(1) Upon the receipt of a Message from the Legislative Assembly, the House shall appoint five Estimates Committees to be known as:
1. Human Services Estimates Committee
2. Natural Resources and Environment Estimates Committee
3. Economic Planning, Development and Infrastructure Estimates Committee
4. Law and Justice Estimates Committee
5. Machinery of Government Estimates Committee,
for the purpose of examining and reporting upon proposed expenditures from the Consolidated Fund for each organisational unit for each Minister listed in the tabled Estimates, and the corresponding clauses and schedules of the Appropriation Bill. Such proposed expenditure shall stand referred to the appropriate Committee.
(2) The resolution shall set out, in respect of each committee:
(a) the names of the Members to be appointed, of whom two shall be Government Members, two shall be Opposition Members and one shall be a non-Government Member nominated by the Leader of the Government;
(b) the name of the Member to be Chairman;
(c) the organisational units, and the corresponding clauses and schedules of the Appropriation Bill to be considered;
(d) the maximum period of time allocated for consideration of each Estimate; and
(e) the days, hours and place during which they shall meet.
Page 1658
(3) The Committees shall have power to send for and examine persons, papers, records and things and to report from time to time.
(4) The quorum of an Estimates Committee shall be eight Members provided that the Committees meet as Joint Committees at all times.
(5) The Chairman of an Estimates Committee shall exercise a deliberative vote, and, in the event of an equality of votes, a casting vote.
(6) A Chairman may from time to time appoint another Member to act as Deputy Chairman and the Member so appointed shall act as Chairman when the Chairman is not present at a meeting of the Committee.
In the event of absence of both the Chairman and the Deputy Chairman, a Member of the Committee shall be elected by the Members present to act as Chairman for that meeting.
(7) The proceedings of the Committees shall be open to the public unless otherwise ordered by the Committees.
(8) In an Estimates Committee:
(a) the responsible Minister shall be present at all times;
(b) the Chairman shall call over each program area of each organisational unit for each Minister and declare the proposed expenditure open for examination;
(c) the question shall be proposed for each organisational unit "That the Vote be recommended"; and
(d) the proceedings of a Committee shall be recorded by the Clerk to the Committee, and such records shall constitute the minutes of the Committee, and shall be signed by the Clerk and the Chairman. The proceedings shall be tape recorded.
(9) Advisers who are present at an Estimates Committee to assist Ministers and the Presiding Officers (in the case of the Estimates of The Legislature) may not directly answer questions or otherwise address a Committee except with the approval and in the presence of a Minister or the Presiding Officers as the case may be.
(10) The proceedings of a Committee shall be regarded as proceedings of the Parliament.
(11) The Report of each Estimates Committee shall state whether the votes of each organisational unit in the Estimates and the corresponding clauses and schedules in the Appropriation Bill are recommended or otherwise.
The failure of an Estimates Committee to report on any part of the votes shall be deemed to be a report recommending the proposed expenditure.
(12) Upon conclusion of its deliberations and after the question on the second reading of the Appropriation Bill has been agreed to, a Member deputed by the Chairman of each Estimates Committee, shall present the Committee's Report to the President in the House.
The Reports shall be set down for consideration in Committee of the Whole House on the Appropriation Bill.
Consideration of a Report in the Committee of the Whole House shall be deemed to be consideration of those clauses and schedules of the Appropriation Bill referred to that Estimates Committee.
(13) A message informing the Legislative Assembly of the terms of the resolutions and the members to participate on each Committee shall be transmitted to the Legislative Assembly.
Page 1659Procedure in Committee of the Whole House
(14) In a Committee of the Whole House:
(a) the Chairman shall put the Question in respect of each Committee Report, "That the Report of the (name of the Committee) be adopted"; and
(b) those clauses and schedules of the Appropriation Bill not referred to an Estimates Committee shall be considered as one Question, "That the remaining clauses and schedules of the Bill be agreed to".
(15) At the conclusion of proceedings in Committee of the Whole, the Chairman shall report to the President that the Committee has or has not adopted the Reports from the Estimates Committees.
Message forwarded to the Legislative Assembly advising it of the resolution.
COMMITTEE ON THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING (Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [2.40]: I move:
(1) That this House agrees to the resolution contained in the Legislative Assembly's Message of 19 September 1991 that in view of the comments on the Independent Commission Against Corruption made by the Hon. Member for Londonderry in the Legislative Assembly on 12 September, 1991, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Independent Commission Against Corruption inquire into and report to both Houses upon:
1. The procedures and structures for the management and control of Independent Commission Against Corruption investigations and operational activities;
2. The relationship between the Independent Commission Against Corruption and other agencies involved in investigating or prosecuting corruption;
3. The Witness Protection facilities available to those assisting the Independent Commission Against Corruption with its investigations.
(2) In carrying out the Inquiry the Committee shall have regard to any matters that may prejudice pending criminal proceedings as confidential matters which, accordingly, should be dealt with in private.
(3) In conducting the Inquiry the Committee shall have due regard to the terms of S. 64(2) of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988.
The motion is self-evident and I do not believe it requires extensive debate.
Motion agreed to.
Message forwarded to the Legislative Assembly advising it of the resolution.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON STATE DEVELOPMENT
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING (Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [2.42]: I move:
Page 1660
(1) That the Standing Committee on State Development inquire into and report upon the application of the present formula for the calculation of payroll tax concessions for country industries.
(2) That the Committee report by 31 December 1991.
This motion is self-explanatory and it would be inappropriate to debate it extensively.
The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [2.43]: I endorse the comments of the Leader of the House. This is an important and urgent reference. The sooner it is considered by the committee the better.
The Hon. R. S. L. JONES [2.43]: It is interesting that this matter should come before the House now, after we fought so valiantly to try to save country industries from losing their payroll tax rebate. This Government, of course, found a backdoor method of reducing that rebate from $25 million a year to $5 million a year. Apparently the upsurge of community activity in Taree, where people lost their jobs en masse, has made Mr Greiner realise that there is value in providing payroll tax rebates to country industries after all. He probably regrets the decision to cut out those rebates by a backdoor method. I shall be interested in finding out the impact of payroll tax rebates for country industries. I have spoken to many managers of country businesses and I am sure the elimination of the rebate has had a major impact. I hope that if the committee determines that the loss of rebate has had a significant impact, the rebate will be reintroduced, as these industries so richly deserve. It is difficult to conduct an industry in rural New South Wales, particularly in today's climate and particularly with the lengthy lines of communication to the cities. I hope the committee will come to a swift decision on this matter and recommend that the rebates be introduced at the previous level and not at the present level.
The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK (Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs) [2.45]: I too look forward with some enthusiasm to the committee's report. However, I should like to correct the honourable member's observations. As he would be well aware - or perhaps he has forgotten - in 1989 the Government established the regional business development scheme, known as the RED scheme. Though he is entitled to be concerned about the level of support and assistance for new and developing industries, particularly in rural areas, it would be at least fair and well advised of him to acknowledge that in the 1990-91 Budget $9.2 million of new subsidies was provided, including $3.4 million to come from the existing country industries payroll tax rebate scheme. Those funds were not allocated to prop up and provide a windfall to large and established companies in rural New South Wales. The whole idea of the rebate scheme and the support scheme is to create new job opportunities and develop new industries in rural areas. The honourable member should be well aware of that. I merely correct him on that matter.
The Hon. Dr B. P. V. PEZZUTTI [2.47]: The reference is quite specific. It goes to the very heart of the application of the formula. The standing committee has considerable interest in rural employment and country enterprise establishments. The committee will probably use the reference to inquire further than this matter only, and to report on the application of the formula, I hope by 31st December. If the
Page 1661
parliamentary sittings are busy, the committee may well seek leave of the House to extend that date.
Motion agreed to.
Message forwarded to the Legislative Assembly advising it of the resolution.
COUNTRY INDUSTRY PAYROLL TAX
The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [2.48]: In view of the resolution of the House relating to the Standing Committee on State Development, under Standing Order 60 I seek the leave of the House to withdraw General Business Order of the Day No. 1 relating to rural and regional industries payroll tax concessions standing in my name on the business paper for today.
Leave granted.
The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN: Nothing that the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs can say and has said will defend the elimination of the payroll tax rebate.
TOTALIZATOR (AMENDMENT) BILL
Second Reading
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER (Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy) [2.50]: I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
I seek the leave of the House to incorporate my second reading speech in Hansard.
Leave granted.
The purpose of this bill is to update the provisions of the Totalizator Act 1916 so as to bring the Act into line with current day practices.
Totalisator betting in its present form commenced in New South Wales in 1916 with the enactment of the Totalizator Act. The impact this decision would eventually have on the State's racing industry could not have been envisaged, with totalisator betting continuing to grow to the stage where it has become the major revenue source for the industry.
As honourable members would be well aware, significant revenue is also derived for the State from commissions deducted from totalisators, thereby enabling additional funding to be made available in areas such as health, education, housing and law enforcement.
In the last financial year, revenue of some $299 million accrued to the State from the $3.7 billion invested with on-course and off-course totalisators.
In recognising the importance of totalisator betting to the viability of the racing industry and the economy, the Government considers it essential that the legislation meets the needs of both the industry and investors.
The Totalizator Act currently provides for the establishment and operation of totalisators on racecourses in New South Wales.
Page 1662
In addition, it prescribes the rates of commission deductable from the various forms of totalisator betting and allows for the making of rules and regulations which govern the use of totalisators.
So as to ensure that the provisions of the legislation accurately reflect the manner in which totalisators are operated, the Government established a working party comprising representatives of the major racing clubs, the various totalisator companies, the TAB and the Department of Sport, Recreation and Racing to undertake a complete review of the Act in consultation with other interested parties in the racing industry. The recommendations of the working party are reflected in the bill now under review.
The bill will amend the formula for the disbursement of commissions in respect of totalisator investments made at metropolitan galloping racecourses on race meetings conducted elsewhere in New South Wales.
Many race clubs in country areas have adopted a form of betting commonly known as "intercity betting" or "cross betting" which enables the country clubs to conduct totalisator betting on events held by other racing clubs with such bets being transmitted for inclusion in the totalisator being conducted by the host club.
This form of betting has proven to be most successful in enabling smaller clubs to provide improved totalisator facilities and in allowing patrons on country racecourses to bet into the larger metropolitan pools.
However, cross betting from metropolitan racecourses to country racecourses has not been as prevalent because of the commission rates payable to the Crown from totalisator investments made in the metropolitan area.
These rates provide no incentive for the country clubs to allow cross betting into their pools.
Measures have been taken in the bill to vary the commission rates so as to make it viable for the metropolitan clubs to offer cross betting to their patrons without jeopardising the viability of country race clubs.
The bill will also give long overdue recognition to the role of independent totalisator companies in the running of totalisators.
As the Act stands, it only provides for the operation of totalisators by racing clubs. In reality however, the majority of totalisators are operated on behalf of the clubs by private totalisator companies.
These companies have played an important role in the development of totalisator betting over the years, not only in this State but throughout Australia and in many other countries. They have been at the forefront in technology development and have enhanced the reputation of the State's racing industry in many parts of the world. It is only fitting that the legislation recognises the role of these companies. At the same time, this amendment will give added protection to the significant public investment on totalisators.
Also included in the bill is a proposal to include a new offence and appropriate penalties within the Act for persons making an investment after a race with the knowledge that the race has been run.
It should be stressed that comprehensive controls have been implemented to guard against totalisator betting continuing after the start of the race and these controls have in the main proved most successful.
Page 1663
However, some instances have occurred where persons have been able to place bets after the running of an event. This has usually arisen in respect of away meetings, where broadcasts to the racecourse have been interrupted and has, in the majority of cases, involved persons placing bets after a race without knowledge of the result.
In such cases, the persons involved have gained no unfair advantage and there was obviously no intent to commit fraud.
Unfortunately, on at least one occasion unscrupulous persons have taken advantage of the situation and obtained a substantial gain by placing investments with knowledge of the result of the race.
Prosecution action ensued and although the court was of the view that the evidence was sufficient to sustain that the persons involved had knowledge of the result of the race prior to placing their investments, it ruled that there was no offence disclosed by the evidence.
As honourable members would agree, this is clearly an unacceptable situation and the bill before the House will close this apparent "loophole" in the law.
A further amendment contained in the bill will increase from 16 years to 18 years the age under which a person may not be detained as a result of a failure to pay a penalty for under-aged betting.
This amendment is in line with the Government's policy of not detaining juveniles for fine default.
The bill also includes a number of other amendments which will repeal certain sections of the Act that have become redundant with the passing of time and with the introduction of new technology.
Finally, amendments of a minor or consequential nature will be made to other sections of the Act.
I commend the bill.
The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [2.52]: The Opposition supports the Totalizator (Amendment) Bill. The proposed amendments will update the provisions of the Totalizator Act 1916 so that the Act will accurately reflect the current situation in respect of totalisator operations. During 1989 the then Minister, the Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith, a punter's friend and a punter himself, approved of the establishment of a working party comprising representatives from the Department of Sport, Recreation and Racing, the Totalisator Agency Board of New South Wales, the major totalisator companies and the Australian Jockey Club/Sydney Turf Club Computer Centre, to undertake a complete review of the Totalizator Act in order that the Act would be amended to take into account current practices and technology. In establishing the working party the Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith was mindful that although the Totalizator Act had been subject to many amendments over the years it had not been changed in substance since its enactment in 1916, despite the rapid advances in computer technology over the past 15 to 20 years. The establishment of that working party was a credit to the Minister at the time. The proposed amendments to the Act reflect the recommendations made by that working party. They obviously have the absolute approval of the Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith.
The proposals were to recognise the role of independent totalisator operating contractors in the conduct of totalisator betting; to change the formula for the disbursement of totalisator commissions in relations to totalisator investments made at metropolitan galloping courses or on race meetings conducted on other race courses in
Page 1664
New South Wales; to include a new offence and appropriate penalties within the Act for persons making investments on a totalisator after the running of the race and with knowledge of the result of that race; to increase from 16 to 18 years the age under which a person may not be detained as a result of a failure to pay a penalty for under-age betting; to repeal a number of sections of the Act which have become redundant with the passing of time and the introduction of the new technology, to which I referred earlier; and to make certain consequential amendments to sections 2, 3, 8, 8A, 11, 16, 17, 18 and 19 which will provide for a clear definition of a totalisator and will make changes of an administrative or mechanical nature that do not affect the intent of the legislation. It seems to me that small clubs in particular will benefit from this very good piece of legislation.
The Hon. R. B. ROWLAND SMITH [2.56]: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for his kind remarks. It is not often I get accolades from the other side of the House. I do want to make one thing clear. The Hon. Barrie Unsworth once described me as a "big gambler". Let me put the record straight; I am a small investor. The proposed amendments seek to update the provisions of the Totalizator Act 1916 so that the Act will accurately reflect the current situation in respect to totalisator operations. Whilst there have been many amendments to the old Act, which was enacted in 1916, there has not been a thorough review of this important piece of legislation. Accordingly, as Minister for Sport, Recreation and Racing, in 1989 I approved the establishment of a working party comprising representatives from the Department of Sport, Recreation and Racing - I pay tribute here to Mr Daryl Lowenthal, who I am pleased to see is advising here this afternoon - the Totalizator Agency Board of New South Wales, the major totalisator companies, and the Australian Jockey Club/Sydney Turf Club Computer Centre, to undertake a complete review of the Totalizator Act in order that that Act could be amended to take into account current practices in technology.
It is important to remember that the total investments on on-course and off-course totalisators during the 1990-91 financial year amounted to $3.7 billion, with revenue of $299 million accruing to the State. In view of the importance of totalisator betting to the viability of the racing industry and to the economy of New South Wales, it is essential that the legislation meets the needs of the industry and of investors. The working party made certain recommendations which are reflected in the proposed amendments to the Totalizator Act, and these include the five which the Deputy Leader of the Opposition read out. This legislation gives long overdue recognition to the role of independent totalisator companies in the running of totalisators. The Act, as it presently stands, provides for the operation of totalisators by racing clubs only. In reality, however, the majority of totalisators are operated on behalf of the clubs by private totalisator companies. Those companies include: AWA Universal Totalisators, which unfortunately had a bit of a hiccup at Newcastle during the running of the Newcastle Cup, but I believe these things do happen in the world of computers; Automatic Totalisators and Racecourse Totalizators Pty Limited, which operate Kembla Grange racecourse and numerous provincial and country racecourses - and sitting alongside the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is a big gambler who can be seen at most of the race meetings.
Page 1665
The Hon. B. H. Vaughan: Alone? Always alone?
The Hon. R. B. ROWLAND SMITH: No. In addition, two other companies, Advance Wagering Systems and P.C. Totalizators, which are based in New South Wales, do not at present have contracts with race clubs in this State. These five companies provide facilities and services for various interstate race clubs and totalizator agency boards. They are major producers of totalisator equipment. These companies have played an important role in the development of totalisator betting over the years, not only in this State but throughout Australia and many other countries. They have been at the forefront of technology development and have enhanced the reputation of the State's racing industry in many parts of the world. It is only fitting that the legislation should recognise the role of these companies. At the same time the proposed amendment will give added protection to the significant public investment on totalisators. I might add here that the legislation really applies to totalisators on-course rather than to the State-run Totalizator Agency Board offices off-course.
As stated in the second reading speech the bill will amend the formula for the disbursement of commissions in respect of totalisator investments made at metropolitan galloping race courses on race-meetings conducted elsewhere in New South Wales. A mechanism currently exists whereby race clubs in country areas may conduct totalisator betting on events held by other racing clubs with such bets being transmitted for inclusion in the totalisator being conducted by the host club. This is known as "intercity betting" or "cross betting". If the Hon. Franca Arena would be quiet for a moment, she would learn just exactly what it is all about. The third matter applies to a new offence for persons making investments after a race with the knowledge that the race has been run. Though controls have been implemented to guard against tote betting continuing after the start of a race, some instances have occurred where people have been able to place bets after the running of an event and have made a killing. Such matters were subsequently taken to court.
The Hon. Franca Arena: This is good going, if you can get it.
The Hon. R. B. ROWLAND SMITH: Let me warn the honourable lady not to go into it because, if she does, she will find out exactly what will happen if they find out about her. The evidence in one case was that the defendant placed a bet on a totalisator at the Hawkesbury racecourse on a race that had taken place in Victoria. The evidence showed that bets were placed some minutes after the race had been completed. Documents produced in court implied that the defendant knew the result of the race at the time he placed his last five bets. As a result he gained the sum of $58,000 from the totalisator company. In deciding the matter the magistrate noted there was evidence the bets had been placed after the completion of the event and the evidence showed that the defendant knew the result of the race. However, the magistrate had to conclude that no offence had been committed. Clearly this is an unacceptable situation and the legislation aims to close the loophole.
In addition to enforcing a monetary penalty of $2,000 the legislation will empower the court to order any person convicted of obtaining moneys in such a way to pay those moneys into the Consolidated Fund. The prosecution action failed as the court was not convinced that an offence had occurred. The fourth matter contained in the bill
Page 1666
relates to the question of age. The amendment will increase from 16 years to 18 years the age under which a person may not be detained as a result of a failure to pay a penalty for under-age betting. This is in line with the Government's policy of not detaining juveniles for fine default. There are other minor and consequential amendments, but in all this is a good piece of legislation and, I believe, is overdue, but nevertheless the issue has been addressed and I support the bill.
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [3.2]: On behalf of Call to Australia I wish to express concern about the Totalizator (Amendment) Bill, the objects of which are as follows:
(a) to recognise the use of independent contractors by racing clubs in the conduct of totalisator betting at racecourses operated by those clubs; and
(b) to change the formula for the disbursement of totalisator commission deducted from investments made under section 3B of that Act (Common-pool totalisator betting) where those investments are made at a metropolitan racecourse and transmitted to a racecourse outside the metropolitan area; and
(c) to make it an offence for a person to make or attempt to make an investment on a totalisator after the end of a race if the person knows that the race has already finished; and
(d) to increase from 16 years to 18 years the age under which a person may not be detained as a result of a failure to pay a penalty imposed on the person for under age betting;
The bill provides for minor and consequential amendments also. Our concern relates to what are referred to as independent contractors. I suppose it could be argued that it is a form of privatisation of the betting industry. In the past New South Wales, the gambling State of Australia if not of the South Pacific, has been compared to places such as New York where the mafia run a great deal of illegal gaming activities, such as the numbers game and so on. In New South Wales such activities are run by the Government. Some people thought that at least if the Government ran them, they should be honest and clean because the Government has rules and regulations that control public servants and so on. Now the door is open for private companies to be involved in totalisator betting.
We know that the former Labor Government, when it was considering the establishment of casinos, had problems in trying to find suitable clean companies that had no association with crime. Even reputable companies such as Hookers Harrah, through some of the individuals connected with it, such as Mr. Herscu, were found to be involved with bribery and corruption. This shows how difficult it is to get private companies that can be guaranteed not to be infiltrated by organised crime. During the hearings into the proposed casinos, at which I gave evidence, I noticed representatives of private companies as well as representatives of private companies associated with poker machines, and of private companies that have been linked with criminal activity. This raises the question of how the Government can guarantee over a period of time that the privatisation would be legitimate and not infiltrated by organised crime. The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith acknowledged that the amendment to make it an offence for a person to bet on a race after the end of the race has been included because this has been happening.
The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith: No, on one or two occasions.
Page 1667
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: Yes, it has been happening and not by a curious person experimenting. I believe that what the authorities detected on that occasion at the Hawkesbury racecourse would have been one of a number of cases. We know that betting and racing have been used to launder money. We know that criminals have made arrangements with bookies to place money on a horse after a race and that this was done as a business transaction, with payments to the bookie so that he would add bets to the betting sheet after the race was run. This was used as a means of laundering money and the police have been active in trying to prevent that practice by conducting forensic tests to establish whether the rule-off line has been rubbed out and moved down the page, so that the name of the person who placed the bet after the race could be added. This work by the police has had a positive effect. The temptation will exist for an individual with enough money to come to an arrangement with a private company to defraud the totalisator system or, worse still, one of the private companies could be associated with corrupt individuals.
One would think that, so far as a clean record is concerned, the security industry would be one of the toughest. However, we have information that criminals have set up security companies, supposedly to keep criminals out of banks and so on where large amounts of cash may be kept. I believe the royal commission into the building industry has received evidence that some security companies employed standover men who were then used in industrial disputes and so on to intimidate and even to physically bash someone. I believe the Government is opening the door and it may live to regret it.
The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith: It is tightening it.
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: The Government is not tightening it up. It is opening the door to private industry, with the difficulties of ensuring that those independent contractors are above question. Where in the legislation are the requirements to ensure that independent contractors are people of good repute?
The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith: Is Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile saying that these people are not of good repute?
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: No, I am asking the honourable member how in the future it can be guaranteed that independent contractors will be of good repute and what the machinery is to ensure that they are. Some people will be rubbing their hands with glee because this legislation has opened the door for them. I have always been concerned with the expansion of gambling in New South Wales and the Government's increasing dependence upon it. I shall speak more about that during the Budget debate. Figures released show that over the past few years, particularly with the Greiner Government, there has been a growing dependence on gambling and betting revenue. The Government has a vested interest in how gambling may be made more efficient, with more people gambling and those activities being taxed to obtain revenue for the Government. No one would question that revenue is needed but I question the Government's dependence upon revenue from gambling and betting. In 1988-89 gambling and betting revenue increased by 13 per cent. In 1989-90 the increase was 8 per cent; in 1990-91 the increase was 11 per cent - and this is during a recession. It is anticipated in the Government's forecast for 1991-92 that the increase will be 5.2 per
Page 1668
cent. Our values are wrong when gambling increases while other areas of activity decline.
This is emphasised by the proposal for two legal casinos given priority by the Liberal Party-National Party. That is not what the voters or the membership of those parties want. I have received letters from Liberal Party branch secretaries in this State expressing support for my views. The Government is moving in a dangerous area. These changes occur gradually - one bill today, another in two weeks' time and another in a month's time. The pattern is developing where there is a priority in the Government's planning, with legislation favouring the gambling industry. The Government has not offset that with the social costs. This will result in more revenue being needed for the family and community services portfolio. On the one hand the Government is expanding gambling and, on the other hand, is trying to patch up the damage caused by gambling legislation. It is time the Government resolved those opposing situations, enabling it to move closer towards adopting my policies.
The Hon. R. S. L. JONES [3.14]: Proposed new section 7(9) is quite fascinating. It reads:
(9) Any racing club that has, before the commencement of Schedule 1 (5) to the Totalizator (Amendment) Act 1991, engaged an independent contractor to operate a totalizator on behalf of the club is declared to have and always to have had the power to enter into the engagement and the engagement of the contractor is declared to have been as lawful as it would have been if subsection (2) had been in force when the engagement was entered into.
The Minister in his second reading speech said that the Act, as it presently stands, provides only for the operation of totalisators by racing clubs. In reality, however, the majority of totalisators are operated on behalf of the clubs by private totalisator companies. The question is who are these companies, who owns them and who are behind them? Mr Rixon in another place mentioned the names of five of these. They are AWA Universal Totalisators, Automatic Totalizators and Racecourse Totalisators Pty Limited which operates at Kembla Grange. Two other companies are Advanced Wagering Systems and P. C. Totalizators which are based in New South Wales but do not at present have contracted race clubs in this State. Evidently these five companies are the ones that will be operating. It appears that they will not all remain viable. When competition becomes severe one or more will go to the wall. I should like to know why these companies were able to operate illegally and for how long they were operating illegally? How did it occur without action being taken. I should like more details on that. I should like to congratulate the Minister for increasing from 16 years to 18 years the age under which a person may not be detained as a result of failure to pay a penalty imposed on that person for under-age betting. This was an initiative of the Australian Democrats. I am pleased that the Government is gradually accepting this initiative as government policy. It is not appropriate to hold any person between the age of 16 years and 18 years in an institution because they have failed to pay a fine. Instead, these young persons should carry out community service. I applaud that provision and hope that follows on in other legislation.
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER (Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy) [3.17], in reply: I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. R. B. Rowland
Page 1669
Smith, Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile and the Hon. R. S. L. Jones for their contributions to this debate. The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith served this State with great distinction as the Minister for Racing. He knows more about racing and this general area than any other honourable member in this Parliament. I listened intently to Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile. I do not wish to turn my reply into a debate about gambling but gambling has perplexed society and government for a long time. To suggest that people will not and should not gamble is almost like suggesting they will not breathe. People have always wanted to gamble. This Government and former governments in New South Wales have regulated the gambling industry better than any other government in the western world. Whatever my personal views of gambling, people want to and will gamble. We live in a democratic society where, generally speaking, governments try to accommodate the wishes of the majority. Equally, people can choose not to gamble. With the assistance of the Police Service and the judiciary, by taxing and regulating gambling, we have been able to ensure that illegal gambling and gambling of an exploitative nature are kept to a bare minimum.
Whilst I take on board the remarks of Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile, it is a fact that taxes extracted from the gambling industry benefit the people of New South Wales. A good deal of that revenue is used for the rehabilitation of those who cannot control their gambling. I share the honourable member's concern about that. I felt that I should make those points. I understood what he said and why he said it. Nevertheless, we live in a society in which people have a wide variety of behavioural patterns. Some people like to go to the TAB every day. I am not one of them, but they do exist. The Government has to cope with that, as it does with many other problems. I should like to allay the fears of Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile about privatisation. Totalisator companies have functioned since the mid 1920s. They have not operated illegally but have been engaged by clubs in the same manner as other contractors, such as caterers, are engaged. The legislation gives legal recognition to their operations and enables the Government to monitor more closely and control those operations for the protection of the public. I reiterate that racing and betting are not being privatised. The operation of totalisators will still come under the control of non proprietary race clubs. The legislation recognises that clubs contract private operators to operate the totalisators on their behalf. The operations will continue to be under the close scrutiny of government inspectors. I hope the points that I have made in reply have clarified the matters that were of concern to the Hon. R. S. L. Jones and Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile. I commend the bill.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.
ELECTRICITY AND OTHER LEGISLATION (AMENDMENT) BILL
Bill read a third time.
Page 1670TOTALIZATOR (OFF-COURSE BETTING) AMENDMENT BILL
Second Reading
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER (Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy) [3.26]: I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
I seek leave of the House to have my second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.
Leave granted.
The purpose of the proposal before the House is to amend the Totalizator (Off-Course Betting) Act to extend the powers of the Totalizator Agency Board to enable it to conduct sweepstakes betting.
I might mention that the legal conduct of sweepstakes by other sectors of the community was made possible following amendments to the Lotteries and Art Unions Act during the 1990 budget session.
At that time the Parliament recognised the demand within the community to make lawful the long standing practice of participating in traditional Melbourne Cup sweeps.
Following the enactment of those changes the board conducted a feasibility study into the possibility of the TAB also running a sweep on the Melbourne Cup.
As a result of its study, the board is of the opinion that a Melbourne Cup sweep offering large prizemoney for a small outlay would be attractive to many people including those who may not otherwise have the opportunity of participating in a sweep. In terms of the existing legislation however, the operations of the TAB are restricted to the conduct of off-course totalisator betting on racing events and on other events and contingencies as approved by the Minister. Hence the necessity for the bill before the House.
It is proposed that tickets in the sweep will be sold at a fixed price of $1.00 each with tickets being on sale at the board's 1252 sales outlets throughout the State commencing two weeks before the Melbourne Cup. The draw will be conducted on the night preceding the cup.
Distribution of prizemoney will be prescribed in rules prepared by the board and approved by the Minister.
The legislation will provide that of the money received from persons who participate in a sweep conducted by the board, 75 per cent will be returned to investors as prizemoney; 15 per cent will be retained by the TAB to meet its expenses and make a small profit and the remainder will be paid into the Sport and Recreation Fund for the further development of sport throughout the State.
It is difficult to estimate the likely sales on a sweep such as that proposed. However the board believes that sales in the order of $1 million are not out of the question. The realisation of these estimates will therefore result in an additional $100,000 being paid into the Sport and Recreation Fund annually.
Page 1671
I might mention for the information of honourable members that since 1983, approximately $8.5 million has been paid into the Sport and Recreation Fund from investments made with the TAB on events other than racing. The most notable of these is of course the successful FootyTAB which is conducted on the NSW rugby league competition.
This is of course only one of many benefits the community receives as a result of the operations of the TAB. For instance during the last financial year alone, investments with the TAB totalled approximately $3.2 billion and as a result revenue of $218.5 million was paid into the Consolidated Fund to make funds available for many important community projects including those in the areas of health, housing and education.
I am pleased to say that the TAB is rapidly gaining a well earned reputation as a world leader in off-course totalisator betting operations as evidenced by its recent engagement by the Hungarian Government to provide an off-course betting system in that country.
It is intended that for the present, the board will only conduct sweeps on the Melbourne Cup. However, in amending the legislation, provision has been made for the board to conduct sweepstakes on other major races such as the Golden Slipper, subject to the Minister's approval and depending upon public demand.
In bringing forward this legislation the opportunity has also been taken to effect a minor amendment in respect of the purposes for which money derived from totalisator betting on events other than racing can be used. In future funds from this source will be directed solely to the Sport and Recreation Fund.
Minor consequential amendments will also be made to the Tourism Commission Act, 1984 to give effect to this change.
I commend the bill.
The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [3.27]: The Opposition supports the Totalizator (Off-course Betting) Amendment Bill. It is a pleasure for one coming from an Irish-Australian heritage to assist in the legitimisation of sweepstakes. We were brought up on sweeps. The object of the bill is to amend the Totalizator (Off-course Betting) Act 1964 to allow the Totalizator Agency Board to conduct sweepstakes on the Melbourne Cup and such other events as the Minister authorises, to provide for the making of rules in relation to the conduct of those sweepstakes, and to provide for the deduction of commission from investments on those sweepstakes at the rate of 25 per cent, which is apportioned as set out in the bill. It must be said that the main purpose of the legislation is to allow the TAB to conduct sweepstakes on the Melbourne Cup and other major races, depending on demand. The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith when Minister for Sport and Racing, and the rest of it, was very strong on that point and often made comments about the need for the legitimisation of the sweepstake. Following amendments last year to the Lotteries and Art Unions Act to allow the conduct of sweepstakes and calcuttas, the Totalizator Agency Board has sought approval to conduct a sweep on the Melbourne Cup. It will not end there. And why should it?
The Totalizator Agency Board claims that such a sweep would be successful because of its appeal to small investors who are familiar with sweeps and who would
Page 1672
like to participate in a sweep with the opportunity to win a substantial prize. The proposed changes would allow the board to conduct sweeps on other major events - for example, the Newcastle Cup - depending on public demand. The TAB estimates that sales on a Melbourne Cup sweep could reach $1 million in its first year of operation, with a likely increase in subsequent years as awareness of sweeps increases. I suggest that the sales figure could be much higher than $1 million. It is proposed that the rate of commission to be deducted from sweepstakes be the same as that applying in respect of investments with the TAB on other sporting events - 25 per cent - and that the TAB retain 15 per cent to meet its operating expenses, with the remaining 10 per cent being used to fund sporting and recreation facilities throughout the State.
A reading of the bill indicates that the proposals are to amend the Totalizator (Off-course Betting) Act to allow the Totalizator Agency Board of New South Wales to conduct sweepstakes on the Melbourne Cup; to permit the deduction of commission, as I have just pointed out; and to provide for the making of rules covering the conduct of sweepstakes by the TAB. The introduction last year of amendments to the Lotteries and Art Unions Act to allow the conduct of sweeps and calcuttas legalised an accepted practice and, at the same time, enabled certain non-profit organisations to utilise sweeps for fund-raising purposes. Similarly, sweeps conducted by the TAB, in addition to providing the opportunity of participating in a sweep with a substantial prize, will generate funds for the improvement of sporting and recreation facilities throughout the State. This will not in any way affect the office sweep with which we are all so familiar. We might even reach a day of enlightenment when two-up is legalised most of the year in the county of Yancowinna, in the city of Broken Hill.
The Hon. R. B. ROWLAND SMITH [3.32]: The proposed amendments to the Totalizator (Off-course Betting) Amendment Bill will allow the Totalizator Agency Board to conduct sweepstakes on the Melbourne Cup and other major races, depending on public demand. I hark back to what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said, sotto voce, about the Irish Sweepstakes. I have been following racing ever since I was knee-high to a grasshopper, which is a few years ago. I suppose the Irish Sweepstakes are the most outstanding sweepstakes in the world - one of the most outstanding races that take place in Ireland in the course of a year. Following amendments last year to the Lotteries and Art Unions Act 1901 to allow the conduct of sweeps and calcuttas, the TAB sought approval to conduct a sweep on the Melbourne Cup. I prefer the word "sweepstakes" to the word "sweep", which tends to denote that something is being pushed out the door. The Totalizator Agency Board claims that such a sweep would be successful because of the appeal to small investors who are familiar with sweeps and who would like to participate in a sweep with the opportunity to win a substantial prize for a small investment. Some people have complained that this might have an effect on the traditional office sweep, but I do not believe this to be the case. Many individuals, such as housewives and retired persons, do not have the opportunity of participating in a sweep. For a small sum of money, they would now have an opportunity to be involved in a sweep which could net them a substantial amount of money.
Page 1673
It is envisaged that tickets in the sweep will be sold at a fixed price of $1. Further, selling would commence two weeks before the Melbourne Cup. The draw would then be conducted on the night preceding the cup. I am not privy to what will take place, but I understand that two weeks before the actual race tickets will be sold and ticketholders will receive a number. On the eve of the cup there will be a draw. Successful ticketholders will be given a horse. They will automatically receive a dividend, irrespective of the placing of the horse. Five per cent of the pool will be allocated to cover this payout and 70 per cent will be allocated to the first three winners. If the prize money is $1 million, $562,500 would be allocated for the first prize; $112,500 for the second prize; and $37,500 for the third prize. As I mentioned earlier, $37,500 will be divided among the drawers of horses. The maximum number of horses for the Melbourne Cup is 24. So that would mean $1,562 would be the dividend for each of the people who had drawn these horses.
The TAB estimates that sales on the Melbourne Cup sweep could reach $1 million in its first year of operation, with a likely increase in subsequent years as awareness of the sweep increases. An important aspect of this legislation is that 75 per cent of sale moneys would be returned to investors as prize money; 15 per cent would be retained by the TAB to offset its expenses; and 10 per cent would be paid into the Sport and Recreation Fund for the further development of sport throughout New South Wales. Having been Minister for Sport, Recreation and Racing for three years, I know that there has been a call for money from various sporting bodies. We just have not had the money in the Sport and Recreation Fund. This sweep, small as it may be, will inject important capital into the Sport and Recreation Fund. In the year ended 30th June, 1990, of the $3 billion sales, 84.23 per cent was returned to investors, amounting to $2.5 billion; 3.46 per cent was paid to race clubs and the Racecourse Development Fund, amounting to $104 million; 4.29 per cent was net costs for the TAB of $129 million; and government revenue from sales, at 8.02 per cent, raised $241 million. In that instance the Government will not derive anything at all.
It is difficult to estimate likely sales on the sweepstakes. However, it is envisaged that it could be of the order of $1 million. This would mean that $100,000 would be paid annually into the Sport and Recreation Fund. As I said, this is important. The Sport and Recreation Fund is not being injected with further money because of the state of the economy. Anything that it can raise in addition to what it is given from the Consolidated Fund is very important. Since 1983, $8.5 million has been paid into the Sport and Recreation Fund from investments made with the TAB. The most notable of these is the successful FootyTAB which is conducted on the rugby league competition. It will be interesting to see how successful this is for the 1991 Melbourne Cup sweepstakes. In the event that it is successful, the Minister will be empowered to hold sweepstakes on other races, such as the Golden Slipper. Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile has spoken repeatedly about gambling in this State. The Government is implementing these programs because of popular demand. This will keep legal gambling above board. Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile and the Hon. Elaine Nile wish to see a return to the bad
Page 1674
old days of illegal gambling. Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile spoke about the mafia. That is exactly where the mafia comes in.
[Interruption]
The Hon. R. B. ROWLAND SMITH: No, I was not. Earlier I was talking about Ireland. The mafia rules triumphant where there are illegal operations. This Government is legalising gambling which would otherwise go underground. I support the bill.
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [3.39]: On behalf of the Call to Australia group I oppose the Totalisator (Off-course Betting) Amendment Bill. The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith said we always oppose gambling bills. That is correct: our policy is to discourage gambling. Though the Leader of the House defended the Government's policy, we say that the Government is not neutral, that it takes an active role in promoting gambling. It is one thing to say that some people have a desire to gamble and you cannot stop that. However, it is a matter of whether the Government should be in the business of encouraging, sponsoring and conducting gambling. We in the Call to Australia group are realists. We know that some people will always want to gamble. However, we say that the Government's policy should be to reduce, not to increase, the level of gambling. I believe that the more revenue that is locked into gambling, the more time public servants must spend in think tanks trying to devise new forms of gambling in order to increase revenue. That is an entirely wrong direction for the Government to travel.
The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith: Is it wrong to obtain revenue for sport and recreation?
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: No, but more money would be available if funds did not have to be allocated for social services to patch up broken homes, and so on. The objects of this bill are:
(a) to allow the Totalizator Agency Board to conduct sweepstakes on the Melbourne Cup and such other events as the Minister authorises and to provide for the making of rules in relation to the conduct of those sweepstakes; and
(b) to provide for the deduction of commission from investments on those sweepstakes at the rate of 25 per cent, comprising:
(i) commission at the rate of 15 per cent to be retained by the Board; and
(ii) commission at the rate of 10 per cent to be paid to the Sport and Recreation Fund.
This legislation is a good example of the very problem to which I have referred. The Government has a policy of introducing gambling legislation in a creeping fashion, step by step. One might have questioned the Government's intention last year, because the reality is, as the Government acknowledges, that legislation was passed then to legalise sweeps and calcuttas on the Melbourne Cup. That legislation was presented most
Page 1675
innocently. It was said that office workers and even students like to run sweeps; as that is an innocent activity it should not be illegal. One might have thought that would be the end of the matter; that nothing more would happen. However, that turned out to be only the first step. Following the enactment of the 1990 legislation the Totalizator Agency Board conducted a feasibility study on how it could exploit that legislation, which, as I say, appeared to represent only a minor step forward.
We have gone from the point of people investing 20c in an office sweep to the discussion of a $1 million operation. We have gone from an innocent office sweep to a TAB feasibility study, and the next step is for the TAB to draw up a proposal for it to conduct a Melbourne Cup sweep offering large prize money for a small outlay. The sweeps will be available through the TAB's 1,252 outlets, there will be a big sales push throughout the State from Sydney to Broken Hill. The TAB boasts that the sweeps will be readily accessible to any person who wishes to participate. There is no doubt about that; the TAB has outlets in virtually every shopping centre. People in this State may well wish that offices of the Department of Family and Community Services and the Commonwealth Employment Service were as accessible as TAB agencies. The Government has a strange priority, with 1,252 TAB sales outlets throughout the State.
The TAB believes it will sell sweepstakes tickets to the value of $1 million. That certainly is not out of the question, but even that does not appear to be sufficient. As with much of the Government's legislation, this bill has a rider. The bill will allow the TAB to conduct sweepstakes on the Melbourne Cup. That is the object upon which we are supposed to focus. However, there then follows the rider, "and such other events as the Minister authorises". That will be a blank cheque for the TAB to conduct sweepstakes on all races. The Government acknowledges that could include the Golden Slipper, the Sydney Cup and other events. Again this legislation represents a big step forward, a major change in policy. At stake is the important principle of the TAB conducting sweepstakes on horseraces. The Government might argue that as one million tickets will be sold at $1 each, a sweepstake will be merely another form of lottery, to be conducted by the TAB. I do not think many people will benefit from prize-money. The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith said that those who are allotted a horse will receive a dividend and that those who are allotted the first three placegetters will divide up the major portion of the prize-money, which supposedly will be in the vicinity of 75 per cent of the $1 million.
Whatever way one looks at it, as there are only 24 runners in the Melbourne Cup, only a small number of people will receive a dividend. The TAB has been very successful in increasing its revenue. During the last financial year, TAB investments totalled not $3 million, not $30 million, not $300 million, but $3.2 billion. That is the equivalent of the cash flow of, say, BHP or Westpac Bank. This is big business. Admittedly the Government received $218.5 million for the Consolidated Fund. Unfortunately, that is the temptation. The Government receives that revenue, but at a social cost that has not been calculated. The social cost is difficult to calculate. If it were more obvious, the Government would understand it. If I had the money and the time, I could prove that. That is why I seek in one of my private member's bills to establish a family impact commission. When that bill is passed, as I hope it is, I would
Page 1676
move that a bill such as this be referred to the commission for a study on the effect of the legislation upon the families of this State. The commission would calculate the short-term and long-term effects of the legislation and whether the financial benefit to the Government would be offset by the social cost. Perhaps not with this legislation, but overall with gambling in this State, I believe that the social cost would be much greater. For those reasons I oppose the bill. Unfortunately the Melbourne Cup is an attractive event.
The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith: Has the honourable member ever participated in a Melbourne Cup sweep?
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: Previously, before I became a Christian, I did.
The Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith: Being a Christian does not prevent your having a bet.
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: In my conviction I also made a decision about gambling: thou shalt not covet and I should resist the temptation to receive money for which I did not work.
The Hon. B. H. Vaughan: You are a member of Parliament.
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: The money I receive I should derive only from working. I make no apologies for my belief that in carrying out my parliamentary duties I am working. I decided to resist the temptation to obtain money from gambling. On one occasion I went to the Westpac Bank at Gladesville. I should have been a bank robber, because all the staff had their backs to the counter and were watching the Melbourne Cup on television. I had to wait patiently. Apparently the staff thought there would not be a customer throughout Australia who would want to transact bank business at that time. I had to wait until the race had finished before I could do my business. I relate that incident to point up that there is no doubt that the Melbourne Cup attracts a lot of interest. The TAB has numerous staff, including promoters and marketing experts. They will work out how to expand sweepstakes. There will be further advertising on television, radio, billboards and so on. That starts a change in attitude in our State, encouraging people to get rich quick by buying a ticket in a Melbourne Cup sweep. It is not good philosophy for the Government to impart to the people of this State, particularly to our youth, that they should follow the example of some adults in our society, and should get on the bandwagon in the hope of making money from gambling.
Very few people benefit from gambling. Many become addicted to gambling or simply go broke. I was told in Perth that only two pawnshops were operating there before the opening of the casino; now there are 30. This shows how that development affects society. I have been trying to work out the real difference in the gambling
Page 1677
policies of the Liberal Party-National Party Government and the Labor Party. I venture to say I can see none. I know there is an argument in that the Government wants two casinos and the Labor Party wants only one. But their policies are the same. That should concern the people of New South Wales. It is difficult for the people to express through voting whether they support an expansion of gambling or not when both sides of the House seem to have given in to the gambling industry. That is to be regretted.
The Hon. R. S. L. JONES [3.53]: Having been born in Epsom, Surrey, and lived half a mile from the Derby racecourse, I thought I knew all about racing - until I came to Australia. To my amazement I discovered that the whole country closed down for one day a year. That was absolutely staggering. In fact, I do more work on Melbourne Cup day and I can get around town more easily because there are very few cars on the road. This is not a really big change. People will pay only one dollar each for a ticket, even though there could be $1 million in the total pool. Whether a million people buy one ticket each or 100,000 people buy 10 tickets each, this will not be a gigantic leap forward in the realms of gambling. It will provide $250,000 - $150,000 to the Board and $100,000 to the sport and recreation fund, which I hope will help our Olympic team in Barcelona. I do not think one could get too steamed up over this legislation. It is a minor change in the scheme of things. I have given up betting on the Melbourne Cup after one or two tries - and picking the wrong horse - although I have got a tip this year which I shall give members privately if they come to me. I do not want to lose my money; I would rather spend it on food.
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER (Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy) [3.54], in reply: I thank honourable members who participated in this debate. It was obviously interesting to hear the contribution of the Hon. R. S. L. Jones about his background in England - a native of Epsom.
The Hon. E. P. Pickering: He is built like a jockey.
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: That is right. I think the bill is quite simple. It will legalise a practice that has been in existence for a long time and will give many people who would not otherwise have the opportunity to place a small investment on a sweepstake the opportunity to do so. Though I understand the concerns of Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile, the Government does have an obligation to provide services for all of the people of this State. This will permit a very sensible expansion of the services that are already available for those people who wish to avail themselves of them. As the Hon. R. B. Rowland Smith said, it will provide additional funds for sport and recreation. I commend the bill.
Question - That this bill be now read a second time - put.
The House divided.
Page 1678Ayes, 35
Mrs Arena
Mr Bull
Dr Burgmann
Ms Burnswoods
Mrs Chadwick
Mr Coleman
Mr Egan
Mr Enderbury
Mrs Evans
Mrs Forsythe
Miss Gardiner
Dr Goldsmith
Mr Hannaford
Mrs Isaksen
Mr Jobling
Mr Johnson
Mr Jones
Mr Kaldis
Miss Kirkby
Mrs Kite
Mr Manson
Mr Moppett
Mr Mutch
Mr Obeid
Mr O'Grady
Mr Pickering
Mr Ryan
Mr Samios
Mrs Sham-Ho
Mr Rowland Smith
Mr Vaughan
Mrs Walker
Mr Webster
Tellers,
Mr Macdonald
Dr Pezzutti
Noes, 2
Revd F. J. Nile
Question so resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT: Order! Pursuant to sessional orders, business is interrupted for the taking of questions.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
______
ASSET SALES
The Hon. M. R. EGAN: My question is directed to the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy. Is the Minister aware that because the Government has raided $872 million from Sydney Electricity in the past two years it has now been forced to put 25 of its properties up for sale? As the Government has now removed many of its own properties from the market because of the depressed state of the market, what will the Minister do to prevent the fire sale of these 25 properties?
Page 1679
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: One of the unfortunate consequences of the Leader of the Opposition making his speech on the Budget immediately after my friend and colleague the Leader of the House is that he did not wait to see what his own leader had to say in the other place. Another problem is that the Opposition does not co-ordinate things properly between this House and the other place. The fact that the Leader of the Opposition made a long and turgid speech and regurgitated much of what he has said before, and got not one line printed in the media, is an indication of how out of touch he is. Had he watched the "7.30 Report" last night he would have seen his leader in a fair bit of trouble. His leader completely repudiated Labor Party policy on which he had gone to the last State election. The Hon. R. J. Carr said last night that he is in favour of privatisation, after telling everyone that the Labor Party in New South Wales is not in favour of privatisation. It is all right to privatise in Victoria or in the Commonwealth sphere, but not the State Bank of New South Wales. He had a conversion last night.
Another thing Mr Carr said was that he is in favour of asset sales. He chastised the Government on the one hand for supposedly having a fire sale of assets and then chastised it for not reaching its asset sales target. Those two criticisms are totally inconsistent with each other. On the one hand he has said he is in favour of asset sales and on the other hand he criticised the Government for having a fire sale of assets. In fact, the Government did not have a fire sale of assets and therefore did not reach the asset sales target. The Government could have sold the State Office Block but did not do so because it was not offered enough money for it. I will not tell the Leader of the Opposition what the media representatives on the sixth floor say about him, but they think that his leader in the other place is an economic idiot. Of course he is because he goes off half-cocked, he goes for the cheap shot and now he is complaining about what he is reported to have said. This morning he gave a couple of the senior journalists a serve because they did not write nice things about him in the press this morning.
The truth is that for the first time in New South Wales history we have a government that is honest about its finances. But the Leader of the Opposition in this place and the leader in the other place are dishonest about finances - or about the little they know about the subject. The truth is that Sydney Electricity was the greatest hollow log that existed in the State of New South Wales. My predecessor the Hon. Neil Pickard, who is now doing a wonderful job as Agent-General in London representing the people of this State very well, set about reforming Sydney Electricity. As a result of that reform a substantial dividend was returned to the taxpayers of this State. That money has been wisely used in the portfolios of my colleagues the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, the Minister for Health and Community Services, who has built hospitals with it, and the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, who has built police stations with it. That is what good management is all about. I understand that the Hon. M. R. Egan does not know about that sort of thing, but that is what the dividends of Sydney Electricity were used for. Of course it is in the business of selling assets. Everyone is selling assets. The Federal Government is selling assets. It sold Customs House at Circular Quay just recently, but I did not hear the Hon. M. R. Egan braying about that. Customs House is a heritage building but we did not hear him talking about that when his mates in Canberra sold it. Sydney
Page 1680
Electricity will not have a fire sale of anything but it will ensure that it divests itself of non-essential assets, and I have no problem with that.
GARBAGE COLLECTION CHARGES
The Hon. ELISABETH KIRKBY: I ask the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy, representing the Minister for Local Government and Minister for Cooperatives, a question without notice. Will the Minister inform the House whether it is possible for local councils to impose a charge for garbage collection on land where there is no residence and, therefore, no domestic garbage to be collected? Under what section of the Local Government Act is this charge levied? Does the Government believe that such a charge is warranted?
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: I thank the honourable lady for the question and I shall seek the information and provide an answer to her in due course.
BROKEN HILL JUVENILE OFFENDER DETENTION
The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN: My question is directed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council in his own capacity, and as Minister representing the Minister for Justice. Is the Minister aware of a complaint made this week by magistrate Sue Schreiner when police advised her during a hearing at Broken Hill that there are no facilities in Broken Hill to hold juveniles on charges? Will the Minister inform the House what happened to an agreement of the former Minister for Family and Community Services last year that juveniles will be held in Broken Hill on a needs basis?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: I refer the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to a question asked in identical terms yesterday and fully answered by me.
The Hon. B. H. Vaughan: Here?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: Here.
CHELMSFORD PRIVATE HOSPITAL PATIENT COMPENSATION
Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: I ask a question without notice of the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council, representing the Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Ethnic Affairs, the Attorney General, Minister for Consumer Affairs and Minister for Arts and the Minister for Health Services Management. Did the Victims Compensation Tribunal grant compensation to a victim from Chelmsford Hospital for criminal assault? Does the Victims Compensation Tribunal give compensation to victims of medical malpractice or
Page 1681
negligence? From evidence found in the royal commission, will the Government give an ex gratia payment to the victims of medical malpractice or negligence from Chelmsford Hospital? If so, when?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: The honourable member would appreciate that the matters raised in his question are complex. I will forward the question to the relevant Ministers and seek their replies.
BUILDING INDUSTRY ROYAL COMMISSION
The Hon. J. W. SHAW: I ask the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council, representing the Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Further Education, Training and Employment a question without notice. Is it a fact that the Royal Commission into Productivity in the Building Industry in New South Wales has received an affidavit alleging improprieties involving the Housing Industry Authority and, in particular, alleging the receipt of commissions from an insurance company for arranging insurance for HIA members, and that such commission has not been disclosed by the HIA to its members? Is it a fact that the royal commission does not propose to investigate these allegations? Will the Government urge the royal commission, in the interests of objectivity and thoroughness, to investigate these matters?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: Obviously I am not able to confirm whether or not an affidavit has been placed before the royal commissioner in the terms foreshadowed by the honourable member. I would certainly not be able to advise him whether the Government has power to direct a royal commissioner in pursuit of his commission. I would have thought that would have been an almost improper situation. However, I really do not know. The royal commissioner has his terms of reference and has a perfect right to conduct his commission within the lines of those terms of reference. As I am not aware of the matter or able to provide legal advice whether we can take such action, I will ask the relevant Minister for his advice on the matters raised.
DEEP SLEEP THERAPY ROYAL COMMISSION
The Hon. ELAINE NILE: I ask the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council, representing the Attorney General, Minister for Consumer Affairs and Minister for Arts a question without notice. Did the royal commission into Chelmsford Hospital show evidence of criminal behaviour by a number of doctors and staff of the hospital, namely Dr Gill, Dr Gardiner, Dr Herron, and Molly Samson? Why did the Director of Public Prosecutions make decisions that no criminal charges would be proffered against any person in respect of this matter? Will the Government order a review of all the decisions of the DPP,
Page 1682
especially with regard to the death of Peter Clarke and the unlawful removal of unsigned consent forms?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: Again that question falls within the category of the previous question. It is for the Director of Public Prosecutions to establish at law, as an independent entity, to avoid the suggestion of political interference in important questions, whether individual citizens should be charged with particular offences. Every honourable member would agree that the development of the concept of the DPP has advanced the efficaciousness of the criminal justice system in this State to a considerable degree, especially as I believe there is a broadly held view within the community that not only is the DPP entirely independent of the Executive Government but acts in an impartial and proper way. I cannot recall anyone suggesting that the DPP is not acting in a proper manner. At times the decisions taken by the DPP, with full knowledge of all the facts presented to that department, can sometimes produce results which are strange to members of the general community who are ill informed about the facts. On occasion I have felt that a particular matter might have proceeded when it has been the recommendation of the DPP not to proceed. On many occasions that has occurred with my own administration. Obviously I must rest upon the decision of the DPP. I am not sure whether at law the Attorney General has the power to order a review. As an engineer, I do not know. I shall confer with the Attorney General and see whether some relief is available to the honourable member.
POLICE AIR WING
The Hon. K. J. ENDERBURY: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council. Is it a fact that the police air wing, now located at Bankstown, is not allowed to undertake any task or patrolling unless specifically requested to do so? Who is responsible for this direction to the air wing? Will the Minister ensure that the air wing is able to undertake its previous role as an airborne patrolling resource, supporting other operational units?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: Some time ago a review was conducted into the role of the Polair organisation to determine what functions it should properly perform. I am not in a position to regurgitate that review in detail. That review found that using Polair in circumstances similar to a general duty police patrol car keeping an eye on the community is an unacceptable use of that resource. The vast majority accepted that the work of Polair would be associated with surveillance operations, using the aircraft as surveillance platforms. Most of its work is to support drug enforcement agencies or other agencies, using it for a specific duty. In that regard it has been extraordinarily successful. Over the past couple of years the quantity of marijuana crops destroyed as a result of the work of Polair, in conjunction with the drug enforcement agencies, is nothing less than mindboggling. This has caused the price of marijuana on the streets
Page 1683
of New South Wales to rise beyond the price of gold. It is true in principle that the department takes the view that it is a totally inappropriate use of an expensive resource for a helicopter to be waiting in the air for an emergency to occur. One can relate to that decision, given the cost of flying and maintenance of helicopters. Polair plays other roles, including in rescue operations. A careful review by a departmental committee specifically rejected the concept of general duty air patrol, and that was a sensible decision.
TAFE VOCATIONAL COURSES
The Hon. ELISABETH KIRKBY: I ask the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council, representing the Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Further Education, Training and Employment a question without notice. Is the Minister aware of statements by the general manager of the Newcastle network of TAFE colleges that non-vocational courses would be cut as a cost-cutting exercise? Will the Minister explain why quotas are being imposed on certain vocational courses, such as training for riggers? Why are the unemployed being barred from these courses? How does the Minister believe that these people will ever be able to gain employment if training in such skills is denied to them? What action will the Minister take to end these discriminatory practices?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: I am not in a position to respond to the details of the honourable member's question. It would be self-evident to any fair-minded person, however, that the Government has generously supported the education of those who have been adversely affected in the employment market. Only yesterday in the Budget many millions of dollars were earmarked for that specific purpose. I suspect that it is self-evident also that an unlimited amount of money is not available to provide to the community for any aspect of government. There would not be a Minister of the Crown who could not happily spend almost twice the amount of his budget allocation. It is easy to spend money, but not so easy to raise it. In those circumstances every government, Minister and department must set priorities. The technical and further education system is no different in that regard. A casual observation of yesterday's Budget Papers will reveal that the Government has been more than generous, and, I should add, more than responsible, in regard to secondary education for people who face difficult employment prospects. I refer the honourable member to those Budget Papers to check that fact. I shall refer her specific question about Newcastle Technical and Further Education College to the Minister in the other place.
MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS PECUNIARY INTEREST DECLARATION
The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: I ask the Minister for Health and Community Services a question without notice. Is he aware that estate agents who sell property in which they have a personal interest are obliged by law to declare such interest to their clients? Is he aware further that doctors who refer patients to their own private hospitals
Page 1684
have no obligation to disclose such pecuniary interest to their patients? Will the Minister consider legislation to make it compulsory for doctors to disclose to their patients their interests in private hospitals?
The Hon. J. P. HANNAFORD: The honourable member's question is not on a matter that has been drawn to my attention previously, but I shall take it on board.
Later,
The Hon. J. P. HANNAFORD: Earlier today the Hon. Franca Arena asked a question about doctors who refer patients to their own private hospitals having an obligation to disclose such a pecuniary interest to patients. I am advised that there is no obligation under the Private Hospitals Act for such a declaration of interest to be made. However, the Act contains provision for a regulation to be made that requires doctors to declare their interests in private hospitals and my department is giving consideration to the drafting of a regulation to implement such a proposal. The honourable member can be assured that appropriate consultation will be carried out with the Private Hospitals Association and with the Australian Medical Association and other interested parties in the development of such a regulation, if it is to proceed.
POLICE MAGNUM TASK FORCE
The Hon. P. F. O'GRADY: I ask the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council whether it is correct that the Magnum task force is to be disbanded? If so, why is that to be done, having regard to the recent spate of armed robberies?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: This morning I read in the Sydney Morning Herald, as did the Hon. P. F. O'Grady, that the Magnum task force apparently is to be disbanded. As of this morning my knowledge of that matter extended to that reading of the newspaper report. The honourable member will appreciate that as the Minister for Police I do not become involved in that type of operational decision-making. However, having requested information from my department I have been advised in the following terms, which I am sure honourable members will find of interest. For the information of honourable members generally I advise that the Magnum task force, as was mentioned in the newspaper article, commenced operations in January of this year under the New South Wales Police Service's major investigations plan. By definition a major investigation is any investigation relating to a crime or incident which is of such a nature as to cause particular concern to the Government or the public and, in the opinion of the State commander, the investigation of such a crime or incident is beyond the resources of a region or it is, in the interests of police effectiveness or the administration of justice, necessary and or desirable to declare a major investigation.
Page 1685
Crimes or incidents that may be defined as major investigations include such matters as murder, extortion, serious fires and explosions, and abductions. The principal effects of declaring a crime or incident a major investigation are that access is granted to necessary resources, including human resources, to form task forces and similar operational groups; relief is granted to regional investigations in suitable cases; responsibility and accountability are clearly defined; a definite line of command is established; and separate budgetary arrangements are implemented to each particular operation. Among other things it is the responsibility of the State commander in a major investigation to see that appropriate terms of reference and a target date are set for each particular inquiry and then to ensure that the target date is met unless extended for good and valid reason. Other officers in the line of command have a similar responsibility to ensure that the terms of reference are adhered to and that the task force is not maintained longer than is necessary. It was in that environment that task force Magnum was formed, with the terms of reference being the investigation of several armed robberies in a country centre and elsewhere that netted substantial amounts and were suspected to involve certain known persons; a number of armed robberies particularly of security vehicles that netted well in excess of $1 million and again were suspected to involve certain known persons; and a number of thefts from various warehouses throughout the State believed to have been committed by an organised group and involving proceeds in excess of $2 million.
As I have said, the task force came together earlier this year and operating under the major investigations plan has achieved resounding success. In all 24 persons have been arrested, including some very well known and hardened criminals. To date a total of 73 charges have been preferred which in addition to armed robbery and theft include murder, attempted murder, possession of firearms, possession and supply of prohibited drugs and receiving. However, I am advised by the Commissioner of Police Mr Lauer that task force Magnum has run its course, as it were, and justification no longer exists for its continuation, at least in its present form. Admittedly, it would seem that the recent armed robbery at the Penrith Leagues Club was carried out by a well organised group of offenders. However, that is still not considered to fall within the specific terms of reference of task force Magnum. Of course that is not to say that the Penrith robbery is not regarded as a serious matter or is not being afforded appropriate police attention. I assure honourable members that most certainly is not the case and that appropriate resources have been allocated to the investigation by the region commissioner, north west, Assistant Commissioner McLachlan. More importantly, the option remains open to the assistant commissioner to have the State commander declare the inquiry a major investigation in its own right. In that regard, as region commander and under the present major investigations plan Assistant Commissioner McLachlan is required to carefully consider all the known circumstances surrounding the incident. I trust that my advice clarifies the position for all honourable members and that they accept that the winding down of task force Magnum is not the untimely action suggested in the newspaper report.
[Interruption]
The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT: Order! The general level of background noise in the Chamber is unacceptable. If honourable members wish to conduct conversations, they should leave the Chamber.
Page 1686FIREFIGHTER NORMAN WALSH
The Hon. A. B. MANSON: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council. Did firefighter Norman Walsh, a married man with six children, die of a heart attack in April 1989 while fighting a fire? Did the New South Wales Fire Brigades last month refuse to meet the funeral expenses? Will the Minister immediately direct the payment of those funeral expenses? If not, why not?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: I regret to inform the honourable member that though the matter he has raised comes under my administration, I am not able to provide him with the detail he seeks. I am genuinely concerned that I cannot do so and shall certainly have the matter investigated with urgency and respond to the House tomorrow.
PARKES DISTRICT HOSPITALS NURSING STAFF
The Hon. DOROTHY ISAKSEN: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Health and Community Services, representing the Minister for Health Services Management. Why is the Government seeking a reduction of 20 per cent in the nursing staff at Parkes District Hospitals when that town is about to experience a boom? Is it not shortsighted to lose such a large proportion of the experienced nursing staff when the North Parkes gold and copper mine is expected to commence operations in the near future and will employ approximately 300 people?
The Hon. J. P. HANNAFORD: I cannot give the honourable member a specific answer about the Parkes District Hospitals. I shall find out what is happening there. The honourable member will know that under the structure of health there are area health boards and regional health boards. The administration of health, in particular country hospitals, is the responsibility of the individual hospitals, their management and boards. Those boards do an outstanding job in New South Wales by providing excellent health services for members of the community. That comment applies particularly to health boards in country regions. When any country hospital board makes a decision about the management of its hospital -
The Hon. Dorothy Isaksen: The Minister made the decision, the board did not.
The Hon. J. P. HANNAFORD: The hospital boards make decisions about the management of their hospitals. They do so having regard to the best interests of health in their areas. I have every confidence in the operations of those boards.
PARKES DISTRICT HOSPITALS NURSING STAFF
The Hon. DOROTHY ISAKSEN: I ask the Minister for Health and Community Services a supplementary question. Is it not a fact that the Department of Health directed the board to reduce the nursing staff by 20 per cent and that it was not the board's decision?
Page 1687
The Hon. J. P. HANNAFORD: As I said, I have no knowledge of the specific decisions made by that hospital. I shall find out about the matter and inform the honourable member.
CHAELUNDI STATE FOREST FAUNA
The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: I ask the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy, representing the Minister for Conservation and Land Management, whether he will accept the result of the Chaelundi decision which was delivered today by Mr Justice Stein of the Land and Environment Court in which he found:
Imminent breaches of section 99 and section 98 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act, have been proven in relation to a large range of endangered and protected species of fauna.
The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT: Order! I draw to the attention of the honourable member that questions must comply with standing orders. Questions must not be statements of fact.
The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: Does the Minister realise that this is the most valuable wildlife habitat so far discovered on the east coast of Australia? No doubt he will be made aware of that when he gets a summary of the judgment. Will the Minister negotiate with the Minister for the Environment to add compartments 180, 198 and 200 of the Chaelundi State Forest to the Guy Fawkes National Park? If not, why not?
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: I thank the Hon. R. S. L. Jones for his speech. I do not intend to make a long speech other than to say that the Chaelundi judgment, which was handed down at 9.30 this morning, was a 50-page judgment. As I speak, officers of the Forestry Commission, the National Parks and Wildlife Service and Cabinet Office are studying that judgment. I am quite sure that Cabinet and the Government will consider all the options available, as the possible implications are wider than just forestry.
AREA ASSISTANCE SCHEME
The Hon. P. F. O'GRADY: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy. Why are area assistance scheme priority ranking committees being advised that they should recommend only those projects that require no pick-up funding? Is it because Treasury has advised pick-up agencies that funding will not be allocated for future projects initially funded under the area assistance scheme?
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: I am disappointed that the Hon. P. F. O'Grady, of all people, is part of the misinformation campaign presently being waged. Honourable members would be well aware that we are in a recession that we had to have - the one Paul Keating said we needed as part of his banana republic strategy for Australia. We now have the recession.
The Hon. E. P. Pickering: A depression.
Page 1688
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: That is right. The present Treasurer, Mr Kerin, said that we were in a depression, not a recession. So money is short. A couple of months ago, the Premier, in his economic statement, temporarily suspended area assistance schemes. Thanks to the hard work of members of the Liberal Party, the National Party and my own Department of Planning, and because of representations I and others made to the expenditure review committee, the area assistance scheme has been fully restored. It is very disturbing that members such as the Hon. P. F. O'Grady would want to frighten little old ladies by suggesting that the schemes have not been fully restored. Last week I read an article placed in a paper by some left-wing group from the western suburbs. It suggested that the area assistance scheme was not being fully restored and that projects would not be picked up. The area assistance scheme was introduced in western Sydney in 1979 but not all projects have been picked up. In fact, in most areas the pick-up rate is about 25 per cent to 30 per cent. Departments have had to submit their proposals to pick up projects under the area assistance scheme as part of their budgetary negotiations with Treasury. Nothing has changed. There is no indication whatsoever that there will be no pick-ups under the scheme. It is ludicrous for the Hon. P. F. O'Grady to suggest such a thing. The truth is that all projects will be considered on their merits. No project will be excluded from consideration for funding. That has been the case in the past and it will continue to be the case in the future.
The Hon. Virginia Chadwick: There has never been an automatic pick-up.
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: The Hon. P. F. O'Grady should do his homework. He does not know what he is talking about. My colleague the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, who was the responsible Minister for more than two years, backs me up with her interjection. For people to suggest otherwise is just plain wrong. So the Hon. P. F. O'Grady got it wrong.
WOMEN'S ADVISORY COUNCIL REGISTER
The Hon. I. M. MACDONALD: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, as Minister responsible for women's affairs. Is the Women's Advisory Council charged with the responsibility for developing a register of women from which nominations would be made for board vacancies? Did the Office of Public Management in the Premier's Department take over the implementation of this register? How was the register set up? What percentage of people on the list have been successfully appointed? What are the criteria for including a person on that list?
The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: I am surprised at the honourable member's emerging interest in matters of importance to women. I hope he maintains his new-man approach. A few years ago the Women's Advisory Council established a register of women who were both interested in and appropriate for consideration for senior positions with advisory bodies, statutory authorities and the like. A register, which is monitored by the Women's Advisory Council, already exists. This is a co-operative venture between the Women's Advisory Council and the Women's Co-
Page 1689
ordination Unit. Registration is voluntary and covers all areas of professional interest. In a sense, that register, which is widely available, acts as a broad, general directory. The Women's Advisory Council has encouraged government and statutory authorities to consider, more appropriately, the appointment of women to such senior positions.
As I have said, the register was an initiative of the council. I am happy to encourage and support it in this regard. From memory, appropriate people were engaged to approach women and compile the register. Again, from memory, Patricia Rochford and Associates had responsibility for establishing this register. A specialist register was compiled of women who had achieved high levels in a wide variety of fields. Clearly, it is not the function of the Women's Advisory Council to have responsibility for the updating and monitoring of that register. As I recall, negotiations were undertaken by Renata Kaldor, chairperson of the Women's Advisory Council, to determine the appropriate location for that register in the public sector. Clearly, the Premier's Department is responsible for establishing and conducting a number of statutory authorities and for overviewing a number of senior appointments. The Women's Advisory Council considered that the Office of Public Management was a suitable body.
The Women's Advisory Council approached the Office of Public Management about whether it would be willing to accept the responsibility of monitoring the register. After a period of negotiation between the Women's Advisory Council and the Office of Public Management that arrangement was reached. This happened two years ago, and I am relying on my memory. If I am wrong, I shall hastily advise the House further. My understanding also is that a significant number of women on the register have been appointed to a variety of advisory boards and statutory authorities throughout the public sector. I hope that more such women will be appointed. The view of the Women's Advisory Council is certainly that this exercise has been successful. At regular meetings between the council, the Premier and me about the activities of that council the Premier has supported the initiative, even to the extent of writing to all Ministers to remind them of the register and urging them to use it, to ensure that the women on the register are considered for appropriate appointment.
As to the standing that the register has with women throughout the State, I merely observe that in recent applications for various appointments I have noted with interest and pride that women are starting to state in their curriculum vitaes that they have been approached and are on this register. Clearly the register is considered to be important and sufficiently prestigious for women, if appropriate, to refer to it in their curriculum vitaes. From a number of perspectives the register has served its purpose and will continue to serve its purpose as a fine initiative of the Greiner Government and the Women's Advisory Council.
WOMEN'S ADVISORY COUNCIL REGISTER
The Hon. I. M. MACDONALD: I ask a supplementary question of the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs. As there was such a register prior to
Page 1690
1988, will the Minister inform the House how many women have been removed from the register since then?
The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: If the Hon. I. M. Macdonald is to live up to his embryonic reputation as a new man he would be well advised to listen to answers. In the answer I just gave I said that there are two registers. One is a generalist register that has hundreds of names. It existed, as the member rightly said, prior to 1988. It still exists, and interested women are invited to, and are welcome to, place their names on this generalist register. I referred in my answer to a different register.
CHAELUNDI STATE FOREST LOGGING
The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: I ask the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy, representing the Minister for Conservation and Land Management, a question without notice. Does the Minister realise that the decision in the Land and Environment Court in relation to the proposed logging and roading activities in compartments 180, 198 and 200 of Chaelundi State Forest will not bring logging to a halt in the native forests of New South Wales, as has been claimed? Is the Minister aware that statements on pages 13 and 17 of the report make it clear that the definition of "disturb" covers conduct which modifies habitat in a significant fashion, thus placing the species of fauna under threat by adversely affecting essential behavioural patterns relating to feeding, breeding or nesting? Does this therefore mean that normal logging activities in regrowth forest and old growth forest of low habitat and wildlife value will be able to continue with hindrance?
The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT: Order! I direct that that question be placed on the notice paper.
TOURISM COMMISSION TICKETEK GUARANTEE
The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN: I direct a question without notice to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, representing the Minister for State Development and Minister for Tourism, and ask her to obtain an answer for me. Is the Government guarantee of $3.1 million by the Tourism Commission to Ticketek still operable? If so, has the guarantee been adjusted in any way?
The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: As requested I shall refer the question to my colleague.
PUBLIC SECTOR MOTOR VEHICLE ENERGY EFFICIENCY
The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: I ask the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy a question without notice. Did the excellent report from the Government's Minerals and Energy Committee entitled "Review of Energy Conservation and
Page 1691
Management Policies and Programs" recommend among many other efficiency improvements that government departments take the lead in vehicle energy efficiency by setting a fleet purchase fuel consumption target for new passenger vehicles which is one litre per 100 kilometres below the national average fuel consumption announced for the previous year, and that this target should apply to each department? What progress, if any, has your Government made in adopting this and other recommendations in the report?
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: I am advised that the report did make such recommendations. As with many recommendations, they are under consideration. When the Government decides to accept or implement any or all of the recommendations of that report I shall inform the House.
POLICE ACADEMY EXPULSIONS
The Hon. JUDITH WALKER: I direct a question without notice to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Vice-President of the Executive Council. Is it true that police recruits at the Goulburn Police Academy are in fact and at law ministerial appointees? Is it a fact also that the Minister has failed to respond adequately to several approaches by the families of at least two of four police recruits who were either terminated or forced to resign from class 248? In view of the inability of police responsible for the academy to equitably and speedily resolve this dispute, which has continued for more than three months, and in view of the lack of a right of appeal by the recruits, will the Minister urgently resolve this matter? If not, why not?
The Hon. E. P. PICKERING: I shall have to rely on memory to answer this question. I am aware that a number of recruits were expelled - I suppose that is the correct word - from the Goulburn academy following certain activity there. I should add that that is not unusual at such institutions, be they army, navy, air force, police or tertiary institutions where young people live on campus. It is not unknown for things to go wrong and for people to be expelled from such institutes. I am aware that some young persons were expelled from the Goulburn academy and that the families of those young people have made representations to my office about this matter. After reviewing the facts I have taken the strong view that it would be entirely inappropriate for me as Minister to interfere in this process. Clearly the commandant of the academy has the overall responsibility to maintain proper discipline there. It would be most unjust of me to interfere with the grave responsibility that that officer has. If I were to do so, I am sure that the Hon. Judith Walker would be the first member of this House to scream blue murder about political interference in what clearly is not a matter appropriate for ministerial interference. I have taken the trouble to consider the matter. I am satisfied that the commandant has acted properly and I do not intend to interfere in the proper exercise of discipline, which ultimately is the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police. It is as clear as a bell that the discipline of the Police Service is the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police and not the responsibility of the Minister, and that is not a matter I intend to interfere with.
Page 1692TAFE CONSULTANTS
The Hon. DOROTHY ISAKSEN: I direct a question without notice to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, representing the Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Further Education, Training and Employment. Did TAFE spend more than $1.9 million during 1990 on consultants? Could 2,500 student places have been made available this year for that amount? How can the Government justify this wasteful expenditure on consultants when TAFE cannot cope with the demand for places?
The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: The honourable member would, of course, realise I do not have the TAFE budget figures in front of me. I cannot either confirm or deny whether a consultancy figure of $1.9 million was in fact expended. In the second part of her question the honourable member asked why one would need such expenditure, if indeed such expenditure did occur. The answer is perfectly clear. Having inherited a shambles of what used to be a once fine TAFE system, it has taken a lot of work, using both inside and outside experts, to try to correct the decade of neglect and despair that has riddled the TAFE system.
GUNNEDAH COAL COMPANY ELECTRICITY GENERATION
The Hon. B. H. VAUGHAN: I direct a question without notice to the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy. Does the Minister recall an announcement by his predecessor, Mr Neil Pickard, in February 1990 of the Government's support for the Gunnedah Coal Company's innovative technology for a private power station utilising coal and water? Is it a fact that no agreement has been entered into between the Gunnedah Coal Company and Elcom, or any other body for that matter, for the supply of power into the State's electricity grid using that technique?
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: I do recall that announcement. So many things have occurred under the depression that we had to have, delivered to us by the Mr Paul Keating.
The Hon. P. F. O'Grady: If the Minister is purporting to answer the question, he should have his facts for a change.
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: The honourable member ignores that earlier I gave him the facts about the area assistance scheme. He should go back into his box. The Gunnedah power station, following feasibility studies that advised of substantial cost escalations which would render the Gunnedah power station uneconomic, indicated that there appears to be no way it can proceed with power generation. Further submissions have been received concerning possible developments in the Hunter Valley and Wollongong areas. Following discussions with the proponents in Shortland County Council, councils received ministerial consent to purchase the output of Wambo private generation which would be connected to the commission's 132kV system. The Electricity Commission is presently considering its position in relation to the cost of providing standby energy to councils purchasing private generation and the Gunnedah project is effectively on hold.
Page 1693TAFE RESTRUCTURING
The Hon. K. J. ENDERBURY: I direct a question without notice to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs, representing the Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Further Education, Training and Employment. What has been the total cost of the restructuring of TAFE and the returning of it to its original structure? Why did the cost of restructuring blow out by $31.7 million last financial year?
The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: While I welcome the interest of the Hon. K. J. Enderbury in matters pertaining to TAFE, I remind him that he is talking about matters which are contained in the Budget that was introduced into this House yesterday afternoon. The honourable member should think about the Budget debate. Though it is your province and not mine, Mr Deputy-Speaker, it seems the question is quite out of order.
NUTRITION EDUCATION
The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: I direct a question to the Minister for School Education and Youth Affairs. In making the decision not to approve the food for health syllabus for development, is the Minister conscious of the need in our community for improving nutrition education and practice and that the components of nutrition integrated into the mandatory physical development, health and physical education courses are dangerously short of being adequate? Is the Minister aware that specialist teachers of nutrition in New South Wales schools - home science teachers - no longer have access to students to teach this subject, nor do students have access to them or the knowledge they have to offer? Are the Minister and the Government unaware of the ramifications of poor health in the community and the subsequent drain on government resources in terms of sick leave, medical expenses and loss of productivity in the work force?
The Hon. VIRGINIA CHADWICK: Yes, I am aware of the issues to which the Hon. R. S. L. Jones refers. A similar question was asked only a few sitting days ago by the Hon. Elaine Nile. I suggest he read the reply I gave then.
CHAELUNDI STATE FOREST LOGGING
The Hon. M. R. EGAN: I direct a question to the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy, representing the Minister for Conservation and Land Management. Given today's ruling in the Land and Environment Court against the Forestry Commission's logging in Chaelundi State Forest, when will the Minister implement Public Accounts Committee recommendations concerning making the Forestry Commission more accountable to the public?
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER: I do not think the decision in the court today has any bearing on that question but I will obviously take that question on board and deliver an answer to the House in due course.
Page 1694PRISONER FAX MESSAGE CHARGES
The Hon. ELISABETH KIRKBY: I direct a question to the Minister for Health and Community Services, representing the Minister for Justice. Will the Minister confirm that the Department of Corrective Services recently instructed superintendents of prisons to charge $1 per page for fax messages received by prisoners? Is it a fact that if a prisoner does not have sufficient funds to pay for a fax