Full Day Hansard Transcript (Legislative Council, 27 August 2002, Corrected Copy)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Tuesday 27 August 2002
______

The President (The Hon. Dr Meredith Burgmann) took the chair at 2.30 p.m.

The President offered the Prayers.

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS

The PRESIDENT: I welcome into the public gallery the Kioari Cultural Group, the Sibisibi Cultural Group, the Huli Cultural Group and the Asaro Mud Men.

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following bills reported:

LEGISLATION REVIEW AMENDMENT BILL

Bill received and read a first time.

Motion by the Hon. Michael Egan agreed to:

That standing orders be suspended to allow the passing of the bill through all its remaining stages during the present or any one sitting of the House.

POULTRY MEAT INDUSTRY AMENDMENT (PRICE DETERMINATION) BILL

GAME BILL

RURAL FIRES AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL

WESTERN LANDS AMENDMENT BILL

SPORTING VENUES MANAGEMENT BILL

PROPERTY, STOCK AND BUSINESS AGENTS BILL

Messages received from the Legislative Assembly agreeing to the Legislative Council's amendments.

BILLS RETURNED

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

INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION

Report

The President announced, pursuant to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, the receipt of the following reports:

The President announced, pursuant to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act, that she had authorised that the report be made public.

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

Report

The President announced, pursuant to the Ombudsman Act 1974, the receipt of a report entitled "Improving the Management of Complaints: Assessing Police Performance in Complaint Management", dated August 2002.

The President announced, pursuant to section 13AA (2) of the Act, that she had authorised that the report be made public.

INSPECTOR OF THE POLICE INTEGRITY COMMISSION

Report

The President announced, pursuant to the Police Integrity Commission Act 1996, the receipt of the annual report for the year ended 30 June 2002.

The President announced, pursuant to the Police Integrity Commission Act, that she had authorised that the report be made public.

COMMITTEE ON THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND THE POLICE INTEGRITY COMMISSION

Report

The Clerk announced, pursuant to the Ombudsman Act 1974, the receipt of a report entitled "Tenth General Meeting with the NSW Ombudsman", dated June 2002.

Ordered to be printed.

GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE No. 1

Report

The Clerk announced, pursuant to the resolution of the House of 13 May 1999, the receipt of report No. 19, entitled "Proposed Closure and Restructuring of Government Schools in inner Sydney", dated July 2002, together with transcripts of evidence, submissions, tabled documents and correspondence.

Ordered to be printed.

GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE No. 3

Report

The Clerk announced, pursuant to the resolution of the House of 13 May 1999, the receipt of report No. 10 entitled "Inquiry into Certain Aspects of the Department of Corrective Services", dated July 2002, together with transcripts of evidence, tabled documents and correspondence.

Report ordered to be printed.

JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON BUSHFIRES

Report

The Clerk announced, pursuant to the resolution of the House of 19 March 2002, the receipt of the report entitled "Report Upon the Quality of Buildings", dated July 2002, together with transcripts of evidence and submissions.

Report ordered to be printed.

INDEPENDENT PRICING AND REGULATORY TRIBUNAL

Report

The Clerk announced, pursuant to the Sydney Water Catchment Management Act 1998, the receipt of a report of the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal of New South Wales entitled "Review of Bulk Water Supply Agreement entered into between the Sydney Catchment Authority and Sydney Water Corporation", dated 24 June 2002.

Ordered to be printed.

AUDIT OFFICE

Reports

The Clerk announced, pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, the receipt of the following performance audit reports:

Ordered to be printed.

JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE QUALITY OF BUILDINGS

Report

The Hon. Tony Kelly, on behalf of the Chairman, tabled the report entitled "Report on Inquiry into 2001/2002 Bushfires", dated June 2002, together with minutes of proceedings.

Report ordered to be printed.

PETITIONS

Stem Cell Research

Petition praying that the House support adult stem cell research and oppose the creation and use of embryos for stem cell extraction, received from the Hon. Duncan Gay.

Freedom of Religion

Petitions praying that the House reject legislative proposals that would detract from the exercise of freedom of religion, and retain the existing exemptions in the Anti-Discrimination Act applying to religious bodies, received from the Hon. Ron Dyer, the Hon. Amanda Fazio and Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile.

Cyanide Heap Mining

Petition praying that cyanide heap mining be banned, received from Ms Lee Rhiannon.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Withdrawal of Business

Private Members' Business item No. 56 inside the Order of Precedence withdrawn by Ms Lee Rhiannon.

MINISTRY

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I inform the House that on 11 July Her Excellency the Governor accepted the resignations of the Hon. Faye Lo Po', MP, as Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for Women and as a member of the Executive Council, and of the Hon. Carmel Mary Tebbutt, MLC, as Minister Assisting the Minister for the Environment. On the same day the Governor appointed the following persons to the offices indicated: the Hon. Sandra Christine Nori, MP, Minister for Women; and the Hon. Carmel Mary Tebbutt, MLC, Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, and Minister for Disability Services.

I inform the House that in the representation of Government responsibilities in this Chamber I shall act in respect of my own portfolios and represent the following Ministers in the other House in relation to all matters concerning their portfolios: the Hon. Bob Carr, MP, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Citizenship; the Hon. Craig Knowles, MP, Minister for Health; and the Hon. Bob Debus, MP, Attorney General.

My colleague the Hon. John Joseph Della Bosca, MLC, Special Minister of State, Minister for Industrial Relations, Assistant Treasurer, Minister Assisting the Premier on Public Sector Management, and Minister Assisting the Premier for the Central Coast, will act in respect of his portfolios and will represent the following Ministers in the other House: the Hon. Andrew Refshauge, MP, Deputy Premier, Minister for Planning, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for Housing; the Hon. John Aquilina, MP, Minister for Land and Water Conservation, and Minister for Fair Trading; and the Hon. Richard Amery, MP, Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Corrective Services.

My colleague the Hon. Edward Moses Obeid, MLC, Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for Fisheries, will act in respect of his portfolios and will represent the following Ministers in the other House: the Hon. Carl Scully, MP, Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads; the Hon. Harry Woods, MP, Minister for Local Government, Minister for Regional Development, and Minister for Rural Affairs; and the Hon. Sandra Nori, MP, Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Tourism. My colleague the Hon. Carmel Mary Tebbutt, MLC, Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, Minister for Juvenile Justice, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth, will act in respect of her portfolios and will represent the following Ministers in the other House: the Hon. Bob Debus, MP, Minister for the Environment, Minister for Emergency Services, and Minister Assisting the Premier on the Arts; the Hon. Kim Yeadon, MP, Minister for Information Technology, Minister for Energy, Minister for Forestry, and Minister for Western Sydney; and the Hon. Sandra Nori, MP, Minister for Women.

My colleague the Hon. Michael Costa, MLC, Minister for Police, will act in respect of his portfolio and will represent the following Ministers in the other House: the Hon. John Watkins, MP, Minister for Education and Training; the Hon. Richard Face, MP, Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development; and the Hon. Morris Iemma, MP, Minister for Public Works and Services, Minister for Sport and Recreation, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Citizenship. I am pleased to inform the House that on 11 July 2002 the Hon. Henry Tsang was appointed as Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Premier on Investment.

DEPUTY OPPOSITION WHIP

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I inform the House that the Hon. Richard Colless was today elected as Deputy Opposition Whip in the Legislative Council.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Notices of Motions

Notice of motion No. 1 called on, and postponed on motion by Ms Lee Rhiannon.

YOUNG OFFENDERS AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 20 June.

The Hon. RICHARD JONES [2.55 p.m.]: The Young Offenders Amendment Bill 2002 provides that a young offender can be cautioned only three times and, after that, a specialist youth officer and the investigating officer will determine whether the offender should be referred to a youth justice conference or whether the matter should proceed to court. The bill requires specialist youth officers, conference administrators and the Director of Public Prosecutions [DPP] to consult with the investigating officer when deciding whether a young offender should be conferenced. If a conference convener considers it appropriate, he or she may invite a representative of the young offender's school to attend a youth justice conference.

The bill requires that consideration be given to a young offender's participation in a program when an outcome plan is being developed at a youth justice conference. The child and the victim who personally attend the conference have the right to veto any outcome plan proposed at the conference. I contacted the Law Society, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the University of New South Wales about this matter. I have a letter from Nicholas Cowdery, QC, who said:

The Law Society, which has some concerns about the bill, stated:

Young Offenders Act

Youth Offenders Act

Therefore only 2.6 per cent of children will be affected by that part of the legislation. In April 2002 the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research published the results of its study comparing juvenile reoffending rates in the Crime and Justice Bulletin article "Reducing Juvenile Crime: Conferencing versus Court". This study found that young people who participated in youth justice conferences appear to have a 15 to 20 per cent lower risk of reoffending than those who went to court. So the conferencing system is working extremely well and should be fully supported. I understand what the Director of Public Prosecutions means when he says that when a child receives three or more cautions that may well be abusing the system. But only a very small proportion of young offenders are covered by these provisions. So I have no problem with supporting the legislation. I understand that the Greens will move amendments to remove the mandatory limitations on cautions, in accordance with advice they have received from the Law Society.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE [3.02 p.m.]: As I retire today, after 14 years as a member of this important House of review, I am pleased to indicate the Christian Democratic Party's in-principle support for the Young Offenders Amendment Bill 2002. I note that today the Deputy Clerk, Ms Lynn Lovelock, sits in the Chamber attired in period dress to note the Centenary of Women's Franchise and gaining the vote for women. It is good to see quite a number of women now sitting in this Chamber and to know that we have come a long way in the past 100 years.

Recently the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research released its report entitled "Reducing Juvenile Crime: Conferencing versus Court". That report shows that conferencing can be considerably more effective than the court process in reducing reoffending and in increasing the crime-free period for juveniles who do reoffend. The report found that the risk of reoffending was almost 20 per cent lower for juveniles who were conferenced than for those who went to court. Another report released by the bureau in 2000 found that young offenders and victims who participated in the conferencing process experienced very high levels of satisfaction. More than 80 per cent of victims surveyed as part of the study said they were satisfied with the outcome of the conference and with the way their case was handled by the justice system.

First, the bill limits to three the number of times a young offender can be cautioned under the Act. The second reform contained in the bill is a requirement for specialist youth officers, conference administrators and the Director of Public Prosecutions to consult with the investigating officer when deciding whether a young offender should be conferenced. The third reform contained in the bill provides that if a conference convenor considers it appropriate, he or she may invite a representative of the young offender's school to attend a youth justice conference. The Christian Democratic Party has always put the family first, and especially the welfare of children and young people.

As I have said, I have been a member of this Chamber for the past 14 years. On this my day of retirement I wish to thank you, Madam President, for your very kind wishes for me on my leaving this place. We have a mutual good friend in Ann Cooper—a good osteopath in Newtown for those who may need those services. She really straightens you out. She is a very straightforward person. I thank the Clerk of the Parliaments, Mr John Evans. We met his parents in a country town. I know he comes from good stock and good parents. I remarked to John, when he removed his robe and wig today, "John, you look like one of us now." Perhaps that is not good, as the media often describe members in less than glowing terms.

I thank also the Deputy Clerk, Lynn Lovelock, and the Clerk Assistant-Procedure, Mike Wilkinson. We met Mike Wilkinson and his lovely wife when we were going into a club one night with a group of Aboriginals. Thank you, Michael, for all the help you have given me over the years. My thanks also to the Usher of the Black Rod, Warren Cahill. I have been trying to get a photograph from him since 1988. I wanted a photo of the Chamber. Warren says I can have a photo of him anytime. Thank you, Warren, for your friendship. All of the officers of the House, including Stuart Lowe, have been most able, willing and friendly in helping me over the years. My thanks to Legislative Council attendants Ian, George, Lucy, Charles, Mike and Maurice—whom I have referred to as "my bagman". The attendants know what I am talking about there. Michael Santiago helped me a number of times with what I might call first-aid type matters.

I congratulate David Draper, Manager, Food and Beverages, on the way in which he has served members of this House. Over my 14 years, and Fred's 21 years, David has become a friend. To his Assistant Manager, Joseph Rokoqo, and his Function Supervisor, Maureen Morgan, I express our thanks. My special thanks to the room service staff, including Carlos, who always answers the phone, John Da Silva, and Jorge Ramos. A number of years ago Jorge, who was serving in the bar, played Premier Bob Carr in a skit at a media Christmas function. He has done a very good job. Sometimes when he came to my room we talked about a common problem that we have with our heels.

My thanks to the Parliamentary Library Manager, Greig Tillotson, and the Deputy Manager, Margaret Horton, and to media monitoring staff member Jan Duncan, who often anticipates my requests. My appreciation to the Hansard staff for the transformation into good English of the less eloquent speeches that I made at times. My thanks also to the Serjeant-at-Arms in the Legislative Assembly, Mr Merv Sheather, who has helped me in the organisation of my meetings of Women for the Family. Many thanks to press gallery members Steve Chase, who has always been a gentleman and has never thrust a microphone in front of us and demanded answers to his questions, and Paul Mullins, who treats all members with the courtesies usually reserved for the ordinary people. Over the years I have appreciated their attitude. To my office staff—Judy, Jeff, Kylie, Kate and David—thank you very much. I guess it is a bit different to work for a Christian party. Thank you very much for the work you have done for us. It is very much appreciated.

But foremost I thank Almighty God and the people of New South Wales for my election in 1988. It is a privilege to be elected to serve as a member of this House. That privilege is accompanied by a responsibility to observe the traditions and history of the Chamber with respect. I had not intended to become a member of Parliament. Of course, I had heard all about it. I watched its operation when Paul Landa was a Minister of the Labor Government of 1981 and when there were experiences within our party similar to "the troubles" that are much spoken about in Ireland. Longer-serving members will know what our "troubles" were in those days.

In 1988 our party was looking for a candidate who could be trusted and would be loyal to the leader. The Hon. Richard Jones, who is amused at that, may not have been here at the time. The party was looking for someone who would be loyal to the leader. Well, I do sleep with my leader! Members of the Liberal Party and the Labor Party know all about the need for loyalty in the party. The point I am making is that in 1988 party co-ordinators were praying for someone suitable. Fred woke one morning and said, "God has given me the answer to my prayer." I said, "Great!" I felt relieved. We had been going through hell at that stage because someone was trying to have Fred thrown out of Parliament. They were difficult times. It is uncomfortable for a wife to watch her husband being attacked. I asked, "Who is it?" He said, "The person is closer than my brother." I knew it was not his brother Jim, who I think was manager of the Bankstown Trotting Club at the time. I love my brother-in-law Jim. Fred then said, "It's you." I said, "No way! I wouldn't go into that place if you paid me." Well, I did get paid eventually. As a Christian gentleman and a Christian pastor he said to me, "You know, Elaine, I really do need you." He almost got down on his knees. The Bible says the husband is the head of the wife, and I believe scripture, so I became a member of this House. Now, after 14 years I feel I am to be freed.

I have appreciated my time here. I have received an education. When I first came to this place the Hon. Duncan Gay was in the chair. Sometimes when I say things I know what I mean but others do not. On one occasion in my early days here I asked Duncan, "What are they laughing at?" He said, "The trouble is you are not double minded." One gets through one's maiden speech without any problem, because no-one interjects. In my first speech on the budget I was speaking about the family and the roles of men and women. I am proud to say that I am not a feminist. I am a woman and I love all men—and I love my husband; we have roles.

During my speech on the budget Johno Johnson was in the chair. Suddenly the Hon. Franca Arena came running into the Chamber huffing and puffing, saying, "Mr President, point of order, stop her, she is talking rubbish." Everybody was saying, "Sit down, Elaine," so I sat down. Johno pondered for a moment and then said, "No point of order. Members are allowed to speak rubbish in this place. There is nothing against it." So I got away with that. And still they talk rubbish—but not everybody! Franca became a friend, mainly because she changed her mind and attitude.

From 1983 I worked with the IDSIA group—Immune Deficiency Syndrome Innocently Acquired. This was a group of people who were dying because they had been given contaminated blood transfusions. There were more than 500 of those people, and we have now lost them all. I worked mainly with Lorraine Cibilic, Lyndal Johns and George Cliff, whose wife, Noelene, was given contaminated semen when they were trying to have a child. That child, Lesleyann, is alive today and is 17 years old. Doug Johnson lost his wife, Dannalee. Before giving birth to Holly, Dannalee was given a blood transfusion, and we lost both Dannalee and Holly. At times over the years that man could not express himself; he could not speak.

Two sets of parents had sons, both haemophiliacs, who were given contaminated blood products. I learnt a lot about politicians in those days. I learnt about the heartlessness of both sides of this Chamber, because nobody wanted to give them compensation. Both sides said they would not help them unless they changed their names, that they were not innocent victims of the disease. They felt as if they were throw-away people, that nobody cared about them. At that stage no Premier or Minister would see them, and I said that we would roam the halls of Parliament House—and we did. One man said to Lorraine Cibilic, "You know it is a privilege to suffer for God." He said that to the wrong person—a person dying from AIDS, the person who was keeping these other people together. She wrote to that man and said, "I don't blame God for this." I have copies of all the letters she received from government and from others.

When the bill to close abortion clinics was being debated I prayed that God would help me get through it because I knew what the response would be from pro-abortion members. When I finished speaking I noticed that all the women had gone. They had all walked out on me—and I had not even noticed, which was marvellous. At a media meeting somebody said that they had heard the material over and over, but they had not. That was the first time for many years that a pro-life bill was presented in this Parliament. It was a good speech. If honourable members do not remember it they should read it.

We were very pleased when the Tobacco Prohibition Advertising Bill was passed. The Opposition of the day, the Australian Labor Party, supported the bill but the Coalition did not. I remember the Hon. Dr Brian Pezzutti going hot tongs against us, but he must have changed his mind overnight because in the morning he said he agreed with the bill. The passing of that bill, to stop the advertising of those products, was one of the greatest moves ever made in this Chamber. We then had the homosexual vilification bill, and the previous day we had the Letona bill, our own private member's bill to help the fruit growers. When I rang Fred to tell him there was going to be a vote he hurried, fell down the stairs and broke three ribs. He was admitted to hospital, but when the bill was being debated he came out in his wheelchair.

The Hon. John Ryan: We remember it well.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: So does he, because his painkillers wore off at midnight and he was here until 5.00 a.m., still debating the bill. We each spoke for 3� hours that night. I pay tribute to some members of this Chamber whom I consider nice—maybe it will be the kiss of death for me to do so. The Hon. Ron Dyer is a thorough gentleman. Many years ago we travelled overseas with the Hon. Richard Bull on a police promotions committee. Just about every hotel room that Ron was given had something wrong with it. At one hotel he could not get in his room, at another the taps did not work. But I think he was given the penthouse at one hotel. We visited the Guggenheim Museum together. Not every man in this Chamber is a gentleman, but Ron has proved to be just that.

I thank the Hon. Henry Tsang for his friendship. He does not tell us any secrets, but I classify Henry as a friend—and he brings us chocolate biscuits at times. I come now to our Treasurer, the Hon. Michael Egan. Michael lightens this place immensely. I remember him changing colour several years ago, when the Hon. Lis Kirkby was a member of this Chamber. He said, "You promised me three minutes ago that you would support this bill," and the Hon. Lis Kirkby got up and walked out. Michael went purple. I thought: Michael, you are not going to last. As he told me, it is an act that is performed in this Chamber. He should have been on the stage. I thank him for his friendship. He is always very helpful and considerate, and always asks about my health. I appreciate that.

The Hon. Henry Tsang: Is he a gentleman?

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: Yes, he is. The next person I would like to mention is the Hon. Charlie Lynn. I thank him for what he has done as a representative of this place at Isurava, on the Kokoda Track, and for what he has done today. He has reminded the younger generation of the sacrifice of our Australian men on the Kokoda Track in New Guinea. Yesterday the Prime Minister honoured the men who fought at Milne Bay. I thank Charlie because he has done it not only for this Chamber but for all Australians, especially the younger generation.

Some of us remember Sir Adrian Solomon—he was a great man who had the wisdom of Solomon—Jack Doohan, Judy Jakins, who always said it as it was, Richard Killen and Bryan Vaughan of the ALP. I remember standing here one day and talking about the smutty, dirty programs on ABC television. Bryan was sitting behind me, goading me; he was saying, "That's not right, that's not right." However, when I finished speaking he said, "I agree with you." That was Bryan. I said to Duncan Gay, "You are my favourite National Party man." He said to me, "Elaine, if I am gone, you know I had to go." To me, Duncan represents the country. I hope he will always remain country at heart. Today many people move to the country and become very trendy. They move away from family values and so on.

I will miss this place, which has been part of my life for 14 years. I will not miss the campaign meetings in the city, which we have attended for 17 years. Country people are different to city people. They are the salt of the earth, and they say things as they are. They know right from wrong, and they do not try to cover things up. Maybe I am talking about an older generation—I am not sure any longer. I shall also miss my leader. This is the part where I should weep.

The Hon. Dr Brian Pezzutti: Are you leaving him?

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: No, but we have sat on the same bench for 14 years. I know that I have embarrassed him at times, but he is a very patient and dedicated man. We have been involved in many different ministries. We worked at Wesley Central Mission, where we dealt with drug addicts and alcoholics. We have worked with young pregnant girls and unmarried mothers, including 13-year-old girls. Indeed, I have babysat for them. We know what life is all about. When we came in here I think many people thought, "He is a minister. And here comes his wife." They know nothing. My great-grandparents owned seven pubs in Sydney, including the Hero of Waterloo. My great-grandfather died an alcoholic at 42 years of age. His 11 children were told, "You are never to drink." So they gambled!

Fred has eaten and slept whatever he has been involved in. He has dedicated himself fully to whatever he has put his hand to. This year we will have been married 44 years. We have been keeping company since we were 16 and 17 years of age. I will miss him when I go home to Gerroa and he is in Sydney. However, as he says, I can come up here and go shopping with the credit card. I have taken him at his word! I remember one time when the Coalition was in government—I think the Hon. John Jobling was there—I embarrassed Fred when Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh were visiting. We all gathered around the fountain outside to have a photograph taken. After that Mrs Greiner accompanied the Duke of Edinburgh; she explained that Fred and I were the only married couple sitting together in the same Chamber. The Duke said to me, "Do you obey him?" I said, "We are loyal to each other and we vote the same way."

I do not know where I got it from but I then said, "You know, we are the only two people who eat together and travel to work together. We sit together on the same bench and as far as I know we are the only two who sleep together." I saw Fred's face going purple, and the Duke threw back his head and laughed. I apologise, Fred. Most members who have families, husbands and wives, make sacrifices when they come here, but their families make a greater sacrifice because of the late nights. However, we do not have the same late night and early morning sittings as previously. I remember one occasion around Christmas time when the House sat until 7.00 a.m.—I think it might have been the fault of the Hon. Ian Cohen—and we had breakfast together in the dining room.

The Hon. Ian Cohen: One year was the planning legislation.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: Yes, and we had breakfast in the dining room.

The Hon. Ian Cohen: It was the Government's fault.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: Was it? We all had breakfast together. Since then, we have not had many late night sittings. I thank my family, my children and my grandchildren. I now have seven little Australians. I will be glad to be there for them on school days and grandparents' days and for other things I have missed in the past. Three of my grandchildren no longer have grandparents on the other side of the family. Their other grandmother and grandfather died within two years of each other—he died of asbestosis and she died of a brain tumour—so we are the only grandparents they have. Over the years during all of our work and when Fred was up to his neck in the ministry, our children suffered financially in the sense that they were unable to go on school camps and so on. We were always the church mice, so to speak; we never had paid work as normal people do. I now hope to make it up to my children by being there for them.

In the Chamber, as Christians we have always tried to represent Almighty God and his biblical values. I believe that those values sustained our nation in the past. We are told by God how to chastise our children, how to love each other, how husbands should love their wives as Christ loved the church, and how husbands should love their wives as they love their own bodies. God's teachings have been very important to us through the years. We have been pro-life in all areas, whether it has been euthanasia or abortion. We have never lied in this Chamber, and we have never done deals with the Government. Premiers have known where we stood on issues and they have said, "We respect you for telling us."

We have always said when we were not in favour of a bill. At times we have been like shags on a rock, when we have been the only two on this side and everybody else has been on the other side. However, that has not worried us because as members of the Christian Democratic Party we have the opportunity to vote according to our conscience, and our conscience comes from the word of God in the Holy Bible. I do not have any qualms that I have voted to legalise brothels or anything like that. As I used to say, I can sleep at night with my own conscience. I have been glad to have that as a member of the Christian Democratic Party. I thank you all for being part of my family. In a sense we are a family and, like a family, we squabble and we disagree. And some of those disagreements have been very lively at times.

We spend much of our time in this place and we get to know each other's faults and virtues, and that is a good thing. Recently we have heard of the murders of two 10-year-old girls in Soham. In New South Wales we have had the murders of Ebony Simpson—I saw what happened to her parents' marriage, what happened to the boys and so on—and Samantha Knight. Many children and young people have disappeared. I believe that part of our ministry in this place is to ensure that we legislate to protect young people and keep them safe on the streets, and to ensure that adults are not frightened. On the news coming from Soham one woman said, "We teach our children not to speak to strangers, but what happens when they are well known to our children? Where do we go from here?"

It is part of the job of parliamentarians in this State to make good laws for parents, families and marriages so that young people will grow up knowing what is right and what is wrong and have respect—something that is lacking in a lot of children today. I ask God to bless you and keep you, to make his face shine upon you, and—something that every person, especially every member of Parliament, needs—to give you peace of mind, that you know what you have done is right according to your conscience and according to Almighty God. I thank you for allowing me to speak to you.

I would like to tell you a little about the man who is taking my seat, Reverend Gordon Moyes. I am sure that some of you will love him and some of you will hate him. I know that Bob Carr has spoken to him on the telephone. Reverend Gordon Moyes is the director of the Wesley Mission, Australia's largest Christian welfare service. It employs 3,500 paid staff, conducts 55 services of worship every week, cares for people in 480 caring centres and has an operational budget of $150 million. The new Wesley Centre at 220 Pitt Street, Sydney, was opened at a cost of $300 million, debt free. Reverend Gordon Moyes has preached in almost every city and large public building in Australia. He has lectured in management at universities, colleges and seminaries in 20 countries.

I do not worry about academia and similar things; they do not have any impact on me. But Reverend Gordon Moyes has a caring heart, a heart after God. He loves people. Those who have been involved in mission work would know that some mighty strange people need to be dealt with. As Mother Teresa said, missionaries deal with people from the gutter and sometimes their clothing is filled with lice. But they are the people that God loves and wants to rescue. Reverend Gordon Moyes will be filling the casual vacancy created by my leaving and he will stand for the 2003 election. I am sure that you will welcome him. Once again, thank you very much for your friendship and for being part of the family of the New South Wales Parliament.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN (Treasurer, Minister for State Development, and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [3.32 p.m.]: I support the bill. I take this opportunity on my behalf and I am sure on behalf of all members of this House to wish the Hon. Elaine Nile well in her retirement from this place. In the 14 years that she has been a member of Parliament she has always been very hard working and diligent. She has been loyal not only to her leader but also to her convictions. Whilst she might not always have won our support and vote on matters before the House, no-one would doubt that right from the start she won our affections. I wish her well in her retirement.

The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS [3.33 p.m.]: On behalf of the Australian Democrats I farewell the Hon. Elaine Nile. Today is the one-hundredth anniversary of women in Parliament. Although she can claim to be not liberated she still has had many good years in Parliament—

The Hon. Elaine Nile: I am definitely liberated.

The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS: I take that back—the Hon. Elaine Nile is liberated. She has been a member of Parliament for 14 years and she is retiring today. The Australian Democrats appreciate the work that she did with Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile with respect to the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Bill and the stand the Christian Democratic Party has taken on gambling and alcohol matters. We have not agreed with her on a number of issues, but we admire the work that she has done. I am sure that the Hon. Elisabeth Kirkby would join me in wishing her well and hoping that her health improves in her retirement. The Young Offenders Act went through this Parliament in 1997 under the guidance of the Hon. Jeff Shaw. It is interesting to reminisce about those times, when this Government had some compassion and was not ruled and dominated by the misguided rhetoric of talkback radio. At the introduction of the Young Offenders Bill in 1997 the then Attorney General said:

It is recognised that emphasis on prevention rather than punishment is appropriate when dealing with most offences committed by young people.

Back in the old days the Government actually got things right. The Australian Democrats supported the 1997 bill without hesitation because it introduced a system of cautions and diversionary conferencing to keep young offenders out of the courts and the rest of the criminal justice system. My predecessor, Lis Kirkby, said that the same pressure from the media was present at that time. She said:

Anyone listening to popular radio commentators or reading some of the popular press would believe that New South Wales was in the grip of a most violent juvenile crime wave, but that belief is not borne out by statistics.

So why does this Government, the same Government that resisted the baying media hounds, now bow to them? The present Attorney General admits that. He said:

The Attorney General said that although there is no evidence to support that perception the Government is still bending to the pressure of a noisy, ill-informed minority articulated to a mass market by talkback radio. The Law Society has expressed its concern about three areas of the bill. First, the bill will limit to three the number of times that a young offender can be cautioned. After the third caution the young offender will be either referred to a youth justice conference or the matter will proceed to court. It is rightly argued that a young offender may be cautioned on three minor and different matters, such as possession of a small amount of marijuana, offensive language or a minor shoplifting offence. It is possible that a young person may use up all three cautions in one bad day's activities. For example, a boy or a girl who steals a pen from a newsagent and is apprehended by police, speaks bad language to the police and is found to be in possession of one joint of marijuana has committed three offences and received three cautions on one bad day. The next time, say six months down the track, that person is caught committing minor damage to property—say spray painting an old tin fence—will result in three strikes and he or she is in.

That provision smacks of mandatory sentencing. It takes discretion away from the police to caution and it forces them to take the matter to the next level. It is a waste of police time, and it would be better if the matter could stay at the caution level. Police have to be given some credit for deciding whether giving another caution is the right approach. I understand that the Greens have taken the advice of the Law Society on this part of the bill and will move an appropriate amendment, which we are happy to support. The second area that the Law Society is concerned about is that schedule 1 item [11] to the bill provides that a conference convener may decide to invite a representative of the young offender's school to attend the youth justice conference. That could be quite damaging to a child's reputation at school. If the offence had nothing to do with the school and did not occur at the school it is inappropriate for the school to be involved. It is unfair that a child should be tarnished in the eyes of the police and then the school. Honourable members are probably aware from personal experience or by observation that once a child's reputation, be it good or bad, is established at a school it is rare that it changes. The Greens have produced an amendment, on advice of the Law Society, that will make the attendance of a school official at a caution not only at the discretion of the conference convener but also with the consent of the alleged offender.

The third concern is that amendments to section 38 of the Act require specialist youth officers, conference administrators and the Director of Public Prosecutions to consult with the investigating officer when deciding whether a young offender should be conferenced. The Law Society argues that there is concern about that approach, and that some investigating officers may form adverse views about some young offenders and may be selective in their application of the Young Offenders Act. The bill allows consideration to be given in certain circumstances to requiring young offenders to participate in a range of programs, including counselling programs, drug and alcohol rehabilitation, educational and other programs that can assist young offenders to stay out of trouble. The bill will also make it explicit that a victim who attends a youth justice conference can veto any outcome plan proposed at that conference.

In conclusion, it is disappointing that the Government is going backwards rather than forwards to a more enlightened law and order approach. It is also predictable that the Opposition's response to this bill is to go even further backwards—to say that a young offender has one chance at a caution. How would it be if members of the Opposition were given only one chance at a preselection, one chance to win a seat, one chance to be a Minister? It is a ridiculous proposition! I will support the Law Society's amendments to the bill. I will not support the Opposition's amendments as I believe they are basically a return to the days of stocks and public executions.

The Hon. RON DYER [3.40 p.m.]: I support the Young Offenders Amendment Bill 2002. I intend in my contribution to the debate, firstly, to deal with the basis of my support for the bill and, secondly, to respond to the kind remarks of the Hon. Elaine Nile. Perhaps I ought also set the record straight regarding another matter to which she referred. In recent years I have had a constant interest in juvenile conferencing and the Young Offenders Act. Prior to the 1995 election when the Labor Government came to office I travelled to New Zealand as shadow Minister to speak to relevant people there regarding means of dealing with young offenders as an alternative to dealing with them in the criminal justice system. During that visit I spoke to police in Auckland and Wellington and to Judge Mick Brown of the Youth Court in New Zealand, an acknowledged expert in this area. I also spoke to the Children's Commissioner in Wellington.

As a result of that visit I formed the view that it would be worthwhile legislating along the general lines of providing, in appropriate cases, that young offenders ought to be dealt with according to a juvenile conferencing model as an alternative to being penalised in the criminal justice system and attracting a criminal record from day one, as it were. The Labor Government subsequently wrote into its policy that there should be provision for such measures. I also readily acknowledge that this policy issue has been dealt with on a relatively bipartisan basis. For example, a former member of this House and holder of the office of Attorney General, the Hon. John Hannaford, was very definitely committed to a juvenile conferencing model. There can be no doubt of that. I am happy to say that the legislation has, by and large, worked well to date. I suppose one could say that this bill is targeted at finetuning and balancing the legislation as between the interests of the child and the interests of society. It is not my intention to go into a detailed appraisal of this bill. However, the first three objects of the bill contain the essence of what it seeks to do.

First, the bill seeks to limit to three the number of occasions on which a child can be dealt with for an offence by caution. I believe that is a reasonable step to take. It is legitimate and proper for a young person to be cautioned where the offence involved is such that it is believed that the young person is unlikely to reoffend and where the offence is of such character that a caution is appropriate—that is, the offence is not unduly serious. However, I do not believe it can be said that cautions should be infinitely available or available for an undue number of occasions. The legislation sets a limit of three, and I believe that is appropriate. Young persons ought to have learned their lesson once they have been apprehended and cautioned on three successive occasions for three different offences.

Second, the bill seeks to ensure that the police officer or other investigating official who initially deals with the child in relation to the commission or alleged commission of an offence is consulted whenever practicable on any decision as to the action to be taken under the legislation in relation to that offence. That equally is an appropriate provision. The police are, after all, at the front line of law enforcement and it is appropriate that the police officer be consulted in regard to a decision under the legislation about an offence for which the child is apprehended. In my experience many police officers have been very supportive of the legislation. For example, I refer to a former member of the Police Service, as it was then known, Senior Sergeant Terry O'Connell, formerly of Wagga Wagga police. His patrol commander, Chief Inspector Kevin Wales—now the Mayor of Wagga Wagga following his retirement from the police—strongly supported Terry O'Connell in his efforts to develop an alternative cautioning model within the Police Service in Wagga Wagga.

In due course that cautioning model matured into the model that we now have. It is appropriate that the police should be involved in the decision about referral of the child to juvenile conferencing. However, I have a concern that the picture appears to be mixed regarding the extent to which juvenile conferencing is utilised in different parts of the State. That could be a product of differing attitudes held by the police in different areas of the State. I cannot prove what I say in that regard. I am not sure that research is currently available to establish what I am saying. However, anecdotally, the apprehension I have in that regard could be the fact. Encouraging police to participate in the decision about referral to juvenile conferencing may remove suspicion and increase their support for conferencing. Third, an important objective of the bill is to provide that a youth justice conference can be attended by a representative from the school of the child involved. Given the circumstances, that obviously is appropriate. I support the legislation and the particular objects that I have referred to.

The Hon. Elaine Nile has left the Chamber as she has had to go to see the Governor in regard to her resignation. Had I been aware that she had to leave the Chamber I would perhaps have trespassed on the forms of the House and said what I wished to say regarding the Hon. Elaine Nile first rather than second. It has been my pleasure to serve with the honourable member since she became a member of the House. Sometimes she might have made judgments and comments with which I would not agree; on other occasions she would have made comments with which I would have been happy to agree. However, clearly, the honourable member has always had a conscientious belief in the correctness of what she has said at any given time, and she has sought to articulate her views and to present them to the House in all good conscience.

I did indeed travel overseas with a former member of the House, the Hon. Richard Bull, and the Hon. Elaine Nile—it was in 1991 if I remember correctly—as a member of the Select Committee upon Means of Improving the Police Positional Promotional System. In the course of that inquiry we visited San Francisco, Chicago, Toronto, New York, Amsterdam and London. We met with members of the police force in each of those large cities with a view to gaining information to furnish our report to the House regarding the police promotional system, which was at that time a matter of some controversy. At that time a Coalition Government was in office and, if my memory serves me correctly, the Hon. Ted Pickering was the Minister for Police. I enjoyed that overseas trip and the company of the Hon. Richard Bull and the Hon. Elaine Nile.

The Hon. Elaine Nile made reference to my having problems with various hotels. I only remember a problem with one hotel, the Mayflower Hotel in New York, which is adjacent to Central Park. It is true that I ended up in the penthouse of that hotel. Lest anyone in the House think I was having a tryst with a Hollywood actress or anything of the sort, I should state that that was not the case. The lock on the door to my room failed and the door could not be opened. Security staff broke through the door, thus allowing access to the room. However, it was considered unwise to stay overnight in an unlocked hotel room in New York, so I found myself in the penthouse of the Mayflower Hotel, with rooms, mirrors and furniture everywhere. I hope I do not appear too defensive, but those were the circumstances in which I found myself in the penthouse.

The Hon. Elaine Nile also referred to a period of her parliamentary career as the time of "the troubles", harking back to a term that is often used regarding Ireland. I am not sure that "the troubles" achieved the heights of the troubles in Ireland, but there were certainly heightened differences at that time, particularly involving the Hon. Marie Bignold. Long-serving members of the House, including the Hon. John Jobling, would remember with some amusement the events that occurred during that time, events that were eventually resolved to the satisfaction of Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile. However, I should like to place on record my respect for the Hon. Elaine Nile for her conscientious representation of her views during her term of service in the House and thank her for her kind words concerning me.

The Hon. Dr PETER WONG [4.53 p.m.]: I also wish to express my good wishes to the Hon. Elaine Nile and wish her all the best in her retirement. May the good Lord bless her with good health and peace in future years. The Young Offenders Amendment Bill 2002 seeks to limit the number of occasions on which a young person may be cautioned under the Young Offenders Act. It also seeks to ensure that a police officer or other investigating officer who initially deals with a child is consulted on decisions to be taken under the Act. The third object of the bill is to provide that a teacher or representative from the child's school may attend a youth justice conference. The fourth object of the bill is to provide that particular consideration be given by the participants in a youth justice conference to the desirability of the child's participation in appropriate counselling, rehabilitation, educational or other programs. The fifth object of the bill is to ensure that the victim of an offence has a right of veto as to any outcome plan proposed at a youth justice conference.

In many respects these provisions seem reasonable. Indeed, the fourth object of the bill— which provides that particular consideration be given by the participants in a youth justice conference to the desirability of the child's participation in appropriate counselling, rehabilitation, educational or other programs—is a fine initiative that brings the Act into line with New Zealand practices on which the New South Wales program is based. In New Zealand it is thought that the interest in assisting children and young people in continuing education and counselling, and engaging in sporting clubs and the like, is one of the major reasons for the success of the program..

However, the reason for the success of the program—and it has been successful, as the Hon. Richard Jones has already pointed out—may not be an aspect of the program per se. As Michael Cain's revolutionary research on juvenile recidivists, which was undertaken while he was working with the Department of Juvenile Justice, clearly shows, most children only ever make one appearance before the juvenile court system. It should come as little surprise that the conferencing program, which places itself as a diversionary tool between the young person and the judicial system, has continued this marvellous outcome. However, the problem is with those young people who do not become involved in the cautioning and conferencing systems. I am particularly concerned about young people from non-English-speaking backgrounds, Aboriginal children and young people, and children who are in the care system, under care and protection orders, or who are wards of the State. It appears that those individuals may not be participating in the diversionary programs at anywhere near the rates of "normal" young people.

A number of years ago during a budget estimates hearing Mr Buttrum, the former Director-General of the Department of Juvenile Justice, referred to the poor level of participation by Aboriginal children and young people in the system. Children in care are also less likely to be given this option. Indeed, it has come to my attention that the former Chief Magistrate of the Children's Court, like many others in similar positions, has complained about Department of Community Services officers not attending court hearings relating to children in care. The fact that this occurs in a properly functioning justice institution suggests, and indeed confirms, that those children are less likely to take part in conferencing. Also, many children from non-English-speaking backgrounds, Aboriginal children and children in care—may of whom get into trouble—do not receive assistance at this level because they do not have homes, working families or operating social structures.

For those children it is highly unlikely that schoolteachers would be even aware of who they are, let alone be willing to appear on their behalf to look after their interests. I should like the Government to take note of that. Too many children who really need the benefit of the provisions of the bill, especially the provision referred to in the fourth object of the bill, do not have the opportunity to participate. That is important to our society. Too many of the children in the juvenile justice system are, or have been, in the care of the State. A study has shown that of all the children under 16 at Reiby Juvenile Justice Centre approximately 20 per cent are presently under State wardship, care and protection orders, and as they represent only 0.1 per cent of the children in the State of New South Wales they are at least 200 times overrepresented. Many more of the children at Reiby had previously been in care and, indeed, 80 per cent had been the subject of three or more child-at-risk notifications to the Department of Community Services before they had committed their first offences.

With that in mind, and bearing in mind that Aboriginal children, young people and individuals from non-English speaking backgrounds have difficulty appearing before conferences in the first instance, I am concerned about the provisions allowing for the veto of outcomes from the conferencing process. As Mr Buttrum stated at the budget estimates hearing mentioned earlier, entry into the juvenile justice system is the first time that many children in the care of the State have access to psychological services. Remedial education and other primary health care services can presumably be added to that. That the power of veto would exist over such children is of grave concern to me, especially when something good may be able to happen for them—perhaps for the first time. I ask honourable members to keep these issues in mind when they vote on this matter. I suggest that, regardless of the outcomes of this bill, the Government should do much more work for these vulnerable children and young people.

The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO [4.00 p.m.]: I support the Young Offenders Amendment Bill 2002. I note the resignation today of the Hon. Elaine Nile. She is an honest and genuine member of this Chamber upon whose word one can rely. In the short time that I have known her I have come to appreciate her values as being those of a truly Christian woman. It is a little unfortunate that on the anniversary of women receiving the vote in New South Wales the Christian Democratic Party, whose membership is a reasonable size, has not been able to find another good, Christian woman to replace the Hon. Elaine Nile. I wish her well in her retirement. I am sure that she will now be able to spend more time with her family, which is a desire that she often expressed to me.

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.

WOMEN'S FRANCHISE ACT CENTENARY

The PRESIDENT: I draw the attention of the House to the fact that today is the centenary of the assent to the Women's Franchise Act 1902 in New South Wales. That followed the Commonwealth Franchise Act of June 1902, which gave women the right to vote in Federal elections. These Acts extended the parliamentary franchise to women, giving them the right to vote in elections on the same basis as men. It should be noted that indigenous women and men were not given the vote on the same basis as women until 1962. The New South Wales Act did not give women the right to stand for Parliament. That right was granted in 1918 for the Legislative Assembly and in 1926 for the Legislative Council. Since 1918 there have been 66 women members of Parliament: 31 in the Legislative Assembly and 35 in the Legislative Council.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

_________

OASIS LIVERPOOL DEVELOPMENT

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: My question is directed to the Treasurer, Minister for State Development, and Vice-President of the Executive Council. Has Cabinet ever discussed any matters relating to the Oasis development?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I do not make any comment on what matters go before Cabinet but to the best of my knowledge there have been no discussions—certainly none involving me—about the Oasis development with members of the Government. Some years ago I received a briefing from Liverpool City Council about the Oasis development.

Later,

During question time today I was asked a question about the proposed Oasis development at Liverpool. Subsequent to my answer to the House I ascertained that I attended a meeting in December 2001 concerning a request from Liverpool City Council to transfer Crown land to the council. I am advised that this land is already administered by Liverpool City Council and that no transfer has taken place.

CHILD PROTECTION

The Hon. PETER PRIMROSE: My question is directed to the Minister for Community Services. Given the release of the new report today suggesting that all States are struggling to resource child protection adequately, what action is being taken in New South Wales?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I am sure that all honourable members will have heard some of the public debate that took place this morning about the release of the report to which the Hon. Peter Primrose referred in his important question. It is certainly the case that the effectiveness of services, both government and non-government, to support families and protect children and young people is fundamental to our society. It is not surprising that this attracts much interest and scrutiny, as evidenced this morning with the release of the report by the Child and Family Welfare Association of Australia about child protection matters across Australia.

The Government has undertaken a substantial reform program in this area since it came to office. There has been a significant increase in resources—funding for child protection has more than doubled since 1995—and a complete overhaul of the legislation as well as significant organisational reform. As honourable members will be aware, there has been a substantial increase in the number of reports of concern to the Department of Community Services [DOCS]. In fact, in the past 10 years the number of child protection reports has increased sevenfold in New South Wales.

I am stating the obvious by admitting that the past few years in the Department of Community Services have been a time of enormous change and challenge. A number of reports have been critical of the department's performance and the new legislation has taken much longer to bed down than anyone in government wanted. The Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act provides a sound foundation for a system of child and family services in New South Wales. However, if that summarises our goal, the practical machinery must be made to work to support it. I am determined to ensure that is achieved.

Openness and transparency in the way in which the Department of Community Services undertakes its work and improving the department's relationship with its various partners are vital in establishing and retaining community support and credibility. The department's relationship with oversight bodies must be robust. I value highly the role of the Ombudsman, the Community Services Commissioner, the Children's Guardian and the Children's Commissioner. They provide a means of driving reform and continuously improving practice. Those oversight bodies must be provided with the information and assistance they need to resolve issues of concern as early as possible. The Public Service Association is also a vital partner in the process of reform, particularly in an agency that depends upon its staff for the quality of its services. Consultation and partnership with the non-government sector is critical to the department's effectiveness. As I have said, I will establish an appropriate forum to consult with that sector.

I turn now to how the department does its work. Everyone knows that there has been a substantial increase in the number of reports of concern to the Department of Community Services. The Government has already injected substantial resources into the department. In the past 18 months alone 330 new caseworker positions have been created in addition to the recent announcement of 100 extra caseworkers. In spite of that, DOCS has clearly struggled to keep up with the increasing volume of work. There is no point denying that and I am committed to a planned and systematic approach to addressing this issue. The Government has already implemented the interim recommendation of the Kibble committee, which has now been requested to develop an accurate measure of workload demand and of what resources are needed to deal with it. When that work is completed we can make accurate decisions about what resources are needed and where.

Of course the issue involves not only how many staff but how they are deployed and what support systems are in place. To that end the department will develop a new client information system and clear guidance will be provided to front-line staff on policy and practice. The department will also use workload data along with other relevant information as a planning tool to assist resource allocation and many more steps will be taken. [Time expired.]

The Hon. PETER PRIMROSE: I ask a supplementary question. Will the Minister for Community Services expand on her answer?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I am happy to do so. These are significant issues and it is in the interests of the House to hear further information about them. Meaningful data derived from the Helpline will be made available publicly and will be released on a regular basis. The department will continue to make improvements to the Helpline to ensure that it operates efficiently as a first instance notification and referral mechanism and to ensure that the transition of information from the Helpline to community service centres is as seamless and productive as possible. I will work closely with the Senior Children's Court Magistrate, the Family Court and other appropriate partners to address any legislative issues. We will examine closely how technology can help us to deliver improved outcomes, particularly through the human service delivery project. Significant issues face the Department of Community Services, just as they face child protection agencies around the world. I am determined to ensure that they are addressed and I know that the department's staff have both the capacity and the willingness to meet those challenges.

I spent the past five weeks meeting with many staff, particularly front-line caseworkers, across the various operations of the department. I was enormously impressed with their professionalism, dedication and commitment. As I said earlier, they have the capacity and willingness to meet these challenges. I make it clear to the House that our efforts to improve our response to children at risk reported to the department must also be accompanied by a continuing and growing commitment to early intervention services. This is essential if we are to reduce the number of reports. The reasoning behind proposals such as Families First, the Better Futures strategy for young people and the Drug Summit plan of action are clear. If we can direct more funds to the front end of the system, to early intervention and to supporting families before problems become too drastic, it will assist in other aspects of the department's operations. More importantly, it will benefit children, young people and families in New South Wales.

STATE SUPERANNUATION FUND

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: My question without notice is addressed to the Treasurer. How can the Treasurer claim he has no responsibility for State Super's losses when the organisational structure in the State Super's annual report clearly shows both the Treasurer and his mate the Special Minister of State at the top of the fund's organisational structure? Is this, like the electricity losses, just another example of the Treasurer's famous hands-off management of this State's finances?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: The Leader of the National Party and Opposition spokesman on Treasury matters has put forward a dangerous and reckless proposal to the effect that the Treasurer of the day should be personally in charge of investing the $25 billion of assets in the pool superannuation fund. I do not know of any Treasurer in Australia today or of any previous Treasurer in this State or anywhere else who is a specialist funds manager. I am quite prepared occasionally to take a gamble with my own investments but, when it comes to $25 billion of public assets in superannuation funds, the responsibility for those investments rests with the trustees and the fund managers they appoint.

Let me turn to the second aspect of the question. The Leader of the National Party was quick to condemn the trustees and the fund managers for a negative net investment return in the last financial year of some $1,900 million—a significant decline over that year. What he did not point out was the investment return in the previous years. He did not point out that in the previous year there was a positive return of $1.4 billion. In the year before that there was a positive return of $3.6 billion. In the year prior to that there was a positive return of almost $1.8 billion. In the year prior to that there was a positive return of $2.2 billion, and in the year prior to that there was a positive investment return of $3.4 billion.

What does all that mean? It means that in the seven years since this Government has been in office, even after paying out $17 billion of benefits to members of that fund, the assets under management—the assets in the scheme—have grown from $15 billion to $25 billion, which is a $10 billion increase. It is regrettable that, in the last 12 months, there has been a negative investment return. But the pool fund is not alone in that. I suspect that most superannuation funds in the last 12 months have had a negative net return.

The Hon. John Ryan: One of the worst performances in Australia.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: The Hon. John Ryan said that it was one of the worst performances in Australia. The fact of the matter is that, over that seven years, the average annual return of the pool fund is 9.9 per cent, well in excess of the average return for superannuation funds over that period.

GLOCK PISTOL SAFETY

The Hon. Dr PETER WONG: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police. The Minister might be aware that, in the lead-up to the introduction of the Glock pistol, numerous articles appeared in the media concerning the safety of that weapon. Given the fact that a number of deaths and injuries have since occurred arising from unintentional discharges of Glock armature, will the Minister provide the House with a detailed account of the failures, jamming, misfiring and unintentional discharges of Glock pistols since their introduction? To assist in a dispassionate exploration of this issue, will the Minister also provide a similar account for the service revolver over a similar time frame prior to it being withdrawn from service? Could both accounts include a breakdown of injuries and deaths arising from such incidents?

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: The honourable member has asked a detailed question. I do not know whether that information is available. I will take the honourable member's question on notice and endeavour to provide whatever information is relevant and appropriate, given the fact that it is an operational issue.

CONVENTION TOURISM INDUSTRY

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: My question without notice is directed to the Treasurer, and Minister for State Development. Will the Treasurer update the House on the increasing contribution of business tourism to the New South Wales economy?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I am pleased to inform the House of encouraging outcomes from the Sydney convention delegate study undertaken by the Sydney Convention and Visitors Bureau. The study demonstrates the growing economic benefits of business tourism to the New South Wales economy. The meetings and exhibition sector is now worth over $7 billion to Australia. New South Wales holds the largest portion of that, valued at some $2.3 billion. Last year, international convention delegates to Sydney spent about $750 per day, which is over nine times more than other international tourists spend. In fact, delegates spend 92� in the dollar on items other than their meeting, highlighting the immense flow-on effects for the local economy.

The study also revealed that nearly half of all delegates travelled with at least one companion, producing an even greater return. I am particularly pleased to report that 57 per cent of delegates undertook a pre-conference or post-conference tour, with the majority choosing to visit regional New South Wales. Conventions are creating new tourists for Sydney and New South Wales with two in three international delegates admitting that they were attracted to Sydney by the convention whereas they would not otherwise have visited New South Wales. The Sydney Convention and Visitors Bureau currently has over $490 million worth of business under negotiation—a 60 per cent increase on the value of meetings won this time last year.

Based on these early figures, Sydney is likely to become the most popular international convention destination. According to the International Congress and Convention Association, Sydney finished the 2000-01 year in the number five spot behind London, Paris, Madrid and Vienna. Sydney has moved ahead due to its exposure from the Olympics. Business tourism is a remarkably powerful source of income. It represents new money that contributes directly to the Sydney economy and, importantly, generates income for regions right across New South Wales.

ROAD TUNNEL POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEM

The Hon. PETER BREEN: My question without notice is to the Minister for Mineral Resources, representing the Minister for Roads. Is the Minister aware of a condition attached to the development approval for the cross-city road tunnel, which includes the possibility of installing pollution control systems if air quality levels at the single emission stack are exceeded? Is the Minister also aware that a similar condition is attached to the development approval for the M5 East road tunnel? Can the Minister say whether he is now considering the installation of pollution control systems in the M5 East road tunnel and the cross-city road tunnel, given the unsatisfactory levels of pollution both inside and outside the M5 East road tunnel? Can the Minister explain why the design of these road tunnels did not include pollution control systems when such systems are a standard feature of similar road tunnels in other parts of the world?

The Hon. EDDIE OBEID: The honourable member's question, requires an answer based on technical knowledge. I will endeavour to obtain the answer for him as soon as possible.

KARIONG JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTRE DISTURBANCE

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE: I ask a question of the Minister for Juvenile Justice. Were police called to last night's incident at the Kariong Juvenile Justice Centre? Is this the third such disturbance at the centre since 5-6 August? Did police lay charges over the 5-6 August incident for malicious damage and assault even when the authorities, with the Minister's agreement, had not called in the police at the time? What action has the Minister taken to move rioting criminals over the age of 18 from Kariong to adult prisons?
The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I confirm that police were called to the Kariong Juvenile Justice Centre as a result of a disturbance, although it is my understanding that the police were not required to take action because the matter was handled by the staff. However, I will provide the House with more background on the issue because the honourable member has raised a matter about which the House should be aware. As the honourable member indicated, a number of disturbances have occurred recently at the Kariong Juvenile Justice Centre. Of course, as I have indicated on any number of occasions, the Government views any disturbance in juvenile justice centres as unacceptable. The detainees involved damaged furniture, fittings and appliances in some units within the centre. While the damage is still being fully assessed, it is estimated to be approximately $90,000.

It is important to note that these disturbances have been resolved with no physical injury to any staff member or detainee. This is a credit to front-line staff and shows the benefits of the extensive training program now provided to staff. The centre's emergency management plan was implemented effectively and without incident. I am advised that in total seven detainees have been involved in these disturbances. I can advise the House that all detainees involved in the disturbances have been referred to police for appropriate action. One detainee has been transferred to an adult prison. Two other detainees are having psychiatric assessments arranged through Corrections Health.

As a result of these incidents, each detainee involved has had all privileges revoked and is now subject to a stringent management regime. Three of the detainees involved have now been placed on a strict management regime, with additional staffing. They will be kept separate from the general population at Kariong. Kariong is a maximum security facility that houses some of the most violent and disturbed young people in New South Wales. There is no question that management of the facility always will be difficult.

I want to remind honourable members of the significant improvements this Government has made at the centre. They include spending $3.25 million on upgrading and repairs; expending additional funds on enhancing security of the administration building; issuing operational staff with belt-mounted duress alarms; fitting closed-circuit television cameras to key areas; increasing staff induction training; introducing tougher measures to stop drugs being smuggled into the centre; and implementing specific training in restraint and cell extraction. The staff should be commended for their efforts in containing these disturbances without injury to staff or detainees. I have requested the director-general to closely monitor the situation at Kariong and ensure that senior operational staff continue to provide appropriate assistance and support to local management.

OLIVE OIL INDUSTRY

The Hon. TONY KELLY: My question without notice is to the Treasurer, and Minister for State Development. Would the Treasurer provide the House with details of the latest progress of the New South Wales olive oil industry?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I am surprised to hear that olive oil consumption in Australia has increased by some 300 per cent over the past decade. Our tastes have developed and matured away from what is described in my printed material as "traditional, stodgy Anglo-Celtic fare". I do not agree with that statement. Actually, I have not been eating well lately. I have been on holidays.

The Hon. Ian Cohen: We would like to hear about them.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I am going to tell you about my holidays later. I have already told you about fishing licences in Slovenia, but I will say more as time goes on to inform honourable members of my experiences on holidays. As our tastes develop and diversify, Australians are increasingly using good basic products such as olive oil in their cooking. Industry estimates place the current value of olive oil imports at around $80 million a year. The Hon. Eddie Obeid produces a fabulous olive oil, not in Australia but in a village in Lebanon.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: If you had blokes like the Hon. Eddie Obeid on your team, you would not exceed your salary cap.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: You would not exceed the salary cap, no. That is what happens when you have a football club president and a leagues club president who is a former Liberal Party candidate. The problem is that Mr McIntyre is a former Liberal Party candidate, but I would not hold that against him. If there had been a Labor Party president of the club there would not have been any breach of the salary cap or any other shenanigans, I can assure the House of that. Currently, only 1 per cent of the domestic olive oil market is supplied locally, with about 22,000 tonnes of olive oil being imported into Australia each year. Accordingly, the potential for growth for local olive oil producers is huge. The Government is working to assist this growing industry, and I am pleased to report important developments in the New South Wales olive oil industry. A New South Wales Agriculture Oils Research laboratory has received international accreditation from the International Olive Oil Council for quality testing—only the second laboratory in the Southern Hemisphere to gain such accreditation. The testing facility based at Wagga Wagga provides crucial feedback to producers, enabling them to make decisions about the direction of their business. The Wagga Wagga olive oil testing laboratory's international accreditation means New South Wales olive growers will receive the best possible information on the quality and value of their produce. This will assist them to determine the most suitable varieties to produce for the marketplace. The laboratory is currently investigating techniques to optimise quality and yield. A collaborative project involving 40 Australian olive oil producers will assess the shelf life of Australian olive oils.

The olive oil industry in Australia is relatively small, with an estimated five million trees having been planted, of which about 1.5 million are in New South Wales. About 6,000 hectares of olive trees have been planted in New South Wales, from Moree in the north to Deniliquin in the south. The Hunter Valley, I am told, is the fastest growing olive-producing area, with more than 150,000 trees having been planted in the past three years. Over the next two to three years many of those trees will start producing commercial yields of fruit.

The Hon. Jennifer Gardiner: It depends on the drought.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I do not think olive trees need a lot of water. [Time expired.]

HOTEL DINING AREAS SMOKING BAN

The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS: My question without notice is directed to the Treasurer, representing the Minister for Health. Is the Minister aware that hotels in New South Wales are blatantly ignoring the provisions of the Smoke Free Environment Act 2000 with regard to smoking in dining areas? Given that the 12-month exemption from the Act for hotel dining areas expired on 31 August 2001, when will the Minister use his powers under the Act to prosecute offending hoteliers?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I congratulate the Democrats in the New South Wales Parliament on, so far, not having split or divided.

The Hon. Charlie Lynn: Chesterfield and Evans?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I think the Hon. Charlie Lynn has hit the nail on the head. If we give Arthur long enough, there will be a bitter dispute between the Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield and the Hon. Dr Arthur Evans, but that is still to come. I would be very interested to know who the honourable member in this House is supporting as his leader.

The Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans: Point of order: The semantic aspects of my name have nothing to do with smoking in hotels or the Ministry for Health. While considerable latitude is given to the Treasurer to waffle, I ask that in this case you ask him, at least in some way, to stick to the topic in hand.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I remind the Treasurer of the requirements of the standing orders.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I am well aware of them, and I will answer the question if the Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans tells us who he is supporting for the Federal leadership of the parliamentary Democrats. If he tells us that, I will give him an answer.

The Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans: Madam President, I ask you to uphold the ruling.

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Treasurer will reply to the question in accordance with the standing orders.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I will refer the question to the Minister for Health. I just have to say, having had a holiday overseas, that it was absolutely delightful to eat in restaurants where everybody smokes.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES EMERGENCY RESPONSE

The Hon. JENNIFER GARDINER: My question is to the Minister for Community Services. Is the Minister aware that on Friday evening two boys aged nine and two, who had just lost their mother in a car accident north of Bendemeer, waited for more than seven hours with a compassionate member of the public at Tamworth Base Hospital, apparently because no-one could contact Department of Community Services [DOCS] officers to notify them of the boys' crisis? Is it acceptable that these boys were apparently left in limbo, and what is being done to avoid a repeat of this incident?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I will undertake to investigate the matters that the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner has raised and get a response for her. However, I indicate that my approach to individuals cases that an honourable member brings up in question time will invariably be to take them on notice, seek information, and respond to the honourable member outside question time. It is my view that in a department that received more than 140,000 reports of concern about children and young people in the past year, and has 84 community service centres and more than 1,000 staff, it is simply not possible to respond to individual cases during question time. Not only is it not possible, it is also inappropriate.

I accept the honourable member's question in good faith and I will undertake to investigate it as soon as possible and get her some information. I make it very clear that I am available at any time to talk to any honourable member about matters of concern with regard to the Department of Community Services. I will take those matters on board. I will follow up the issues and get honourable members the information they request, as I have done in this portfolio and as I always did in my previous portfolio, as honourable members know.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Why do you not look in your House file?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I have much in my House file. I make it clear that it is my view that if honourable members raise individual matters, such as the honourable member has done, it will not be possible to respond to them adequately. It can also lead to those issues being politicised. I do not believe that is appropriate, and it is certainly not in the best interests of individual children or families. I am not making excuses: I have outlined to the House issues confronting the Department of Community Services, and I am not backing away from them in any way, shape or form. I am happy to put on the public record a response for the honourable member.

But that is not the issue. The issue is that question time is not an appropriate time to raise individual cases relating to individual families when I am unable to name them or give appropriate responses. It is not the way to deal with cases that often involve human misery and family dysfunction. It is completely inappropriate, and the Opposition knows that. I will get the honourable member an answer to her question.

BROKEN HILL MINING

The Hon. IAN WEST: My question without notice is to the Minister for Mineral Resources. What has been done to protect the jobs of mineworkers and the future of mining in the Broken Hill area?

The Hon. EDDIE OBEID: My colleague's question is an important one. The New South Wales Government is keen to ensure that Broken Hill's place as a source of minerals continues well beyond the predicted life of the town's ore body. We want to ensure that Broken Hill families have a secure future. This important region was the birthplace of large-scale metalliferous mining in Australia. Since 1883 more than 200 million tonnes of ore-producing silver, lead and zinc has been mined at Broken Hill. That is $70 billion worth of production. Now the local community has another reason to be optimistic, with the handing over of mining leases, formerly held by Pasminco, to Perilya Resources.

Earlier this month my parliamentary colleague the honourable member for Murray-Darling handed over the new leases to Perilya on behalf of the New South Wales Government. The parcel of mining titles now held by Perilya includes all of the line of lode previously held by Pasminco. Perilya plans to extend the life of mining and will create 400 jobs in its new operation. The current work force is 303, with more than 90 per cent coming from Broken Hill. The company started production in early July and the first load of concentrates left Broken Hill by rail three days later. Perilya is confident of maintaining production to at least 2011. This is well beyond Pasminco's previously scheduled mine closure of 2005-06.

This transition is good news for the Broken Hill community. It protects jobs and gives families greater security. The operation is expected to inject $55 million a year into the Broken Hill economy. The change is also good news for the environment. Perilya Resources is committed to ensuring the area is rehabilitated when mining eventually ceases. The company is also investing in an ongoing program of site rehabilitation. This will see tens of millions of dollars spent on remedial works over the life of the mine. I look forward to updating the House about further developments.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES AND DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING CHILD ABUSE NOTIFICATIONS

The Hon. IAN COHEN: My question is directed to the Minister for Community Services. I will refer to an individual example, so I hope the Minister does not see this as something she cannot answer, because I think the example indicates certain issues. The recent tragic case of a girl who was locked in her room by her mother and stepfather for almost two years seems to indicate that there is very little sharing of information between the Department of Community Services [DOCS] and the Department of Education and Training about children at risk.

In this case it appears there was no follow-up by the Department of Education and Training or DOCS despite the fact that the girl in question failed to attend school after the notification of abuse. What processes are in place or will be put in place for children notified to DOCS who subsequently fail to attend school when there was been a notification to DOCS that the child is at risk? Does DOCS communicate to a child's school that he or she is the subject of an investigation into child abuse?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: The Hon. Ian Cohen has raised an important issue: co-operation and support between different government agencies with regard to protecting children who may be at risk. With regard to the matter he has referred to—and this is information that is on the public record—two reports were made to the Department of Community Services by the Department of Education and Training, in 1998 and 1999, prior to the alleged incarceration. They involved extensive investigation, including liaison with the Department of Education and Training, local health services and the girl's own doctor.

With regard to the incident the honourable member referred to, there was extensive liaison between the two agencies. I think the issue may well have become difficult once the girl was over the age of 15, and therefore there was no particular requirement by the Department of Education and Training with regard to her attendance at school. Nonetheless, the honourable member has raised a significant issue. It is important that there is good interagency co-operation between the Department of Education and Training, the Department of Community Services and many other governments agencies. A number of mechanisms are in place to address this, including committees that bring together the chief executive officers of those agencies to discuss various different issues.

In my capacity as Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth I established the Youth Interagency Task Force, which provides some scope to address the issues raised by the honourable member. Recently, the Youth Interagency Task Force has been responsible for overseeing the development of the youth policy, and it has representatives of all the major government agencies dealing with young people, including Education, Community Services, Health, Sport and Recreation and a range of other agencies. I hope that body will assist in the processes to ensure more effective interagency co-operation. Department of Education and Training teachers are mandatory reporters, and that places an onus on them with regard to reporting any concern.

NURSES PAY CLAIM

The Hon. JAMES SAMIOS: My question is addressed to the Minister for Industrial Relations. Has the Minister asked the Industrial Relations Commission to fast-track the decision on the nurses' pay claim? What action has the Minister taken to support a significant pay rise for nurses?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The honourable member has asked two questions. The answer to the first question is no, I have not done that. It is not the custom of Ministers for Industrial Relations—nor should it or would it be the custom—to direct the commission as to how it deals with a matter. As the honourable member knows, the matter relating to the nurses' case was not referred to the commission by the Government or by me as the Minister. It is the result of an application by the Nurses Federation, to which the Government is responding.

I think the second question deals with what my attitude or submission may be. As Minister for Industrial Relations I am in charge of the administration of the commission itself. As the honourable member knows—I think this Chamber has had several various solicitations about the Government's position in relation to the Industrial Relations Commission—we support a strong umpire in the form of an independent Industrial Relations Commission. The Industrial Relations Commission is hearing the matter relating to nurses as an independent umpire. As the employer, the Government is placing before the commission information and a case relating to each position in terms of the nurses' salary increase. Both the Government's case and the nurses' case are matters of public record, copies of which the honourable member is at liberty to obtain at his convenience.

COALITION TAX POLICY

The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO: My question without notice is directed to the Treasurer. Is the Treasurer aware of any new tax policies supported by certain members of this House?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I am aware of a new tax that Opposition members plan to impose on the people of this State if they happen to win the State election next year. This is a new tax that they did not intend to tell us about, but their Treasury spokesman, the member for Upper Hunter, has let the cat out of the bag. The New South Wales Coalition wants to hit families living in rented homes with the 10 per cent GST. I am sure that Mr Souris did not mean to do it—I suspect that he does not mean to do a lot of the things he does—but last week he let slip that the Coalition does not like renters getting away without paying GST. In an extraordinary letter to the Australian Financial Review of 19 August he argued that the State Government, as a tenant, should pay GST on its lease on Governor Macquarie Tower in Sydney. In other words, according to Mr Souris, the tenant, not the landlord, should pay the GST.

This is a sea change in Coalition policy, and it is a frightening development for every one of the 532,000 families renting their homes in New South Wales. To put it simply, the Coalition is out to hit renters with a 10 per cent tax. The Coalition's Treasury spokesman, Mr Souris, has made his intentions clear to the big end of town via the Australian Financial Review. However, he has been very quiet about this new tax out in the bush. There has been not a word about it in his local paper or in his regular column in the Quirindi Advocate or the Coonabarabran Times.

Nor has there been a word about it to the 215,000 families renting homes in rural and regional New South Wales. With George Souris as Treasurer in a Coalition government, these tenants would be hit with a 10 per cent tax on their rent. Recent figures indicate an average rental of $170 per week in rural and regional areas. The Coalition wants to hit those families with an extra $17 a week GST. For each family that would mean $884 a year in extra tax, paid straight to John Howard and Peter Costello courtesy of the State Coalition.

Let us face it: The Coalition wants a GST on everything. During last year's Federal election campaign a number of Coalition members let slip that they wanted a GST on fresh food. Now the New South Wales Coalition has taken it a step further. Obviously, that is what they mean when they promise a tax review. When in Government, Coalition members were high-taxing bunglers. They would be the same again in government, and even riskier, because they would be led by inexperience. I tell members opposite that one needs a lot of experience to handle a serial high-taxing bungler like the member for Upper Hunter.

CARERS ASSISTANCE

The Hon. ALAN CORBETT: My question is addressed to the Treasurer, representing the Minister for Health. Given the obvious difficulty and expense of having a specialist local general practitioner and/or community nurse regularly visit people who are both chronically ill and bedridden, what action is being taken to ensure that the carers of these people are assisted in the management of the ongoing and complex health care needs that often occur on a day-to-day basis?

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Why don't you represent other people apart from yourself?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: There are a lot of carers in New South Wales and they are entitled to representation in this Parliament. Just as every member of this Parliament represents a constituency, the Hon. Alan Corbett is fully entitled to represent the carers in New South Wales, and I give him credit for doing so. I will refer the question to my colleague the Minister for Health.

OASIS LIVERPOOL DEVELOPMENT AND Mr TOM DOMICAN

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: My question is addressed to the Minister for Industrial Relations. What action has the Minister taken to investigate allegations that Tom Domican is employed at the Oasis project as an industrial relations consultant? If no action has been taken, will the Minister give an undertaking to order an immediate investigation into this matter?
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: While I attempt to keep a straight face let me say that, firstly, I do not have any knowledge of the Oasis project—and nor would I claim any knowledge of it—other than what is in the public media. Secondly, I have no knowledge of the Oasis personnel, who they employ or for what reason those people might be employed. Therefore, the question is probably an instance—

The Hon. Duncan Gay: But you will check.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Why would I check? It has nothing to do with the administration of my portfolio. I do not understand why I should check. If I understand the question, I was asked for an opinion on what is contained in today's Daily Telegraph story about an industrial relations [IR] consultant. As to whether I support the regulation of IR consultants, perhaps we could develop a consensus about these matters on some other broader issue. If the House is prepared to have us chase all sorts of side issues, we might be here for many, many hours, instead of just being brought back a week early. I have no knowledge of Mr Domican. There is no way within the administration of my portfolio that I could find out in what capacity Mr Domican or anyone else is employed.

YOUNG PEOPLE AND WORKPLACE RIGHTS

The Hon. RON DYER: My question without notice is addressed to the Minister for Industrial Relations. Will the Minister inform the House of recent efforts to ensure that young people are aware of their legal rights in the workplace?

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: You have a new blue book?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I am glad that you noticed. I am very pleased to report to the House that a new guide has been produced to help young people protect their rights and entitlements at work. The guide is a collaborative effort, involving the Department of Industrial Relations and WorkCover New South Wales. Starting Work? Know Your Legal Rights has been developed jointly by WorkCover New South Wales and the department and is a ready reference on occupational health and safety, working conditions and rates of pay. It is a great new resource for young people as they enter an increasingly complex and demanding work environment.

In recent years we have seen great changes in the Australian workplace with new industries, the expansion of casual employment, new work practices and relationships. Those changes impact most strongly on young people. It is more important than ever for young people starting work to have a solid understanding of their rights and entitlements and how to protect them. The guide has been developed as part of the Carr Government's new youth policy, Working Together—Working for Young People. It is a plan for improving services to young people over the next five years. The policy and the guide were developed with extensive input from young people and cover key areas of concern, major needs and interests.

WorkCover and the Department of Industrial Relations will work with schools, TAFE and a range of other organisations to promote and distribute the pocket-size guide, which includes a tear-off card with key contact numbers for easy reference. Copies of Starting Work? Know Your Legal Rights can be obtained by contacting WorkCover on 1800 658 134.

MARINE PARKS

The Hon. RICHARD JONES: I ask the Minister for Fisheries whether he is aware that in late June Victoria passed legislation declaring 13 new marine parks and 11 marine sanctuaries and that all of those new parks are 100 per cent no-take zones? Is the Minister aware that 5.3 per cent of the entire coastline of Victoria, the same length as New South Wales, is now in no-take parks and sanctuaries and that the Bracks Government did that in consultation with fishers? Is less than 1.3 per cent of the New South Wales coastline in no-take zones? Why have we slipped so far behind Victoria? Will the Minister guarantee that the Government will at least match Victoria in having at least 5.3 per cent of the New South Wales coastline in no-take zones? Why was the Bracks Government able to achieve large genuine no-take marine parks so quickly, with a hostile upper House, while the New South Wales marine parks are a patchwork of fishing zones? With a friendly upper House, why has the Minister taken so long to match that?

The Hon. EDDIE OBEID: It is amazing that the Hon. Richard Jones does not acknowledge the tremendous effort that this Government has made in dedicating four marine parks while at the same time consulting with the community, who are the main beneficiaries of those parks. It is unfair to compare not only the coastline but the fishing fleet of the Victorians—their bay and inlet commercial fleet numbers less than 200, ours had more than 1,800.

The Hon. Jennifer Gardiner: You are slashing and burning them.

The Hon. EDDIE OBEID: No, we are paying them out, which is only fair. The interjection by the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner is totally incorrect. The Government is paying them top dollar in every instance. In fact the fishers are queuing and asking us to buy them out. I want to put on record that the Carr Labor Government has achieved tremendous acceptance from the community with the announcement of the declaration of various marine parks. In future there will be another two marine parks. Most importantly, we have done this with community consultation. The community understands the multiuse aspects of the marine parks, and the Government has considered the many users of the parks.

The intention is to conserve the sustainability of the resource for generations to come. We want to make sure that the community gets maximum benefit from the parks and that is why the Government ensures that the community understands and accepts the issues at stake. The Government makes respective decisions and I am very happy with the way that the marine parks that have been announced have been accepted by the community. I am sure that this State will be a good example to other States. If we were to dedicate certain areas without community consultation I am sure that the Hon. Richard Jones would be the first to complain.

This community-owned resource is for the benefit of the community and it is important that we dedicate the marine parks. Of course the resource must be sustainable but, most importantly, any government should include the community in that decision. On any issue there will never be a 100 per cent approval, but the Government has consulted on zoning plans for more than two years. Plans were shown to the community, they were changed and then recommitted, and in the end we had the best outcome that the community considered fair. Without community consultation and participation no government should make any dedication. Communities should be consulted on anything that affects them. The Government has adopted a strategy of consulting the community and the rightful owners of the resources to make sure that they are on board. At the end of the day they will be part of the management. No amount of legislation can protect the parks, but community acceptance will guarantee the long-term benefits.

FORMER MINISTER FOR COMMUNITY SERVICES CORRUPT INTERFERENCE ALLEGATION

The Hon. JOHN RYAN: My question without notice is to the Minister for Community Services. In asking the question I refer to a single sentence from the transcript of a Four Corners program that reports that Pam Greer, of the New South Wales Child Death Review Team, said that she had been directly pressured by Mrs Lo Po's office to tone down references in a report by the Department of Community Services [DOCS] on child deaths two years ago. What investigations has the Minister undertaken into those allegations of corrupt interference by the former DOCS Minister, Faye Lo Po', and/or the former Minister's office in reporting the truth about children's deaths in New South Wales where DOCS has had some involvement?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: As the honourable member well knows, the former Minister rejected that allegation. As the honourable member also knows, the actual reference that the member of the Child Death Review Team referred to, the reference known to DOCS, was reinstated in the subsequent year's report by the team. I have made it quite clear in a number of statements that the Department of Community Services will operate in an open, accountable and transparent manner.

The Hon. JOHN RYAN: I ask a supplementary question. Whether the Minister has denied the allegations or not, they refer to corrupt conduct. Why has the Minister not referred the matter to the ICAC?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: That course of action is open to the honourable member if he chooses to follow it.

WORKCOVER GOSFORD RELOCATION

The Hon. JAN BURNSWOODS: My question is to the Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister Assisting the Premier for the Central Coast. Will the Minister provide the House with an update on WorkCover's impending move to Gosford?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: This morning it was my pleasant duty, on behalf of the State of New South Wales, to sign the lease for the new headquarters of WorkCover. It is all too rare an occasion when the merchants of doom are in full retreat. We were told that the WorkCover building would not be built, but it is there now in Donnison Street, Gosford. We were told that the agency would not bring 400 employees. At the last count there are actually 470 employees from WorkCover alone, and today we signed the 10-year lease with two five-year options.

The Hon. Michael Egan: Why have they exceeded 400 employees?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Because we are moving more people than we said we would, virtually the entire head office. It is the biggest relocation of a State Government organisation in more than 30 years. Today's signing is more than a formal business contract. We are meeting the Carr Government's contract with the people of the Central Coast. We are meeting our contract to help create quality jobs in the region. The new building will also house another government agency, the Long Service Payments Corporation. The project has created a boom for the local construction industry. More than 200 Central Coast residents have been working on the site and $11.3 million in subcontracting work has been carried out to date by regional businesses. That figure has been climbing during the current fit-out stage. The building will also generate an important new income stream for many local businesses that will provide support services to WorkCover and its employees.

The construction of the WorkCover building, a first-class office building in the Gosford central business district, is a vote of confidence in the city of Gosford. It has renewed interest in the city from other property owners. By taking the lead the Government has shown what is possible in such an excellent location—in close proximity to the main northern railway line and the Pacific Highway and, of course, with a well-educated work force. I am sure that all coast residents are looking forward to welcoming WorkCover and the Long Service Payments Corporation.

M5 EAST TUNNEL VENTILATION

The Hon. MALCOLM JONES: My question is to the Minister for Mineral Resources, representing the Minister for Roads. I recently travelled by motorcycle through the M5 tunnel. The air pollution within the tunnel was unbearable, reducing visibility and posing a danger to travellers. My lungs were filled with noxious gas, which caused me some trauma. Notwithstanding the warnings regarding the design of air extraction equipment in this tunnel, when will the Minister attend to this shameful problem?

The Hon. EDDIE OBEID: I believe my colleague to be telling the truth, that he had problems travelling on a motorcycle. This issue has been raised in this House today.

The Hon. Jennifer Gardiner: When are you going to fix it?

The Hon. EDDIE OBEID: I am more than happy to seek an answer from my colleague. It is a very important issue. The honourable member has related his experience and we should be able to give him a qualified answer.

JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTRE DETAINEES OUTING SUPERVISION

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: Has the Minister for Juvenile Justice changed the formally firm guidelines and criteria for detainees at the Kariong maximum security juvenile justice centre to take part in outings? If not, has the Minister been able to establish why boys from the maximum security Kariong facility were reportedly drunk on an outing with only one staff member supervising?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I suggest that if the Hon. Rick Colless wants to ask questions in future he does not take advice from the shadow Attorney General, because the shadow Attorney General, who is also the shadow Minister for Juvenile Justice, has absolutely no understanding about how juvenile justice works.

The Hon. Rick Colless: I read the paper.

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: The honourable member also should not believe everything he reads in the newspaper. Anyone who knows anything about how juvenile justice functions in New South Wales would know that Kariong is the maximum security centre, and leave is not allowed from Kariong. Detainees from Kariong do not undertake leave. I have tried to make this point clear to the Hon. Chris Hartcher on any number of occasions, because he continues to misrepresent the situation. I make it absolutely clear for Opposition members: detainees do not leave Kariong for escorted absences except for medical emergencies or other reasons for which leave is approved by the director-general. Nonetheless, I know that the honourable member wants an answer to the issues raised in the newspaper article, and I am keen to give him one. The detainees in question were from the Frank Baxter centre, not from the Kariong Juvenile Justice Centre. The incident occurred in May 2002. The Opposition is really on the ball—it is six months later! Nonetheless, the report appeared in the newspaper on the weekend. Why not give it a run at question time?

The Hon. John Ryan: The Parliament has not been sitting for a while.

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I point out to the Hon. John Ryan that the Parliament has met since 1 May. The article relating to the incident recently appeared in the media. As I said, it incorrectly reported that the young people were from Kariong. That is not true. Nonetheless, this does not detract from the seriousness of this incident. The cross-Chamber banter should not indicate that I in any way regard this incident as other than extremely serious. The supervision on this outing was unacceptable. The behaviour of the detainees was unacceptable, and the incident does a great disservice to the majority of juvenile justice staff, who do a good job. As a result of this incident one staff member was suspended from duty. The staff member is now required to respond to disciplinary charges relating to this matter. I have had the department review the guidelines for supervised outings. As a result of this review, procedures relating to detainee leave, eligibility, and staff supervision of outings have been tightened. Supervised outings in the juvenile justice system form part of a carefully staged process to assist rehabilitation and reintegration into the community—and incidents such as this are unacceptable.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I ask honourable members who have further questions to place them on notice.

HEAT ISLAND EFFECT

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 4 June the Hon. Alan Corbett asked the Special Minister of State a question regarding the heat island effect. The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer:

This question should be addressed to the Minister for the Environment, the Hon Bob Debus MP.

SYDNEY CITY ABORIGINAL LAND CLAIMS

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 5 June the Hon. David Oldfield asked the Special Minister of State a question concerning Sydney City Aboriginal land claims. The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer:

I am unaware of comments made by Geoff Clarke on this issue.

NEW PRISON SITE

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 5 June the Hon. Peter Breen asked the Special Minister of State a question concerning a new prison site. The Minister for Corrective Services has provided the following answer:

On 4 June 2002 and again on 6 June 2002, the Premier informed the Legislative Assembly that the Government will not build a new correctional centre in the Campbelltown area, nor on the south coast, including Nowra. The Premier stated that the Government is building three new correctional centres and is considering building a fourth to accommodate a prison population of up to 9,000 by 2005 to deliver a safer community to all the people of New South Wales.

HISTORICAL SITES PRESERVATION

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 6 June the Hon. David Oldfield asked the Special Minister of State a question about historical sites preservation. The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer:

ABORIGINAL RECONCILIATION

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 11 June the Hon. Helen Sham-Ho asked the Special Minister of State a question about Aboriginal reconciliation. The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer:

CENTRAL COAST RAIL PROJECT

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 12 June the Leader of the Opposition asked the Special Minister of State a question concerning the Central Coast rail project. The Minister for Transport, has provided the following answer:

, www.transport.NSW.gov.au

CESSNOCK CORRECTIONAL CENTRE

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 12 June the Hon. David Oldfield asked the Special Minister of State a question about Cessnock Correctional Centre. The Minister for Corrective Services has provided the following answer:

per year

CONTAMINATED INDUSTRIAL WASTE FERTILISER USE

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 12 June Ms Lee Rhiannon asked the Special Minister of State a question about commercial waste disposal. The Minister for Agriculture has provided the following answer:

Many industrial wastes are beneficial to soils and plant growth but need to be appropriately managed. Guideline development for their beneficial use on land is an objective of NSW Agriculture’s Centre for Recycled Organics in Agriculture now under development at Menangle.

SOUTH COAST CHARCOAL PLANT

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 12 June the Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans asked the Special Minister of State a question about the South Coast charcoal plant. The Minister for Planning has provided the following answer:

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 12 June the Hon. Don Harwin asked the Special Minister of State a question about industrial disputes. The Special Minister of State has provided the following answer:

SCHOOLS SPORTS FIELD SAFETY

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 13 June the Hon. Patricia Forsythe asked the Special Minister of State a question concerning school safety. The Minister for Education and Training has provided the following answer:

PORT KEMBLA COPPER PTY LTD ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 19 June the Hon. Ian Cohen asked the Special Minister of State a question about Port Kembla Copper Pty Ltd. The Minister for Planning has provided the following answer:

THOMAS JOHNSON PTY LTD WORKERS COMPENSATION CLAIM

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 20 June the Leader of the Opposition asked the Special Minister of State a question concerning a compensation claim made by Thomas Johnson Pty Ltd workers. The Special Minister of State has provided the following answer:

FOOD HEAVY METAL CONTAMINATION

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 20 June Ms Lee Rhiannon asked the Special Minister of State a question concerning heavy metal contamination of food. The Minister for Agriculture has provided the following answer:

MOTOR ACCIDENTS AUTHORITY MOTORCYCLES SAFETY REPORT

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 25 June the Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans asked the Special Minister of State a question concerning motorcycle accidents. The Minister for Roads has provided the following answer:

The Roads and Traffic Authority is developing several strategies including public education campaigns which target motorcyclists and drivers. These initiatives will highlight the need for greater awareness of motorcycle safety and target the behaviours that are identified as significantly contributing to motorcycle trauma.

CANNABIS MEDICAL USE

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 26 June Ms Lee Rhiannon asked the Special Minister of State a question concerning the medical use of cannabis. The Special Minister of State has provided the following answer:

Report of the Working Party on the Use of Cannabis for Medical Purposes

ECOVILLAGES DEVELOPMENT

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: On 26 June the Hon. Alan Corbett asked the Special Minister of State a question about ecovillages. The Minister for Planning has provided the following answer:

DEFERRED ANSWERS

The following answers to questions without notice were received by the Clerk during the adjournment of the House:

DRUG LAW ENFORCEMENT

POLICE SERVICE EXAMINATION QUESTIONS

SOUTHERN CROSS UNIVERSITY PORT MACQUARIE CAMPUS

ATTACKS ON PLACES OF WORSHIP

POLICE JOINT INVESTIGATIVE RESPONSE TEAM COUNSELLING

McDONALD'S FAMILY RESTAURANTS POLICE DISCOUNTS

JUANITA NIELSEN DISAPPEARANCE INVESTIGATION

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

LITHGOW SILICON SMELTER

KATOOMBA HOSPITAL MIDWIVES MEDICAL INDEMNITY INSURANCE

STATE-OWNED ELECTRICITY GENERATORS COAL SUPPLY

STATE-OWNED ELECTRICITY COMPANIES RECAPITALISATION

SANDON POINT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

HOMOSEXUAL DISCRIMINATION

Miscellaneous Acts Amendment (Relationships) Bill

HUNTER REGION SHIPBUILDING CONTRACTS

SWAREFLEX WILDLIFE WARNING REFLECTORS

SYDNEY WATER OFFICE RELOCATION

WHIAN WHIAN STATE FOREST CATCHMENT LOGGING

Forestry and National Park Estate

Act 1998

TOMAREE NATIONAL PARK PLAN OF MANAGEMENT

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES CENTRAL COAST SERVICES

a) Ten additional Child Protection Caseworkers to work in front line child protection service delivery.

b) Three additional Casework Managers to provide support, supervision and training to these and other Caseworkers. This gives DoCS a total of 10 Casework Managers on the Central Coast to support and guide frontline staff, and work on the continual upgrading of our services.

c) Two additional Child Protection Casework Specialists have been created which gives a total of four on the Central Coast. They provide invaluable "hands on" support and mentoring in the field to Caseworkers, develop DoCS' working relationship with other community partner agencies, and deliver structured training to other agencies and DoCS staff in child protection matters.

e) Additionally a Senior Practitioner and a Director for Child and Family Services have been established which cover the Central Coast and Northern Sydney Areas and provide skilled clinical and management direction to our staff.

Families First

FAMILY DAY CARE CENTRES GLASS SAFETY STANDARDS

OZONE PROTECTION LEGISLATION

TUGGERAH LAKES REMEDIAL WORKS

SAWMILL OPERATIONS

and

OLNEY STATE FOREST THREATENED SPECIES PROTECTION

WORKPLACE POLLUTION UNION OVERSIGHT

TUGGERAH PIONEER DAIRY SITE

Crown Lands Act 1989

National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

RAILWAY STATION ACCESS

Details of projects and associated funding levels for the Government’s Easy Access program are contained in Budget Paper Number 4.

TOWED VEHICLES SPEED LIMIT

M5 EAST EXHAUST STACK HEALTH IMPACTS

DOG CONTROL

Dog attacks and dangerous dogs are issues of widespread community concern and ones which the NSW Government takes seriously.

However, it is important to note that dangerous dogs represent a small percentage of the total dog population. In fact, dogs which have been declared dangerous represent less than 1% of the population recorded on the NSW Companion Animals Register.

The Companion Animals Act 1998 has a range of tough penalties on owners of dangerous dogs and dogs which attack. These include:

�

Dr Kersti Seksel carried out the report. Dr Seksel is a veterinary surgeon and an internationally renowned animal behaviourist who has undertaken considerable research in this area.

Briefly, Dr Seksel concluded that:

�

The most important issue is that of identification. There is no DNA test available to differentiate between breeds and it seems unlikely that one will be developed within the next 50 to 100 years.

Therefore, it's not possible to be certain that a dog is of a specific breed from its physical characteristics alone.

�

We will also set up a taskforce with other agencies to co-ordinate a strategy for the prevention of dog attacks.

The comprehensive five-year review of the Companion Animals Act will take place next year. Issues such as whether current provisions and penalties need to be changed will be considered in the context of this review.

M5 EAST TUNNEL VENTILATION

M5 EAST EXHAUST STACK PROPERTY VALUE GUARANTEE

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

PACIFIC HIGHWAY NORTH COAST FATALITIES

ROCKDALE CITY COUNCIL COOKS COVE PROJECT CONSIDERATION

"…the evidence obtained in this investigation established that the corrupt conduct within Rockdale City Council was limited to Councillor McCormick and Councillor Smyrnis"

The evidence before the ICAC did not indicate the level of systemic corruption within Rockdale City Council to warrant a recommendation that consideration be given to the dismissal of all councillors"

RAIL TRACK MAINTENANCE

DISUSED POWER STATION SITES

NSW Statement of System Opportunities 2001-2002

MULTIPLE CHEMICAL SENSITIVITY

DIABETES PREVENTION CAMPAIGN

TANILBA BAY PUBLIC SCHOOL

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

The Clinician’s Toolkit for Improving Patient Care

Toolkit

BOTANY AND HILLSDALE INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS RISK ASSESSMENT

GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROP CONTAMINATION

In addition, it is worth noting that both the EU and Japan currently do import GM food products. The claim is frequently made that these markets are GM-free, but that is demonstrably wrong.

the claims have merit, or will succeed.

that is the complementary legislation needed to ensure we have a very tight national regulatory system to control GM technology in research and in commercial use.

SYDNEY 2002 GAY GAMES

RURAL HOSPITALS ANAESTHETISTS SHORTAGE

Mrs DAVIS AND Mrs WHELAN MURDER INVESTIGATION

Coroners Act

PUBLIC SECTOR RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

Managing Risk in the NSW Public Sector

The survey suggests that some agencies, mainly those in the Public Trading Enterprise Sector, have approached risk management in a systematic way and in accordance with the principles of better practice standards

In specific relation to the State’s energy businesses, Treasury has issued an Energy Trading Policy for Distributors and Generators, and the Treasurer has released a Discussion Paper, A Risk Management Proposal for New South Wales' Electricity Businesses, as the Audit Office acknowledges in the Report.

Response from NSW Treasury

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the performance audit report,

The Audit Office and the Treasury play a vital role in facilitating better risk management in the NSW Public Sector. I am pleased to note that the audit report supports Treasury’s initiatives to manage risk in the NSW Public Sector.

The Audit Opinion indicates that a number of the General Government sector agencies surveyed state that their risk management systems focus on the management of financial risks (preventing financial loss). Treasury agrees that better practice is for the scope of a risk management system to extend beyond managing financial risk to managing risks arising from all of an agency’s objectives, in a systematic manner.

Treasury also agrees with the Audit Office’s view that "there is a role for Treasury to oversight risk management practices in agencies and encourage the adoption of better practice where necessary."

Treasury currently undertakes such a role. Treasury has developed the Financial Management Framework for the General Government Sector (the "Framework") which aims, inter alia, to improve management of the Government’s asset and resource base, including better risk management. One of the key elements of the Framework is the development of Service and Resource Allocation Agreements (SRAA) between an agency and its Minister.

An agency is required to set out in the SRAA the major risks it faces and the risk management strategies and risk indicators associated with those risks. The development of a SRAA facilitates discussion between the agency and Treasury about the risk management strategies adopted by the agency. Treasury will discuss risk management improvement strategies with the agency, where such a need is identified.

Treasury itself has a Service and Resource Allocation Agreement with the Treasurer that identifies the major risks, risk indicators and risk mitigation strategies for each of its desired outcomes. The SRAA documents a systematic approach to the management of agency-wide risks in Treasury. It is intended that Treasury will build on this agency-wide approach to risk management in its upcoming corporate planning process.

The results of the survey do not indicate that agencies in the Public Trading Enterprise sector consider their risk management systems to be inadequate. Nevertheless, Treasury will continue to review agencies’ Statements of Corporate Intent/Business Intent and Annual Risk Management Returns submitted as part of Treasury’s monitoring process.

The audit report includes a recommendation that Treasury "ensure that there is a standard for risk management across the public sector."

Treasury has developed the Risk Management and Internal Control Toolkit (the Toolkit), which is a self-assessment diagnostic tool to assist agencies to develop strategies to improve risk management.

Treasury will also promote the use of the Risk Management Standard (AS/NZS 4360:1999) and the Guidelines for Managing Risk in the Australian and New Zealand Public Sector (HB 143:1999) issued by Standards Australia, where appropriate. For example, the Risk Management Standard provides a methodology for developing a "Risk Management Plan" identified as better practice in the Toolkit.

As part of the implementation of the Financial Management Framework, Treasury is currently developing a Working Paper to initiate discussion with agencies about the characteristics of performance management systems necessary to support efficient and effective service delivery. This project will incorporate identification of the basic characteristics, or standards, of an effective risk management system, including demonstrating how that system is an integral part of an agency’s performance management system.

In addition to the initiatives aimed at improving agencies’ risk management processes, noted above, Treasury will continue its annual reports review program, which includes a review of agencies’ risk management disclosures. Treasury will continue to contact agencies to discuss specific disclosure matters and issue circulars providing advice in general areas that need improvement.

Treasury notes the recommendation in the audit report that "the Government progresses the recommendation by Treasury that the Chief Executive Officer (and a Board Member, where there is one) provide an attestation in regard to the adequacy and implementation of the internal framework maintained by the agency."

Treasury is progressing incrementally the fundamental review of the financial and annual reporting legislation. The Public Finance and Audit Amendment (Auditor-General) Act 20001 enhanced the auditing and reporting powers of the Auditor-General. The Treasury is currently addressing annual reporting, financial reporting and auditing. The recommendation in the audit report, along with practice in other jurisdictions and the private sector, will be considered in the development of recommendations for the new legislation.

(signed)

John Pierce

Secretary

Dated: 30 May 2002

Questions without notice concluded.

YOUNG OFFENDERS BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [5.06 p.m.]: On behalf of the Christian Democratic Party I am pleased to speak in support of the Young Offenders Amendment Bill. The Young Offenders Act 1997, which brought into effect formal cautions and youth justice conferences, resulted from the "Youth In Justice" report and inquiries of the Legislative Council Standing Committee on Social Issues, of which I was a member a number of years ago, which were referred to earlier by the Hon. Ron Dyer. We are pleased that the Act is still supported by the Government. This bill will further streamline the operation of youth conferencing procedures and cautions. We see the bill as not in any way undermining youth conferencing but helping it to function more efficiently. The Young Offenders Act established a scheme that provides an alternative process to court proceedings—involving warnings, cautions and youth justice conferences—for dealing with juveniles who commit certain offences.

Reports from the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research have provided strong endorsement for the approach taken under the Young Offenders Act. A report released by the bureau last month found that youth justice conferences are up to 30 per cent more effective than court proceedings in preventing a young person from reoffending. That is very encouraging and it supports the provisions of the Act and this bill. Members of the Legislative Council committee visited juvenile justice centres where young people are placed for committing various offences. Young people placed in such an environment following the commission of minor offences can be influenced by older and more experienced young people and taught more expert ways of stealing a car, mugging a person or breaking and entering, making the young person more skilled in crime. It became clear that alternatives to that approach were needed. The Young Offenders Act provided that approach, which has since been supported by reports from the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.

The bill limits to three the number of times a young offender can be cautioned under the Act. If a young offender has already received three cautions, a specialist youth officer will determine, in consultation with the investigating officer, whether the offender should be referred to a youth justice conference or whether the matter should proceed to court. I was concerned about media reports quoting Judge Patricia Staunton, who expressed concern about the operation of certain juvenile conferences. It was her opinion that the conferences should cease because they had an uncertain legal status. I ask the Government to indicate whether Judge Staunton's views are justified and whether they will restrict the operation of youth conferences now or in the future.

The bill also requires specialist youth officers, conference administrators and the Director of Public Prosecutions to consult with the investigating officer when deciding whether a young offender should be conferenced. I share the concerns of many in the community, who are often unhappy with the decisions and public statements of the Director of Public Prosecutions with regard to legalising heroin and other matters. I do not believe he should make those public statements because it is difficult to define when he is speaking in a private capacity as opposed to his capacity as the Director of Public Prosecutions. I also query whether he has an advisory role or has the power to veto conferences and, if so, whether this would prevent a conference going ahead.

The bill also provides that if a conference convener considers it appropriate, he or she may invite a representative of the young offender's school to attend a youth justice conference. This amendment implements an initiative agreed to by the Community, Parents and Police Forum, which was held in April. I was surprised that some earlier speakers criticised this proposal, which I believe to be positive. After the home, school is the second most important environment for a young person. Indeed, because of the social problems and violence that have occurred recently in schools the Government has introduced a policy to erect fences around schools. I would certainly not support an amendment to remove that provision, particularly in view of the fact that parents, police and the community were all involved in the forum.

Another positive provision in the bill is for consideration to be given to a young offender's participation in an appropriate program when an outcome plan is being developed at a youth justice conference. Examples of appropriate programs include counselling programs, drug and alcohol rehabilitation programs, educational and other programs aimed at improving a young offender's prospects, and programs offered through organisations such as police and community youth clubs. In the past it has been said that it is difficult to have cohesive drug rehabilitation programs, but this is a way to achieve that goal. Participants agree to fulfil the conditions, and hopefully those with drug addiction problems can be rehabilitated through counselling. Indeed, this can be regarded as self-help. This positive aspect of the bill is also a policy of the Christian Democratic Party as strong support for cohesive drug rehabilitation programs has been so successful in Sweden.

Finally, the bill makes explicit reference to the right of each victim who personally attends a youth justice conference to veto any outcome plan proposed at the conference. It highlights the rights of victims, an important principle that the Government has been promoting and developing and which the Christian Democratic Party supports. It is part of the youth conference procedure that victims must be involved and confront the offenders so that the offenders can become aware of the pain, loss or anguish they have caused the victims. It is often quite illuminating for offenders to witness the distress their actions have caused, something they had not previously fully comprehended. It enables young offenders to appreciate the consequences of their actions and may prevent them reoffending. The fact that conferencing is 30 per cent more effective than court proceedings is very encouraging, and it is hoped that that figure will increase as youth conferencing becomes more sophisticated in the future. We are pleased to support the bill.

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT (Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, Minister for Juvenile Justice, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth) [5.17 p.m.], in reply: I thank all honourable members for their contributions to the debate. I concur with the last point made by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile. I have met many victims who have been through the youth justice conference process. Invariably, when initially approached to participate in a conference they have been reluctant, but invariably, having been through the process, they indicate how successful it has been for them and how successful it has been in helping young people acknowledge the impact of their behaviour.

One of the most powerful things about youth justice conferencing is that it brings young people face-to-face with their victims. It helps them realise that when they steal cars it deprives the victims of the use of those cars to take their children to school, travel to and from work, or carry out their daily duties. The Young Offenders Act has been in operation for a number of years. Independent evaluations of the Act by the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research have shown that the approach adopted by the Government under the Act has been successful, particularly youth justice conferencing.

This bill aims to build upon the good results achieved under the Act so far by improving and enhancing aspects of the Act and addressing concerns that have been raised in relation to the Act. The bill does this by: first, taking a fair and sensible approach to juveniles who repeatedly offend by limiting the number of cautions they can receive and ensuring a more appropriate form of intervention is used; second, ensuring that investigating officers who have first-hand knowledge of the facts of the case are consulted on decisions to deal with the young offender by way of a youth justice conference; third, allowing a representative of a young offender's school to attend a youth justice conference, if appropriate; fourth, ensuring that young offenders who are dealt with by way of a youth justice conference are able to access programs that will help them overcome their offending behaviour; and, fifth, giving each and every victim who attends a youth justice conference the right to veto any outcome plan that is proposed.

As to the issue raised by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, if there is disagreement about whether a child or young person should be conferenced, the matter can be referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions for determination. The DPP then has the right not to proceed with a youth conference and to refer the matter back to the court. I commend the bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Schedule 1

The Hon. IAN COHEN [5.20 p.m.]: I move Greens amendment No. 1:

No. 1 Page 3, schedule 1, line 3, to page 4, schedule 1, line 10. Omit all words on those lines.

This amendment removes the mandatory limitations on cautions. The Government's bill specifies that a child will be eligible to be cautioned only three times under the Young Offenders Act. After this an offender must be dealt with in a more interventionist way, such as by conferencing or prosecution before the court. The Greens believe it is better to leave to the investigating official, a specialist youth officer, the Director of Public Prosecutions or the court the discretion as to whether an offender should be cautioned. In some circumstances it may be appropriate for a young offender to be cautioned more than three times, particularly when three very different minor offences have been committed—such as offensive language, possession of a small quantity of marijuana or damaging a fountain by putting detergent in it—and/or there are appropriate mitigating circumstances. I commend Greens amendment No. 1 to the Committee.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE [5.22 p.m.], by leave: I move Opposition amendments Nos 1, 2, 3 and 4 in globo:

(5) Despite any other provision of this section, a court may not give a caution to a child in relation to an offence if the child:

(6) Despite any other provision of this section, it is not appropriate for a child to be dealt with by caution in relation to an offence if the child:

The Opposition does not support the Greens amendment, which seeks to negative the Government's proposed amendments to this bill. We believe the bill should be amended. There are presently problems with the bill's application because of the number of warnings that can be given to juveniles. The Opposition believes only one warning should be given and our amendments would achieve that result.

The Hon. IAN COHEN [5.23 p.m.]: The Greens strongly oppose the Opposition's amendments, which we believe would further reduce the discretion of investigating officers, special youth officers, the Director of Public Prosecutions or the court to decide whether a child should be dealt with by way of a caution. I understand that the Opposition's amendments would allow for only one caution and would exclude young offenders who have been convicted of or found guilty of another offence. The Opposition's amendments are in stark contrast to the Greens' position and we believe they are not in the best interests of young offenders.

The Hon. JOHN JOBLING [5.24 p.m.]: I support the amendments moved by the Hon. Greg Pearce. Although the Greens amendment is different from those of the Opposition, I note that the amendments of both parties propose the deletion of certain words. If the Greens amendment is not passed, I want to be absolutely certain that Opposition amendments Nos 1, 2, 3 and 4, which call for the deletion and insertion of particular words, will still be in order.

The CHAIRMAN: They will be in order. Even if the Greens amendment is not passed I will call for a vote on Opposition amendments Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4.

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS [5.26 p.m.]: The Government opposes Greens amendment No. 1, which seeks to remove clauses from the bill that limit to three the number of cautions that a young offender can receive. The Government cannot support this. The Government approach in this bill is fair to young offenders who persist in their offending behaviour. Limiting to three the number of cautions that young offenders can receive will give them a sufficient opportunity to mend their ways and cease their offending behaviour. The reform recognises that repeated cautioning may be ineffective and that a more intensive form of intervention, such as conferencing or court, may be needed for juveniles who repeatedly offend. It is clearly unacceptable to the community that juveniles who repeatedly offend continue to be issued with caution after caution, which would be the impact of the Greens amendment.

The Government's response is fair and seeks to balance the interests of young offenders with those of the community through the use of appropriate intervention to address the behaviour of repeat juvenile offenders. Police discretion will be preserved under the Government's bill and police will be able to give cautions in all cases when the criteria in the Young Offenders Act are met, except when a young offender has already received three cautions. In these cases the specialist youth officers will have the discretion to refer the matter to the youth justice conference or to court. Similarly, conference administrators, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the court have options other than a caution available to them when they are dealing with a young offender who has already received three cautions. For those reasons the Government also cannot support the Opposition amendments.

The Opposition amendments will mean, conversely, that a child will lose all entitlements to be given a caution if he or she has been cautioned previously, conferenced under the Young Offenders Act or found guilty of an offence by the court. The Opposition amendments will severely restrict a young offender's entitlement to be dealt with under the Act and are contrary to the fundamental principles of the Act, which will remove police discretion to deal with young offenders as they see fit. Under the current legislation, police have the discretion to decide whether a young offender should be cautioned and to take account of issues such as the seriousness of the offence, the degree of violence involved, the harm caused to the victim, the number and nature of previous offences committed by the young offender and other matters that the police consider relevant.

By removing the discretion as proposed by the Opposition, police will be effectively hamstrung. The Opposition is saying implicitly that it has no confidence in the capacity and judgment of the New South Wales police. That is an extraordinary attack on the New South Wales police. For those reasons the Government will oppose the amendment moved by the Hon. Ian Cohen and those moved by the Hon. Greg Pearce.

The Hon. IAN COHEN [5.30 p.m.]: The Hon. John Hatzistergos, who spoke in the debate on behalf of the Government, said that the Greens amendment will somehow result in young offenders reoffending. That is not the intention of the Greens amendment. The Greens are concerned about taking away powers from appropriate decision makers, be it court officials, specialist youth officers, the Director of Public Prosecutions, or investigating officials. The Greens want those decision makers to have that degree of flexibility. We do not want young offenders to continue to offend and get away with it. There is a subtle difference in the amendment moved by the Greens.

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [5.31 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party does not support the Greens amendment. It appears as though the Greens lack confidence in the conferencing process. The Greens believe that if this amendment is not agreed to, offenders will be dealt with in a more interventionist way, such as through conferencing or prosecution before the courts, which are two different ways of dealing with an offender. Obviously the preference would be to deal with offenders through conferencing. I do not believe that the Greens amendment is necessary. Once an offender has been issued with three cautions the next step in the process would be conferencing and not prosecution before the courts. However, that is a decision to be taken by investigating officers at the time.

The Opposition amendments state that an offender can be cautioned only once, but the bill provides that an offender can be cautioned three times. Another point raised in debate by the Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans related to the fact that an offender could be cautioned three times by one police officer. An offender might be cautioned, he or she could say something that a police officer found offensive and the offender would be cautioned again. It would be unusual for a police officer to have to caution a young person three times. We should not misjudge the commonsense attitude taken by police officers.

Progress reported from Committee and leave granted to sit again.

ADJOURNMENT

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT (Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, Minister for Juvenile Justice, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth) [5.35 p.m.]: I move:

That this House do now adjourn.

ST PHILIPS ANGLICAN CHURCH TWO HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY

The Hon. RON DYER [5.35 p.m.]: On Sunday 21 July I was pleased to represent the Premier at a service at St Philips Anglican Church, Church Hill, Sydney, to mark the two hundredth anniversary of the promulgation by Governor King on 23 July 1802 of the parishes of St Philips, Sydney, and St Johns, Parramatta, as the first parishes in Australia. The preacher at this service was the Most Reverend Dr Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney. After the arrival of the First Fleet no suitable building was available for church services for five years until one was built by the Chaplain, the Reverend Richard Johnson.

This building stood for five years on what is now the corner of Hunter, Bligh and Castlereagh streets until it was burnt down in 1798, probably as a result of the activity of one of the convicts who was obliged to attend services there. A new church building, St Philips, was erected on Church Hill, where Lang Park is today. The first minister, the Reverend William Cowper, served at the church for more than 40 years and, as the old building ceased to be adequate, a new sandstone building for St Philips parish was erected higher on Church Hill. The new church was designed by Edmund Blacket. After it opened in 1856 Reverend Cowper continued his ministry there until his death two years later.

The proclamation of the first two parishes by Governor King, to which I referred earlier, is interesting in that it specifies that the church on Church Hill was named St Phillip, that is, Phillip spelled with two "ls" in honour of the first Governor of New South Wales, while St Johns, Parramatta, was named in honour of Governor John Hunter. It is apparent that, over the years, St Philips has reverted to the name of the saint rather than the Governor.

The Hon. John Ryan: Yes, by changing the spelling.

The Hon. RON DYER: Yes, by changing the spelling to the use of one "l" in the name "Philip". The parish has an unbroken tradition of using the Anglican book of common prayer at all Sunday services. Successive rectors have endeavoured to maintain the priorities established by the first rector, the Reverend William Cowper. St Philips has been strongly linked with Moore Theological College. William Macquarie Cowper, who succeeded his father at St Philips in 1858, acted as the college's principal for a short time when Moore College opened.

Another former rector, Archdeacon T. C. Hammond, was rector of St Philips and principal of Moore College for 25 years. The current rector is Canon Allan Blanch. Over the years St Philips parish boundaries have been greatly reduced. Once centrally placed in relation to Sydney's residential population, it is now located on the edge of the CBD. I was honoured to represent the Premier on the occasion of the two hundredth anniversary of the Parish of St Phillips, especially given the associations of this church extending back to the early days of the colony in Sydney. This is certainly one of the most beautiful and historic churches in New South Wales.

DEATH OF EMERITUS PROFESSOR GODFREY TANNER

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [5.39 p.m.]: On Tuesday 16 July a Solomon Requiem Eucharist was held in Christ Church Cathedral at Newcastle to mark the life of Emeritus Professor Godfrey Tanner, who died on 10 July. Perhaps it says as much about the idiosyncratic nature of the city of Newcastle as it does about the late Godfrey Tanner that the cathedral was packed to the point of standing room for the funeral of a person described in the Newcastle Herald as "one of the icons of Newcastle education". Indeed no student at the university since the beginning of the 1960s would not have known of Godfrey Tanner.

This is especially remarkable because Godfrey's academic field was the classics, not an academic field one might especially associate with the city of Newcastle. Godfrey was the Foundation Professor of Latin and Head of Classics Department at the Newcastle University College and the University of Newcastle, and at different times was Dean of Arts. He was described in the eulogy given by Dr Bernie Curran as "a gentleman, a scholar, a teacher, an orator, a citizen of the world, a patron of the arts, of culture and sport, theologian and philosopher", to which one must add one of those remarkable individuals who drove the debate for a university in the Hunter and then one of those who shaped its style.

Godfrey Tanner stands alongside the first vice-chancellor, James Auchumuty, and the first principal, Brin Newton-John, as three of the academics who created in Newcastle a fine traditional university. Godfrey was always an advocate for students and student services. Indeed, the students showed their support of him by naming the student bar the Tanner bar. Members might appreciate that from the perspective of students that was indeed a high honour.

In the early years Godfrey ensured that the university had an active debating club and a student newspaper. He even founded a boat club with an inheritance from a great aunt. He was a vocal spectator at university rugby matches. In his later years he was an active participant in the establishment of the alumni committees and their work, and he remained a supporter of all the other activities of which he had been part from the beginning. Godfrey lent his name to the Godfrey Tanner Scholarship to support disadvantaged students. As a member of the Sydney chapter of the alumni committee I can say that his support of our activities was much appreciated. Godfrey was a great scholar. In the eulogy Dr Curran recalled an event in 1981. He said:

Godfrey Tanner was born in Brisbane in 1927 and educated at Melbourne Grammar School, the University of Melbourne and the University of Cambridge. Godfrey was one of the great eccentric personalities of Newcastle. Never one to drive a car, he was until his later years a familiar figure on his bicycle riding to lectures in his academic gown. He will not be easily forgotten because if his mark is indelibly printed on the university it is as well printed on the city he adopted as his home in 1959. He served as a member of the Newcastle Diocesan Council from 1963 to 1988 and he served on the General Synod Doctrine Committee for three years in the 1970s. He was as well an active participant in his local resident action group. He was a person of great wit and humour. His rendition of grace in Latin before many a university dinner was of itself capable of getting a standing ovation. Above all else he was a great teacher who inspired students. Can we ever ask for more than that in anyone whose life calling is education? Vale Godfrey Tanner!

COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTARY ASSOCIATION STUDY TOUR

The Hon. HELEN SHAM-HO [5.44 p.m.]: I report to the House on the second phase of my Commonwealth Parliamentary Association study tour into community policing, which I undertook between July and August. Before I begin, it is appropriate that I acknowledge that today is the Centenary of Women's Franchise in New South Wales. As one of the 66 women to become a member of this Parliament over the past 100 years I feel very honoured and privileged. I also take this opportunity to say farewell to the Hon. Elaine Nile, who resigned today after 14 years as a member. I wish her all the best for her retirement. It has been a pleasure working with her. Honourable members may recall that I undertook the first phase of this study tour last year, when I visited the police departments of Los Angeles, Toronto, London and Seoul. The purpose of this fact-finding tour was to broaden my knowledge of community-based policing with a particular emphasis on ethnic communities where relevant.

This year I visited the police departments of New York and Hong Kong. Both New York and Hong Kong have restructured their police departments in recent years and have experienced dramatic decreases in their crime rates as a result. Security at New York Police Headquarters was rigorous and thorough. I was required to undergo a couple of checks and to wear a photo identification badge. At police headquarters I met with Detective John Rowan, the Corporate, Diplomatic and Jewish Community Liaison; Detective Hector Lorenzo, the Hispanic Liaison; Detective Eugene Canapi, the Asian Liaison; and Detective Kevin Alexander, the Afro-American Liaison. I had lengthy discussions with each officer about their individual views and about policing ethnic communities. I am grateful to them. I learned a lot.

I visited the police station in Chinatown at Lower Manhattan, which is the fifth precinct of the 76 in New York, containing one of the largest Asian populations in New York. At this police station I met with Detective David Yat, one of the two community affairs officers in that precinct, and Glen Kresge, the Auxiliary Police Co-ordinator. I also spent several hours in two police car patrols in the fifth precinct, where I was able to observe how duty officers respond to calls and deal with the public first hand. The New York Police Department officially adopted a policy of zero-tolerance policing in 1994. This model of policing is based on the broken-window theory or the view that the strict enforcement of minor crimes will prevent the more serious crimes from occurring. While zero-tolerance policing is said to be the antithesis of community-based policing, it is my opinion that the two models are not necessarily incongruous. My study of the New York police suggests that zero-tolerance policing and community policing can co-exist, and that each model has its own distinct advantages.

The adoption of zero-tolerance policing by the New York Police Department has been accompanied by a distinct community-based policing approach. In recent years the department has devised and implemented a diverse range of community programs, with particular attention focused on building lasting relationships with the diverse cultural communities that reside in and around New York. While I was not in a position to analyse or assess the effectiveness or otherwise of these programs, the impression I got from both officers and members of the public in New York was that these programs have been very successful in developing relationships with the community and ultimately in reducing crime. In particular, I was told that the relationship between the police and the community in Chinatown has improved dramatically over the past few years. The community members to whom I spoke said that they now feel safe and that they trust their local police.

In Hong Kong I met with officers from the Police Community Relations Office and the Police Public Relations Branch at the Wanchai police station. These included Senior Superintendent Fan, Chief Inspector Kwan, Sergeant Chan and Sergeant Chow. I also met with Madam May-Li, a police sergeant, and was impressed by the fact that a woman occupied such a high-ranking position in a police station. Over the past year or so the Hong Kong police have introduced a number of programs designed to improve police and community relations. This shift to a more community-oriented policing model has also been accompanied by a distinct image change. The Hong Kong police force has tried hard to shake off its old image of a corrupt force and to replace it with the values of pride, professionalism and integrity. The police officers in Hong Kong to whom I spoke all said that they were proud to be police officers and that police recruitment has increased because of this image change. In conclusion, I thank the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and Russell Grove, the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, for enabling me to conduct this study tour. I believe that my knowledge and understanding of community policing have substantially increased as a result.

WOMEN'S FRANCHISE ACT CENTENARY

The Hon. JAN BURNSWOODS [5.49 p.m.]: I speak in celebration of the centenary of the Women's Franchise Act in New South Wales and the fact that today, 27 August, marks exactly 100 years since the bill was passed. That is a great achievement. However, perhaps it is not surprising that while we are debating these matters a function to celebrate this event is taking place in the Stranger's Dining Room. I hope the House adjourns as quickly as possible so that we can join in the celebration. During debate on the bill the then Premier, John See, said:

The contention that a woman is better engaged in looking after her children, in making bread and in fulfilling her various domestic duties, than she is when exercising her common sense with regard to matters of great moment and public concern, is one of those puerile things unworthy of notice.

The then Premier needed to say that for a number of reasons. Perhaps he was responding to the following comment:

Can we, as sane people, subscribe to such a preposterous possibility as being governed by a Legislature and Cabinet of females—most of the women who have failed in the pursuit of woman's great object in life—man—and whose intellectual attainments and individual attractiveness would not, as a matter of course, be of a high order?

Those two quotes from the period when the legislation was being debated 100 years ago sum up the two sides of the argument. Now is a chance for us to pause and look back on how far women, and indeed we as a society, have come in the past 100 years and how far we still have to go. It is important to note that non-Aboriginal women in New South Wales have now enjoyed suffrage since 1902 and that that was a great victory at the time. It is also important to note that New South Wales was hardly progressive in this matter. South Australia and Western Australia acted in the 1890s. Although Premier Lyne tried in 1900 and the Legislative Assembly passed the bill on that occasion the Legislative Council—that benighted House—refused to do so.

Indeed, it was not until the third attempt that the Women's Franchise Act was passed in New South Wales, having been defeated by the Legislative Council on two occasions. It is clear that it passed on that third occasion only because similar legislation had already been passed by the Commonwealth Parliament. In New South Wales women were in the ludicrous situation of facing the imminent prospect of being good enough to vote in a Federal election but not in a New South Wales election. It was a hard-won right, one that the early suffragists and feminists fought hard to achieve. A number of sensible and intelligent men also fought hard to achieve the right for women to vote. It is appropriate to now pay tribute to them.

An issue raised at that time, and one that has been discussed on many occasions since, is whether the vote for suffrage was sufficient in itself or whether, as most of the first-wave feminists argued, it was a matter not only of political equality and rights but also a means of women in Parliament achieving better policies, including assistance for women in a variety of ways, particularly as the heads of families and as mothers, improvements in health and housing, legal means for women to escape violent husbands, equal pay, equal rights in the workplace and so on. Those issues are more problematic because in many ways women have found it more difficult to change government policy and practice than it was to win the right to vote 100 years ago.

On the other hand it is true that women, like men, have the right to disagree amongst themselves, to cover the entire political spectrum from the most radical to the most conservative. It is ludicrous and unfair to expect women to have the same agenda on policy and reform merely because they are women. We do not have that expectation of men. Why should we expect all women to act as if they belong to one party? In one sense we do belong to one party, the women's party, but in many other senses we do not. Obviously we still have a long way to go. The current debate about maternity leave, family-friendly policies, child care, and so on demonstrates that. The rather nasty tendency of those debates to spill over into natal arguments about giving women maternity leave so they will have more babies also shows how far we still have to go. We also have a fair way to go in representation. When I was elected to this House in 1991 there were 42 members, including 15 women. Today we have 10 women members. We will gain one but the figure will go down by one when the Hon. Elaine Nile retires. [Time expired.]

BATTLE OF ISURAVA AND MILNE BAY SIXTIETH ANNIVERSARY

The Hon. CHARLIE LYNN [5.54 p.m.]: Sixty years ago today the fate of Australia hung in the balance when the Japanese launched a two-pronged attack on Milne Bay and Isurava. Two desperate battles were fought on 27 August 1942, sixty years ago today, against a hitherto undefeated enemy: a superior foe in manpower and firepower. History records that the Australians defeated the Japanese at the battle of Milne Bay, the first defeat ever inflicted on the Japanese until that stage of the war. The average age of the young Australian battalion at Isurava was 18� years, and they hung on desperately while regular forces were brought back from the Middle East. That was the first time Australian regular and reserve forces fought side-by-side on Australian territory in defence of Australia.

Private Bruce Kingsbury became the first Australian to be awarded the Victoria Cross posthumously; he received the award for bravery during that battle. To a large degree those Australians have been forgotten for the past 60 years. In 1998 I visited the area and found the original Isurava battle site by using a global positioning system. I am pleased that the Australian Government has constructed significant memorials at Isurava, which was opened by the Prime Minister on 14 August, and at Milne Bay, Buna and Gona. Those magnificent memorials are a real credit to Australia in honouring the sacrifice of our veterans.

We are now linking the spirit, and I commend a recently published book by Patrick Lindsay entitled The Spirit of Kokoda—Then and Now, which compares the qualities of young Australians of 60 years ago with those of young Australians today. He sought a common area, and his book links that spirit. The Sydney Swans have been heavily involved in that linking of the spirit and have dedicated a Kokoda Memorial Game to be played at Telstra Stadium close to VP [Victory in the Pacific] Day each year for the next five years. This year 60 veterans from around Australia representing each Kokoda battalion are to parade before the crowd, along with 60 current peacekeepers. That is the spirit of both then and now. It will be the last time the men who fought in those battles—they come from Western Australia, South Australia, Queensland and Victoria—will meet.

I compliment the Chief Executive Officer of the Sydney Swans, Kelvin Templeton, whose vision made this commemoration possible. As part of the linking of the spirit we have honoured our closest neighbours, to whom we are still greatly indebted, for the support they gave us during our hour of need. Today members of the Koiara cultural group, the Huli Duna cultural group, the Asaro mud men and the Sibisibi cultural group came to Parliament House.

The Hon. Michael Egan: Where do they come from?

The Hon. CHARLIE LYNN: From Oro Province. The Sibisibi and the Koiara are from along the Kokoda Track. They are the sons and grandsons of the Fuzzy Wuzzy Angels. The Asaro mud men and the Huli Duni are from the highlands. The idea was to showcase the Bintangi culture. They have done a magnificent fundraising job. I thank Parliament for welcoming them. Today they were supposed to perform at the Museum of Contemporary Art. It was raining and mud was running, so they came via the Royal Botanic Gardens, replaced the mud on their leaves and performed an impromptu dance. Parliament House security did not know whether Parliament House was being attacked or whether a demonstration was being held. I again thank Parliament for making them welcome today.

It was a great moment: most of them had never been out of their villages When I brought them here last night, they had their first experience of riding in a lift. Many of the things we take for granted are new to them. A team of under-sixteens, the Papua-New Guinea Bintangs, will play in the curtain-raiser on Saturday night. Those young kids, who play Australian Rules football in their villages, will play in front of a crowd of about 50,000.

The Hon. Michael Egan: What is the salary cap for them?

The Hon. CHARLIE LYNN: They are right under the salary cap! On Saturday night we will also launch the Kokoda Fuzzy Wuzzy Angel Foundation, which is designed to assist with educational scholarships for kids along the Kokoda Track and in other areas. It will be a wonderful occasion and I hope it is the start of something great. It is linked to, and honours, the sacrifice of our Diggers of 60 years ago. I know they would feel great about that and I am proud to be part of it.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: Are many of the Fuzzy Wuzzy Angels still alive?

The Hon. CHARLIE LYNN: I am bringing one, Ovoru Indiki, down here. He will arrive tomorrow afternoon and I am bringing him to lunch at Parliament House on Thursday. I will introduce him to you.

The Hon. Michael Egan: How old is he?

The Hon. CHARLIE LYNN: He claims to be 97. [Time expired.]

TRIBUTE TO Mr HELMUTH GUNTER AIMANN

The Hon. IAN COHEN [5.59 p.m.]: It is with sadness that I inform the House of the passing of Helmuth Gunter Aimann. He was found in his yard one night recently, staring at the stars with a smile on his face. There are people in life who are simply good, not because they need to be appreciated or want to be adored and not because they fear any man-made god. They are just good because life does not make any sense to them if they are not good. They know that the focus of existence is finding peace, and that no-one can truly be at peace if they are not good. Helmuth was one such person. He was always there as a source of support, always good to friends, and always had something intelligent to say and some peace to impart. For the wider community the earth shifted; he was there no more. The community was unprepared for how desolate his passing made us feel. The whole world looks different. It quivers, as though one of the rocks it was built on, one of its foundations, has crumbled like talc, and the stability of the others is suddenly in question. We are no longer who we were, because part of who we were was being Helmuth's friend
.

Helmuth was born in Haifa, Palestine, in 1943. In 1948, after the declaration of the State of Israel, his family, along with other Germans farmers who were religious dissidents, was moved to a compound. His parents were murdered by members of Haganah, a zionist organisation. In 1949 Helmuth, his brother and his sister moved to Australia from a tent camp in Cyprus. Here they lived in a refugee camp and then went to live with their Auntie Anne and her husband, Julius. At the end of the 1960s Helmuth met Helen Hannah and in 1972 their beautiful daughter, Maya, was born. They left Sydney for the peace and tranquillity of the Bulga Plateau at the head of the Manning Valley, where they put into practice their dream of an alternative lifestyle.

Helmuth was an active and inspired member of the community and the environmental movement. He was actively involved with an alternative school and a food co-operative. He was also a good friend to many and "uncle" to dozens of village children. He was described by Susie Russell, a North East Forest Alliance company-ordinator, as "a wonderful communard". In 1988 he was elected President of Wingham Forest Action and led the first anti-old growth logging and woodchipping campaign in Wingham management area forests. For many years he was a co-ordinator of the North-east Forest Alliance and was involved in the early legal endeavours to make forestry operations in this State accountable.

In 1991 he was at Chaelundi. I remember him well, chained into a concrete pipe following an earlier difficult and volatile situation. He was patient and quiet. He was anchored, at peace with himself. When I went to see how he was, he looked up at me with a cement-stained face, passively resisting the efforts to destroy an old-growth forest. We will continue Helmuth's efforts to protect our precious old-growth forests in places like Chaelundi, which is scheduled for logging later this year.

In 1993 the State sought to silence Helmuth when he was the respondent to the first SLAPP [Strategic Litigation against Public Participation] suit in New South Wales brought by the Forestry Commission against 33 forest activists. But Helmuth was not silenced. He just became more active and more committed to social justice and ecological sustainability. For almost a decade he served on the management committee of the Oxygen Farm, a private conservation reserve.

Helmuth was the convener of the Bulga Landcare Group. He formed the Manning Toxic Action Group and co-ordinated local campaigns against genetically engineered foods. In the late 1990s Helmuth showed that same generous selfless spirit that so identified him as a good man by moving to Cooma to look after Auntie Anne. She wanted to die at home so he made her wish possible in return for the wonderful life she gave him when he first came to Australia. While in Cooma, Helmuth was active in landcare and the reconciliation committee. He built bridges that are still part of the reconciliation network today.

For many years Helmuth was a member of the Taree Envirofair Committee. This year he saved the day by constructing magnificent bamboo structures to keep the crowd dry when it rained. He and his partner, Sandra Bassetti, were active in the local folk dancing group and Helmuth cut a dashing figure as he moved to the centuries old eastern European melodies. At his funeral last week more than 30 people stood to speak about his goodness. We laughed, cried, danced and sang together as we laid his body in the ground. The memory of Helmuth inspires those who knew him to never give up in our pursuit of peace, social justice and caring for the earth and all her creatures. Helmuth was father, friend, community pillar, oxygen farmer, rainbow warrior and grandfather. We love him very much.

M5 EAST TUNNEL VENTILATION

The Hon. RICHARD JONES [6.02 p.m.]: Last night I attended a meeting of Residents Against Polluting Stacks at Earlwood with the Hon. John Ryan, the Hon. Ian Cohen and the Hon. Peter Breen to hear about the adverse effect on residents of exhaust fumes from the M5 East unfiltered tunnel. The pollution is well above the safety standards of the World Health Organization and it poses a risk to motorcyclists, emergency workers and maintenance workers. The tunnel is an absolute disgrace and is a monument to the inefficiency of the Roads and Traffic Authority and its disregard for the local community.

The single stack was a political decision in the first place. Originally, the tunnel was to have three stacks, which may have provided more relief for people living around the stacks. The ventilation system in this 800-metre tunnel is clearly not working. The fans regularly break down and on some nights there has been no ventilation for eight hours. The operator now seeks to use the portals for emissions. The whole project is a disaster and I ask the Premier to involve himself with these problems. Last night a woman informed me that she had previously been a member of the Labor Party and had never voted for the Liberal Party. However, she stated that for the first time she would vote for the Liberal Party at the next State election. If the Government does not attend to these matters right across Sydney—whether it is the cross-city tunnel, the Lane Cove tunnel, the M5 East or the Woolloomooloo exhaust pipe, which has extensive fumes—it will receive a real shock in seven months time.

People are up in arms about this issue. There is a cross-city alliance—in fact, two meetings were held last night—on air pollution. Air pollution in the city of Sydney will be a major issue at the next election and if the Government does not act now it will get a rude shock in some of its supposedly safe electorates. I ask the Treasurer to take this message to the Premier and to get involved himself. Paul Forward from the Roads and Traffic Authority has not listened to the people and there has been one disaster after another. The tunnel is not fit for human traffic.

The Hon. Elaine Nile, who today resigned from the Legislative Council due to health problems, and Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile have travelled through the tunnel several times and have both suffered ill effects as a result. I ask the Government to address this issue urgently. Filtration and electrostatic precipitation in the Drammen tunnel in Norway work well and could be used in this tunnel. It would cost only 1 per cent of the original outlay on the tunnel to solve the problem and reduce air pollution for people across the whole of Sydney. This is a serious problem for people who travel through the tunnel and for those who live in areas near the stack. Last night we met people who suffer health problems every day as a result of this tunnel.

[Time for debate expired.]

Motion agreed to.

The House adjourned at 6.05 p.m.
_______________

Last modified 30/09/2008 11:49:40 : Update this page