Government is, and will remain, committed to the national firearms agreement developed four years ago in the wake of the tragic shootings at Port Arthur. As a follow-on from that historic national agreement, the Government pledged to review New South Wales gun laws to ensure they are achieving their key goal of putting the public's right to safety before the privilege of owning a gun. The Government's first priority is public safety. However, at the same time we acknowledge the rights of law-abiding firearms owners. For that reason a review of the Firearms Act has taken place in accordance with the requirements of the legislation. The review took a long, hard look at gun laws and their administration in New South Wales and made several recommendations. The recommendations include even tougher penalties for illegal possession of firearms, new laws to target gun traffickers, increased gaol terms and fines for the Mr Bigs of organised gun crime syndicates and acknowledgment of the special needs of farmers, including rice growers.

The report considered almost 4,000 submissions from interested quarters, including gun user and gun control groups, members of the public and members of Parliament. The report makes several recommendations that target gun crime and gun criminals, including a scheme of tougher gaol terms and fines for illegal possession of a firearm such as gaol for anyone found guilty of illegally possessing a prohibited firearm. The report also seeks changes specifically designed to catch the Mr Bigs, those at the top of organised crime syndicates, who stay one step ahead of the law. It recommends a range of new offences relating to the illegal supply of guns to people not authorised to possess or use firearms, for example, a 14-year gaol term for anyone who uses someone else to obtain a licence to act as a front for a disqualified person so that person can conduct a gun dealership or other business.

Another section of the report is devoted to examining the special needs of primary producers. In times of hardship and stress for rural communities, and for primary producers in particular, the report argues that the laws of the land must recognise that a farmer's family is vital to the continued success of the business. In light of that, the report proposes extending the definition of an employee of a primary producer to an immediate adult family member. That means that family members would be recognised as employees. They would be able to use firearms on the property for the purpose of carrying out duties in connection with the primary production business.

Another aspect of the review highlights the ongoing need to encourage the voluntary surrender of all unlicensed firearms to police. Honourable members would be aware of the overwhelming success of the 1997 amnesty during which almost 185,000 guns were surrendered to New South Wales police under the Commonwealth's buy-back scheme. In March the Police Service advised me that the figure had risen to almost 193,000 when firearms surrendered by firearms dealers were added to the total.

The review also recommends the introduction of a three-month amnesty for the surrender of firearms to police without penalty; a six-month amnesty for the sale of non-prohibited firearms; and a six-month amnesty for the lodgment of registration applications by licence holders. The position of New South Wales is clear and unchanged. It was the first State to introduce tough new gun laws under the John Howard plan and it continues to abide by national uniform gun laws to reduce the number of illegal weapons in our community.

I take this opportunity to thank those who have contributed to the report. I look forward to further comment during the three-month consultation period that ends on 30 September. In the spirit of the sentiments expressed by the Prime Minister in May 1996, New South Wales, like the rest of Australia, will not go down the American path. The Carr Government will continue to ensure that this State becomes a safer place to live. For the benefit of honourable members, I seek leave to table the report to the Minister for Police of the review of the Firearms Act 1996 by Mr L. Tree, Director-General of the Ministry for Police.

Leave granted.

Report tabled.

Mr OAKESHOTT: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development. Will the Minister explain why, in the department's own telephone list of 6 March, he is credited with a second ministerial driver, who is listed in the keno branch of the Casino Surveillance Division? Why does he have two mobile phones, a desk phone and a pager?

Mr FACE: I do not have a second ministerial driver.

Mr McBRIDE: My question without notice is to the Minister for the Olympics. What is the latest information on the financial arrangements for the preparation of the Sydney Olympic Games?

Mr KNIGHT: I commend the honourable member for his longstanding interest and support for both the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games. There are now only 87 days to go until the opening ceremony of the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games. We are in the final stretch. Indeed, the Olympic torch is already travelling around Australia and is receiving enthusiastic responses from large crowds in every community it passes through. Athletes from 200 countries are completing their final preparations for Sydney, and right around the world there is tremendous interest in and enthusiasm for what will happen in September and October in Sydney. Of course, as any athlete will tell us, races are won and lost in the final straight. All the preparation that goes before is obviously essential, but it can be undone if one cannot give one's all in the final dash to the finish line.

In the past six months, the Government has been looking closely at what resources SOCOG has available for its crucial role in the team delivering the Olympic and the Paralympic Games. The risks and exposures that SOCOG faces have been rigorously examined by Michael Eyers and the finance department of SOCOG, by David Richmond and Bob Adby from the Olympic Co-ordination Authority [OCA], and by SOCOG's finance and contingency committees, which include representatives from the New South Wales Treasury. As SOCOG was aiming for a balanced budget, any risks that materialised would move the SOCOG budget into deficit and automatically call upon underwriting by the State.

From the first days of the bid, the SOCOG budget has been fully underwritten by the State. The then Premier, Nick Greiner, and his Cabinet—many of whom are still with us in other capacities—made that decision, recognising that in a once-only project like the Olympic Games it is extremely difficult to quantify precisely both all income and all expenditure before the event takes place. Of course, the closer we get to the Games, the more accurately costs and revenues can be quantified. For example, only with the experience of the past six months in rebuilding SOCOG's ticket-selling capacity can we quantify more accurately the actual costs of operating a ticket call centre. The combination of our experiences over the past six months and the rigorous work by many people in assessing risks indicates that, without government assistance, SOCOG would be at least $70 million short of the funds necessary to put on Games of the quality that Australians deserve and that the world expects.

I stress that are these are unavoidable facts that in no way involve criticism of the SOCOG board or SOCOG staff. It simply recognises that, if all the identified risks materialised, there would have to be either cuts to the SOCOG expenditure or support from the Government as underwriter. At this stage, cuts to the SOCOG expenditure would compromise the quality of the Games and would undermine all of the good work that has gone before. Consequently, the Government has decided to provide assistance now. While we had all hoped that, ideally, the underwriting would not need to be called upon, it is preferable to do so now in an open and transparent way that preserves the quality of the Games. Consequently, the budget committee of Cabinet today accepted a proposal from the Treasurer and me to make a special grant of $140 million to a special SOCOG contingency fund. This sum covers the explicit risks that have been identified and makes prudent provision for additional risks that may emerge, including any possible shortfall in ticketing revenue.

The Government has naturally attached some strong conditions to this grant. Money from the contingency fund can be spent only on the recommendation of the SOCOG contingency committee, which comprises Brian Sherman as Chair; Michael Eyers, the Deputy Chief Executive Officer of SOCOG; Bob Adby from OCA; and Mark Ronsisvalle from the New South Wales Treasury. Even then it will need the sign-off of both the Treasurer and me as Minister for the Olympics. Any funds that are not allocated according to this procedure will be returned to the Treasury. I have consulted members of SOCOG's finance committee, including Nick Greiner and Brian Sherman, both of whom strongly support this arrangement. It would be remiss of me not to convey to the House the longstanding sentiments of many board members and senior staff who believe there has always been an anomaly in the SOCOG accounts of transfer payments to the Government from SOCOG.

In particular, there has been concern about the $218.7 million that SOCOG has paid to the OCA for the construction of the Sydney international aquatic and athletics centres. That commitment dates from the bid, but is viewed as being inconsistent with the fact that the Government, through the OCA, has taken responsibility for funding all permanent venues. Indeed, several board members to whom I have spoken today expressed the view that the $140 million grant goes a long way towards addressing that anomaly. In conclusion, I make it absolutely clear that both SOCOG and the Government are determined to deliver an outstanding Olympic Games in Sydney this year.

Ms MOORE: My question is directed to the Premier. Given his recent letter to me refusing to amend the Parliamentary Electorates and Elections Act 1912 to permit the display of candidates' election posters on power poles, will the Premier give an undertaking that, if any candidates put posters on poles during any future local, State or Federal election campaigns, they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law?

Mr CARR: The law has always been enforced in the fine State of New South Wales and I expect election candidates to exercise a sense of restraint and a feel for the aesthetics of the streetscapes that are the jewel of our polis.

Ms MEGARRITY: My question is directed to the Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts. What is the Government's response to the Federal Government's decision to upgrade the Lucas Heights facility?

Mr DEBUS: This matter is obviously of deep concern to the honourable member for Menai and her constituents and she has been very effective in raising it with me—as has the honourable member for Murray-Darling. who presents the related concerns of people in western New South Wales. As the House will be aware, the Federal Government has decided to construct a replacement nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights. The honourable member for Menai has brought to my attention the large number of concerns that the Sutherland community has in relation to that proposal. I have met with residents and with representatives of Sutherland Shire Council to hear those concerns and to examine options for helping to resolve them. I am pleased to report to the House that the Government is delivering on its election commitment to reassess the emergency management and response arrangements associated with the operation of the Lucas Heights reactor.

A review of the local disaster plan has commenced and I have appointed Mr Brian Carr, a former senior inspector of the New South Wales Police Service and a person with some 30 years experience in emergency management and planning, to conduct that review. I have also directed that the review be undertaken in close consultation with Sutherland Shire Council and the local community. I expect the final report of Mr Carr's review to be with me in the near future and for it to be publicly available shortly thereafter. Should the Commonwealth persist with its plan to construct a new reactor at Lucas Heights, this report and its recommendations will provide important information for our emergency services and the local Sutherland Shire community on what to do in the event of an emergency.

However, many issues related to the Lucas Heights reactor are beyond the jurisdiction of the New South Wales Government. In fact, Commonwealth legislation specifically excludes the New South Wales Government from regulating any activity undertaken by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation [ANSTO]. That places very tight limits on the role that the State Government may play in matters affecting Lucas Heights. Nevertheless, the New South Wales Government has prepared a detailed submission to the Commonwealth in response to its draft environmental impact statement [EIS]. The New South Wales Government has made its views clearly known to the Federal Government and they reflect those of the community: the Commonwealth is proceeding with this project with many issues still unresolved and with little potential for public scrutiny of the details.

The New South Wales Government's submission highlighted the many unanswered questions and concerns that exist about the project, particularly the lack of detail concerning the proposed reactor's design and operating details. Importantly, the draft EIS did not justify the Commonwealth's decision to construct the reactor in such close proximity to the suburbs of Sydney. This is a fundamental question for families living in the area surrounding Lucas Heights, and it has not been addressed adequately by the Commonwealth. As honourable members will be aware, there is also considerable dispute about the cost of the project. The Federal Government estimates that the cost will be $290 million, but other estimates have put the figure as high as $527 million.

These are significant flaws. In its submission the State Government called upon the Federal Government to ensure that before the environmental impact statement process was finalised, these concerns should be addressed and that a further opportunity should be provided for public comment. To date, that has not occurred. Instead, the Federal Government has announced a preferred tenderer to construct the reactor aiming to commission it by September 2005. The Federal Government has ignored calls to address the many unresolved issues, including reviewing all the options for a long-term solution for the management of associated waste from the reactor. I am also advised that the Senate Economics References Committee found that a full public inquiry should have been conducted prior to any final decision to build a new reactor.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is too much audible conversation in the Chamber. The honourable member for Burrinjuck will remain silent.

Mr DEBUS: I turn now specifically to the crucial question of how and where waste from the proposed reactor will be disposed of. With much fanfare the South Australian Government recently introduced legislation to prohibit a nuclear waste storage facility in that State. That bill is remarkably similar to legislation enacted in New South Wales 14 years ago. The legislation seeks to prohibit the construction or operation of nuclear waste storage facilities in this State. Both the South Australian bill and the New South Wales legislation include important exemptions for the disposal of waste material resulting from medical and research projects. Without those exceptions, essential lifesaving medical research could not be legally carried out by hospitals and research institutions.

The South Australian Liberals have finally acted on an issue that the New South Wales Government had the foresight to address 14 years ago. The South Australian Government has followed the lead of the New South Wales Government in opposing the construction of a nuclear dump within its State. It must be recognised, nevertheless, that the final decision on the siting of a waste dump is ultimately one for the Commonwealth Government. I am certainly aware of the great concerns held by many Broken Hill residents and those living nearby and across the border in South Australia about the possible siting of a dump in their backyards.

At the end of the day State governments and local communities can place their strong objections on record, leaving the final decision to approve a waste dump to the sensitivity, or lack of it, of the Howard Government to their concerns. Considerable confusion and uncertainty remains around the Federal Government's proposed reactor and any options for long-term solutions to nuclear waste disposal. I am fully supportive and understanding of the concerns raised by the honourable member for Menai. The community of the Sutherland area must have its questions answered. The Federal Government needs to address those issues before it proceeds any further with the project.

Mr TINK: My question is directed to the Minister for Police. In light of the Minister's continuing defiance of recommendation 60 of the Wood royal commission that police should be barred from taking up second jobs in high-risk industries, such as gaming, how many off-duty officers are currently working part-time at Star City Casino or in associated security services?

Mr WHELAN: One could be offended in this House! Even though the honourable member for Epping and all of those opposite continually voted against the royal commission, and even though they were at great pains to resist reform of the New South Wales Police Service, I will obtain the information sought by the honourable member and advise the House accordingly.

Mr TINK: I ask a supplementary question. Is the real reason that the Minister has done nothing about recommendation 60 that it would prevent him employing off-duty police in his pubs?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a supplementary question.

Mr McMANUS: My question without notice is to the Minister for Fair Trading. What is the Government's response to an Israeli company which claims to help New South Wales Holocaust victims get compensation?

Mr WATKINS: Millions of people suffered terribly at the hands of the Nazis in World War II. All members know that innocent civilians were herded in their millions into concentration camps. They died through overwork, or were murdered to make room for the next intake arriving at the death camp gates. The Holocaust is unarguably mankind's darkest episode. Recently, Holocaust victims have begun to receive limited compensation from those who wronged them so badly during World War II. Last year the Federal Republic of Germany and German industry announced that compensation would be given to forced labourers and slave labourers who worked for the Nazis. Justice has been long overdue for them. I am saddened to say that Fair Trading has become aware of an organisation that is trying to take advantage of New South Wales Holocaust victims. Yaffa Golan Investments and Financing of Tel Aviv, Israel, offers to help Holocaust victims fill out compensation claim forms.

The forms are simple, but Yaffa Golan demands a 10 per cent cut of any money its client gets. In contrast, JewishCare and the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies will give the same assistance for a simple $25 fee, which covers legal, postage and other administrative costs. The Department of Fair Trading has held discussions with Jewish community organisations about the Israeli company. I am appalled that Yaffa Golan Investments would even try such a cruel hoax on people who survived the horrors of Nazi death and labour camps. Holocaust victims deserve every cent of any compensation for their unprecedented suffering at the Nazis' hands. People who survived concentration camps are now around 75 years of age and many in Australia live on pensions. Compensation money may help make their final years a little more comfortable.

Yaffa Golan Investments has been sending unsolicited postcards directly to New South Wales Holocaust victims. The postcards are marked "German Pension Department". They offer to apply for compensation on the person's behalf in return for 10 per cent of what the person receives. It is estimated that the German Government and German industry will distribute around $A2 billion to victims. Therefore, Yaffa Golan Investments could get several thousand dollars in commission from each of its clients. The compensation was to be given in mid-2000, but application forms still have not been distributed to survivors. However, I have been informed that the forms are very simple to understand and have been adapted for people who have English as their second language. Using the Israeli company makes no difference to the success or otherwise of the claim.

Compensation will be awarded according to a strict international formula that no-one, including Yaffa Golan, has any power to change. Australia has about 18,000 Holocaust survivors, and the majority live in our electorates. That is the highest percentage of Holocaust survivors in a local Jewish community outside Israel. Around 4,000 of that group are classified by social agencies as needy. New South Wales Holocaust victims are already aware that JewishCare can provide legitimate information on claiming compensation for work done for the Nazis. JewishCare can be contacted on telephone number 9369 1400.

Many Jews were worked to death in unbearable conditions in Nazi war factories. The few who survived were scarred for life, after seeing their families, friends and neighbours disappear forever. Holocaust victims deserve special protection, including any assistance that the Department of Fair Trading can provide. It is fitting that the German compensation, so long overdue, is finally being paid to them. The most strenuous efforts should be made to ensure that every cent goes to the victims of the death camps and slave labour factories and to no-one else.

Ms HARRISON: My question without notice is to the Minister for Public Works and Services. How is the Government protecting historic buildings through its sandstone heritage program?

Mr IEMMA: We have a responsibility to look after our heritage buildings. I am pleased to advise the House that the Government is fully committed to maintaining and restoring them. In this budget $9.3 million has been allocated for that purpose. The Government has a restoration program that focuses on public buildings and monuments that are on the National Estate Register. That program is administered by the Department of Public Works and Services, which has developed world-class skills in heritage protection. The program includes protecting important buildings such as the Art Gallery, the Australian Museum, the Sydney Observatory, Darlinghurst Court, East Sydney College and Government House.

Through the program, work has also been carried out on public buildings in regional centres, including Bathurst, Dubbo, Goulburn, Maitland, Newcastle and Wollongong. Without this important activity, stonework on some of those buildings would decay to such an extent that they would no longer be properly sealed against the weather. A decision of a parliamentary standing committee on public works just over 100 years ago is having a big impact on today's maintenance program. In 1899 a public works standing committee was convened to investigate the construction of a government building at the corner of Phillip and Hunter streets.

Ms Moore: Point of order: The Minister's answer is important. I am finding it difficult to hear him because of the noise in the Chamber.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is the last answer in question time. Honourable members will remain silent for the remainder of the Minister's answer.

Mr IEMMA: In 1899 the distinguished government architect Walter Liberty Vernon was asked what material should be used. He had the vision to recommend sandstone, but he added that it would require maintenance in 100 years. His words have proved prophetic, with sandstone buildings in the city now requiring ongoing restoration—100 years after Vernon reported that it would be necessary. I am pleased to inform the House that the Government has designed a maintenance heritage restoration program to undertake the work that Vernon had foreseen 100 years ago. The $9.3 million budget allocation includes $4.5 million for maintenance. Through this program our key heritage buildings are being restored to a level that will ensure they will not require major maintenance work for many years to come.

An amount of $5 million has been allocated in the next financial year for the purchase of yellow block sandstone. At times it has been difficult to get a sufficient supply of this stone. Negotiations are currently under way to purchase stone from the St Patrick's church site in Harrington Street, The Rocks, and at McCaffreys Hill, Pyrmont. This will be stockpiled for further use over the next six to seven years. With the passing of time, the outer face of a sandstone building loses its architectural detail, and this important aspect of the building disappears. For example, the original Sydney Technical College building, now known as the Sydney Institute of Technology, included an ornately carved date stone. In its early years the date stone was damaged by coal burning at nearby Pyrmont power station and later by motor vehicle emissions. By the 1980s most of the detail had been lost.

I am pleased to advise that under the direction of one of the Department of Public Works and Services leading stonemasons, Alfy Pires, a new date stone has been carved. Mr Pires leads a group of stonemasons who are among the best in the world. The work they have done on the new date stone has been completed to the same standard as on the original date stone. The original will be placed in a museum at the Sydney Institute of Technology as a permanent reminder of how stone wears over the years and of the important work of these stonemasons. When a sandstone restoration program was being planned in the 1970s, the craft of stonemasonry had nearly died out. Almost single-handedly, the late George Proudman breathed life into the craft.

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

Mr IEMMA: George Proudman started the Department of Public Works and Services apprentice training program and was instrumental in the establishment of a course for stonemasons in this State. Following his retirement in 1989, George remained incredibly active in his commitment to serving the State. He gave generously of his time to restoration work at Sydney University, St Mary's Cathedral and the Great Synagogue. George's passing was a great loss, not only to his family and his many friends, but also to the community of New South Wales and to stonemasons.

Recently, I, along with a number of my parliamentary colleagues, had the pleasure of attending a ceremony for young people who had recently won apprenticeships with the Department of Public Works and Services. Among them were Adam Taylor and Katie Hicks, who are indentured to the department as apprentice stonemasons for the next four years. They will inherit the mantle of those fine stonemasons, such as George Proudman, who have contributed so much to ensuring that New South Wales is at the forefront of restoring sandstone heritage buildings.

Questions without notice concluded.

Mr SPEAKER: I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of a delegation of senior Chinese officials from the Ministry of Finance of the People's Republic of China.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [3.16 p.m.]: Honourable members would be aware that this morning there was a memorial service to pay tribute to three National Parks and Wildlife Service officers—Claire Deane, George Fitzsimmons and Erik Furlan—who lost their lives in the tragic fire of 8 June. Claire was a young woman who had not yet reached her twenty-sixth birthday. She had her whole life before her. I had met her only briefly, but I was struck by her energy and her passionate love for the environment. Erik was a quiet, dedicated man who was devoted to his work in bush regeneration in Lane Cove River and Ku-ring-gai Chase national parks. George Fitzsimmons was a committed environmentalist, a strong family man, a firefighter and an expert in marine mammal rescue. He was also quite a character, as the reminiscences of many of his workmates attest. All of these people leave families, friends and work mates, who are showing, in this time of intense trial, remarkable strength and serenity.

The ceremony this morning was also an opportunity to honour the four staff of the service who are still lying in hospital, battling dreadful injuries. Mark Cupit, Luke McSweeney, Natalie Saville and Jamie Shaw are all strong young people, and they are receiving expert and dedicated care. I am sure that the prayers of all honourable members of this House are with them, as our thoughts are with their families, who are waiting anxiously by their hospital bedside. These terrible events occurred while National Parks and Wildlife Service officers were carrying out their duties, conducting hazard reduction to protect the lives and property of the people of Mount Kuring-gai. I salute their courage and that of their work mates, who have been brought closer together by this tragedy and have shown renewed dedication to the preservation of the environment. On their behalf, I thank honourable members of this House who have expressed their condolences. I thank also the many members of the wider community who have been generous in their expressions of support and their appreciation for the work of the officers of the service.

Mr O'DOHERTY (Hornsby) [3.18 p.m.]: The people of Mount Kuring-gai have asked me to express to this House their deep gratitude to those who were working to protect their lives and property. They have asked me to inform the House that they will never forget that the work being done was for their protection. They feel a close bond to those people who have died and those who remain injured as a result of that work. Last Sunday my community held a memorial service in a park at Mount Kuring-gai, near to where the tragedy happened. In relation to that service, I congratulate members of the Mount Kuring-gai Residents Action Group, particularly its president Mark Burnette, for its foresight and organisational efforts. The group has been leading efforts to have the park renamed after those who have perished and those who are injured and to erect a memorial statue as a gift to their families.

We were reminded very much about how precious the Australian bush is, how much a part of the community it is, and how closely it is linked to the great Australian struggle. As I said at the memorial service on Sunday, what has happened in the past 10 days is a very Australian tragedy in that it relates to our bushland environment, an environment that helps to define us, an environment that we both grapple with and struggle to protect, and seek to be protected from. It is an Australian tragedy in that it speaks to us of mateship. The Minister has already mentioned that one of the youngest people in the service, Claire Deane, was with one of the older hands, George Fitzsimmons. Erik Furlan was a man whose only family was his workmates. We have not been able to establish that he had any family in Australia.

This tragedy speaks of the mateship of that close group, as Mark Cupit, Luke McSweeney, Natalie Saville and Jamie Shaw battle with their horrific injuries. It is an Australian tragedy because it speaks to us of community. The work they were doing was on behalf of the entire community. In coming to terms with this awful tragedy and facing those things they now have to face, that community has grown stronger. None of us will ever forget the events of 8 June or the piercing lights that flashed that night as members of the service and the community tried to comprehend the tragedy. Once again, at the behest of the community of Mount Kuring-gai, I say thank you on their behalf.

Mr CRITTENDEN (Wyong—Parliamentary Secretary) [3.21 p.m.]: This matter is urgent for four distinct, cogent and lucid reasons. The first reason is that the goods and services tax [GST] commences on 1 July. There is not much time. The second reason is that 50,0000 families in New South Wales live in this form of accommodation. The third reason is the clear anomaly of residential park residents paying the GST, when other renters do not have such an impost placed upon them. The fourth reason is that in many cases people in residential parks cannot afford to pay this ridiculous, unfair GST to rent their own homes.

Mr BROGDEN (Pittwater) [3.22 p.m.]: My motion seeks to deal with the revelation yesterday before an estimates committee that the Managing Director of Sydney Water Corporation, Mr Alex Walker, has no knowledge of the regime for independent testing of Sydney's water that will take place in the coming months. Two years after the Sydney water crisis the Managing Director of the Sydney Water Corporation has no idea of how the water he produces and distributes to the consumers in some one million households in Sydney will be tested. He has no concept. It is a disgrace that after two years he is not able to answer the estimates committee's questions on the details of the testing system.

He has indicated, and we know this to be a fact, that the testing regime and the tender are dealt with by the Department of Health. We understand that is the correct delineation of duties. But it is the responsibility of Sydney Water to know about that regime, to know how it works and to know the details. It is not acceptable that yesterday in the other place, before an estimates committee, the Managing Director of Sydney Water was unable to give details to the committee members upon direct questioning as to how the system will work. He does not know. It is not good enough. When asked by the Hon. C. J. S. Lynn whether the independent testing laboratory would test every site that is tested by Australian Water Technologies on a daily basis, he stated that it is for the Department Health to deal with the regulator.

The managing director said that Sydney Water had had very little to do with that project. Why? Why has Sydney Water had nothing to do with the process that will test its water? Why is it not aware of the details? Why does it not know? When Peter McClellan, QC, delivered his report in December 1998 he clearly stated that there was a requirement for an independent testing laboratory. Finally, after two years, the Government has acted on that recommendation. Page 163 of the December 1998 report states, in part:

I confirm my recommendation that a suitably qualified independent testing laboratory be established to provide accurate data for health and regulatory authorities.

But we also discovered under questioning, and this has been confirmed to us by the Minister for Health in a press release, that the independent testing laboratory will not test Sydney water on a daily basis. It will test any samples that prove positive, which are the samples that show there is disease in the water, after the fact. It will also randomly test negative samples and rural water samples. The people of Sydney expect nothing less than daily testing of their drinking water by an independent laboratory. We are not far away today from where we were two years ago with a government that is not willing to test the water it gives its community on a daily basis.

Why will the Government not have the water tested on a daily basis by an independent body? It was proved two years ago that we cannot trust Sydney Water to test its own water. Its organisation, Australian Water Technologies, tests its water today, then in a few months time the South Australian organisation that is not at this point accredited to test for giardia and cryptosporidium will test the water. However, we are told that the South Australian organisation will be accredited within a few months. Sydney Water is not subjecting itself to a daily testing regime. What does it have to hide? The Government has been passing the buck from one Minister to another, from the Minister responsible for Sydney Water, Kim Yeadon, to the Minister for Health, Craig Knowles.

As late as yesterday we found that the Managing Director of Sydney Water had absolutely no idea about and no interest in the independent testing process that will give some comfort to the people of Sydney so that they can drink their water with a level of security for their health. It is an appalling situation. It is a matter of great urgency. It only come to light yesterday, 19 June, in the parliamentary processes. I seek support of the House for this motion so that we can get to the bottom of the incompetence of Sydney Water and the incompetence of the Government.

Question—That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Wyong be proceeded with—put.

The House divided.

Ms Allan Mr Amery Ms Andrews Mr Aquilina Mr Ashton Mr Bartlett Ms Beamer Mr Black Mr Brown Miss Burton Mr Campbell Mr Carr Mr Collier Mr Crittenden Mr Debus Mr Face Mr Gaudry

Mr Greene Mrs Grusovin Ms Harrison Mr Hickey Mr Hunter Mr Iemma Mrs Lo Po' Mr Lynch Mr McBride Mr McManus Mr Markham Mr Martin Ms Meagher Ms Megarrity Mr Mills Mr Nagle Mr Newell

Ms Nori Mr Orkopoulos Mr E. T. Page Mr Price Dr Refshauge Ms Saliba Mr Scully Mr W. D. Smith Mr Stewart Mr Tripodi Mr Watkins Mr Whelan Mr Woods Mr Yeadon Tellers, Mr Anderson Mr Thompson

Mr Armstrong Mr Barr Mr Brogden Mr Collins Mr Debnam Mr George Mr Glachan Mr Hartcher Mr Hazzard Ms Hodgkinson Mr Humpherson Dr Kernohan Mr Kerr

Mr Maguire Mr McGrane Mr Merton Ms Moore Mr Oakeshott Mr O'Doherty Mr O'Farrell Mr D. L. Page Mr Piccoli Mr Richardson Mr Rozzoli Ms Seaton Mrs Skinner

Mr Slack-Smith Mr Souris Mr Stoner Mr Tink Mr Torbay Mr R. W. Turner Mr Webb Mr Windsor Tellers, Mr Fraser Mr R. H. L. Smith

Mr Gibson	Mrs Chikarovksi
Mr Moss	Mr J. H. Turner

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Motion by Mr Whelan agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow up to 24 additional speakers for five minutes each on the motion for urgent consideration.

Mr CRITTENDEN (Wyong—Parliamentary Secretary) [3.34 p.m.]: I move:

That this House:

(1) reaffirms its resolution on 11 April 2000 to call on the Federal Government to remove the GST on rents paid by permanent residential park residents;

(2) notes that at the time 30 New South Wales Coalition members voted in support of the GST on residential park residents;

(3) welcomes the about-face by the 11 New South Wales National Party members who have now joined Country Labor and the Central Coast Labor team's fight for justice for permanent residential park residents; and

(4) condemns the Federal Government for claiming the GST could not be altered for humans, despite making allowances for cattle on 18 May 2000.

Mr Fraser: Point of order: My point of order is based on Decisions From the Chair 1979 at 19.6.4, which states:

If the terms of the motion are not in accordance with the facts as disclosed it is futile to allow debate thereon to continue. Motion amended to accord with fact.

Standing Order 146 states:

A notice containing argument, unbecoming expressions or otherwise not conforming with the practice of the House may:

(1) Be ordered not to be printed by the Speaker or

(2) The House may order it expunged from the Business Paper.

On 11 April this year the Coalition voted for its amendment to the motion moved by the Minister for Fair Trading, and then voted for the Government motion.

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

Mr Fraser: Point of order: The motion is not factual. Therefore, paragraph (2) should be removed or amended by the mover of the motion.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Paragraph (1) of the motion refers to the resolution of the House of 11 April. There is no mention of any amendment.

Mr Fraser: Paragraph (2) of the motion states:

Notes that at the time 30 New South Wales Coalition members of Parliament voted in support of the GST on residential park residents.

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

Mr Fraser: Votes and Proceedings of this House and a video of the Chamber shows conclusively that whilst we voted for our amendment, we did not vote against the motion. Therefore, the motion is out of order.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Coogee will have an opportunity to reply at the appropriate time.

Mr Fraser: The motion is out of order. It does not disclose the facts as represented in this House on 11 April. I call on you to rule paragraph (2) of the motion out of order.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I rule paragraph (2) out of order, and I direct that the motion be amended.

[Debate interrupted.]

Motion by Mr Whelan agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to restore the full speaking time of the mover of the motion.

[Debate resumed.]

Mr Armstrong: Point of order: Government members do not like this, but paragraph (4) of the motion states:

(4) condemns the Federal Government for claiming the GST could not be altered for humans, despite making allowances for cattle on 18 May 2000.

No allowance was made for cattle; it was made for the owners of cattle and abattoirs, I put it to you that the motion is out of order.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Paragraph (4) of the motion is in order as an inference is available that the allowances referred to related to the impact of the goods and services tax on the owners of cattle and those associated with abattoirs.

Mr Armstrong: Point of order: There is no impact on cattle; it is on the owners of the cattle and the abattoirs.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Lachlan will have an opportunity to discuss the matter in the debate at the appropriate time.

Mr Armstrong: I do not speak on motions that are not in order. The motion is not in order.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have ruled on the point of order.

Mr Humpherson: Point of order: Earlier the House voted on which urgency motion should receive precedence. The motion for which precedence was granted comprised four paragraphs. The content of the motion has been substantially altered. I submit that it is no longer appropriate for that motion to be dealt with. It is substantially different from that which was put earlier; the honourable member for Pittwater submitted an alternative motion. Clearly, the motion now proposed by the honourable member for Wyong is substantially different from that which he argued earlier should be given precedence. As the motion has been substantially altered, I submit that the House should debate urgency again, or at least vote on the urgency motion again.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have sought advice from the Clerk before ruling on the point of order. The content of the motion has been changed. However, that was at the discretion of the Chair and I am advised that in those circumstances the matter may proceed.

Mr Stoner: Point of order: Consistent with your ruling in relation to paragraph (2), paragraph (3) is no longer correct. How can there be an about-face by the 11 New South Wales National Party members of Parliament if they did not oppose the motion on 11 April? We have been consistent in our opposition, so there has been no about-face. Therefore, paragraph (3) is not factual. Also, in relation to paragraph (4)—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Paragraph (3) of the motion stands alone; it bears no relationship to paragraphs (1), (2) and (4). There is no point of order.

Mr Stoner: There has been no about-face. Paragraph (4) is not factual: the Federal Government has never claimed that the GST could not be altered for humans. If Government members can show me where the Federal Government has claimed that the GST could not be altered for humans I will let it go. Paragraph (4) implies that the Federal Government is treating cattle better than it is treating humans. That is clearly not the case, as has been explained by the honourable member for Lachlan.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! As I said to the honourable member for Lachlan earlier, whether the statement is in relation to cattle is correct is a matter for debate. I am able to offer an interpretation of paragraph (2) as it refers to what happened in the House earlier this year. However, paragraph (4) is a matter for interpretation and debate.

Mr Whelan: I ask you to clarify whether the 10 minutes of speaking time of the honourable member for Wyong will start now.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The speaking time of the honourable member for Wyong will commence now.

Mr Whelan: I wish to move an extension for the honourable member to have the requisite period of 10 minutes.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the House should move the relevant motion.

[Debate interrupted.]

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield—Minister for Police) [3.48 p.m.]: I move:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to permit the mover of the motion to speak for a full 10 minutes irrespective of points of order taken during his contribution.

This is a simple motion to provide the honourable member for Wyong ample opportunity to make a 10-minute speech. I understand the great embarrassment the National Party feels about this issue. I have looked at the motion. If the honourable member for Wyong has made a mistake, it is that he has not recognised that National Party members have the courage of their convictions. The motion should be amended so that we are talking not about the backflip, the desertion of rural people or the treatment of people who live in caravans—National Party members went to Tweed Heads via Damascus; they changed their minds—but congratulating them. They are a pack of dimwits and failures. That is why their popularity is 4 per cent. After the way they talked to people who live in caravans, it is a wonder they have any support left. They keep playing games on procedural issues in the Chamber. The standing orders will be complied with.

Mr Hazzard: Point of order: The Minister has spent the last minute and a half talking about matters totally unrelated to either the original incompetently drafted motion or the second incompetently drafted motion. Mr Speaker, I ask that you direct the Minister to come back to the leave of the latest version of his motion.

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

Mr Hazzard: I am seeking the right—

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

Mr Fraser: Point of order—

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

Mr Hazzard: This is pure incompetent game playing and a political stunt.

Mr SPEAKER: What is the point of order?

Mr Hazzard: I have not taken a point of order. I am replying to the Minister's motion. This place is turning into a circus and Government members are the little monkeys. I have a right to address this motion.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The House had not been informed that the honourable member for Wakehurst was to reply to the motion moved by the Leader of the House for the suspension of standing and sessional orders. That is normally done by the Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition or the manager of Opposition business. The Chair had assumed that the honourable member for Wakehurst was seeking to take a point of order. The honourable member for Wakehurst has the call.

Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [3.50 p.m.]: This is purely about game playing and the incompetence of the honourable member for Wyong. His motion is a political stunt. He knows that the Premier of New South Wales was the first person to rush to Canberra to support all the goods and services tax [GST] provisions. He ticked all the boxes—he ticked the caravan tax, he ticked the GST, and now the Government has incompetently moved a motion that is wrong. The Leader of the House has moved two motions to suspend standing orders. The Opposition let him move one, but he could not even get that right. The House has heard sufficient about this silly motion and the way it has been drafted for political purposes. The Government wants to play political games and it does not care about people's lives. The Leader of the House tows his caravan on the back of his police cars up to the Central Coast on the weekends—he rarely spends any time in his electorate—so of course he has an interest. Did honourable members think that he would actually take the honourable member for Wyong under his wing?

This is not just about the incompetence of the honourable member for Wyong in drafting a motion that is factually incorrect; it is also about the Leader of the House being totally incapable of ensuring that his humble backbenchers move motions that should take up the time of the House. The Leader of the House does not know the first thing about running the House. If there is a problem he simply shakes the foundations of Westminster democracy—he moves another suspension of standing orders. Honourable members should not forget that great day when he moved a motion that every member who was not in the Chamber was deemed to have voted no. Why do we bother having a Parliament? Government members are utterly incompetent, and this motion confirms yet again that they will just play games. There are seven laughing buffoons and a Minister on the Government front bench, yet they could not get one lousy motion right. They are utterly incompetent. The honourable member for The Entrance laughs. He does not care one iota about residential park tenants. He merely supports an incompetent motion.

Mr McBride: Point of order: The honourable member for Wakehurst is arguing a decision that has been made by the House in accordance with the standing orders of the House.

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

Question—That the motion be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Ms Allan Mr Amery Ms Andrews Mr Aquilina Mr Ashton Mr Barr Mr Bartlett Ms Beamer Mr Black Mr Brown Miss Burton Mr Campbell Mr Collier Mr Crittenden Mr Debus Mr Face Mr Gaudry Mr Greene Mrs Grusovin

Ms Harrison Mr Hickey Mr Hunter Mr Iemma Mrs Lo Po' Mr Lynch Mr Markham Mr Martin Mr McBride Mr McGrane Mr McManus Ms Meagher Ms Megarrity Mr Mills Ms Moore Mr Nagle Mr Newell Ms Nori Mr Orkopoulos

Mr E. T. Page Mr Price Dr Refshauge Ms Saliba Mr Scully Mr W. D. Smith Mr Stewart Mr Torbay Mr Tripodi Mr Watkins Mr Whelan Mr Windsor Mr Woods Mr Yeadon Tellers, Mr Anderson Mr Thompson

Mr Armstrong Mr Brogden Mr Collins Mr Debnam Mr George Mr Glachan Mr Hartcher Mr Hazzard Ms Hodgkinson Mr Humpherson Dr Kernohan

Mr Kerr Mr Maguire Mr Merton Mr Oakeshott Mr O'Farrell Mr D. L. Page Mr Piccoli Mr Richardson Mr Rozzoli Ms Seaton Mrs Skinner

Mr Slack-Smith Mr Souris Mr Stoner Mr Tink Mr R. W. Turner Mr Webb Tellers, Mr Fraser Mr R. H. L. Smith

Mr Gibson	Mrs Chikarovksi
Mr Moss	Mr J. H. Turner

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

[Debate resumed.]

Mr CRITTENDEN (Wyong—Parliamentary Secretary) [4.04 p.m.]: No amount of obfuscation and hyperbole can change the fact that, on 11 April 2000, the Minister for Fair Trading—

Mr Armstrong: Point of order: The honourable member for Wyong has not indicated which motion he is speaking to. The motion was altered dramatically from that which was presented to the House. Mr Speaker, I ask that you request the honourable member to articulate fully the wording of the motion that is to be debated in the Chamber this afternoon.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Wyong has moved the motion in its original form. I directed that the motion be amended by the deletion of paragraph (2) and the motion in its amended form is now before the House.

Mr Armstrong: Point of order: May we have a copy of the amended motion?

Mr SPEAKER: You may.

Mr CRITTENDEN: No amount of obfuscation, hyperbole or malice on the part of the Opposition can change the fact that, at 3.35 p.m. on 11 April 2000, the Minister for Fair Trading moved the following urgent motion:

That this House calls on the Federal Government to remove the goods and services tax on rents paid by residential park residents.

Opposition members could not bring themselves to support that simple motion.

Mr Fraser: Point of order: In response to a point of order from me, you ruled that the second paragraph of the motion as originally put was not factual, and therefore had to be deleted. The honourable member for Wyong now insists on trying to make the House believe that that part of the motion, which was removed, is factual. It is not. I ask you to bring the honourable member back to the motion before the House and request that he stop misleading the House about the paragraph of the motion that was deleted by your order earlier today.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Coffs Harbour will have the opportunity at the appropriate time to rebut any allegations made by the honourable member for Wyong. There is no point of order.

Mr CRITTENDEN: That was the simple, clear motion that was before the House in April, but Opposition members simply could not bring themselves to come to the party and present a united front to the Federal Government on this issue. As I said in my contribution to the debate on 11 April, the Opposition's record in this area is one of gross hypocrisy. I am pleased that the honourable member for Gosford is in the Chamber today and I hope that he will have the courage at least to vote on this occasion. This has been a clear anomaly since the beginning of February. The first day of July is only a few days away and people who live in residential parks in this State deserve a fair go. They deserve to be treated like all other tenants in New South Wales; they do not deserve to pay a goods and services tax on their rent. I had hoped that, by December 1998, the New South Wales Opposition had learned from its previous mistakes.

I refer honourable members to the dreadful Residential Tenancies (Movable Dwellings) Amendment Bill that was introduced by the then honourable member for Wagga Wagga, Mr Schipp. It was a clayton's bill: it did nothing to improve the rights of residential park residents. Unfortunately, the Coalition proceeded with that nonsense and pretended that it was taking action when in fact it was not. At that time, Coalition members decided to vote against my amendment that would have offered security of tenure to people living in residential parks. They also voted against my proposition that premiums and commissions should not be paid on the sale of mobile homes in residential parks. It is pretty sad that we have reached the stage today—

Mr STONER (Oxley) [4.10 p.m.]: I move:

That the honourable member for Wyong be not further heard.

The House divided.

Mr Brogden Mr Collins Mr Debnam Mr George Mr Glachan Mr Hartcher Mr Hazzard Ms Hodgkinson Mr Humpherson Dr Kernohan Mr Kerr

Mr Maguire Mr Merton Mr Oakeshott Mr O'Doherty Mr O'Farrell Mr D. L. Page Mr Piccoli Mr Richardson Mr Rozzoli Ms Seaton Mrs Skinner

Mr Slack-Smith Mr Souris Mr Stoner Mr Tink Mr R. W. Turner Mr Webb Tellers, Mr Fraser Mr R. H. L. Smith

Ms Allan Mr Amery Ms Andrews Mr Aquilina Mr Ashton Mr Barr Mr Bartlett Ms Beamer Mr Black Mr Brown Miss Burton Mr Campbell Mr Collier Mr Crittenden Mr Debus Mr Face Mr Gaudry Mr Greene Mrs Grusovin

Ms Harrison Mr Hickey Mr Hunter Mr Iemma Mrs Lo Po' Mr Lynch Mr Markham Mr Martin Mr McBride Mr McGrane Mr McManus Ms Meagher Ms Megarrity Mr Mills Ms Moore Mr Nagle Mr Newell Ms Nori Mr Orkopoulos

Mr E. T. Page Mr Price Dr Refshauge Ms Saliba Mr Scully Mr W. D. Smith Mr Stewart Mr Torbay Mr Tripodi Mr Watkins Mr Whelan Mr Windsor Mr Woods Mr Yeadon Tellers, Mr Anderson Mr Thompson

Mrs Chikarovski	Mr Gibson
Mr J. H. Turner	Mr Moss

Question resolved in the negative.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The speaking time of the honourable member for Wyong has expired.

Mr HUMPHERSON (Davidson) [4.19 p.m.]: Hypocrisy, lies and incompetence have characterised this debate. For almost an hour we have listened to the most blatant display of hypocrisy on the part of the Government. The motion is characterised by lies and distortion and, yet again, Government members have displayed incompetence. It is worth reflecting on the incompetence of the honourable member for Wyong in moving a motion which not only lacks fact but was unsustainable and had to be overruled and amended by Mr Speaker. He follows in the shoes of the honourable member for Lakemba, the Minister for Public Works and Services, who only weeks ago gave notice of a motion that was so badly worded it was thrown out of the House within minutes of notice being given. Government members who profess to be Ministers or parliamentary secretaries do not have the ability or competence to put a motion before this House.

This is the second time this House has debated this issue in two months. This is the second time that the honourable member for Wyong has sought cheap publicity by grandstanding on issues relating to permanent park residents. We debated this issue in early April, as the honourable member has acknowledged, and nothing has changed since then. We will now spend the next two hours—in total the debate will take the best part of three hours—debating this issue when we should be debating other issues of equal or greater significance to the people of this State.

Mr Orkopoulos: Point of order: I ask that the honourable member for Davidson be brought back to the subject of the motion and not refer to other issues that could have been debated.

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

Mr HUMPHERSON: The hypocrisy of the Australian Labor Party is demonstrated by its support for the goods and services tax [GST]. The Labor Party has supported the GST year in, year out since Paul Keating was Federal Treasurer. Since he raised the issue in the previous decade, it has been on the public agenda and it is now in place. Paul Keating was an advocate of the GST, and with its introduction and implementation over the past 12 months it has now become evident that the Premier also advocates and supports it. He was the first Premier to agree that a GST should be introduced in this country. It was also agreed to and supported by the Treasurer, the Hon. M. R. Egan.

During the past six to 12 months the Premier and the Minister for Regional Development have gone around the State telling people in local government and the wider business community about how great the GST is. They know the GST will improve the economy of this State and will create many benefits. They know, as the Prime Minister has said on numerous occasions, that no-one will be worse off. The supposed leaders of the Government supported a GST and now they pretend to permanent park residents that they oppose the GST. Wrong! They supported it. They knew about the details and intricacies of this issue. They are now trying to pretend that something has changed. I move the following amendment:

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

"this House condemns the Government for its hypocrisy in supporting the GST and then purporting to oppose it to residential park residents, and further, condemns the Government’s failure to provide adequate resources for the homeless and accommodation for 100,000 people on the housing waiting list."

The amendment refers to other priorities that should be debated: homeless people and those who are on the housing waiting list. As to the permanent park residents, I make it clear that the Liberal-National Party in this State is proud of its record. When the Coalition was in government under Premier Greiner and Premier Fahey it supported permanent park residents. The coalition acknowledges that when people retire they often choose to live in permanent accommodation in residential parks on the coast. They choose that lifestyle, they develop relationships and friendships, they build communities of support amongst the people who live around them, and they make permanent vans and the surrounding park their homes. They clearly regard those vans as long-term accommodation. They have well and truly become part of the community up and down the coast of New South Wales and inland. The Coalition not only supports them; we acknowledge that they are an important part of the wider community.

I remind the House that the Coalition supported park residents in 1994 when we introduced legislation which gave them increased security of tenure. Prior to that legislation, many residents were vulnerable. If residential park owners had little tolerance of or consideration for residents' circumstances, on many occasions they threatened them by trying to force them out of their homes. We introduced legislation which provided many benefits. The coalition removed the charging of overnight fees for visitors and the ability of park owners to charge premiums on the sale of on-site homes. We provided protection under the Residential Tenancies Act and also provided leases of up to 20 years. We provided for minimum health, safety and amenities standards for parks in this State.

All of those initiatives were not taken by the Government, as it would now have the park residents believe. They were introduced by the Liberal and National parties in this State. We acknowledged a longstanding problem and the concerns of park residents about their security and future. It took a Liberal-National party Government to take the initiative and provide that security of tenure. Members of the Labor Party have not acknowledged that initiative, and they have not actively sought to criticise it. They have failed to acknowledge that for the 12 years up to 1988 when they were in government they failed to move on these issues. The Coalition introduced other changes, including electricity rebates and the establishing of a tenancy advice and advocacy program. Our record in government is a good one.

Mr Crittenden: Point of order: I have been very tolerant with the honourable member for Davidson. There is only one National party member in this Chamber, and the honourable member for Davidson has not said anything relating to the GST on caravan park residents for the past 2½ minutes.

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

Mr HUMPHERSON: The debate on the other side of the House is characterised by hypocrisy. The Leader of the Opposition, Kim Beazley, has refused to acknowledge that he will not change the GST. [Time expired.]

Mr WATKINS (Ryde—Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister for Sport and Recreation) [4.29 p.m.]: It is tradition for Labor Party members of this House to defend those without a voice and to defend those who suffer unfair treatment. That is why members of the Labor Party in this Chamber are proud to step forward once again today to protect and speak up for residential park residents, who will yet again cop it in the neck from the Federal Government when the GST is introduced. The hypocrisy of the National Party on this matter is astounding. Two months ago I moved a motion in this House calling on the Howard Government to remove the GST from residential park residents. During that debate honourable members opposite tried to defend the indefensible: that the GST on caravan park residents was a good thing.

The reason for their rank hypocrisy is now clear: the issue is about saving their skins and the skins of their Federal colleagues. Residential park residents will not be fooled by their about-face. They know that honourable members opposite do not care about them and that the reason for their alleged change of heart is about one thing and one thing only: trying to stem the tide of discontent and disenchantment with this pernicious tax, the GST. In the true tradition of the modern National Party, honourable members opposite have failed to convince John Howard that this terrible injustice can be fixed. National Party members are cowering in their offices at this very moment because they do not have the courage to take part in this debate. But they have tried to stop honourable members from this side standing up in favour of people living in residential parks. John Anderson's backflip this morning is an indication of the impact the National Party has on its Coalition partner, and that is none.

Mr Humpherson: Point of order: The Minister and his Government supported the GST, yet he is continuing to try to pretend that it did not, that it has not and that it would overturn it. It is not appropriate that you allow him to continue in that vein.

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

Mr WATKINS: The New South Wales Labor Party, through Country Labor and its Central Coast members in particular, have been trying for months to have this pernicious tax removed from caravan park dwellers. I first made statements about this injustice in January, and the honourable member for Wyong has been tireless in his campaign to get justice for this group. A tenant is a tenant. How can the Commonwealth tax one differently from the other just because one chooses to live in a residential park? It seems, though, that John Howard is not listening. It is clear he is not listening when one considers his behaviour in the past couple of days. He has well and truly abandoned the battlers for his second term.

John Howard's argument about why the tax must stay is a contradictory confidence trick. On one hand he said that residential park residents would be worse off if they are treated like other tenants. He made that statement on AM yesterday. He said they would pay more if they are subject to the same rules as those renting million dollar properties on Sydney Harbour. But his analysis does not stack up. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission recently published a document called "Everyday Shopping Guide with the GST", which lists the supposed impact of the GST on a range of everyday matters.

According to that document private rents are expected to increase by 1 per cent or 2 per cent under GST because things like rates will increase, which will impact on rents. That, of course, is in contrast to the 5 per cent—or is it 5.5 per cent—GST that will be forced onto residential park residents. On the Federal Government's own analysis that means that private rents will increase by 2 per cent while caravan park rents will increase by 5.5 per cent. But after this morning even that seems unclear. This morning AAP reported John Anderson in a convoluted quote as saying:

Some may not be aware that there is no real difference between applying the 5.5 per cent concessional GST rate and not applying it, in which case all the cost increases are passed on in input tax and tenants pay an increase that is comparable.

That is just nonsense. It does not make sense. It does not add up. The battlers in the caravan parks know that they will be hit by an unfair pernicious 5.5 per cent tax on their rents. That is unfair. It applies to no other tenants in Australia. It should be removed. [Time expired.]

Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [4.34 p.m.]: The Government has moved a couple of hopeless motions today. It is behaving as if it is the Federal Opposition, but running around the same track again. It is trying to make out to residential park tenants that its actions to date have been without fault. The New South Wales Coalition will be concerned if any permanent residents of any permanent park suffer a negative impact as a result of the GST. A number of claims have been made in this debate, not the least of which is that the whole equation is not being put before the House. Obviously, certain tax advantages will flow to any person in New South Wales as result of sales tax reductions: taxes that were 26 per cent will become 10 per cent and in other instances tax scales will be lowered. If we are to make an informed evaluation of the impact of the GST on permanent park residents we must be aware of all of those factors.

The honourable member for Wyong has moved a half-baked motion which is born more of political stunt-making than any desire to protect permanent residents in residential parks. He likes to herald the fact in the local papers and the national media that he is a member of the troglodytes. In this case that is certainly true: he is a troglodyte. He is right out of touch with reality. Worse still, he is supported by the honourable member for Murray-Darling. He is a mendacious troglodyte. Lined up along the front bench are a series of Government members who are prepared to be mendacious in the way they debate this important concern to people who reside in residential parks.

The GST was a Labor initiative. Paul Keating and Bob Carr started in the Right faction of Young Labor together; they were Right faction mates from the time they were in Young Labor. Who dreamed up the idea of GST? It was Paul Keating. He wanted it. The GST has been on the agenda since 1985 when the Hawke-Keating tax summit listed the GST for debate because Mr Keating wanted it on the agenda. It was rejected then by the unions, but Labor wanted a GST. Who was there on 24 June 1999 when the GST documents were signed? I see John Howard's signature and whose signature is right below it? It is the signature of no-one else but the Premier of New South Wales, Mr Bob Carr. No other Premier from anywhere in Australia signed the document. How much clearer could it be to the troglodytes of the Labor Party and the people who wish to lie and misconstrue the truth?

The document makes it absolutely clear that Bob Carr, Labor's Premier, supported the GST right down the line. I do not want the people in residential parks to suffer. I do not want them to be disadvantaged. I do not believe they will be disadvantaged, contrary to what the Labor Party claims. But if they are disadvantaged members opposite have a precedent for ensuring that some sort of compensation is forthcoming. They gave $50 to the parents of all schoolchildren. I call on the honourable member for Wyong, who has a high status in the Labor Party, to undertake on behalf of the Treasurer and the Premier that the Government will refund that component of the GST that results in residential park tenants being out of pocket.

I challenge members opposite to do so. If they do not, anybody reading that document will know that Government members are a bunch of gutless wimps and liars because this is all a political stunt. The 100,000 people on the housing waiting list are not being helped by the Government and the 3,222 homeless callers to the homeless help line in February are not being helped by the Government. Government members should get off their backsides and start helping those who really need help instead of making these stupid political stunts in the Parliament! [Time expired.]

Mr MARKHAM (Wollongong—Parliamentary Secretary) [4.39 p.m.]: I support the motion moved by the honourable member for Wyong and I should like to add my comments about the effect of this insidious tax on those who can least afford to pay it. Permanent residents in manufactured home villages and caravan parks are being put into the same category as tourists for the application of the goods and services tax [GST]. In principle there is little difference between their lifestyle renting land in a manufactured home village or caravan park and renting a townhouse or home unit. A permanent park resident can buy a home-caravan and then rent the site on which it is placed. Quite often the management of the park issues a long-term lease agreement, for example, for three years and continuous periods.

Permanent park residents are people of all ages, employed and unemployed, but mainly seniors, pensioners, superannuants, self-funded retirees and others on fixed incomes. In New South Wales approximately 100,000 people reside permanently in residential parks, and there are more than 170 villages and caravan parks in the South Coast area alone. About 2,500 permanent residential park residents in the Illawarra, South Coast and far South Coast areas will pay up to $500,000 a year in GST, while 2,532 people renting exclusive Sydney properties for $1,000 a week will get off scot-free. Some of the poorest families in New South Wales who live permanently in residential parks will pay an extra $234 a year in rent while property renters will be exempt.

This July more than 2,500 residential park residents throughout the Illawarra, South Coast and far South Coast will face a 5 per cent GST on their rent. More than 40 per cent of residential park residents are over 60 years of age, 73 per cent are not in paid employment and 53 per cent earn under $300 a week. There are 2,500 permanent park residents in the Illawarra, South Coast and far South Coast areas: 727 in Wollongong, 837 in the Shoalhaven, 149 in Shellharbour, 37 in Kiama, 463 in the Eurobodalla shire, 277 in the Bega valley shire and 11 in the Cooma-Monaro region.

Statewide, up to 50,000 New South Wales families live permanently in residential parks and face a 5 per cent GST increase in their weekly rents, while people renting flats, apartments and houses will not be charged the GST. The Federal Government claims the GST is fair and will hit everyone equally. Once again its claims have been proved false. While GST is not levied on rents for houses, flats or apartments, the Federal Government has classified residential parks as commercial residential premises and therefore park residents face a direct 5 per cent GST hike. Residential park residents are just like any other person renting a home and should not have to pay the GST.

Once again the battlers in the community will be hit hardest. This plan is unfair and illogical. I cannot understand why residential parks have been singled out. At a meeting I attended on Monday 14 February at the Windang Bowling Club, which was organised by Noel Cox, President of the South Coast Park Residents Association, the following residential parks in the Wollongong electorate were put forward as those that will be affected by the GST: Figtree Gardens Caravan Park, Oaklands Village Caravan Park, Oasis Resort Holiday Park, Lake Illawarra Village Caravan Park, Windang Beach Caravan Park, Wollongong Surf Leisure Resort and Lakeline Estate Kanahooka.

Yesterday I again met with Noel Cox in my office. Again he raised the concerns of the people he represents—pensioners, people on fixed incomes, and retirees—who are being subjected to unfair attacks by a Government that could not care less about working-class people. The majority of those who live in residential parks are retirees from a working-class background. If Howard thinks he can get away with this because of that fact, I fear he has sadly forgotten his own constituency, especially that of the National Party. It is quite obvious that many National Party members, both in this Parliament and in the Federal Parliament, are concerned about the effect of the GST on residential park residents. The motion moved by the honourable member for Wyong needs to be supported wholeheartedly. I give him my undertaking to continue the initiatives he has proposed because he is looking after ordinary Australians while the Federal Government has abandoned them. [Time expired.]

Mr R. H. L. SMITH (Bega) [4.44 p.m.]: This is a hypocritical motion by the Government. Obviously it has been moved for political reasons. I have with me the document that the House has been shown a number of times. The Premier was the first to sign the GST document. That document lists John Howard and then Bob Carr. Premier Carr raced to Canberra because he knew there was a heap of money in it for him. It is in his hands. If the Coalition feels that permanent caravan park residents will be disadvantaged, it will do what it can to sort it out. The simple fact is that the New South Wales Government is running this line of attack because it believes there is political advantage to be gained from it. It is not a State matter but a Federal matter, and should be dealt with by the Federal Government, not by the State Government. However, as the State Government will get all that money from the GST, if it wants to fix up what it consider to be anomalies, it will be able to do so. The GST will go to the State Government—and it gives away its money wherever it likes. The Federal Treasurer said:

Bob Carr was the first State Premier to sign the tax reform agreement on 24 June 1999. He was like a roadrunner racing to the table to get his signature on a document lest it be taken away. Other State Premiers followed Bob Carr's lead.

Many of those other State premiers were Labor Premiers, as members opposite well know. Government members do not hold this topic close to their hearts. All they are trying to do is raise a political issue. In 1992 there were 9,000 homeless people. Since Labor was elected to office the number has increased gradually, until in 1999 there were 30,000 people without homes. What is the Government doing about them?

Mr Crittenden: You don't care about residential park residents.

Mr R. H. L. SMITH: The Government does not care about the homeless. Government members also do not like to hear about the dairy industry. The Coalition moved an amendment to the dairy industry deregulation motion. That Coalition amendment would have helped dairy farmers by enabling a few of them to remain on their farms. At that time the New South Wales Government could have done something about the matter, but its response was: "No, we are not going to help them. That is our money. We do not want to deal with State issues. We want to deal with Federal issues. We don't care less about dairy farmers who go off their land. All we are worried about is to make sure we can score a political point here and make sure the Federal National Party gets the full political effect of a great political strike on behalf of the Carr Government."

The simple fact is that the GST will be implemented, but umpteen exemptions from it are being sought. Countries that have implemented GST programs successfully are those that have brought it in across the board. The Labor Party has claimed that it will wind the GST back. It has not said what part of the GST it will wind back. That will be decided later. Labor Party members are bluffing their way through. They hope that by the time of the next Federal election everyone will have forgotten about the wind-back promise. Once the GST is introduced the State Government will get its grubby little hands on the money and absolutely love it. The GST will not be wound back one iota. Labor will gain all the benefits of the GST. That is the thing that will most interest Labor members. [Time expired.]

Mr McBRIDE (The Entrance) [4.49 p.m.]: I congratulate Paul Crittenden, the honourable member for Wyong, for bringing this motion before the House. He has constantly battled on the Central Coast, firstly for the rights of residents to security of placement in caravan parks and mobile home parks, and secondly in relation to the application of the GST. I also congratulate the Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister for Sport and Recreation, who on 11 April moved the motion referred to in the motion we are now debating. That motion stated:

That this House calls on the Federal Government to remove the goods and services tax on rent paid by residential park residents.

The problem is that the Federal Government has classified residential parks as commercial residential premises. They are clearly not commercial premises—they are people's homes. But unlike the occupiers of rented homes, houses, apartments, townhouses or units, residential park residents are facing a 5.5 per cent GST. On behalf of the 50,000 people living in residential parks across New South Wales I say that a 5.5 per cent GST on their rent is simply unfair. Not only is the system complicated, it is totally unfair. More than 40 per cent of residents are aged more than 60 years, 73 per cent do not do paid work, and 53 per cent have household incomes of less than $300 a week. Department of Fair Trading tenancy figures show that residential park weekly rents range from $60 to $100. How can it be fair that many people will have to pay GST on the rent that they pay in residential parks?

Even some Coalition members have acknowledged the unfairness of the GST and the impact it will have on residential park communities. The Federal Liberal member for Gilmore, Joanna Gash, in the South Coast Register of 1 March described the provisions as a stuff-up. She called the GST on residential part rents "a discriminatory tax on where you are living". The Commonwealth Government's so-called concern for regional New South Wales and the battlers is nothing but hollow rhetoric. The howls of protest have rung loud in every corner of the State, but Canberra is clearly not listening to the message. In the debate on 11 April the shadow Treasurer, the honourable member for Vaucluse, Mr Debnam, led for the Opposition. He said that the motion moved by the Minister was purely scaremongering. He said, "This motion is simply a scare campaign." He then went on to say:

The best explanation of this particular issue is set out in a letter from the Hon. Mark Vaile, which was addressed to the honourable member for Myall Lakes, Mr John Turner. That letter stated:

The facts are that the [Commonwealth] Government's tax reform legislation already provides for long-term residents in caravan parks to be given the same treatment as a tenant in any other permanent rental situation.

That is clearly untrue. Another speaker for the Opposition in that debate was the honourable member for Oxley. He said:

I have met with constituents in my electorate—which has many residential parks—including representatives of the Residential Parks Association. I often visit parks in Urunga and Nambucca. I, too, was concerned about the battlers in my electorate. The GST on residential parks appeared to be unfair. However, it is now clear that permanent park residents will be much better off under the Commonwealth Government's comprehensive tax package.

In other words, he endorsed the GST on residential park rents. He went on to say:

The impact of the GST will be minimal in country areas because costs will come down.

It is interesting to see how honourable members opposite voted on that motion. Members of the Labor Party supported the motion by the Minister. The Independent country members of this House also supported it—the honourable members for Dubbo, the honourable member for Northern Tablelands, and the honourable member for Tamworth. But all members of the National Party opposed the motion—all 13 of them—as well as the country Liberals. That is recorded in Hansard.

Mr R. H. L. Smith: You are misleading the House.

Mr McBRIDE: Country Liberals, including the honourable member for Bega, opposed it. They all supported a GST on rents paid by caravan park residents. [Time expired.]

Mr D. L. PAGE (Ballina) [4.54 p.m.]: I wish to put the record right in relation to the matter raised by the honourable member for The Entrance. Members on this side of the House supported an amendment to the motion. We did not divide on the primary issue. As the member for Ballina I have always supported local caravan park and mobile home park residents. As other members have said, many of these people are low income earners. Many are on fixed incomes. Some are in retirement mode. I acknowledge that the Parliamentary Secretary at the table has had a longstanding interest in caravan park dwellers. I think that in fairness he should recognise my longstanding interest in this area as well. Indeed, back in 1994 I was Parliamentary Secretary for Planning and Housing and responsible for bringing in a number of changes to caravan park management, particularly in relation to tenancy arrangements, which yielded tremendous benefits to caravan park dwellers.

I do not want to go over old ground but I think it is important to put the debate into context. There have been changes to the management of caravan parks under Coalition governments and, more recently, the Labor Government. Now we confront the issue of how to treat the GST on rentals. Back in 1994 we provided for increased security of tenure. Before that time caravan park and mobile home dwellers had no security of tenure. They could be kicked out for no cause with 180 days notice, and frequently were. We introduced legislation to require landlords to give just cause, and the just causes were restricted. They essentially centred on non-payment of rent, something tangible rather than not liking the colour of a person's hair or wanting to see the back end of someone who was a nuisance.

Under our legislation compensation was payable to people who were forced to move through no fault of their own. For example, if a caravan park was rezoned and the residents were forced to move they were compensated for the cost of moving up to 300 kilometres. That was landmark legislation. It was the first legislation introduced into an Australian Parliament to protect caravan park dwellers. Subsequently, we also abolished the need to pay overnight visitor fees. We also introduced legislation to abolish the right of park owners to charge commission on the sale of vans and mobile homes on their sites unless the park owner was actually acting as the resident's agent. We also paved the way for pensioner tenants of caravan parks to be eligible for electricity rebates.

I emphasise that the Labor Party had done nothing in its 12 years in office for caravan park residents and mobile home residents. On 25 November 1998 the Labor Government introduced amendments which dealt with the sale of caravans on site, rents, private mail facilities, dispute resolution and so on. People are playing politics on this issue. The disappointing aspect of the debate is that the Labor Party is raising a legitimate issue in some respects but the Federal leader of the Labor Party has not stated that he will change the policy. I put Labor members on notice.

Mr Crittenden: John Anderson said he is not going to do anything either.

Mr D. L. PAGE: Kim Beazley has said that he will not roll it over.

Mr Crittenden: He said it is the first cab off the rank.

Mr D. L. PAGE: That is not a commitment. The second point is that Bob Carr was the first Premier to rush in and sign the agreement in relation to the introduction of tax reform. I now come to the issue. The National Party State Conference last Friday passed a unanimous resolution to exempt rentals on caravan park and mobile homes, in the same way that rentals are exempt on units and houses. I said at the conference, and I am on the public record for this also, that it is appropriate for rent to be exempt. Even though the Federal Government has said that no-one will be worse off, the formula of GST on the one hand and input credits on the other is complex. It would be much clearer and fairer if those rentals were exempt. [Time expired.]

Mr W. D. SMITH (South Coast) [4.59 p.m.]: The imposition of a GST on fees at caravan parks and residential parks is symbolic of the utter contempt the Howard Government has for the less fortunate and the disadvantaged in our communities. Mr Howard and the Treasurer continually maintain that the new tax system is not going to make taxpayers worse off, that we will all pay our fair share, including the wealthy—heavens above! This GST on caravan park fees only shows how easy it is for the ordinary citizen to slip back yet again, in our supposedly egalitarian society.

In 1996 more than 900 people were living in residential parks and caravan parks in the Shoalhaven. I am certain this number has increased, with more than 50 caravan parks in my electorate and that number again in the electorate of Kiama, which abuts mine. Permanent residents of these dwellings are predominantly either retired pensioners or families which have not been able to afford to rent in the private market. Whatever the situation, almost all are on low and fixed incomes. These are people who will feel the sting of the GST as soon as it starts. In less than three months they will know where their money is being spent and the amount of tax they will be paying with the GST. That is appalling and Prime Minister Howard is saying to these people he will not do anything about it. Once again he is using this notion of fairness.

In yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald he is quoted as saying, "The policy is staying because it is fair." How the heck can it be fair? Even our local Federal Liberal member for Gilmore, Joanna Gash, said that the GST on caravan park fees was a stuff-up, but somehow someone has whispered in her ear on this matter and she has gone fairly silent after stating the obvious. Of course it is a stuff-up when the Federal Coalition Government promises voters that they will not be worse off under a GST and forgets to mention the many, many exceptions.

Even if it were possible to see this as an unfortunate oversight, even if we were to contend that somehow the Coalition Government does not really understand the implications of its own tax system on our families, what cannot be dismissed is its disregard for the consequences on the ordinary person. This is the very core of the Federal Government's ideological substance—the brushing aside of the ordinary person and ordinary families who are doing it tough, many through circumstances out of their control. I see these terrible situations in my electorate all the time with people losing their jobs, their homes and sometimes their families. Many find themselves in residential parks because that is all they can afford. They include young families with babies, aged pensioners unable to continue in the private rental market, and single people who can no longer live at home.

These are real situations that I see in my electorate. These people do not deserve to be penalised for their misfortune by a Government which insists that we will all be better off with a GST. We have to understand that caravan parks are not simply holiday havens for tourists and visitors. The Carr Labor Government has acknowledged this with the introduction last year of new regulations to protect the rights of permanent residents in these parks. It is ironic that at the same time as these regulations are being put in place, the Howard Government stumbles along with its GST campaign tactics. Residents will be caught with the GST, indirectly or directly, because owners are entitled to recoup any GST costs from the residents. This will happen despite the Federal Government telling residents they will not have to pay a GST on site fees if they are permanent residents. Even members of the National Party are speaking out against the thoughtlessness of this tax, and still the Prime Minister refuses to look at it.

The imposition of a GST on these fees is symbolic of the arrogance, contempt and ignorance the Federal Government has for the battlers in this country—the battlers John Howard talked about during the last Federal election, the battlers he has forgotten about, although I doubt very much if he ever actually knew any of them. This morning on level 10 of this Parliament there was a bit of a shiver that was looking for a Liberal spine to run up. It did not find one this morning. Now it is looking for a National spine to run up and it cannot find one even this afternoon—same shiver, similar spine, similar mob, but it still cannot find anything to run up. This GST on van parks is an absolute disgrace and should be wiped out. In fact, the Minister for Fair Trading some months ago moved to try to help people in caravan parks, yet the Federal Government is making a mess of it yet again. [Time expired.]

Mr STONER (Oxley) [5.04 p.m.]: This poorly worded motion is a cheap political stunt by the Carr Labor Government. In fact, paragraph (2) of the original motion was ruled out of order and removed because it was blatantly untrue in claiming that Coalition members of Parliament voted in support of the GST on residential parks. The member for The Entrance has also perpetrated untruths. National Party members of Parliament have not done an about-face. We have been concerned about the scaremongering of the Labor Party over this issue. Yesterday's Daily Telegraph depicts protesters against the GST and at the front of the crowd are all the Labor Party apparatchiks with their little circles around them.

The Coalition is concerned about the perceptions that the Labor Party has created in the minds of certain people. Long before this motion was moved and the motion of 11 April I met with residents from caravan parks and mobile homes, and the permanent residents association and took up their concerns, unlike Country Labor. I wrote twice to the Federal Government and received a response outlining the true picture that there are compensatory measures for all people under the GST and that people will not be disadvantaged. Nevertheless, the Tweed convention unanimously resolved that the matter should be taken up with the Federal Government. If anything, the motion should congratulate the National Party on having the backbone to represent country constituents and taking up these issues, unlike Government members opposite.

This motion reeks of hypocrisy. The Premier and the Treasurer ran to sign off on the GST because they are looking forward to the huge windfall. In their simple scaremongering campaign they failed to mention anything about rent assistance and pension increases or the option of park owners not to charge GST. It smacks of an ineffective Federal Opposition when these sorts of issues are raised repeatedly in State Parliament. What a waste of the State Parliament's time: Federal issue after Federal issue must be raised in this place because the Federal Labor Party cannot address them successfully. The position is clear: I am fighting for the battlers in my electorate. I always have and I always will. The motion before the House is a blatant untruth. The fourth paragraph is incorrect. It seeks to condemn

the Federal Government for claiming the GST could not be altered for humans—despite making allowances for cattle on May 18.

The only allowances for cattle were made in relation to farmers and abattoirs. That is another incorrect point in this poorly worded motion. I support the amendment moved earlier by the honourable member for Davidson. This State Government stands to receive a huge windfall from the GST and I urge it to give some of that money back to permanent caravan park residents. Like the back-to-school allowance, the money should go to the people. The ball is in the Government's court.

Mr COLLIER (Miranda) [5.09 p.m.]: I am pleased to support the motion of the honourable member for Wyong. This goods and services tax [GST] is unfair because it impacts upon those who can least afford to pay it. According to statistics, more than 40 per cent of permanent residents of caravan parks are aged over 60 and the vast majority of them and their families are on pensions and low incomes. The tax is unfair because it discriminates between tenants. A person living in a $1,000-a-week flat in Vaucluse will not pay 1¢ in GST on his or her rent, but a family living permanently in Harts caravan park in Miranda will see their rent increase by 5.5 per cent—or will it be 5 per cent, $5 or $5.50? The tax is unfair because it discriminates between those who choose to pay to live in a flat and those who live in a caravan.

It is misleading to say that those in receipt of pensions and benefits will be compensated by an increase in those benefits. If all pensions increase by the same amount, people who live in caravans will have to shell out for the GST but pensioners who live in flats will not. If rents increase by 5 per cent, pensioners who are resident in caravan parks will have to live on less than $120 a week—and that is taking account of the pension increase to offset the cost of the GST. The battlers who are already doing it tough will cop it in the neck once again. The Federal Government is punishing them for being permanent residents of caravan parks. On national television on the weekend Senator Ross Lighfoot, from Western Australia, said that the GST on permanent caravan park dwellers might encourage them to get a house. That is like Marie Antoinette saying, "Let them eat cake"—and we all know what happened to her. A tenant is a tenant regardless of his or her accommodation.

Those who think the problems of permanent residents of caravan parks are confined to the North Coast, the west and the South Coast should think again. There are 400 to 500 permanent residents in the six shire residential parks and about 300 to 400 casual occupiers. The rent at residential parks is about $100 a week and many residents of those parks believe they will face a GST of 5 per cent. However, it appears that a large number of caravan park operators throughout New South Wales have informed their residents that the increase will be 5.5 per cent. I have said that the tax is unfair and I have given three reasons why. Park residents want urgent clarification of this issue, as do park managers so that they can do the right thing by their residents. The Federal Government has spent millions of dollars—$400-odd million—on an advertising campaign depicting chains falling off people wearing relieved expressions. However, the chains on permanent residents of caravan parks are being tightened; those residents are being punished for living in caravans.
On national television I also saw the honourable member for Coffs Harbour make a speech to his National Party conference calling for the abolition of the GST on permanent caravan park dwellers. I applaud the honourable member for that speech—I never thought I would see the day when I would applaud him for anything. I also applaud the honourable member for Ballina for the total frankness and candour that he demonstrated in a recent speech to this House. The Howard Government must clearly rethink the GST on caravan parks. Some people say that this is a Federal issue and that, as a State member of Parliament, I should not intervene and speak up. However, it is my duty to speak out against any tax that is unfair and that discriminates against those on low incomes who can least afford to pay; I must expose this tax for what it is. The Howard Government does not have to spend money on advertising campaigns. With one stroke of the pen, it could make a minor amendment to the GST and remove the tax on permanent dwellers of caravan parks. That will improve the lives of people residing in Sutherland shire residential caravan parks.

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.

Mr NAGLE (Auburn) [5.15 p.m.]: Two young people were injured recently at the Kiama blowhole. As she and her boyfriend walked near the blowhole, a teenage girl fell 15 metres and suffered multiple broken bones, including a suspected broken pelvis and spinal injuries. The young man, who suffered a broken ankle, climbed the cliff to alert friends of the accident. I bring this incident to the attention of the House because in 1992 there was another terrible tragedy when members of an Afghan family were sucked into the ocean near the blowhole. My constituent Mr Zobair lost his wife, Nasrin; daughter, Khaleda; and son, Mostafa; while Mr Mohammed Sharif lost his daughter-in-law, Angeella Cina; her young daughter; and grandson, Arash Sharif. Their son, Fared, remains missing. The Zobair, Cina and Sharif families are related and emigrated to Australia as refugees trying to escape the war and oppression that have devastated their country. Tragedy had befallen the Sharif family many times: since leaving Afghanistan, they had lost four sons, one of whom was executed in Kabul.

The Afghan community in Sydney and in my electorate is small: there are only 600 or 700 Afghan people throughout the Sydney metropolitan area. As refugees, they are obviously very poor and, although they band together in times of hardship and tragedy, they do not have the resources to assist each other financially. I remind the House of that terrible tragedy affecting three families and of the recent accident near the blowhole. I commend the then Premier, Mr John Fahey, who, through the then Minister for Community Services, and Assistant Minister for Health, Jim Longley, paid $4,043 to the Zobair family and $3,244 to the Cina family to cover their direct funeral costs. Miss Peggy Heng then of the Ethnic Affairs Commission was also able to assist the families during this trying time and my wife, Karen, and I provided counselling. Unfortunately, as a result of this tragedy—and because of the interference of others, particularly my former electorate secretary—the Zobair family has split. Be that as it may, the family approached me after the recent incident to ask whether the Government might consider erecting some monument to the family at the blowhole to warn other people against entering that dangerous area.

The area is not fenced; it is impossible to fence. If we were to fence that area, governments would be obligated to provide funds to fence every beach and every cliff throughout Australia. These fine families, although employed, are struggling. They wish to warn people of the dangers of going near the Kiama blowhole. It is not the blowhole that causes problems, it is people wandering around the dangerous cliffs who are the problem. Recently a young lass fell 20 metres to her death at the Kiama blowhole. I ask the Deputy Premier, who is in the Chamber, to raise this matter with the Premier. It would not cost a lot of money to erect a memorial to the Zobair family containing a warning to people of the dangers of the area. If people do not heed those warnings or use their commonsense they could suffer the tragedy that was suffered by the Zobair family.

Dr REFSHAUGE (Marrickville—Deputy Premier, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for Housing) [5.20 p.m.]: The honourable member for Auburn has raised the very important issue of safety along the shoreline. The Kiama blowhole, which is an interesting feature of the local geography, is a dangerous area. I am sure that all members of this House extended sympathy to the members of the Zobair, Sharif and Cina families. I am sure that the Premier will take an interest in the matter raised by the honourable member for Auburn. Perhaps the local council could assist with the honourable member's proposal. The Afghan community played an important part in the opening up of the centre of Australia. They brought camels with them; the Afghan hops that can be seen blooming throughout Central Australia are a reminder of their leaking saddles.

Mr O'FARRELL (Ku-ring-gai—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [5.21 p.m.]: Education is an important issue within my electorate, which is blessed by a number of good public and private schools. I believe in choice in education but there can be no choice without a proper commitment to public education. The public school system in my electorate is strongly supported, as evidenced by an increase in enrolments. Last Friday night I met with representatives of schools to which Ku-ring-gai families send their children. They are category one to category three schools and include Barker College, Abbotsleigh, Knox Grammar, Ravenswood, Roseville College, and Pymble Ladies College. The schools were represented by principals and parent bodies and we discussed their concerns at the recent decision of the Carr Government to slash $5 million in funding from those schools.

I am concerned about that action; I regard it as an attack upon the non-government school sector and a divisive and unfair policy pursued by the Carr Government. In the pursuit of this policy the Carr Government blames the actions of the Federal Government. The reality is, despite the rhetoric of the Minister for Education and Training, Commonwealth funding to New South Wales schools has increased every year that the Howard Government has been in office. In 1996 $528 million was provided for New South Wales government schools. This year the figure is $649 million—an increase in excess of 20 per cent. The enrolment benchmark agreement [EBA] is designed to ensure that State governments do not engage in cost-shifting to the Commonwealth, an important indicator.

Last year the New South Wales Government made a saving of approximately $44 million on the proportionate shift to the non-government sector. The EBA claimed $16.9 million of this saving to the Commonwealth. The New South Wales Government retains the balance, which it could use to invest in government schools if it chooses. I have two concerns with singling out category one to category three schools. First, it is a divisive policy based on the false assumption that only the wealthy, the affluent, the better-off in the community attend those schools. That is not the reality for the many hundreds of families not only in my electorate but across New South Wales who are battling. They send spouses out to work so that they can afford to send their children to private schools. Why do they do that? They do it because of the perception that the private schools offer a better quality of education than that provided by the public school system.

I am a strong supporter of the public school system, but the Government has failed to address the perception, the reality, that many public schools across the city and State are failing students and parents. As a result, many spouses go out to work to pay fees to get their children to private schools. Second, as often happens, the Government announced its policy late in the day and without warning, well after the school budgets were set. In essence, schools across New South Wales, including those in Maitland, Bathurst, Sutherland and Menai—which I would have thought the Government would have been sensitive about—have been hit with a fairly significant change to their budgets, after the school year commenced.

That change will be passed on to the parents. This once again underlines the Minister's hypocrisy. He comes into the Chamber to boost public education, to talk the talk but not to deliver the goods. He does not deliver on the outcomes of public education. It is a matter of public record that he does not send his children to public schools, unlike some of us who participate in these debates. I do not believe that there should be a division in education between private and public schools. I do not believe that private schools should be set against public schools. I do not believe that public schools should be set against public schools. The Government has a $830 million slush fund, as revealed in its last budget. If it wants to compensate it can well do that. The Government wastes $3 million a year on upgrading its annual reports to Vogue status; it wastes $1 million a year on employing additional press secretaries, which, before elected to office, it said it would not have; it wastes $1.2 million a year in renting Bligh House, which is unoccupied. This unfair Government issues unfair policies. [Time expired.]

Dr REFSHAUGE (Marrickville—Deputy Premier, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for Housing) [5.26 p.m.]: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said, "I support public schools", which is like him saying, "I support Kerry Chikarovski as the Leader of the Opposition".

Ms HARRISON (Parramatta) [5.27 p.m.]: I commend the Government—in particular the Minister for Gaming and Racing for his insight—for implementing initiatives to alleviate gambling-related harm in the community. I join the Premier and the Minister in saying that those initiatives are a priority for the Government. It has been estimated that three out of every four adults in the State engage in some form of gambling activity. Very clearly the harm attributable to gambling can seriously affect a great number of individuals and their families. Last week I announced that funding of $1,089,836 has been allocated to the Parramatta electorate for counselling, treatment and rehabilitation services for problem gamblers and their families. That money is part of the $8.36 million from the Casino Community Benefit Fund and will assist 46 counselling agencies based throughout New South Wales in the delivery of these important services.

Under the new funding allocations, Centacare Catholic Family Services in the diocese of Parramatta; Lifeline Western Sydney, Parramatta Mission; the Western Sydney Area Health Service; and the Ethnic Affairs Commission of New South Wales will receive funding to provide counselling and treatment services. Centacare Catholic Family Services will receive a grant of $291,376 to continue with the provision of a general counselling service for problem gamblers and their families. Mr Ray Reid, Director of Centacare, Parramatta, has tirelessly lobbied for this grant to secure the experienced counsellors that already work for Centacare.

In correspondence to my office Mr Reid said that counselling of gamblers is a new field and trained and experienced counsellors are relatively few. I believe, as he does, that experienced counsellors make for a more successful service. Lifeline Western Sydney, Parramatta Mission, will receive a grant $168,460 to continue with the provision of a bilingual counselling service for problem gamblers and their families. The Parramatta Mission supports an extensive network of welfare services in Parramatta and western Sydney, including emergency housing, women's refuges, and the now well-known Kitchen project—a soup kitchen providing meals for up to 100 people a day. The mission also runs a financial counselling service, which is receiving part of the grant. Very few organisations do as much for the Parramatta community as the mission. I will continue to support it in its initiatives, wherever possible.

The Western Sydney Area Health Service and Ethnic Affairs Commission of New South Wales received a grant of $630,000 to provide a multicultural counselling service for New South Wales. This service operates out of Cumberland Hospital in North Parramatta. I am pleased to say that financial assistance for counselling and treatment services for problem gamblers and their families is but one of a series of government initiatives to alleviate gambling-related harms in the community to be introduced this year. Other initiatives include: landmark legislation to require commercial gambling and wagering activities to be conducted in a manner that minimises the harm to gamblers, their families and friends; legislation to slow the growth in the number of gaming machines by imposing a freeze of at least 12 months on the number of gaming machines allowed in registered clubs; legislation to require the preparation of social impact assessments when clubs seek to increase the number of gaming machines in their premises; and legislation prohibiting the establishment of new clubs and hotels containing gaming machines in shopping centres.

A large number of my constituents and organisations, such as Parramatta City Council and, in particular, Lord Mayor David Borger, have expressed their strong concern about the possibility of gaming machines in shopping centres. I was extremely pleased to alleviate their concerns by informing them that the Government opposed any such extension. Our community can be proud of the level of responsible commitment the Government has shown in this area, not only with the most recent legislative series, but also the $30 million that has already been allocated from the Casino Community Benefit Fund for gambling-related counselling, treatment services and research projects related to gambling issues. In an area as diverse as Parramatta, services that cater for those in more unfortunate circumstances than others are particularly important. I congratulate those organisations in my electorate whose hard work, dedication and care has been acknowledged and assisted by these grants.

Dr REFSHAUGE (Marrickville—Deputy Premier, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for Housing) [5.31 p.m.]: The honourable member for Parramatta raises an important issue about the need for support for problem gamblers. That has been recognised by her hard work in ensuring that her constituents can access counselling services in their electorate from well-equipped agencies. More than $1 million has been allocated from the Casino Community Benefit Fund, which was set up to provide these services. I have no doubt that the people of Parramatta will benefit from the hard work of their local member.

Mr WEBB (Monaro) [5.32 p.m.]: I wish to bring to the attention of the House a recent publication by the National Parks and Wildlife Service, a book called The Aboriginal People of the Monaro. It is a documentary history compiled by Michael Young, with the assistance of Ellen and Debbie Mundy. Ellen and Debbie recently visited my office and asked for assistance to continue the work that began in this book. I particularly commend the documentation of the history of the Aboriginal people in Monaro and the area itself. The book is a weighty tome, with close to 400 pages. The compilation by Michael Young follows themes, and the preface acknowledges a number of people. I would like to acknowledge some of them: Tom Barry, Blanche McGufficke, Kate and Neville Locker, Dave and Neen Pendergast, Rueben Byrne, whom I believe is recently deceased, many members of the Cooma Historical Society and, of course, Debbie and Ellen Mundy for their contribution. Another notable person is Graeme Enders, who is a member of the National Parks and Wildlife Service in the Kosciusko region. His input, and the rest of the staff there, has contributed greatly to this worthy book.

Many of the photographs and some of the documentation were acquired from the Charles Kerry photograph collection. Charles Kerry was born in Bombala and spent some time amassing a wonderful collection of photographic work, which has now been given to the Powerhouse Museum and the Bombala Historical Association. That photographic evidence has assisted the documentation. There is a great deal of information in the book about Monaro and the many different names it has been called. It has been called Monaro for a long time, but previously it was called Maneroo, with many variations. Interestingly, it is believed that the name Maneroo is derived from an Aboriginal word which originally meant "woman's breasts".

The book documents the area in which the Ngarigo tribe lived and explains that the climate was not so harsh that the Aboriginal people could not live there all year round. It describes the tribe, its language and its relationship with its neighbours. It explains why the tribal people existed as they did and the problems they confronted with white settlement. In fact, disease preceded white settlement and the boundary of occupation. From visits up north, to Braidwood and beyond, the Ngarigo tribe brought disease back to the local groups and they largely died out before white man even reached them. The book also acknowledges the day-to-day work of the Aboriginal people to survive. It refers to people such as Josephine Flood, whose book The Moth Hunters details the migration of the bogong moth to the Brindabellas, the Snowy Mountains, and the Victorian alps, and the initiation ceremonies and celebrations of the Aboriginal people. Up to 10,000 Aboriginals collected in the mountains in the summer period to feast on the moths and return to their local areas fat and shiny. The bogong moths helped them to survive.

I make particular reference to the 7,000-year-old Aboriginal teeth necklace, which is made of 326 kangaroo teeth, each one with a hole bored through it. The necklace is one of only three that has been found, and has been carbon dated as being 7,000 years ago. The necklace goes a long way to proving Aboriginal occupation of the area 20,000 years ago. When I first met the Mundy sisters, they related to me that they had traced their ancestry back to Murray Jack, also known as Malian Ebai, king of the Wolgal. The book contains a photograph of this formidable person. The sisters have traced their ancestry back to the early 1700s. The book does an excellent job in connecting the various information. I commend the reading of this book to anyone who is interested in Aboriginal history and the Monaro area.

Dr REFSHAUGE (Marrickville—Deputy Premier, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for Housing) [5.37 p.m.]: The honourable member for Monaro raises a number of important issues. One worth highlighting is that although the Government and the Opposition seem to spend a great deal of time fighting each other about policy, there is a lot we agree on. By referring to this book, which was published by the National Parks and Wildlife Service, the honourable member has highlighted the enormous amount of good work that is done in the public sector. During my high school years I spent time on the limestone plains around the Monaro. I love the area. If such a book had been available in those days it would have enhanced my enjoyment of the area. I hope that all schools receive a copy of it. I am sure that the honourable member for Monaro will ensure that schools in his electorate will receive a copy.

Mr BARTLETT (Port Stephens) [5.38 p.m.]: I refer to the Tilligerry Habitat Association and its success in looking after the habitat over the past few years. The association was formed in 1993 and looks after an area of just under 15 hectares on the foreshores of Port Stephens between Tanilba and Mallabula. Since 1993, $246,000 of Federal, State and local funding from a variety of sources has been used on projects on these sites. That funding was either in the form of grants or materials. A further $15,000 has been provided by non-government sources, local volunteers and the community. Thousands of volunteer hours have gone into projects in the Tilligerry habitat; it is an amazing local community venture.

The site is being restored after the damage caused by mineral extraction some 30 years ago. It has a large diversity of fauna and flora, with delightful existing and evolving sectors coming into play. Unfortunately, I have only the time to deal with two of the projects among many in the Tilligerry habitat. The first is the Straw Bale House construction and the second is the naming project, which was held on 18 May. Throughout the project, ownership by the community of the Tilligerry habitat has been central to the goals of the association. The Straw Bale House consists of bales placed between two timber plates, held together by strands of wire that are tightened to give the top plate a level sufficient to allow for the placement of the roofing timbers. Bird wire is then spread over the walls externally and internally, and they are then cement plastered with an earthen red ochre. The effect is quite outstanding. The wall is the width of a straw bale. The construction is cool in summer and warm in winter with the help of a little heating. It has become the storage area for other projects on the Tilligerry habitat.

The name-giving competition was designed to involve the communities in the habitat, give ownership of the habitat to the community, decrease vandalism on the site and ensure that more than only the volunteers were looking after the site. More than 375 names were submitted by the 16 entrants for paths, streams, bridges, ponds and vegetation communities on the site. Awards were presented by myself and Councillor Lorraine Yudaeff from the Port Stephens Council. The names were delightful. The youngest entrant was 3½-year-old Brittany Muxlow, who drew a superb koala and collected the family certificate. The most creative entrants were Pat and Dave Tribe, who devised nine winning names. The names were divided into different categories: vegetation, creeks and streams, ponds, major paths, corners, and bridges.

In the vegetation category Koala Kitchen was devised by Kristen Joss; Frogcall and Waterways were devised by Jeannette Fox; and Whispering Forest was devised by Pat and Dave Tribe. In the creeks and streams category Christmas Bill Creek was devised by Kristen Joss. In the ponds category Tadpole Tank and Froglet's Leap were devised by Dita Briers. In the major paths category Duck Quack Track was devised by Indi Ward, Koala Paws Path was devised by Lilly Ward, and Bandicoot Flats was devised by Jeannette Fox. In the corners category Magpie Corner was devised by Ashlee and Dane Peet, Paperbark Pause was devised by Pat and David Tribe, and Koala Corner was devised by Tim, Lee-Anne, Brittany and Nicholas Muxlow as well as Ashlee and Dane Peet. In the bridges category Frog Hollow Bridge was devised by the Cook family; and Serenity was devised by Tiffany Carroll-Macdonald. [Time expired.]

Dr REFSHAUGE (Marrickville—Deputy Premier, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for Housing) [5.43 p.m.]: The honourable member for Port Stephens has highlighted the good work done by the Tilligerry Habitat Association and the exciting naming project. I am sure the House is keen to praise those who have done such great work. I am sure the honourable member for Port Stephens will welcome members of this House who visit his electorate to show them the good works of the Tilligerry Habitat Association.

Mr RICHARDSON (The Hills) [5.44 p.m.]: Yesterday I received the enrolment statistics for New South Wales from the State Electoral Office, which showed that my electorate has become the first in the State to exceed 50,000 voters. It is now 12 per cent over quota, and in the last month has been drawing away from the second-biggest electorate, Port Jackson. I mention this to illustrate the level of growth in The Hills. About 5,000 extra people are moving into Baulkham Hills shire every year. If one drives out along Windsor Road, Kellyville, past Australia's biggest display village, Home World, one cannot fail to be astounded by the number of new subdivisions that have been created. GST or no GST, the building industry is booming in The Hills.

New houses need three main services: water, sewerage and electricity. The first two are provided by Sydney Water. A state-of-the-art treatment plant is located at Rouse Hill. Integral Energy is responsible for providing power but, unfortunately, it is providing less than state-of-the-art service to its customers in the Rouse Hill development area. With the number of new homes being built in Kellyville, Rouse Hill and Stanhope Gardens, it is understandable that occasionally power should have to be turned off to augment the system or to make new connections. The people of Kellyville understand that and support appropriate safety standards for workers. But the blackouts are more than occasional. My electorate secretary, Jannette Moseley, who lives in Kellyville, reported that in the first week of June there were power interruptions on four days out of eight. Two of the blackouts were for only a few minutes, two were for just over an hour.

These blackouts are enormously frustrating for Mrs Moseley's husband, Trevor, who works on a computer from home and has to stop work and reboot when the power comes back on. Conversely, local residents receive notices saying there will be blackouts on certain days, but they never happen. Residents of one street were told that power would be cut from 9.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m., but the power went off an hour earlier. Modern telecommunications have made it possible for literally hundreds of thousands of Australians to work from home, but modern telecommunications demand electricity. It is as much their lifeblood as water is a farmer's lifeblood. One cannot run a business in the new economy without power. It is as simple as that. Both the Beaumont Hills Residents Association and the Kellyville-Rouse Hill Progress Association have taken up this issue with me. Lyn Cole, the President of the Beaumont Hills Residents Association, wrote to me recently in the following terms:

Integral explain that at this time we are experiencing a major use of power due to the current cold weather, however we also regularly suffer the "New Estate" power cuts. Recently we had a power interference from 9am until 7pm when Integral installed generators to assist with the evening and then disconnected again at 12.15am until 3.15am.

We experience on a very regular basis short spikes as well as a fifty minute blackout last evening. We have at previous times also been without power for long periods after being notified by Integral they would need to cut service to work on Sub-stations or equipment in the area.

This is causing havoc with electrical equipment. New stoves installed within the last two to three years, have clocks that now lose time every day, videos, televisions, computers, all needing to be replaced suddenly. Electric garage doors are reacting to the sudden spikes.

In the world in which we live, there is such reliance on electricity, however with the continuing replacement factor of equipment that is not categorised as "old" one wonders what responsibility Integral has to the homeowners of this area.

Indeed, one does wonder what responsibility Integral has to the home owners of this area. Over the past few years it has discharged whatever responsibility it has in a poor way. Businesses in my electorate have complained about power cuts that are totally unacceptable in the central business district of Sydney. It is not only businesses that are affected, but every aspect of daily life. Power cuts can also be life threatening. Recently I heard about a resident of Bella Vista, which is in the Baulkham Hills electorate, who experienced a blackout during dialysis. Had his relatives not been well trained in emergency procedures he would have almost certainly died. Surely it is not beyond Integral's ability to minimise the frequency and duration of interruptions to power supply and to give affected residents adequate warning when blackouts are to occur. I am sure my constituents would prefer to have fewer, longer blackouts with adequate warning and preferably at the weekend.

Honourable members might be interested in Integral's mission statement, which is, "Our business purpose is to be the best in customer energy services." Clearly, Integral is not the best in customer energy services. On the basis of its substandard performance and the substandard service it is providing to the people of Kellyville it is probably the worst in customer energy services. It is absolutely appalling that people who have to put up with substandard public transport services and that appalling shambles on Windsor Road should also have to put up with power blackouts at the drop of a hat almost every other day. I ask the Minister for Energy to investigate this matter, which affects tens of thousands of residents in New South Wales. It affects not only my constituents, but constituents of the honourable member for Hawkesbury and the honourable member for Baulkham Hills. It affects the constituents of Labor members as well. The honourable member for Riverstone is one of those members. I would like to know if the reforms I have suggested can be implemented.

Mr ORKOPOULOS (Swansea) [5.49 p.m.]: I have spoken in this House before about my concerns relating to coastal development in the Swansea electorate and particularly the proposal by BHP to rezone coastal land across the Charlestown and Swansea electorates. In my contributions I have asked the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning to consider seriously any application for rezoning of that precious coastal land for over 2,000 housing lots. On Saturday 17 June I was pleased to attend the presentation by Ms Leslie Jacobi from the Lake Macquarie Coastal and Wetlands Alliance of a petition containing over 5,000 signatures to all three levels of government.

Also present at that time were my colleagues the Minister for Gaming and Racing, the honourable member for Charlestown; Ms Jill Hall, Federal member for Shortland and former popular member of this House; councillors Mercia Buck, Matthew Morris and Chris Foteff; and the Hon Peter Morris, a former Federal member for Shortland, who has long championed the community cause against BHP. I am pleased that Lake Macquarie City Council has resolved, in the implementation of its land use strategy in a new local environment plan, that the site not be developed for housing. That means that council has signalled clearly to the applicant what it wants on the site. The petition that was presented stated:

We the undersigned are opposed to the development proposed by the owners for Belmont to Redhead dunes wetland area known as Belmont Sands and the rezoning of this land which would allow the development to occur.

We want Lake Macquarie City Council to maximise conservation for public use, protect the area from any residential development and minimise any other type of development.

We request that the owners make a contribution to the people of the Hunter by rehabilitating the area and returning the land to the people.

The significance of Saturday's event was that Federal, State and local governments agreed with the terms of the petition and stated that they believe BHP should do the right thing by the region and return the land to the people. I am pleased to present my colleague the Minister for Gaming and Racing, the honourable member for Charlestown, with this petition containing 5,000 signatures. The reason I present it to him is that it is not worded in accordance with the appropriate forms of this House. I ask him to pass it on to the Government, particularly the Minister for the Environment, for consideration.

Mr FACE (Charlestown—Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development) [5.53 p.m.]: I compliment the honourable member for Swansea for the petition he has passed to me, which contains 5,000 names. I thank those who presented the petition to me last Saturday, including Ms Jacobi. The Lake Macquarie Coastal and Wetlands Alliance is one of several organisations that have, over a period of time, brought to notice the environmental impact upon a piece of land stretching from Redhead to the back of Belmont south. Over the years the site has suffered the impact of sandmining and various other intrusions and has been seriously degraded. It is a vexed problem: I expect some people still have a desire to develop the land, whereas the Lake Macquarie Coastal and Wetlands Alliance want it retained totally and rehabilitated in some form. A considerable amount of money will be needed to do that.

I understand the Federal Government has not been willing to provide any money under a heritage grant. Nevertheless, Lake Macquarie City Council has finally indicated the site will not be rezoned. A whole-of-government approach is being taken to this matter and to various other land use matters in the Hunter region. I am not in a position to comment other than to say that attempts are being made to reach a long-term resolution. Whether it is to the satisfaction of everybody in the community remains to be seen. I will pass on this petition to both the Minister for the Environment and to the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning. This issue has become a great talking point. It is marvellous how the attitude to the environment has changed since I became a member of the House many years ago. I commend the honourable member for Swansea for the petition he has presented to me.

Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [5.55 p.m.]: I express my condolences to the relatives and friends of the three National Parks and Wildlife Service officers who passed away in the terrible fire tragedy only 13 days ago. Claire Deane, aged 25, George Fitzsimmons, aged 52 and Eric Furlan, aged 51 each passed away while trying to help other people and trying to ensure lives and property were safe and protected. George Fitzsimmons was previously involved in the Rural Fire Service and was a former northern beaches or peninsula resident. He was also a member of the Duffys Forest Rural Fire Service. I express my condolences and those of the Opposition and, I am sure, the Government to his wife, Karen, and his family. At today's memorial service his son, Shane Fitzsimmons, of whom George would have been very proud, was present not only as his son but in his capacity as Assistant Commissioner of the Rural Fire Service.

I should like to talk particularly about Claire Deane. Claire was a resident of Forestville, which of course is in the Wakehurst electorate. Claire was born on 9 August 1974. She attended Forestville Public School and then Killarney Heights High School; she was very much a local. She went on to the University of Technology Sydney [UTS] where she obtained a Bachelor of Science (Environmental Science). I understand one needs commitment to do that course. When I attended Macquarie University I undertook the same course of academic study. I have spoken to Claire's dad, Trevor; to her brother, Keith; and to her boyfriend—her very special friend, Nathan Fitzgerald.

The one thing they all me told was that Claire was committed to the environment. She was committed to Australia and its history. She loved all aspects of it. Nathan Fitzgerald told me that more than anything else she loved to be in the bush. She was, however, committed to everything about Australia. Indeed, she had a strong commitment to reconciliation. He told me also that she lived her life to the full. He had known her for eight years. They did all the normal things that young people do: they went to various venues to see bands, they had a good time, they lived their lives together. He misses Claire, as one would expect. In today's Manly Daily he is quoted as saying, "I will always love Claire and I know I will never be the same."

Claire's dad, Trevor, and her brother tell me that she was always a bright, vivacious and bubbly person. Indeed, her brother, Keith, told me that when they were growing up they never had fights like many brothers and sisters; they always had a great relationship. Claire was one of three children: Wynne, her older sister, is aged 27, and Keith, her brother, is aged 23. Her dad, Trevor, said that Claire loved the National Parks and Wildlife Service. She had literally waited for this job for some years since finishing her degree. She undertook a great deal of volunteer work and had been involved in bush regeneration.

Indeed, even after she started work on a temporary basis six months ago, and full time three months ago, she still used to leap out of bed before the due hour and go off to do volunteer work. I am told by Keith that on the weekends she used to head off to the parks and do volunteer bush regeneration work. She lived her life for the bush, for Australia and for her family. I ask that the condolences of this House be noted. Her family should know that every member of this place, including staff members, expresses sorrow and condolences to the family. I am sure that wherever she is now, as her brother said, she will always be a really happy, enthusiastic and bubbly person. We will all miss her. [Time expired.]

Mr BROWN (Kiama) [6.00 p.m.]: Tonight I pay tribute to the Berry community, which organised last Friday a tribute to James Joyce and his novel Ulysses at Berry. The evening raised money for the James Joyce Foundation and the Berry Courthouse Conservation Committee. The committee organised a program starting early in the morning with a Bloomsday breakfast. The program continued late into the night with readings of Joyce's works by local people. I spoke at the Berry Courthouse about 7.30 p.m. and thoroughly enjoyed being part of the program. The foundation and the committee raised around $1,500 . I pay particular tribute to Col Waller, the publican of the Berry Hotel for opening his premises, which played such a significant part in the day.

A special Irish dinner consisted of oysters and a choice of salmon and potato pie or Irish stew. I chose the pie but after seeing the stew I would have been equally happy with it. Col Waller has recently employed a new chef named Matthew Watson. The team that prepared the meals should be thanked. Another issue concerns the sale of Kiama Infants School. On Saturday I attended a meeting of more than 250 local residents concerned about the future of the infants school. A number of motions were passed. One resolution was:

The meeting expresses its grave concern that Kiama Council does not have a heritage conservation management plan for the infants school property and urges the council to expedite its preparation and adoption of such a plan.

The meeting further resolved:

The meeting presses the Government of the State of New South Wales to defer the public auction of the property to at least enable the Kiama Municipal Council to prepare a development control plan including development guidelines for the site prior to its sale.

This evening I met representatives of the education department, the office of the education Minister and the Ministry of the Arts in the Premier's Department to look at ways to delay the auction of the site. The Save the Infants School Committee should also be congratulated for collecting the signatures of more than 3,000 people to ensure that that fantastic heritage building is properly preserved and that there will always be adequate protection for the heritage site. The school evokes much emotion for me because I attended that beautiful school. The person who has put petrol in my car all my life, Fredrick Addison, who lives just up the road, also attended that school. It is a lifeline of the Kiama community. I will do everything I can to ensure that the heritage integrity of the building is maintained.

Dr REFSHAUGE (Marrickville—Deputy Premier, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for Housing) [6.05 p.m.]: I congratulate the honourable member for Kiama on his contribution to the tribute to the James Joyce readings. I presume that he read some of Ulysses as well. The Berry Court House is a great place for the reading of Joyce's work. A number of people were doing similar things around the State. The Premier also read in Sydney. The money raised will go to enhance facilities for the Berry community. It is not surprising to hear that a new Government member has immediately contacted the Minister for Education and Training and even the office of the Minister for the Arts about an issue in his electorate: the infants school. It shows again that members of this Government are into solving problems, listening to the community and making sure that action occurs.

Mr GEORGE (Lismore) [6.07 p.m.]: I assure the Deputy Premier that we on this side of the House are about trying to solve problems too.

Dr Refshauge: Let me listen. What do you have to fix?

Mr GEORGE: This afternoon I spoke to the office of the Minister for Roads. Unfortunately, he could not attend the Chamber to hear this speech but I am sure that the Deputy Premier will assist me in getting the message to the Minister for Roads. I ask him for that support. There is much anecdotal evidence that the roads in the Lismore electorate are in poor condition. With any large road network such as the Lismore City Council network it is difficult to get a single measure or snapshot of the overall condition of the roads. This is mainly due to the enormous size of the asset. The amount of information which needs to be collected, analysed and reported is staggering. Usually, roads also have very long lives—between 20 and 30 years. Normally, once a road is constructed it is fairly robust and will endure less than optimal maintenance funding for many years. The life of the road will be reduced but it will still provide service for many years. Even roads in terminal condition still provide some level of service. That is, vehicles can still travel along them.

The average condition of the Lismore road network is very low. That is due to a number of factors including a lack of funding over many years, increased traffic loads, thin pavements, and adverse weather conditions. The condition of the road network is directly related to funding. If an improvement to the overall condition is desired an increase in funding is required. A large increase in funding will result in a rapid improvement; a modest increase will result in improvement over an extended period. The current condition of the network is causing substantial funds to be wasted undertaking emergency or band-aid works rather than programmed or preventive maintenance. That is particularly prevalent where there is pothole patching of terminal sections of pavement that really require rehabilitation or heavy patching.

Recent roughness surveys have shown that about half the road links in the Lismore City Council area are terminal or failing and will become terminal within five years. That certainly would be a bad medical condition. The rough roads are costing road users an estimated $4.8 million per year in extra wear and tear on their vehicles. The poor condition of the roads is leading to scarce funding being wasted on band-aid or emergency work. To turn the situation around a huge amount of capital is required. Options available to councils are limited.

First, council can lobby the State and Federal governments for more funds, which is what I am trying to do; second, it can rationalise the length of road sought to be maintained to a satisfactory standard, which may require turning some less trafficked bitumen roads back to gravel; or, third, it can continue with the same approach. The last option is not acceptable, and time does not permit me to elaborate on the three proposals. The regional road network in the Lismore City Council area includes the Nimbin-Blue Knob Road, Dunoon Road, Coraki Road, Kyogle Road and Rous Road. They are the arterial feeder roads between regions in the North Coast area and are the lifeblood of the Lismore City Council area and shopping area. In 1990, 47 per cent of roads were in terminal condition; in 1998 that figure had fallen to 30 per cent. Similarly, the proportion of roads due to fail within five years had dropped from 44 per cent to 21 per cent.

A relatively small improvement has taken place over such a long period but the perception is that there has been no improvement. The expectations of the community have also risen during this period. Only 49 per cent of our regional road network is in a satisfactory condition. Regional roads carry the bulk of the traffic throughout the city area and are therefore most susceptible to rapid deterioration, as illustrated by Blue Knob Road during last year. Regional roads are the most important roads in the Lismore City Council area, but if they fully fund rehabilitation projects they risk losing potentially half their funding from the Roads and Traffic Authority. I seek a meeting with the Minister for Roads to raise the concerns of Lismore City Council. I have already had discussions with the Minister's advisers and council but I highlight these matters. [Time expired.]

Dr REFSHAUGE (Marrickville—Deputy Premier, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for Housing) [6.11 p.m.]: I am sure that the Minister for Roads will give the honourable member a good hearing. It is important to acknowledge that the vast majority of road funding is spent outside Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong; it is spent in the regions. If this Government received more funding from Canberra I am sure it would be spending more on rural roads.

Mr TORBAY (Northern Tablelands) [6.12 p.m.]: Not a week goes by in my Northern Tablelands electorate without someone calling in or phoning about the dental crisis. They are either in pain and have been told they have to wait years for dentures or they have been told that immediate orthodontic treatment is not available for their children. They face a waiting period of months for fillings and routine dental work. Sometimes immediate relief is available but the long-term prospect for these people is not good.

It is well known that decaying teeth and gums are a major health problem for those who cannot afford regular dental care. We know that people with poor teeth suffer from low self-esteem and have a substandard quality of life. Although this is well understood throughout the State and nation, an increasing number of people, particularly the elderly and children, have no access to proper dental care. I draw to the attention of the House this deplorable situation and ask the State Government to step up pressure on the Federal Government to meet its commitment in this regard.

On 14 June the Sydney Morning Herald published the findings of an investigation into the dental health of the people of this State, four years after the Howard Government withdrew $100 million in dental care funding. The impact on low income earners has been devastating. People are waiting up to five years for basic dental care and most can get dental care only if they are in pain. A case was presented to me this week in which a patient in an Armidale nursing home who was suffering extreme pain was told he would have to wait almost four weeks for an appointment.

Another disturbing part of the report is that bad teeth and gums in adults are a clear mark of the difference between the haves and the have-nots in Australia, as stated by the Sydney Morning Herald. New South Wales lost $37.8 million in Federal funds; waiting lists at public dental clinics, which had dropped to six months, have now shot back to years; and the number of people treated has fallen by more than half. In 1995-96, the last full year of Commonwealth funding, 440,000 people were seen in New South Wales public dental clinics. In 1997-98, when the funding ran out, the number fell to 172,000. These figures were quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald from the dental officer of New South Wales Health, Dr Alan Patterson.

The report stated that the Federal Government, at the time it withdrew the $100 million for dental services, offered a $290 million subsidy for dental care for better off Australians through the 30 per cent tax rebate for private health insurance. The report said that staff at public dental surgeries have been taught aggression management to handle the anger of patients denied treatment. What a shameful state of affairs! Is the compassion fatigue suffered by our current Federal Government so far advanced that the disadvantaged in our society have become victims of a repellent style of corporate management? These people have a right to be angry and a right to basic dental treatment.

In the opinion of most people I speak to, dental health is a higher priority than glossy brochures talking up the GST or expensive and ineffective advertising campaigns that attract huge funds from the national purse. When the Keating Government introduced the $100 million Commonwealth dental health program in 1994, it was a response to the dreadful state of dental health amongst the poorer members of our society. That program was a success, especially in rural and regional areas. It cut the number of tooth extractions by a third and reduced waiting lists to manageable levels.

The State Government has recently injected $33 million over three years into public dental health. While this will help, it is nowhere near enough. This funding should be at least matched by the Commonwealth Government, and both governments should monitor the situation until dental health care offered to those in lower income groups is at an acceptable level. That would not only improve the general health of many people, it would also help their employment prospects and improve the wellbeing of the elderly, who should not have to wait five years for dentures. The majority of Australians believe that dental health care should have priority over the trivial matters that governments have been spending money on and indulging in recently.

Private members' statements noted.

Motion by Mr Whelan agreed to:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to permit resumption of the adjourned second reading debate on the Appropriation Bill and cognate bills.

Debate resumed from 9 June.

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield—Minister for Police) [6.17 p.m.]: I seek leave to table amendments to the Appropriation (Further Budget Variations) Bill.

Leave granted.

Amendments tabled.

The Government plans to set aside an additional $140 million from this year's budget surplus to cover possible additional costs associated with staging the Olympic Games. When New South Wales secured the Olympics, the State Government took on the responsibility of underwriting the budget of the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games [SOCOG]. It is a responsibility that now falls on this Government. Setting aside money now is the prudent approach. The 1999-2000 budget is in a strong surplus position and is well able to afford the full amount of the planned Olympic contingency. On current Treasury estimates, and after the Olympic contingency is set aside, the budget results for 1999-2000 would be: operating balance, $2,293 million surplus; Government finance statistics [GFS] net lending result, $989 million positive; and GFS cash result, $174 million surplus.

The amendment the Government proposes will appropriate an additional $140 million to the Crown Transactions Entity, which in turn will provide $140 million to SOCOG. None of the $140 million provided to SOCOG could be spent without the explicit approval of both the Treasurer and the Minister for the Olympics and it would remain under the close supervision of the New South Wales Treasury and the Olympic Co-ordination Authority. Since SOCOG prepared its budget in February a number of risks have emerged that are prudent for the Government to address.

The contingency fund will cover any revenue shortfalls and additional costs and provide a reasonable buffer against other possible costs. Of the $140 million to be set aside, $50 million is provided to cover immediate likely reductions in SOCOG revenue and increased costs. These include possible shortfalls in sponsorship revenues, higher costs from expanding telephone ticket sales, higher ticket distribution costs and a possible increase in the cost of ceremonies; around $18 million for possible additional expenditure on services contracted to the Olympic Co-ordination Authority by SOCOG, including waste collection and venue fit out; and $70 million for other contingencies. The provision of a $140 million contingency will increase SOCOG's budget to $2.514 billion of income and the same amount of expenditure. That is an increase from the $2.375 billion balanced budget proposed in February this year but is below the previous SOCOG budget set in August 1998 that forecast expenditure of $2.567 billion.

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

Mr WHELAN: Earlier today I was asked a question by the honourable member for Epping about royal commission recommendation No. 60 on secondary employment. Under the revised secondary employment policy, employment in high-risk areas is permitted in limited circumstances under strict controls. The onus is now on the applicant to prove that a conflict of interest does not arise. Probity assessment is now required by Internal Affairs and approval by the director of human resources, rather than the local area commander. If Opposition members are aware of any situation in which the rules have been, or are being, breached, they should alert the Police Service.

I am also advised by the police commissioner's office that no New South Wales police officer had permission to work as an employee of the Star City Casino. I am advised that two police officers have the commissioner's approval to work in the gaming industry: one is an administrative officer in the TAB, and the other is an owner-driver in the harness racing industry. If Opposition members are aware of any circumstances in which the rules are being breached, they should alert the Police Service.

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

Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Bill
Crimes Legislation Amendment Bill
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Amendment (Private Insurance) Bill

[Mr Deputy-Speaker left the chair at 6.21 p.m. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m.]
Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr ORKOPOULOS (Swansea) [7.30 p.m.]: With 11 days to go before it is imposed, the Howard-Anderson Liberal-National Party goods and services tax [GST] on caravans must go. In 11 days up to 50,000 New South Wales people who live permanently in residential parks will have to pay an extra 5.5 per cent on the rent for the ground on which their homes stand. The Liberal-National Party is saying to people who pay rent on private property, which in 11 days time will increase by 2 per cent, that if they live in a residential home park they will cop a 5.5 per cent increase. Mr Howard says that the GST package is fair, and that it will not change.

A secret report prepared by Econotec and commissioned by Federal Treasury has contradicted this declaration by our Prime Minister. The Government, of course, rejects the amendment moved by the honourable member for Davidson as a typical mangy stunt to divert attention from the New South Wales Liberal Party, which is hopelessly divided. National Party members really want to vote with the Government, because they do not believe the assurances of the Liberals that everyone will be happy and grateful to them for slugging everything that moves with a GST.

Along with other conference delegates, 11 National Party members voted, apparently unanimously, for a motion similar to the one we are now debating. I suppose, for the sake of Coalition unity, they will support a Liberal amendment. For how along will they blindly follow the hapless and hopeless Liberal Party? For it is the Tories who have imposed a discriminatory GST on the mostly retired folk who have chosen to live in mobile home parks. In this House on an earlier occasion I read a letter I received from Wyong Shire Council outlining its unanimous resolution. I shall read that letter again:

Council is concerned that under GST legislation residential rents are not subject to any GST however, caravan parks and mobile home/relocatable villages and parks are classed as commercial accommodation and are therefore subject to GST for rental purposes. Concessional treatment is given to long term commercial accommodation rental under GST legislation, however they are still effectively subject to a GST levy of 5.5%.

Residents of parks and the relevant associations believe this is both discriminatory and unfair as there is no justifiable reason to charge GST, while exempting a person renting a residential home. Further, many residents have made substantial capital investment in their relocatable homes or caravans, and see the levying of the GST as inequitable, and regressive. The imposition of the GST may make it impossible for them to realise their capital investment, as demand will be substantially reduced.

I am happy to say that the Federal Opposition will move an amendment in the Senate—which, hopefully, will be supported by the Democrats—to exempt in full the GST on residential park rents, as announced in the media tonight. The Tory speakers in this debate had not even bothered to respond to the concerns raised by Labor Party and National Party members. This discriminatory caravan tax must be defeated. I will ensure that residents in mobile home parks on the Central Coast, especially in the Federal electorate of Robertson, know who is responsible for this disgraceful beating up on vulnerable people.

Mr WEBB (Monaro) [7.34 p.m.]: This is a serious debate. Unfortunately, members on the other side of the House have missed the point. If they had the concerns that those on this side of the House have they would make representations to their Federal colleagues, as we have done. The implications of the GST are Federal issues. It is all very well to make a song and dance in this House about it but we ought to remember that the State Government is in fact the beneficiary of the GST. I urge members on the other side of the House who have been very vocal today to lobby their side of government, rather than attack this side of the House. It is their so-called Leader of the Federal Opposition who shrugged and said, "I can't do it either, I cannot fix it". That is an interesting and important point.

At the end of last week and on the weekend I attended the National Party conference and Federal convention which moved unanimously to request the Federal Government to amend the GST legislation to remove the anomaly whereby permanent-stay caravan park residents would see rentals rise while their neighbours in flats and apartments, maybe just next door, remained GST free. I fully supported that motion. In my electorate of Monaro many people choose to reside in caravan parks at Eden, along the far south coast and up the coast, and I have received representations also from people at Batemans Bay. In Queanbeyan and Canberra people live in long-stay permanent residencies in caravan parks. They abhor the thought of having to pay GST on their rentals because their neighbours who choose to live in flats and apartments will not pay that fee. Originally the Federal Government chose to exempt rentals—

Mr Crittenden: You might have to cross the floor on this.

Mr WEBB: We do not have to cross the floor because we have already said that we oppose that concept. We supported the National Party convention resolution to exempt caravan park occupants from the GST. There has been no about-face by me or my colleagues. We stand firm in representing our constituents, including the many thousands of permanent residents of caravan parks not only in my electorate but across the State. Many of these people are in lower socioeconomic groups and need our help. I call on the State Government to solve the problems members of our community are facing through lack of affordable rental accommodation.

In Queanbeyan and Canberra, and I am sure across the State, there is a severe lack of affordable accommodation. Many people in lower socioeconomic groups have to live in caravan accommodation and relocatable homes because that is what suits their circumstances. They should not have to pay a GST. The National Party fully supports their objections. Members on the other side of the House do not seem to understand that the GST is a Federal issue and that this State is the recipient of those payments. The motion has been put in an inept way, so inept that at least two of the paragraphs in the original motion have been removed. I treat the fourth part of the motion with the contempt it deserves—cattle do not pay GST. We have all seen how Country Labor treated the dairy industry deregulation. [Time expired.]

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Lynch): Order! The honourable member for Monaro will resume his seat. If he again behaves in the manner in which he has just conducted himself I will direct that he be removed from the Chamber.

Mr BARTLETT (Port Stephens) [7.39 p.m.]: On 5 April I brought this matter to the attention of the House in the form of a private member's statement. It was subsequently followed by a resolution on 11 April. A number of my constituents spoke to me before 5 April about this issue. The Federal Government cannot change the goods and services tax [GST] on residential park residents—although everyone agrees it should be changed—because of all the other GST anomalies, such as a GST on fresh crab at the markets but not on fish. If the Federal Government changed this anomaly, it would be expected to change other anomalies. The detail of the GST makes this tax as complicated as the existing sales tax regime which the Federal Government is trying to get rid of. There are about 1,500 van sites in the Great Lakes and Port Stephens area. Many park residents in that area reside in caravan parks because it is affordable accommodation. I am talking about people who either own or are paying off a $70,000 home and pay about $65 per week for the privilege of leaving their home in a rental park. Most of these people live on a pension of $8,500 a year.

Recently I received information that some caravan park owners will pass on costs and increase the charge to caravan owners by $3 plus the GST component. Those pensioners then have the problem of the 10 per cent GST on other purchases. All those pensioners are given in return is a 4 per cent increase in their pension. That 4 per cent increase disappears for residents of mobile home parks. Other people renting other types of accommodation still have that 4 per cent to spend on increases due to the 10 per cent GST. Park residents feel discriminated against, and they are complaining about the situation in large numbers. Unbelievably, the GST consumer and business line is dispensing conflicting information. People are now keeping records of the information they are being given by the GST hotline because they are getting conflicting information from the government body that is implementing this tax in the caravan parks. The situation is unjust. After my private member's statement on 5 April and the debate in this House on 11 April, on Monday 17 April 600 park residents held a meeting at the Central Coast Leagues Club. Their resolution stated:

This meeting of residential parks condemns the proposed 5.5% GST on permanent residents as discriminatory, unjust and inequitable.
Discriminatory because Australia-wide, it targets only those home owners who live permanently, and rent a piece of ground, in a residential park.
Unjust because most of these home owners are pensioners, unemployed and low income earners.
Inequitable because proposed compensatory benefits will apply to all pensioners while those pensioners in residential parks will suffer an additional 5.5% GST without appropriate compensation.

This issue is not going to go away, as the National Party found out at its conference. At a meeting on 22 May in Port Stephens, the New South Wales and Port Stephens President of the Park Residents Association stated:

This country has never witnessed such an ill-conceived, ill-considered, discriminatory attack on the quality of life of its senior and other disadvantaged citizens …

Mr FRASER (Coffs Harbour) [7.44 p.m.]: I move:

That the amendment be amended by leaving out all words after the words “this House” with a view to inserting instead the following:

"recognises that, as 100% of the GST revenue is distributed to State governments, the New South Wales Government commit to refunding the full 5.5% to caravan park residents."

We have seen absolute hypocrisy from the Government. It will benefit from the GST by receiving the 5.5 per cent. Last Saturday or Sunday, members of the Australian Labor Party, such as the Hon. Janelle Saffin, were in the electorate of Tweed with park residents. The National Party has already called for action on this issue. We supported the motion the last time it was before the House. The honourable member for Wyong knows that my previous point of order was ruled in order. The video is there for him to watch. We supported the motion, and he has lied and misled the House and the people of New South Wales. The Government has failed to support the homeless in New South Wales. It has run a line that the GST is the cause of all these dastardly things. We are probably talking about a $5 increase, which I do not agree with. I have said so in the media, well before Government members spoke against it.

Mr Crittenden: That is rubbish.

Mr FRASER: It is the truth. I do not mislead the House, like the honourable member for Wyong tried to today or the Minister for Fair Trading has done in the past. Park residents are not only battlers; they are also people who have decided to retire to the North Coast or the Central Coast, buy a mobile home and live there for the lifestyle. They spend $100,000 or $150,000 on a mobile home and have someone else look after their lawn. They are self-funded retirees, who go fishing and play bowls. They do not want to pay an increased rent. I believe that the Federal Government gave an assurance prior to the last election that no-one would be disadvantaged by increased rents. Mr Howard has increased the rent of people living in caravan parks. I cannot support that, and I will not. I stated clearly and loudly at the National Party conference last weekend that I did not support it.

The conference stated unanimously that we do not support a GST on caravan parks. Walt is sitting in the gallery listening—he writes all the spin on this for the Labor Party. He has got it wrong, and he got it wrong before because he told lies. What he issued in the media for the Minister for Fair Trading was a lie. The records of this House will prove that the Coalition did not vote against the motion last time. In fact, we supported it. We voted for the amendment. The amendment that I have moved tonight recognises that, if Mr Howard is going to be bloody-minded and introduce this GST on park residents, the State Government will benefit. It will get the 5.5 per cent. My amendment calls on the honourable member for Tweed—Napping Neville—the honourable member for Murray-Darling and the honourable member for Wyong to support my amendment that Mr Egan and Mr Carr return that 5.5 per cent to caravan park residents. I challenge the honourable member for Wyong to support my amendment. I challenge him to go to his Treasurer and his Premier and say, "If Mr Howard brings this in—"

Mr Crittenden: This is a Federal issue and it needs to be resolved federally.

Mr FRASER: Honourable members opposite are nothing more than a Federal Opposition. Instead of being a State Government they are a Federal Opposition. They have an absolute obligation to support my amendment, to go to Mr Carr and Mr Egan and say, "The 5.5 per cent that you are getting out of the GST on caravan parks, if Howard continues on this line, should be returned by you to the people." That is the challenge tonight. That is my amendment. I challenge honourable members opposite to back it. [Time expired.]

Mr NEWELL (Tweed) [7.49 p.m.]: I appreciate the concern of the honourable member for Wyong and the concerns of other honourable members for residents in their electorates who will be severely affected by the impost of the GST on caravan parks and mobile home parks. I wish to express further the concerns of honourable members on this side of the House for what will happen from 1 July when residents in mobile home parks and caravan parks are subject to a GST of some 5.5 per cent. I make the distinction between caravan parks and mobile home parks for the benefit of honourable members on the other side of the House who do not quite understand that it is not just about residents in caravan parks. My electorate has some 20 caravan parks and mobile home parks. Honourable members from other electorates know the difference. Unfortunately, Federal National Party and Liberal Party members, in particular, do not seem to understand that mobile home parks are a designated and recognised form of living, particularly along the eastern coast of Australia.

The hundreds of people who live in mobile home parks are not caravan park dwellers; they choose to live in mobile home parks, which is an accepted lifestyle choice. The 20-odd caravan parks and mobile home parks in the Federal electorate of Richmond, not so much in the electorate of Tweed, are home to some 6,000 residents. It is a very important constituency. Last weekend, when the Federal and State National Party members attended their national conference at Twin Towns in Tweed Heads, they had the concerns of their electorates at heart. After the honourable member for Wyong, other honourable members and I raised our concerns in this House last year about the impost of the GST on residents of caravan parks and mobile homes, the National Party rejected our approaches. We have been fighting against it for some time because we are concerned about the impact of the GST on their living standards and their quality of life. Last weekend the concerns of those who attended the National Party conference at Tweed Heads were not about the people in caravan parks—

Mr Fraser: Where were you when the dairy farmers were out there? Where were you?

Mr NEWELL: This debate is about the GST. We will have the other debate later on; I am more than happy to respond to that. Last year the National Party, with all its sincerity, could not have cared less about this matter. But it has suddenly realised that half a dozen seats, including the Federal seat of Richmond in which Larry Anthony is facing the death knock and will be chucked out of at the next Federal election, are under threat. The National Party had the temerity to pass the following motion:

The Conference calls for the anomaly in the GST treatment of long term residents of relocatable homes and caravan parks to be removed on the grounds that those residents should be treated on the same basis as other residential rentals.

I, and I am sure other members of this House, could not agree more. The press release from the National Party stated, "For further information, contact Prue Phillips" whose name is on the press release. The motion was moved by Peter Mason on behalf of the Tweed Heads Branch of the National Party. The press release stated further:

The Conference agreed the resolution should be referred to National Party leaders to pursue in their respective States.

Where is our National Party Leader in New South Wales? Honourable members on the other side of the House are moving amendments to oppose the motion moved by the honourable member for Wyong. National Party members stood up in their conference and voted for the motion, yet they oppose the motion moved in this House by the honourable member for Wyong. [Time expired.]

Mr BLACK (Murray-Darling) [7.54 p.m.]: I support my coalition colleague in city Labor, the honourable member for Wyong. But let me start by establishing the credibility of Country Labor in this matter. Country Labor was the first organisation to raise this matter in this Chamber. Country Labor supported the Minister for Fair Trading when he moved the motion earlier today, about which we have heard denials this evening. Country Labor was the first organisation to point out that not only would 5.5 per cent apply to residents in caravan parks but 4.7 per cent would apply to the rent paid by borders, not the 2 per cent that was referred to earlier in this Chamber by honourable members opposite. That fact was confirmed on television this evening in a report that the Federal Government has been sitting on for three months.

I wish to refer to matters raised by the National Party in this Chamber about the National Party State Conference held last Friday, Saturday and Sunday at Tweed Heads, followed by its Federal Convention. The National Party Federal Convention was addressed by the Federal Leader of the National Party and the title of his address was "The National Party Leading the Way in the New Century". That is great stuff, but the new century does not start for another six months! In his speech George Souris, the Leader of the New South Wales National Party, referred to Country Labor 12 times. In fact, being my modest self on behalf of Country Labor, he referred to Country Labor more often than he referred to the Carr Labor Government. However, his seminal contribution to the conference was:

From this point forward we must dedicate our efforts to regaining the confidence and support of our constituency.

What does he really mean? Let us analyse what happened after the conference. On Sunday a glorious headline appeared in the Sunday Telegraph: "Nats risk oblivion in coalition". It is a great headline directly opposite another headline: "The huge headache". Under the headline "Nats risk oblivion in coalition" the Sunday Telegraph states:

The politics of its coalition with the Liberals are slowly destroying the National Party.

The realities imposed by Cabinet solidarity, and the cold imperatives of economic rationalism so enthusiastically embraced by the Howard government, have seen the Nationals fighting One Nation to their right and, more threateningly, Country Labor for the centre in the bush.

One of the headlines on the front page of today's Sydney Morning Herald is, "Cabinet lashings for Nats as caravan park GST stays". The Leader of the Federal National Party, John Anderson, is up at Tweed Heads, out comes the leather gear, John Howard gives him the lashing and says, "Not on." In the meantime we have Caravan George, who has not been sighted in the debate today—like someone else called George whose second name was Custer. He has all the caravans in a ring! The same will happen to Caravan George as happened to George Custer because Country Labor is coming over the top! Goodbye George, goodbye for good!

Today's Sydney Morning Herald has a great editorial entitled, "Nationals with nowhere to go". But what do they say in the bush about National Party members? Another headline from a bush paper states, "Lifeline for bush", which is a statement according to John Anderson. Beneath that article is another article under the heading "Nationals face rural revolt". One of the three issues raised in that article is the caravan park residents issue. Another newspaper heading states "Nationals' offer 'a few crumbs'"—the ridiculous offer that is dead in the water. The offer of $90 million to caravan parks across 295 different regions works out to be $80,000 for a place like Broken Hill. The salvation of Broken Hill predicated on $80,000—what a load of nonsense! Give these caravan park people a fair go. Some of them are living happily at Moama in my electorate. They are good people. They do not deserve this garbage from John Anderson. [Time expired.]

Mr PICCOLI (Murrumbidgee) [8.59 p.m.]: What an interesting contribution by the honourable member for Murray-Darling. I cannot believe anybody in country New South Wales would deny the value of a $90 million contribution. It must not be forgotten that that is in addition to the $500-odd million announced in the Federal budget for health, and in addition to road funding and everything else, yet the honourable member for Murray-Darling comes in here and says he does not want the $90 million. I will add that to what the honourable member for Northern Tablelands said in the Northern Star about the Government not wanting $90 million. What does it want from the Federal Government? It was $90 million this week, $500 million a few weeks ago; what else does it want? Members opposite keep saying, "Please spend more money on country Australia and country New South Wales." Another $90 million was added, and that is pretty good, but according to the blokes on the other side that is not quite good enough.

Let us examine the Labor Party's record on housing as we debate this motion about caravan park residents. Home loans over $100,000 in 1987 attracted an interest rate of 16 per cent per annum. Members opposite talk about doing things for battlers and home owners; perhaps the reason so many people live permanently in caravan parks is the outrageous interest rates we had to suffer whilst Paul Keating and Bob Hawke led this country. Government members talk about 5 per cent per annum goods and services tax [GST] being imposed on caravan park residents, but we should consider the 16 per cent per annum interest rate that was imposed on all home loan borrowers across Australia. That interest rate was not limited to caravan park residents. How many people did the Labor Party in those dark years of the Hawke Government force out of their homes and into bankruptcy? How many people had to sell their houses?

Mr Black: I bet I have Murray-Darling orange juice in this place before you get your orange juice here.

Mr PICCOLI: I will get to orange juice later, and to your hypocrisy on that issue!

Mr Newell: Have you got anything to say on this motion?

Mr PICCOLI: Absolutely. I am speaking about what the Labor Party did to home owners. How many farmers were sent to bankruptcy by the 22 per cent interest rate which, if it was a day late, increased to something like 26 per cent? How many farmers has Labor sent into bankruptcy? How many small businesses did it send into bankruptcy? How many home owners had to sell their homes or units because of the interest rates they were forced to suffer?

Mr Crittenden: Point of order: I acknowledge that the honourable member is a new member of this place, but I ask him to start talking about the issue before the House—the GST on residential park residents that will commence on 1 July. Perhaps he could also tell us the truth about HomeFund and the involvement of the former honourable member for Wagga Wagga.

Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I uphold the point of order. The honourable member for Murrumbidgee will return to the leave of the motion.

Mr PICCOLI: I am speaking to the amendment moved by the honourable member for Coffs Harbour. Without doubt, the GST issue with respect to caravan parks is significant, but it is significant also to talk about what will happen at the Federal election. The State Government is behaving in this debate as a de facto Federal Government, so we should examine what it will do when it is in place. The honourable member for Murray-Darling said it was unfair for caravan park residents to be forced to pay an additional 5 per cent, but what happened with producers of orange juice? The whole point of the GST is to make it a fair tax burden on everybody. When Keating and Hawke were in power sales tax on orange juice was 36 per cent! Why? What did that do to sales of fresh orange juice? Members opposite defended the citrus industry, which I support them in doing, but their hypocrisy knows no bounds or comparison. A large sector of the southern electorate is involved in the citrus industry.

Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [8.04 p.m.]: I support the motion moved by the honourable member for Wyong. I congratulate him on placing it before the House. The contribution of the honourable member for Murrumbidgee ranks as one of the most bizarre presentations I have heard in this place, and certainly I have heard some bizarre speeches over the past few years! However, that one almost takes the cake! I thought we were here to talk about the impact of the goods and services tax [GST] on caravan park residents. The last speaker seems to have spent most of his time talking about home ownership. The whole point of this debate was that people could not afford home ownership and could not get into the private rental market. They are the sort of people we should be talking about.

This is a classic example of the class bias of the lunatics on the other side of the House. We want to talk about people who cannot afford to get into the private rental market. All members opposite want to do is respond about issues of home ownership. The whole point is that in the society in which we live there are people who cannot afford to get into the private rental market. What makes things worse is that the Opposition comes up with this absolute hypocrisy about homelessness and the fact that this Government does not do enough about that. The single most important thing the State Government can do in dealing with homelessness is to drive down the cost of the private rental market through Department of Housing constructions. We cannot do that because of your mates in Canberra.

Your mates in Canberra have ripped the guts out of the capital construction budget for the Department of Housing. If members opposite want to talk about homelessness, let us do that. The people who provide the money for that program are in Canberra. We have the most class-based Federal Government since Stanley Bruce paraded around looking after his rich mates and forgetting the hardship of people who cannot afford to get into the private rental market. That is exactly what your mates have done and you have the hide to raise this issue here! It is absolutely extraordinary. Another issue that the honourable member for Murrumbidgee talked about, which was quite bizarre, was orange juice. I have heard of comparing apples with oranges and comparing lemons with oranges, but I have not heard of comparing caravan parks with oranges. As I said, his presentation was one of the most bizarre I have heard in a long time.

Mr Fraser: I eat oranges as well. Didn't you know that?

Mr LYNCH: In response to the honourable member for Coffs Harbour, Marie Antoinette once said, "Let them eat cake" when they could not get bread. She lost her head. Those opposite now say, "They cannot afford to pay the GST in caravan parks, let them have oranges!" That is extraordinary stuff! The issue before us highlights the fundamental inequity of the GST. It is inequitable in treating renters in one fashion and permanent caravan park residents in another—treating them adversely and far worse than renters. Morally that is just simply wrong; politically and philosophically it is perhaps typical of the current Federal Government and its lackeys on the other side of the House.

The people who for the most part live permanently in caravan parks are the poorest, the weakest and the least powerful in our community. They need people who are prepared to stand up for them and look after them. They do not need a Federal Government that is prepared to whack a 5 per cent GST on their rent when it is not prepared to put a 5 per cent GST on those who rent premises in the eastern suburbs of Sydney and pay $1,000 or $1,500 a week for the pleasure of doing so.

Forty per cent of those who live in caravan parks permanently are over 60 years of age, 73 per cent do no paid work, and 53 per cent earn less than $300 a week. They are the least able to afford an impost on their rent. They are the least able to afford a GST. They are the least able to afford the 5 per cent increase. Yet they are expected to pay it. Anyone who owns a house or is able to get into the private rental market is not expected to pay the GST on accommodation costs. It is an appalling and extraordinary inequity and is unfair. Much of the debate so far has been from people who represent regional and rural areas. There are clearly quite legitimate issues for them to raise in that context.

However, it will also be remembered that a significant number of people in western Sydney live in caravan parks. They will be ripped off and attacked by the Federal conservative Government in the same way as those living in rural and regional areas. Some 238 permanent residents of caravan parks live in the Liverpool local government area. They will have a 5 per cent increase in their rent because of what the Federal Government is doing to them. Working on an average rental of $100, they will each pay an extra $234 a year. That means that in my area about $62,000 will be ripped out for GST by the Federal Government from caravan park owners when nothing is being taken from those in the rich areas of Sydney who are paying rent. That is clearly iniquitous and it is typical of the class-based bias of the Federal Government.

Mr OAKESHOTT (Port Macquarie) [8.09 p.m.]: I am pleased that the House is in heated agreement about the importance of caravan park residents in New South Wales. Indeed, as everyone knows, the New South Wales National Party conference at Tweed Heads last weekend unanimously supported action being taken about this issue. I am pleased that the Government has acknowledged that there is a problem in Australia in regard to inequities facing caravan park residents. I am pleased that today the Australian Democrats have announced that they will try to negotiate from their position in the Senate on this issue. I would hope that the difficulties in sorting the issue out can be resolved.

Federal Cabinet is two weeks away from implementing the GST, which has been on the agenda for two or three years. It is disappointing that this issue has raised its head in the political arena only two weeks away from implementation of the GST. Why was this motion not moved a long time ago? I would hope that the Government, the Democrats and everyone involved in politics would recognise the difficulties faced by caravan park owners. I hope that the issue will be dealt with by the Federal Government in the near future. I doubt that it will be within the next two weeks before the implementation of the GST. I hope that once it has been implemented the Federal Government will fully assess the impact. Everyone agrees on the impact it will have and, if it does have that impact, I would hope that the Federal Government will do something about it. As I said, we heatedly agree in this debate. I will be very interested to learn where the State Government stands on the amendment. Will Labor members agree with Coalition members? The State Government will get the benefits of the GST.

Mr Orkopoulos: We are fighting against the GST.

Mr OAKESHOTT: So this is a broader campaign against the GST, is it?

Mr Orkopoulos: No. We are fighting against the GST on the residents.

Mr OAKESHOTT: Does the State Government accept the point that it collects the tax benefits from the GST?

Mr Orkopoulos: No.

Mr OAKESHOTT: You do not accept that? Members of the Government will have to go back and read the tax package that is being introduced. There seems to be a fundamental problem in their understanding of what the GST is all about. The benefits will come back to all the States. Let us talk about the State budget that was delivered a few weeks ago. Was there not a rainy day fund of $800 million tucked in there somewhere? What a great budget that was for Government members. The State Government should put its money where its mouth is. Is this the rainy day that the Government has been talking about? If Government members are not the ideological hypocrites that they are calling everyone else, then this is their rainy day. Are they not sticking up for caravan park residents any more? Why not? Here is another opportunity. Today the Treasurer announced a $143 million hole in the Olympic budget. He has managed to put that money into the black hole of the Olympics. The GST issue affects caravan park residents up and down the coast of New South Wales. Where is the Treasurer now? The onus is on the State Government to deliver the money to the residents of New South Wales.

Mr PRICE (Maitland) [8.14 p.m.]: I support the motion and express my continuing concern over the application of the 5.5 per cent GST to mobile homes and permanent caravan sites because the Federal Government considers them commercial premises for the purposes of taxation. Sydney is probably the dearest town in Australia for rented accommodation. People will pay up to $1,000 a week rent with no GST. Yet pensioners, living in very modest accommodation on permanent sites in caravan parks and mobile homes, who are on the bottom end of the income scale, mostly in receipt of social service benefits, are struggling to pay their rents as it is. Now they will be hit with an extra 5.5 per cent as a result of the GST. Oakwood Village is one of the places in my electorate that will be hit. Gilliston Heights is a few kilometres from Maitland. It is a beautiful little residential site but one that will be severely disadvantaged as a result of the application of the GST.

The National Party huffed and puffed at its conference at the weekend, endeavouring to imply that it can change the Federal Government's attitude through Cabinet activity. That is an absolute furphy. The only offer National Party members received from the Federal Government is to police the application of the GST through the close monitoring of park arrangements to ensure that tenants are being treated fairly. That is to be supervised by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. What a limp-handed way of dealing with it! It is an absolute shame to a once-great party that even its Federal leader is unable to have an impact on the decision of Cabinet in the best interests of the people of the northern New South Wales community in mobile homes and caravans.

It also shows the capacity of the National Party to vary Federal Coalition decisions. It is an absolute disaster. It is a slap in the face to the Coalition partner. It is obvious that the Nationals in New South Wales not only have zero impact; they are unable to negotiate on behalf of their constituents. One has only to look at some of the statements made over the weekend. I quote from Media Monitors. Commentator Fiona Reynolds spoke to the honourable member for Ballina and the honourable member for Coffs Harbour. The honourable member for Ballina said, "Let these guys, and these men and women, burn at the stake for the next month and a half." What an appalling statement to make! The honourable member for Coffs Harbour said, "It could lose us Cowper. I would suggest it would give us no chance in Paterson because of the Port Stephens area where there's a lot of people living in mobile homes." That is very accurate. I am amazed at the hostile way in which the Opposition is debating this matter. Obviously, it wants the tax removed and does not want to seek any compromise. At the conference John Anderson said:

There is a process, and I'm not going to be steam-rolled. I'm not going to have judgments cast by those who would seek to make sport or difficulty out of this. We will handle it in the proper, true, tried and tested way.

If what has happened since is a demonstration of the impact of the leadership of the National Party acting on a unanimous resolution of its own conference, the National Party is doomed and does not stand a chance. Those of us who have been members of this House for some time know Lynne Beck, one of the local mayors, who is always most sincere in what she says. She stated:

And the message must go to … Mr Anderson, I hope, is listening to it somewhere, and we must go to Mr Howard and say you've bent over backwards for the Democrats, how about giving the National Party and Larry Anthony a go.

When one reads in today's newspapers about what has happened since, it is a fairly lousy demonstration of solidarity. The National Party has not made the grade anywhere down the line and what has happened is an indictment of that once-great party. The National Party has no other option but to support Labor and the Democrats in the Senate when the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate moves, on behalf of the Australian Labor Party and pensioners, to legislatively delete that tax from the program.

Mr HARTCHER (Gosford) [8.19 p.m.]: This motion is yet another motion moved by the honourable member for Wyong as part of his attempt to build up his profile on the Central Coast. The debate has been embarrassing for the honourable member for Wyong because, first, he could not get the facts right in the motion, which had to be corrected by the Speaker. He was then unable to present his argument and the Government had to suspend standing orders to give him extra time. That is a commentary on the role of the honourable member for Wyong, but it is no surprise to those who know and love him. The Coalition strongly supports caravan park residents in this State. It is interested to ensure that they receive a fair go and that they get justice. I am pleased to acknowledge that the proprietors of four of the major caravan parks in my electorate have indicated that they will not pass on any of the GST to their residents but will absorb it.

Ms Allan: How noble!

Mr HARTCHER: As the honourable member for Wentworthville so rightly says, they are very noble. I thank her for her interjection. They are noble, and I congratulate them on that decision. They work well with their residents and with the Federal member, Jim Lloyd, who has taken a magnificent stand on behalf of permanent caravan park residents. No wonder the Australian Labor Party [ALP] held the seat of Robertson for some 28 years. Jim won it convincingly in 1996, held it again so well in 1998 and will hold it again in 2001. He works hard and is committed to residents of the Central Coast, especially those who reside in permanent caravan parks. The real interest, though, is the role of the State Government in this matter. The honourable member for Wyong has sought to use this issue for his own political purposes. That is no surprise. The State Government has in its armoury the power to rectify this problem, if it so desires, rather than seek to politicise it and play on people's fears.

The State Government will receive every cent of the GST and if it wants to rebate that money to caravan park residents, it need only pass the appropriate legislation. The remedy is in the hands of the honourable member for Wyong and the State Government. I invite the honourable member for Wyong to introduce a private member's bill in this House which will ensure that the money received from caravan park residents will go straight back to them in the form of a rebate. Having organised the numbers to take over from Harry Moore in 1991 the honourable member for Wyong pledged to introduce a private member's bill to look after caravan park residents. That was his solemn pledge. We have not seen the bill. When the honourable member for Wyong finally gets around to honouring that promise he made in 1991, he might include in the bill a commitment to ensure that people get the money from the GST in the form of a rebate. It is in his hands.

The honourable member for Wyong has done nothing for caravan park residents other than ruthlessly use them and seek to exploit them. He is a past master at that. Some people may say that is politics but few people would say it is good government. The real issue is why the State Government is not looking after these people it claims to represent and protect and why it will not give any indication to this House that it will rebate the money to them. The honourable member for Wyong has not lived up to the expectations of his electorate. I say that more in sorrow than in anger. He has had many opportunities to do something for his electorate, yet he moves a motion in this House only on Federal issues. He never moves motions about State issues affecting Wyong such as railway services, development problems, lack of services, law and order problems and Wyong hospital. Those matters are never addressed by the honourable member for Wyong, but he knows how to exploit an issue and he does that very well. I congratulate him. He exploits people and issues well but he will not do anything to help people who are in his charge. [Time expired.]

Ms ALLAN (Wentworthville) [8.24 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Wyong for giving me the opportunity to participate in this debate. I was disappointed that he was not in a position to complete his speech and I look forward to his speech in reply. Unlike some other speakers, the honourable member for Wyong has been closely associated with the interests and aspirations of people living in caravan parks for as long as he has been a member of this Parliament. This has been a fascinating debate. A number of leadership aspirants from the other side of the Chamber have rushed to the podium to put on record their apparent concern for the welfare of people living in caravan parks in this State. I was intrigued by the contributions from members of the National Party who spoke in the debate. They were obviously making a desperate attempt to reconcile their base political interest with the apparent needs of people in their respective electorates.

I was most impressed with the honourable member for Port Macquarie, who has obviously just had a very neat hair cut in preparation for the extra media attention that was focused on the Coalition today. He attempted to take the battle to the Government on this important issue. It would have been a different story at the National Party conference. We have read about concerns expressed over the weekend by National Party members. However, looking at the media pictures of today's National Party meeting in Canberra it is interesting to see how compliant and docile the members of the National Party are, when over the weekend they were apparently tigers of the Tweed when they had a motion before them from their rank and file, who are justifiably irate about this proposal to place the GST on caravan dwellers.

I was intrigued by the humble contribution from the honourable member for Ballina. One of the newer Government members, the honourable member for Miranda, complimented the honourable member for Ballina on his frankness and candour in the debate. Perhaps because I have been here over a decade I refuse to be that generous. The honourable member for Ballina and I became members of this House the same day. He is frank, but he is certainly not showing his normal candour on this issue. He should have the courage not only to express his concern about GST hardships that will be placed on caravan dwellers on the far North Coast of New South Wales but to take the fight to his own people outside Parliament. There has been some amazing hypocrisy—

Mr Fraser: Point of order: Government members have quoted from press clippings throughout this debate. I draw the attention of the honourable member for Wentworthville to those clippings, which show that the honourable member for Ballina was against this tax all the time.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Lynch): Order! There is no point of order.

Ms ALLAN: Members can see how sensitive National Party members are about this issue. Labor members have been accused of manipulating caravan park dwellers for political purposes. I saw the reference in yesterday's edition of the Sydney Morning Herald to the activities of certain members of the Federal caucus and the Hon. Janelle Saffin. People in the Labor Party have been concerned about the interests of caravan park dwellers for many years. Two of my uncles reside in caravan parks on the New South Wales Coast. One is at Banora Point caravan park, which is in the electorate of the honourable member for Tweed, who has already participated in the debate and the other is at a caravan park at Brighton-Le-Sands, which is in the electorate of the honourable member for Rockdale. Both of my uncles—one is aged 80 and the other is 74—have chosen to live in those establishments because they were the only economical alternatives open to them when they had to move from their houses. One uncle was retrenched from the Pagewood General Motors Holden depot and the other is a retired nurseryman.

People choose to live in caravan parks because it suits their economic needs and aspirations. They do not live there because they have lots of money to throw around, and can therefore afford to pay higher rents. If the GST is applied to caravan park rents it will be an unnecessary burden on permanent residents. I am delighted to hear that this evening in Canberra the Federal Leader of the Opposition said that he will roll back the proposed extra cost. I am also pleased that Senator Meg Lees, who was instrumental in ensuring that the GST package was carried through the Senate, has said that she will review the proceedings. I welcome her current enthusiasm for this issue.

Mr GAUDRY (Newcastle—Parliamentary Secretary) [8.29 p.m.]: This debate has been driven by two principles. On this side of the House, we espouse the principle of assisting those who are disadvantaged and of speaking out against an iniquitous tax that will be distributed unfairly across the poorer sections of the electorate. As the honourable member for Wentworthville said, many disadvantaged people live in caravan parks across the community, particularly in coastal New South Wales. More than 40 per cent of residential park residents are over 60 years of age, 73 per cent of them are not in paid employment, and 53 per cent earn less than $300 a week. If we were to assay the population of New South Wales, we could not find a group of people more in need of advocacy and support in the face of this undoubtedly iniquitous tax. The tax will not be distributed fairly: others in rental accommodation will not suffer the impact of it. The Federal Government is happy to impose a 5.5 per cent goods and services tax [GST] increase on people in this disadvantaged position.

People are taking up the cause of caravan park residents out of principle and concern about that iniquitous tax. They are attempting to persuade the Federal Government to withdraw its tax plans before 1 July. I congratulate the 11 members of the National Party who at the weekend conference made it clear to their national leader, John Anderson, that that should occur. I listened to the speech made by the honourable member for Ballina, who has credibility in relation to this matter. He outlined the steps that were taken with regard to caravan parks when he was involved in government. However, no member of this place has more credibility in relation to this matter than the honourable member for Wyong. From the moment he came into this House, he has spoken on behalf of caravan park residents and driven many of the legislative changes that have occurred since the Government has been in office. That is the principled position.

There is undoubtedly another driving force in this debate, which was evident at the National Party conference at the weekend. National Party members are aware of the many people who live in caravan parks in susceptible National Party electorates up and down the coast. At that conference, they put down the 5.5 per cent GST clearly and unanimously and called upon their Federal leader, John Anderson, to return to Cabinet and tell the Prime Minister John Howard that tax should not continue. The National Party stood up to be counted and joined Country Labor and the Labor Party in taking that important step. I am fairly sure that the honourable member for Oxley was of that view. Yet, in his contribution of 11 April, he did not think the tax was unfair. He said:

However, it is now clear that permanent park residents will be much better off under the Commonwealth Government's comprehensive tax package.

By the time of the conference, the honourable member had changed his opinion—and I hope he made that clear in the Chamber today. I imagine he will vote with the Government on the motion before the House. Whether one opposes the tax for reasons of principle or pure political pragmatism—the National Party realises that it is in danger of losing seats over this issue—the fact is that this tax is iniquitous. It is detrimental to the most disadvantaged groups in our community and it should be eliminated by the Commonwealth Government from its proposed GST package.

Mr TORBAY (Northern Tablelands) [8.34 p.m.]: Rather than engaging in the political point scoring that has been going on, backwards and forwards, on this issue, I intend to take a tack similar to that taken by the community. The people who protested at the recent National Party conference got it right. If we look past the many political issues, those people were simply saying that the goods and services tax [GST] will have an impact on them that the Prime Minister denied. We should focus the debate on that point, rather than on whether the Premier rushed to sign and accept the GST revenue. We must put such issues aside. During the dairy deregulation debate, Opposition members told Labor, "It's your bill; you're in government". The GST belongs to the Federal Government and the Prime Minister clearly said that the GST would be equitable. That is not the case.

If we look at this issue in the sober light of day, we must acknowledge that permanent residents of caravan parks were misled. There is no doubt about that. There is a good case for excluding those residents from the GST. The hypocrisy on this issue is staggering. Like most honourable members, I watched with interest the events that unfolded at the National Party conference. I saw the sad and solemn expressions on the faces of National Party members of Parliament when they faced the people whom this tax will affect adversely. National members said, "We support you and we will work hard to make sure that the Prime Minister listens". They promised to persuade the Federal Leader of the National Party—who had to be forced—to go to the Prime Minister and make representations on behalf of those people. What happened? It is very clear that the National Party rolled over. Tonight on the television news National Party members who supported the park residents at the conference said that they had a guarantee and assurance that the situation would be monitored very closely.

It is no wonder that people lose faith in governments, because governments lose sight of the issues. People believe what governments say in the first instance. I do not blame people for losing faith in politicians, because we were not going to have a GST in the first place. All political parties have broken various promises and I am not here to advocate for one side or another. However, on the GST the Federal Government has misled not only park residents but many people. Politically, this issue has sharp teeth and we will see one issue after another unfold, because people voted for tax reform but they did not vote for the GST. That was a political deal. We do not know what is in and what is out. Depending on the political issues of the day, problems will continue to arise. No-one had measured the impact of the GST.

I cannot believe the comments made by the honourable member for Oxley and others indicating that we have more important matters to discuss. That is not what they said to park residents at the conference, and I have evidence to support that. If we are to keep faith with the people, we have to do what we say we are going to do. That is my message to the Prime Minister. I do not know where John Anderson, the Federal Leader of the National Party, sits on this. He seems to have a different view depending on whomever he is speaking to. Like the hypocrisy surrounding debate on the deregulation bill, members on this side of the House, the National Party members in particular, will not escape this issue. They can put up all the contrary arguments they like, but when it came to the vote they voted for the GST, and they will have to wear it at a future election.

Ms ANDREWS (Peats) [8.39 p.m.]: Debate in this House on the GST to date, particularly tonight, clearly defines the difference between the philosophy of an Australian Labor Party government and a Coalition government comprising members of the Liberal and National parties. We on this side of the House rightly believe that the decision to impose a 5.5 per cent GST on residential park residents is discriminatory and totally uncalled for. The Federal Government remains stubborn on this, despite the announcements in May this year announcing changes to the GST on livestock, when it stated that the changes were "to make the system fair and bring benefits to all Australians". Why cannot a similar change be made in the GST to exempt residential park residents?

There is no consistency among Coalition members of Parliament in either the Federal or State arenas. They cannot, or do not want to, acknowledge that approximately 50,000 people living permanently in 950 residential parks across the State are being discriminated against. Of that number, 12,000 people reside permanently in residential parks in the Central Coast, Hunter, Upper Hunter and mid North Coast. They will be forced to pay $2.81 million per annum by way of GST; and that is only the 5.5 per cent component applicable to rental of land on which their relocatable, mobile homes or caravans are located. What about all the other goods and services on which the 10 per cent GST will apply from 1 July?

To add salt to the wound, residents who are pensioners and eligible for the Federal Government's less than generous compensation package will receive only a 4 per cent increase in their pension. A real joke! That will not come anywhere near to compensating them for the increases they will encounter in day-to-day living because of the introduction of the GST. It is a most unfair tax. In the Gosford City Council area there are over 1,620 residential park dwellings. I am sure the residents of those dwellings are very disappointed at the failure by their Federal representative, the member for Robertson, to convince the Prime Minister, John Howard, to reverse the Federal Government's stand on a 5.5 per cent GST on residential park dwellings.

At Ettalong Beach there is a residential park, and I know its residents will be required to pay the 5.5 per cent GST on their mobile dwellings. A public meeting held on this controversy in April this year at the Central Coast Leagues Club was attended by more than 500 permanent residents of residential parks. At that meeting the Federal member for Robertson defended the tax. It is worthwhile noting that a spokeswoman for the National Association of Tenants Organisations is quoted as saying that the 5.5 per cent GST on residential park dwellings will hurt the most disadvantaged, those people who pay a large proportion of their income on rent. Sadly, that is the case. But is it not always the same with a Coalition government in office? The disadvantaged suffer while the rich grow richer.

The average weekly rent per dwelling applicable to residential parks on the Central Coast is $90. Each year the Federal Coalition Government will be punishing permanent residential park residents to the tune of $234. How fair is that, when over 2,500 people renting exclusive Sydney properties will not be required to pay any GST on their very high weekly rents? We all know that a 5.5 per cent GST will be imposed on permanent residents of relocatable or mobile homes or caravans because the Federal Coalition Government has classified residential parks as commercial residential premises. Try to convince mobile home residents of that fact! They regard their dwelling as a permanent place of abode or, more importantly, their home.

It will be interesting to see how Coalition members vote tonight on this motion, particularly in view of the fiery debates that the National Party members had at their weekend State conference—it was almost like a State Labor conference. Taking into account the comments of the honourable member for Ballina and the honourable member for Coffs Harbour that the GST on residential park dwellings should be removed, they obviously agree with members on this side of the House that the tax is unjust. In the Federal sphere 30 New South Wales Coalition members of Parliament voted in support of the GST on residential parks. One of the 30 was the Federal member for Robertson. The Federal member should be quite concerned that many of his constituents will be unfairly penalised as from 1 July simply because they are long-term residents of residential parks. I commend the motion to the House.

Mr CRITTENDEN (Wyong—Parliamentary Secretary) [8.44 p.m.], in reply: It is predictable that tonight we have heard the same run of Opposition speakers that are often heard in this place. The first three speakers from the Opposition side were the honourable member for Davidson, the honourable member for Wakehurst and the honourable member for Bega. The honourable member for Davidson put up a pedestrian, nonsensical amendment to the motion. The National Party did not do what it did on 11 April when it simply voted against the motion of the Minister for Fair Trading. This time, through the honourable member for Coffs Harbour, it decided to put up an amendment. But the result was still the same: it is still trying to have a bit each way in the debate.

Members of the National Party are still saying that it is all right to go to a National Party conference in Tweed Heads and vote unanimously to support people who live in residential parks so that the GST is not imposed on them. Yet, in this Chamber they are still the lap-dogs of the Liberal Party; they are still doing the same things they have always done. They simply follow the Liberal Party down the same boring track, ignoring their constituents, ignoring people in regional and rural New South Wales. Their behaviour is an indictment of the National Party—a party that has existed for 80 years. They are apologists for big business and are not interested in dealing with issues that concern people in their electorates. After the Liberals, we heard from the honourable members for Ballina, Oxley, Monaro, Coffs Harbour and Port Macquarie, and finally from the Liberal member for Gosford.

Mr Fraser: And the honourable member for Murrumbidgee.

Mr CRITTENDEN: His contribution was so laughable it hardly deserves mentioning. Members of the National Party in this State are no different to John Anderson in Canberra, who will not stand up to his Prime Minister and say, "This is not on in regional New South Wales". There has been a great deal of talk in this debate about point scoring. About 50,000 people in this State who live in residential park accommodation are suffering fear and anxiety. When John Howard was elected he said he wanted people to feel warm and comfortable. The people living in mobile home parks are not feeling comfortable or secure at the moment. They are faced with a GST impost of 5.5 per cent. In many cases they will be forced to severely cut back on their basic living needs.

Sadly, the National Party, a political party, can unanimously carry a motion as it did at the conference last weekend, yet it cannot come to grips with supporting the motion before the House. Some members in this place are not concerned about a substantial proportion of constituents in their electorates. The real indictment is that we have not heard from the Leader of the Opposition. She squeaked home today. If four members had changed their minds she would have lost. Her electorate covers the Federal electorate of Bennelong, which is the seat of the Prime Minister. She has not come into the House to debate this issue, which affects 50,000 families in this State. The conference resolution of the National Party, which was referred to by the honourable member for Tweed, stated:

The conference agreed the resolution should be referred to all National Party leaders to pursue in their respective States.

Where are the Leader of the National Party, the Deputy Leader of the National Party—in whose electorate a substantial proportion of people live in residential parks—the honourable member for Burrinjuck and the honourable member for Lachlan? The honourable member for Ballina was genuine in his contribution. However, I would like to clarify one point. The 1994 amendments did not do much at all. By 1995 it was obvious there were substantial problems. The amendment moved by the honourable member for Coffs Harbour is a joke. The Federal Government administers the GST. These people should not have to suffer the fear and anxiety that they are experiencing at the moment. They deserve better. The amendment moved by the honourable member for Coffs Harbour should be rejected.

Question—That the amendment of the amendment be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Mr Armstrong Mr Collins Mr Debnam Mr George Mr Glachan Mr Hartcher Mr Hazzard Ms Hodgkinson Mr Humpherson Dr Kernohan

Mr Kerr Mr Maguire Mr Merton Mr Oakeshott Mr O'Doherty Mr D. L. Page Mr Piccoli Mr Richardson Mr Rozzoli Ms Seaton

Mrs Skinner Mr Slack-Smith Mr Stoner Mr Tink Mr R. W. Turner Mr Webb Tellers, Mr Fraser Mr R. H. L. Smith

Ms Allan Mr Amery Ms Andrews Mr Aquilina Mr Ashton Mr Barr Mr Bartlett Mr Black Mr Brown Miss Burton Mr Campbell Mr Collier Mr Crittenden Mr Debus Mr Face Mr Gaudry Mr Greene Mrs Grusovin

Ms Harrison Mr Hickey Mr Hunter Mr Iemma Mrs Lo Po' Mr Lynch Mr McBride Mr McGrane Mr McManus Mr Markham Mr Martin Ms Meagher Ms Megarrity Mr Mills Ms Moore Mr Newell Mr Orkopoulos Mr E. T. Page

Mr Price Dr Refshauge Ms Saliba Mr Scully Mr W. D. Smith Mr Stewart Mr Torbay Mr Tripodi Mr Watkins Mr Whelan Mr Windsor Mr Woods Mr Yeadon Tellers, Mr Anderson Mr Thompson

Mrs Chikarovksi	Mr Gibson
Mr O'Farrell Mr Souris Mr J. H. Turner	Mr Moss Mr Murray Mr Nagle

Question resolved in the negative.

Amendment of amendment negatived.

Amendment negatived.

Motion agreed to.

Mr SLACK-SMITH (Barwon) [9.05 p.m.]: I ask the House to note as a matter of public importance the important role of bush fire fighters in protecting life and property. In the next 12 months bushfires can occur in any part of the State, and regional and rural residents have to face that ever changing menace. I predict that the Far West will be the next area under threat because of a huge increase in natural fuel following a magnificent season. The Far West of New South Wales might have to endure the same fate as that suffered by the Blue Mountains, Berowra north of Sydney, the Pilliga State Forest and other areas. People in rural and regional New South Wales do not know from year to year when bushfires will occur.

Bushfires have a terrible effect on families, businesses and properties throughout New South Wales. No area is excluded from this natural phenomenon. When Captain Cook first discovered New South Wales in 1770 he remarked on the fires he saw before he landed in Botany Bay. Nothing much has changed since then. Whenever we have a decent season, fuel builds up, and that results in lives, properties and communities being under threat from bushfire. Today most members of this House attended a thanksgiving memorial service for two people who lost their lives in a fire gone wrong. I cannot comment on that situation because an investigation has not yet been held.

Claire Deane, George Fitzsimmons and Erik Furlan, three people with a wealth of experience in bush fire fighting, perished in that terrible mishap on 8 June. At today's memorial service a tribute was given not only to those who perished, but also to those who were seriously injured: Mark Cupit, Luke McSweeney, Natalie Saville and Jamie Shaw. Those seven people were involved in hazard-reduction burning, which means that they were attempting to reduce a hazard that would emerge during the oncoming summer. Something went terribly wrong and, unfortunately, three of those seven people lost their lives.

I believe that had the reduction burning not taken place the results next summer might have been far worse than the tragic result we have just experienced. As the Premier said today, we send our sympathies, condolences and thoughts to those who lost their loved ones, and our prayers are with those who were seriously injured. We hope they make a good recovery. Bushfires have occurred in New South Wales since time immemorial. We do not know when bushfires will strike. As I said in my opening remarks, I believe the next bushfire hazard will be in far western New South Wales because of the increase in fuel build-up in that area. Speaking as a past fire captain in north-western New South Wales—my colleague the honourable member for Monaro will speak as a fire captain in the southern part of New South Wales—I believe New South Wales should focus on several things at this point of time.

The Rural Fire Service encompasses 70,000 volunteers throughout New South Wales who give their time and effort for no pay or reward, except to protect life and property in our communities. For that I commend those people. However, in spite of the accolades the Rural Fire Service receives I am somewhat disappointed to learn that the public perception is that the Fire Brigades seems to be taking the lion's share of funding from the New South Wales budget while the Rural Fire Service lags behind. That is unfortunate and will impact on the protection of lives and property throughout rural New South Wales. The Pilliga fires, which occurred a couple of years ago, were in my electorate. The amount of equipment, manpower and commitment to those fires was fantastic. I commend everyone involved in combating those fires. However, we faced many problems with communications and in deploying sufficient machinery to specific jobs.

In my little brigade of Merah north, of which I was captain at the time of the Pilliga fire, we had two antiquated C1800 International machines from Victoria—Victoria had discarded them as obsolete machinery. They were petrol-fuelled machines with little water capacity. Merah north 1, which was my brigade, was thrust into patrolling a six-kilometre zone of the Pilliga fire. In the meantime, fully equipped brigades from other areas—with big machines that were better equipped, and had more water storage and crew—were on stand-by for directions on how to combat the fire. The only communication my brigade had was one CB radio. Communication during the Pilliga fires was a total disaster. Rural Fire Services needs more funding, co-ordination and decent communication, which was the one thing we lacked badly fighting the Pilliga fires. We lacked also co-ordination with the airborne firefighting component.

Unfortunately, the Rural Fire Service and Fire Brigades New South Wales are more content to use helicopters with bandy buckets to put out blazes than to use 900 air tractors. In many areas helicopters are totally inadequate to fight fires and are expensive. From my experience fighting fires over the years, airborne firefighting machinery must be totally supported. The Minister should look seriously at using the large fixed-wing aircraft instead of small helicopters. In the next two or three years New South Wales will face big fires. The Rural Fire Service needs more support.

Mr DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Corrective Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts) [9.15 p.m.]: I am pleased to speak on this matter of public importance. Today of all days the wider community has many reasons to pay tribute to the role of our firefighters in protecting not only life and property but also our environment. A few hours ago the Premier and I, and other members of this House, participated in the moving memorial service for the three National Parks and Wildlife Service officers who gave their lives just 13 days ago to preserve the lives and property of the people of the Mount Kuring-gai community. Over the past few days I have also attended the funerals of two of those officers—George Fitzsimmons and Claire Deane. On both occasions I was struck by the special place reserved in the hearts of the wider community for those who fight bushfires. It showed me again the qualities of these men and women, and why the community owes them an immeasurable debt of gratitude.

Since assuming responsibility for the Emergency Services portfolio more than five years ago I have made the equipping of our fire services my highest priority. In that time the Government has made rural firefighting central to its community safety policies. Over the past five years I have travelled widely throughout the State visiting bushfire stations and discussing the development of the Rural Fire Service with thousands of volunteers. Fire risks faced in different parts of the State vary greatly—from the open grasslands of the west, through to the rainforests of the northern rivers, to the rugged national parks on the fringes of the Sydney Basin. The thing that unites all volunteers is their dedication to their local communities, and in times of major emergencies to communities which are often hundreds of kilometres away. There could be few higher priorities than supporting these people in their vital work.

For that reason, on coming to office in March 1995 I had to take definitive action to address the previous seven years of neglect. It is no exaggeration to say that 5½ years ago the Government found a bush fire fighting organisation constrained by antiquated legislation and suffering from a lack of funding. The then Department of Bush Fire Services was highly fragmented and consisted essentially of 142 allied but separate bushfire services based on local government areas throughout the State. These shortcomings caused other problems, including inconsistent operating procedures and standards of training; occupational health and safety standards that were poor and inconsistent; a radio communications system that was wholly inadequate because of significant gaps in coverage and a lack of essential backup facilities for the network; underresourcing and underequipping, particularly in the western areas of the State; and the use by volunteer firefighters of unsafe, old and inappropriate equipment. This last point is illustrated by the fact that only 42 per cent of the tanker fleet was considered to be in good condition and 43 per cent was over 20 years old—that is, 1975 manufacture.

Mr Slack-Smith: That is very biased, Bob.

Mr DEBUS: And true. Immediately on coming to office I therefore recommended to the Premier and Treasurer that a dramatic increase in funding was required to redress the neglect of the previous seven years. As a result, in our six budgets $128 million has been dedicated specifically for the acquisition of 1,579 tankers. This dramatic increase in funding for basic equipment used by our volunteer bush fire fighters is just one part of our budget policy. In our first budget in 1995 the service's allocation was increased by 30 per cent up to $65.8 million. In 2000-01 the amount stands at $91 million. Over the six years of this Government $437 million has been allocated to the New South Wales Rural Firefighting Fund, compared with just $179 million for the equivalent period when the Coalition was in charge. That is a massive increase of 144 per cent.

Mr Slack-Smith: Don't mislead the House, Bob.

Mr DEBUS: Go and look at the budgets if you do not agree. I am pleased to say that spending on volunteer safety is also one of our highest priorities. Between 1995 and today more than 39,000 sets of firefighting overalls have been provided to volunteers. Next month we will begin a three-year, $12 million program to fit additional safety equipment to existing firefighting vehicles, such as spray bars and fire blankets. An additional $2.1 million has been allocated to purchase more protective clothing and other safety equipment for volunteer firefighters. Another aspect of our funding policy was a decision to positively discriminate in favour of the western areas of the State. In our first five budgets we have allocated almost $20 million to the west compared with less than $6 million under the former Coalition Government over the same period—a 238 per cent increase. The other major problem confronting our bush fire fighters in 1995 was the inadequacy of the structure of their service.

The shortcomings were highlighted by the statewide emergency of 1994 when the lack of a cohesive command system hindered an operation that was successful despite many structural problems. It was exhibited in many ways—from the absence of standard radio and firefighting equipment to different training and operating procedures between local brigades. This problem was detailed by Coroner Hiatt in his report of March 1996. His principal recommendation was that the Government should introduce a more cohesive and integrated command structure under the umbrella of a rural fire service. The reform was implemented when the Government proclaimed the Rural Fires Act 1997. It followed widespread consultation with volunteers, local government, farmers and environmentalists.

Mr Slack-Smith: There are still no radios.

Mr DEBUS: The new Act replaced the antiquated Bush Fires Act 1949, which was not only a statute from a bygone era but had become so complicated that firefighters needed a legal degree to interpret many of its provisions. The current Act provides for a cohesive and integrated management structure for the delivery of rural fire services throughout New South Wales. In response to the Coroner's recommendations for improved levels of accountability, the Act also introduced mandatory service standards that unite hundreds of brigades across the State into a cohesive service. As a result there are now uniform standards for training, equipment and safety for volunteers throughout the State. It is to the credit of all levels of the service that considerable flexibility has been retained to adapt these standards to meet local conditions.

I will end my contribution to this debate by reiterating the Government's latest reform to the Rural Fire Service—one that has been enthusiastically adopted by the vast majority of volunteers. Recently I adopted in principle the recommendations of a working party comprising the Rural Fire Service Association, which represents volunteers, the Local Government and Shires Associations and the service. I established this working party in August last year to address continuing concerns about dual accountability arrangements for fire control officers who currently report to Commissioner Koperberg for operational matters and to local government for day-to-day administrative matters. The working party recommended first the streamlining of the reporting lines of fire control officers and related staff so that they are solely accountable to the commissioner as employees of the State. It recommended secondly that the service perform local councils' administrative responsibilities for rural fire brigades under service delivery contracts.

The Government's support for this next stage of the reform process followed the overwhelming adoption of these proposals at the Shires Association annual conference a few weeks ago. Following further discussions to ensure a smooth transition to the new arrangements, changes to the Act will be made to bring the new arrangements into effect on 1 July 2001. The Government is well aware of the vital role played by our rural firefighters in protecting lives, property and the natural environment. This is why we have worked with them to reform our firefighting structures, and provided them with massive increases in funding to ensure that they have the best possible equipment to do their job properly for the community.

[Interruption]

In response to the interjection from the honourable member for Barwon, I should mention that we are installing so-called PMR radio systems in every shire throughout New South Wales.

Ms Hodgkinson: What does PMR stand for?

Mr DEBUS: I cannot remember what it stands for but it is a local radio system which ensures that every unit in every shire in New South Wales is able at the flick of a switch to speak to every other unit. It is an extraordinary improvement in the system of communications in New South Wales, and if you do not know about it you should be ashamed of yourselves.

Mr WEBB (Monaro) [9.25 p.m.]: This matter of public importance is of much greater public importance than a lot of the business that the Government deems important to it. I am not sure but I may be one of the only recently appointed fire captains in this House. I am certainly a continuing member of a bush fire brigade and I have had 27 or 28 years experience as a volunteer bush fire fighter. It is in that capacity that I speak tonight. I offer my condolences to the families and colleagues of those who were lost most recently from the National Parks and Wildlife Service. My experience relates to the Rural Fire Service and the previous New South Wales volunteer bush fire brigades. I speak with humility but with some experience. I am a second generation fire captain of the Fairlight Bush Fire Brigade. The brigade was formed in 1947 to address serious bushfires in and around the Australian Capital Territory at that time.

For some time I have been a member of the Australian Capital Territory Bush Fire Council, firstly as a representative of volunteers and secondly as a representative of the Yarrowlumla Shire Council. I was very proud to represent and be part of the New South Wales Rural Fire Service and the brigades representing some 70,000 volunteers in this State. It is acknowledged today as one of the largest and most effective volunteer organisations in the world. The mission statement is: to minimise the adverse impact of bush and other fires. The charter is to save life and property. It is in this role that, regrettably, the other day people laid down their lives. Unfortunately, there have been many other cases of volunteers doing the same thing. In 1985 in the Queanbeyan fires, which were very serious and burnt houses—the fire jumped two kilometres across Googong reservoir—a young Malcolm Allen lost his life.

More recently we have heard of the loss of life and serious injuries sustained by rural firefighters at Wingecarribee. A friend of mine, Ray Moroney, also sustained serious burns as he attempted to fight fires in the Goulburn area just a couple of years ago. The honourable member for Barwon spoke about Cook's log entries about fires on the New South Wales coast, with fire and smoke everywhere. This nation has a history of bushfires. The 1939 fires decimated the Australian Capital Territory and south-east region. The 1952 fires burnt vast areas in and around Canberra and down the far South Coast at Eden. The 1967 fires, when I started to attend, were in the Tinderrys, and at Wee Jasper and Horseshoe. The 1985 fires which I spoke about were to the north of Canberra. There were recently fires in the Brindabellas and other areas.

The work carried out by the Rural Fire brigades underpins their concern for the protection of life and property. The Government's decision to lock up vast areas of bush puts firefighters at risk. Fires are an inevitable consequence of our environment following lightening, rain from time to time, and good seasons, all of which cause a build-up of fuel. If it is not properly managed firefighters are placed in great danger. Firefighters rely on their experience, training, safeguards and funding from governments of the day for equipment to put out fires and to conduct the necessary hazard reduction to protect the broader community. People have laid down their lives and given many years of service. One recent retiree was Barry Belt, the superintendent from the southern region. When people retire, their experience is lost. We must remember that the effects, the damage and danger of fires are ongoing.

Mr SLACK-SMITH (Barwon) [9.30 p.m.], in reply: The importance of bush fire fighters and the protection of life and property in New South Wales is paramount, as has been mentioned by the Minister for Emergency Services and the honourable member for Monaro. The Minister was somewhat self-congratulatory when he said that the radio service throughout New South Wales is about to come on line and will be a great success for all New South Wales Fire Brigades and rural fire services. After the Pilliga fires, which occurred two years ago, the Minister was fully aware that communication was so bad in the forest that a number of lives were put at risk—it was a miracle that lives were not lost. Mobile phones did not work, analog phones did not and still do not work, and digital phones will not work. CDMA [code division multiple access] was a total disgrace and, as a consequence, the rural fire service radio was non-existent.

Today—20 June, and two years after the Pilliga fires—the Minister announced that he will fix up the radio service. I have never heard that the radios have been successful, and Rural Fire Service personnel are sceptical about it. However, the communication service is as good as the Minister asserts—which is fantastic—and I congratulate him on having the foresight, after two years, to have communication within the Rural Fire Service. Throughout New South Wales—from the North Coast to the South Coast; from the Far West to the north-west; from Bega, one of the leading dairy areas in New South Wales, to all areas in between—the biggest problem at any time of any year is that fatalities occur because of fire. The role of bush fire fighters is paramount.

Some 70,000 volunteers in the Rural Fire Service in many cases are getting a raw deal. I have heard of many instances in which volunteers in the Rural Fire Service have been injured in the course of protecting life and property, yet at a later date their compensation is not worth a cracker. That is inexcusable. Many volunteers are self-employed and forsake their businesses to attend a fire. They often lose money, yet when they are injured, some seriously, they are not compensated. The Wingecarribee fire was an inexcusable situation: volunteers did not receive proper compensation for the injuries they received. Many of the injuries will remain with them for the rest of their lives, yet their compensation is abysmal. The State Government should support the Rural Fire Service in a far greater way than it is at present.

Discussion concluded.

Mr O'DOHERTY (Hornsby) [9.36 p.m.]: I move:

That this House dissents from the decisions of the Speaker given on 6 June 2000:

(1) That there were no points of order involved when the members for Ku-ring-gai, Gosford and Hornsby sought to have answers given by the Premier, the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Community Services declared ministerial statements; and

(2) That there was no point of order involved when the member for Hawkesbury sought to have an answer given by the Minister for Transport ruled out of order as it anticipated debate on a motion before the House and listed for consideration immediately after question time.

Members of this House have become accustomed to the events of 6 June. In question time after question time Opposition members are regularly placed on three calls to order, yet no Government members are called to order. A reasonable person would understand that it is just not logical in a House of robust debate such as the Parliament of New South Wales that all members on one side can be on three calls to order and no-one on the other side has transgressed during the whole of question time. We put up with that day after day, with regular members being picked.

Mr Whelan: Point of order: I am reluctant to take a point of order so early in an important debate about dissent, but the rulings specifically contained in the motion do not enable the honourable member to have wide-ranging debate about his purview of the ruling of anyone in this Chamber. I ask that you bring the honourable member back to the leave of his motion.

Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I believe that the honourable member is about to return to the leave of his motion.

Mr O'DOHERTY: Having made those preliminary comments, the thing that gets on our goat the most is the potential of the Government to abuse question time by making long ministerial statements; they are the province of a different part of the notice paper. That principle has been upheld in this Parliament time and again by many Speakers, going back decades—well before any of us graced this earth. Speakers stand up for the right of ordinary members to ask questions and how those questions are answered by Ministers. When the Chair allows Ministers to turn question time into a series of lengthy ministerial statements, it is a transgression on the right and the privilege of ordinary members of Parliament to seek answers to questions on behalf of their electorates. That is why we have moved this motion of dissent.

I will take honourable members briefly through the events of 6 June. It was the day on which the Government received the report of the judicial inquiry into the train disaster in the Blue Mountains. Question time began with the Premier providing an answer to a question that asked him to comment on the report—which the Government had only just received. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition raised the first point of order, reminding the Speaker of successive rulings by past Speakers about Ministers making ministerial statements during question time. The Premier went on to talk about the way in which the Government intended to respond to the report. On page 4 of the Hansard proof of that day, the Premier said:

That is why today I can announce that my Government accepts the recommendations of Acting Justice McInerney's interim report.

At that point the honourable member for Gosford, the Leader of Opposition Business in this House, took a point of order and said:

You have previously ruled on this matter, but the Premier has now given a further answer which indicates his Government's policy.

As he said with regard to the previous point of order taken by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the Speaker said:

No point of order is involved.

And that is all he said; he did not explain his ruling. The Premier continued with his lengthy answer, again announcing government policy. A second matter then arose. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition took a point of order relating to the anticipation of debate and referred to the fact that the Opposition would move a motion of no confidence, about which notice had been given. At that point the Leader of the House said:

The motion will be debated after question time.

There is a standing order that provides that during question time honourable members cannot anticipate debate on a motion that is before the House. The situation was clear: the Opposition gave notice of its intention to move a motion and the Leader of the House indicated that the motion would be debated after question time. Therefore, we raise our second objection: the Speaker subsequently failed to rule that answers to questions about the Glenbrook rail tragedy were anticipating debate on our motion of no confidence, which the Government indicated would be debated immediately after question time. I refer honourable members to page 5 of the Hansard proof of 6 June. The Parliamentary Secretary for Transport, the honourable member for Canterbury, asked a question and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition attempted to take a point of order. Before he even had the chance to begin, he was interrupted by the Speaker, who said:

Order! I anticipate the point of order that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition seeks to take. The question sought a response from the Minister to the report.

That is the report of the Glenbrook rail disaster. The Speaker continued:

I do not know whether the Minister will respond by announcing Government policy. I will allow the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to take the point of order, but I forewarn him of what my ruling is likely to be.

We all knew what the Speaker's ruling would be: he of course said that there was no point of order. The point is, during that exchange, the Speaker acknowledged that, when deciding whether an answer to a question is a ministerial statement, he must take into consideration not only the length of the answer but whether a Minister is announcing Government policy. The Speaker mentioned the issue of Government policy. The Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads then began to talk about Government initiatives—as did the Premier—and said:

Since the Glenbrook rail accident, the Government has already put in place a number of initiatives to improve safety.

The Minister went on to list what were clearly Government policy responses to an important report, at which point the honourable member for Gosford took another point of order. Addressing the Speaker, he said:

… you indicated that you would wait to hear the answer by the Minister for Transport … and then make the appropriate ruling.

The honourable member for Gosford said that the Minister had clearly gone on to announce Government policy and invited the Speaker to make the appropriate ruling. Of course, the Speaker once again said, there is no point of order. He gave no reason for that ruling either. Prior to that, the honourable member for Hawkesbury—who will speak next in this debate for the Opposition—had again raised the question of anticipation of debate. The honourable member is a highly esteemed and well-respected former Speaker of this House and he will set out his case in a moment. In both instances, the Speaker was clearly allowing the Government to have its way with the House. We are not the only ones to raise this important matter, which transgresses the standing orders that have been upheld by many previous Speakers throughout history. Honourable members on both sides of the House have long drawn this issue to the attention of Speakers.

Mr Whelan: Give me one standing order.

Mr O'DOHERTY: Standing Order 137, which relates to ministerial statements. On 13 September 1988 the honourable member for Drummoyne raised this very matter with the Speaker of the day. In taking a point of order during an answer to a question by the then Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, Mr Peacocke, the honourable member for Drummoyne said:

On a point of order. I invite your attention to the length of the answer of the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs. More important, I believe the content of the answer is more suited to be delivered by way of a ministerial statement.

I mention that incident specifically because I anticipate that, in his response, the Leader of the House will say that all my points have to do with the days when the time for questions was limited and, if Ministers gave long answers, they would use up the allotted time. I expect the Leader of the House will say that that is one reason why there is a ruling about ministerial statements. I refer to the objection raised by the honourable member for Drummoyne, who is now Speaker of the New South Wales Parliament. On 13 September 1988 the honourable member said:

More important, I believe the content of the answer is more suited to be delivered by way of a ministerial statement.

In 1988 the honourable member for Drummoyne thought the content of an answer dictated whether it was a ministerial statement. As the Speaker of the House in 2000 he should have the same opinion. He should uphold the point of order that he would have taken if he were sitting on the Opposition benches—as we do day in, day out—listening to lengthy answers that amount to ministerial statements.

Why are answers declared ministerial statements? That has happened in the past. It began with Speaker Ellis in 1966, who said that he would rule as ministerial statements lengthy answers to do with policy. Why? First, because it meant that such statements would not take up the time intended for genuine questions and answers; and, secondly, because it allowed the Leader of the Opposition and his or her deputy to provide a policy response. This is an important matter, and I invite other honourable members to agree with us for the sake of the standing orders.

Mr ROZZOLI (Hawkesbury) [9.48 p.m.]: I support this motion of dissent and point out that, although there are two arms to this motion, they both arise from essentially the same matter. The first part of the motion relates to the making of ministerial statements. The history of ministerial statements is long and dates back to the early days of this Chamber. It originated in the House of Commons, where it is common practice for matters of Government policy to be announced by way of ministerial statement in the Parliament in order to allow the Opposition to respond. This is a fair and reasonable proposition, which was honoured for many years. However, there is no doubt that that practice deteriorated in subsequent years. Governments now announce policies in many different guises, including press releases, and in such a way that it becomes difficult for Oppositions to get equal time to debate policy as it is delivered.

It has become a common feature of this Government's attitude to the announcement of policy that its members ask not a question that seeks facts but an ambit question such as, "What is the Government doing about …" whatever it might be. That gives Ministers carte blanche to enunciate the Government's policy. Under those circumstances, irrespective of Government members saying that this is a wrong interpretation of the various rulings by Speakers over the years, if an answer relates purely to policy and does not give factual information relating to policy—and there is a subtle difference—it should be ruled to be a ministerial statement.

Honourable members would be aware that even though there is no limit on time for questions, there is a limit to the number of questions that can be asked, and that is 10. It is appropriate that questions are directed towards either side of the House to elicit factual detail about matters of government administration. That is different from a general statement of policy on government administration. Therefore, the ambit question: What is the Government going to do about XYZ? is taking away from members of this House the right to ask a question eliciting factual information on a matter of government administration.

For two reasons a question that elicits what is clearly going to be a ministerial statement—and the first two or three minutes of the Minister's answer clearly demonstrate that the response is a ministerial statement—should be declared a ministerial statement. First, it is an erosion of the basic principle of democratic debate in a Parliament that a statement of policy, as distinct from the giving of factual information, should be given in such a way to allow a response of equal time from the Opposition on that statement of policy. Second, question time should not be taken up with statements of policy as this is an erosion of the rights of members to ask questions relating to factual matters of administration.

The second arm of the dissent motion relates to the point of order that I took relating to anticipation of debate. Such a point of order is not often taken, nor is it one that is often upheld. The nexus that has to be drawn in the anticipation of debate argument is twofold: first, that a matter will be debated by the House and, second, that it will be debated by the House in the foreseeable future. In this case, it could not be any clearer: the Leader of the House, upon the motion being moved by the Opposition to have a full-ranging debate regarding the Glenbrook rail disaster, indicated that not only would it be debated, therefore meeting the first arm of the requirement, but it would be debated immediately after question time.

It has always been considered valid for a member to seek factual information relating to, for instance, the budget debate, which might roll on for several weeks, or on a motion that may come up tomorrow or the next day, or may not come up at all this session even though it is on the business paper. A question seeking information that may be of use in subsequent debate is valid. But in this case we had the rare situation of a matter that was to be debated that same day, indeed, immediately after question time. There could be no greater sense of immediacy, no greater conformity to the rule of anticipation of debate.

Why do we have a rule against anticipation of debate? The reason is simple: it is a waste of Parliament's time for matters to be debated twice. It is an erosion of the time devoted to one facet of the standing orders to debate, discuss or raise matters that will shortly be the subject of full-ranging debate—not a debate in which a member's time is restricted to five or 10 minutes, but a full-ranging debate such as that relating to the Glenbrook rail disaster. Whatever the Government wanted to say about its policy or its administrative response to the matters raised in the Glenbrook report could have been said and canvassed fully within an hour of the question being raised. Not only that, during that debate the Opposition would have the opportunity to respond to matters raised by the Government.

There can be no clearer infringement of the rule relating to anticipation of debate than the question asked on that day. What grieves the Opposition, Mr Speaker, is that you appear not to give any credence to the technical matters, the procedural matters, and the traditions that relate to a point of order. You appear to have your mind made up because it is the will of the Government that you so rule without any consideration of the matters raised. I have sat in your position and have had to deliberate on such matters myself, and know that there is some measure of difficulty in that, although in this case I believe the issue to be clear cut. It would not have been detrimental to the Government's interest if you had ruled the response to the question to be a ministerial statement and permitted a member of the Opposition to respond. Had you ruled the questions out of order because they infringed the rule relating to anticipation of debate, the Government's ability to put across its point of view would not have been affected. That would not have impeded the capacity of the Government to make its statements, but it certainly impeded the right of the Opposition to make its statements. [Time expired.]

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield—Minister for Police) [9.57 p.m.]: The only comments in the contribution of the honourable member for Hornsby that I agree with are those he made about the honourable member for Hawkesbury, who he said is an esteemed and in some respects revered member of this Chamber; a member who has served as Speaker of this Chamber and who has represented his constituents for many years. The motion, however, is without foundation, without merit, without reason, without rationale. I have heard some lame duck speeches in this Parliament, but the speech of the honourable member for Hornsby would have to be the worst. He does not even understand the standing orders. I invite him to read and try to understand Standing Order 137, the first line of which states:

The following general rules apply to questions:

That standing order refers to nothing but questions. The honourable member for Hornsby has jumped to the conclusion that it refers to answers. After the preamble there is a prescription relating to questions, which states, inter alia:

Questions should not ask for—
…
(b) legal opinion
(c) an announcement of government policy.

What were the questions that were asked? What is the status of the interim report of the special commission of inquiry? What is the Government's response to the interim report? The Opposition is trying to circumscribe the questions that can be asked. That is the worst feature. Having said that I agree the honourable member for Hawkesbury is a revered member, I am surprised that he has not researched this matter thoroughly. For some reason, he has done a double somersault. On 14 September 1989 the honourable member for Hawkesbury, who was Speaker at the time, said, "[It is within the] Speaker's discretion to determine whether a reply is a ministerial statement. Canvassing of a ruling will not be allowed, but members can raise a matter in the Speaker's chambers at a later time."

Why did the honourable member for Hornsby seek to waste the time of the Parliament rather than raise the matter in the Speaker's chamber in accordance with the ruling of a member whom he has described as esteemed in this Parliament. When circumstances do not suit, the honourable member for Hornsby walks away from the rulings of the honourable member for Hawkesbury. The guiding rules about questions are Standing Orders 137, 138 and 139, which were adopted by the Coalition Government on 12 December 1994. Speaker Rozzoli further ruled:

In answering a question a Minister may give facts about certain things or give facts about matters and initiatives which are proposed by the Government.

Mr O'Doherty: Which standing order is that?

Mr WHELAN: That was a ruling by Speaker Rozzoli on 4 April 1988 at page 5744. It suited Opposition members in 1988; it does not suit them now. There is a time-honoured principle about rulings. As well as Speaker Rozzoli, to my knowledge many Speakers—including Speaker Kelly and, I am sure, the present Speaker—have ruled on this issue. Many have ruled that the Speaker has no control over the way a Minister answers a question other than to ensure compliance with Standing Order 138, that is, that an answer shall be relevant to the question asked. Whether or not an answer by a Minister is relevant is a separate issue. We are debating a censure motion of the Speaker.

Mr O'Doherty: Point of order: It is not a censure motion, it is a dissent motion.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order. If he wishes to do so, the honourable member for Hornsby may raise the matter to which he has referred in reply.

Mr WHELAN: The honourable member for Hornsby is wasting the time of the Parliament with his pettiness and stupidity. He should read the standing orders and understand them. We could debate this issue ad nauseam, but I do not intend to waste the time of the House. There are ample precedents about the types of questions that are asked. This dissent motion is not about the Speaker gagging or attempting to gag a member who makes a point of order. Hansard clearly indicates that points of order were taken by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for Gosford and others. At no time did the Speaker prevent a member from arguing that the Speaker should exercise his discretion one way or the other. Had I been in his position, I would have been tempted to ask a member to move the gag so that we could get on with the business of the House rather than waste time. But Mr Speaker did not do that, nor did he seek to intervene in the debate. He heard the debate and applied the fairness for which he is known.

I ask honourable members to reject this ridiculous motion. There is ample precedent on this matter by former Speakers, in particular by a former Speaker whom the honourable member for Hornsby has described as an esteemed member of Parliament. I do not dispute that. The honourable member for Hawkesbury was without doubt a good Speaker. He was the Speaker for a long time, and over the years he improved and exercised greater finesse. His rulings are there for everyone to see and to abide by. Stare decisis! The Government agrees, as Speaker Rozzoli ruled, that

[It is within] the Speaker's discretion to determine whether a reply is a ministerial statement. Canvassing of a ruling will not be allowed, but members can raise a matter in the Speaker's Chambers at a later time.

If I had the opportunity, I would move an amendment to the motion asking the Clerk to provide the honourable member for Hornsby with a copy of the standing orders, with Standing Orders 137, 138 and 139 highlighted, and requesting the honourable member for Hornsby to make proper arrangements to meet the Speaker in his chambers in accordance with the very learned ruling of Speaker Rozzoli in 1988.

Mr O'DOHERTY (Hornsby) [10.06 p.m.], in reply: I am glad we agree on the esteemed nature of the honourable member for Hawkesbury as a former Speaker because on 13 September 1988 in a key ruling he said:

Should a Minister in replying go beyond the question asked, his answer may be ruled a ministerial statement and be deferred until the time allotted for questions has expired.

That was a critical, key ruling by the member whom the Minister agrees was an esteemed Speaker. We all agree. We should abide by what the honourable member for Hawkesbury said in that ruling in 1988. In 1937 Speaker Weaver ruled:

… when the occasion arises that a Minister makes so lengthy a reply to a question that in my judgment it borders on a Ministerial statement … the Leader of the Opposition shall have an opportunity to answer it. I think Ministers should not take advantage of the House at question time …

In 1942 Speaker Clyne said that while a Minister:

… confines himself to a reply to the question he will be in order. If he goes beyond that it will become a Ministerial statement and the Leader of the Opposition will have the right to reply.

In a lengthy ruling in 1966 Speaker Ellis made the same point. He said:

I will assume that a question which is itself lengthy or involved, or which raises matters too large to be dealt with briefly and within the limits of an answer to a question, must necessarily involve a Minister in making a lengthy and involved reply and that … the reply itself would be likely to assume all the qualities of a ministerial statement.

Four Speakers prior to the present Speaker had no trouble sorting out the difference between ministerial statements and answers to questions before the House. We ask that the Speaker's rulings be consistent with the rulings of those four previous Speakers. If a Minister in answering a question without notice, which is supposed to elicit information—as the honourable member for Hawkesbury said—proceeds to make announcements about government policy, the answer should be ruled to be a ministerial statement. That will allow other questions to be asked, which is the purpose of question time. The primary privilege of members in this House is to ask questions of Ministers of the Crown. That is our duty on behalf of our constituents. We are not here to listen to lengthy answers, which are really ministerial statements.

We can read the press releases, search the Internet, go to the press gallery and listen to the press conferences, but in this Chamber on behalf of our constituents we should be able to ask questions. Further, if an answer is ruled as a ministerial statement, as provided for in the standing orders, protocol—which has been established for a century or more—demands that the Leader of the Opposition or a nominee be permitted to respond. I do not want to take up the time of the House so I will finish by pointing out how important this matter becomes if the Government does not use this to its advantage. This is why we ask the Chair for fairness. On the same day, 6 June, the Minister for Community Services was answering a dorothy dix question about child protection policies. She was asked—

Mr Whelan: Point of order: This debate is an important matter. It relates to dissent on two specific rulings. I ask you to request the honourable member to refer only to the matters that have been raised in the debate. He has not said anything in his contribution about the Minister for Community Services. I did not refer to that matter in my reply. He is not at liberty to introduce new topics into the debate in reply.

Mr O'Doherty: To the point of order: I refer to the motion, which refers specifically to the Minister for Community Services and to a point of order that was taken by me. What I am saying is clearly within the leave of the motion I moved. The Leader of the House gave a wide-ranging speech during which he canvassed a number of general matters, and I am simply responding.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Hornsby has almost concluded his contribution in reply. I will allow him to continue.

Mr O'DOHERTY: To amplify the point, the Minister for Community Services was asked a to announce government policy, a policy that she had announced not half an hour previously in a press release.

Mr Whelan: You know that's not right.

Mr O'DOHERTY: It is right.

Mr Whelan: Read the question.

Mr O'DOHERTY: The Minister was asked, "What is the latest information available on the Government's plan—" and she said, "I am pleased to announce that I shall shortly introduce a draft exposure bill." If that is not Government policy, what is? On three separate occasions, from memory, I took a point of order in relation to Standing Order No. 137: first that the question was out of order because it asked for public policy, and second that the answer was out of order because it gave the Government policy. I appreciate the fact that you listened to me in silence, Mr Speaker. However, as you have done on 105 other occasions during this session of Parliament, you ruled simply, "There is no point of order."

There was no discussion and no basis on which members could try to assess how you establish whether an answer is a ministerial statement. You simply said, "There is no point of order." At the end of her contribution, after flogging us with Government policy for about five minutes, after our attempts to have the answer ruled to be a ministerial statement so we could respond to the critical matter announced by the Minister, which dealt with the adoption of children and a significant change of policy, and after you, Mr Speaker, ruled that the answer was not a ministerial statement and therefore we had no right to reply, what did the Minister say? She said, "The honourable member for Hornsby has been yipping for some time that he has not had a chance to have a say. He will get his."

I took a point of order in which I asked you to rule that the answer had been a ministerial statement. You said it was not a ministerial statement. The Minister invited us to have a say. I asked for the chance to have a say, as the standing orders provide, but you, Mr Speaker, said that I could not. We simply want fairness and consistency in rulings. The case rests. It is an important matter that we are asking the House to agree to: to uphold the standing orders that have governed this place in one form or another since 1856 or thereabouts. The standing orders have always provided that question time is the greatest privilege that members have and it should not be toyed with by Ministers taking up the time with lengthy ministerial statements.

Question—That the motion be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Mr Armstrong Mr Collins Mr Debnam Mr George Mr Glachan Mr Hartcher Mr Hazzard Mr Humpherson Dr Kernohan Mr Kerr

Mr Maguire Mr Merton Mr Oakeshott Mr O'Doherty Mr D. L. Page Mr Piccoli Mr Richardson Mr Rozzoli Ms Seaton Mrs Skinner

Mr Slack-Smith Mr Souris Mr Stoner Mr Tink Mr R. W. Turner Mr Webb Mr Windsor Tellers, Mr Fraser Mr R. H. L. Smith

Ms Allan Mr Amery Ms Andrews Mr Aquilina Mr Ashton Mr Barr Mr Bartlett Ms Beamer Mr Black Mr Brown Miss Burton Mr Campbell Mr Collier Mr Crittenden Mr Debus Mr Face Mr Gaudry

Mr Greene Mrs Grusovin Ms Harrison Mr Hickey Mr Hunter Mr Iemma Mrs Lo Po' Mr Lynch Mr McBride Mr McGrane Mr McManus Mr Markham Mr Martin Ms Meagher Ms Megarrity Mr Mills Ms Moore

Mr Newell Mr Orkopoulos Mr Price Dr Refshauge Ms Saliba Mr Scully Mr W. D. Smith Mr Stewart Mr Torbay Mr Tripodi Mr Watkins Mr Whelan Mr Woods Mr Yeadon Tellers, Mr Anderson Mr Thompson

Mrs Chikarovski	Mr Gibson
Ms Hodgkinson Mr O'Farrell Mr J. H. Turner	Mr Moss Mr Nagle Mr E. T. Page

Question resolved in the negative.

Motion negatived.

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Ms MEAGHER (Cabramatta—Parliamentary Secretary) [10.25 p.m.]: I take this opportunity to congratulate the Carr Government on its 2000-01 budget. It is a great budget for south-western Sydney and is in keeping with the Carr Government's ongoing commitment to deliver improved services to our region. The budget works hard to improve a range of services, and that is reflected in record spending by the State Government. Policing has received a record $1.6 billion for new technology and smarter policing initiatives. The $149.2 million increase in funding for the New South Wales Police Service since the 1999-2000 budget will help to create a more efficient service and improve investigations statewide.

The increased funding will mean more police and more police resources for Cabramatta in real terms. The budget underpins the Police Service's continuing program of improvement in work practices, especially in information and effective staffing. Highlights of the police budget also include $20.2 million for sophisticated technology and equipment so that New South Wales police can employ smarter and more accountable policing practices and improved communications. Once again the Government has delivered a budget that provides for an increase of 200 police in line with its commitment to make 2,110 more police available to the front line by the end of the year 2003.

First home buyers will also receive up to $6,070 in assistance under the first home purchase scheme. This program replaces the existing first home owners scheme. The new program will cost $230 million over four years and is expected to encourage more people to buy or build first homes. The First Home Plus package replaces the existing 50 per cent discount on stamp duty on contracts and conveyances with a full exemption from stamp duty. That is exciting news for young couples starting out to achieve the Australian dream of owning their first home. The First Home Plus program is an indication of the Carr Government's commitment to assist those couples to realise their dream by providing up to a total of $13,000 in government assistance.

The Department of Housing intends to build 15 medium-density units in the Canley Heights area. This accommodation will be general style housing that is designed for families. A number of families with high needs are on the waiting list in the local area and will be given the first priority. A total of 24 community housing units will be built on old Department of Housing sites in the Cabramatta electorate during the period 2000-01. The accommodation will contain a total of 20 two-bedroom units and four three-bedroom units at a cost in this budget of $2.5 million. The budget contains more good news for young people from low income families. It gives them more opportunities to enhance their job prospects through an allocation of $2.2 million in funding to TAFE scholarship programs. The TAFE program fast tracks students towards industry-recognised qualifications leading to real jobs. The South Western Institute of TAFE will target resources from the Get Skilled program in the Cabramatta area and will step up efforts to attract the Indochinese people into TAFE courses.

The budget also provides a record $1,486 million for community and disabled services. Since 1994-95 funding has increased by $601.3 million or 67.9 per cent in this portfolio area. New South Wales will benefit from $110 million for child protection, a 17.7 per cent increase. There will be an increase of $20 million in foster care payments, and a $44.9 million increase in funding for disability services. There will also be $100.3 million for child care and related services and $23 million to refurbish and maintain group homes, large residential units and other facilities for the disabled. The budget also provides $63.1 million in electricity rebates for financially disadvantaged people. There will be $120.7 million in pensioner rebates for electricity and water bills.

This budget also provides for the finalisation of the $18 million program to build 12 new fire stations across western Sydney. The new fire station at Bonnyrigg Heights is due for completion by the end of August, which is great news for the Cabramatta region. The area will also benefit from the roads budget, with a total of $8.7 million to be spent on road improvements. The Carr Government's record annual average spending on western Sydney roads continues to be more than double the annual average spending by the previous Coalition Government. The Cabramatta community will benefit from better road links and transport facilities and I am delighted that the Government has ensured a fair share of resources for this area.

The budget includes the allocation of $7.3 million towards the construction of the Liverpool to Parramatta rapid bus-only transitway, which is being built at a total cost of $203 million. When complete in 2003 it will significantly improve transport options for people in south-western Sydney. The roads budget also provides $266,000 to complete the $24 million upgrade of Elizabeth Drive to a four-line divided carriageway between Cabramatta Road and Cowpasture Road. Funding of $67,000 has been provided for the $54.6 million Liverpool to Parramatta trail cycleway, which is expected to be completed this year. This new and exciting concept for cyclists will run along the existing rail corridor. It is a means of providing safe access to railway stations, shops and sporting fields along the route. A major part of the cycleway incorporates the Cabramatta local area and will provide improved transport and connection options for locals.

This year's budget also provides a boost for business and it has won top marks from the business community. The Chairman of the Greater Western Sydney Economic Board, Jim Bosnjak, said that the local business community should look favourably on the budget as a tool to deliver even higher rates of investment and jobs growth to Australia's economic powerhouse. He said that of the $4 billion allocated to the region for 2000-01, three-quarters would go directly to education and health—$300 million more than in 1999-2000. Mr Bosnjak is also quoted as having said that strategies to fast track investment in high-growth industries such as transport, tourism and information would also help deliver positive outcomes to the region's 1.7 million people and 72,000 businesses.

The Carr Government has also slashed taxes affecting families and businesses. The budget delivers tax relief to the community by bringing forward payroll tax by six months, to 1January 2001. The Government has continued to address unemployment by creating an environment which prolongs economic buoyancy and job growth after the Olympics. The Government will spend $14 million in Cabramatta to create more than 200 local jobs. The programs include $120,000 for various road safety initiatives, including upgrading the intersection of St Johns Road and Cumberland Highway, $30,000 for improvements to traffic signals outside Cabramatta West Public School and $3.75 million for the Liverpool to Parramatta cycleway.

Creating jobs through capital works programs is one way the Government is ensuring that New South Wales remains prosperous. Other programs being implemented include assistance from the Business Enterprise Centre at Fairfield that is designed to provide small business services to the Cabramatta area. The Women in Business Mentor program and the Women in Business growth strategy's workshops have been devised to stimulate employment opportunities for women in particular and business in general. These strategies by the Carr Government to assist small business, combined with the payroll tax cuts, will directly assist those who have devoted significant time and energy to establish a business and provide employment opportunities for the Cabramatta local community. They will also encourage and provide the necessary skills and support networks for those contemplating setting up a business.

Health services remain a top priority for the Carr Government. It is planning to spend around $1.2 billion on better health services for the residents of western Sydney. This funding for new and upgraded hospitals and specialised cancer, women's health and other health services will continue to make it easier for western Sydney people to obtain health care without having to travel long distances. Over the period of the 2000-01 budget western Sydney will receive an additional $60 million. Recurrent funding for Western Sydney Area Health Service will rise by $26.2 million, from $491.1 million in the 1999-2000 budget year to $517.3 million in 2000-01. That additional funding demonstrates the commitment of the State Government to public health care. While the Federal Government is robbing the public health system of funds and diverting them to the private system, we continue to pour resources into the public system to address this inequality and ensure quality services are provided.

The Commonwealth Government's decision to abolish the Commonwealth dental health program has outraged many of my constituents who can ill afford dental treatment. The Federal Government has again failed to deliver on services which are regarded as basic health needs. The Federal Government continues to neglect the people of south-west Sydney. The State Government has recognised the shortfall in the Federal Government's spending and has provided the people of Cabramatta and south-west Sydney with $27 million purely for dental services. Education remains a key focus throughout this term, And this is confirmed by allocations in the budget. Families in Cabramatta will continue to benefit from the back-to-school allowance, which will assist with the cost of uniforms, textbooks and other school needs.

In our competitive global environment it is important to be up to date with new emerging technologies. The Government is continuing to equip students with the necessary skills and knowledge that will help this nation to forge ahead with its commitment to implement its Computers in Schools policy, which has provided schools in western Sydney with more than $38.7 million worth of computer equipment. This year an additional 25,000 computers will be delivered to schools across the State, adding to the 90,000 currently used by students. The State Government is putting a further $6 million into 600 schools for electrical upgrades, playground improvements, new seating, fencing and floors. A further $2.3 million has been made available under the joint funding program to construct shade shelters, covered outdoor learning areas, games courts, libraries and multipurpose centres, providing students and teachers with well-equipped learning and teaching environments.

Tourism funding lifts to a new level in the 2000-01 budget with allocations of a record $49.7 million. That again is great news for Cabramatta. With funding from Tourism New South Wales and the Department of State and Regional Development's Main Street program, this boost in tourism funding will bolster Cabramatta as a growing tourist destination. The local tourism officer is currently producing a guide map to Cabramatta's shops and restaurants, along with a number of fact sheets for tourists outlining unique Cabramatta experiences and what the area has to offer. The Cabramatta food trails are now an established event on the Sydney calendar. With some 40,000 people attending this year's lunar new year festival in Cabramatta, tourism has been established as a growth industry for the Cabramatta local area.

With the Premier's announcement of a $300,000 budget increase for Carnivale, this budget shows that the New South Wales Government is working harder for all New South Wales by maximising tourism benefits for the State. Other budget initiatives for migrant communities include more than $960,000 in new funding for a transcultural mental health centre servicing the needs of our multicultural community. There will be $1.5 million over five years for the Migration Heritage Centre, which was set up by the Premier in 1998 to co-ordinate the recurring maintenance and display of the State's fixed and living migration heritage. More than $1.5 million has been allocated for the Ethnic Affairs Commission Community Development Grants program and $330,000 has been allocated for an outward program aimed at improving working conditions for migrant women in the textile industry. The Carr Government's budget remembered the people that John Howard forgot. The State budget has delivered quality services and created new jobs and a favourable economic environment for people of Cabramatta. I commend the budget to the House.

Mr MERTON (Baulkham Hills) [10.39 p.m.]: This is a budget of lost opportunities, a budget based on political expediencies and one that does little to help those in real need. The new millennium began with a solid financial basis generated by the responsible economic policies of the Howard Federal Government, and it afforded the Carr Labor Government a unique chance to improve public housing and combat homelessness. The Sydney Morning Herald of 24 May stated:

However, the Government has provided no extra money for public housing or to combat homelessness. And the Department of Community Services, having overspent its budget last year by $81 million, receives a negligible increase to cover the real cost of its services …

A $21.5 million increase for the Home and Community Care program was also welcomed. But Mr Gary Moore, director of the NSW Council of Social Service, said the Government has ignored the major social problem of housing affordability: "It has provided some relief for first-home buyers but nothing for renters, the 97,000 people on the Housing Department waiting list and the State's 40,000 homeless."

For the people of Baulkham Hills, this budget is little more than a fairytale on time payment, a good times budget, boosted by high taxes—$1 billion more than last year—and big spending. For the Baulkham Hills area it is drip-feed infrastructure or road and transport improvements on the never-never. The world's biggest traffic jam, Windsor Road, received just $4.5 million towards the $220 million decade-long upgrade. This has sentenced motorists to more years of misery, more years of sitting in gridlock on the roads.

The Epping to Castle Hill rail line was allocated a miserly $298,000—a trifle short of the $364 million estimated cost! The $75 million allocated for the Parramatta to Chatswood line, while welcomed, is also a few track lengths shy of the total cost of $1.3 billion. Scandalously, no money was allocated to upgrade the dreaded Seven Hills station car park where one vehicle is stolen every day and other cars are trashed while being burgled. I have received correspondence from people who have parked their cars there. What happened there is of great concern to me. For example, Mrs Sandra Simpson of 30 Kalimna Drive, Baulkham Hills, said that she parked her car in the Seven Hills station car park on the evening of 16 May and returned to find the window of her vehicle smashed. She made the point that commuters felt that they and their vehicles were safe when guards patrolled the car park. I have also raised this issue on behalf of Mrs Mary Ingram, who stated:

On Friday 19 May I arrived at my car at the station car park at 6.20 pm to find, yet again, my car had been broken into (the 5^th time) and the back window smashed. I contacted Blacktown Police Station to be told that there is now a 1300 number to lodge complaints. During my conversation with one of their operators, I was told that the video cameras were not working as it required too much man power, and that I was just unlucky that my car appeared to be the target of vandalism. I was asked if someone in Seven Hills had a grudge against me. The person then stated that the situation was worsened because of lack of police and if I could provide more police personnel, this problem would not happen. I was also advised that a working party had been set up to look into the security and met every six weeks, so far achieving [few] results.

People in the Baulkham Hills area are forced to park their cars at Seven Hills car park because there is no other rail service. I have spoken about the Windsor Road upgrade over 10 years, but at the end of that 10 years less than one-third of the distance between Windsor and Parramatta will have two lanes in each direction. If the work contemplated by the budget were to be carried out tomorrow, it would still be inadequate.

Of considerable concern to me is the fact that State Rail is in chaos. Many people from Baulkham Hills use public transport facilities, albeit having to travel to Parramatta or Pennant Hills, and they are concerned about safety on the rail network at present. The Government has not increased maintenance subsidies from the $115 million spent last year. In fact, the Carr Government has slashed operating subsidies in the State's rail system by almost 30 per cent. Operating grants to CityRail and Countrylink were cut from $262.73 million in 1999-2000 to $185.97 million in 2000-01. This budget does nothing to provide adequate funding, despite these problems with the rail network.

I recently quoted an expression from Winston Churchill that State Rail is crying out to the Minister, "Give us the tools and let us do the job", but that has not happened with this budget. There is some good news in the budget for Baulkham Hills, albeit of a limited nature. Baulkham Hills High School has finally seen some action on its much-needed multifunction hall to be used for broader community purposes. I am pleased to note that the budget has allocated $135,000 towards the hall, with the balance of $2 million promised to complete the project by 2002. It was my pleasure to accompany the Minister for Education and Training on his visit to the school and I thank him again for that. Although the hall has been a long time coming, it is very much welcomed by the school community. Baulkham Hills High School is a high standard selective high school and its dance team was recently chosen as one of three schools to take part in the Olympic Games opening ceremony, which is no mean feat. The hall will be a considerable advantage to the school. The budget is based on the fundamental performance of the Howard Government. An article in the Daily Telegraph of 24 May stated:

Any grumbling from Michael Egan about the GST should be taken with a truck load of salt.

The State Treasurer's Budget delivered yesterday showed that NSW will do rather nicely from the GST-based tax changes starting on July 1.

Yesterday alone, they helped finance more than half of the State Government's stamp duty concessions, and hasten reductions in payroll tax. And in a few years the GST will be bringing in more cash that is now reaped by the State from the old federal handouts …

No great skill is needed to raise money through land taxes during a period of asset inflation; no economic genius is required to pull in millions from gaming.

In fact, this budget is based on good times, but that in itself has difficulties because good times will not be with us forever. The article further stated:

Treasurer Michael Egan's sixth budget is Olympian in more ways that one and deserves credit, in part. But the Government still has a lot of tax reductions to do to make the State more competitive.

It referred to the fact that the Government is a high-taxing government and that taxes in New South Wales are considerably higher than those in most other States. However, it does little to assist those in need. I commend the Government for reducing stamp duty and for providing an exemption to first-time home buyers because that is worthwhile. However, the exemption will not apply to many first home buyers because the Sydney housing market is so high. The Sydney Morning Herald of 24 May referred to Carissa Read buying a three-bedroom house at St Peters worth about $350,000, and realising that as a single person she is lucky to have bought her own house but that with a $300,000 cut-off she will not receive the benefit of stamp duty relief.

I commend the Government for that very worthwhile initiative, but it has to take into account the Sydney residential market. Because this budget is based on a shaky revenue base of increased stamp duty from a real estate boom which is crumbling almost daily, the Government faces fundamental problems. This budget will have to be reviewed carefully as State revenue based on stamp duties deteriorates with the ailing property market. This budget brings certain benefits to the people of Baulkham Hills but unfortunately it is only a drip-feed for most of them.

Ms MOORE (Bligh) [10.50 p.m.]: The electorate of Bligh is the most densely populated electorate in New South Wales with an average of approximately 6,200 persons per square kilometre—almost double the Sydney average. The Bligh electorate covers 13 square kilometres and has a total population of 80,000. Continued urban consolidation and redevelopment of former industrial areas are dramatically increasing this population. In fact, during the past year the population has increased by approximately 4,000 but there has been no equal increase in services in the area. The emerging crisis in this fast consolidating inner-city area is whether the current ageing infrastructure, declining service levels and reduced open space can meet the increasing demands for the future.

Excessive traffic and parking generation, increasing demands on health, public housing and social services, declining police levels and complex social pressures are all critical concerns in an area that is growing without adequate oversight or long-term planning. While I support urban consolidation as a valid policy aimed at slowing urban sprawl by better utilising developed land, there are limits to how far existing services and infrastructure can be stretched. The budget continues the trend of the State Government failing in its responsibilities for urban consolidation in the city, and continues to exploit the area by placing increasing demands on services, facilities and infrastructure. In the context of ongoing urban consolidation, the role of the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning [DUAP] is vital.

The budget papers reported that DUAP has a role of strategic overview to guide sound planning decisions in New South Wales, develop strategies for sustainable development and assessment, and oversee urban development and renewal. It is failing in this responsibility, even though $45.9 million has been allocated to the promotion, implementation and co-ordination of the Government's metropolitan planning policies, $10.9 million to sustainable development and $7.5 million to its planning system program. Funding needs to be urgently allocated to an effective review of the benefits and impacts of the Government's urban consolidation policies. It is not only in my electorate that there is growing concern.

I am concerned by the reduced funding to the Heritage Office for its vital work in developing a comprehensive inventory of the State's significant heritage items, developing the community's understanding and achieving best practice conservation and reuse. Continued commitment to the role of the Heritage Office is increasingly important, as our heritage is constantly under threat. The Centennial Park and Moore Park lands have now received additional protection from the McDonald's development by the recent listing on the heritage register, and the community wants to see the heritage of White City preserved in the same way. Bomera and Tarana at Potts Point are now being considered for the heritage register following the Federal Government's announced sale, and the likely risk of permanent damage to those historic harbourside defence properties. Much has been lost, with Jenner and Tresco already sold off by the Federal Government, and Chatsworth sold and demolished for private development. So much of our architectural and social history has been lost.

As the representative of an area in which a high proportion of residents use public transport or walk, rather than drive, I am disappointed with the limited allocation to public transport and pedestrian safety. The proportion of people in Bligh using public transport to get to work is dramatically above the Sydney average—almost double the Sydney average in some suburbs. More than 30 per cent of people in Surry Hills-Darlinghurst get to work by walking or cycling, compared with a Sydney average of approximately 5 per cent. The proportion of households without a car in Bligh is up to 48 per cent in some suburbs, compared with a Sydney average of less than 20 per cent. I welcome the continued upgrading of Central railway station. The densely populated area that I represent continues to be a loser in the Government's regularly announced $3 billion plan to revitalise public transport.

Recently I raised a classic example. Redfern and Surry Hills residents continue to wait for buses that do not turn up, arrive late or are full. In my response to last year's budget I reported that residents were standing 15 and 20 deep for infrequent peak hour services. Nothing has changed, except that residents in Baptist Street, Redfern, now wait in groups of 20, 30 or up to 60 during morning peak hour. Despite the Minister telling me that bus services in Bligh are under regular review, no comprehensive, effective assessment has been done of changing public transport needs in the inner east.

Bus passengers are forced to travel via Central or the city wherever they want to go. No bus services go directly up Cleveland Street to and from the inner west, to service Redfern and Moore Park. The Moore Park precinct remains underserviced by buses—despite the 364 days a year operation of the Fox complex and use of the sporting stadia—with peak hour buses from Central to Moore Park regularly commandeered as express services to the University of New South Wales. The 200 bus service route needs to be revised to take it past densely populated areas in Woolloomooloo, Elizabeth Bay and Potts Point, rather than requiring residents, particularly elderly residents, to walk through Darlinghurst Road, Kings Cross, risking their health and safety.

I am particularly concerned about the reduction of access to buses due to the consolidation of bus stops in the inner east. Buses, particularly along William and Oxford streets, are now saved the time and hassle of picking up passengers who are forced to walk long distances, which again impacts on people with limited mobility. Those people are also affected by the fact that the Government has continued to fail to fund an escalator at Edgecliff station. Safety at railway stations continues to be a serious problem, particularly at Kings Cross and Redfern. Public transport users, particularly at Kings Cross, regularly face a barrage of threats and abuse as they enter the station from alcohol and drug affected people hanging around the station because security staff do not adequately patrol the entrance to the train platforms.

There is real anger in Woolloomooloo about the Government's failure to honour its 1999 election commitment to a trial ferry service to Woolloomooloo Bay. It is disturbing for a Labor Government to fail to honour public transport commitments because of threats from private lessees on the publicly owned Woolloomooloo finger wharf. Indeed, the Woolloomooloo ferry is an important public transport service for visitors to the Art Gallery, the Domain and the Royal Botanic Gardens, and was promised as a key benefit of the finger wharf redevelopment.

However, I am pleased with the increased funding of an estimated $8 million for public transport and taxis subsidies for pensioners and people with disabilities. I hope that some of the operational problems about which I have recently written to the Minister will soon be resolved, including the lack of subsidies for carers and the inadequacy of taxi services for the disabled. Pedestrian safety continues to be a serious problem for the inner city, an area where many people do not own cars and walk to work, and many others visit the area for recreation, entertainment, sports and shopping. I am relieved finally by the $40,000 allocation to fund a new set of pedestrian signals on Oxford Street, Paddington, that will link the Verona and the Ariel bookshop area even though the Parliamentary Secretary for Roads previously told me the funding was allocated last year. Local residents and business owners have been campaigning for this much-needed crossing. In fact, people have been killed in the vicinity of my office.

There is a serious lack of funding for other pedestrian safety facilities to address the many black spots. I am deeply concerned that there has been no funding allocated for the problems in the mid-block crossing at Oxford Street near Paddington Public School. Again I welcome the funding for cycleways. However, I am concerned that it is only a paltry $15,000 out of a total $270,000 proposal for the Darlinghurst to Mascot cycleway. An ongoing serious problem is the traffic chaos in the innercity, despite the opening of the airport tollway last December. The Moore Park region particularly continues to experience traffic gridlock as a result of inadequate public transport to the sporting stadia and Fox Studios. The Government has also failed to fund an alternative, such as light rail to Moore Park and Kensington.

Despite last year's funding for a Woollahra traffic study, through traffic in the local government area remains a serious problem. The Paddington traffic plan remains stalled by the Minister and the Roads and Traffic Authority. There are increasing volumes of traffic travelling through that neighbourhood but no funding has been allocated to redress this worsening problem. Parking also remains a serious problem in the innercity with few residents having access to off-street and on-street parking, which is severely limited. An ongoing issue is the defacing of parking restrictions signs by drivers who then park illegally without risk of penalty notice. While the regulations provide for an alternative to street signage through colour coding painted on the kerbside, that has not been implemented because the RTA has not undertaken community education. Recently I wrote to the Minister seeking an education campaign, and I call on him to find sufficient RTA funds to allow that to occur.

Open space is another important issue. The budget papers report that an estimated $10.613 million has been allocated to restore Moore Park after the ravages of the Eastern Distributor, with $3 million allocated this financial year. I am concerned about the lack of community consultation regarding this funding for the people's park and about the fact that the parkland adjacent to Redfern remains exposed to the tollway, with no protection for park users seeking to enjoy its peace and quiet. The Kippax Lake area of Moore Park was purpose built as a protected area for passive recreation but, because of the Eastern Distributor construction and consistent car parking, the area is now a hard, barren dust bowl.

A total of $1.593 million has been allocated—with $0.3 million in 2000-01—for the upgrading of this area to redress this Government-approved abuse of parkland for car parking for major events and the Olympics. These millions of dollars will be wasted if the Government-sanctioned abuse of the parkland continues. The scandal of car parking on our precious parkland must end. The continued pressure on the Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust to increase and diversify its revenue base is concerning. Pressure on the trust to generate income led to the plan to construct a McDonald's in Moore Park, and I am concerned that this type of unacceptable development could recur.

With the continued loss of public parkland in the inner east, the future of White City is a major open space issue. In the context of increasing population densities in the area, we hope the Government will oppose the current proposal to rezone White City for redevelopment. Given the new facilities and headquarters being provided for Tennis New South Wales with a hefty subsidy of $30 million of taxpayers' money, I thought the State Government might require the redundant Paddington site to remain as open space for public use in perpetuity.

Despite the allocation of an extra $189 million to policing in New South Wales over the next year and the implementation of strategies to attract new recruits, this will apparently not mean many more uniformed police officers on the beat. This budget's focus is primarily on high-tech policing methods, including an allocation of $2.3 million for upgrading police forensic laboratories in preparation for DNA testing. The budget increase allows for only 200 new recruits instead of the 500 uniformed police that will be needed to ensure safety for the community and a reduction in crime.

While not wishing to disavow the merits of new technologies for advancing the effectiveness of the police, I maintain that community policing is the most effective form of policing in terms of bolstering community safety and providing a deterrent to crime. Preventive policing is far more effective than reactive policing. Special operations may be necessary, but they should be in addition to proactive community policing. This budget should provide relief for local area commands that are already completely stretched in terms of staffing numbers and enable the police to do their jobs and keep the community safe. I note that $1.876 million has been allocated to placing resources in Surry Hills and Darlinghurst. It is vital that this allocation contributes to making people feel safer on the streets.

The Government has made a significant contribution to public dental health, with the United Dental Hospital in Surry Hills receiving $160,000. It has also been recognised that more funding must be allocated to mental health services. I hope that Bligh, which has the greatest number of mentally ill people in the State and the country, will benefit from that increased allocation. Although the provision of approximately $80,000 for public housing for the elderly, people with disabilities and larger families may appear generous, it does little to address the waiting list for priority housing. I question whether adequate funding is being provided for crisis accommodation services to address the growing number of homeless people, particularly in the inner city.

While not a specific budget initiative, I nevertheless welcome and commend the Government's decision to allocate $40,000 to an emergency outreach project that will address the growing issue of homelessness in Tom Uren Square in Woolloomooloo. I hope that this model can be the basis for addressing other similar situations in the future. If adequate resources were allocated to crisis and support accommodation in the first place, perhaps such emergency measures would not be necessary.

I note this Government's ongoing statements of commitment to Aboriginal affairs, which I support. However, I remain concerned that the Government is unwilling to tackle the issues facing urban Aboriginal communities. Why is the Government unable to implement a program similar to the Aboriginal Communities Development program, which has been successful in rural and regional communities in New South Wales? The purpose of the program is to improve health and living standards in Aboriginal communities with major environmental health needs. Surely there are urban Aboriginal communities with the same problems. I would argue that the Redfern-Waterloo community has major environmental health needs which are not currently being addressed but which require urgent attention. I reiterate my belief that the serious problems of health and crime in the Eveleigh Street area require not only a whole-of-government approach but a bottom-up approach whereby the community plays the major role in determining its future.

The Council of Social Service of New South Wales has expressed concern that the budget gives no indication of whether the State Government will increase grants to community organisations as compensation for the goods and services tax [GST] that it will have to pay on each grant after 1 July. In March I wrote to both the Premier and the Minister for Health on behalf of two community organisations, the Bobby Goldsmith Foundation and the Network of Alcohol and Other Drug Agencies, requesting a response to this question. Both organisations were concerned that the impact of the GST would force them to reduce service provision dramatically or to close altogether. I have not yet received an answer to my letter from either the Premier or the Minister for Health and the budget provides no further clue.

With this budget covering the period of the introduction of the Federal Government's goods and services tax, I am surprised—as I am sure the whole of New South Wales is—that it does not include a comprehensive review of all State taxes. State governments are to be the beneficiaries of substantially increased revenue from the controversial GST, which, no matter what the Federal Government says, will lead to increases in the cost of living for most people. I note the stamp duty concessions for first home buyers, but I would have thought this budget would try to ensure that the overall level of taxes, both Federal and State, would not substantially exceed current totals.

People do not really care about the lines of demarcation between the Commonwealth and the States, and when New South Wales gets increased tax revenue from other sources it is reasonable to expect State taxes to be reduced accordingly. Taxes such as the recently introduced and discriminatory land tax should go and land taxes on low-income housing and related residential investment thresholds should be reviewed at a time of high Sydney property prices, up-market conversions of boarding house accommodation and high levels of homelessness. The people of New South Wales want greater assurances than were given in this budget. While political mileage and a lot of revenue is being extracted from the GST, State Labor is keeping quiet about State taxes and grabbing all it can get. What is the Government of New South Wales doing in this budget to ensure that the overall level of taxes will not increase with the inevitable rise in the cost of living for people in this State? Is enough being done to address low-income housing costs and availability?

I welcome the Government's emphasis on disability services in the 2000-01 budget, particularly the funding allocated for supported accommodation services. The Government has provided a significant boost to supported accommodation places. This means that 200 people currently living in respite care will receive permanent accommodation and 100 people living with elderly parents will be able to move into alternative supported housing. However, it is important to remember that the Australian Institute for Health and Welfare estimates that 4,500 people with disabilities urgently need supported accommodation. So while the Government has made a welcome start in addressing this problem, there is still a long way to go.

I support the Government's commitment to juvenile justice, particularly the implementation of recommendations made at the 1999 Drug Summit, including the appointment of 10 alcohol and other drug counsellors, the introduction of medical detoxification services at Cobham and Yasmar and the establishment of regional residential drug rehabilitation services. As to corrective services, there has been 50 per cent growth in the full-time inmate population average since 1992. This means that the Government has had to spend $10.6 million in this budget to increase bed capacity in correctional centres. That is an alarming figure and I suggest that the money would be better spent on increasing the uniformed police presence on the beat as a crime prevention initiative.

Finally, I would like to refer to funding cuts to the Women's Equity Bureau [WEB]. The Women's Equity Bureau, within the Department of Industrial Relations, is to have its staffing levels slashed from 11 to five and its budget allocation cut by two-thirds. The WEB was established in 1996 to conduct research for the pay equity task force. It has been at the forefront of progressing industrial equity and maternity rights for women, as well as fighting workplace harassment. The cuts to the WEB in this budget mark a failure of this Government to follow through on its commitments to working women. The cuts will prevent the WEB from progressing education campaigns on issues for working women.

Of particular concern is the impact that these funding cuts will have on the renegotiation of the social and community sector award, which is currently before the Industrial Relations Commission. This award affected workers in community social welfare, 80 per cent of whom are women. I have received numerous requests to urge this Labor Government to commit to funding any pay increases determined by the commission in order to ensure pay equity. I fear that cuts to this important body will lead to the further disadvantage of people working in community-based welfare organisations that carry out such important work.

Mr BARR (Manly) [11.10 p.m.]: The Government has again handed down a financially conservative budget in line with last year's effort. It certainly is a budget that will not spook the ratings agencies or the screen jocks of the money market. The triple-A rating remains secure, and that is the way it should be. Whilst this budget represents an improvement on 1999, with extra and sorely needed funding in some critical areas, and whilst it is not irresponsible, it does have some serious shortcomings in terms of expenditure in critical areas such as education.

It should be acknowledged that New South Wales and the rest of Australia have benefited from the strong growth in the economy of the United States of America and the pick-up of economic activity in Asia and Europe. Economic and structural reforms made by both sides of Federal politics over the past two decades have benefited the Federal Government. The New South Wales Government has benefited enormously from the gaming machine duty windfall. This is not a healthy basis for revenue collection. The Government will collect $940 million in this financial year, up from $22 million in 1999. Without this, the Government's financial position would be considerably more difficult.

I would like to traverse some of the key areas of concern to my electorate. The first is health. The new three-year funding arrangement is to be applauded. The Minister deserves credit for revamping the funding allocation based on the recommendations of the Menadue report. Funding will be based on principles of better management and equity, and the three-year funding provides more certainty. The Northern Sydney Area Health Service will get an increase of $63 million over the three-year recurrent funding period. In real terms, after allowing for inflation and wage and salary rises, this amounts to an increase of some $30 million.

This represents the second biggest increase in any of the metropolitan area health services and the fifth largest in the 17 State health services. This would seem to reflect a basic tenet of the recommendations of the Menadue report—equity. I welcome the fact that the northern part of Sydney is receiving an equitable increase in funding. In my neck of the woods, we tend to feel left out in the cold when it comes to government expenditure. I do not say it will meet all of our health needs. It patently will not. But it is a step in the right direction, and I look forward to Manly Hospital getting its fair share of funding.

The Northern Sydney Area Health Service has placed a question mark over the future role of Manly Hospital. An options paper canvassing the possibility of a new northern beaches facility and most of the activities of Mona Vale and Manly hospitals has been released. The position of many in the community and of the hospital staff is to be open-minded but cautious and sceptical. Until there is a definite proposal that clearly outlines benefits justifying a centralised facility, the people of Manly will continue to expect that this hospital, which has served the community so well for over 100 years, will receive the resources and funding to which they and it are entitled.

Against this backdrop of uncertainty, the Northern Sydney Area Health Service announced the closure of the paediatrics ward in January. There was an immediate outcry from the community and the hospital staff. A staff proposal for a viable and sustainable paediatrics ward is currently being reviewed by an independent third party. What the staff and community want is a facility that can adequately cater for the common child ailments, such as ear, nose and throat conditions, broken bones, asthma, gastro and appendicitis—not serious ailments requiring high-tech facilities and treatment. Last month there were 102 births at the hospital's reopened maternity ward, a record number. In the past two years there has been an enrolment increase of more than 6 per cent in primary schools in the Manly electorate. This points to a demographic shift. The hospital has to respond to this with appropriate facilities, and the Government must provide the funding for them.

In education, the budget increases by $311.6 million, to just under $7 billion, an increase of 4.7 per cent. This is a significant improvement on the 1.7 per cent for 1999-2000. But public education is in difficulty. Though $7 billion is a lot of money, it is not enough. Public education is in need of a new deal. Without a greater funding commitment, it will continue to drift, with ageing infrastructure and an inability to compete with the private schools. It is in danger of becoming the Cinderella in the education business.

On 13 September last year I held a public meeting on public education. I asked the parents and citizens groups of the public schools in my electorate to complete a report card on their school. They were asked to rate the school facilities from A to F. Of those that responded, there was only one A rating for a library and one A rating for a hall. The majority gave C ratings—which is poor or very bad—for libraries, staff room facilities, halls, canteens and general classrooms. The report cards show there is much room for improvement. Public schools are achieving excellent results but, with more funding for maintenance and facilities, they could be doing a lot better.

Harbord Primary is a case in point. It is an excellent school with a growing enrolment. Yet a building that burnt down several years ago has still not been replaced, and no funding is provided in this budget for the necessary capital works. The latest data from the Department of Education and Training indicates that there was a drop in year-on-year enrolments in 1999, the third time that this has occurred in the past decade, and an increase in non-government school enrolments, taking the non-government sector schools to nearly 30 per cent of the total New South Wales school population. Parents are voting with their feet. Many of those who can afford it are sending their children to private schools. They do this for a number of reasons, but among them is surely because they know that their children will have better facilities and better access to technology.

Access to technology is a particularly important issue. We need to ensure that children in public schools have better access to properly integrated computer technology. The performance audit carried out by the Audit Office titled "Using computers in schools for reading and learning", dated June 2000, made a number of critical observations. The first was that computer-to-student ratios are greatly uneven, largely due to differences in discretionary resources that some schools have been able to utilise to supplement resources received through the program. The same can be said for local area networking, peripheral equipment and technical support.

Point two was that the level per computer and the approach to technical support varied markedly, although all schools that were visited indicated that technical support was inadequate and presented an impediment to effective use of computers. The third point was that knowledge about technology and how to use it for educational purposes varied between school communities and individual teachers. Written guidance available to schools was limited. Whilst not the only source of advice, much reliance was placed on district technology advisers. Each technology adviser was required to support approximately 55 schools on average. The schools visited reported that they needed more assistance than the technology adviser was able to provide. This is in marked contrast with what is happening in private schools, where most if not all of the students have laptops, or notebooks as they are called, and computer courses are integrated with learning. That puts those schools at a competitive advantage over public schools.

Recently I was visited by someone who was trying to access public schools with the idea of implementing such schemes in them. One of the problems is that it costs parents $90 per month to give their children access to this equipment. Obviously, parents who have children at public schools cannot be asked to bear that cost; there are some who can afford it and some who cannot, and it becomes an equity issue. Ultimately this Parliament, and in particular the Government, has to take responsibility for that. A significant funding increase is needed to make sure that children in public schools have access to the same sort of technology equipment that children in private schools have. Otherwise we are heading towards two solitudes—children educated in a threadbare public sector, and children educated in better-resourced private schools—and the point of contact between the two will be fairly minimal. That is not the way forward for a society that takes pride in its egalitarianism.

In relation to environmental matters, the Manly electorate is virtually surrounded by water, and water quality is a critical issue to my electorate. Manly Lagoon remains one of the most heavily polluted recreational waterways in the State. It has failed the Australian and New Zealand Environment Conservation Council guidelines for water quality for the past two years. The water has very high nutrient levels, well above the ANZECC guidelines. There are very low levels of dissolved oxygen. High levels mean greater density of aquatic and plant life breathing and photosynthesising. But there are low levels in Manly Lagoon.

Manly Lagoon is unsuitable for primary or secondary treatment; basically, it cannot be touched. Exfiltration from Sydney Water's pipes is a major cause of pollution and there are 29 sewage overflows which empty into the lagoon or its catchment, some of which have been capped. The recently released report of the Waterways Advisory Panel recommend that Manly Lagoon be given priority by Sydney Water. The state of the lagoon is testament to the obvious—if we do not look after our catchment areas we will face massive rehabilitation costs in the future. Repair of the infrastructure will cost $15 million, but there is no sign of a commitment for that in the budget. A recent report card on the nation's infrastructure commissioned by the Institution of Engineers, Australia, rated sewerage infrastructure as D-minus, that is something less than poor. It stated that ageing infrastructure is a major problem as many assets are 50 to 100 years old. Sewage treatment and disposal often does not meet community and environmental standards. This is certainly true of much of Sydney Water's ageing infrastructure.

On traffic and transport, access and exit from the northern beaches continues to be a problem. There are only three roads into the peninsula, plus ferry access. Buses provide the major means of public transport. The park and ride scheme is very successful and I have asked the Minister to look into the feasibility of building another one at Brookvale. We still need a greater commitment to improving public transport, which will reduce cars clogging up those three roads. The Spit Bridge still remains a serious bottleneck. I welcome the ongoing funding for the two new SuperCats, which are scheduled to operate by the end of the year, and the $5 million-plus for refurbishment of ferries.

On a much smaller scale, I welcome the $60,000 allocated for noise wall deviation at the Burnt Bridge Creek deviation. The total project still needs another $350,000 and I will be pushing for the balance. It is a matter of enormous importance for people living near the deviation who have to cope with high noise levels day and night. The Minister has also committed $10,000 for the Roads and Traffic Authority to undertake a study of the Seaforth roundabout, a matter of significant local concern. That single-lane roundabout is a bottleneck at peak-hour times. At the very least it should be made into two lanes, but traffic lights might be the most effective means of managing traffic flows at this five-street intersection.

In recent days there has been significant coverage in the Manly Daily concerning the remediation works carried out along the beach wall last season. I have not read the report by Professor Thom, but it appears that the execution of those works may have been faulty and may involve significant expenditure for rectification. If that is the case, I ask that the Government look sympathetically at providing funding for it. I will certainly be pushing for that. Manly Beach belongs not only to the people of Manly but to all people of the State. It also has international significance. The welfare of that beach, the protection of its seawall and the maintenance of its sand make it a pleasurable place for people to visit and enjoy passive recreation. That is of fundamental importance to the people of Manly and the State.

The Treasurer, in his Budget Speech, said that the Olympics will, at their commencement, be totally paid for. In one sense that would seem to be a good thing because the State is not up to its eyeballs in debt to pay for this enormous event. In another sense it is not so good. New South Wales taxpayers are paying something like $1.2 billion for the Games—or they were until today; that figure has blown out by another $140 million. Today the Government announced that it was putting $140 million into the SOCOG contingency fund for further works. That kind of money has to come from somewhere; that money could be used for other purposes. The opportunity cost is the funding which could have gone into health and education and other areas. There is an aspect of intergenerational inequity in this; the facilities and infrastructure which we have created will benefit future generations, but they will not have borne the cost for it.

There is no reason why the cost of the Games could not have been spread over a few years post the Games in order to mitigate the impact on the community today. Why, for example, should this generation of schoolchildren have to bear the burden for something which will also benefit their successors? Although the Olympics will be welcomed by us all, I question the way they have been funded. The pain could have been spread over a longer period so that this generation does not bear the full burden. I hope that after the Olympics more funding will be found for critical areas. We will need to make an Olympian effort in relation to health, education and the environment. At the moment, although the books seem to balance and the ratings look good on the desk screens of the money market managers, we are not in medal contention. We should be going for gold.

Mr HICKEY (Cessnock) [11.25 p.m.]: I am proud to speak to the positive budget that our Government handed down recently. Other speakers have stated that this budget builds on past economic strategies and allows New South Wales to continue its growth into the future through sound economic management. The 2000-01 budget has in essence economic, social and environmental infrastructures that place New South Wales in a healthy position to continue to provide conditions for sustainable growth. The growth and confidence in New South Wales provides the economic base to lead Australia into the new millennium, and we do this for all of New South Wales not just the select few who have enough capital to influence decision makers.

New South Wales has maintained its triple-A economic rating for the period of this and the previous Labor Government, which is one of the many jewels in the crown of this Government's achievements. Our Government has maintained and developed the appropriate checks and balances to ensure that New South Wales not only survived but thrived in the recent economic meltdown that had such a devastating impact on the Pacific region. Several Pacific economies did not escape unscathed, and we need look only at our near neighbours for proof of that. It strikes a sour note in me and in many of my constituents to hear the Opposition, in particular the shadow Treasurer, constantly flouting misinformation when he describes the Government as incompetent in the field of financial planning. This ineffective diatribe serves to prove that the Opposition not only cannot read the electorate but also cannot understand that in today's society Mr and Mrs Smith want and demand a financially responsible government.

That financial responsibility, in Labor circles, also means that economic planning and development is driven by policy that is driven by the concepts of social justice and equity in the distribution of resources. The same Mr and Mrs Smith do not want a government that throws resources at inappropriate projects that cannot and will not be funded beyond the next election. Our Government is interested in not just developing new economic infrastructures, but in ensuring that successful initiatives are consolidated and supported. We know that this is what the electorate wants and we need to look back only as far as the last election results and the huge gains that were made by the New South Wales Labor Party in traditional National and Liberal seats for proof of that.

New South Wales has the lowest unemployment rate of any State and the best building program that the Opposition has ever seen. The Government has provided a surplus of $393 million. The Coalition, when in government for seven years, could not produce a surplus. Where did the money go? Where are the measurable outcomes of a financial plan that tried to keep the two-party Coalition satisfied? The outcomes of this abysmal planning regime are in the same situation as the present state of the Coalition—nowhere, and going nowhere fast. It is interesting to note that the Coalition has many financial advisers and economists in its midst, but it cannot seem to pull a shopping list together, let alone a budget for this great State.

When one pursues the election-driven promises the Opposition gave before the last election one must wonder how it can stand in this House and condemn the Government's very positive budget, which, I repeat, delivers a surplus of $393 million for the people of New South Wales. The Government has managed to pay for the Olympics while putting $1 billion more than any other government into health and education. The Government brought in a $214 million surplus that it had budgeted for last year and this year a magnificent surplus of $393 million. One can honestly say that this Government has credibility; it showed at the last election. The electorate said yes, it wanted to be led by the successful, dynamic, proven, Carr Labor Government.

It is sad, but true, that the Opposition is not in a position to claim that the 1999 election was a close match; it was not, and it has lost its credibility. The New South Wales Labor Government has increased funding in every departmental portfolio and has paid for the Olympics before they commence. I note with pride that New South Wales has paid for the Olympic Games infrastructure faster than any other host city in the history of the modern Olympics. Even though the Government has assured the economic future of New South Wales, the Federal Opposition is in the process of implementing a regressive tax scheme which will have a negative impact on anyone who comes into contact with it.

The people of New South Wales will be hard hit by the Federal Government's GST. It does not provide a windfall for the States as people in some quarters would have us believe. In fact, as the Treasurer, the Hon. Michael Egan, said, New South Wales will not break even until 2007. All the while 37 per cent of the GST will be collected from New South Wales, but it will receive only 30 per cent. According to the Federal Coalition Government, that is how this regressive tax called the GST works. The Federal Government believes that it can squeeze the life out of New South Wales to support other States. Honourable members should not be mistaken; I support the other States, but the proposed distribution is inequitable. One must question whether it is because New South Wales has a strong Labor Government or whether the Federal Coalition Government just does not care for the concepts of fairness and equity. This regressive tax, which is soon to be foisted upon us, will affect all and sundry.

But the impact on people who choose, or who are forced, to reside in caravan parks is unfair and discriminatory. One has only to look at the dissension in the ranks of the Opposition to see how unpopular this decision is. At a recent National Party conference a prominent member said that he would attack Mr Howard with a hammer if he did not reel back this unfair tax burden on those who could least afford it. The Federal Government, in all its caring oppression, is making sure that it puts the boot into those who can least defend themselves. A benevolent dictator would have more compassion than Mr Howard. I have previously spoken in this House about the impact of the GST on families and individuals who live in caravan parks. Honourable members know that I am passionate about this subject. The Cessnock electorate has four caravan parks. The GST will discriminate against my constituents when they are forced to pay an extra 5 per cent on their rents—an extra 5 per cent that most of them can ill afford.

Let me move away from the doom and gloom of the GST and consider the positive aspects of the Government's last budget. This Government understands how difficult it can be for young families buying their first homes. The Government not only understands how difficult it is; it is prepared to do something about it. For the benefit of members of the Opposition, the Government is taking a proactive approach. First home buyers will be exempt from stamp duty on a home costing up to $200,000. That is a windfall for those battling to get on their feet. I encourage any person to look at housing in the Cessnock electorate, where $200,000 would buy a magnificent home. Approximately 74 per cent of first home buyers purchase their homes for approximately $200,000 to $300,000. So this stamp duty exemption is a great initiative for any first home buyer to buy a home in the Cessnock electorate. This Government cares for those who live outside the blue ribbon areas—the areas in which members of the current Opposition tend to reside. I say to those people, "Come to Cessnock. Bring your families. There is room for all. I will be proud to represent you."

In the area of disabilities this Government has allocated an extra $10 million for 3,000 voluntary carers and an extra $21.5 million for home and community care. The Government has also committed an extra $65.2 million to programs for the Ageing and Disability Department and $25.4 million for accommodation. I do not wish to labour the point, but a theme is emerging. The Labor Government in New South Wales is able to balance the budget and keep its commitment to its foundation principles of social justice. The New South Wales Government is spending $7 billion on education—an increase of $312 million this year. A recent $56,000 budgetary allocation will assist Cessnock Primary School in planning for its much-needed administrative building, and additional funding will be allocated in upcoming budgets.

A further $411,000 has been made available for the Information Technology Centre at Singleton, which will cater for a wide range of industry training needs, up to diploma level. This Government is delivering on its education commitment to provide high-quality services for country New South Wales. This funding, which is well directed, will enable local educational institutions to tailor course content to meet emerging demand at the local level. The school system will benefit from the 90,000 computers that the Government is installing for students. This Government well knows the importance of up-to-date technology for schools. Country New South Wales has been a big winner in this budget. Approximately 35 per cent of all budget spending will benefit rural and regional areas, which make up only 27 per cent of the population. That means that country areas are benefiting from the lion's share of funding.

This year over 46 per cent of spending on capital works and road maintenance will benefit all those living outside Sydney. That is a total of $2.6 billion going to areas outside Sydney. The Regional Co-ordination program is utilising a $2.949 million budgetary allocation to lead and support local initiatives, such as job creation and economic development in places facing challenges, such as the Hunter region, Wollongong, Bega and Lithgow. This program will assist in the co-ordination of such projects as the Cessnock pipeline and it will help in developing partnerships between businesses and the Government to construct a pipeline from the Hunter River to drought proof the Pokolbin wine region. Construction of that pipeline has already commenced, with an estimated capital investment of over $100 million. It is estimated that some 600 new jobs will be created in the region. The $10 million Hunter and Illawarra Advantage Fund will also be utilised to secure new investment and expand existing businesses.

I refer also to the Main Street and Small Towns program, which will help small communities to revitalise and promote town centres through capital improvements and tourist events. Thirty towns will be targeted by this program in 2000-01. The Cessnock electorate can only benefit from these programs that are aimed at developing and consolidating rural and regional New South Wales. If the economic future of rural communities can be assured, we can maintain the integrity of those communities and the people who live in them; often for generations. Rural New South Wales is proud of its history. One need only visit the smallest community to find parks, buildings and museums of historical significance. This Government has made a commitment to ensure that rural New South Wales can count on having a future. We know that its future is our future. The Minister for Health is showing great strength and insight. His portfolio is well managed and he and his departmental officers are continuing their competent development of this State's health system. This Government is allocating $1.8 billion for rural and regional health services in New South Wales—an increase of 45 per cent in funding.

The Cessnock electorate has scored a windfall with budget allocations for health. The Minister for Health, the Hon. Craig Knowles, should be congratulated on his support for regional centres and all New South Wales. Twenty hospitals are being developed in small rural and regional communities and a further 14 hospitals are planned. Over the next three years the health budget will address long-standing inequities under the resource distribution formula. That will mean a faster flow of money to high-growth areas over the next three years. The Hunter region has been allocated an additional $57.6 million per annum. The Government has allocated $105 million over the next three years to fund incentive programs to improve health care, teamwork and service management.

There is a $107.5 million increase in recurrent spending for mental health services over the next three years, with rural and regional New South Wales being given priority. Overall, spending for rural and regional mental health services will grow by $45 million, or 28.6 per cent, and also by 28.6 per cent in the Hunter region. That is great news for those in our communities who are affected by mental illness. The $12 million allocation for a new pathology building at John Hunter Hospital in Newcastle is also great news for the region. It is pleasing to see positive things happening in the health area. Policing and public safety initiatives have been addressed in this budget. By the end of 2003, 2,110 new frontline police will be on active service across New South Wales. Regional New South Wales will get its fair share of these new frontline police. New South Wales will receive $20.2 million for new technology to improve communications, police investigations and management to create a more effective Police Service.

Roads tie rural New South Wales to regional centres. This Government is well aware of the importance of transport infrastructures to rural New South Wales. The Government's recent budget allocated $2.2 billion to roads and road safety, with more than 60 per cent being directed towards new road construction in rural and regional New South Wales. The Cessnock electorate has had more than $1.2 million directed towards road upgrades and improvement projects. A budgetary allocation of $665,000 will enable the construction of a west-bound overtaking lane on John Renshaw Drive at Blackhill. Funds have been allocated to develop a strategy to divert heavy traffic from Vincent Street, Cessnock, and for the realignment of Main Road 220 from Palmers Lane to Wilderness Road, north of Cessnock.

The Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads listens to the needs of our electorates. A number of bridges will be replaced or repaired as part of this Government's $129 million Country Timber Bridges program. Bridges, like roads, link communities. This Government is committed to linking and building communities, especially in the bush. Approximately $1.95 million will be spent on the replacement of five bridges in the Putty Valley, south-west of Singleton. An amount of $500,000 is committed to the rehabilitation of the heritage-listed Redbournberry Bridge in Singleton. That bridge, the longest wood-span bridge in the State, is worthy of maintenance. My electorate also gained significant grants for local road improvements in the Cessnock and Singleton local government areas.

This Government has all bases covered—roads, health, community services, transport, education, the environment and the Olympics—and it did not break the bank. When this budget is measured against the efforts of former Coalition governments we see that New South Wales has never been a greater place in which to live. Let us not hear any more inaccurate statements coming from members on the Opposition benches in relation to this Government's financial management. We have seen the miserable attempts of the Opposition. Members of the Opposition should ensure that they get their shopping list right before they advance towards setting worthwhile budgets. I commend the budget to the House.

Mr HUMPHERSON (Davidson) [11.39 p.m.]: I wish to address a number of concerns on behalf of my electorate of Davidson, which comprises a large part of the Ku-ring-gai and Warringah council areas. Many Government members who have spoken in this debate have crowed and gloated about the amount of capital works expenditure in the budget for their electorates and the benefits of recurrent expenditure. I contrast that with the announcement today of a further $140 million allocation for the Olympics. That amount has been allocated without consultation or prior acknowledgment of concern, and clearly it has been done in a dishonest way. Surely the Government had prior knowledge of this matter before today's announcement and certainly at the time of the estimates committees, which were held only the week before last. I express my reservations and concerns about that matter and indicate that I wish to move an amendment to the motion. I move:

That the question be amended by the addition of the following words:

", with the exception of the Appropriation (Further Budget Variations) Bill, which is referred to the General Purpose Standing Committee No. 1 with a reference to report by Friday 23 June 2000 upon the Government's proposed amendments."

I move this amendment on behalf of all the people of this State who, I am sure, believe in the appropriateness of Parliament scrutinising the budget, which is the purpose of this debate. There should be a further and detailed analysis of the reason for this extra $140 million for the Olympic Games and an indication of the point at which the Government knew or understood that it had to allocate the money. What will that $140 million be applied to? The Government has told us that $70 million is an extra allocation over and above that which it believed would have to be allocated less than a month ago. What will that $70 million be applied to? What elements of the Olympics budget have changed so significantly in the past month that an extra $70 million had to be allocated? What degree of contingency is appropriate? With another $70 million being applied as a contingency to the Olympics budget there is great uncertainty. What is the exposure, and is this the end of the story for us as a community?

Put in context, that $140 million could fund a large part of the capital and recurrent budget in areas across the State. I identify my electorate as one area that needs capital works funding. This amount far exceeds the entire capital works budget for schools across New South Wales. A multitude of schools need capital works, but they are not getting them in this budget. They have waited for those facilities for years, but they have had no indication of when they will be provided. Police stations are needed in some areas. Other capital works, particularly in roads and transport, are desperately needed. Many members, particularly Coalition members, could identify how, when and where that $140 million could be applied. If the money is now being applied by the Government in an attempt to change the budget, at what point did it know that its budget forecast was wrong? What has changed in the past month? We are entitled to have answers to those questions before this budget is passed.

The Government has been dishonest. It must have known of these concerns. It should not try to squeeze this budget change of $140 million through the House with only a few hours notice. Any member of this House who has any respect for parliamentary appropriation, and any appreciation of the sort of scrutiny the Auditor-General would expect to be applied to this level of expenditure, would agree that this matter ought to be referred to a general purpose committee for a detailed analysis before finally being passed by Parliament. There has been a significant contrast between the capital and recurrent funding received in my electorate of Davidson and that received in the electorates of many Labor members. There are no major capital works at all in my area in this year's budget, and there have been no major capital works during the past five years of the Carr Government.

It makes terrific local media for Government members when they crow about the money that is being spent in their areas. I ask for a fair go and put strongly on the record that equity should apply to all areas. Regardless of whether there are demands in a Labor, Liberal or an Independent electorate, the constituents are entitled to a reasonable allocation of funding and resources to ensure that their quality of life, needs and wants are addressed. This is the sixth budget brought down by the Government, but my constituents have been ignored year after year. Whilst many Government members may try to characterise the constituents of Davidson as well-off silvertails, that is not the case. Although many people in my electorate are socially and economically well-off, a great many live on incomes that would be considered below a reasonable level. Many elderly people have great difficulty meeting their needs and many self-funded retirees have difficulty maintaining their homes. They are asset rich, because of the increase in the value of their homes, but income poor. As a consequence, they experience difficulty managing their domestic budgets.

Given the lack of money in my area over the past six years, I believe it is only appropriate as and when there is a change of government in this State that a future Liberal-National government undertake an equity audit. An equity audit is necessary to review the inequity that has occurred in the electorates during the time of a Labor Government in New South Wales in the allocation of money to the various grants programs, capital works improvements and recurrent funding programs. Where there is a clearly identifiable trend and certain areas have been deliberately and politically disadvantaged, some form of compensatory package should be applied on a one-off basis. The purpose is not to simply throw money around; it is to address the deep needs in my area and other areas.

In my electorate there are many people who are disadvantaged and people who have a need for recurrent disability services or general community services. In education, funding is needed for early intervention for those students who are at risk of falling between the cracks. Because people live in a relatively well-off area does not mean that every one of them is well-off. Many people in my community find it difficult to live day by day, week by week, and they have to make great sacrifices. They have been ignored by the Government over the past five to six years.

I would like to refer to some areas in my electorate that should have received funding but did not. First, one school has been pursuing improved facilities for a number of years. Belrose Primary School has no permanent administrative centre for the principal and staff. They have been operating out of portable classrooms for more than a decade. Despite promises and assurances of a multipurpose centre and despite increased enrolments, nothing is forthcoming and they have been forced into trying to sell off land to fund those facilities. Ironically, the Government is not prepared to facilitate the sale of the land to achieve that purpose, and it has been on the drawing board now for several years.

Numerous people in my area desperately need respite care and support. Frequently I hear stories about respite care centres and homes in my area having inadequate space for those people or a number of beds being taken up on a permanent basis by one or two clients who thereby deny others access. A number of those clients are taking up those beds while they are drying out and they have a history of violence. Carers or parents are reluctant to leave their relatives there for casual respite, because they fear for their safety. That is a particular problem and has been for some years.

Bearing in mind that funds are available at the click of a finger, such as the additional $140 million to fund the Olympics, why were the two portions of land along Mona Vale Road that were recently sold not acquired by the Government and transferred into the adjoining national park? On numerous occasions in this House I have mentioned the fact that the Government could have applied money to preserve our urban national parks system, but that did not happen. There has been a progressive reduction in police services in my area, including the north shore, Davidson and Manly patrols. The reference in today's newspapers to the increase in break and enter crimes over the period that the Carr Government has been in office demonstrates the need for resources. It is not surprising, given its attitude over the past few years, that the Government is not prepared to allocate the necessary resources to those areas.

Roads and transport are two of the biggest issues in my electorate. While the Parramatta to Chatswood rail link offers future improvement to the public transport network, there is no preparedness by the Government to ensure it will be extended to the northern beaches at some time in the future. Clearly, that is not even on the drawing board. It is just loose rhetoric, nothing more. There is a need for a new transport link in one form or another between the northern beaches and the lower North Shore. The Government has allowed that to moulder, despite the section 22 committee recommendation of approximately four or five years ago. It has run the priority down to the extent that it does not exist in the Government's mind. The irony is that that transport link could well be built almost entirely, if not entirely, by private sector funding. Proposals have been put up that would enable a facility to be provided—primarily a tunnel—to connect the northern beaches with the lower North Shore and the Warringah Freeway in the North Sydney region. Yet, the Government is not even prepared to consider those proposals.

There is a need for improvements in local roads, including the Wakehurst Parkway and a graded separation with Warringah Road, help overcome the extended delays and congestion that occur in peak periods. Naturally enough, given the approach of the Carr Government, not a cent will be spent on those improvements. Commuter parking is one strategy that would improve patronage of public transport. On the north shore rail line from Chatswood to Gordon there is a need for improved commuter car parking. The commuter car park at Gordon is always congested early, often by people from the Central Coast. Increased commuter parking would alleviate congestion in local streets and would also enable more people in my electorate to use the rail connection to the city and elsewhere. If more people had the option to park and ride on the route through Warringah Road and the Wakehurst Parkway they would avail themselves of it and catch express buses. But the Government is not prepared to provide the resources or funding to that end.

Over the past six years the northern beaches have been ignored as the Government has wound back funding for the hospitals at Mona Vale and Manly. It is now floating the concept of a new centrally located hospital, which has many attractions for many people, particularly in my electorate. However, I fear there is an underhanded strategy on the part of the Government to use this as an excuse to further wind back resources and services from both those hospitals to the detriment of the quarter of a million people on the northern beaches. I have identified a number of areas, and I have raised these in previous years, where appropriate funding should be allocated, not because money should be evenly distributed right across every electorate in the State but because of demonstrated need. [Quorum formed.]

I expect a fair go for my constituents. I expect funding to be applied on the basis of need, and there is need. There is a need for capital works grants and for recurrent services from which many people in my electorate would benefit—many elderly, and many very young. I fear, because of the bigoted approach, policy and funding application of the Government in the past five years that some people in my area will be deliberately disadvantaged. There is an urgent need for funding, whether it be for young people with reading disabilities or difficulties, or wayward young people who may fall through the cracks. I simply ask that my constituents and my electorate be given a fair go and receive the appropriate level of funding on the basis of need. [Time expired.]

Mr W. D. SMITH (South Coast) [11.59 p.m.]: The Treasurer announced a most responsible budget that reflects the strong New South Wales economy. Expenditure has been increased in the important areas of health, education, law enforcement and community services. Public works expenditure has also increased, and that means more infrastructure and more jobs. At the same time a large portion of State debt and liabilities have been paid off, thus shoring up New South Wales triple-A rating, which is sure to encourage even greater investment in this State and create more job opportunities. It is fair to say that the strength of the national economy depends largely on the domestic achievements and confidence of the New South Wales economy. In the past five years New South Wales has experienced considerable improvement in the management of State services, the cultivation of investment interest and job prospects. To this end the Government can proudly stand on its record of prudence, astuteness and fair-mindedness.

New South Wales has a Labor Government that moves with the times, that takes heed of the past and learns. It is a Government that goes forward and accommodates the hectic demands and ideals of this new age, the new millennium. It is a credit to this Government that the year 2000 Olympic and Paralympic Games have been paid off. The logistics of these events are mind-boggling, to say the least. Organising and training some 50,000 to 60,000 volunteers must be a daunting task. In addition there are the athletes, spectators, media, administrators and officials, and all the systems and processes needed to facilitate the smooth running of the Games. The challenge has been accepted, and Australia will deliver the best Games ever, leaving a lasting and positive legacy for us all.

The Government has achieved a unique standing on an international level by ensuring that the people of New South Wales and Australia are not only free of the Olympic debt experienced by other host cities, but that they share in the benefits of a restored, renewed and restructured New South Wales, which includes sporting facilities and recreational centres of the most modern and highest standing in the world. The Olympics will also showcase Australia to the world: our remarkable uniqueness, down under and distanced from crowded nations, as well as the diversity of our culture and people, our beautiful landscapes and natural environment, and our products and services. We will be paraded as a great place for business investment, a great place to live and a great place to visit. The Sydney of the year 2000 will open the gateway to an unprecedented level of confidence for years to come for the people of New South Wales.

Recently, I attended the South Coast Regional Tourism Awards in Merimbula where tourist operators on the South Coast informed me that bookings have already been taken from people attending the Games who also want to see some of the beautiful South Coast. In my electorate businesses involving steel, glass and transport have benefited to the tune of several million dollars from Games contracts. As well, the German ladies volleyball team, the Belarus ladies artistic gymnastics team, the Belarus rowing and canoeing team, the Egyptian rowing team, the Papua New Guinea and Netherlands ladies volleyball teams have chosen to use facilities in the Shoalhaven for pre-Games training. In the past five years an extra 324,000 jobs have been created in this State, 134,000 of which were created in the past 12 months. That is more than half of the predicted 200,000 over four years from 1999. That is another sign of the Government's skill and ability to inspire community confidence with attainable and logical aspirations: a careful, measured approach to complex and sensitive issues, an approach that is serving our New South Wales communities well.

With the lowest unemployment rate in the nation at 5.8 per cent, the unemployed and young people in regional, rural and metropolitan regions can be assured that new opportunities for the future are expanding in New South Wales. Job growth will continue long after the Olympic Games are over through the Government's Beyond 2000 plan, which involves not only the Government's capital program but billions of dollars in private sector investment to be facilitated by the Department of State and Regional Development, the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning and many other Government agencies. Over the past four years the value of the State asset acquisition program was $18.25 billion. Over the next four years it is expected to increase to some $21.5 billion, sustaining about 84,000 jobs each year. The health of the people of New South Wales is in good hands. The health budget has been increased by $479 million from the previous budget to $7.4 billion. The further $472 million for capital works is another sign of the Government's commitment to improving the health of the State's communities.

Once again, rural and original communities will benefit through the construction and redevelopment of 20 hospitals in small towns. The most welcome asset of the State's new health budget is the introduction of three-year planning phases for area health services. The budget confirms that commitment with the first instalment of $414 million in recurrent cash payments. Health services are a major issue for our families and communities, particularly those in rural areas, and it is a credit to the Government that the needs of these communities are being acknowledged. Country Labor has been a force in ensuring greater attention is given to the urgency of health issues in country areas. It is filling the gap left by the neglect of the party that used to stand up for those communities: the National Party. The Carr Labor Government is committed to the provision of health services. Recurrent health spending will rise to almost $8.1 billion per year over the next three years.

As all members of Parliament representing country areas will no doubt agree, dental health is a serious concern for both families and communities. The provision of public dental treatment was allowed to fall to a pitiful state under the New South Wales Coalition Government. That was exacerbated when the current Federal Coalition Government scrapped the Commonwealth Dental Health Scheme. The State Labor Government has been left with the task of overhauling and rebuilding the New South Wales public dental health system. Credit must go to the Minister for Health for determining that as a priority. The $4 million in this budget for dental health services, which will increase to an extra $20 million per annum in 2002-03, is most welcome. Mental health services will also undergo significant improvements thanks to the extra $36.5 billion, which will increase to an extra $107 million per year in 2002-03.

The Carr Government's commitment to education and training is another formidable example of the high value placed on public institutions. We must remember that public education is an integral part of our society, and there is no question but that it plays an enormous part in the growth and development of our children. It needs to be respected and valued only by governments but by parents, teachers, students, business and the wider community. Since the Carr Labor Government took office funding for education and training has increased by $1,482 million. This year funding will increase by $312 million on last year's budget to $6,930 million. This is a solid indication that the Government is taking a valiant stand on education and training, keeping pace with communications and technology, addressing the levels of literacy and accuracy, and continuing the school maintenance program. Funding for community services and disability services also represents a commitment by the Government to further improve the conditions of the most disadvantaged in our communities. Demands on community services and its workers are high, and it is fair to say that some people somehow fall through the net.

Mr Armstrong: Point of order: I am reluctant to take this point of order, but the honourable member, who has made a major contribution since he has became a member of this House, is reading word from word from his notes. I ask that he use notes purely for support and give us the benefit of the rhetoric he is capable of delivering as opposed to reading a prepared speech.

Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! I am sure the honourable member for South Coast is referring only to copious notes on an irregular basis. I will allow him to continue.

Mr W. D. SMITH: The $1,486 million in funding for community services is truly welcome, particularly the 18 per cent or $110 million increase for child protection; the $389 million for child and family services, which is an increase of $54 million or 16 per cent; the increase of $20 million in foster care payments; and the $21.5 million of growth funding for home and community care which will provide an extra 500,000 hours of care to 8,000 more older people and people with disabilities. I welcome the extra funding for police services, firefighters and emergency services. Funding for roads and transport is also gladly welcomed.

The Government is establishing an admirable record for the preservation and protection of the natural environment. As our communities, businesses, agriculture and industries become more focused on conservation and the environment it is pleasing to know that the Government is a leading force with an inspiring budget that includes a record allocation of $223 million to the National Parks and Wildlife Service, and an extra $23 million in additional funding for work of the Environment Protection Authority on scientific research, air quality monitoring, waste management and radiation control.

The budget also includes funding of $13.6 million for the acquisition of land in regional New South Wales for new national parks and reserves and the allocation of $6 million over the next three years to combat the problem of soil acidity, including acid sulphate soil. The move to exempt first home buyers from stamp duty is welcome. It will benefit young families and boost the real estate industry, particularly in regional areas. The further reduction of payroll tax is welcome and, hopefully, it will encourage the business sector to create more job opportunities. The move to reduce stamp duty on general insurance and some commercial insurance is also welcomed and should serve to ease the burden of the GST on these products for consumers. The cut from 11.5 per cent to 10 per cent is a marked difference and will help all families, particularly young families and the elderly.

This has been a concern to people in my electorate as insurance policy renewal notices arrive with new increases due to the GST. The implications of the GST are beginning to be felt by consumers. It is a pity that the Federal Government has not seen fit to explain these implications in its expensive advertising campaigns. Country Labor has been very effective in drawing attention to the needs and concerns of rural and regional communities in New South Wales. Once again I am delighted and grateful that the South Coast electorate is benefiting from the Government's commitment to ensuring a better and fairer deal for country New South Wales. For the first time in decades the South Coast is being viewed as a major centre of distinction, with the ideal foundations to build a leading, productive regional economy in harmony with the natural environment. The irony is that because the region in general has sat in the background of State affairs and business interests for so long, it has not been savagely exploited by the rampant commercialisation and overdevelopment that was so prevalent in many areas in the 1970s and 1980s.

Today we are blessed with opportunities to get it right and build on the wisdom of cautious, measured economic growth and development, in consideration of the infrastructure needs of the South Coast's many communities, as well as the natural environment. It is an honour for me to be part of the Government's designs to deliver better services in health, education, policing, transport and community services. There is no question that health and hospitals remain a major concern to South Coast families and communities. I am pleased that the health budget includes $9 million towards the $28 million redevelopment project for Shoalhaven hospital.

As part of the Illawarra Area Health Service, the South Coast electorate will also benefit from funding increases to its budget. We are also looking forward to improvements to our dental health services and mental health services under the new funding programs. I thank the Minister for Health for his considered approach to these issues. Roads in the South Coast electorate are also a major issue for families and communities, and roads funding for the region has been directed to some of the most important sites of concern. More than $300,000 has been granted as part of the planning phase for upgrading the Princes Highway at South Nowra. The general community and business sector has been pressing for improvements to this particular section of the highway for a number of years.

This area of the Shoalhaven is developing into a major industrial and commercial centre, and it is likely to be the focus for future investment prospects. The Minister for Roads continues his commitment to the Princes Highway with funding for works at Milton and Ulladulla and improvements to the BTU Road intersection. Planning work for a deviation at Conjola Mountain, widening at Condies Creek Bridge near Wandandian, widening of curved sections of Moss Vale Road at Cambewarra Mountain and the allocation of more than $1.7 million to Shoalhaven City Council are all welcome projects for the South Coast.

The $15 million allocated for the north Kiama bypass is also welcomed by the South Coast electorate. When this project is completed the benefits for my electorate will be enormous. As many honourable members will note from their visits to the South Coast, the region as a major tourist destination and is among the targets of a number of successful tourist promotion schemes. Our tourism organisations are being well supported by the Minister for Tourism, and they work hard to attract visitors. One of our biggest problems is road access, particularly during the major Easter and summer holiday periods. Motorists driving south on the Princes Highway from Wollongong hit major traffic hold-ups from Albion Park to south of Kiama, then again at Gerringong all the way through Nowra and Ulladulla. Although our visitors do not suffer the same problems as those travelling north, these sections of the highway nevertheless experience their fair share of traffic congestion.

I thank the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads for his continued efforts to fund works for the Princes Highway, despite the Federal Government's continuing refusal to acknowledge the significance of the Princes Highway as a road of national importance. Education and training on the South Coast are also receiving funding from this budget with $57,000 for the commencement of work on the new hall at Nowra Public School. Parents, teachers and students are delighted that this project is a certainty. As well, our students will benefit from the education and training programs, including the Computers in Schools program and funding for cabling with the local network infrastructure. I am also pleased with the funding of almost $300 million allocated for investment in new school and TAFE facilities.

Access to public housing continues to be among the most pressing issues in the South Coast electorate, as it is in many other electorates. This budget again represents the Government's commitment to addressing housing matters, with 39 new homes to be built in the South Coast region. Some $530,000 is allocated to start building or refurbishing public housing units in Nowra. Public, community and Aboriginal housing will benefit with these projects ultimately representing investment of $6.2 million. Public housing in the South Coast electorate has undergone major improvement works in past years, and that has led to an increase in morale of many residents. We now see fresh gardens and neat facades, with the park areas much improved and tended by local residents. I thank the Minister for Housing for his continuing interest in improving conditions for public housing residents and understanding the demands placed on a heavily utilised service.

Conservation and the environment are particularly relevant to the South Coast electorate. One of the most important events to occur in the electorate in recent years has been the decision on the Southern Comprehensive Regional Assessment. The process culminating in the decision moved relatively smoothly, and I am pleased by the result. More than 45 new staff will start work with the National Parks and Wildlife Service in the southern region, the first of 91 additional jobs created as a result of the assessment. Some 100 new national parks and reserves will be gazetted, and more than 300,000 hectares will be added to the reserve system. I also welcome funding of more than $3 million to purchase land for the Jervis Bay National Park, which is a pristine jewel on the South Coast.

As I said earlier, the exemption of stamp duty for first home owners is welcome, and I expect it to have a major impact on home ownership in the South Coast electorate. Young families in the area will now have an opportunity to move out of the precarious and often insecure rental market and into a place of their own. That must be viewed as a huge break for families in my electorate which find themselves moving on a regular basis because their homes are to be sold or refurbished. Together with the $7,000 First Home Owner Grant scheme, First Home Plus will save first home buyers about $4,500. They will now have a better chance to buy a place of their own. I commend the budget to the House.

Mr O'DOHERTY (Hornsby) [12.15 a.m.]: I commend to the House the amendment moved by the honourable member for Davidson a few moments ago. The Opposition is extremely concerned that the Government, at five minutes to midnight—indeed, it is now quarter past midnight—is asking the House to approve, without any explanation or forewarning, an additional $140 million in contingencies for the Olympics budget. The Government made an announcement on the matters this afternoon, and the Treasurer brashly told a press conference that this may not be the end of the matter. He could not give a guarantee that this would be the end of additional expenditure that the taxpayers of New South Wales would have to make to SOCOG in preparation for the Olympic Games.

Recently during a committee hearing on the budget estimates the Treasurer was unable to provide a total budget figure for the Olympics. We are simply saying that this matter needs to be referred to a committee, which would report back to the House by Friday, so that we can make a determination about whether it is reasonable expenditure. That is a more than reasonable proposition for the Opposition, standing as it does on behalf of the taxpayers of New South Wales who are being asked, without warning, to spend an additional $140 million on the Olympics.

I shall put that in context. The total additional capital expenditure the Government will make across all agencies in New South Wales over what they spent last year—in other words, the total increase in the capital budget this year for schools, hospitals, police stations and roads in New South Wales—is $135 million. The Government has asked us to approve another $140 million for SOCOG, again refusing to say that that will be the end of the matter. That puts it into context. This $140 million is almost as much as the Government will spend this year on all school building and maintenance projects in New South Wales. The total amount the Government will spend on schools and TAFE building programs in New South Wales is $300 million, yet in the blink of an eyelid the Government wants us to approve another $140 million for SOCOG.

Imagine where that money could be better spent! Without any proper accounting for it, the Government has asked us to approve the expenditure now. We are not here to write the Government a blank cheque on the Olympics. We fully support the Olympic Games. We brought them to Australia. We believe they will be fantastic for the economy and for the people of New South Wales. However, they were never designed to be a sink for money, as Michael Egan and the Minister for the Olympics have made them. They were never designed to continue to pull down the New South Wales budget in the way that the Government is arrogantly trying to assume by asking us, at 20 minutes past midnight, to consider an amendment, simply click our fingers and give the Government another $140 million.

The growth in the home and community care funding for people with disabilities and older people who need support in their homes simply to have quality of life is only $20 million, and the Government is asking for $140 million for SOCOG. The increase in the disability budget for this year is $45 million, and the Government is asking for $140 million for SOCOG. Where are the Government's priorities? How does it justify itself to the people of New South Wales, who will miss out because this money will come out of the Consolidated Fund? Therefore, the Opposition, through the honourable member for Davidson, will move an amendment. We want the Committee to examine this matter and report back to the House after asking those who refused to provide answers two weeks ago questions that they must answer, otherwise we will not be prepared to simply write a blank cheque for the Government for this amount of money.

Mr GREENE (Georges River) [12.19 a.m.]: I shall refrain from getting carried away in my contribution on the Appropriation Bill and cognate bills by speaking in too much detail about the overall extent of the budget and the enormous efforts the Treasurer has put in place to ensure a successful fiscal year for New South Wales. Basically I shall restrict my comments to the seat of Georges River, which obviously impacts on me as the member for the electorate. The Georges River electorate is well served by continued expenditure on the M5 East project. That project, which will ultimately cost $750 million, is a major bonus not only for New South Wales but particularly for Georges River residents. Upon completion of this project in 2002 an extensive amount of traffic that is currently diverted onto King Georges Road, Stoney Creek Road and other arterial roads will continue along the M5 East to link up with the Eastern Distributor.

The M5 East is a major roads project and the continued funding and satisfactory work progress on the M5 East is welcomed by Georges River constituents. Additionally, $500,000 has been allocated for roadworks within the Georges River electorate; $196,000 has been allocated to Hurstville City Council and $186,000 to Kogarah Municipal Council for general roadworks. It is pleasing also to see continued funding for road safety projects within both of those council areas. I congratulate the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads on his desire to ensure the continuation of those road safety initiatives. As a member of the Staysafe committee I am particularly pleased with those funding allocations.

This year's budget has set aside funds for the continuation of the amplification of the East Hills railway line, a project also welcomed by Georges River constituents. That will undoubtedly lead to a much better service on the East Hills rail line. Extension of fast train express services together with the amplification project will be well received by my constituents. This project ties in with the Millennium trains, which will be available from May. Without going into great detail, all New South Wales residents are impressed by the projects undertaken by the Minister for Transport for security across the New South Wales rail network.

The South Eastern Area Health Service will receive a 4.5 per cent funding increase. Again, I will not go into the detail of that funding as it has been recorded many times in this place. The successful announcements by the Minister for Health in recent months of increased funding into the health budget have been warmly applauded throughout New South Wales. The South Eastern Area Health Service benefits from that increased funding. In particular, St George Hospital has been allocated an extra $1.1 million for its procedural centre, and a further $1.1 million for the psychiatric admission centre.

I am pleased that $2.2 million has been allocated in this budget for the completion of the Calvary Hospital redevelopment project. Approximately $19.9 million will be spent on that redevelopment. Anyone who has been associated with Calvary Hospital would appreciate the enormous effort that has gone into that project and the Government's commitment to its completion, which has been strongly supported by the St George district community. Calvary Hospital is known worldwide as a leader in palliative care and it is wonderful to see this new facility is almost complete.

Education is a subject close to my heart, and the Georges River electorate has again been extremely well treated by the Minister for Education and Training. A further $350,000 has been allocated to the Penshurst Public School for the completion of its administration block, which will conclude the upgrade of the school. Some weeks ago I attended that school's council meeting, and everyone was delighted by the works that had not only been undertaken but were soon to be completed at the school. It is pleasing also to note that an allocation of $3.3 million has been set aside for the commencement of the Beverly Hills primary school upgrade. That upgrade will be completed by 2002. Debbie Sutton, Principal of the Beverly Hills school and Craig Stevens, president of its parents and citizens association, are excited about that allocation. In fact, today students from Beverly Hills primary school were present in Parliament House and I spoke to them about the upgrade of their school.

Extensive minor capital works are taking place at a number of schools throughout the electorate. I will not detail them, but I thank the Minister for Education and Training for his contribution to those schools. An amount of $7.2 million has been allocated to the Georges River college, which will be part of the Oatley education precinct. That project was announced last year by the Minister for Education and Training. The Minister announced this year that the three schools to participate by sending senior students to the college will be Peakhurst High School, Hurstville High School and Penshurst Girls High School. The State Government, through the Minister for Education and Training, has made a significant contribution to ensure that this new education resource will be well funded.

I thank the Minister for his contribution of $7.2 million towards that project, which will ultimately cost in the vicinity of $10 million. The college will be an enormous boon to the area. The honourable member for Kogarah and the honourable member for Rockdale both commented today in their contributions to this debate about the enormous bonus the college will provide for education within the area. In recent weeks I have been pleased to hear from a number of parents whose children will attend the college next year. They are excited about this new educational initiative within the Georges River electorate. As I have said, it will service the whole of the St George district and particularly those three high schools. Only two weeks ago I attended a consultative committee meeting with a number of parents, who said that their school communities were delighted with the process.

The Department of Housing will spend $2.3 million in the Georges River electorate on the acquisition of new properties in the Kingsgrove, Peakhurst and Beverly Hills areas. I thank the Minister for Housing for that contribution. A continued maintenance program will be undertaken by the Department of Housing throughout the Georges River electorate. I thank the department for ensuring that Housing Department tenants are well catered for by providing maintenance to the premises. Of course, the Georges River electorate takes its name from the Georges River. I thank the Minister for Fisheries for his allocation of $200,000 a year for the next four years to clean up and remove unused oyster leases in the Georges River. That will be part of the provision of cleaner water and a better Georges River.

I thank also the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning for the continuation of the $6 million funding over four years for foreshore access projects to benefit the residents of Georges River. I particularly note the support of the Lugarno Progress Association, which has applied in the past year for grants from the foreshore access fund for its boardwalk proposal. I also congratulate Dr Peter Tralaggon and Sharon Cullus on their support of projects that will ensure improved access to the Georges River. This week we are awaiting announcements of funding from last year's allocation, and it is great to see the continuation of that funding into the next budget. That is a very brief summary of the support that the budget has given to the Georges River electorate. I congratulate the Treasurer on the work he has done for both the Georges River electorate and the State.

Mr SOURIS (Upper Hunter—Leader of the National Party) [12.30 a.m.]: I support the amendment but indicate that it is regarded as a very late and sudden amendment. There has been no explanation and no attempt whatsoever by the Government to brief the Opposition. The Government should not deal in this way with an amendment proposing a $140 million contingency for the Olympic Games by foreshadowing it as an amendment in the Committee stage. There needs to be more accountability and more openness. The Government should treat this House with a little more respect rather than simply bouncing in with an amendment of such an enormous magnitude.

The amendment highlights the gross mismanagement that daily characterises planning for the Olympic Games. There has been one blow-out after another. The previous contingency was $140 million. This additional contingency of the same amount means that the contingency component alone is in the order of $280 million. With shortfalls in sponsorship and ticket sales already in the public domain, and many project bills and other items of expenditure drawing to a close and being finalised, and many other bills yet to come in, who would know—certainly the Government does not know—exactly what Olympics shortfalls and blow-outs are in store for us.

I particularly focus on statements made by the Premier with great fanfare, and assertions by many Government members during their contributions, that every citizen of this State should feel well satisfied that the Olympic Games have been managed superbly, are paid for and will not leave any continuing debt. The rest of this State, including country New South Wales, has forgone much infrastructure and much funding for recurrent services so that the Olympic Games can be held, so-called paid for and so-called concluded without debt. That turned out to be a fallacy, and once again emphasised the sacrifice made by country people and the rest of the community.

The Carr Government seems quite capable of finding $140 million in the space of an hour—by suddenly introducing an amendment in the dying moments of this bill. Without flinching, the Government can suddenly find $140 million, without rearranging its finances, but seems completely impervious to the call and plight of areas in New South Wales that are desperate for funding. It seems that the Carr Government cannot find any money to provide a State-based structural adjustment program for the dairy industry—which would save the industry. It is incapable of adequately funding the capital requirements of education and health.

The Government is incapable of funding adequately a rural stock squad and incapable of suppressing or solving stock theft and crime in rural areas. It is incapable of paying off Health Department creditors in every area health board in country New South Wales and incapable of providing adequate police strengths in country areas during the Olympic Games—country areas will lose up to one-third of their police force to Homebush during the Olympic Games. The Carr Government is also incapable of finding money to appropriately fund local government roads and bridges.

That list is only a very brief snapshot. There is a far greater list of deprivations suffered by the people of country New South Wales and of this State generally who are calling for urgent, equitable funding to complete vital capital expenditure and vital services. We owe it to the people of country New South Wales and the community generally to seek better accountability on this amendment, and to call on this Parliament to examine that measure through its estimates committees. If the Government opposes that approach by exerting its numbers, the Opposition will oppose the amendment that the Government intends to move in the Committee stage to find $140 million to cover up this massive emerging black hole that the Olympics has become. It is waste and mismanagement beyond compare!

Mr TRIPODI (Fairfield) [12.36 p.m.]: The Carr Government's 2000-01 budget builds on five years of hard work to deliver better services in my electorate of Fairfield by making more money available for health, education, policing, transport and community services. This year the Government will spend $23.6 million on important capital works in Fairfield, supporting more than 350 jobs. In a firm demonstration of the Carr Government's resolve to ensure Fairfield students have access to the best possible education facilities, this State budget has provided $166,000 to begin a $4.86 million upgrade of Westfields Sports High School. This is particularly good news for the school, especially after the devastating fire it experienced late last year. The new project will upgrade science and technical learning facilities, the administration block, student and staff study areas, and car parking.

The first stage of the State Government-funded $19.5 million Carramar rail overpass has been completed and was officially opened to traffic on Saturday 27 May. In this budget the Government has committed $5.3 million towards the completion of this project. Fairfield motorists will benefit from improved safety and travel conditions, as well as improved travel times. A proposed underpass on Wattle Avenue will make local access safer and more convenient, and will complement work by Fairfield City Council to revitalise the Villawood town centre. In another major boost to road improvements in the electorate of Fairfield the Government has committed $850,000 for major upgrading works along Woodville Road and the Hume Highway; $644,000 for road safety initiatives in the Fairfield area such as improved signage, road resurfacing, upgrading signal displays; the construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Harris Street and Thomas Street, Fairfield; and $100,000 to fund the planning stages of the widening of The Horsley Drive to four lanes between Fairfield Street and Carramar.

Construction of a slip-lane at the intersection of Polding Street and The Horsley Drive, Fairfield, will commence this year. Once complete, the slip-lane will complement other major road works undertaken in the Fairfield electorate, and will relieve traffic congestion and improve traffic flow to the central business district. As this Government is firmly committed to improving accessibility of public transport services and facilities for all commuters in accordance with draft standards for accessible public transport under the Disability Discrimination Act, $2.5 million has been allocated in this budget for further easy access improvements to Fairfield station. This funding will provide lifts, elevators, tactile tiling to assist the vision-impaired, and toilets for the disabled.

A new multipurpose facility will be constructed in the Fairfield local government area to provide methadone and counselling services to drug addicts. The budget has set aside $400,000 this financial year, and further funding is likely to be allocated on an annual basis. To ensure that the new centre does not dispense methadone for profit, it will be either government-operated or run by a suitable non-government organisation. A great incentive has been provided in this budget for young people and families in Fairfield who are struggling to buy their first home. A new scheme, First Home Plus, will provide enormous assistance to new families. The New South Wales Government's Family's First Strategy has allocated ongoing funds to provide an integrated network of early intervention services to support new parents and carers in south-western Sydney. More than $468,000 has been allocated in this budget to the Karitane service located in Carramar. These funds will enable the establishment of a volunteer home visiting service.

The aim of the service is to improve parent-child interaction, establish regular contact with appropriate health service providers, increase knowledge about child development and boost the satisfaction of parents with their parenting skills. Each and every member of my constituency stands to benefit from this budget. Students will gain improved facilities and new teaching programs. Motorists will enjoy an improvement in safety and travelling times. Train commuters will see a transformation of Fairfield railway station with easy access for travellers. Furthermore, the budget also provides tax cuts that will provide savings to families and businesses in the Fairfield area. I commend the budget to the House.

Mr THOMPSON (Rockdale) [12.41 a.m.]: I am delighted to support the Carr Labor Government's budget. I note a couple of points with particular reference to my electorate. First is the relocation and rebuilding of the St George Special School, which is a school for children with disabilities. It is a great organisation with great people, tremendous staff, wonderful teachers and magnificent young people attending the school. I particularly note the amount of about $15 million to be expended for improvements around Rockdale railway station. They include easy access upgrades and the rail-bus interchange and parking facilities.

Another outstanding item in the budget is in Aboriginal affairs. An amount of $23 million has been allocated for Aboriginal community development programs, which allow Aboriginal people to make decisions themselves about issues that affect them in their daily lives. It allows for the establishment of working parties throughout 39 communities in New South Wales which will identify infrastructure programs for future government action. This is a great Labor Government. It focuses on the key issues of education, health, transport, law and order, social services and hospitals. I am proud to be a member of the Carr Labor Government with such a great traditional Labor budget.

Question—That the amendment be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Mr Armstrong Mr Collins Mr Debnam Mr George Mr Glachan Mr Hartcher Mr Hazzard Ms Hodgkinson Mr Humpherson Dr Kernohan Mr Kerr

Mr Maguire Mr Merton Mr Oakeshott Mr O'Doherty Mr O'Farrell Mr D. L. Page Mr Piccoli Mr Richardson Mr Rozzoli Ms Seaton Mrs Skinner

Mr Slack-Smith Mr Souris Mr Stoner Mr Tink Mr R. W. Turner Mr Webb Tellers, Mr Fraser Mr R. H. L. Smith

Ms Allan Mr Amery Ms Andrews Mr Ashton Mr Bartlett Ms Beamer Mr Black Mr Brown Miss Burton Mr Campbell Mr Collier Mr Debus Mr Face Mr Gaudry Mr Greene Mrs Grusovin

Ms Harrison Mr Hickey Mr Hunter Mr Iemma Mrs Lo Po' Mr Lynch Mr McBride Mr McManus Mr Markham Mr Martin Ms Meagher Ms Megarrity Mr Mills Mr Newell Mr Orkopoulos Mr E. T. Page

Mr Price Dr Refshauge Ms Saliba Mr Scully Mr W. D. Smith Mr Stewart Mr Tripodi Mr Watkins Mr Whelan Mr Woods Mr Yeadon Tellers, Mr Anderson Mr Thompson

Mr Brogden	Mr Gibson
Mrs Chikarovksi	Mr Moss
Mr J. H. Turner	Mr Nagle

Question resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Motion agreed to.

Bills read a second time.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The Committee will deal first with the Appropriation Bill.

Clauses 1 to 28 agreed to.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The Committee will deal next with the Appropriation (Parliament) Bill.

Clauses 1 to 6 agreed to.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The Committee will deal next with the Appropriation (Special Offices) Bill.

Clauses 1 to 10 agreed to.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The Committee will deal next with the Appropriation (Further Budget Variations) Bill.

Clauses 1 to 8 and schedule 1

Mr WHELAN (Strathfield—Minister for Police) [12.54 a.m.], by leave: I move the following Government amendments in globo:

No. 1 Page 3, clause 5, line 29. Omit "$403,400,000". Insert instead "$543,400,000".

No. 2 Page 16, schedule 1, line 7. Insert "Entity" after "Crown Transactions".

No. 3 Page 16, schedule 1. Insert after line 9 (and, in so far as the amount is concerned, in the Column headed "Further approp"):

Contingency grant to SOCOG 140,000

No. 4 Page 16, schedule 1, lines 13 and 15. Omit "$335,000" wherever occurring. Insert instead "$475,000".

No. 5 Page 17, schedule 1, line 18. Omit "$403,400". Insert instead "$543,400".

Mr O'DOHERTY (Hornsby) [12. 54 a.m.]: The Government asks the Parliament to simply snap its fingers and give it a blank cheque for another $140 million, yet the school computer program this year—a mere fraction of that amount—is ignored. Instead the budget is focused on contingencies for the Olympics. It is simply irresponsible of this Parliament to do what the Government is proposing without proper scrutiny. The Opposition gave the Government the opportunity to have this matter referred to a committee to examine the nature of the expenditure that will be undertaken in support of the Olympics.

In spite of that, there has been no referral of this matter to the appropriate parliamentary committee and there has been no explanation of the expenditure. What is the $140 million for? No explanation has been provided by the Government. The Opposition gave the Government the chance to put this matter before a committee so that the committee could report back to this House by Friday and the Parliament could have information on which to base this $140 million decision. The Government has dishonoured its obligation to refer this matter for examination in the interests of responsible financial management.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! There is too much interjection from the Government benches. The honourable member for Hornsby has the call. The honourable member for Fairfield and the Minister for Public Works and Services will cease interjecting.

Mr O'DOHERTY: Because the Government will not come clean on whether this is the last amount to be paid out of consolidated revenue to hand to the Minister for the Olympics, Michael Knight, in the interests of responsible financial management, the Opposition is simply not prepared to provide the Government with a blank cheque and will not agree to the amendment. This is one of the matters that the Government refuses to acknowledge, yet it has come to this House at five minutes to one in the morning and has asked the Opposition to approve the payment of $140 million and hand the Minister for the Olympics, Michael Knight, another blank cheque, thereby continuing the financial mismanagement that has characterised the Olympics under the Carr Government. Regrettably, the Opposition cannot agree to the amendment.

Question—That the amendments be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Ms Allan Mr Amery Ms Andrews Mr Ashton Mr Bartlett Ms Beamer Mr Black Mr Brown Miss Burton Mr Campbell Mr Collier Mr Debus Mr Face Mr Gaudry Mr Greene

Mrs Grusovin Ms Harrison Mr Hickey Mr Hunter Mr Iemma Mrs Lo Po' Mr Lynch Mr McBride Mr McManus Mr Markham Mr Martin Ms Meagher Ms Megarrity Mr Newell Mr Orkopoulos

Mr E. T. Page Mr Price Dr Refshauge Ms Saliba Mr Scully Mr W. D. Smith Mr Stewart Mr Tripodi Mr Watkins Mr Whelan Mr Woods Mr Yeadon Tellers, Mr Anderson Mr Thompson

Mr Armstrong Mr Collins Mr Debnam Mr George Mr Glachan Mr Hartcher Mr Hazzard Ms Hodgkinson Mr Humpherson Dr Kernohan Mr Kerr

Mr Maguire Mr Merton Mr Oakeshott Mr O'Doherty Mr O'Farrell Mr D. L. Page Mr Piccoli Mr Richardson Mr Rozzoli Ms Seaton Mrs Skinner

Mr Slack-Smith Mr Souris Mr Stoner Mr Tink Mr R. W. Turner Mr Webb Tellers, Mr Fraser Mr R. H. L. Smith

Mr Gibson	Mr Brogden
Mr Moss	Mrs Chikarovksi
Mr Nagle	Mr J. H. Turner

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Amendments agreed to.

Clauses 1 to 8 and schedule 1 as amended agreed to.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The Committee will deal next with the State Revenue Legislation Amendment Bill.

Clauses 1 to 9 agreed to.

Schedules 1 to 7 agreed to.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The Committee will deal next with the Unclaimed Money Amendment Bill.

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Schedule 1 agreed to.

Appropriation Bill reported from Committee without amendment, Appropriation (Further Budget Variations) Bill reported from Committee with amendments, and remaining cognate bills reported from Committee without amendment, and bills passed through remaining stages.

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

Intergovernmental Agreement Implementation (GST) Bill
Public Authorities (Financial Arrangements) Amendment Bill

Motion by Mr Whelan agreed to:

That the House at its rising this day do adjourn until Wednesday 21 June 2000 at 10.00 a.m.

House adjourned at 1.08 a.m., Wednesday.
_______________