Full Day Hansard Transcript (Legislative Assembly, 27 May 2005, Corrected Copy)

Mr Speaker (The Hon. John Joseph Aquilina) took the chair at 10.00 a.m.

Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr BOB DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment) [10.00 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Since 1995 the Carr Government has carried out forestry assessments in accordance with the national forest agreement between the Commonwealth and the States. These assessments have produced historic regional forest agreements in four major coastal regions—the Eden area, southern New South Wales, and on the upper and lower North Coast. In striking an appropriate balance between social, economic, environmental and cultural values, the Government's forestry assessments have set a national benchmark for the involvement of all stakeholders and community groups. They have resulted in a world-class conservation network that protects biodiversity, old-growth forests and wilderness, as well as providing secure access for the timber industry to timber resources and long-term certainty for the industry's future.

Over the past decade the Carr Government has declared more than two million hectares of new national parks and reserves. More than half of those gains have resulted from forestry assessments and it has supplemented them with significant purchases of high conservation areas throughout the State. The Government has now completed its fifth major forestry assessment, in the Brigalow and Nandewar regions of the central west. As a result, it will make the single most important, one-off addition to the reserve system in western New South Wales. The bill will permanently protect 352,000 hectares of high conservation value forests in new reserves, including public land that will change its tenure from productive forests to reserves and former private lands that have been purchased by the Department of Environment and Conservation in recent years.

The bill introduces an entirely new land management tenure. To be known as a community conservation area, this tenure was developed specifically for this part of western New South Wales. Most importantly, the Government's new community conservation area will provide an appropriate balance—between conservation and sustainable industries that will provide jobs in the timber, gas, minerals and apiary sectors. It will also be underpinned by strong community involvement. The Government's decision follows five years of detailed scientific analysis and consultation with timber operators, conservation and Aboriginal groups, the minerals and gas industries, and local communities.

The Brigalow and Nandewar regions have experienced more than 100 years of intensive development, including the clearing of approximately 70 per cent of the original vegetation. These areas are the heart of what we call the sheep-wheat belt, and have contributed greatly to the State's—indeed, the nation's—economic development. As a result of this massive clearing, however, this part of New South Wales has experienced a high rate of extinctions. Indeed, species decline in the region is amongst the worst in Australia. That is why the Commonwealth Government recently declared the Brigalow region as a biodiversity hotspot, one of 15 around the nation. The creation of new conservation reserves is an essential part of a reversal of this trend. The public lands that will be permanently protected as a result of the bill contain the highest quality habitat for the most endangered species. They contain the best of the region's remaining vegetation and biodiversity.

I am pleased that the forests of highest cultural significance to Aboriginal people will also now be permanently protected and managed to support Aboriginal cultural heritage and cultural practices. Local Aboriginal communities will benefit from jobs set aside for Aboriginal people, as well as the inclusion of land in special areas that will permanently protect Aboriginal culture. They will also fully participate in the future management of public lands that make up the new community conservation area. Two of the Aboriginal communities' icons of traditional and cultural significance—the Goonoo and Terry Hie Hie forests—have been identified as areas that could be managed through indigenous land use agreements, based on the highly successful model of the Arakwal National Park at Byron Bay.

The forests in these regions contain 47 threatened fauna species, and the new conservation reserves will provide permanent strongholds for these animals and birds, including the turquoise parrot, the barking owl, mallee fowls and the swift parrot. The Government's decision will protect 60,000 hectares of endangered ecological communities and rare, vulnerable and endangered ecosystems. Most importantly, it will ensure the continuation of a viable, sustainable and value-added timber industry with up to 57,000 cubic metres of cypress pine per year available to the cypress industry in secure 20-year wood supply agreements. This industry has provided a vital part of the region's economy over the past century, creating jobs and providing prosperity to small towns that have had little opportunity to diversify their economies.

In order to sustain and improve this industry, the Government will provide an $80-million package to create new jobs, assist mills to exit the industry, compensate workers with either new jobs or generous redundancy packages, and develop joint investment strategies to better use the timber resources and add value to the industry's products. The provision of unprecedented industry assistance at a rate of two Government dollars for every $1 of private investment will facilitate this investment in value-adding processes. Forests NSW will also source timber from outside the Brigalow and Nandewar bioregions, and dedicated resources will be committed to obtaining timber from private property and leasehold lands. The previous timber supply zones for the region will no longer apply and timber will be made available from areas to the south as well as from the west.

Haulage assistance will also be available as part of the wood supply agreements to equalise any transportation costs associated in obtaining timber from non-traditional supply areas. There will in fact be a net increase in the number of jobs in these regions as a result of the funding announced as part of this decision—both within the timber industry and in the new reserves created within the community conservation area. Some timber mills in both the cypress and ironbark industries have already nominated to exit the timber industry permanently. In keeping with the Government's innovative forestry policies, these mills will receive generous assistance packages for business exit. Some small ironbark operators will also exit the industry because of the Government's decision. A separate generous compensation package will be negotiated with these small operators.

The Government is also committed to reviewing the firewood industry, and an exit package will be available for that sector. The Government has made adequate provision for mills that will cease operations. It has put aside up to $15 million for the Business Exit Fund. The fund will provide generous business exit payments similar to the successful model used in the coastal assessments. This fund will also include a special one-off redundancy payment of $72,000 to timber workers from the affected mills who wish to exit the timber industry. There is, however, a special fund to create new jobs for any displaced timber worker who wishes to take up the Government's offer of alternative employment.

Workers who opt to take a new position created as a result of government initiatives will also receive a one-off payment of $27,000 on top of their award entitlements, as well us an amount of up to $45,000 for any required retraining and relocation expenses. It is important to emphasise that the individual interests of every displaced timber worker will be carefully managed by the Government's highly successful Forestry Structural Adjustment Unit. The unit reports to the Minister for Natural Resources and its recommendations will be made to the Minister for the Environment and the Minister for Primary Industries through the Community Conservation Council. Provision has also been made for a special Transition Fund of $10 million over five years. This will ensure continuity of employment for timber workers in those mills that will continue to operate.

The Government is determined to assist the remaining mills to add value to their operations and will be investing jointly with these mills in a range of innovative industry initiatives. If any of these mills require extra assistance during the transition period this fund may be accessed to ensure that workers remain employed while these initiatives come on line and new jobs are established. One of the most important aspects of the Government's policy is the provision of certainty to the industry. As with the previous forestry assessments, those cypress mills that remain in the industry will receive 20-year wood supply agreements. In addition, the Government will invest over $50 million in the future of the region's timber industry. At least $15 million will be provided for timber industry development with wide-ranging initiatives to improve production and maximise value adding in this important industry.
Work on the value-adding package has been undertaken in close consultation with the Forest Products Association and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union. We will continue to work with the association and the union on new projects for the region. The Government will work closely with industry to identify those ideas that will help to develop a strong value-added industry. The industry has already developed some of those ideas in its cypress industry strategic plan. The Government looks forward to working with the remaining mills to consolidate and then build on these plans. Another special fund will be used to create new jobs and improve the quality of white cypress forests to ensure the long-term viability of the timber industry. An amount of $12 million will be available to employ up to 50 workers in a major white cypress thinning program.

This program will not be limited to areas within the community conservation area but will be extended to private and Crown lease lands. The program will optimise the growth rate and quality of white cypress trees and is an essential part of improving the productivity of the forests and ensuring a sustainable timber industry in the long term. This package also includes dedicated permanent jobs for both displaced timber workers and the Aboriginal community. Parts of the Brigalow and Nandewar regions have high minerals and gas potential. Significant exploration activity has already occurred and is expected to expand rapidly over the next 10 to 20 years.

The Government's decision will preserve the full economic potential of the regions by ensuring the local coal and gas reserves can be accessed by the mining industry, including in reserve zone 3, which is the same as State conservation areas in the National Parks and Wildlife Act that permit exploration and extraction activities for gas and mining. The job potential from these industries is considerable. It is predicted that more than $2 billion will be invested in these industries over the next 15 years. As a result, hundreds of new jobs will be created. Indeed, the first of these jobs are already in place, following the development by Eastern Star Gas of a $9 million natural gas gathering system and electricity generating facility near Narrabri.

The Government's decision will also ensure that the regionally important apiary industry will continue to have full access to the forests for honey production. This industry will securely operate in all zones of the new community conservation area. The Government will also provide funding of $2 million over four years to assist with the acquisition and transitional arrangements that will arise from revocation of occupational permits, including annual permits allowing grazing in State forests. Compensation will also be provided to landholders for existing infrastructure on leased land that could be usefully retained and used in the management of a new reserve. These arrangements are consistent with those put in place following other forestry decisions.

An occupational permit task force will be established by the Department of Environment and Conservation based on the model effectively used in other forest assessments, and will include representatives from the New South Wales Farmers Association and the Department of Primary Industries. The task force will advise landholders of the revocation of occupational permits, identify capital works that may have taken place on the leased land, consider the effects of the loss of permits on landholders, and manage transitional arrangements such as fencing and access issues in order to limit negative impacts. Permissive occupancies will also be considered. An important part of this legislation is the proposal to create a community conservation area.

This is an internationally recognised reserve concept new to Australia and is based on recognised International Union for the Conservation of Nature reserve categories. It is a different way of resolving forestry assessments by creating a framework for the co-ordinated management of all public lands. It will achieve both permanent conservation outcomes and provide certainty to the various industries operating in the region. The community conservation area will have three statutorily defined conservation zones: zone 1, a conservation and recreation zone that reserves certain former State forests, Crown land and land vested in the Minister administering the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 as national parks under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974; zone 2, a conservation and Aboriginal culture zone that reserves certain former State forests as Aboriginal areas under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974; and zone 3, a conservation, recreation and mineral extraction zone that reserves certain former State forests and Crown land as State conservation areas under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. No commercial extraction of timber can occur in these three zones.

Over the next five years $29 million in recurrent funding will be provided to the parks and wildlife division of the Department of Environment and Conservation to manage these zones. This will eventually reach $8 million annually and will be supplemented by $9.5 million in capital funding to establish infrastructure in these zones. Statutory responsibility for these three conservation zones will reside with the Minister for the Environment. The fourth zone in the community conservation area will provide for commercial timber extraction and mining. Statutory responsibility for this zone will reside with the Minister for Primary Industries. The usual special management zoning system applied by Forests NSW will be established within zone 4. Minor boundary adjustments to the zones will be required for roads, access and other operational matters. These adjustments must be in order to alter the boundaries of the land for the purposes of more effective management and to adjust boundaries to public roads. Any such adjustment must not result in any significant reduction in the size or conservation values of the land. Adjustments are also authorised in connection with easements.

The Director General of the Department of Environment and Conservation must have the agreement of the relevant Ministers to make any changes. Adjustments must be made before 31 December 2005 or, in the case of an adjustment of the boundary of land adjoining a public road, by 31 December 2011. Clause 16 of the bill provides that future additions to these zones may be made by proclamation. Clause 17 provides that land in zones 1, 2 or 3 can cease to be in that zone only if its reservation as a national park, Aboriginal area or State conservation area is revoked by an Act of Parliament. In other words, the conservation gains achieved by this decision are secure. It also provides that land in zone 4 ceases to be in that zone if it ceases to be State forest.

Clause 19 of the bill provides that land in zones 1, 2, 3 or 4 is not eligible to be identified or proposed for identification, or declared, as a wilderness area under the Wilderness Act 1987 or the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. Some of the State forest identified for addition to the conservation reserves has existing non-negotiable leases. This land will be vested in the Minister for the Environment under part 11 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 and held until the leaseholders voluntarily sell their interests. If this occurs the land will be formally included in the appropriate conservation zone. An amount of $9 million will be provided over the next five years for the purchase of these leases and to buy high conservation value private land that might come onto the market in the future.

Any land within these regions that is later purchased for conservation by the Department of Environment and Conservation will be included in one of the three conservation zones, unless the land is more appropriate as a boundary rationalisation for an existing national park or nature reserve. Management of the new community conservation area will also link directly to management of the existing reserve system, including the Warrumbungle and Mount Kaputar national parks and the Pilliga Nature Reserve. While individual agencies will be responsible for managing each of the four zones, responsibility for overseeing the co-ordinated management of the community conservation area will reside with the new Community Conservation Council. This council will also be responsible for implementing other aspects of the Government's decision.

The council will consist of the directors general of the Premier's Department, the Department of Environment and Conservation, the Department of Primary Industries, and the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources, or their delegates. The council will be subject to the control and direction of the relevant Ministers in the exercise of its functions and will report directly to the Premier. The council will be responsible also for developing a community conservation agreement. The purpose of the agreement is to provide a co-ordinated management framework for the entire area, which will ensure integrated and effective management across all zones, including for pest, weed and fire management. The management principles that will apply in zones 1, 2 and 3 will be developed in accordance with guidelines to be provided to the council by the Minister for the Environment.

The principles are not to be inconsistent with the relevant management principles in the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 applying to national parks, Aboriginal areas and State conservation areas respectively. The reporting framework for the three conservation zones will be the established State of the Parks system, with further reporting as required by the council. The council will be responsible also for providing recommendations to the Government regarding all aspects of the restructuring of the timber industry, including exit payments to mills and workers and timber industry development initiatives. Although the legislation will not commence in full until 1 December 2005, co-ordination and planning must commence immediately. Provisions of the Act that relate to funding of the Community Conservation Council will therefore commence on 1 July 2005.

The council will be advised by three community conservation advisory committees, which will include a wide representative membership, with priority given to local people. These community-based advisory committees centre round the three main groups of forests in the region: the Goonoo in the south, the Pilliga in the central area, and the northern forests such as Bebo and Terry Hie Hie. The advisory committees are central to the Government's decision. The will bring together local communities and a range of social, scientific, conservation and economic interests. They will also include local Aboriginal community representatives. Agencies responsible for managing the public lands which make up the community conservation area's core areas will attend as observers. The chairpersons of the relevant catchment management authorities will also be members and this arrangement will link public and private land management issues.
The main work of the community conservation advisory committees will be to advise on the Community Conservation Area Agreement, with specific focus on those management issues that require co-ordination across all zones within the community conservation area, including fire and pests; to consult and ensure effective communication with local communities; to form partnerships with private landowners to implement landscape-wide policies; and to provide advice to the Director-General of the Department of Environment and Conservation on draft plans of management for community conservation area zones 1, 2 and 3. The intention is that the advisory committees will attempt to reach consensus on the various issues they consider and, where this is not possible, the council will be provided with the various views of the committee members. In other words, this model will form the basis for establishing a co-operative management framework and community partnerships involving all interested stakeholders—including local catchment management authorities, local councils, government land management agencies, tourism organisations, Aboriginal groups, landholders, conservationists, industries and scientific institutions.

I turn now to the source of funding to implement this decision. The bill will reform the Environmental Trust to combine the resources of the existing Environmental Trust Fund and the Waste Fund. The new trust will therefore be larger and more flexible than the bodies that it replaces. The Forestry Restructuring and Nature Conservation Act 1995 will also be amended to allow funding to be provided for the purpose of implementing the forestry restructuring and assistance schemes in the Brigalow and Nandewar bioregions. Section 7 of the Environmental Trust Act 1998 will be amended to allow funding to be provided for other key environmental initiatives including selected waste reduction, resource recovery and waste management programs, which are currently funded by the Waste Fund, which will now be combined with the Environmental Trust Fund; the purchase of water to enhance environmental flows for the State's rivers and restore and rehabilitate major wetlands; the declaration of new marine parks; and the provision of funding support to community conservation groups.

The legislative amendments to the Forestry Restructuring and Nature Conservation Act 1995 will enable the Environmental Trust to fund the proposed Brigalow and Nandewar outcomes. The Minister for the Environment and the Minister for Primary Industries will be jointly responsible for approving relevant spending on these programs. I am proud to introduce this bill, which forms a crucial part of the Carr Government's continuing forest reform and internationally acclaimed conservation achievements. I acknowledge the presence in the House of the honourable member for Tamworth. I thank him, along with the honourable members representing the electorates of Dubbo and Northern Tablelands, for their instructive involvement in this process. I recognise that the honourable member for Wagga Wagga is present on behalf of the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of The Nationals. I commend the bill to the House. For the information of honourable members I seek leave to table colour copies of a map that shows the land described in the schedules to the bill.

Leave granted.

Documents tabled.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Daryl Maguire.

Bill introduced and read a first time, by leave.

Mr BOB DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment) [10.20 a.m.], by leave: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

This bill provides for miscellaneous amendments to legislation affecting the operation of the courts of New South Wales. Schedule 1 amends the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 by clarifying the qualifications of members who are entitled to determine proceedings in the Retail Leases Division of the tribunal. The present provisions allow only a member who is a retired judge of the Supreme Court or Federal Court or who has equivalent experience or qualifications. A recent interpretation of this provision in a decision by the Supreme Court meant that only one current member of the tribunal could meet the criteria. The amendment will extend the class of members entitled to determine these cases to include any current, retired or acting judge or a deputy president.
The amendment is designed to ensure that members who had previously determined these cases can continue to do so. The amendments will also validate previous decisions made by these members. Schedule 2 amends the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 by inserting section 88B to make it clear that where a complaint is lodged in more than one jurisdiction, the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal is to have regard to any decision made in other proceedings relating to the complaint. Schedules 3, 13 and 14 relate to the change in title of Masters of the Supreme Court to Associate Judges. This change has the support of the Chief Justice. The title of Associate Judge is more easily understood by the public and reflects the position that Masters hold within the hierarchy of judicial officers of the Supreme Court. The use of the term "Master" is inconsistent with the use of non-gender specific titles.

The change in title involves a minor amendment to section 52 of the Constitution Act 1902 by inserting "Associate Judge" in the definition of judicial office. The Parliamentary Counsel's Office has advised that a minor amendment of this nature does not require a referendum. Other consequential amendments have been made to a number of other Acts, including the Supreme Court Act 1970 and the Judicial Officers Act 1986. The amendments will not have any adverse impacts on officers currently appointed as Masters of the Supreme Court. Masters will automatically be appointed as Associate Judges and their conditions of appointment will continue to apply. Savings provisions will ensure that the change of title will not affect any proceedings before the Supreme Court.

Schedules 4 and 13 also amend the Supreme Court Act 1970 and the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 to ensure that the legislation reflects that all Supreme Court officers are appointed under the Public Sector Employment and Management Act 2002 and to clarify the powers of Registrars and officers of the court. Schedules 5 and 6 amend the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986 and the Judges Pension Act 1953. Under the Judges Pensions Act 1953 a widow or widower of a judge is generally entitled to a reversionary pension to the value of 30 per cent of the judges' salary at the time of the judge's retirement or death, if in office at the time. A widow or widower is entitled to this pension from the date of the death of the judge or retired judge until the widow or widower's own death.

Section 16 of the Judges Pensions Act 1953 gives a de facto partner of a deceased judge a degree of legal recognition where the judge is also survived by a widow or widower, and the de facto partner has foreshadowed that he or she may institute proceedings under the Family Provision Act 1982 in relation to the deceased judge's estate. However, section 16 does not apply where a judge is survived only by a de facto partner. To enable the de facto partner of a deceased judge or a deceased retired judge to receive a reversionary pension, the Judges Pensions Act 1953 is to be amended. Such amendments will bring the Judges Pension Scheme in New South Wales into line with all other New South Wales State superannuation and pension schemes.

The Director of Public Prosecutions and his or her spouse are also entitled to a pension under the Judges Pensions Act 1953 and, accordingly, consequential amendments should be made to the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986. Appropriate amendments to the Judges Pensions Act 1953 and the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986 are recommended accordingly. Schedule 7 contains amendments to the Jury Act 1977 relating to the form and manner in which a jury takes an oath or affirmation to give a true verdict according to the evidence. Section 45 is to be amended to remove the necessity for an oath to be taken by a jurist while holding a religious text. This is consistent with provisions relating to witnesses under the Evidence Act 1995.

Section 72A of the Jury Act 1977 is amended by including a standard form of wording for the oath or affirmation to be administered to a jurist. The standard form of oath or affirmation is intended to give guidance to judicial officers on the appropriate manner of administering an oath or affirmation. The standard form of oath or affirmation does not replace other variations of oaths and affirmations that may currently be used. A justice of the peace is required to take an oath of office when they are newly appointed. Justices of the peace are now required to periodically renew their appointment. Schedule 8 amends the Justice of the Peace Act 2002 to ensure that a justice of the peace is not required to take the oath of office again at the time of re-appointment if the former appointment has not lapsed.

The Chief Judge of the Land and Environment Court, the Hon. Justice McClellan, has asked for a number of minor amendments to the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to further the package of non-legislative reforms recently undertaken by the court. These are included in schedule 8 to the bill. The amendments requested by the Chief Judge, which extend the power of the court to direct the mediation of proceedings, to appoint a person to execute an instrument, and to order costs against a defaulting solicitor, all relate to matters where the Supreme Court has existing statutory powers, which have not been extended to the Land and Environment Court. Appropriate amendments to the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are recommended accordingly.

The Chief Judge of the District Court has requested that section 338A of the Legal Profession Act 2004 be amended to increase the maximum costs for certain claims in the District Court. The proposed amendment will allow a respondent to a matter reheard after arbitration, or a respondent to an appeal, to claim an additional amount of costs of up to 15 per cent of the amount recovered, or $7,500, whichever is the greater. The District Court has experienced a significant decrease in the number of cases that may be referred to alternative dispute resolution through arbitration. The proposed amendment is intended to ease the restrictions in the limitation on maximum costs to encourage the continued use of alternative dispute resolution options. It will ensure that a respondent may recover additional costs that may be incurred through no fault of the respondent at a rehearing after arbitration or on an appeal.

The Chief Magistrate of the Local Court has requested that section 19A of the Local Courts Act 1982 be repealed to allow magistrates to robe in court. The Chief Magistrate is of the view that the wearing of a judicial robe will enhance the security of the magistracy and the dignity of the court. To moderate against an undue level of formality in the court, magistrates would be confined to wearing a plain black robe, and the choice to robe would not extend to members of the legal profession. It is proposed that the wearing of robes by magistrates would be a matter of individual choice with the cost to be borne by the judicial officer. An appropriate amendment to the Local Courts Act 1982 is recommended accordingly.

Under the Oaths Act 1900 the oaths of office for a justice of the peace may be administered by a range of judicial officers or by a specially authorised justice of the peace. To reduce the burden currently being placed on magistrates, schedule 11 amends the Oaths Act 1900 to allow a registrar of the Local Court to administer the oaths of office for a justice of the peace. The Public Defenders Act 1995 provides for the appointment of senior and deputy senior public defenders for fixed terms. Schedule 12 will amend the Public Defenders Act 1995 to provide that a senior or deputy senior public defender, who immediately before his or her appointment was a Crown prosecutor, shall also be appointed as a public defender and, subject to the Public Defenders Act 1995, shall remain a public defender after ceasing to hold that office.

The Bar Association has noted that Crown prosecutors have security of tenure but must relinquish that security if appointed as a senior or a deputy senior public defender. These amendments ensure that Crown prosecutors are not discouraged from seeking appointment as a senior and deputy senior public defender. These amendments improve the efficiency of the courts, and provide an improved and more accessible service for legal practitioners and the public. With those recommended changes, I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Daryl Maguire.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Mr CRAIG KNOWLES (Macquarie Fields—Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, and Minister for Natural Resources) [10.40 a.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I am pleased to introduce the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Infrastructure and Other Planning Reform) Bill 2005. The wellbeing of our economy depends on business being able to work with certainty, a minimum of risk, low transaction costs, and appropriate levels of regulation. This bill demonstrates the Government's determination to take decisive action to achieve these objectives. By establishing greater certainty in the assessment of projects of State significance and major infrastructure projects, the bill further assists in the Government's desire to afford opportunities for the private sector to participate in the delivery of our infrastructure programs.

There is no doubt that this bill dramatically improves the climate in which to do business in this State. The bill implements important elements of this Government's planning reform program—a program which is overhauling our planning system and cutting red tape at all levels, whilst continuing to improve the high standards of environmental assessment and community participation that have been the hallmark of planning legislation in this State for almost 30 years. The bill introduces new mechanisms which will ensure that the Government delivers quickly and efficiently on its infrastructure programs—projects for roads and transport, schools, hospital upgrades, and water and energy projects are obvious examples.

The bill will introduce a number of important changes. A single assessment and approval system for major development and infrastructure projects will replace approval processes currently scattered throughout several pieces of legislation. The bill will also improve the co-ordination of major strategic projects as well as ensure that the State focuses properly only on those matters which are genuinely of State or regional significance. In that sense, this bill re-establishes the duality of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act by ensuring the appropriate level of assessment is applied to each matter considered under the Act and, in particular, by ensuring that there is proper delineation between those matters which are properly dealt with by the State and those which are properly dealt with by local government. For matters of State significance or major projects, the new single assessment process will strengthen the rigour, transparency and independence of the process of assessment, providing higher levels of up-front certainty for the proponent, the community and other stakeholders.

The bill will cut red tape by reducing time, cost and complexity in the assessment of infrastructure projects, projects of State significance and critical infrastructure projects. Together with the new State Environmental Planning Policy (State Significant Development) 2005, which was gazetted last Wednesday, the provisions contained in the bill enable the Minister to determine strategic sites, projects or programs of State significance and resolve issues associated with them decisively, transparently and expeditiously. These reforms not only are vital to the delivery of major infrastructure projects and to the economy of New South Wales but also underpin the Government's ability to implement strategic initiatives such as the Metropolitan Strategy. As part of that implementation objective, the bill introduces further legislative changes to support the necessary planning reforms to streamline the statutory planning system by reducing the number of planning instruments and ensuring those that remain are more consistent in their form and content, especially as they relate to local environmental plans.

I will now address the elements of the bill in turn. Schedule 1 deals with infrastructure and other projects amendments. It inserts a new part into the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act which will deals with projects, programs or sites which are determined by the Minister. The bill provides up-front certainty for major projects through the introduction of new concept approvals; removes the need for up to 15 different approvals and licences from nine separate pieces of legislation, replacing them with one assessment and approval process; removes the need for concurrences for major development; and abolishes the stop-the-clock provisions that currently add significantly to assessment times. For projects of major worth to the economy, we are compelling our government agencies to follow processes which will provide certainty at the front end of a proposal in order to reduce investment risk. Projects which will be considered major are projects such as the Pacific Highway in its entirety, plans like the freight strategy, and sites like the Royal North Shore Hospital or the Westmead campus. This new legislation will deliver those types of projects faster and with more certainty. For private sector projects or public-private partnership type projects, that increased certainty translates into real cost savings and bankable security.

A new part for major infrastructure and development is also proposed. Currently, the same set of rules applies to a house extension as to, for example, a $300-million commercial, residential and retail complex. This one-size-fits-all approach has resulted in delays and has significantly added to costs for major projects. The existing single-issue approach to managing particular aspects of the environment has also led to additional layers of approvals and unnecessary constraints on development and significant added costs. It leads to potentially poorer environmental outcomes. The bill will deliver a more interrelated system, focused on delivering major projects together with sound environmental and community outcomes.

There is new project assessment under the new part. The bill provides for a new part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act that will replace two different assessment and approval processes for major private and public projects. The new part will apply to the following major projects: development currently identified as State significant development under the State environmental planning policy; major State Government infrastructure projects, for example, projects which normally require an environmental impact statement under part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act; and other projects, plans or programs which are "declared" by the Minister because of their economic, social or environmental planning significance to the State or region.
The environmental assessment will be carried out under guidelines and protocols to be developed by a new Chief Executive Officers Forum. That forum will be made up of the directors general of the major regulatory agencies. Those guidelines and protocols will set the rules for assessment methodology, consultation requirements and performance levels, and will ensure that high environmental outcomes are achieved. The level of assessment will be tailored to the complexity and likely level of significance of the impacts of the project in question. The guidelines and protocols will be published and gazetted by the Minister and, in relation to legislation administered by the Minister for the Environment, following consultation with that Minister.

For each project, the Director General of the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources will issue specific requirements for the assessment of the project, including the level of assessment, assessment methodology, any performance criteria, and consultation requirements, based on the guidelines. One of the requirements will include the preparation of a statement of commitments by the proponent. This is an important new initiative as it makes the proponent state clearly and up front to regulators and the community how it intends to manage the project to minimise the impacts on the environment. Prior to exhibiting the environmental assessment, the director-general must be satisfied that the assessment meets the specified requirements. The director general will seek advice from relevant agencies in making this decision. If the assessment is not adequate, additional information must be provided prior to the exhibition of the project. This initiative ensures that the community, not just the regulators, have access to all relevant information important in the assessment of the project. There will be no stop-the-clock opportunities for delays caused by requests from agencies for additional information later in the process.

The environmental assessment will be exhibited for a minimum of 30 days, with submissions invited from government agencies, councils and the community. Following exhibition, the submissions—or a summary of the issues in submissions—will be sent to the proponent, with a request to respond to the issues raised. The proponent may modify the project and the statement of commitments to minimise impacts on the environment. If significant modifications occur, a preferred project report, including a modified statement of commitments, will be made public. This initiative increases the importance of community submissions, as the proponent will need to respond to issues raised. For the proponent, this initiative provides flexibility by allowing modifications to the project to minimise impacts without having to go through the full re-exhibition process.

The director general then prepares an assessment report with recommendations for the Minister on the determination of the project. The director general will seek advice from other relevant government agencies in finalising the report and recommendations. The Minister will then make his determination public, and the bill contains requirements to make all key documents public. Appeal rights will generally continue to apply as if the project was being assessed under either part 4 or part 5 as is relevant. The proponent will continue to have the right of appeal against the Minister's decision. Third party merit appeals will continue to apply if the project is listed in schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, unless there has been a commission of inquiry, an expert panel hearing or a concept approval. Judicial review provisions will continue to apply under section 123 of the Act.

Integrated approvals have also been considered. New part 3A provides for integrated approvals that will consolidate 15 approvals under nine Acts into a single assessment process and approval given under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The assessment and approvals will be actively co-ordinated by the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources. The provisions relating to the assessment and management of impacts on critical habitats, and threatened species, populations and ecological communities and their habitats under the Fisheries Management Act, the Threatened Species Conservation Act and the National Parks and Wildlife Act will be integrated into the assessment under this new part.

In addition, the environmental protection provisions under eight different Acts will be integrated into one approval. Those provisions relate to impacts on waterways, riparian zones and coastal processes, including from the use of water, water management works, dredging and aquifer interference under the Rivers and Foreshores Improvement Act 1948, the Water Management Act 2000 and the Coastal Protection Act 1979; impacts on aquatic ecology, including from dredging, obstructions in waterways or disturbance of mangroves under the Fisheries Management Act 1994; impacts on terrestrial ecology under the Native Vegetation Act 2003 and the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974; bushfire risks under the Rural Fires Act 1997; impacts on Aboriginal items or places under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974; and impacts on heritage values, including in relation to excavation under the Heritage Act 1979.

Projects may still require a licence for ongoing operations under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act, an approval under the Roads Act, an aquaculture permit, mining or petroleum production lease or approval under the Mine Subsidence Compensation Act as is relevant. In these circumstances, there will be a joint assessment with the agencies contributing to the one assessment. Once the Minister has determined the project, any subsequent approval must be substantially consistent with the Minister's approval. This requirement will also apply in relation to any appeal over those authorisations.

The chief executive officers forum will ensure that appropriate assessment and approval guidelines and protocols are agreed to and are consistently applied. These guidelines, together with initiatives like biodiversity mapping and Aboriginal heritage landscape assessments, will better inform proponents and improve the quality of environmental assessments. Concept approvals are also included. For the first time, this bill will introduce concept approvals into the planning system for major projects.

Concept approvals will have statutory force and are designed to provide up-front certainty for those projects or programs which are either long term or complex, or where overarching strategies require statutory endorsement so their component parts can proceed with bankable security. Concept approvals will also allow for a program of projects, such as upgrading of the Pacific Highway, or an infrastructure plan like the Freight Strategy, to be assessed in a transparent manner to provide an early sign-off of the various components of the project or the plan. Concept approvals will increase certainty up front and reduce environmental and investment risks and costs. They will allow the community to comment earlier in the development process, and for community views to be taken into consideration in the refinement of the projects.

Critical infrastructure is introduced in this bill. As another new provision, the bill will also allow the Minister to declare projects as critical infrastructure. For example, if the drought continues, infrastructure work to implement the Metropolitan Water Plan will need to be accelerated. Under the present planning regime, some of those components would normally require lengthy environmental assessments. The presumption underpinning such assessments is that they will determine whether work should proceed. However, for critical infrastructure, the environmental assessment process should not be about whether such projects should be approved, but, rather, how they will proceed. A concept approval will be required for all critical infrastructure projects, but no further planning approvals.

The bill provides that there will be no appeals against decisions on critical infrastructure and there will be no third party legal challenges under any environmental and planning statutes against those decisions. The bill will ensure that that the construction and operation of approved critical infrastructure projects cannot be stopped or delayed by other government agencies or local councils. It is important to note that infrastructure will only be declared critical where its speedy completion is considered essential to the social, economic or environmental welfare of the State. Further, once declared as critical infrastructure, these projects will be subject to appropriate environmental assessment and controls.

There will be independent hearings and assessment panels. To underpin these reforms, the bill will include another important initiative to strengthen the integrated assessment process. The bill will make legislative provision for independent hearings and assessment panels to provide additional expertise to resolve technical issues in a timely manner and strengthen the scientific basis for decision making. Panels will be appointed by the Minister, who will specify the make-up of the panel and the scope of the matters it is to investigate. The Minister may direct the panel to be involved in any phase of the assessment process.

A panel may be composed of independent technical experts, which is an expert panel, or a panel of government agency officers. The panel may hold hearings to assist in clarifying issues with stakeholders and to ensure that community views are appropriately considered. The panel is advisory and reports to the Minister with its findings, which must be taken into consideration by the director-general when preparing the assessment report and recommendations for the Minister. The bill makes provisions for regulations in relation to time frames, landowners consent provisions, exhibition and notification provisions, and assessment fees. The bill includes transitional provisions for projects already being assessed under existing provisions of the Act.

These reforms will provide additional opportunities for the community to comment. All major development will be advertised for community input and proponents will be required to respond to issues raised in submissions and, if appropriate, to modify the project. The new panels may also provide an independent mechanism for the community to raise issues and have them considered. The bill includes a requirement to make all assessment documents public.

New part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act will strengthen environmental outcomes and provide for earlier consideration of environmental constraints. These changes will provide a more systematic approach to resolving environmental issues, replacing the current single issue considerations. Earlier consideration of environmental constraints will allow earlier and more effective influence over project design and location decisions. This provides better outcomes for the community and the environment without unreasonable cost to the proponent.

In summary, new part 3A will provide a more appropriate regime for the assessment and approval of major investment in New South Wales. It will provide up-front certainty for complex projects by introducing concept approvals with better opportunity for improved service delivery through public-private partnerships. Red tape is cut by replacing single issue assessment processes and approvals with one integrated process delivering better environmental outcomes. Rigour, transparency and independence are strengthened through the introduction of independent hearings and assessment panels, and enforcement provisions are strengthened to ensure the desired outcomes are delivered on the ground.

Allied to this bill is a new State-significant environmental planning policy, which has already been gazetted and will be one of the ways to access these new provisions. It will focus the Minister's consent role on significant projects and sites, enable the Minister to tailor planning provisions to suit particular sites of State significance and allow the Minister to amend the State environmental planning policy to add new sites. Under the new State environmental planning policy, decisions on local development will be devolved to local government. That will allow better use of State resources and speed up the approval process. The Minister for Infrastructure and Planning has always had the power to approve projects. However, over the past 25 years more than 85 different planning instruments, directions and declarations have been made for this purpose.

This new State environmental planning policy will provide a more systematic approach for nominating projects and programs as well as for sites. The State environmental planning policy will continue to nominate as State-significant development of major mines and industry, infrastructure and coastal development. Other developments have been added to the list. Construction projects worth $50 million or more will now be included where the Minister considers the project necessary to deliver State or regional planning objectives. The $50 million construction project criteria will not apply everywhere but only in selected strategically important locations. The Minister might, for example, declare a $50 million residential project to be of State significance where the project would assist the implementation of the Metropolitan Strategy by helping to locate people close to transport hubs. However, construction projects that are subject to the City of Sydney Act will continue to be determined by the Central City Planning Committee.

Major government infrastructure projects have also been added to the list to ensure that the State Government's infrastructure program can be delivered in an efficient manner. These include, for example, major hospitals, schools, TAFEs, university and medical research facilities, prisons and electricity generating plants. Once the bill is passed and commenced, State significant developments will be assessed as projects in the new part. Schedule 1 to the bill will remove all provisions relating to State significant development from part 4 of the Act. Similarly, the bill will remove all the provisions in part 5 of the Act relating to division 4 assessments as these will also be handled in new part 3A. The bill and regulations also provide for the transition to the new part for all such projects.

The bill also implements other elements of the planning reforms announced by the Government late last year. The Government is preparing new regional strategies in priority regions to align development with population growth and infrastructure needs and to protect our high-value natural resources. These strategies will provide the context for modernising the statutory plans in those regions. The amendments in schedule 2 to the bill will support those reforms to simplify and modernise statutory land use planning. The amendments do not involve a radical rewrite of part 3 of the Act and are limited to changes necessary for delivering the major elements of the reform program. The amendments are the outcome of several relevant task force reviews in 2004, involving experts and stakeholder representatives. The Government places on record its appreciation for their involvement over that period. Further consultation on the detail of these changes has also occurred with the development industry, local government, the legal profession and environmental groups.

The bill provides the critical drivers for the modernisation of local environmental plans [LEPs]. Our objective is to require every local council to bring in one LEP for its area, which means that over the next five years we will have moved from 5,500 planning instruments to 152. There is no reason there should be 5,500 local planning instruments around the State. Spot zonings and outdated orders going back prior to 1979 all add to the confusion and complexity of the system. The other goal of the planning reforms is to achieve greater standardisation and consistency of LEPs. The bill provides for standard instruments to be prepared for environmental planning instruments—namely, State environmental planning policies, regional environmental plans and LEPs. It is intended that this provision would initially be used for LEPs.
The Government has exhibited the working draft standard LEP template that seeks to standardise definitions, zones and key provisions of local environmental plans. As a result of the exhibition and stakeholder input, especially from local government and industry bodies, the amended standard LEP will be re-exhibited in the near future for further comment. We believe that the standard LEP will substantially reduce the time it takes to prepare new LEPs by reducing the involvement of lawyers in the process, offering another time saving. The standard LEP will also revise the zoning categories from the present 3,100 down to around 25 and the 1,700 definitions down to fewer than 300. The bill includes amendments to streamline and enhance the process for making LEPs. These changes will ensure that local councils prepare new LEPs in accordance with the standard instrument.

The director-general will be obliged to ensure that the plan is consistent with the standard LEP before the draft plan is exhibited, and when making a report to the Minister for the approval of the local environmental plan. A further major element of the reform agenda is ensuring that new LEPs implement the State's strategic plans. The bill will enable us to ensure that these strategies are implemented through planning controls in LEPs. It does this by enhancing the existing power of the Minister to issue directions to local councils under section 117. The bill provides new powers for the Minister to ensure that the modernisation of LEPs occurs in a reasonable time. Section 33B provides for the creation of a staged repeal program for existing LEPs, which will require local councils to review and prepare new LEPs within a specified time period.

The staged repeal program may specify dates for the repeal of existing LEPs and key milestones for the preparation of new plans. The staged repeal program may also allow for the postponement of the repeal of an instrument in justifiable circumstances, and can also be used to establish requirements for the periodic review of LEPs. Local councils will be identified as requiring a new LEP within two, three or five years. The Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources recently wrote to all general managers of local councils in New South Wales providing initial advice to them of their priority status. It is intended that shortly after the bill is passed the list will be used to establish the staged repeal program. The draft priority list is also being used to inform the provision of the next round of financial assistance to local councils from the Planning Reform Fund.

The staged repeal program is essential to achieve the modernisation of LEPs within a reasonable time frame. For the first time in recent history the Government is offering local councils substantial financial assistance to assist them to prepare new plans. Around $5.8 million of the Planning Reform Fund has already been granted to 57 councils for work associated with modernising their LEPs, and further rounds of assistance will be provided. Transitional provisions have also been included to assist in the smooth implementation of these requirements for new LEPs. A number of local councils are already well advanced in preparing new LEPs, and have invested significant effort and resources into this process. Transitional provisions are included to allow councils in these circumstances to proceed with making a LEP that does not comply with the standard LEP. Generally, these councils will be required to transpose their plan into the complying format within five years.

The bill contains amendments to provisions regarding development control plans [DCPs]. These changes are aimed at rationalising the number of DCPs, clarifying their relationship to environmental planning instruments and enabling an owner of land to prepare a DCP instead of a master plan. The bill aims to achieve a reduction in the number of DCPs by generally allowing one only to apply to a site. This means that in future a DCP may cover the whole local government area, a precinct or a site. The bill also clarifies that a development control plan may not duplicate the provisions of an environmental planning instrument, be inconsistent with an instrument or contain provisions that prevent compliance with an instrument. The bill provides for development control plans to replace master plans. Master plans have become another layer in the planning system. To simplify the system, in the future master planning will be implemented through development control plans and staged development approvals. The bill delivers this by allowing an environmental planning instrument to require that a development control plan should be prepared by, or on behalf of, an owner of land before development may occur.

The provisions also allow for land pooling, by providing for an environmental planning instrument to specify that a number of landowners within a defined area must jointly prepare a development control plan before development can be carried out. This provision is likely to assist in the timely delivery of urban land releases as part of the Metropolitan Development Program. The provisions will prevent planning authorities from stopping development by refusing to make a development control plan. The provision allows developers to submit a development application where council refuses a development control plan or delays the making of the development control plan by more than 60 days.

The usual appeal rights will be available in relation to the development application. The provisions also empower the regulations to extend the 60-day time limit where the owner fails to provide requested additional information. Transitional provisions have been included to ensure that the new requirements apply only to new development control plans. Local councils will not be required to remake all DCPs within a set time, although it is expected that many councils will, in practice, review their DCPs at the same time as preparing their new local environment plan. A transitional provision also deems all existing master plans to be DCPs, and deems all existing provisions that require a master plan to require a DCP.

Schedule 3 to the bill provides for the existing provisions in the Act for staged approvals to be augmented with the introduction of procedures for the lodgment, assessment and approval of staged development applications. This will enable developers to stage complex developments with clear procedures for obtaining approvals for the development. Section 83B provides that a staged development application may set out an overview of the proposal across the whole site, with the details of each separate component of the development to be subjected to subsequent development applications. Alternatively, a first stage development application may include both the concept for the entire site and a detailed proposal for the first component of the development.

Only the applicant can request that a staged development application be lodged. Where a development control plan is required for a site by an environmental planning instrument, section 83C allows a staged development application to be prepared and approved as an alternative. A staged development application is subject to the provisions of integrated approvals and designated development, and requirements prescribed by the regulations. While any consent on a staged development application remains in force, a determination on any further development applications for that site cannot be inconsistent with the staged approval. It should be noted that already more than 1,100 of the 3,000 concurrences and referrals in LEPs have been removed, and permits under the Rivers and Foreshores Improvement Act have been reduced by 60 per cent. This will assist in streamlining the approvals of local development with the removal of unnecessary red tape.

The bill also amends the following Acts to allow for regulations to be made that specify persons, activities or projects which could be exempted from the need for an approval under those Acts: the Fisheries Management Act 1994, the Mine Subsidence Compensation Act 19610 and the Rural Fires Act. Schedule 4 to the bill limits the duty on determining authorities to consider section 111 where the environmental implications have already been considered by another determining authority. The provisions also provide that a determining authority can be exempted from this duty where routine activities—for example, the maintenance of infrastructure—are being undertaken in accordance with a code approved by the Minister.

Amendments to the bill expand the role of the nominated determining authority from co-ordinating the exhibition of the environmental impact statement to include the co-ordination of the preparation and furnishing of the assessment report that forms the basis of a determination. This will ensure a better integration of all environmental matters relating to the activities and an upfront resolution of issues. The bill also provides for fishery management strategies to continue to be assessed under part 5, including in circumstances when the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning is the approval authority. In those circumstances a regulation will set out the appropriate procedures.

The enforcement provisions in the Act need updating and strengthening to ensure outcomes are delivered on the ground. Schedule 5 to the bill makes a new range of investigative, compliance and enforcement powers available to the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources to ensure projects approved under the new part are carried out in accordance with their conditions of approval. In particular, the bill strengthens the monitoring, compliance and audit powers, and provides for offences where the monitoring or audit reporting has been inadequate, false or misleading. To achieve a more streamlined assessment process, the bill amends other legislation that requires permits and approvals for development.

The bill lists mining leases and petroleum production leases as integrated approvals under section 91 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. As a result, the Department of Primary Industries will be an integrated approval authority and will actively participate in the assessment of mining and petroleum projects under the integrated approval provisions. The bill also amends the Mining Act 1992 and the Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991 to remove provisions which suspend the operation of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The repeal of section 74 of the Mining Act makes it clear that the environmental impacts of proposals such as expansions of mines into new areas must be assessed and determined. This is essential as these proposals may have significant impacts, for example, on river systems that are important for Sydney's drinking water supply.

Section 65 (3) of the Mining Act will also be repealed. This makes it clear that any conditions the Minister might impose on a mine to protect the community and the environment from its impacts must be complied with. It is important that the mining industry be treated like any other industry in New South Wales. The reforms will achieve that; they will ensure that new mines and expansions of existing mines are properly assessed and that the mining industry complies with the undertakings it gave to the community when it applied for a consent. Similar provisions in the Petroleum Act will also be amended or revoked. It is intended that exemptions would be progressively introduced for minor and low impact development.

Development that is addressed by environmental planning instruments may be satisfactorily assessed by local councils under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. It is important to note that the Government will not allow the repeal of section 74 to prevent existing mining operations continuing under their existing approvals. The Government undertakes to amend the State significant development State environmental planning policy [SEPP] before the mining-related provisions of the bill are commenced to ensure that planning instruments cannot prohibit mining and petroleum production activities carried out under existing leases. The SEPP will also provide appropriate transitional provisions for all existing mines. Regulations can also be made under the bill to ensure a smooth transition to the new regime for existing mines.

The Government has moved decisively with its planning reform agenda to cut red tape and provide the regulatory conditions to support a strong economy, jobs growth and both public and private sector investment. The competitiveness of New South Wales to attract sustainable infrastructure and investment opportunities depends on having an efficient and clear development approval system underpinned by an up-to-date planning regime. This suite of initiatives—the State significant development SEPP, the new part of the Act providing for the efficient assessment and approval of major development, and the reforms to the planning regime—continues our drive to cut red tape and deliver on our infrastructure commitments. I thank those in the various industry groups who have participated in the formulation of this legislation. I particularly thank the staff of the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources and my ministerial staff who have contributed enormously to what is a very competent piece of legislation that will underpin the State's economy for generations to come. I commend it to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Daryl Maguire.

Bill introduced and read a first time, by leave.

Mr KERRY HICKEY (Cessnock—Minister for Mineral Resources) [11.19 a.m.], on behalf of Dr Andrew Refshauge, by leave: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I am pleased to introduce the Occupational Health and Safety Amendment (Workplace Deaths) Bill. It will create a new offence, with a higher penalty regime, under the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 where a person who owes a duty of care under the Act engages in reckless conduct that causes the death of a person in a workplace. In October 2004 the Minister released the Occupational Health and Safety Legislation Amendment (Workplace Fatalities) Bill 2004 for consultation. Since then the Government has consulted widely with employers and unions on the nature of the workplace death offence. In more than six months of extensive consultations about the draft bill employers have consistently told the Government they want the full force of the law to apply to rogues whose disregard of basic safety obligations results in the death of a vulnerable worker.

Employers have consistently commented that they support strong action being taken against rogue employers whose conduct is negligent or reckless. Based on these constructive views, the Minister gave a commitment that the bill would not be introduced in the form as originally released in 2004. In a ministerial statement on 5 May 2005 the Minister announced the release of a revised bill—the Occupational Health and Safety Amendment (Workplace Deaths) Bill 2005. This is the bill I have introduced today. The revised bill is aimed at a small minority of rogues whose indifference to health and safety in the workplace results in death. The bill represents the most effective means of targeting those who are most culpable and deserving of greater degrees of punishment.

I turn now to the specific provisions of the bill. The bill creates a new offence where a person who owes a duty under part 2 of the Act engages in conduct that causes the death of another person at any place of work and that person is reckless as to the danger of death or serious injury arising from that conduct. Those who have duties under part 2 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 and to whom the workplace death provision may apply include employers, controllers of work premises, directors and managers, employees and persons hindering the aid of injured workers. "Recklessness" has been defined as heedless or careless conduct where the person can foresee some probable or possible harmful consequence but nevertheless decides to continue with those actions with an indifference to, or disregard of, the consequences.

One example of a reckless act could be if an employer directs workers to work at heights without fall protection. The death of a person under the new offence is taken to have been caused at a place of work even if the person is injured at work but dies elsewhere, such as a hospital. It also does not matter where the culpable conduct that led to the death at work took place. An employer can therefore be held accountable for conduct or decisions taking place at corporate headquarters although the fatal injury to the worker took place at the worksite. Under the bill a corporation that engages in reckless conduct that causes the death of a person at a workplace can also be charged under the new provision. Directors and managers will also be liable to prosecution under the new offence, although they will have to be personally engaged in reckless conduct causing death to be convicted under the new offence. This accords with one of the prime objectives of the bill: to target and punish those who are most culpable and indifferent to the health and safety of employees and others at the workplace.

The bill provides for a significantly higher penalty regime in relation to the new offence. These higher penalties are justified given the greater degree of culpability needed to be proven by the prosecution under the new offence. The penalties for this new offence are up to $165,000 for individuals and/or up to five years' imprisonment and $1.65 million for corporations. These penalties are an appropriate reflection of the gravity of the consequences of the reckless behaviour of the offender. Under the bill a person who is charged with the new provision will be able to use the defence that they had a reasonable excuse. What constitutes a reasonable excuse will be a matter for the court to determine on the particular facts of a case, but will require a compelling and overriding reason why reckless conduct causing death in the workplace might be excused. An example might be where, in an emergency, some action is taken that causes a death in the workplace. The court will be able to take the circumstances of the action into account in determining whether a conviction is warranted.

This defence is wider than that of "lawful excuse" which would relate, for example, to police engaging in certain conduct in the execution of their duties. This additional defence ensures that a court will take into account the inherent dangers and difficulties of particular types of work, such as policing, when considering the application of the new offence. The current defences under section 28 of the Act will continue to apply. That is, it was not reasonably practicable for a person to comply or the commission of the offence was due to causes over which the person had no control and against the happening of which it was impracticable for the person to make provision.

The bill provides that the new offence can be prosecuted only by a WorkCover inspector or, in the case of mines, a mines inspector in the Department of Primary Industries. However, if either of these agencies decided not to prosecute a person following a workplace death, a union will be able to ask the relevant agency for the reasons behind the decision not to prosecute under this offence. The bill also provides for another person to bring a prosecution with ministerial consent. This provision takes into account circumstances where it may be necessary to prosecute either WorkCover or the Department of Primary Industries.

In addition, the bill provides that the prosecution will not be allowed to appeal if a person is acquitted of charges under proposed section 32A. That is very important. The bill also includes amendments to the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 to allow a person sentenced to a term of imprisonment under the new offence a right of appeal from the Full Bench of the Industrial Relations Commission in Court Session to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal. This bill is the result of a thorough and exhaustive process of consultation. The views of all stakeholders have been well vented and the result in the form of this bill is a rewarding one. The bill is the most effective form of achieving the goal of safe workplaces by punishing those few who are indifferent to the health and safety of those at the workplace. The Government thanks those unions and employer groups who have contributed so constructively to the development of the bill.

This reform ensures there will be sufficient punitive measures to punish those with the requisite degree of culpability. The vast majority of employers have nothing to fear from this new provision—the rogue employers must now realise that very harsh consequences will follow their criminally reckless acts. The community has the right to expect that the appropriate penalties and deterrents are in place to ensure that people who leave for work every day can return home safely to their families and friends. I believe we all want safe workplaces. We all want our loved ones to return home safely from work. This bill is not some token measure but is an effective amendment to ensure the health and safety of everyone in the workplace. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Daryl Maguire.

Motion by Mr Kerry Hickey agreed to:

That the House at its rising this day do adjourn until Tuesday 7 June 2005 at 2.15 p.m.

Ms NOREEN HAY (Wollongong) [11.31 a.m.]: The Lagoon Seafood Restaurant in the electorate of Wollongong had the honour this year of hosting the 2005 Restaurant and Catering Awards ceremony, where businesses and individuals from Wollongong and across the Illawarra were acknowledged for their excellence within the hospitality industry. The function was hosted by Erica and Marty from the very popular Illawarra i98 FM radio station and featured a number of speakers, including Mr Brien Trippas, President of the New South Wales Restaurants and Caterers Association, and Robert Goldman, Restaurant and Catering New South Wales and Australian Capital Territory Chief Executive Officer, and was attended by more than 360 industry professionals. I was also honoured by the opportunity to address the region's finest talents in the hospitality industry and present the two major awards for the evening—Restaurant of the Year, and Caterer of the Year.

The awards provide deserved recognition to restaurants and caterers that excel in the field of dining in both regional New South Wales and metropolitan Sydney. The awards reflect a unique combination of public participation and professional judging to determine the winners in each of the categories. The Restaurant and Catering New South Wales Awards attract representatives from across the tourism and hospitality industries, including restaurateurs, caterers, cafes, suppliers, media, government dignitaries, and industry figures. Restaurant and Catering New South Wales has developed the awards for excellence into a comprehensive program that recognises the diversity and quality of food service in this State. Restaurants and caterers make a significant contribution to our economic health and prosperity as well as improving our way of life. The growth in regional tourism is a reflection of the strength of restaurants in the regions.

I acknowledge and congratulate Restaurant and Catering New South Wales as the major association representing the needs of restaurants, including those in hotels and taverns, and caterers in New South Wales. The South Coast, Highlands and the Illawarra—Wollongong in particular—have many outstanding eateries and caterers that are assets to our city. With the unique judging criteria of public participation and anonymous professional judges used to establish the winner, I am absolutely confident that the service and quality of food provided by the nominees is of the highest standard at all times. I congratulate Eschalot Bowral on being named Restaurant of the Year, and Culinarius by Monika for winning Caterer of the Year. I would also like to congratulate Mylan, Southern Crepes, Zest Restaurant, Caveau, Ruby's Country Style Cuisine, and the Portofino International Function Centre, all of which won awards in their relevant categories.

There were other award winners, but the ones I have named were award winners predominantly from the electorate of Wollongong. The event brought hundreds of people together in a magnificent venue, which has a view of the ocean that is second to none. I applaud Vania Harrison and her team at the Lagoon Seafood Restaurant for the wonderful job they did on the evening. These kinds of events encourage many people, not only tourists but professionals, into the Wollongong electorate, and that is healthy for our economy. Hospitality and tourism provide many jobs and are among the fastest growing industries in Australia. Events such as these awards ceremonies not only highlight the vast amount of talent in an area but also showcase the venue in which they are held, such as, in the electorate of Wollongong, the Lagoon Seafood Restaurant.

It was an absolute privilege for me to be at the function. It was close to midnight before the presentation of the main awards were made. That such a relatively new venue in Wollongong, such as the rebuilt Lagoon, was able to cater for the hundreds of people who attended and enjoyed the ambience on the outside patios on a wonderful and warm evening, is absolutely amazing. It brought people from all over New South Wales to Wollongong and was an outstanding achievement. I look forward to Wollongong reaping the benefits of this function. There obviously will be benefits because the complimentary comments made by many visitors about this magnificent venue were heart warming. I am always saying that this is a magnificent area of Wollongong, and to have visitors recognising and applauding that fact was an absolute pleasure for me. I congratulate everyone who was involved in the function, including the participants and nominees.

Ms KATRINA HODGKINSON (Burrinjuck) [11.36 a.m.]: I again raise in the House a matter of the highest importance: the need for urgent action to ensure the 23,000 residents of Goulburn that they will not be left high and dry in the face of the city's continually worsening water supply problem. Last week Goulburn's total useable water supply had dropped to just 9.8 per cent of capacity. I have already spoken in the House on many occasions about the seriousness of the water supply situation in Goulburn, which has been on stage five restrictions since October 2004.

Goulburn's residents are currently managing on about 120 litres of water per person per day. By contrast, Sydney consumes 367 litres per person per day and Canberra 476 litres per person per day. The timing of this crisis is dependent on many factors, including future rainfall, the extent of the Kingsdale aquifers, Goulburn's continuing water usage, water supplies available in the Copford Reach, and the availability of sufficient funding. Work has already started on the emergency bores and pipelines in the Kingsdale area and they are expected to come on line in September. This may or may not be in time to delay the exhaustion of Goulburn's water.

Goulburn is certainly doing its part to keep its water usage as low as possible. Businesses, including Goulburn abattoirs and the wool scour, recently were asked to reduce their consumption by 30 per cent, and the residents are also responding magnificently. The relatively new indoor swimming pool has been closed, and sports have been cut back due to a lack of safe playing fields. Major tourist drawcards for the city such as Wakefield Park and the Blues Festival are also facing an uncertain future. Goulburn Mulwaree Council has flagged its intention to increase water and sewerage rates to help meet the projected costs of the capital infrastructure work necessary to address this crisis.

Unfortunately, when it is going to rain and the extent of emergency water sources are factors beyond anyone's control. I cannot stress strongly enough to the House that the Kingsdale bores are only a temporary solution. We do not know how long the aquifer will hold out. It may supply water for four months, or six months, or it may fail within a month. The residents of Goulburn need reassurance that another source of water is available. And this source, at Copford Reach, needs to be brought online as soon as is humanly possible.

I acknowledge that there are questions about water quality, but this is simply an engineering problem that is well within our capacity to address if there is sufficient funding. We need a unified approach and planning for this looming crisis right now. Next Tuesday I will attend a bipartisan meeting in relation to Goulburn's water crisis called by the Deputy Prime Minister. That will bring together Federal and State members of Parliament and Senators, the Chair of the National Water Fund, and the Goulburn Mulwaree Council. An editorial in the Goulburn Post of 18 May, headed "Call for Unity in Tough Times", said in part:

The drought and Goulburn's water supply woes should not become a political point scoring exercise. Politicians and party groups of all persuasions and at all tiers of government need to be at one on this.

I sincerely hope that the statements made the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, and Minister for Natural Resources, Craig Knowles, during question time yesterday are the last gasp of party politicking on this matter and that we can now get down to working constructively together for the benefit of the people of Goulburn. We cannot control the rain. We cannot increase the amount of water in the Kingsdale aquifer. But we can make sure that the Copford Reach pipeline is properly funded. I strongly urge the Minister for Energy and Utilities to immediately commit to funding assistance to Goulburn Mulwaree Council for the Copford Reach pipeline and any additional filtration work necessary to bring this water to a suitable standard.

Now is the time for action and commitment to provide a secure, affordable, long-term water supply for Goulburn. The first step is to secure an adequate emergency supply from the Kingsdale aquifer and the Copford Reach and to provide assistance for better self-reliance measures such as increased rainwater tank subsidies and household and industrial water-saving measures. The second is for the State Government to provide a firm commitment to council to implement medium and long-term solutions to Goulburn's water supply problem. If we do not bite the bullet now, the problem will continue to recur, each crisis getting worse and more difficult and more expensive to address.

Future long-term options for Goulburn's water supply include raising the wall of the Sooley Dam to increase storage capacity by some 30 per cent, constructing a water recycling plant in south Goulburn, and achieving greater savings through increased water efficiency. I would like to flag three additional options, which should be considered to secure the future water supply of the Goulburn region. Goulburn sits squarely inside Sydney's water catchment area. Connections to the Sydney or Australian Capital Territory water supplies are other feasible options that should be considered. Quite simply, all options, including the Welcome Reef Dam option, must be put back on the table for consideration. If the Government does not act now, it must explain to the 23,000 strong residents of Goulburn what its contingency plan will be should a worst-case scenario arise. I cannot stress strongly enough the importance of this critical situation that is now facing the city of Goulburn.

Mr PAUL LYNCH (Liverpool) [11.41 a.m.]: I wish to advise the House of the activities and the significance of the Mauritian community in Sydney. While Australian Mauritians live in many parts of Sydney, a significant number are constituents of mine and residents generally of western and south-western Sydney. There have long been connections between Mauritius and Australia. Dutch colonisers settled in Mauritius from 1598 and it was there from whence Dutch navigator Tasman set out on his journeys to the western and southern parts of Australia. Likewise, it had been a base for Willem Janszoon, who reached the north coast of Australia.

I had the pleasure on Saturday 12 March of attending an event to celebrate Mauritius National Day. It was held at All Saints Hall, Liverpool. In attendance at the Mauritius National Day Ball were Her Excellency Jane Jouanis, the Mauritian High Commissioner; Barclay O'Brien, the Honorary Consul of Mauritius for New South Wales, P. G. Varughese from the Ethnic Community Council of New South Wales; Laurie Ferguson, Federal member for Reid and Federal Opposition frontbencher; and Parramatta councillor Maureen Walsh. There were also representatives of Air Mauritius, which was a sponsor for the evening. The ball was organised by a number of Mauritian clubs, especially soccer clubs, and several hundred members of the Mauritian community attended the event.

Given the size of Mauritius, the number of Mauritians in Australia is quite high, and the number has been growing steadily. The 2001 census recorded 16,910 Mauritian-born people in Australia. Of these, 5,318 live in New South Wales. Two-thirds of that number live within 10 local government areas in Sydney, mostly in Sydney's west. People born in Mauritius who live in Australia have become a natural part of our multicultural society. A symbol of this is in our citizenship figures. The rate of Australian citizenship for the Mauritian-born in Australia was 92.3 per cent in the 2001 census. The rate for all those born overseas was 75.1 per cent. That is not surprising at one level, because the history of Mauritius and Australia are closely linked. The position is well summarised in a book entitled Of the Star and the Key by Edward Duyker, who I think at one time was the honorary consul for Mauritius. He wrote:

Mauritius is inextricably linked with the history of Australia. Its strategic location made it a vital base for exploration of the southland. British fears of French naval power on the island also precipitated settlement of New South Wales and Tasmania. With the advent of British rule in Mauritius, it was integrated into a whole new set of political, economic and ecclesiastical relations. In the first half of the 19th century, Mauritius became a major trading partner of the Australian colonies. On the merchant vessels which carried Mauritian sugar and rum to Australia came free Mauritian immigrants, convicts and gold diggers. In the second half of the 19th century, Mauritian sugar specialists made a profound contribution to the development of Australia's sugar industry.

After Federation, racist immigration regulations precluded significant numbers of Mauritians from settling in Australia. The decision to relax these regulations in the mid-1960s coincided with Mauritian independence.

I would also agree with Edward Duyker's further comment:

Although they are a relatively small community, they have had a unique cultural impact in Australia.

As I said, I enjoyed attending the Mauritius National Day Ball, where I represented the Premier. The master of ceremonies and one of the main organisers was Philippe Etienne, who deserves congratulations and credit for the effort that he and other organisers contributed. Independence for Mauritius occurred on 12 March 1968 and Mauritius became a republic on 12 March 1992. On that occasion Queen Elizabeth II was replaced as head of State. I always enjoy attending events at which island nations in the Southern Hemisphere celebrate independence and becoming a republic. My only regret on the night was that Australia had not followed the fine example of Mauritius and become a republic. A number of those present assured me they did not think that would be too long in coming.
Mauritius was colonised by the Dutch, who left in 1710. Mauritius was then claimed by the French in 1715 and remained under French control until the Napoleonic Wars. It was captured by the British in 1810 and officially became British with the Treaty of Paris in 1814. Despite British colonisation, French institutions remained very significant and French is still spoken more widely than English. In common with, for example, Fiji, indentured Indian labourers were brought to work in the cane fields in the nineteenth century. They replaced the slaves of an earlier generation. Elections were held for the newly created Legislative Assembly in 1947. An independence campaign gained momentum after 1961.

Mauritians have made a very significant contribution to New South Wales historically. For example, individuals such as Leonard Adam played an important role in pioneering the sugar industry on the Clarence. The same might be said for northern New South Wales and Maryborough. Other significant Mauritian-born people who made a contribution to Australian industry were Jerome Thomy De Keating, Paul Laurent Icery, and Albert Jules Giraud. Within Liverpool, Mauritians have been especially noted for their enthusiastic involvement in soccer. I have had dealings with what was the Prestons Soccer Club and with community activists such as Jacques Knell and Louis Antoine. The Prestons Soccer Club, which played for a long time at Blamfield Oval, is now merging with the racing club. Many other Mauritians are noticeable in the community. Others with whom I have had dealings and who I know are involved in community affairs include Gilbert Morvan, the Boissezon family, and Pierre Letier. I am delighted to take this opportunity to express my regard for the Mauritian community and pay tribute to their contribution to Liverpool and Sydney.

Mr DARYL MAGUIRE (Wagga Wagga) [11.46 a.m.]: I have referred previously in the House to the decrepit condition of parts of the Alpine Way, and particularly the 11 kilometres stretch from Khancoban to the Bringenbrong Bridge. In another place a question was asked recently of the Minister for Roads about roads 627 and 621. The Minister was asked whether he had had any discussions about the highway. It is clear from Hansard that the Minister has not had discussions. He noted there was a mechanism called the Road Classification Review. It was also clear to me that the Minister had not been on the Alpine Way, nor was he aware of the stretch of road to which I refer—the 11 kilometres section from Khancoban to the Bringenbrong Bridge, which is on the border of Victoria.

The National Parks and Wildlife Amendment (Kosciuszko National Park Roads) Bill, which was dealt with recently, gave control of the Alpine Way through the national park to the Roads and Traffic Authority as a State road. The section that runs from Khancoban to the Bringenbrong Road is under the control of Tumbarumba Shire Council. The problem is that the two sections are engineered to a different standard. The section from Jindabyne to Khancoban is engineered to one standard under State control and the section from Khancoban to the Bringenbrong Bridge is different under local government control.

Apart from the engineering differences, road funding is also an issue. In his answer in another place the Minister said there are various mechanisms to fund roads. I understand that. But the issue is that, because of its poor standard, the road has claimed lives. In particular, motorbike riders have died on the section that is under council control. The council has pleaded that its funds are insufficient to repair this 11 kilometres section. The Minister also referred to regional grants and the Roads To Recovery Program. From those programs the Federal Government has allocated $300,000 to Tumbarumba Shire Council to undertake repairs. But it is not enough.

In a debate in this House I put to the Minister as a solution that if he does not want to take control of this 11 kilometres section or does not refer it to the Road Classification Review—or undertake whatever measures are necessary—he should give Tumbarumba Shire Council approximately $1.5 million to bring this section up to standard so that unwary travellers, motorcyclists, and tourists can use the road in safety. Since I have been a member of this place, lives have been lost on this section of road, and, as I have said previously, lives will continue to be lost until this discrepancy is addressed.

I have a map of the Alpine Way, which I will lay upon the table for the edification of members. I hope the Minister will look at it, hop in his Prado and head down the Alpine Way. I am more than happy to meet with him and show him this treacherous piece of road that has been the subject of numerous petitions in this place, correspondence, and meetings with Tumbarumba Shire Council and others. The community of Khancoban wants this stretch of road to be under the control of the State. That is a sensible measure. It is a nonsense to continue to have only 11 kilometres of the road under the control of a local council that is clearly struggling to fund its adequate maintenance and repair. The Minister has the power to refer this matter to the Road Classification Review, allocate $1.5 million to the council to undertake immediate repairs, or ultimately take control of this section of road. Local communities depend on this road for tourism because the mountains are a beautiful tourist destination, and action needs to be taken to stop the loss of lives.

Mr JOHN PRICE (Maitland) [11.51 a.m.]: In a way I follow on from the previous speaker. I am pleased to see my colleague the honourable member for Myall Lakes in the Chamber because what I am about to say will impact on his electorate. I am concerned about Main Road 101, which passes through the city of Maitland and the shire of Dungog and then leads into Myall Lakes towards Gloucester. It is currently classified as a main road and, therefore, is subject to 50:50 maintenance funding through State Treasury. Maitland City Council and Dungog Council applied for the road to be considered as a State road or a State highway under the road classification review procedure. Although the road passes through sparsely populated shires, it is the main access through Dungog and Gloucester on its way to the Pacific Highway. It is an alternate route and one that is used quite frequently, particularly in times of flood.

I understand that the reclassification has been rejected. I have advised both my councils to resubmit their claims during the review period to reinforce their original claim as to the value of the road and the need for its upgrade to a State road, which would attract 100 per cent funding for maintenance and repair. If the road were upgraded, the benefits to the State from increased tourism would be significant. The shires of Dungog and Gloucester are big on area but small on population and, therefore, not really capable of raising significant funds to contribute to major repairs. They exist hand to mouth, which creates difficulty and concern for the council officers who are responsible for its upkeep. I understand that Dungog and Gloucester are the only two shires in the State that do not have a State road. Therefore all their resources must be spent on existing main roads, which exacerbates the problem.

The proposed reclassification would very much benefit the richer councils. It is high time the department had a second look at some of these smaller shires, the value of road linkages to major highway locations, and the services required for small populations, particularly in rural areas. I have struck some difficulty with the Federal member for Paterson over a promise he made in the last Federal election that Federal Treasury would provide $6 million to the shire of Dungog. However, in a later sentence he said, "provided it is matched by similar funding from the State Government". This promise was made without reference to the State Minister, who, therefore, is under no obligation. It has caused extreme angst to the councils concerned. I understand that Port Stephens is in a similar situation. The State is sympathetic to spending money on these roads, but, with the shortfall of $3 billion from the GST distribution, the extra funds are difficult to find.

I have a proposal that the Federal member, Mr Bob Baldwin, could consider. The Dungog shire has spent more than $3.5 million in extra projects. It might be appropriate if he were to supplement that figure with 50:50 funding. I am sure the shire would be very happy with even a $3 million grant to assist with the program. It could use that funding on the main road structure as the 50:50 maintenance component for main roads, which would make a significant difference to Main Road 101 while the application was being considered. I mean my Federal colleague no ill will, but one has to be sensible about it. He should not campaign on State issues for a Federal election, just as I should not campaign on Federal issues for a State election. Perhaps it is because he is a relatively new boy. I hope some consideration will be given to that suggestion because the shire certainly needs that support.

Mr JOHN TURNER (Myall Lakes) [11.56 a.m.]: I congratulate the Forster Tuncurry Coastal Patrol on the official opening of its new search and rescue co-ordination centre at the Forster break wall. I was invited to the opening but unfortunately I was unable to attend because I was on parliamentary duty. I have watched with great delight as the centre has come out of the ground. I can see it from my electorate office. I congratulate all those involved, from the present Divisional Commander, John Lynch, right through to those who have been involved in bringing to fruition this important asset to our area.

The patrol provides outstanding service to the boating community, the marine sector, and the general community of the Great Lakes region. For many years, through the generosity of the surf club, the patrol was housed in surf club premises at Forster. However, those premises were not adequate. The new premises are at the breakwater, where the patrol can monitor boats coming in and out. From the old premises the patrol would lose sight of boats, and that was not conducive for good coverage of the lake opening at Forster Tuncurry.
The new headquarters boasts an administration area, equipment and storage area, training room, and control room fully equipped with high frequency, very high frequency, and 27 megahertz radios that are manned 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, by more than 60 volunteers. It is no mean feat that the group raised $500,000 to build this outstanding facility. Much of the funds were raised from the community, particularly by volunteer patrol officers taking time out of their busy lives and out of the time they spend saving our lives. The new premises have been some 16 years in coming, but they have now been built and I acknowledge the hard work of the many people who were involved during that time. A former member of this House, Mr Max Smith, was involved in the process and he has been to see me on a number of occasions.

Regrettably, the State Government did not contribute any funding to the project, but I acknowledge that the Federal Government contributed significant funding to the project. By far the bulk of the funding was raised from the community. The entrance to the lake can be extremely dangerous for small vessels, and the location of the centre will mitigate problems associated with crossing the bar at Forster. The patrol service will monitor between Crowdy Head and Seal Rocks as well as the lake. It has been involved in many rescues. It is true to say that the project went through some rocky times, but where there is a will there is a way. I congratulate Divisional Commander John Lynch, all those who were involved in bringing the project to fruition, and all those who were involved in the opening. In its new building, the patrol will provide not only a rescue service but also training and skills improvement, which will help to save lives in our area.

Mr MILTON ORKOPOULOS (Swansea) [12 noon]: When I was a councillor on Lake Macquarie City Council the then planning Minister, Craig Knowles, introduced regulations that required councils to notify adjoining property owners of the receipt and assessment of development applications. It was a fair system then and it is a fair system now, notwithstanding the new rules that have been passed in relation to exempt and complying developments. I note that my colleague the honourable member for Charlestown yesterday made a similar speech on this matter. I support everything he said. I want to voice my objections to the fact that the council of Lake Macquarie—a fast-growing area with a lot of pressures for development, especially large-scale development, on our coastline—is, for want of expediency, now considering a policy of not notifying adjoining property owners about development applications that have been lodged with council.

The Carr State Government has introduced a whole raft of reforms of New South Wales planning laws, not only to facilitate development, protect the environment and do all the other things you would expect of State Government planning laws, but also to facilitate development by introducing exempt and complying development procedures. It beggars belief that Lake Macquarie City Council would consider it appropriate that council deny adjoining property owners the right to comment on issues relating to their the neighbourhood. As Councillor John Jenkins, a senior councillor and the father of Lake Macquarie City Council—if there is such a thing—stated in an article in the Lake Macquarie News of Wednesday 25 May, "It will exclude the community from the decision-making process." That is something we cannot countenance at this level of government.

The council's strategic planner produced figures that showed that in respect of 2,839 development applications [DAs] received by council last year, almost 13,500 notifications were posted out to neighbours. This amounted to almost five letters for each DA. The letters elicited just 328 replies, or 2 per cent, and of the 328 DAs referred to, only 27 were refused or withdrawn, around 1 per cent. The Lake Macquarie City Council has used those figures as an argument to ditch the entire system, rather than viewing them as an indication that the majority of those notified were, firstly, happy to have been notified and, secondly, had no objection to the application. A ratepayer is hardly likely to go to the trouble of sending a letter to council saying, "Yes, I think this is a great idea."

People are more likely to be motivated to write if they have an objection. In my view, the fact that 98 per cent of those notified did not object is an indication that they supported the proposed developments on the adjoining properties. I believe it is important that honourable members of this House voice their objection to local government authorities attempting to deny their communities a voice in planning, especially when the proposed development is next door to them. It ill behoves councils to use statistics, such as those produced here today, to deny members of the community the right to comment. The Parliamentary Secretary assisting the Minister for Local Government, who is at the table, would know from his experience with Tweed Shire Council how difficult it is when you have a council hell-bent on denying people a right to speak. [Time expired.]

Mr NEVILLE NEWELL (Tweed—Parliamentary Secretary) [12.05 p.m.]: I commend the honourable member for Swansea for having raised this very important issue in the House, thereby bringing it to the attention of honourable members. I am aware that the honourable member for Charlestown is also concerned about this issue and has commented on it. Large-scale developments along our coastline do impinge upon our amenity and upon our neighbours, and we must allow the community a say in how the development is to occur. Property owners adjacent to proposed developments sometimes have legitimate objections and must be afforded an opportunity to comment. I do not think we should allow anything that detracts from that to be put in place.

As the honourable member for Swansea said, it is often the case that adjoining property owners are quite happy with the proposed development and are unlikely to lodge a frivolous objection. However, we must ensure that members of the community with an interest in a development should be able to approach council—in this instance, the Lake Macquarie City Council—to have their say. The community must be afforded that opportunity. I can understand the concern expressed by the honourable member for Swansea and the honourable member for Charlestown. No doubt other members in that area are most concerned about the proposal foreshadowed by this council. I will ensure that this matter is brought to the attention of the appropriate Minister.

Mrs JUDY HOPWOOD (Hornsby) [12.07 p.m.]: Today I draw to the attention of the House an important project that is under way in my electorate, the Centre for Eating Disorders and Recovery Support [CEDARS], a Lions Club project with a great deal of community support. The head of the project is Sarah McMahon, who spoke at an eating disorders forum held earlier this year. Bronte and Jan Cullis were special guests, and Dr Carol Kefford spoke about the importance of recognising the problem and supporting those experiencing the eating disorder nightmare, which it often is. The aim of CEDARS is to establish a day centre that will provide treatment options for people who have been identified as suffering from anorexia and/or bulimia, and provide support for their families.

As I said, the project is under the auspices of the Hornsby Lions Club. The facility will be an independent day centre for clients who have been identified with an eating disorder, with an emphasis on the mental and physical well-being of the clients, as distinct from simply concentrating on weight restoration. It will be a multidisciplinary approach to treatment, incorporating health professionals from a variety of specialties, including psychology, occupational therapy, social work and dietetics. It will be a holistic approach to treatment, incorporating a range of therapies, including art therapy, massage and Pilates exercises. There will be an emphasis on maintaining the client's involvement within the family and community setting; and also on supporting and educating family members and carers.

The centre will work in association with general practitioners in the treatment process and in collaboration with other community organisations, including the Eating Disorders Foundation of New South Wales. The success of the program depends upon attracting and retaining dedicated staff who are enthusiastic and empathetic, and have expertise pertaining to eating disorders. Sarah McMahon is a remarkable young woman. A number of articles about her have been featured in the local newspaper, the Hornsby Advocate. Sarah suffered from anorexia nervosa. She has recovered and, at the age of 24, has a psychology degree and is also very much involved with counselling for Lifeline.

Sarah's problem began when she was a student and decided she would lose some weight so she could fit into her dress for her Year 10 formal. Later that same year she weighed only 37 kilograms and was an extremely sick young lady. Eating disorders can be found in people as young as 7 years of age and as old as 70. It is generally estimated that in Australia 2 to 3 per cent of adolescents and adult females satisfy the diagnostic criteria for anorexia and bulimia nervosa. Approximately one in every 100 adolescent girls develops anorexia nervosa. It is the third most chronic illness for adolescent girls in Australia, after obesity and asthma. One in 10 young adults and approximately 25 per cent of children diagnosed with anorexia are males.

Other very hard-working local community people involved in CEDARS include the President of the Hornsby Lions Club, Pauline Henebery; Barry Palmer, a Lions member and very involved in shaping the project; Maureen Flanagan, who is also a member of the Lions Club; Jane Li, Tracie and Sarah Roe, Elaine Fraser, Tracey Fitzpatrick, Irene Logan and many others. The assistance provided by the Eating Disorders Foundation and the Butterfly Foundation has been exceptional. For the project to become a reality we definitely need assistance from the State Government, not only from a funding perspective but also from a support perspective. We also urge the Federal Government, as well as local community groups and non-government organisations, to have input into the establishment of this wonderful project.

About 200 people attended the eating disorders forum held earlier in the year, which was a big surprise to the organisers. The fact that so many people from the Hornsby area alone attended such a forum demonstrates that it is obviously a widespread problem. Some beds are available in New South Wales for eating disorders patients, at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney Children's Hospital and Westmead Hospital. The CEDARS project, which is a niche project to be based on the Melbourne and Brisbane Bronte Foundation model, is certainly greatly needed in Sydney. [Time expired.]

Ms LINDA BURNEY (Canterbury) [12.12 p.m.]: I wish to speak about two events in my electorate of Canterbury with a similar theme. I had the pleasure and honour of attending both events and representing the Premier. The first event was titled "Muslims and Christians—An Open Look at What Brings Us Together". It was an amazing evening, attended by about 800 or 900 people. The groups responsible for organising the event were the Lebanese Muslim Association, Canterbury City Council, the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, the Community Relations Commission, and MRA-Initiatives of Change. The theme of the event was an open look at what brings Muslims and Christians together. Honourable members would be aware that this is an extremely important topic of discussion not only in Sydney but across the world.

There were probably more Muslims than Christians in attendance, but it was a fairly even mix. We heard from a number of extremely eminent speakers, both national and international, and there was great discussion from the floor. The speakers included Reverend Professor James Haire, Keysar Trad, Giovanni Farquer, Ms Amina Elshafei, Sheikh Khalid Yasin, a visiting sheikh from America, Stepan Kerkyasharian, Philip Ruddock, whom I sat next to for several hours that evening, the local Federal member, Tony Burke, and me. I was given the job of summing up the evening, and I would like to make a few comments in relation to that.

What we saw on that evening was something I wish many people across the world, not just in our own region, could have experienced. We heard a number of points of view. But what struck me, as the person who had the job of reflecting on what the speakers had said, was how similar the messages were. I would like to share with the House some of the fundamental themes from the evening. The Mayor of Canterbury, Robert Furolo, opened the event and made the point that religion is an intensely personal affair. Reverend Professor James Haire made the point that openness to learn is not about changing others; it is about respect and understanding each other. Tolerance with integrity was his theme.

Amina Elshafei, a fantastic young Muslim woman who lives in Croydon Park, is a nursing student at Sydney University. She spoke about her neighbourhood, which has a mix of Christians and Muslims. She really summed up the evening with her message about the importance of being good neighbours. Giovanni Farquer spoke about humbleness, Keysar Trad spoke about transcending difference, and Sheikh Khalid Yasin from America spoke about the intrinsic goodness of humanity and the capacity for all of us to look deeply. The general message on the evening was that there are many more things that bring us together than there are things that divide us. What a fantastic message.

The second event took place not just in the Canterbury electorate but right across the south-western and western suburbs of Sydney. I refer to the twenty-second Arabic Carnivale. It was a fantastic six weeks; I cannot believe the event was sustained for that long. Hassan Moussa is the chairperson of the Arabic Council of Australia and Ms Randa Kattan is the executive director. Ms Kattan is a truly amazing woman; she has a capacity for organisation and stamina that I have rarely seen in anyone else. She deserves to be congratulated.

I also attended the Arabic Women's Awards presentation. The recipient of the 2004 award, which was celebrated this year, was Professor Fadia Boudagher Ghossayn, who was also named the Arabic Woman of the Year. The carnivale celebrations ran from 3 April to 7 May, and included activities such as youth quizzes, workshops, concerts, celebrations for Higher School Certificate achievements, music, dinners, and community days. The event, which is now an institution in our city, is open to all comers. I commend Arabic Carnivale to everyone because it is a wonderful event, and I congratulate all those who were involved in it. [Time expired.]

Mr ANDREW STONER (Oxley—Leader of The Nationals) [12.17 p.m.]: I draw to the attention of the House a gross injustice done to my constituent Mr Neil Heuston. Mr Heuston was charged in 1993 with armed robbery and sexual assault, and was subsequently convicted and imprisoned in 1994. The evidence for Mr Heuston's conviction was based on the testimony of a Mr and Mrs Mulholland, which had been given four months after the alleged incident at a time when Mr Mulholland was seeking immunity from prosecution for drug-related matters. This immunity was subsequently granted by the Attorney General.

In 1996 Mr Heuston was convicted on a charge of using an offensive weapon with intent to assault, based on the testimony of a couple with the surname Goodwin, who had lived in a caravan on the Heustons' property until Mr Heuston asked them to leave because of the woman's drug habits. The additional sentence imposed meant that Mr Heuston would serve a total of 13 years in prison. Mr Heuston has always maintained his innocence in relation to both of these matters. Given that the complainants were involved in the drug trade and had strong motivations to fabricate the allegations, and given strong concerns about the methods used by police in the investigations, as well as the subsequently proven corruption of officers involved, Mr Heuston's claims of innocence must be taken very seriously.

Indeed, the Police Integrity Commission found during the course of Operation Florida that at least two officers, codenamed M5 and F7, had fabricated evidence and taken money from drug dealers. The evidence of these officers to the Police Integrity Commission implicated two other officers involved in the Heuston case as being corrupt, and another officer involved was accused of corruption during the Wood royal commission. F7 was an officer named Detective Fabris, who admitted verballing people and lying. Mr Heuston maintains he was assaulted, threatened, and forced by Detective Fabris to sign an admission. At the time Detective Fabris claimed that the tape recorder available for taking statements was not operational.

Mr Heuston was eventually released from gaol on 31 July 2003 following an appeal, having served more than 10 years. The charges arising from the Mulholland allegations were quashed. However, the Attorney General refused to reconsider the charges arising from the Goodwin allegations, even though Mr Goodwin had subsequently admitted that his statements to police had contained fabrications and that he was more worried about repercussions from the police concerned than from the Heustons. It must be stressed that the Police Integrity Commission, and therefore the Government, was, for four years prior to Mr Heuston's release, in possession of material that indicated that police officers responsible for Mr Heuston's arrest and subsequent gaoling were corrupt and involved in the fabrication of evidence, and were receiving bribes from persons involved in the drug trade. In other words, despite strong evidence of his innocence, Mr Heuston was left to rot in gaol for another four long years.

I have made representations on Mr Heuston's behalf on several occasions dating back to June 2002, when I interviewed his son—Mr Heuston was still in custody. Following his release on 31 July 2003 I wrote again to the Attorney General seeking an ex gratia payment in line with the suffering caused to him and his family by his wrongful imprisonment. The Attorney General refused that request, stating that the Court of Criminal Appeal quashed the so-called Mulholland convictions on the basis of new evidence that would have allowed the defence to challenge the police evidence rather than because he was actually acquitted. The Attorney General stated that he was not technically acquitted.

That is nothing more than a technicality that the Government has used to dodge blame and compensation. It is both ironic and unjust that the police officers named in Operation Florida were never charged in relation to their crimes, despite substantial evidence. Detective Fabris resigned from the Police Force on 30 November 2002, and presumably collected accrued leave and superannuation entitlements. Mr Heuston has never received any form of compensation for his false imprisonment and the devastating effect it has had on his life and the lives of his family. [Time expired.]

Ms ANGELA D'AMORE (Drummoyne) [12.22 p.m.]: I acknowledge the important work of the Sydney Breast Cancer Institute and Foundation and recognise the contribution of the Touch of Pink dinner dance fundraiser celebrated on Friday 20 April 2005 at La Mirage in Five Dock. The fundraiser was organised by two local small business women, Maria Pollicina and Kathleen Badolato from Jeanelle Fashion and Lingerie on Great North Road at Five Dock, in partnership with the Sydney Breast Cancer Foundation. Special guest speakers included Pam Hance from the Sydney Breast Cancer Foundation, who shared her own experience of being a breast cancer survivor, Ivan Amore from Five Dock Chamber of Commerce and owner of Amore Jewellery on Great North Road, Five Dock, Maria Pollicina, Kathleen Badolato and me, as the State member for Drummoyne.

The fundraiser was attended by 200 people within the local community, small businesses, local families and breast cancer survivors. It raised over $12,000 and will assist the Sydney Breast Cancer Institute in undertaking its vital work involving breast cancer. I acknowledge Greg Andrews, the national manager of Elders Premier Wool sales, who was our auctioneer for the evening and successfully contributed to the moneys raised. I express sincere thanks to the 59 sponsors for their generosity and compassion in supporting this event and making a major contribution to the funds raised on this special evening. On the evening I met many of my local residents, who spoke to me about how their lives had been affected by breast cancer in their families. Joanna McGill, a local resident of Five Dock, told me of her sister, Mrs Virginia Webber, who passed away from breast cancer, and who had initiated Pink Ribbon magazine. I pay tribute to the memory of Virginia Webber, who passed away on 27 May 2004, exactly a year ago today.

The Sydney Breast Cancer Foundation is the fundraising arm of the Sydney Breast Cancer Institute, which is one of Australia's leading centres for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of breast cancer. The Sydney Breast Cancer Foundation is dedicated to raising funds for research and treatment of breast cancer, raising awareness of breast cancer and supporting individuals and their families who are faced with breast cancer. Since 1995 the Sydney Breast Cancer Foundation has raised close to $3 million due to the tireless energy and dedication of its members, who work in a voluntary capacity for the foundation. The Sydney Breast Cancer Institute is one of Australia's leading centres for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of breast cancer. The institute is Australia's largest breast cancer treatment centre, currently treating over 3,500 breast cancer patients every year, representing 40 per cent of women with breast cancer in New South Wales.

The institute provides a full range of services from regular check-ups to full treatment, using the country's top specialists, specialist equipment and the latest research. The institute is made up of a network of Sydney hospitals and research units, which are all centres of excellence in treating breast cancer. These include Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Concord General Hospital, King George V Hospital, Rachel Forster Breast Clinic, Strathfield Private Hospital, the University of Sydney and the Centenary Institute of Cancer Medicine and Cell Biology. I am very proud that women in the inner west have a fantastic service through the oncology unit at Concord hospital and I acknowledge the head of breast cancer and endocrine surgery, Professor David Gillett, and his brilliant team at Concord hospital.

The Strathfield Breast Cancer Centre is an outpatient department of Concord hospital. All the surgeons associated with the centre have appointments at Concord hospital. In 2003, 354 patients sought assistance from the Strathfield Breast Cancer Centre; of these 107 went to Concord hospital for their definitive surgical management. I note that 0.1 per cent of all patients diagnosed were male patients. Through our service at Concord hospital, every woman who is diagnosed with breast cancer and has to have a breast removed is offered, where appropriate, a breast reconstruction. I would like to put on record some keys facts about breast cancer in Australia. One in 11 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer before the age of 75. Breast cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related deaths in women in Australia and is the second most common cancer among Australian women, after non-melanoma skin cancer.

From 1991 to 2001 the breast cancer death rate declined by an average of 2.2 per cent per annum due to increased awareness amongst the community. Breast cancer can affect women at any age. In Australia, over 11,300 cases of breast cancer are diagnosed each year. Of these, 6 per cent are women younger than 40 years and 18 per cent are women aged between 40 and 49 years. The aim of treatment for early breast cancer is to remove the cancer from the breast and destroy any cancer cells that may be spread to other parts of the body. Younger women are likely to face particular issues because of their age and life stage. Younger women with breast cancer are also reported as having a higher risk of psychological distress, anxiety and depression. As there is currently no means of preventing breast cancer, the focus in reducing deaths from the disease has been on finding breast cancer as early as possible.

Breast cancer experts are lobbying for magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] screening to be made available for women at high risk of breast cancer following a landmark study in the United States showing that an MRI scan could potentially be better than mammography at detecting tumours. Concord hospital has just received a $2.8 million MRI machine and I will be closely monitoring that development. As a member of Parliament, I am passionate about the issue of breast cancer, as I understand personally the devastating effects on women who are diagnosed with breast cancer and their families My own mother passed away from breast cancer at the age of 42 in 1986 after a two-year battle with the disease. I extend my thanks to all who were involved and attended the Touch of Pink dinner dance. As individuals, we have chosen to be part of the solution and support our women in the community and their families through breast cancer awareness and fundraising activities. My sincerest compliments to all involved. [Time expired.]
Mr GREG APLIN (Albury) [12.27 p.m.]: This morning I am going to talk about one of the towns in the electorate of Albury that was once known as the oasis of the Riverina because of its unlimited underground water supply. That town is Culcairn—one of those great country towns rich in heritage. This town was established in 1880 due to the extension of the railway line from Wagga Wagga to Albury. The town itself features picturesque parks and tree-lined streets and many historical buildings which have been classified by the National Trust. Particularly of note are the authentically restored stationmaster's residence and Culcairn Hotel, which stand rather proudly on either side of the Great Southern Railway line.

The first, the stationmaster's residence, was built in 1883, and Culcairn Hotel—one of those wonderful country hotels—was established in 1891. As many members here may be well aware, Culcairn is the home town of equestrian Andrew Hoy, who of course has represented Australia at five Olympic Games and has won three gold medals in equestrian three-day events, at Barcelona, Atlanta and Sydney. The town is justifiably proud of its home-grown Olympic champion. Culcairn really is a case of location because, being based in southern New South Wales, it accommodates both the Hume and the Olympic highways. It is roughly 500 kilometres from Sydney, just 300 kilometres from Melbourne, and three hours from Canberra.

Eighty kilometres to the north of Culcairn lies Wagga Wagga, and Albury-Wodonga to the south is some half hour's drive away on the Murray River. The Murray River, of course, defines part of the south-eastern boundary of the Holbrook Shire, with which it is now amalgamated. Transport-wise the Great Southern Railway line carries the Sydney to Melbourne XPT service. Of course, that has been in the news recently because of concerns over delays in the running time, and in fact there are question marks over whether it will continue to stop at some of the country stations that rely so heavily on that form of transportation.

As I pointed out, Culcairn shire sits on a growth corridor between Albury-Wodonga and Wagga Wagga. It has rural-based industries, which in the agricultural sector focus on sheep, beef and cropping. The sustainability of these farms is bolstered through the wholehearted adoption in this region of the Landcare movement. The industries primarily support or value add to primary and rural industries. But, unfortunately, at the end of last year Michel Leather, which was one of the major employers in town, was closed down. Therefore the problem, as with so many other country towns, is to find replacement industries.

To that end, the shire has focused on a project for economic and social redevelopment. Four years ago it achieved funding to come up with a strategic plan. It looked specifically at the positive social and economic outcomes. As we are all aware, in rural areas there is a link between the two; they are extremely closely connected. Unfortunately, since the former Culcairn Shire Council embarked upon that project it has amalgamated with the adjacent shires of Hume and Holbrook. That has somewhat hindered the process of achieving desirable outcomes. The community economic development programs that were being developed are now obsolete to a degree or unable to be applied easily in the amalgamated shire.

The community economic development officer is focusing on things such as building on that strategic plan with community economic and social capacity; the importance of developing in Culcairn shire the opportunities to grow industries and the population and therefore attract services. The program implemented strategies that have been, importantly, identified by the community to ensure and enhance the economic sustainability of the towns. To that end it employed a community development officer and recently an economic development officer who will work out of Holbrook and Culcairn, their role being to help existing businesses expand. Of course, those officers will liaise with businesses that want to go into the shire.

There are many business opportunities in the Culcairn area. It is exciting to visit the area and talk to people such as Bruno Biti. On eight occasions Biti Motors has been dealer of the year for Ford Australia in the country towns division. Also in Culcairn one can visit the Culcairn Multi Purpose Service and meet its manager, Jenny Wardrop, and the committee chair, Mavis Gardiner. Culcairn Bowling Club is currently undergoing enlargement, with Brian Caldwell and Veronica Brown at the helm. Culcairn has a vibrant RSL club, a senior citizens association with Nigel Preston as its president, and a Culcairn Community Committee under the chairmanship of Paul Wilksch. Culcairn is a town that is going places. I look forward to participating in its future. [Time expired.]


Mr PETER DRAPER (Tamworth) [12.32 p.m.]: I wish to detail progress toward the Australian Railway Monument and Rail Journeys Museum at Werris Creek. This project, as exciting and ambitious as it is, was under a cloud earlier this year due to a period of inaction and delay in the allocation of leases of the buildings, much to the concern of the group of local rail enthusiasts who are charged with managing the monument operations, the Australian Railway Museum Management Inc. [ARM]. I recently attended a meeting convened by the group at Werris Creek railway station with RailCorp, Liverpool Plains Shire Council, community members and Government representatives, to assess progress on the project. I am pleased to report that forward momentum appears to have been reinstated. The project should provide a wonderful spectacle for the community on its opening date, which is scheduled for Saturday 1 October 2005. Werris Creek is located near Tamworth, 480 kilometres north-east of Sydney, and it is one of the most significant rail junctions in New South Wales.

Mr Richard Torbay: A great town.

Mr PETER DRAPER: It is a fantastic town. The station, with its two main buildings, is the third largest in New South Wales—Werris Creek owes its very existence to the rail industry. On the evening of 26 April 1877 the seeds for its settlement were planted when the New South Wales Parliament decided to build a rail line from Werris Creek to Gunnedah and Moree off the Great Northern Line. It seemed only fitting, therefore, that an Australian railway monument honouring and commemorating the contribution of railway workers to the development of our nation be located at Werris Creek. The goal of the ARM is to honour the memory of almost 10,000 workers—2,500 in New South Wales alone—who died whilst conducting their duties on the Australian railway network. The Australian railway monument will consist of two parts.

The monument itself features six large sculptures of railway workers set in a landscaped area joined by paths, with an honour roll mounted on cuttings through the wall of a central amphitheatre. The second part is the Rail Journeys Museum, located inside the station. It will be a world-class exhibition interpreting the work culture of Australian railways and their contribution to the nation. The State Government has undertaken to back the construction of the monument, and the external restoration of the Werris Creek railway station buildings is under way. In mid-2001 the former Minister for Transport, Carl Scully, announced an initial $1.3 million for the first stage. Since then a total contribution of some $3 million has been allocated for the restoration and monument equipment. For Werris Creek the ARM will do more than elevate the town to its appropriate place in Australia's rail history. Liverpool Plains Shire Council expects the project to provide direct employment and generate more than half a million dollars per year in direct income. In its feasibility report the council predicts significant flow-on benefits to the district from expenditure as a result of the 40,000 visitors a year that the project is expected to attract by its sixth year.

The original proposal put forward by State Rail was for construction of the monument to begin in July 2004—the same date for the detailed design for the fit-out and services for the railway refreshment room buildings and the rail journeys exhibition to be prepared. The monument was to be completed by February this year, giving time for the landscaping to become established and stage one to be opened by 1 October to coincide with the 150th anniversary of rail in New South Wales. Unfortunately, the evolvement of the Australian Rail Track Corporation and RailCorp as the administrative bodies of New South Wales railways saw progress on the development of stage one grind to a halt. This process delayed the lease arrangements that would have resulted in the buildings being handed over to Liverpool Plains Shire Council. As a result of the delay the ARM management group held fears that the landscaping for the 300-seat amphitheatre associated with the monument would not be undertaken in time for the opening.

I was pleased to attend the meeting and to hear RailCorp representatives reconfirm the Government's commitment to the project and progress toward the Railway Journeys Museum, the upstairs area of the old railway refreshment rooms and the monument. However, I noted that there was no monetary commitment. I have been advised that at least another $1 million is needed for stage one to be completed in time for the October opening. Such a commitment from the Government at this stage would enable the ARM group to help Liverpool Plains Shire Council achieve its mission statement; that being to create the Rail Journeys Museum, to complete the Australian Railway Monument, and to honour and promote the role of railway workers in Australia's development.

While the concerns of ARM committee members over the future of the project have been allayed as a result of the meeting, I believe it is necessary for the Department of Transport to guarantee the $1 million that is required to complete stage one and that that money be forthcoming quickly. The Werris Creek community is extremely fortunate to have so many hardworking and active community members passionately devoted to the completion of this project. I look forward to seeing the project through to fruition.

Mr RICHARD TORBAY (Northern Tablelands) [12.37 p.m.]: I would like to draw attention to the initiatives taken in the Northern Tablelands electorate to assist the Aboriginal community. I thank the Premier's Department and the government agencies that helped to co-ordinate a recent meeting at which these strategies were outlined. Government agencies that respond with front-line services must receive feedback from, and communicate with, various stakeholders in that process so they know where to target their resources and they know that their resources are meeting community concerns.

I was pleased that Tom Briggs, Councillor Margaret Walford and Steve Widders, who are highly respected members of the Aboriginal community, were also present at the meeting. Although they did not represent the views of everyone, the meeting was constructive and it put forward a number of recommendations. One significant recommendation was the proposal for an assembly. Representatives of government agencies and the Armidale-Dumaresq Council raised the problem of signing off initiatives and programs to help Aboriginal people.

The proposed assembly will provide a wonderful opportunity to deliver proper consultation, with the Aboriginal community taking control of issues that affect it and providing valuable input. However, it is important that these initiatives are signed off so that proper processes can be put in place. That will prevent a breakdown of negotiations on sound initiatives and avoid any argument as to whether proper consultation has taken place. In the past a number of positive initiatives failed or were not pursued. Fractiousness between family groups, which potentially undermines some of these positive initiatives, has always been a matter of concern. I congratulate those who attended the meeting on proposing the assembly. It will provide the opportunity for a unified voice. I firmly support the assembly and urge everyone to soldier on throughout this process. Armidale just put its hand up to become a branch that is responsible for promoting the Aboriginal employment strategy. Honourable members would be aware of the good work of Dick Estens and his team. The last Federal budget included additional and substantial resources for that very worthwhile cause.

Mr Peter Draper: With 200 jobs in Tamworth.

Mr RICHARD TORBAY: The honourable member for Tamworth appropriately interjects and says that more than 200 jobs have been provided for Tamworth. He is a strong supporter of the Aboriginal employment strategy, which has been successful in Dubbo. The honourable member for Dubbo is also a strong supporter. During question time the Premier announced the introduction of circle sentencing in Armidale. I pursued the introduction of that initiative for a considerable period and was pleased that the Premier made that announcement in response to a question he was asked during question time. I place on record my thanks to the Attorney General, who also responded appropriately to those representations. The programs will assist in dealing with those substantial matters—not merely policing issues but something that requires a contribution from the entire community.

It is important to introduce as many early intervention and crime prevention programs as possible. It is a statement of fact that too many Aboriginal people are involved in crime. A broad cross-section of the community agrees that we should do everything we can to improve this situation. I intend to set up an advisory group to assist me in pursuing these positive programs. Many programs are already in place but I want to ensure they are working and, if not, that resources are being targeted towards those that do work. As I said earlier, far too many Aboriginal people are involved in our justice system and there are far too many incidents of substance abuse, domestic violence and opportunistic crime. We must help them break the crime cycle, not just by looking at policing and gaols but through early intervention, involving the entire community. [Time expired.]

Private members' statements noted.