Full Day Hansard Transcript (Legislative Council, 19 October 2004, Corrected Copy)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Tuesday 19 October 2004
______

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

The Clerk of the Parliaments offered the Prayers.

The PRESIDENT: I acknowledge that we are meeting on Eora land.

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following bills reported:

MOTOR ACCIDENTS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL

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

JAKARTA TERRORIST ATTACK

The President reported the receipt of the following message from Megawati Soekarnoputri, President of the Republic of Indonesia:

REGISTER OF DISCLOSURES

The President tabled, pursuant to the Constitution (Disclosures by Members) Regulation 1983, a copy of the Register of Disclosures by Members of the Legislative Council for the period 1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004.

Ordered to be printed.

TABLING OF PAPERS NOT ORDERED TO BE PRINTED

The Hon. Carmel Tebbutt tabled, in accordance with Standing Order No. 59, a list of all papers tabled in September 2004 but not ordered to be printed.

The following report was ordered to be printed:

Report of the Rural Lands Protection Boards for the year ended 31 December 2003

TREASURER'S REPORT

The Hon. Carmel Tebbutt tabled, on behalf of the Treasurer, pursuant to the Public Finance and Audit Act 1983, the report entitled "Report on State Finances 2003-2004".

LEGISLATION REVIEW COMMITTEE

Report

The Hon. Peter Primrose tabled, on behalf of the Chair, a report entitled "Legislation Review Digest No. 13 of 2004", dated 19 October 2004.

Ordered to be printed.

LAKE CATHIE PRIMARY SCHOOL PROPOSAL

Return to Order

The Clerk tabled, pursuant to the resolution of the House of 16 September 2004, documents relating to a proposed primary school at Lake Cathie received on 29 September 2004 from the Director-General of the Premier's Department, together with an indexed list of documents.

Return to Order: Claim of Privilege

The Clerk tabled a return identifying documents for which privilege is claimed and which are available only to members of the Legislative Council.

SYDNEY WATER SUPPLY

Return to Order

The Clerk tabled, pursuant to the resolution of the House of 1 September 2004, additional documents relating to the Sydney water supply received on 29 September 2004 from the Director-General of the Premier's Department.

ZOOLOGICAL PARKS BOARD OF NEW SOUTH WALES DOCUMENTS

Return to Order

The Clerk tabled, pursuant to the resolution of the House of 21 September 2004, documents relating to the Zoological Parks Board of New South Wales received on 5 October 2004 from the Director-General of the Premier's Department, together with an indexed list of documents.

BEACON HILL HIGH SCHOOL CLOSURE

Return to Order

The Clerk tabled, pursuant to the resolution of the House of 21 September 2004, documents relating to the Beacon Hill High School received on 5 October 2004 from the Director-General of the Premier's Department, together with an indexed list of documents.

Return to Order: Claim of Privilege

The Clerk tabled a return identifying documents for which privilege is claimed and which are available only to members of the Legislative Council.

COMMITTEE ON THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION

Reports

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

The Clerk announced further that, pursuant to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, it had been authorised that the reports be printed.

PETITIONS

Department of Primary Industries Budget

Petition requesting support for primary producers and opposing Department of Primary Industries budget cuts that may affect key field staff, front-line services and research and development, received from the Hon. Duncan Gay.

Temporary Protection Visa Holders

Petition praying that temporary protection visa holders be provided with the same rights and services as permanent protection visa holders, received Ms Sylvia Hale.

Breast Screening Funding

Petition requesting effective breast screening for women and maintenance of funding to BreastScreen NSW, received from the Hon. Patricia Forsythe.

Oath of Allegiance

Petition praying that the oath of allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen be retained in the pledge of loyalty by members of the Parliament of New South Wales and by Ministers of the Crown, received from the Hon. David Clarke.

Australian Defence Industries Site Redevelopment

Petition requesting that the Australian Defence Industries St Marys site be protected as a conservation area and that development consent be denied, received from Ms Sylvia Hale.

Cyanide Heap Mining

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

Anti-Discrimination Legislation

Petition requesting amendments to the Anti-Discrimination Act to provide adequate protection for same-sex partners, received from Ms Lee Rhiannon.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Withdrawal of Business

Private Members' Business item No. 123 outside the Order of Precedence withdrawn by the Hon. John Ryan.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Postponement of Business

Business of the House Notice of Motion No. 1 postponed on motion by the Hon. John Ryan.

Government Business Notices of Motions Nos 1 and 2 postponed on motion by the Hon. Tony Kelly.

Government Business Orders of the Day Nos 1 and 2 postponed on motion by the Hon. Tony Kelly.

GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 4

Extension of Reporting Date

The Hon. JENNIFER GARDINER: I inform the House that on 20 September 2004 General Purpose Standing Committee No. 4 resolved that the reporting date relating to the inquiry into the designer outlets centre at Liverpool be extended to 3 December 2004.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Ms LEE RHIANNON [2.54 p.m.]: I move:

That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow a motion to be moved forthwith that Private Members' Business item No. 18 outside the Order of Precedence, relating to the Mining Amendment (Cyanide Leaching) Bill 2004, be called on forthwith.

It is a matter of urgency that this bill be debated today. As the Cowal gold project is now entering its construction phase an estimated 6,000 tonnes of cyanide is scheduled to be transported each year—beginning in early 2005—from Queensland to the edge of Lake Cowal, the State's largest inland lake, which is located 35 kilometres north-east of West Wyalong. I urge members to support this motion. The Parliament must consider the implications of transporting 6,000 tonnes of cyanide across the State. According to the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority, on average, one of 10 trucks has an accident each year. For at least eight years 25 tonnes of cyanide will be trucked to the site most days of the week.

Taking into account the figures of the Roads and Traffic Authority, we have a 10 per cent probability of a cyanide-laden truck on its way to Lake Cowal being involved in an accident, which is simply unacceptable. I put it to members that it is a matter of urgency that this bill be debated today because the frequency of cyanide leaks and spills and the damage wrought by these accidents has been previously underreported both in Australia and overseas. Since the year 2000 dozens of incidents involving cyanide leaks and spills have been reported worldwide, sometimes wiping out entire river systems as in the case of the Tisza and Danube rivers in Romania and Hungary. As lawmakers in this State we have a responsibility to consider these matters and to act in the public good. We have a duty of care and we need to act accordingly.

The Mining Amendment (Cyanide Leaching) Bill 2004 provides the means to respond to this urgent situation. It is of critical importance that this bill be debated today. There is no protection in place for the environment and communities if a cyanide spill occurs. A tailings pond disaster could occur at the Cowal gold project in the same manner as it did at the North Parkes copper mine. In that incident thousands of birds were killed due to the failure of monitoring to detect dangerous cyanide levels near Parkes, New South Wales, in 1995. Spills of cyanide-laced water also occurred at the Timbarra goldmine in 2001.

It is of the utmost importance that this bill is debated in Parliament today to ensure that the Parliament is fully aware that the tailings ponds proposed for the Cowal gold project are as poorly designed and as high risk as those at the Kalgoorlie cyanide leach goldmines, which are owned 50 per cent by Barrick Gold, owner of the Cowal gold project, and which, according to the Cook report, an independent study commissioned by the Western Australian Government, have led to groundwater contamination with elevated cyanide levels.

It is a matter of urgency that this bill is discussed in Parliament today because thousands of residents in New South Wales have signed a petition asking for an end to the use of cyanide leaching in gold and other mining. It is extremely important that New South Wales takes a progressive stance on cyanide usage, as have a number of States in the United States of America, which have banned cyanide leach mining. One of these States, Montana, reported 62 spills or leaks of cyanide between 1982 and 1998. Now it is banned. I commend the motion to the House.

The Hon DUNCAN GAY (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [2.55 p.m.]: On behalf of the Opposition I indicate that the Opposition will not oppose the introduction of this bill but it has strong objections to the bill as such.

Motion agreed to.

Order of Business

Motion by Ms Lee Rhiannon agreed to:

That Private Members' Business item No. 18 outside the Order of Precedence be called on forthwith.

MINING AMENDMENT (CYANIDE LEACHING) BILL

Bill introduced, read a first time and ordered to be printed.

Second Reading

Ms LEE RHIANNON [2.58 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Mining Amendment (Cyanide Leaching) Bill 2004, if passed, would prohibit the recovery of gold, silver and other metals by cyanide leaching of the ore. The bill would not apply to an existing authority or mineral claim in respect of which all processing by cyanide leaching had commenced before 1 July 2004. Cyanide is a lethal substance that is used to extract gold and other minerals from ore in mining. One teaspoon of a 2 per cent cyanide solution will kill an adult human. Cyanide in much lower levels is toxic to birds, animals and aquatic creatures. With the Cowal gold project near West Wyalong in western New South Wales now entering its construction phase, an estimated 6,000 tonnes of cyanide will be transported each year from Queensland to the mine site if it begins in early 2005.

The mine is located at the edge of Lake Cowal, the State's largest inland lake 35 kilometres north-east of West Wyalong. The transport of cyanide in New South Wales is an extremely serious matter because, according to the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority, on average one of ten trucks has an accident every year. For at least eight years 25 tonnes of cyanide will be trucked to the site most days of the week. So we have a 10 per cent probability of a cyanide-laden truck being involved in an accident on its way to Lake Cowal, and that is unacceptable. I emphasise that these are Roads and Traffic Authority figures; they are not our figures. It is an unacceptable risk to the many communities and water catchment areas through which the trucks will travel.

The frequency of cyanide leaks and spills and the damage wrought by accidents involving trucks transporting cyanide has been previously underreported both in Australia and overseas. Since the year 2000 improved reporting has seen dozens of incidents involving cyanide leaks and spills reported worldwide. These accidents underline why we need to ban cyanide leaching in mining, and they go to the heart of why we have introduced this bill as a matter of urgency today. Some of the more widely reported incidents have involved Australian companies operating in countries with weaker environmental standards. I think we would all remember the tragedy in January 2000 when Eurogold was involved in a cyanide spill in Romania that killed thousands of tonnes of fish in the Tisza and Danube rivers.

The Hon. Melinda Pavey: That is a Communist regime.

Ms LEE RHIANNON: Many other spills have occurred in the United States of America, which has environmental regulations similar to those of Australia. Despite these regulations, major cyanide spills have occurred in the goldmining states of Colorado, Idaho, California, Nevada, Montana and South Dakota. I was looking forward to hearing some interjections from those opposite about what a good capitalist country the United States is, but unfortunately there were none. In Montana between 1982 and 1998 there were 62 spills or leaks of cyanide that resulted in wildlife deaths and severe contamination of streams and ground water. In 1992 the United States Environmental Protection Agency inspected a mine in Colorado where the owners had gone bankrupt and found six leak sites that were releasing 3,000 gallons of potentially toxic fluids per minute. The cyanide, heavy metals and acid drainage from this mine killed all aquatic life within 17 miles in the nearby Alamosa River. That is the experience in the United States. We often hear the Premier talk about his love of American history. It is a pity he does not take note of that country's recent history so that we can learn some hard lessons from the experiences of the American people.

Closer to home, in Australia in January and February 2001 contaminated waste water from a storm pond at the Timbarra goldmine near Tenterfield overflowed numerous times into the surrounding forest and streams. These spills occurred despite repeated claims by the New South Wales Government that the mine was a world-class operation. These incidents occurred because the storm pond's capacity was not large enough due to the mining company's miscalculation of rainfall events. If that mine had ever gone into full operation it could have been a disaster for north-western and north-eastern New South Wales, particularly the Clarence River and the many communities and industries it supports. More recently, in February 2002 there was an accident in the Northern Territory involving the spillage of 4,000 litres of liquid cyanide, which killed more than 500 birds, a dingo and some kangaroos. It is surely time that we learnt from these accidents.

Aside from spills, monitoring cyanide levels is a consistent problem, whether overseas or in Australia. Serious cyanide accidents in Australia have been caused by the failure of monitoring mechanisms to detect increased cyanide levels—for example, the 1995 accident at the Northparkes copper and goldmine when thousands of birds were killed in a contaminated tailings pond. The problems that have already occurred in Australia could also easily occur at the Cowal gold project. When discussing this project Government members often claim that the Greens want to deny jobs to the people of western New South Wales. That is certainly not true: the Greens back completely the creation of meaningful, real, productive and long-term jobs in rural New South Wales. However, this project sells local communities short. They will bear the risks and if accidents occur even more local jobs will vanish.

Premier Carr has been misleading the people of the Central West by claiming that the proposed goldmine at Lake Cowal will create jobs in the region. The Premier claims that the Lake Cowal mine will create 200 permanent jobs and 350 construction jobs in the region. But the fact is that most of those jobs will not go to the people of the central west but will be filled by outsiders, who will leave the area when the mine winds up in 10 or 13 years. Section 4.8 of the project's environmental impact statement refers to this matter and states:

So the Premier's promise goes up in a puff of smoke—so much for the locals!

The Hon. Duncan Gay: So the jobs aren't really there?

Ms LEE RHIANNON: I acknowledge that interjection. No, the jobs are really important. That is why I have raised this issue and introduced this bill. We need real jobs and Government and Opposition members are not acknowledging the huge risks involved.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: These aren't real jobs?

The DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Amanda Fazio): Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting.

Ms LEE RHIANNON: The communities will bear a huge risk. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is well aware that if accidents occur local productivity will decline and jobs will vanish. By approving the Barrick goldmine the Government is not offering long-term sustainable employment for the unemployed of West Wyalong and the central west. Local communities will bear the full brunt of any environmental disaster without enjoying the benefits of local jobs. The locals will bear all the risks. Any accidents will jeopardise the long-term productivity of the area and a few jobs gained by locals is not worth the risk to local communities. We need jobs that do not carry that risk. This project could create long-term jobs only for those who are called in to clean up the pollution and remedy the ecological degradation when Barrick leaves town in 2015.

The tailings ponds and cyanide leaching processing units planned for the Cowal gold project will be located in a highly sensitive and biodiverse environment. Lake Cowal is the State's largest natural inland lake and is part of the Wilbertroy-Cowal wetlands within a large floodplain, the Jemalong Plain. As floodwaters recede, Lake Cowal drains back into the Lachlan River, which then flows into the Murray River. Lake Cowal is included in the Australian Register of the National Estate and its Directory of Important Wetlands. The National Trust of Australia (NSW) has listed Lake Cowal as a "landscape conservation area" and the Australian Heritage Commission has suggested that the New South Wales Government consider the Lake Cowal region for listing under the Ramsar Convention as a wetland of international importance.

A spill from the tailings ponds or an accident at the cyanide leaching units would contaminate ground water, Lake Cowal and the surrounding precious wetlands—one of the few remaining as 89 per cent of Australia's wetlands have already been lost to environmental destruction. According to the Cooke report, an independent study commissioned by the Western Australian Government, goldmine extraction at Kalgoorlie's cyanide leach goldmines—which are 50 per cent owned by Barrick Gold, which also owns the Cowal gold project—has led to ground water contamination, with elevated cyanide levels. There is absolutely no indication that the cyanide leaching facility at Lake Cowal will pose any lesser risk. The Cowal tailings ponds are not designed according to Australia's best practice guidelines. Under the guidelines large tailings ponds should be avoided as they attract a large number of birds and "make … tailings difficult to manage." Small operational ponds are recommended, where water can be shifted more easily from one pond to the other during an emergency detoxification situation.

Despite these guidelines, the Cowal gold project has planned huge ponds, the surface areas of which measure 1.3 kilometres by 1.3 kilometres. These huge ponds will be extremely difficult to monitor and the Government should have rejected them. They are a disaster waiting to happen. These huge ponds also pose a high risk to the many migratory and breeding birds that live in the region. Research into the safety of cyanide levels for birdlife does not consider ducks and other water and migratory birds that might sit in the ponds for up to 12 hours each day. Behaviour patterns of wildlife species at Lake Cowal have not been evaluated properly with regard to the impact of cyanide levels in the ponds. The Government has failed to investigate adequately the impact that this mine will have on the inhabitants of the wetlands. That is disgraceful, Premier Carr.

New South Wales should follow the examples of other countries that have banned cyanide leach mining. Governments around the world recognise that cyanide leaching is an extremely hazardous process, and it is about time that the New South Wales Government caught up. This bill's call to ban cyanide leaching is not radical: many countries are following this path. In 1997 the Turkish Council of State decided not to allow gold production through cyanide leaching on the basis of article 56 of the Turkish Constitution, which guarantees the right of people to live in a healthy environment.

In the United States of America, the State of Montana has banned cyanide leach technology in gold and silver mining. Other mining States of Colorado and Wisconsin are working to follow suit. Other countries that have passed a decree to prohibit cyanide leach mining include Germany, the Czech Republic, Costa Rica, Argentina, Greece and Ecuador. Cyanide leach goldmining exposes rivers and precious wetlands like Lake Cowal to an unacceptable risk of contamination. The monitoring of cyanide contamination has a failed track record. The transportation of cyanide poses a high risk to the communities that the cyanide-laden trucks drive though during the life of the mine.

If this bill is passed it will give the public confidence in the State's regulation of the mining industry. I believe that this bill is in line with community expectations. It will allow the community to feel confident that their right to live in a clean, safe environment takes precedence over the rights of mining companies to use dangerous mining methods to extract gold. Unfortunately, the Government in this State is willing to look after the bottom line for Barrack Gold before it looks after the needs of public safety, the wellbeing of local communities and the environment. I commend the Greens bill to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by Ms Sylvia Hale.

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION AMENDMENT (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL

Second Reading

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD (Minister for Primary Industries) [3.12 p.m.]: I move:

I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

Anti-Discrimination Act 1977

Lodgment of complaints

Complaints handling by the Anti-Discrimination Board

in part

MacDonald v Home Care Services of NSW

request

require

Referral to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal

Proceedings before the Tribunal

Orders of the Tribunal

Codes of Practice

Protection of information

Freedom of Information Act 1989

Freedom of Information Act

Fees for services

• $800 for sessions up to 2.5 hours,
• $1060 for sessions between 2.5 hours and � a day in length and
• $1920 for sessions lasting for a day.

Disability discrimination

Disability Discrimination Act 1992

The Hon. GREG PEARCE [3.12 p.m.]: I lead for the Opposition on this bill, which, in essence, amends the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 and makes a number of amendments to various other Acts. The Opposition does not oppose the bill, which, makes a number of essentially procedural changes to the administration of the anti-discrimination laws. These stem from recommendations by the Law Reform Commission to improve complaints handling and review process for discrimination matters in New South Wales. A number of recommendations are made by the New South Wales Law Reform Commission in its report No. 92 entitled, "Review of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977" and some of those recommendations were incorporated in an Act last year.

This bill goes further and makes amendments which are included in a variety of those recommendations. Amongst them are amendments which allow a complaint to be made by an agent of a person or by the parent or guardian if the person lacks legal capacity. The president of the board is also given powers to ensure that a complainant has consented, where possible, to the complaint being made on their behalf, and to appoint another person to act on their behalf if the president believes a person's best interests are not being served.

The bill also enables a person who has consented to a complaint being made on his or her behalf to withdraw the consent. It allows the president to assist a person to make a complaint, and this will help those with special needs, such as dyslxia. Under the bill a person is not prevented from making a complaint if that person has prosecuted the subject matter of the complaint in another jurisdiction, whether in New South Wales or elsewhere. The bill provides for electronic lodgment of complaints, and clarifies the president's powers to accept, dismiss, refer and terminate complaints, both at the outset and during an investigation. It provides also that a decision by the president to decline a complaint is not reviewable by the Administrative Decisions Tribunal.

The bill also sets out the powers of the president to acquire the relevant information required to conduct an investigation into a complaint, and enables the president to endeavour to resolve a complaint by conciliation at any stage. The bill broadens the power of the president to delegate the president's functions and sets out the circumstances in which a complaint may be referred to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal either by the Minister, the president or a party to the complaint. Further provisions also widen the circumstances in which the tribunal can make interim orders and make it an offence to refuse or neglect to comply with certain orders, or an interim order of the tribunal. The bill also sensibly empowers the tribunal to order apologies and retractions, and enables the president to enforce orders of the tribunal in the public interest.

The bill allows the Anti-Discrimination Board to charge fees for the services or materials it provides while exercising its education functions under the Act. It also contains a minor substantive reform which extends the protection from disability discrimination arising out of the use of disability assisting aids—human, mechanical or electronic. This bill brings the Anti-Discrimination Act into line with the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992. As I mentioned at the outset, the Opposition considers it very important to continue to improve our anti-discrimination laws as part of our efforts to protect human rights. This bill incorporates a number of the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission and, accordingly, the Opposition does not oppose it.

Ms LEE RHIANNON [3.16 p.m.]: The Greens support the bill. The Anti-Discrimination Act has provided thousands of people in New South Wales with the opportunity to challenge injustice in employment, the workplace, education, the supply of goods and services and other areas of public life. In 1977 the passing of the Anti-Discrimination Act for the first time provided legal protection for those in our communities who suffer discrimination. In turn, this brought a heightened level of humanities to our whole society, which was most welcome. The Act has been amended from time to time over the past 27 years to reflect the development of our society, and we hope it will continue to be so amended. During that time we have become aware of the need to remove discrimination in all its manifestations. The Act has long been in need of some important amendments.

Indeed, attention by this Government to report No. 92 on the Law Reform Commission's review of the Anti-Discrimination Act, which was released in 1999, is long overdue. In its report the commission made 161 recommendations. Clearly, the commission believed that the law dealing with anti-discrimination requires considerable attention to bring it up to date with the contemporary needs and understanding of our society. This bill deals only with those recommendations relating to the procedural reforms and falls very short of adequately addressing the problems with the legislation highlighted by the commission's report. The Greens acknowledge that in improving the mechanisms for the lodgment and determination of discrimination complaints, the bill will go some way to address some of the issues confronted by complainants. But the majority of the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission are substantive in nature. If it has taken the Government five years to address those procedural recommendations, will it take another five years to address the important substantive recommendations of the commission?

After 9� years in office the Carr Government has failed to amend the legislation to reflect the development of our society. We welcome this bill, but it has many shortcomings which highlight a problem with this Government. The recommendations of the Law Reform Commission seek to reflect changes in our society. The Government has been remiss in not acting on those recommendations. Unlike most discrimination legislation, the Anti-Discrimination Act does not include a preamble, and that omission was addressed by recommendation 7 of the commission's report, which stated that the Anti-Discrimination Act should include a preamble that refers to a right to substantive, as distinct from formal, equality. The Carr Government's failure to bring New South Wales legislation into line with other similar legislation clearly underlines its inadequacy in addressing the ugly phenomenon of discrimination in our society.

As the years role by one starts to feel that the Carr Government is unwilling to do this. This is why the Greens have been forced to launch a private member's bill, the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Equality in Education and Employment) Bill, which addresses one of the major anomalies that has lingered with the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Act [ADA]. Since 1977 private and religious schools and small businesses that employ fewer than six people have not been required to comply with the Anti-Discrimination Act. Side by side with the advances achieved by the Anti-Discrimination Act we have allowed and, if anything, codified discrimination against people in private schools and small businesses. Recommendation 14 of the report of the New South Wales Law Reform Commission urges the repeal of the small business exception. Recommendation 20 deals specifically with the anomaly with regard to private schools, and recommends the repeal of exception on all grounds.

The Government addressed just one of the recommendations of the report of the commission with the passage of the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Carers' Responsibility) Act 2000, which was assented to in June 2000 and commenced in March 2001. The amendment adopted recommendation 40 of the report of the commission and extended the Act to include carers' responsibility as a new ground of discrimination in employment. However, it did not follow recommendation 38, extending the Act to religious belief, or recommendation 39, extending it to political opinion. In the current bill the Government was willing in one instance only to address one of the substantive recommendations of the report of the commission and to bring the ADA into line with its Commonwealth counterpart. This was in an area of disability discrimination, where the bill extends protection from disability discrimination arising out of the use of disability assisting aids. The Greens welcome this amendment, but call on the Government to address the need for substantive reform of the ADA in keeping with the recommendations of the report of the commission.

The extent of the need for serious reform is evidenced by the fact that the commission called for redefinition of both direct and indirect discrimination. These recommendations go to the heart of our discrimination legislation. The Government must move to address them. As I mentioned earlier, the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Act has provided thousands of people in New South Wales with the opportunity to challenge discrimination, harassment and vilification in employment, education, the supply of goods and services, and other areas of public life. However, significant loopholes still exist. Experience in operating under the legislation has highlighted the need for some clarification and amendment to reflect the development of our society. Clearly, as our society develops and changes, the Government of the day, if it has a commitment to anti-discrimination, must respond to this greater knowledge about the manifestations of discrimination. Again the Premier is failing in an area he says he is deeply committed to.

The Greens call on the Government to close the loopholes and address the need for substantive reform. Not doing so reflects badly on the Government. But, sadly, it comes as no surprise when one considers that during the Government's time in office there has been a gradual, but determined, running down of the Anti-Discrimination Board's funding, staffing and status. It is a tragedy. What a legacy Labor has given itself. The Greens call on the Government to fulfil its promise to provide a further package of substantive amendments. We should have these amendments now, not later. However, as I said, the Greens will support the bill.

The Hon. ROBYN PARKER [3.23 p.m.]: I support the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. As other speakers have noted, the anti-discrimination legislation has been in place for the past seven years. Discrimination law, which has existed in this country for less than 30 years, has served our community well. It is all about giving people a fair go. We in this country value dearly the proposition that everyone should have the opportunity to have a fair go. The fundamental rights in the Anti-Discrimination Act receive the support of all governments. But it is a welcome opportunity to update legislation and make it relevant to our changing times, albeit rather late when one considers that the report was produced in 1999. But these are good alterations and it is pleasing, therefore, that the amendments have bipartisan support. When one considers the recent cuts to disability services, the provisions outlined in the bill are welcomed and give me some heart.

As other speakers have mentioned, the legislation is the result of deliberations by the New South Wales Law Reform Commission and its findings in report No. 92. The response to recommendations in the report has led to a renovation of procedures for complaints handling and review under the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. These renovations aim to improve the way the Act operates with a view to improving the capacity of the board and the tribunal to make effective interventions on behalf of those who have been discriminated against. I acknowledge Mr Jim Bond of Killarney Vale, who has been a champion in bringing special needs issues to the forefront and, in regard to the bill, the need for people with dyslexia in particular to receive assistance where necessary in compiling a written complaint to the Anti-Discrimination Board.

I met with Mr Bond last year during a discussion about dyslexia, and I met with him again recently to discuss the amending bill. I acknowledge his commitment and determination over a substantial period. Mr Bond has a learning difficulty that we term dyslexia. Mr Bond informed me that in attempting to lodge a complaint with the Anti-Discrimination Board about the honourable member for The Entrance, Mr Grant McBride, in about 1999, he was made aware of restrictions that existed with the board. The tragic irony of anti-discrimination law today it is that those with a disability or learning difficulty who have been subject to discrimination can find it hard to lodge a complaint with the board because of restrictions in the procedure. Under section 88 of the Anti-Discrimination Act a complaint of discrimination must be in writing. This provision clearly raises issues for people with a disability or a learning difficulty that affects their ability to write.

The Government's web site contains a link to a site that is used as a resource by staff who serve people with disabilities. That site notes certain medical conditions that may require adjustments in terms of client services. Those medical conditions include dyslexia. The Government has acknowledged that adjustments need to be made for people with such disabilities. However, it has taken some time for the anti-discrimination law to catch up with that. The bill amends the Act to allow the president of the board to assist people with special needs, such as those with dyslexia, to make a complaint. It further provides the president with powers to ensure that a complainant has consented, where possible, to a complaint being made on his or her behalf.

New section 88A therefore gives the president the power to assist a person to make a complaint. Complainants are further protected as the bill provides that when the president is not satisfied that a complaint is being made on someone's behalf with his or her best interests in mind the president can appoint another person to act on his or her behalf, or may decline the complaint. New section 89 maintains that a complaint must still be in writing, but it does not have to take any particular form or to demonstrate evidence that is sufficient to raise a presumption of fact. Provided it is in writing, no view is taken. This means that no forms have to be filled out by a person who wishes to lodge a complaint with the board. The lodging of the complaint in its original form is enough to initiate a further investigation.

The ability to lodge a complaint with the Anti-Discrimination Board concerning unlawful discrimination is crucial to the protection of human rights. Indeed, this bill seeks to bring the 1977 Act into line with human rights legislation and will create similar provisions to those contained in the Federal Disability Discrimination Act 1992. It makes sense to me that just as the Anti-Discrimination Board currently provides translators for both on-the-spot meetings and for the board's inquiry line to assist complainants for whom English is a second language, it should make similar provision for people with disabilities and learning difficulties. We have certainly come a long way toward assisting people for whom English is a second language and this bill represents a catch-up or modernisation of legislation. The bill has sensible amendments that will provide people who have a disability or learning difficulty with the opportunity to seek protection from discrimination. The bill brings the definition in the New South Wales legislation into line with the definition of disability in the Federal Disability Discrimination Act 1992. It is long overdue. I heartily support the bill.

The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS [3.30 p.m.]: The Australian Democrats support the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which implements many of the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission's report into the 1977 Anti-Discrimination Act which was introduced by a former Premier, Mr Wran. The Law Reform Commission's report was published in 1999 and contains 161 recommendations. This bill addresses 60 of those recommendations. The Government previously implemented the report's recommendations through the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Carers' Responsibilities) Act 2000. I understand that many of the other recommendations will be incorporated in subsequent bills. This bill addresses recommendations related to the mechanism of lodging complaints, the handling of complaints by the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board, hearings and appeals procedures, additions to the list of powers of the tribunal to make orders, allowing the board to develop codes of practice, new secrecy provisions, and additions to the Freedom of Information Act to exempt the president from its operations as is the case in relation to the Independent Commission Against Corruption and the Ombudsman.

The Legislation Review Committee expressed two concerns in relation to the bill associated with the retrospective application of some provisions and commencement of the legislation by proclamation. The committee concluded that the retrospective operation of the bill does not adversely affect the rights of individuals who may be parties to a complaint or trespass on personal rights. Regarding commencement of provisions by proclamation, the committee expressed the view that generally the practice is not good but added that the committee had been advised by the Minister that in this instance it has been necessary to undertake an education campaign regarding the changes prior to implementation. The Minister has indicated that material is already being prepared and that the bill, if passed, should commence within a few weeks of assent. Naturally I am concerned about the committee's reservations relating to proclamation. On numerous occasions in this House I have expressed fears regarding unproclaimed legislation. Indeed, my predecessor listed similar concerns quarterly. The Australian Democrats are disgusted that provisions passed by the Parliament but not favoured by the Government are rendered nugatory by non-proclamation—a totally undemocratic process.

An advocate for people who suffer from dyslexia, Jim Bond, was referred to in the Minister's second reading speech and by the Opposition during debate. Mr Bond thinks this legislation has merit because it provides people with rights to better access to facilities when lodging a complaint. By virtue of this legislation, complainants will be able to obtain assistance from Anti-Discrimination Board officers when lodging their complaints whereas currently that is not the case. A complaint barrier that is used by a lot of people is a request to "put it in writing" and that represents a severe barrier for people who have dyslexia. As many people who have problems with literacy or dyslexia tend to hide their discomfort from almost everybody in their world, naturally they will be pleased to have the assistance of an officer of the board in lodging a valid complaint. The Australian Democrats give praise when praise is due, and it is pleasing to note the Minister has taken steps to assist complainants who are affected by disability. Let us hope that similar action is taken to protect whistleblowers who, despite legislation that is intended to assist them in making disclosures, receive a very bad deal.

In one of today's newspapers there is a suggestion by a police whistleblower that in the event of the whistleblower's death in the next few days, it should not be regarded as suicide. Even if it turned out to be suicide, that is a very worrying situation. It demonstrates that whistleblowers have a very hard time and the events surrounding the Campbelltown inquiry are proof of that. This legislation has merit. The Australian Democrats hope the Government will proclaim the legislation in its entirety very soon, and will take similar action to strengthen whistleblower legislation.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG [Parliamentary Secretary] [3.35 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions to the debate. I wish to respond to some of the criticism expressed by the Coalition and the Greens, who queried why the Government took so long—approximately five years—to respond to the report of the Law Reform Commission. I point out that between 1992 and 1999 the New South Wales Law Reform Commission [LRC] conducted a full review of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. The LRC released its final report, report No. 92, in December 1999. The report examined the Act in detail and set out a large number of recommendations for reform—a total of 161 recommendations. I acknowledge the wonderful support for the bill expressed by the Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans in recognising the large number of recommendations for reform. The honourable member also recognised that the recommendations fall into three broad categories: concepts of discrimination, areas of operation of the Act and the grounds of unlawful discrimination; improved procedures for complaints handling by the Anti-Discrimination Board, which the honourable member supported particularly; and the availability of procedures and remedies in discrimination proceedings before the Administrative Decisions Tribunal.

Owing to the large number and wide range of recommendations, the Government is responding to the LRC report in a number of stages. Extensive consultation has taken place in relation to the LRC's report, but the Government is not restricted to the issues canvassed in the report in taking forward its reform agenda. The Government will continue to make sensible changes to enhance the human rights of members of our community and to make our system of human rights protection more workable and effective. The first stage concerns carers' responsibilities. This was the subject of amendments in 2000 to the Anti-Discrimination Act that prohibit discrimination in employment on the grounds of a person's responsibilities as a carer. This ground covers a number of carers' responsibilities, including the care of a child, an adult who requires a guardian, a person's spouse, a parent, grandparent, or sibling. The second stage concerns procedural reforms. A large number of procedural reforms are incorporated in the bill. Consideration has been given to approximately 60 recommendations of the LRC report in the compilation of the bill.

Overall, the bill constitutes a general renovation of the procedures for complaint handling and review under the Act. It is designed to improve the quality of decision making and thereby to contribute to the protection of the community's human rights. The third stage concerns further reforms. The Government is still considering other recommendations in the Law Reform Commission's report so further changes to the Act may be anticipated. The Coalition expressed the view that although it took five years to formulate the reforms reflected in the bill, more needs to be done.

In the meantime the Government has consulted extensively with interest groups, government agencies and the board. The process has been lengthy and has been further delayed by the appointment late last year of the new president, Mr Stepan Kerkyasharian. The new president had mooted a number of suggestions, which have been included in the bill, and that was a good reason for the Government taking its time to make sure that everything was right. I commend the bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.

LIQUOR AMENDMENT (RACING CLUBS) BILL

Second Reading

The Hon. HENRY TSANG [Parliamentary Secretary] [3.40 p.m.]: I move:

I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY [3.41 p.m.]: I speak on behalf of the Opposition and at the outset indicate that the Opposition will not oppose the Liquor Amendment (Racing Clubs) Bill. The Liquor Act reforms introduced in 2001 allowed for the granting of a Governor's licence to racing clubs. Those reforms helped improve the viability of country racing clubs as they can offset the cost of maintenance of racetracks and associated facilities. As a result, in many country areas clubs achieved a greater level of employment and economic viability. However, at law an unregistered club is defined as a club that does not hold a certificate of registration under the Registered Clubs Act. Under the Act unregistered clubs may sell alcohol only when a function licence or university liquor licence is held.

The bill aims to correct that anomaly to ensure that race clubs are able to serve alcohol under their granted Governor's licence without threat of disciplinary action. The bill amends the Liquor Act 1882 so that a Governor's licence may authorise the sale of liquor on premises occupied by a racing club. That is because under section 133 of the Act it is an offence to sell or supply liquor on the premises of an unregistered club. The bill provides also that greyhound racing clubs can apply for a Governor's licence. This ensures that greyhound, thoroughbred and harness racing clubs are aligned in their ability to apply for a Governor's licence.

The shadow Minister in the other place, the Hon. George Souris, mentioned that he had consulted widely with racing industry groups, including Greyhound Racing NSW, Harness Racing NSW and the NSW Country Racing Council, all of whom support the bill. During the Gaming and Racing budget estimates hearings it came home to me that we probably do not have the best jockey on the horse, so to speak, in this Minister. Quite gamely and honestly he said that he is not known for his expertise in the racing industry or great knowledge of racing. It is a bit of a shame that a Minister of the Crown quite readily admits that he is not an expert in his portfolio. I cannot expect all Ministers to have had extensive experience in their portfolio areas, but it is incumbent on all Ministers on becoming a Minister of the Crown, to learn a great detail about the industry and the people they represent. I thank the officers of the Department of Gaming and Racing for keeping the show on the road.

The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS [3.44 p.m.]: The Australian Democrats support the bill. We are not wild about increasing the number of liquor outlets, and certainly are not wild about the number of gaming outlets either. However, it is said that greyhounds are poor men's horses, and that people get a great deal of pleasure out of breeding and racing their dogs. Changes to poker machine legislation and rises in land values have put some greyhound racing clubs at risk. Obviously if this bill helps people who have a legitimate outlook—not simply putting their money into poker machines but taking an interest in racing and breeding of dogs and the tourism and recreational benefits that can follow—we feel it is worth supporting.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG [Parliamentary Secretary] [3.45 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions. In response to the comment of the Hon. Melinda Pavey, the Minister is not addicted to gaming or drinking, but he does know how the gaming industry works.

The Hon. Melinda Pavey: You would have more knowledge of gaming than he would. You should be the Minister, Henry.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: I would like to be the Minister responsible for tourism. I assure you that the Minister can ride a horse. I commend the bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.

RETAIL LEASES AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 29 June.

The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY [3.47 p.m.]: The Retail Leases Act 1994 was subject to a national competition policy review. The Retail Leases Amendment Bill is the result of the review. The Retail Leases Act 1994 regulates the relationship between landlords of retail spaces and small- and medium-size retailers. The final report of the review, which was released in February 2004, found that while there were some provisions regulating the rights of landlords and retail tenants that could potentially create anti-competitive outcomes in the retail leasing market, those should be retained on the basis that they provided a net public benefit by the promotion of an efficient and fair marketplace. The provisions identified were in the nature of compliance costs and the exclusion of certain types and sizes of retail shop businesses from protection under the Act.

The Retail Leases Amendment Bill makes two main amendments to the Retail Leases Act. It amends section 14 to stop landlords from recovering from lessees the costs of preparing and entering into a lease, other than the costs incurred in making amendments to the lease at the request of the lessee. The industry, headed by the Shopping Centre Council of Australia, has some genuine concerns about that aspect of the bill. I will detail their level of concern later. The bill will also repeal section 27 (c) and (d), which relates to the requirement for landlords to provide an outgoings expenditure statement every six months. The removal of the requirement to provide an outgoings expenditure statement is non-controversial and supported by all parties. The statement was considered to be of little benefit to tenants and costly to landlords.

The Australian Retailers Association and those chambers of commerce that were consulted supported the amendment to section 14, as it reduces their costs in establishing retail leases and means that, except where they request an amendment to a lease, they do not have to pay the legal costs of the landlord in preparing the lease. Previously tenants were found to have little control over the amount of costs that those landlords were entitled to recover. The Shopping Centre Council of Australia, which represents landlords, is opposed to the section 14 amendment. Council estimates that this provision will mean that an annual cost of about $11 million will be borne by landlords in New South Wales. It maintains that that will lead to increased rents over time and that landlords will recoup those costs through the imposition of other charges.

The Shopping Centre Council also maintains that that provision is discriminatory as no such protection, or limited protection against recovering costs, exists in the preparation of residential, caravan park, retirement village, office business and industrial leases. The shadow Minister in the other House, Katrina Hodgkinson, consulted widely in relation to this bill. She also arranged meetings with interested parties and she and I met with representatives from the Shopping Centre Council. She also discussed this matter with the Australian Retailers Association, the Small Business Association of Australia, Restaurant and Catering New South Wales, the New South Wales Chamber of Commerce, and the Chatswood, Hornsby and Yass chambers of commerce.

The Opposition does not oppose this bill but it believes it is relevant to highlight the concerns of the Shopping Centre Council of Australia in relation to this amendment and the problems that will be encountered in getting costs back from the signing of leases. It is concerned about this Government's lack of consultation. This matter was forced on council without it being able to put forward another point of view or another argument. New South Wales is the first State in Australia to implement these initiatives, which might be popular in some quarters. When I was a lessee at a major shopping centre I was not too thrilled to get from the landlord of that shopping centre a bill for $2,000 for establishing that lease.

At some point landlords will recover the costs associated with the preparation of leases. I believe there is a better way. The Shopping Centre Council of Australia supports the idea that there should be better disclosure upfront of the costs of establishing a lease. It believes that there should be more transparency and co-operation between all parties. This amendment is being forced on landlords. Some tenants might be happy with it and future or proposed tenants might accept that it is a good idea, but it means that those costs will be recouped in other areas through increased rents and so forth. The Shopping Centre Council of Australia states:

The proposed amendments are unnecessary and cumbersome and the existing provision of the Act (section 13) is an effective way of protecting a tenant from exploitation by stipulating that a tenant is not required to pay more than a "reasonable sum". If additional protections are desired, the disclosure statement could be amended to inform the tenant that they will be required to pay lease preparation costs and to provide an estimate of these costs.

I thank the shadow Minister, Katrina Hodgkinson, for her work in preparing these notes and for organising the meeting with the Shopping Centre Council of Australia. Whilst the Opposition does not oppose the bill it is important to highlight that we cannot keep legislating, forcing costs on businesses and interfering with the way in which business is being done. We can make recommendations for better transparency. The imposition of additional legislation on our economic drivers and generators is cumbersome, interferes with good business practice and is not necessarily a healthy thing, especially as New South Wales is the first State to introduce such measures. This is just another disincentive for people to do business in New South Wales.

Ms SYLVIA HALE [3.55 p.m.]: The Greens support the Retail Leases Amendment Bill and congratulate the Government on introducing legislation that will help to create a more level playing field for small business. All too often in this place we see legislation that favours the interests of big business and multinational corporations at the expense of small family-run businesses and local industry. It is unfortunate, however, that this bill is being introduced in the shadow of the Government's recent decision to close business enterprise centres across the State. The reduction in centres from 48 to 18 slashed government support for small business and will force many people running small businesses in rural New South Wales to drive long distances to obtain support. Unfortunately, the people of New South Wales have grown accustomed to schizophrenic government that gives with one hand and takes with the other.

I now turn to the specific provisions in the bill. The Greens note that the provision to do away with the requirement for landlords to provide six-monthly financial reports of outgoing expenditure and to replace those reports with an annual report is an initiative generally supported by both landlords and lessees. This appears to be a commonsense outcome agreed to by all. The new regime will result in two reports, with landlords reporting budgeted or anticipated expenditure at the commencement of the financial year and then a follow-up report at the end of the year detailing actual expenditure. This reform provides a balance between the maintenance of adequate and transparent disclosure requirements while minimising the administrative burden on landlords.

The second provision, which is more contentious, moves the costs of lease preparation onto the operators of shopping centres. Not unexpectedly, centre owners and the Shopping Centre Council of Australia have resisted this move. The Shopping Centre Council of Australia, in a briefing to crossbench members last month, suggested that lessees often have the upper hand in lease negotiations and that landlords are sometimes forced into situations of accepting low rents in an effort to retain good tenants. In some cases that may be true, but surely this is a case where market forces should come into play. The final decision as to whether the benefits associated with keeping a key tenant warrant a rent reduction ultimately is one that rests with the shopping centre operator.

Too often we hear stories of shopping centre operators charging very low rents, sometimes even forgoing rent altogether, in order to entice large tenants such as Coles or Woolworths into a shopping centre complex, then attempting to recoup lost income by charging the smaller tenants higher rents. Equally, there are stories of small business operators having extortionate rent increases foisted upon them by unscrupulous landlords aware of how difficult and expensive it is for small businesses to relocate. The threat of this is all the more present in cases where a single landlord owns multiple properties in the one area and exerts monopolistic control over rents.

Unfortunately, this bill will do nothing to address these problems. Lease preparation costs do not need to be onerous for either party, nor should we forget that irrespective of who prepares the lease the costs are written off as a tax-deductible business expense and it is the public that ultimately pays. In most cases a shopping centre landlord who is preparing multiple leases every year would have a standard lease prepared which is subsequently tailored to individual circumstances. Approximately 50 per cent of lessees in shopping centres in Australia are individual traders. The cost for individual traders is much higher than the costs would be for centre owners, given that individual traders prepare a single lease periodically only once every three to five years. The landlord has the benefits of an economy of scale not available to the lessee. For this reason, simply in an attempt to minimise the costs overall, it makes more sense for the shopping centre operator to bear the burden of lease preparation.

The Greens note that approximately 50 per cent of all lessees are not mum-and-dad businesses but large national chains. In some cases these chains, with multiple stores across the country, may be larger entities than the shopping centre operator and it is possible that these lessees will have the upper hand in negotiations. The Greens note that the Government has been silent on the scenario and has painted the bill solely as an attempt to create a fairer environment for small businesses. The second reading speech of the Minister for Rural Affairs, Minister for Local Government, Minister for Emergency Services, and Minister for Lands focused exclusively on easing the burden—

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.

DISTINGUISHED VISITORS

The PRESIDENT: I welcome to the public gallery members of a delegation from the House of Representatives of Ireland. accompanied by the Irish Consul-General, Ms Anne Webster.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

_________

RAIL SYSTEM ASBESTOS DUST

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: My question is directed to the Minister for Commerce. Will the Minister assure the workers who work at, and commuters who use, Bondi Junction railway station each day that RailCorp's removal of asbestos trays from railway tunnels adjacent to the station is being undertaken in full accordance with WorkCover regulations? Will he further assure CityRail staff who worked at the railway station last night and this morning who were not undertaking asbestos removal and who were reportedly not issued with protective clothing that they were not contaminated with asbestos fibres during the removal process or when trains subsequently travelled through the tunnels this morning? Will the Minister assure commuters who used the railway station this morning and those who will use it every day until 4 November that RailCorp's admission that there would be some dust contamination and that "some small breakages may be required" will not result in asbestos fibres being drawn into the air and spread throughout the underground network between Edgecliff and Bondi Junction stations?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question and for his flattering view of me as being someone who, incredibly, knows things well in advance of reasonable human expectation. The Leader of the Opposition will be aware that that is the sort of question that can be answered only when it is placed on notice. As it deals with grave and serious matters I will undertake to secure an answer as soon as practicable.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: It is extremely urgent because you would want to stop work if these things were not being undertaken.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I concede that it is an important matter. As I have said, I will get an answer to the question and provide it to the House as soon as practicable.

DILLWYNIA CORRECTIONAL CENTRE

The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO: My question is addressed to the Minister for Justice. What is the latest information on the new Dillwynia correctional facility?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I thank the Hon. Amanda Fazio for her question because I am pleased to inform the House that yesterday the first group of 25 female inmates were transferred to Dillwynia Correctional Centre for women at Windsor, as the prison's commissioning phase moves into full swing. Honourable members will remember that the Governor of New South Wales officially opened the $53.56 million centre on 15 July.

The Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans: A penal colony.

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I know that the honourable member opposed it but I cannot believe he is opposed to something that will offer a lot of hope to many people. Since 1995 the female prison population has increased by 92 per cent, growing from 314 in 1995 to 600 today and representing 7 per cent of today's inmate population. Significantly, the female remand population—those women awaiting sentencing—increased from 38 to 156 over the same period. In meeting this challenge the Government has responded with the first purpose-built correctional facility for female offenders in this State. The facility has contemporary design features taken from modern female correctional centres around the world. These include Shakopee in Minneapolis, Minnesota in the United States of America; the Healing Lodge in Saskatchewan, Canada; Tarrengower in Victoria; Lodden Prison in Victoria; and the Emu Plains Correctional Centre in New South Wales. In order to facilitate Dillwynia's progress minimum-security inmates from the Emu Plains Correctional Centre have in past months been attending the centre to work on the grounds and be involved in the testing procedures for all the centre's systems.

Since the majority of female inmates are mothers to dependent children, the centre includes children-friendly visiting areas that will allow children to spend a day—but not overnight—with their mothers in a positive environment that is not intimidating or sterile in appearance yet secure. This recognises that children should not be punished for their mothers' actions and creates a lifeline for the mothers back into the community upon their release. Domestic-style living units are a principal feature of the facility, promoting respect and responsibility among inmates. State-of-the-art security systems, including dozens of surveillance cameras, motion detection systems and perimeter security, have been installed, making Dillwynia an unquestionably secure facility. It also features an extremely secure segregation unit for non-compliant inmates. The centre will hold 200 medium- and minimum- security female inmates when fully operational in 2005.

Together with yesterday's first inmates, 52 correctional officers will take up duty at the centre this week, and who have all been trained specifically for duty at Dillwynia. Of the 52 new staff, 28 are female custodial recruits who have completed their entire correctional training at the centre. The remaining 24 are transferring from other correctional centres. More recruits will be trained for duty at Dillwynia over the coming months. It is expected that Dillwynia will employ 139 staff in total, including 95 correctional officers, 20 programs staff, 11 industries staff, eight administration staff, two Community Offender Services staff and three Justice Health staff.

The new facility will improve the management of female offenders by better preparing them for eventual release and reintegration into the community. Inmates will be required to address their offending behaviour, with all offenders at Dillwynia expected to be employed and to attend programs. Examples of programs to address offending behaviour include substance abuse, domestic violence, violence prevention, parenting, health and fitness, self-management for depression and social responsibility. An important part of the rehabilitation strategy is the provision of four business units where offenders will work. These include food services, hygiene services, maintenance services and a call centre and mailing service. Offender employment will be linked to vocational training that is accredited through TAFE New South Wales. This will allow women to receive a statement of attainment and to continue their vocational training on release.

If inmates fail to comply with the centre's routine and programs and the good order of the centre, they will face the prospect of segregation or even regression to another facility, such as Mulawa Correctional Centre. With the completion of Dillwynia, a redeveloped Mulawa Correctional Centre and the new women's facilities at Kempsey and Wellington, our management of female offenders in this State and their prospects of rehabilitation will be radically improved.

DUBBO POLICE AND COMMUNITY YOUTH CLUB

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: My question is directed to the Minister for Justice, representing the Minister for Police?

The Hon. Henry Tsang: Duncan, are you Irish?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I am Irish—they call me O'Gay. Why has the Minister for Police, John Watkins, failed to follow through with the decision made by the previous police Minister, Michael Costa, on the location of the Dubbo police and community youth club? Given that the far-sighted Minister Costa gave that commitment to the community two years ago, will the current Minister follow it up?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I will refer the question to the Minister for Police.

MOTORWAY E-WAY TAGS

The Hon. PETER BREEN: My question is directed to the Minister for Transport Services, representing the Minister for Roads. Is the Minister aware that the equipment used by the Roads and Traffic Authority to identify and register E-way tags used on the M4 western motorway and the M5 south-west motorway is defective? Is it a fact that the E-way tags monitoring equipment is unable to distinguish between two vehicles travelling parallel if their E-way tags register simultaneously on the equipment? On 12 August 2004 a Ford Fiesta motor vehicle registered to my E-way account travelled west on the M5 south-west motorway at 7.24 a.m. and was recorded as a car, for which a toll of $3.30 was paid. Two hours later the same vehicle was recorded as a truck, for which a toll of $7.10 was charged to my account. On 4 September 2004 a toll of $2.20 was charged to my E-way account for a trip on the M4 western motorway by a motor vehicle with the registration No. QTV179, which is not registered to my account. Are these errors in the monitoring equipment for E-way tags widespread and how many motorists are being billed incorrectly on Sydney motorways?

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: That is obviously a very detailed question, which is certainly of great personal interest to the Hon. Peter Breen. I will ask the Minister for Roads to respond to it.

The Hon. Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans: He's good at apologising.

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: It is not up to Ministers to apologise for these matters. We will get the relevant information and find out whether it is accurate or whether there is some other explanation.

FIRST HOME PLUS SCHEME

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: My question without notice is addressed to the Treasurer. In view of the presence in the House of visitors from the Irish Parliament, I ask: Is the Treasurer of Irish stock? Will the Treasurer advise how the Government's First Home Plus Scheme is helping young first home buyers to get into the New South Wales market?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I am not only proudly of Irish stock but, as some honourable members might also be aware, I am descended from two members of the First Fleet who both happened to be English and convicts and, I regret to say, Protestants too. It is a very mixed background.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: That explains a lot of things about you!

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: It does. Fortunately their daughter redeemed things and married into the Irish. I thank the Hon. Henry Tsang for his question about the First Home Plus Scheme, and I am pleased to report that we have reached a significant milestone: we have given first home buyers more than $201 million in stamp duty exemptions since the April mini budget. Between 7 April and 12 October, as I have mentioned, $201 million in First Home Plus exemptions was given to 20,437 first home buyers.

The Hon. Rick Colless: Did you tell them it is only a loan?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: No, it is not a loan. It is an exemption. It is a concession, which means that these young people are much more easily able to reach the deposit gap, money that would otherwise have been taken up in paying stamp duty can now go to paying the deposit. First home buyers across New South Wales are now saving an average $9,830—

The Hon. Catherine Cusack: It's their money!

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: But under your government you took it! You took it! You were proposing to give first home buyers a 10 per cent reduction in stamp duty. We do not give them a 10 per cent reduction—we have abolished it! We have abolished it for 95 per cent of first hone buyers. Any first home buyers in New South Wales buying a home for less than $500,000 do not pay one cent in stamp duty! As I say, this is a great opportunity for these people, mainly young people, to get into their first home. First home buyers in regional New South Wales are taking full advantage of what is on offer. On Monday 18 October, local Tamworth real estate agent, Ian Binney, told the Northern Daily Leader that the "dropping of the stamp duty had been a tremendous help for first home buyers".

The Hon. Catherine Cusack: What did he say about investment taxes?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I will come to that. Since April in Tamworth 163 first home buyers have saved an average of $4,670 in stamp duty. Thanks to our generous State Government stamp duty exemptions, 7,588 first home buyers outside Sydney have saved $52 million, an average saving of $6,857. The Real Estate Institute of New South Wales June quarter 2004 sales figures showed that in regional New South Wales the median house price was below $411,000. This means almost every first home buyer outside Sydney pays no stamp duty.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: They are not all Catholic in Ireland.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: That is true but the nice ones are. Some people did take the soup; remember that.

The Hon. John Ryan: Some of us escaped.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: Some of you escaped, yes. I will come to you later. You give me great cause for concern. [Time expired.]

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: I ask a supplementary question. Will the Treasurer elucidate his answer?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: On the North Coast, 1,056 first home buyers have saved a total of $7.35 million, which represents an average saving of $6,958 in stamp duty.

The Hon. Catherine Cusack: It's their money! They didn't save it.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: Again it is money that the previous government, of which the Hon. Catherine Cusack was a greater supporter and, indeed, a staff member, was ripping off. The average of $6,958 paid by first home buyers on the North Coast used to go straight into Consolidated Revenue when John Fahey, Peter Collins, or indeed Bob Askin was Treasurer—I am old enough to remember that. That is probably one of the reasons, with more than 1,000 first home buyers on the North Coast, why Labor is about to pick up the seat of Richmond.

The Hon. Melinda Pavey: Why did you lose Greenway?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: There will be no seats of The Nationals left in New South Wales as they are already taken by the Independents or by great Labor candidates. In south-western New South Wales, 974 first home buyers have saved a total $4.07 million which represents an average saving of $4,181 in stamp duty. In the Hunter, there are 1,402 first home buyers. On the Central Coast there are 809 first home buyers. It is clear that our property reforms are helping first home buyers across New South Wales. In delivering the mini budget in April I said that we intended to tip the balance in favour of first home buyers, and we are doing just that!

MENTAL HEALTH SENTINEL EVENTS REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT 2003
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS: My question is directed to the Special Minister of State, representing the Minister for Health. What is the Government's response to the New South Wales Mental Health Sentinel Events Review Committee Report 2003, and when will it be made available. What was the response of the Sentinel Events Review Committee to the Government's response, and can it be made public?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I will pass the question on to my colleague, the Minister for Health, and I am sure he will provide an answer at the earliest possible occasion.

SHOALHAVEN HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT SUICIDE

The Hon. JOHN RYAN: My question is directed to the Minister for Community Services. How many times did members of the public notify the Department of Community Services [DOCS] that they were concerned about the safety and wellbeing of a 14-year-old girl from the Nowra area, who tragically took her life yesterday in the company of a 23-year-old man who also took his life? Did DOCS also receive notifications from the young girl's school, Shoalhaven High School, during the past week, together with follow-up representations, seeking details as to how DOCS had responded to its concerns last Thursday? At what category were these reports rated? Did the staff of DOCS sight the girl prior to her death, following the notification from her school?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: The Hon. John Ryan has raised a very tragic case and I can advise the House that I am aware of the tragic death of the young person. I extend my condolences to her family and friends at this very difficult time for them. My information is that a Department of Community Services [DOCS] and police Joint Investigative Response Team dealt with a child protection report about the young person last year. Fresh concerns were raised about the young person last week, and the matter was given a high priority by the department. I am advised that efforts were made to contact the young person but her whereabouts could not be determined. The DOCS sought to locate the young person in contacts with other relevant parties but these efforts were unsuccessful. I cannot provide any more information because this matter is subject to investigation by the police and the Coroner.

AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH FACILITIES CLOSURE

The Hon. TONY CATANZARITI: My question is addressed to the Minister for Primary Industries. Will the Minister update the House on the progress of discussions about the future of Agricultural Research Stations in New South Wales?

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: I thank the honourable member for his question and his valiant efforts on behalf of Country Labor in seeking to reach an equitable and honourable solution to some of these issues. For the benefit of the House, it is my absolute pleasure to highlight a major breakthrough that will bring significant benefits to agricultural research and extension in this State. Honourable members recall efforts over the past few months to secure a long-term future for agricultural research, in particular, for Gosford, Grafton, Deniliquin and Temora Research and Advisory Stations.

Local communities are united behind one goal: to reverse the drain of industry funding that had been flowing out of these research stations for years. As the State Government has made clear, this lack of funding was jeopardising many of our cutting-edge programs. The State Government was becoming the sole source of research funding support in many instances, and that simply was not sustainable. The call went out for all stakeholder groups to sit down together and work to re-establish that critical industry support base. I commend all groups involved for their goodwill and creativity throughout the negotiation process, including the New South Wales Farmers Association, Country Labor, the Public Service Association, the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries staff and industry groups.

On 23 September I announced I had brokered a series of agreements that represented a new era of co-operation in productive and modern agricultural research. Stakeholders have now signed a memorandum of understanding that commit them to working together to rebuild that critical industry and commercial investment base. For example, in terms of the Gosford Horticultural Research and Advisory Station, the partners have signed a three-year memorandum of understanding. The partners include the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, the New South Wales Farmers Association, Wyong Shire Council, the Public Service Association, and industry groups such as Wildflowers New South Wales. They will seek increased industry support for research into a range of areas, such as greenhouse production, integrated pest management, green tea, inoculants, native flowers and Asian vegetables. I place on record the skilful work of the Hon. John Della Bosca in assisting this arrangement for the Narara and Somersby sites.

The horticultural research station will be established at the Somersby sites contingent on the sale of the Narara site, which is expected to occur within two years. The memorandum for the Grafton site commits partners to creating a forestry centre of excellence to support expanding forestry work in the area. Partners include the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, the New South Wales Farmers Association, the Public Serves Association, the Clarence Valley Council, and industry groups such as the North Coast Oilseed Growers Association of New South Wales.

Increased industry and commercial backing will be sought for research into coastal soybean production, silver perch and freshwater aquaculture, weeds and forestry. A major centre of excellence for forestry will be on that site. Under the Deniliquin memorandum of understanding agriculture, fisheries and forestry services will be collocated at the Charlotte Street office. The key focus for industry investment at this site will be fresh strategic alliances with rice, inland fisheries and irrigation industries in the Murray Valley. Partners in this memorandum of understanding include the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, the New South Wales Farmers Association, Deniliquin Council and the Public Service Association. To help secure the future of the Temora research station site, various stakeholders have agreed to pursue industry and commercial support for winter wheat and barley programs. The Temora memorandum of understanding partners include the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, the New South Wales Farmers Association who have been co-operative right throughout the process, Temora Shire Council, Temora Agricultural Bureau and the Public Service Association. I should add that a separate memorandum of understanding was signed for the Trangie research station. This was, of course, the research station that people like Ian Slack-Smith, a member in another place, said we were closing, even when we announced we were considering selling a small portion.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: You said you were closing it.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: I never said that.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: You did. Don't mislead this place. You're a liar.

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition should not speak into the microphone if he wishes to make interjections, which I remind him are disorderly at all times.

The Hon. TONY CATANZARITI: I ask a supplementary question. Will the Minister elucidate his answer?

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: Yes. In relation to Trangie, that is the lie the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has peddled around the State, as have some other members opposite: that we would sell Trangie. That was never the proposition.

The Hon. Greg Pearce: Look up Hansard. You said you were going to sell half of it.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: The 22 May statement that was presented to the association said that part of the Trangie land would be sold, but the research station would remain open. It was never ever under consideration for sale. That is a gross lie by The Nationals. I am absolutely right, and that is an absolute lie. I will continue. I will show those opposite every statement I have made on it and every statement that the department has made on it. All of these agreements will help to define our approach to agricultural research in New South Wales into the future. This is the way forward for long-term, cutting-edge research. Again, I commend everyone involved for coming to the table with so many good ideas. I said from the start that I would listen to alternative suggestions and that commitment is really starting to bear fruit. I had faith that the communities cared enough about their research stations to sit down with us and work with us to find a way to tackle this difficult issue.

The difficult issue was to get further research times from industry into those research centres. It was a difficult road, but hopefully we are starting to see a real turnaround in the outlook for these research stations. The next step is to cement real partnerships with the community to help guide the process forward. Working parties will be established and chaired by community leaders with executive support from the department. It is a very good process to get those research stations that have not attracted industry dollars in recent times to get those industry dollars in so that once more they can join in the overall effort of the department in providing world-class research for the farmers of New South Wales.

JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE INQUIRY ON THE TRANSPORTATION AND STORAGE OF NUCLEAR WASTE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO REPORT

Mr IAN COHEN: I ask the Minister for Justice, representing the Minister for the Environment, a question without notice. As it is now almost eight months since the report of the New South Wales joint select committee inquiry on the transport and storage of nuclear waste was issued, will the Minister please advise whether the Government intends to respond to any of the recommendations in the report? A secret Commonwealth Government list of potential nuclear dump sites in New South Wales has been released by the media. Will the Government legislate to prohibit Commonwealth nuclear dumping in both New South Wales and on New South Wales-administered islands as recommended in the inquiry?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I will refer the question to the Minister for the Environment.

KARIONG JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTRE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK: I direct my question to the Minister for Industrial Relations. Did the Gosford office of WorkCover investigate two incidents at Kariong Detention Centre in October and November 2002 in which a gang of adult Lebanese gang rapists held staff hostage to negotiate their transfer to prison? Did the investigators find a strong prima facie case against the Department of Juvenile Justice, and in April of this year recommend that WorkCover's legal branch press charges against the department and management at Kariong in relation to the incidents? Given that the statutory time limit for initiating charges against the department expires on 20 October 2004, in other words tomorrow, what action is he taking to ensure that WorkCover acts in time to pursue this case?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: As the honourable member would be aware, it does not behove a Minister to interfere in the operational concerns of a prosecutorial and inspectorial authority like WorkCover, and I think she understands that. I appreciate that the matters she raises are of some importance and a great deal of concern. I am happy to provide what information I can to her at the earliest possible opportunity.

REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS INVESTMENT IN NEW SOUTH WALES

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: My question without notice is addressed to the Treasurer. Will he inform the House about some of the latest investment successes in New South Wales?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I would be delighted to.

The Hon. Greg Pearce: Did he write that question himself?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: No, I gave him a bit of help. The advantages of locating regional headquarters and regional operations centres in Sydney have been recognised by many multinational companies. This State's strong, stable economy, competitive cost structure, abundant resources and highly educated and sophisticated workforce make it an ideal Asia-Pacific location. I am very pleased to inform the House that there are now 600 regional headquarters and regional operations centres in New South Wales. Since April 1995 the New South Wales Government has welcomed more than 210 to Sydney. One of the latest companies to call Sydney its Asia-Pacific home is global financial services provider Morgan Stanley Serco Solutions. Last month the Premier officially opened its new building in the Bond Complex in Millers Point. The launch of this new headquarters further confirmed our commitment to attract international investment. It also confirmed that Sydney is a major financial centre in the Asia-Pacific region, attracting investment ahead of other cities in the region. Some other companies to announce regional investment in Sydney in recent months included Lazard, Babcock and Brown, Multimap.com, Wey Technology, Vanguard and Konica Minolta.

In August it was my pleasure to welcome Lazard's new Sydney operations. As honourable members would be aware, Lazard is one of a small number of privately held investment banks. The company expects to have 20 investment bankers in Sydney by next year. Another recent announcement concerning Sydney this year was the decision by a global investment bank, Babcock and Brown, to shift its global headquarters from San Francisco to Sydney. Europe's largest online provider of mapping services, Multimap.com, has also chosen Sydney ahead of other Asia-Pacific destinations. Multimap's move to Sydney is expected to create 14 direct jobs in sales, marketing and information technology within a short period. The company is considering plans to establish a regional software development centre in Sydney with the potential to create between 20 and 40 more jobs.

Some other positive investment wins for New South Wales include a decision by Swiss-based trading room specialist, Wey Technology, to expand its regional headquarters in Sydney, an announcement by index fund manager, Vanguard, that it will open a Sydney office, a decision by Air France to select Sydney ahead of a number of other Asian-Pacific locations for a high-technology reservations and sales centre, and a decision by Konica Minolta to open a new regional support centre. It is encouraging that Sydney and New South Wales continue to attract some of the world's leading companies. I certainly wish these recent corporate additions every success in Sydney.

MOBILE PHONE TOWERS RENTAL ARRANGEMENTS

Ms SYLVIA HALE: I direct my question to the Minister for Local Government, and Minister for Lands. Why do hundreds of mobile phone towers that are located on public land throughout New South Wales pay no rent to either local councils or the State Government? What is the nature of, and justification for, lease agreements that allow no rent to be paid when similar towers on private land collect between $15,000 and $30,000 in rent, per tower, per annum? In view of the chronic shortage of funds that is experienced by local councils and the extra costs shifted onto them by this Government, why has the introduction of appropriately leases been delayed?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] has been asked to assist in developing consistent government policy covering tenure and rental matters for all users of government agency communication sites. The tribunal has been asked to report on the existing rental arrangements for communication tower sites—a matter that is addressed in the honourable member's question—and a framework that allows the New South Wales Government to obtain a fair market-based commercial return which reflects the benefits realised by all users of the sites. Last month the tribunal released an issues paper and welcomes submissions from interested parties. The issues paper and terms of reference may be downloaded from IPART's web site at www.ipart.nsw.gov.au. Submissions are due by Friday 5 November 2004. Ms Sylvia Hale might care to lodge a submission.

BERRIMA CORRECTIONAL CENTRE SECURITY

The Hon. CHARLIE LYNN: My question is directed to the Minister for Justice. Has he investigated why security is so lax at Berrima gaol, which I understand is known as Club Southern Highlands following the escape yesterday of two convicted drug criminals—who allegedly had to remove only a couple bricks from a wall to make good their escape—and last month's incident when a prisoner was released for court sentencing without the required documentation needed to return him to gaol? Is it true that one of the escaped felons was given a privileged position in the drug and alcohol program at Berrima, which I understand is a much sought-after location, only 14 days after being sentenced?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: On 18 October two minimum security inmates escaped from the Berrima Correctional Centre. Bowral police were immediately notified and attended at the centre. As always occurs, the department is conducting an investigation into the process of classifying inmates and also into the process of selecting inmates for the workshop. There will be a correctional centre security review undertaken by the department's security and investigation unit, as is always the case in matters of this nature. Anyone who suggests that life in any of the correctional facilities is a club is welcome to experience the pleasures.

The Hon. Michael Egan: Why not put the Hon. Charlie Lynn in for 12 months?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: Yes. That opportunity has been offered to a few members of the Opposition, but so far not one has rushed to accept the offer. I am advised that neither of the inmates concerned was considered dangerous.

CARERS WEEK

The Hon. KAYEE GRIFFIN: My question is addressed to the Minister for Community Services, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability Services, and Minister for Youth. What action is the Government taking to support the contribution that carers make to our community?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: The question of the Hon. Kayee Griffin is important because this week is Carers Week, which presents an opportunity for everyone to acknowledge the wonderful role that carers play in our community. Today I was pleased to represent the Government at Cabramatta while attending the launch of Carers Week, which is being run by Carers New South Wales. I thank Carers New South Wales for the work it has done and for organising this week's events. The Cabramatta-Fairfield area has a high percentage of carers—approximately 20 per cent of the population—and that is why Carers New South Wales chose the area for the launch of the campaign.

Carers Week is a national event that celebrates and raises awareness of the valuable role that carers play in our community. Carers are the foundation of community care because they enable the people for whom care is provided, such as older people and people with a disability, to continue to live in and participate among the community. There is no doubt that caring can be emotionally, physically and financially demanding. This week is a chance to show appreciation and to express thanks for what carers do; but, more importantly, it is a chance to raise awareness of the need for support for carers. The research shows that informal support for carers—from friends, community and neighbours—can do a great deal to make the job of a carer a more satisfying experience.

The New South Wales Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care provided $90,000 for Carers Week. That amount includes funding for Carers New South Wales to support more than 150 events throughout New South Wales and the provision of $60,000 for a strategy to reach hidden carers throughout New South Wales by increasing their awareness of support services that are available to them. In New South Wales alone there are 800,000 carers. Approximately 150,000 of them are aged 65 or over, and our ageing population will result in this number increasing. Almost half the number of primary carers report that they have been caring for at least 10 years. Although the majority of carers are of working age, only 40 per cent are in the work force. The Government is well aware of the need to provide appropriate support for carers. An example has been the New South Wales Carers Program, which provides valuable and much-needed services and support throughout New South Wales.

As part of the New South Wales Carers Program, carers support services have been implemented in area health services to improve the manner in which health services respond to carers. Funding of $3.1 million has also been allocated to non-government organisations, local government authorities and community groups for the delivery of direct carers' support projects over the next three years. The projects include carer training in education, social and emotional support, carer networking, information resources and peer leadership. The Minister for Health recently approved triennial funding for 10 new statewide carer initiatives to support particular carer groups. These programs will be available to carers across New South Wales and will combine rural and regional service networks with the use of new technologies, such as the Internet, to reach carers.

This year the Government will spend more than $800 million on community-based caring in New South Wales. Approximately half that amount will be provided for services for people who have a disability, and the other major portion will be spent on the Home and Community Care Program. There is much that the New South Wales Government is doing to support carers, but there is no doubt that Carers Week is an opportunity to acknowledge and celebrate the role of carers while raising awareness among the broader community of ways in which to support carers.

FIRE TRAILS CLEARING

The Hon. JON JENKINS: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Emergency Services, and it refers specifically to fires that occurred at Bogangar last week in which my house and many others were saved only by the actions of the Rural Fire Service. I applaud that service for its work. Is the Minister aware of the risks involved to the personnel of the Rural Fire Service and contractors in accessing fire trails in emergency situations? Does the Minister believe that fire trails should be maintained in an easily navigable and readily marked manner for use by both local and non-local emergency workers rather than having to be cleared in an emergency situation as a fire approaches? Would the back-burning operations in Bogangar last week have commenced earlier if the fire trails had already been cleared and marked and a bulldozer had not worked all night and day to clear the trails at most times literally a few hundred metres in front of the fire? How much did the fire trail clearing cost?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: I acknowledge the congratulations the Hon. Jon Jenkins gave to the Rural Fire Service in the prelude to his question. Over the past few years a protocol in relation to the width of fire trails and the way they should be prepared has been developed. I will take on notice the balance of the question, which seeks a detailed response, and provide an answer to him as soon as possible.

The Hon. JON JENKINS: I ask a supplementary question. Considering the benefits of safety to firefighting personnel and the potential saving to the Government of millions of dollars, will the Minister support the offer of nearly 10,000 volunteers to maintain clearly navigable and marked fire trails?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: As I said, I will take the detail of the question on notice. I presume that the question includes not only land administered by the Department of Lands but also land administered by the National Parks and Wildlife Service. I will provide a whole-of-government response.

EMERGENCY SERVICES CALLS

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: My question without notice is directed to the Special Minister of State, representing the Minister for Health. Is the Minister aware that the 000 emergency system failed to register a call from a panic-stricken businessman who collapsed and died at his business premises in West Wyalong last Tuesday? Is the Minister aware also that a Cowra-born man waited 30 minutes for an ambulance after being attacked and robbed in Sydney last Friday night and that the man is now in a coma and on life support? What immediate action will the Minister take to prevent a recurrence of those disastrous situations with regard to the 000 system?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I have no knowledge of the details of either of the matters referred to. The specifics of the question relate to very regrettable matters. I express appropriate condolences about the death of the man and the man on life support as outlined in the question. The alleged failure of the 000 system and the alleged failure of an appropriate emergency response as implied necessitate a detailed investigation and may involve other jurisdictional issues. I will refer the specifics of both matters to the Minister for Health and ask him to provide an answer as soon as practicable.

EMERGENCY SERVICES VOLUNTEERS

The Hon. IAN WEST: My question is directed to the Minister for Emergency Services. How is the Government recognising volunteer emergency service workers?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: It is with great sorrow I announce that today marks the tragic start to this summer's bushfire season. Last week's scorching weather resulted in bushfires burning in several areas of the State, from Nowra in the south to Cabarita on the far north coast—as was alluded to by an honourable member earlier. Fires broke out also around the Sydney Basin and in the Hunter Valley. Tragically a fire in the Hunter claimed the life of a senior, experienced volunteer firefighter from the Rural Fire Service. The captain of Scotts Flat Rural Fire Brigade, 60-year-old Graham Patton, died after attending a building fire near Singleton on Thursday 14 October. Brigades were called to a fire at a farmhouse outside the town just after 9.00 a.m. I understand that while fighting this fire Mr Patton collapsed with a suspected heart attack. Ambulance paramedics were called and the firefighter was transported to Singleton District Hospital. Sadly he died shortly after arrival. That is yet another reminder of the courage and commitment of this State's firefighters, particularly our remarkable force of volunteer firefighters.

As I noted after the death of New South Wales Fire Brigades officer Phillip Viles at Donaldson on the Central Coast earlier this year, there are not many professions or community service activities that require individuals to risk their lives to save others in danger. But our firefighters face that potential risk every time they answer the call for help, especially in a bushfire season—and they do so with great courage. They deserve nothing but the highest praise and heartfelt thanks. That message was again brought home to me last Sunday when I attended the annual Volunteers Memorial Service with members of the volunteer emergency services. Members of the Rural Fire Service, the State Emergency Service, the Volunteer Rescue Association, the Royal Volunteer Coastal Patrol and the Australian Volunteer Coast Guard also attended. I am sure all honourable members would be familiar with the Volunteers Memorial, which is located alongside Sydney Harbour at Mrs Macquarie's Chair.

The annual service is an opportunity to publicly recognise and thank all our volunteers, particularly those who have lost their lives in the course of their service to the community. This year, two volunteers' names were added to the roll of honour carved on the memorial: Edward Alan Bristow, from the Australian Volunteer Coast Guard's Port Stephens Flotilla; and Michael Hanley, from the Rural Fire Service's Nundle Brigade. Both men died of cardiac arrest, Mr Bristow while taking part in a Coast Guard recruitment and fund-raising drive at Wallsend and Mr Hanley after collapsing at the Nundle station during a briefing before a bushfire operation. Brigade Captain Patton's name will also be added to the memorial, following his death last week. All of those present at Sunday's service were honoured by the presence of members of the Patton family in the midst of their grief and sorrow.

Our thoughts and condolences of course are with them at this sad time—and with the families, friends and colleagues of the other 77 volunteers whose names are also inscribed on the roll of honour. The commissioner and I spoke with Mr Patton's family at the service. Again, I cannot pay high enough tribute to our volunteer firefighters for the work they do—particularly to Mr Patton, who in helping to keep his community safe paid the ultimate price. I am sure all members of the House join with me in paying tribute to him: his is a sad loss to us all.

UNBORN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE LEGISLATION

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: I ask the Minister for Justice, representing the Attorney General, a question without notice: Is the Minister aware that currently there are no legislative measures to deal with the grievances held by both Renee Shears and Kylie Flick on the death of their unborn children? As the Minister may remember, Kylie Flick's unborn child died as a result of the father of her baby, Phillip King, punching and stamping on Ms Flick's abdomen numerous times, and Renee Shield lost her unborn child in a road-rage accident. Is the Minister aware that spokespersons for the Attorney General's Department stated in March this year that draft laws were in place to deal with the issue and would be introduced into Parliament after King was sentenced? Is the Minister aware that King was sentenced on 16 June 2004, and will the Minister inform the House when this legislation will be introduced?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I will refer the matter to the Attorney General.

VENDOR DUTY

The Hon. DON HARWIN: My question is addressed to the Treasurer, and Minister for State Development. How much did the State Government raise from vendor duty in the month of September?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: I have not seen the figure for September. In August the amount was $29 million.

GOVERNMENT USE OF CONSULTANTS

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE: My question is addressed to the Treasurer, and Minister for State Development. How does the Government justify spending $96 million on consultants last year, as reported in the report on State finances that was tabled today?

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: As honourable members would know, the Government engages consultants only when that is the most efficient means of providing services the Government needs.

POLITICAL ACTIVISM IN SCHOOLS

The Hon. DAVID OLDFIELD: My question is addressed to the Minister for Community Services, representing the Minister for Education and Training. Is the Minister aware that during the recent Federal election the New South Wales Teachers Federation targeted schools in marginal electorates? Is the Minister aware that according to the teachers union it succeeded in handing out 116,000 glossy colour brochures attacking the Howard Government? Is the Minister aware also that 2GB's Ray Hadley specifically identified Cherrybrook High School, Narellan Vale Primary School and Cambridge Gardens Public School as examples of the schools that were targeted? What disciplinary measures will the Minister take against staff who defied his September memo in relation to the inappropriateness of distributing political material, in particular in the period of the Federal election? What will the Minister do this time to reassure parents that their children will be protected from activist political material? Was it a coincidence or simply convenient that the Minister was on leave while that propaganda was being distributed and hence unavailable to explain his continuing failure to halt the use of schools for activist political purposes?

The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT: I will refer the question of the Hon. David Oldfield to the Minister in the other place and undertake to obtain a response as soon as possible.

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS SYSTEM

The Hon. PETER PRIMROSE: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Industrial Relations. Will the Minister inform the House whether New South Wales gains a competitive advantage from retaining its own industrial relations system?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Members will recall that on many occasions I have indicated that the Carr Labor Government will oppose any hostile takeover of the New South Wales industrial relations system. New South Wales is committed to an efficient and popular Industrial Relations Act that promotes co-operation and productivity, overseen by a strong and independent umpire settling disputes fairly. When we reviewed that Act in 2002 not one submission was made calling for its abolition or any substantial change. Contrast that with the Federal system, which is unproductive, divisive and destructive. I do not make this claim lightly.

Historically New South Wales has experienced low levels of industrial disputation since the early 1990s. Importantly, disputes continue to be resolved more quickly in New South Wales compared to the situation with the Federal industrial relations system imposed on Victoria. From the three years to December 2003 New South Wales accounted for just under 24 per cent of the nation's working days lost in disputes running for two or more days, and 24 per cent of disputes running for five or more days. For the same period Victoria, which has a monopoly over the Federal system, accounted for over 44 per cent of working days lost in disputes running for two or more days and 45 per cent of disputes running for five or more days. Quite clearly, the Federal model is very poor at resolving disputes and it is unable to resolve them quickly.

In its submission to the Cole royal commission the Howard Government conceded that building projects in Sydney were 20 per cent to 30 per cent cheaper than identical projects in Melbourne. It said that the reason for Victoria's disadvantage was an inferior industrial relations climate. The climate is inferior in Victoria because the inflexible Federal industrial relations system is the only show in town, with an umpire with no power, no respect and no way to resolve disputes. The latest figures show that the Federal system is only getting worse, with a surge in employer lockouts of workers unprecedented in the modern era—an appalling fact directly attributable to the divisive policy of the Howard Government.

A lockout represents the ultimate industrial relations failure, when employers and their workers declare war and financially cripple each other. A recently released study by the Australian Centre for Industrial Relations Research and Training demonstrates that 91 per cent of lockouts in Australia occur in the Federal jurisdiction, compared to 7 per cent in all other State industrial relations systems combined. Of even greater concern is the fact that lockouts have increased sevenfold during the life of the Howard Government, to the point where nearly 60 per cent of three-week-old disputes are now due to employers locking out their workers. That is not inefficient, it is not harmonious and it does not make for a strong or a profitable economy. It is a culture of confrontation, not co-operation.

In recent days there has been much conjecture over the future of the New South Wales industrial relations system. I urge those who may be trigger happy with the constitutional corporations power to take a deep breath and to assess the performance of industrial relations systems in this State. The New South Wales economy produces 35 per cent of the national output, is home to 45 per cent of the top 500 companies and provides 42 per cent of the nation's employment. We have a system that clearly suits us well and one that the Howard Government has previously conceded produces better outcomes than its own model. [Time expired.]

The Hon. PETER PRIMROSE: I ask a supplementary question. Will the Minister elucidate his answer?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I am happy to elucidate my answer. As I was saying, employers have the freedom of choice to use the system that best suits the needs of their businesses and their work forces. It is estimated that 45 per cent of workers are covered by State awards and that only 23 per cent are covered federally. The New South Wales system provides certainty to small businesses in fulfilling their employment obligations through common rule awards. The system provides a meaningful safety net to workers who are not in a position to take advantage of productivity improvements or, for that matter, collective bargaining in their workplaces. The Howard Government can claim no mandate to dismantle the productive and harmonious New South Wales system and replace it with a model that is demonstrably inferior and inefficient.

NSW POLICE COBURN REPORT

Ms LEE RHIANNON: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Justice, representing the Minister for Police. Will the Minister tell the family of TJ Hickey that he is sorry for the distress that the mishandling of the police Coburn report caused that family, given that he expressed his sorrow in a media statement to the parents of the 14-year-old girl whose complaints about gang rape allegations were mishandled by a corrupt investigating officer? Has the Minister referred the Redfern inquiry testimony of the Aboriginal liaison officers back to the police commissioner, the Police Integrity Commission and the Ombudsman for appropriate action, given that he immediately did this for the parents of the 14-year-old gang rape victim? Has the police Minister written to the family of TJ Hickey inviting it to make direct contact with either the Ombudsman or the investigators at the local area command regarding the failure of the Coburn report investigators to interview two Aboriginal liaison officers, as he has done for this family? Does the Government have a double standard in dealing with families who have suffered from the mishandling of flawed police investigations?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: A number of the questions that the member asked are clearly argumentative. Nevertheless, I will refer them to the Minister for Police, obtain an answer and advise the House in due course.

BONALBO RURAL FIRE SERVICE UNIT

The Hon. MELINDA PAVEY: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Emergency Services. Is the Minister aware that a $250,000 Rural Fire Service unit at old Bonalbo was grounded in September due to a broken window winder that is yet to be fixed? Is he further aware that in early October firefighters had to use the smaller striker Land Rover defender unit, but the unit had no fuel and firefighters were forced to borrow diesel because the fire control officer forgot to order it? Given the prospect of a fierce fire season, a factor that the Minister highlighted earlier, and the possibility of road accidents requiring emergency assistance and backup, will the Minister take immediate action to rectify this situation? Are the Minister's fire control officers failing to take the fire season seriously?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: I am not aware of the fuel levels of the 2,500 new and reconditioned vehicles that this Government has provided to the Rural Fire Service over the past 10 years—part of the $930 million in funding that the Carr Government has given to the Rural Fire Service. Compare that amount with the $197 million that the previous Government allocated to the Rural Fire Service during its seven years in office. As a result of the 7.7 per cent increase in this year's budget—a massive increase in funding by the Treasurer to the Rural Fire Service—it now has $134 million this year, which is two-thirds the amount allocated by the Coalition Government over the entire period it was in office.

LOCUST CONTROL

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Primary Industries. Will the Minister update the House on the State Government's locust control campaign?

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: I thank the honourable member for his question to me—the first of many, I am sure. Every measure possible is being taken to control the current plague locust outbreak. Landholders, the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, rural lands protection boards and the Australian Plague Locust Commission are carrying out the most comprehensive locust response plan ever developed in this country. Over 6,294 hatching reports—and that is the latest figure—have been received so far this spring from landholders. The locust hot spots are in the Dubbo, Coonabarabran, Tamworth, Mudgee, Forbes and Molong rural lands protection boards, with increasing reports now occurring in the southern boards, including Narrandera. So far, rural lands protection board rangers have distributed enough ground control agents to treat nearly 141,000 hectares, with more supplies being handed out every day, many of them being handed out by mobile distributors—an initiative that was announced last week.

Eight locust control centres are now operational, at Narrabri, Coonabarabran, Gunnedah, Dubbo, Mudgee, Forbes, Molong and Narrandera. The centres assist in co-ordination and control operations at a local level. Aerial surveillance for locust nymph bands is occurring and landholders are being advised to spray these locust bands. Some aerial spraying of locust bands is occurring where the bands are so widespread that control is beyond the capability of the landholder from the ground or where significant damage would occur if ground control vehicles were used. The aim of the campaign is to control nymph locusts before they mature and get on the wing and cause greater damage.

The department, the New South Wales Farmers Association and the rural lands protection boards [RLPBs] have been working as a team to develop an agreed approach on insecticide stockpiles and plans to secure additional supplies if required. There is now enough locust control insecticide currently on hand and on order to treat 856,000 hectares. Nearly 141,000 hectares of insecticide has already been issued to landholders for locust control. This brings total chemical supplies to more than 997,000 hectares. There is obviously a need to make sure that we do not commit to one exclusive supplier. Indeed, the department has at least nine different types of chemicals on hand to cater for different circumstances. For instance, the fungus-based product Green Guard is used in more environmentally sensitive areas or on organics. That is basic risk management.

But the key point is that we have worked closely with the New South Wales Farmers Association and the RLPBs to determine exactly how much chemical is required in their combined expert opinion. Approximately 7,800 litres of fenitrothion has already been distributed through the RLPB system. This alone is enough to cover roughly 30,000 hectares on a ratio of 3.7:2.4 litres. There are 100 boomless jets to help landholders supply ground control insecticide more evenly and more than one dozen misters to assist with ground control. A fleet of helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft are available to survey and apply locust insecticide from the air. Mobile depots—I mentioned before that I launched them last week in Molong, Forbes and Dubbo—are already operating where required to facilitate insecticide distribution to landholders and are visiting areas where farmers are reporting significant locust hatching. Put simply, the Government has done everything in its power to ensure an unprecedented level of preparation and response to one of the worst locust plagues on record, and the farmers and the RLPBs agree.

The Hon. MICHAEL EGAN: If honourable members have further questions, I suggest they put them on notice.

RAIL SYSTEM ASBESTOS DUST

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Earlier today in question time I was asked by the Leader of the Opposition about the removal of asbestos from railway tunnels. I can inform the House that WorkCover is aware of the current asbestos removal work being undertaken between Bondi Junction and Edgecliff on the Eastern Suburbs railway and of the concerns raised in relation to that work by the Rail, Tram and Bus Union. WorkCover has confirmed that the company undertaking the asbestos removal work is licensed, had notified WorkCover of the intended work and had engaged the services of appropriate environmental monitors for the work.

I further inform the House that WorkCover has reviewed the company's safe work method statements and is satisfied with the working procedures in place. WorkCover has also advised me that a meeting was held yesterday between representatives of the licensed asbestos removalist undertaking the work, the State Rail Authority and the Rail, Tram and Bus Union. I am advised that all parties are satisfied with the outcomes of the meeting and that WorkCover's further involvement at the site is not required at this stage. WorkCover will, however, continue to maintain a close watch on work at the site to ensure that the safety of workers and passengers is not compromised.

KARIONG JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTRE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Earlier today in question time the Hon. Catherine Cusack asked me a question about a potential WorkCover prosecution of the Department of Juvenile Justice in respect of incidents at the Kariong Juvenile Justice Centre. WorkCover has advised that charges under section 8 (1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act against the Department of Juvenile Justice were filed yesterday, 18 October, in the Industrial Relations Commission. These relate to incidents at the centre on 20 October 2002 and 15 November 2002. As the matter is before the court I am not prepared to make any further comments.

DEFERRED ANSWERS

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

POLITICAL ACTIVISM IN SCHOOLS

On 31 August the Hon. David Oldfield asked the Minister for Community Services, representing the Minister for Education and Training, a question without notice regarding political activism in schools. The Acting Minister for Education and Training provided the following response:

The Department of Education and Training has specific policies in place which clearly state that information of a political nature should not be distributed to students by teachers or other school staff during school hours.

JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE INTO THE TRANSPORTATION AND STORAGE OF NUCLEAR WASTE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO REPORT

On 1 September Mr Ian Cohen asked the Treasurer, representing the Premier, a question without notice regarding the Joint Select Committee into the Transportation and Storage of Nuclear Waste Government response to report. The Premier provided the following response:

The Premier wrote to the Prime Minister in May 2004 expressing the New South Wales Government's opposition to the transport of nuclear waste and the establishment of a storage facility within this State. The Premier also forwarded the Report of the Joint Select Committee. On 6 August 2004, the Federal Minister for Science, the Hon Peter McGauran MP, replied to this letter on behalf of the Prime Minister. The Premier has asked that a copy of the letter be tabled. The response provided no new information or commitment to an open process with adequate consultation.

The Government will provide a comprehensive response to the Report of the New South Wales Inquiry into the Transportation and Storage of Nuclear Waste. The matter is being assessed, and will go to Cabinet for whole-of-government consideration.

Recommendation 22 of the Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry's report suggests that the New South Wales Government should amend legislation (the Uranium Mining and Nuclear Facilities (Prohibitions) Act 1986). This will be considered, with the other Inquiry recommendations.

A copy of the letter dated 6 August 2004 from the Federal Minister for Science, the Hon Peter McGauran MP, to the Premier, is available at the LC Procedures office.

PORT MACQUARIE BASE HOSPITAL

On 1 September the Hon. Melinda Pavey asked the Special Minister of State, representing the Minister for Health, a question without notice regarding the Port Macquarie Base Hospital. The Minister for Health provided the following response:

Mayne Group Limited has agreed to transfer its hospitals throughout Australia and Indonesia to Affinity Health Pty Limited. This transfer includes Port Macquarie Base Hospital.

Under a Services Agreement entered into between Mayne and the Health Administration Corporation in 1994, Mayne is required to seek the consent of the Corporation to the transfer of the Hospital's operation to another party such as Affinity.

The Health Administration Corporation has commenced legal proceedings against Mayne Group Limited and Affinity Health Pty Limited in regard to the management of Port Macquarie Base Hospital.

Notwithstanding the commencement of legal proceedings, the NSW Government expects that Mayne Health and the Mid North Coast Area Health Service will ensure that there is no change to the delivery of health services to the Port Macquarie community.

Given that this matter is now the subject of legal proceedings further comment at this time is not appropriate.

PUBLIC SCHOOLS ASBESTOS REMOVAL

On 1 September the Hon. Dr Peter Wong asked the Minister for Community Services, representing the Minister for Education and Training, a question without notice regarding public schools asbestos removal. The Acting Minister for Education and Training provided the following response:

The Department of Education and Training maintains records specific to each site concerning works undertaken in schools which involve asbestos material.

The removal of asbestos and asbestos containing materials from public schools in the 1980s was part of a whole of government statewide program coordinated by the Department of Commerce. Any information available to the Department of Education and Training was the same as that provided to all government agencies.

The Department is a participant in the NSW Treasury Managed Fund. The Fund provides liability coverage in relation to all of the Department's activities.

CRIME STATISTICS

On 1 September the Hon. Peter Breen asked the Minister for Justice, representing the Attorney General, a question without notice regarding crime statistics. The Attorney General provided the following response:

The Director of the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research advises that the Bureau subjects the monthly figures in each offence category to a statistical test. This is designed to see whether the pattern of recorded offences over the 24-month period covered by the test represents normal statistical variation. If the answer is 'yes' the trend is described as 'stable'. If the answer is 'no' the percentage change between the first and second 12-month periods is used to gauge the size and direction of the change.

The Director advises that a decision was made by the Bureau to exclude drug crimes from the quarterly report because recorded incidents of these offences do not reliably represent trends in drug offending, they are more strongly variable in response to particular police operations.

Because of the way traffic data is collected by the police, it is not possible to report indictable traffic offences on a quarterly basis.

FIREARMS LICENCE APPLICATIONS

On 2 September the Hon. David Oldfield asked the Minister for Justice, representing the Minister for Police, a question without notice regarding firearms licence applications. The Minister for Police provided the following response:

I have responded to the Honourable Member's letter.

DARLING HARBOUR ZOO PROPOSAL

On 15 September the Hon. John Tingle asked the Minister for Transport Services, representing the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, a question without notice regarding the Darling Harbour zoo proposal. The Minister for Infrastructure and Planning provided the following response:

All issues relating to animal welfare at the Australia's Animal World exhibit at Darling Harbour have been the subject of independent examination by the Exhibited Animals Advisory Committee, which is convened by NSW Agriculture.

POLITICAL ACTIVISM IN SCHOOLS

On 21 September the Hon. David Oldfield asked the Minister for Community Services, representing the Minister for Education and Training, a question without notice regarding political activism in schools. The Acting Minister for Education and Training provided the following response:

BINNAWAY TO GWABEGAR RAIL LINE CLOSURE

On 15 September 2004 the Hon. Rick Colless asked the Minister for Transport Services a question without notice regarding rail secured for the upcoming grain harvest. The Minister provided the following response:

I refer the Member to my public statement of 16 September 2004.

RAIL SYSTEM ASBESTOS DUST

On 21 September 2004 the Hon. Dr Peter Wong asked the Minister for Transport Services, a question without notice regarding the City Circle tunnel. The Minister provided the following response:

I am advised by RailCorp:

The current brake shoes (blocks and pads) used by RailCorp do not have asbestos in them, and have not contained asbestos since 1983.

HASTINGS EARLY INTERVENTION PROGRAM FUNDING

On 15 September 2004 the Hon. Melinda Pavey asked the Minister for Community Services a question without notice regarding the Hastings Early Intervention Program in Port Macquarie. The Minister provided the following response:

The Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care has adjusted the funding for Hastings Early Intervention Service to reflect the approved level. The service received supplementary funding in 2003/04 under the Government’s package of support to non-government organisations that employ staff under the Social and Community Services Award. The supplementary funding was made available to assist non-government organisations meet the costs of a new Award.

As the Hastings Early Intervention Service does not employ staff under the Social and Community Services Award it was ineligible to receive the supplementation and its funding has been adjusted for 2004/05.

The service has not been required to make any repayments to the Department. All funded services also receive annual indexation payments to assist them to meet rising costs. These included 2.2% in 2001/02, 3.1% in 2002/03, and 2.66% last year.

LIFESTART SCHOOL AGE SERVICES PROGRAM FUNDING

On 21 September the Hon. John Ryan asked the Minister for Community Services a question without notice regarding funding for the Lifestart School Age Services Program. The Minister provided the following response:

1. Funding applications of this kind are not determined by the Minister.

2. I am advised that Lifestart requested funding from the Department's Metro North Region in 2002 but no funding was available at that time. In 2003/04 Lifestart self funded and delivered a School Age Service in the Metro North Region. Lifestart applied for funding from the Region in June 2004. While the Department supports the achievements of Lifestart, there is no additional funding available in the 2004/05 financial year, and the Department has communicated this to the Lifestart Board.

3. During 2003/04, the Department provided in excess of $1.6 million to Lifestart for the provision of early intervention services across several metropolitan regions including the Metro North Region.

BIKIE GANGS

On 14 September 2004 the Hon. John Tingle asked the Minister for Justice a question without notice regarding bikie gangs. The Minister for Police provided the following response:

NSW Police advise that it has no information that the Nomads outlaw motor cycle gang (OMCG) is expanding its operations within New South Wales.

NSW Police can confirm that since 2003, the number of Nomads chapters in NSW has decreased by one with the closure of the Nambucca Heads chapter.

NSW Police can also confirm that there was an incident on 12 September 2004, at which two people were shot and others injured. NSW Police investigations are continuing.

NSW Police will continue to respond to acts of violence involving the Nomads or any other OMCGs. The State Crime Command—Gangs Squad has dedicated resources to assist with such law enforcement action.

CENTRAL COAST RESIDENTIAL PARK RESIDENTS

On 14 September 2004, Ms Sylvia Hale asked the Special Minister for State and Minister for the Central Coast a question without notice regarding Central Coast residential park residents. The following response was provided by the Minister Assisting the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning (Planning Administration):

With substantial assistance from DIPNR, Gosford Council prepared a Local Environmental Plan (LEP) to protect caravan and residential home parks from redevelopment. This LEP was gazetted on 27 February 2004.

Those provisions have now withstood the scrutiny of the Court as Gosford Council was successful in defending an appeal to redevelop a Central Coast caravan park [Baker v Gosford City Council (No 2) [2004] NSWLEC 467 (25 August 2004)].

The LEP now has potential to be used as a model LEP for other council areas where residential parks are under threat from redevelopment.

• The Government shares the concerns of residents facing possible closure of their park and remains firmly committed to protecting the rights of its vulnerable and elderly citizens who reside in residential parks.

• The Residential Parks Act is currently under review and a report will be tabled in Parliament in December.

• The Review commenced late last year with preliminary consultation with park resident and park owners groups.

• A discussion paper was released in June 2004 with submissions closing on 16 August 2004.

• The paper invited comment on many aspects of the laws applying to park living including:

• information disclosed to residents when they move in,
• rent increases,
• electricity, water and gas services,
• sale of homes on-site,
• termination of tenancies and rights to compensation,
• liaison committees, park rules, dispute resolution and
• access to parks by emergency services.
• Over 250 individual submissions have been received, including one from the Honourable Member.

• The submissions are currently being assessed and a report will be tabled in Parliament by 8 December 2004.

• I would like to remind the House that the Act currently provides that the owner must give at least 6 months written notice should the park owner seek to obtain possession of sites from residents for the purpose of changing the use of the park.

• A park resident is not required to vacate on receiving notice and may remain in occupation until the issue has been considered by the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. The park owner must substantiate the case in the Tribunal.

• Should the Tribunal decide to award possession of the site to the park owner, the resident is entitled to compensation to assist in relocation—this may be awarded up front by the CTTT.

• The Tribunal may also delay the effect of an order to vacate and may allow a substantial period of time for the resident to make other arrangements.

Questions without notice concluded.

RETAIL LEASES AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Ms SYLVIA HALE [5.04 p.m.]: As I was saying, the Greens note that the Government has been silent about the scenario that some of the larger chain stores that lease premises in retail shopping centres may be larger than the shopping centre operators. It is possible that in those circumstances lessees will have the upper hand in any negotiations. The Greens note that the Government has been silent about that and has painted the bill solely as an attempt to create a fair environment for small businesses. The second reading speech of the Minister for Rural Affairs, Minister for Local Government, Minister for Emergency Services, and Minister for Lands focused exclusively on easing the burden on small- to medium-size retailers, but chains such as Starbucks, Flight Centre and Dick Smith, while a ubiquitous part of suburban shopping centres, can hardly be described as small retailers in need of greater protection.

The Greens also note the concerns of the Law Society of New South Wales—namely, that the legislation has been poorly worded and could lead to disputes between lessees and lessors regarding what constitutes a normal lease expense and what constitutes an exception. The legislation should be monitored after these amendments are made in order to ascertain their impact and to ensure that they do not increase the number of disputes. The Greens support any move that offers greater assistance to small business over big business, and therefore we do not oppose the bill.

The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS [5.06 p.m.]: The Australian Democrats support the Retail Leases Amendment Bill. The national competition policy review of the Retail Leases Act 1994 in Victoria, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory has led those jurisdictions to place similar provisions in their legislation. The level playing field argument with regard to competition policy holds water as these States and Territories have borders with New South Wales. There are also direct cross-border commercial links between Albury and Wodonga, Tweed Heads and Coolangatta and Canberra and Queanbeyan.

The Shopping Centre Council of Australia [SCCA] opposes the bill, which is understandable. The council represents the interests of major owners and managers of shopping centres. It is also domiciled with and closely aligned to the Property Council of Australia, which is an advocacy group for major property owners. The "corporate leaders"—as they are called in the Property Council—are also members of the SCCA. The Property Council's web site says that the corporate leaders have "committed themselves to resourcing the Property Council advocacy program". The SCCA includes well-known corporate entities such as Westfield, AMP, Jones Lang LaSalle, Lend Lease and Mirvac. Interestingly, the letter from the SCCA referred to the small landlords in suburban shopping strips and country towns who would be badly affected by this bill. One can see this only as an attempt to gain credibility for its cause, which is to look after the major shopping centre owners who are also corporate leaders. The letter also refers to some retail tenants from large retail chains, such as Just Jeans or Portmans, who are "larger and much better resourced than their landlords." But it is a bit much to suggest that these chains have a huge competitive advantage over Westfield or Lend Lease. That is a curious suggestion indeed.

The position of the Law Society of New South Wales starts from the premise that lessors will recoup the costs of lease preparation by including this in the calculation of rent. That is a logical assumption. It is concerned that any change to the present costs regime does not have the effect of creating more areas of dispute or delaying the time taken for the preparation of leases. The Law Society says that the new definition for "lease preparation expenses" needs to have added to it "and stamp duty payable under the Duties Act 1997", as this is not clearly stated in the definition but is implied to be the case.

I do not know whether there is an amendment to that effect. I ask the Minister to clarify that matter in reply. Where there are amendments to a lease under section 14 (4) the prospective lessee will be liable to pay a "reasonable sum" for certain exemptions. The concern of the society is that where an exemption is applicable it may lead to disputes, and therefore delays. The Law Society would prefer to have no change, as is the case in Western Australia; each party to pay its own costs, as in the Australian Capital Territory; or each party to pay a proportion of the costs, as in South Australia, which is at 50:50.

It could also be argued that this bill makes the process less transparent, because the costs of preparing the lease will be buried in the rent charged. The fairest scheme in the circumstances would be for each party to bear its own costs, as is the case in the Australian Capital Territory. In this case if either party does not proceed after lease negotiations the costs are evenly shared. The principle that the landlord should pay for the preparation of the lease is fine when it is applied to parties with unequal bargaining power, like Westfield and a small retailer in a shopping centre. However, it does not translate when referring to a landlord who has one shop and lives above it. In an ideal world the party best able to bear the costs should do so, but such a scheme would be difficult to devise and more difficult to implement. This bill, however, is reasonable. There should be clearer definitions so that lease negotiations do not become bogged down in technical arguments as to who pays for what, and some of the Law Society's suggested amendments assist in that regard. I will give qualified support for the bill, and I hope that the Minister in reply will clarify the issue to which I referred.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG [Parliamentary Secretary] [5.12 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions, and I commend the bill to the House.

In Committee

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG [Parliamentary Secretary] [5.13 p.m.]: I move Government amendment No. 1:

No. 1 Page 6, schedule 1 [11], line 8. Omit "of a retail shop lease".

The Government has introduced amendments to remove any possible ambiguity relating to the transitional provisions. This amendment will make it clear that the new provisions of this bill will apply to all renewals and extensions of retail leases to take effect after the legislation commences. The bill does not affect the granting, renewal or extension of a retail lease made before the legislation comes into effect. I commend this amendment to the Committee.

Amendment agreed to.

Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported from Committee with an amendment and report adopted.

Third reading ordered to stand as an order of the day.

ADJOURNMENT

The Hon. HENRY TSANG [Parliamentary Secretary] [5.16 p.m.]: I move:

CANOBOLAS POLICE LOCAL AREA COMMAND PRESENTATION CEREMONY

BALLINA TRUST MEMBERS AWARDS

The Hon. AMANDA FAZIO [5.16 p.m.]: On Friday 1 October I had the pleasure of representing the Minister for Police, John Watkins, at the Canobolas Local Area Command [LAC] presentation ceremony. Also present were the Commissioner of Police, Mr Ken Moroney; Superintendent McKechnie, Canobolas Local Area Command; Chief Superintendent Australia; Acting Region Commander Single from the Western Region; Inspector Pringle from the Canobolas LAC; Inspector Dominello from the Canobolas LAC; Peter Hetherington, Deputy Mayor of Orange City Council; Russell Turner, the honourable member for Orange; and Bruce Miller, Mayor of Cowra Shire Council.

It was great to see that family members, wives, husbands and children were so proud of the contribution of the officers who were acknowledged at the presentation. So often we forget that without strong family support the work of police men and women of this State would be much more difficult. The commissioner recognised the importance of this support. Present and former police officers who received national and NSW Police medals for 15 years service were Sergeant Nicholas Hallett, from Cowra; Sergeant Troy Klower, Orange; Sergeant Paul Macartney, Orange; Leading Senior Constable Martin McLean, Molong; Leading Senior Constable Grant Terry, Cowra; Senior Constable Tim Arantz, Orange; Senior Constable Nigel Mangelsdorf, Canowindra; Senior Constable Gregory Treavors, Cudal; and Senior Constable Scott Vickary, Cowra.

Former Detective Senior Constable Darren Lang received a NSW Police medal for 15 years service. Sergeant Garry Shiels from Orange received a NSW Police medal for 20 years service. NSW Police medals for 15 years service were received by Leading Senior Constable Amanda Beatty, Orange; Senior Constable Kevin Beatty, Orange; Senior Constable Alison Hodge, Orange; Senior Constable John Newton, Cowra; and Senior Constable Lynn Stone, Cowra. NSW Police medals for 10 years service were received by Inspector Paul Dominello, Cowra; Sergeant Jason Puxty, Orange; Leading Senior Constable Steven Foster, Orange; and Senior Constable Anthony Stelling from Orange.

The Regional Commander's Commendation certificate went to probationary Constable Beau Riley from the Orange police, who has one year's service. Ceremonies like the one I attended are important because they give the community an opportunity to thank serving and former police for what they do and who they are. Policing is a tough, dangerous profession that requires determined, vigilant and compassionate people. These medals are given in recognition of the outstanding commitment, professionalism and diligent policing displayed by officers, and of the long and distinguished service that so many members of NSW Police have achieved. Recipients of the medals should be very proud that their outstanding efforts have been acknowledged by these awards, which demonstrate to both the community and to members of NSW Police the exemplary work they and their colleagues have undertaken. On behalf of the Minister I was pleased to be able to congratulate the officers on their awards and achievements as members of NSW Police.

Last week, on Wednesday 13 October, I had the pleasure of representing the Minister for Lands, the Hon. Tony Kelly, at the presentation of certificates for long-serving trust members in the Ballina area. Again, it was great to see that spouses, children and, in some cases, grandchildren of the trust members were present to see their family members honoured, and to share morning tea with representatives from the Department of Lands. Certificates were awarded to recognise the many years of enthusiasm, dedication and hard work of trust members. There are about 900 community trusts in New South Wales, managing Crown reserves. They encompass a diverse range of facilities and public spaces, from beaches and showgrounds to lighthouses and caravan parks. Certificates were awarded to members of Booyong Public Recreation and Preservation of Native Flora Reserve Trust, including Ernest Anton Fiedler, who received a certificate for 42 years service. Mr Fiedler, who is 90 years old, was unable to attend, and was represented by his son, Ernest Barry Fiedler, who received a certificate for 20 years service. Certificates were awarded also to Keith William Morrow for 23 years service, Ian Kirkland for 12 years service, Arthur Lloyd Napper for 41 years service, and Rowan Burnett Trimble for 12 years service.

From the Tintenbar Recreation Reserve Trust, certificates were awarded to Ronald Victor Warburton for 24 years service, Desmond John Healy for 24 years service, Michael Joseph Murphy for 27 years service and Norman Elwyn Parry for 27 years service. From the Meerschaum Vale Public Hall Reserve Trust certificates were awarded to Lesley Frances Cordry for 14 years service, Marion Gladys Jackson for 26 years service, Barry Thomas Johnson for 24 years service, Rodney Stewart Outerbridge for 12 years service and Vicki Nola Outerbridge for 12 years service. From the Rous Mill Recreation Reserve Trust a certificate was awarded to William Albert George Robb for 46 years service.

From the Mullumbimby Hospital Site Trust certificates were awarded to William Henry James for 31 years service and Ronald Gray for 20 years service. From the Ellangowan Public Hall Trust certificates were awarded to Joan Patricia Reid for 25 years service and Kenneth Edward Cole for 16 years service. From the Tabulam Racecourse Trust certificates were awarded to Allen Dudley Bell for 11 years service, Errol Lindsay O'Driscoll for 38 years service and Patrick Anthony Cosgrove for 10 years service. On behalf of the New South Wales Government and the people of New South Wales I was proud to thank the trust members for their wonderful efforts on behalf of rural communities.

MARRIAGE LAWS

The Hon. DAVID CLARKE [5.21 p.m.]: The recent passage of legislation in the Federal Parliament enshrining marriage between a man and woman and excluding homosexual relationships is a great victory for the institution of marriage, the preservation of marriage, the sanctity of marriage and the wellbeing of our nation. It is a fitting response to the same-sex marriage lobby, which has been given more credence by some than its numbers and cause deserve and warrant. Marriage is universally and overwhelmingly understood to be a relationship between a man and a woman, and certainly not one between people of the same gender. This is what marriage has been understood to mean by all cultures, civilisations, societies, nationalities and religions since the beginning of recorded history. Marriage is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as "the legal union of a man and a woman in order to live together and often to have children" and "an act or ceremony establishing this union".

Traditional marriage is not something that is created by man-made law: it is a fundamental human institution created by the natural law. Marriage predates man-made laws and constitutions. It is an anthropological reality as well as a sociological reality. Laws relating to marriage merely recognise and regulate an institution that has existed for thousands of years. Our society will never accept same-sex relationships as a valid form of marriage, despite its purveyors trying to convince us otherwise and despite a few judges who, given half a chance, would cunningly misuse their judicial power in an endeavour to classify same-sex relationships as a form of marriage. Traditional marriage should hold a privileged place in public policy, and this Parliament should ensure that it stands always in an important and pivotal position. It is a public institution because it brings men and women together in a unique human relationship, including for the procreation of the human race. It provides an institution in which children can best be raised to maturity and adulthood.

Traditional marriage must be in a privileged and enshrined position for a whole variety of reasons. Numerous scientific studies establish beyond doubt that it creates the strongest foundations for the family, which is a fundamental anchor of our society. It is through traditional marriage that our society and nation are renewed. It provides the best environment for raising children. There is no evidence that children benefit from being raised in homosexual households. In fact, the evidence is that it is detrimental. Evidence shows that children raised by their biological married parents are far less likely to be abused or neglected than those raised in homosexual households. They are less likely to be prone to substance abuse and delinquency, and they are more likely to achieve academically. The evidence shows that same-sex relationships are far more susceptible to being unstable and more violent than traditional households. Those in homosexual relationships face a greater risk of overall health problems, suicide and attempted suicide. Studies show a far higher rate of sexual molestation of children in homosexual households than in heterosexual households.

According to the highly respected American Sociological Review, children raised in homosexual households are more likely to experience gender and sexual disorders. The truth is that the ideal environment for the raising of children is a household with a mother and father. Each parent will contribute to the children's development in a way that cannot be replicated. Both parents exercise a separate and unique social and biological influence on their children. The enshrining by the Federal Parliament of traditional marriage and the rejection of homosexual relationships as a valid marriage reflects the overwhelming view of the Australian people. Same-sex marriage overseas has been legalised only when parliaments have acted without approval through referendum of the electorate or through a few mischievous judges who have dishonestly misinterpreted marriage statutes to extend their meaning to include same-sex unions. In the United States, 38 States so far have rejected same-sex marriage, very often as a result of overwhelming voter direction by referendum. I hope that this Parliament always will exalt traditional marriage and reject any moves that serve to undermine marriage through the promotion by stealth or otherwise of same-sex unions.

INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR TOLERANCE

The Hon. PETER BREEN [5.26 p.m.]: I am pleased to follow the Hon. David Clarke in the adjournment debate. I am one of eight children and one of my siblings is homosexual. He has been in the same stable relationship for 25 years, and his relationship has been much more stable and much more successful than the relationships of the seven heterosexual members of the family. I am also reminded that on 16 November the international community celebrates the International Day for Tolerance. The day developed from the 1995 United Nations Year for Tolerance, when a worldwide campaign for tolerance and non-violence was launched. I take this opportunity to express my understanding of tolerance and how I believe it helps all of us to prosper in a culturally diverse society. Australia is the most culturally diverse country in the world, and ours is the model the rest of the world regards as the tolerance benchmark. I am inclined to the view that the two most likely areas of intolerance between human beings are religion and race. It is fair to say that one of the positive aspects of globalisation is an emerging standard or level of tolerance, a human being is entitled to expect.

A person has the right to participate in society on an equal footing with others and to enjoy a certain basic respect and a sense of security as a fellow human being. This basic entitlement to tolerance is recognised widely between different racial and religious groups, and we see it operating every day at all levels of society in Australia. Religious rather than racial tolerance is perhaps more difficult to achieve between different groups of people. I say that on the basis that none of the monotheistic traditions regard religious tolerance as a virtue. It can be said of many religious groups that tolerance is judged to be a vice. I refer to the dogmatic and fundamentalist elements of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, all of which identify tolerance with a lack of faith. The irony, of course, is that all of us who belong to the monotheistic tradition are descendants of the Prophet Abraham. If God had wanted us to embrace only one religion all of us would belong to the Jewish faith.

I find it difficult to avoid the possibility of different revelations of the same truth about the transcendent God. Jewish holy books are replete with the insights of the prophets. The Prophet Mohammed left us the words he was given in the Holy Koran, and the New Testament is the authentic recording of the teachings of Jesus. Tolerance in the monotheistic tradition demands an acceptance on some level that Judaism, Christianity and Islam reflect different aspects of the same truth about the transcendent God. Tolerance also recognises different forms of belief within the monotheistic tradition. For example, one could not deny a person's Christianity because that person does not accept the authority of the Pope. Others claim to be Christians and do good work yet they promote extraordinary theological concepts about Jesus. In the same vein the Islamic religious leader who declares the validity of a certain doctrine about martyrdom does so in his name and not in the name of other Muslims. The teachings of Islam do not condone or reward violence despite assertions to the contrary by those with a vested interest in denigrating minority religious groups for base political purposes.

Tolerance does not require a person to give up their own belief; on the contrary, a truly tolerant person has strong and unshakeable beliefs of his or her own while at the same time accommodating, and even accepting, contrary beliefs. There is genuine tolerance only when a person is firmly and absolutely convinced of the truth, or of what he or she holds to be the truth, and at the same time the person recognises the right of those who deny this truth to exist, to contradict, to speak their own mind, and to continue the search for truth in their own way. A tolerant person is not someone who gives something away by recognising and respecting the beliefs of others. Tolerance is really the natural consequence of contemplating what Swiss theologian Hans Kung called the totally other: the further we reach into the unknown and the unknowable, the more we discover that God comes out to meet us, in a thousand different ways. I think it was the author, Joseph Campbell, who described God as the hero with a thousand faces. I commend to the House the International Day for Tolerance on 16 November.

CROOKWELL II WIND FARM

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [5.31 p.m.]: Tonight I wish to highlight my concerns regarding a farming family in the Crookwell district, the Dooleys, and the effect that the proposed Crookwell II wind farm will have upon their way of life and its impact upon their property, Elmgrove, which was settled by their ancestors in 1840. I do not make these comments as criticism of the Prell and Seaman families who have signed up to have wind turbines built on their properties: Both families are of extremely high calibre and are well respected within Crookwell district by me and people who live in the area. Held in equally high regard is Mr David Hannan, whose family owns grazing property at Rosslyn, alongside Crookwell II. Mr Hannan was reported in the Land on Thursday 14 October as saying that the environmental impact assessment process for Crookwell II deliberately excluded people who had not signed up to host potential wind turbine licence sites. The purpose of my speech is not to enter into a debate between the advocates and objectors involved in the Crookwell II wind farm but, rather, to highlight the considerable injustice that is being caused to a family that is located smack bang in the middle of the proposed Crookwell II wind farm.

It is a situation very much like that in The Castle or David and Goliath. The Dooley family is being affected by a large development that will make their home as well as their farming life unbearable. Just like Darryl Kerrigan in The Castle, the situation facing the Dooley family has cast them in the role of the underdog as they battle against the intertwined cabal of government and big business. Should Crookwell II go ahead, the Dooley's family property, Elmgrove, effectively will be surrounded on all four points of the compass by wind turbines that are located on the proposed Crookwell II wind farm and the existing Wharekaroi wind farm. Col Dooley compares the sound of the existing eight wind turbines on a windy day to "a stock crate on a gravel road, with its decks down". Should an additional 20 much larger turbines be built along the ridges overlooking Elmgrove, the additional noise will be even more relentless and excruciating.

Various members of the Dooley family have resided in the Crookwell district for over 100 years. The family does not want to sell the property; but if they did, the height, location and spatial distribution of the proposed turbines on the Crookwell II farm will have a detrimental effect on the marketability of their property. Unlike their neighbours, they have not been approached by industry developers to have turbines placed on their property. That means the Dooleys will not be receiving any compensation for what will be a substantial effect upon the operation of their farm and the quality of their lifestyle. Moreover, the number, height, location and spatial distribution of wind turbines of the proposed Crookwell II wind farm, combined with the existing Wharekaroi wind turbines, will prevent the effective use of aerial firefighting support within the Elmgrove area, the control of noxious weeds by aerial measures, and the aerial application of superphosphate fertilisers.

The Dooleys have a very real concern that insufficient research has been conducted into the possible serious damage to their health and the health of their livestock from geomagnetic and radioactive side-effects from the wind turbines. I make it very clear that I support wind farms. They have the potential to make a significant contribution to the Federal Government's mandatory renewable energy target of 2 per cent of the nation's electricity being derived from renewable sources by 2010. While there are many economic and environmental benefits that may be derived from the Crookwell II wind farm, it is imperative that industry and government improve planning and community consultation to ensure that renewable energy projects are successful.

I am pleased to advise the House that the upper Lachlan Shire Council decided unanimously to ask the New South Wales Government to hold a commission of inquiry into the whole concept of large-scale wind farms. I certainly hope that such an inquiry will be established and will go a long way toward addressing the considerable problems that are facing the Dooley family as a result of the Crookwell II wind farm development. It is unacceptable that a development of such State significance should go ahead without complete assessment. [Time expired.]

AUSTRALIAN COALITION FOR DEMOCRACY IN BURMA

The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS [5.36 p.m.]: I am pleased to inform the House that on 16 September this year, in the presence of the President of the Legislative Council, the Hon. Dr Meredith Burgmann, U Tin Htut, who is the National League for Democracy MP in exile, and Dr Myint Cho, among other guests and friends of Burma, I had the honour of being the charter president at the launch of the Australian Coalition for Democracy in Burma, which was formed on 27 July 2004. The official launch was held on 16 September because that is the anniversary of the National League for Democracy's election victory. The objects of the Australian Coalition for Democracy in Burma are to inform the Australian people about the developments in Burma, to promote friendship between the people of Australia and the people of Burma, to promote organisations in Burma that advocate democracy, gender equality, racial equality and human rights, and to help the convening of the democratically elected Burmese Parliament of 1990.

The Australian Coalition for Democracy in Burma especially wishes to convince parliamentarians and decision makers about the legitimacy of the Committee Representing the People's Parliament [CRPP], which consists of representatives of the National League for Democracy outside Burma. The leader of the National League for Democracy, Aung San Suu Kyi, is a household name in Australia. The appalling treatment of her—a person who is a hero among her own people—is a disgrace. During the launch, the representative of the National League for Democracy, U Tin Htut, referred to the situation in Burma. In Australia, people take democracy for granted. Although our system is not perfect, at least we are able to get rid of a government when that is necessary. Australians are not confronted with problems that exist in Burma where there is real oppression by the illegitimate government that effectively has stolen the wealth of the country and enslaved the people.

Australia is in the process of taking democracy to Iraq, but has ignored a legitimate government that has been forced into exile by an illegitimate regime in Burma. The State Peace and Development Council, the name of the former State Law and Order Restoration Council, is the junta that controls power in Burma. To a large extent, Burma is run by both the Chinese mafia and the Japanese yakuza. The attitude of surrounding Asian countries is extremely important for Burma and it is vitally important for Australia to maintain its pressure on the Burmese regime and the illegitimate junta that currently holds power. Recent events that have caused concern include Japanese monks being sentenced to three years imprisonment for allegedly, according to the regime, breaking the rules. If the monks broke the rules, that is because the rules are incredibly restrictive and place much of Burma off limits.

The monks visited only major towns and were particularly interested in the monasteries. It is significant that the monks were targeted, as Japan is seen to support the current Burmese regime. The interpreters for the Japanese monks were also gaoled. Honourable members should write letters of protest to the Burmese Government, because pressure from other countries, and particularly from parliamentarians, may lead to its ceasing its appalling practices. Burma has eight major ethnic groups and more than 100 minor ethnic groups, many of which have their own languages, although Burmese is universal and widely spoken.

I ask all members of this Parliament to support the Burmese in their struggle for justice and to have the result of the legitimate 1990 election acknowledged. Presumably the junta thought it would win and simply ignored the results that did not suit it. It is up to Australia to be a long-term friend of the Burmese people. I ask all people associated with Parliament to support the Australian Coalition for Democracy in Burma.

FPA HEALTH FUNDING

The Hon. JAN BURNSWOODS [5.41 p.m.]: In June this year I spoke in the adjournment debate about a meeting I had recently had with FPA Health, formerly known as the Family Planning Association. At that time I pointed out that FPA Health was concerned that the invaluable services it had provided for a long time in this State, particularly in the areas of reproductive and sexual health services, were at risk. The reason for concern was the change made, relatively recently at that time, by the Commonwealth Government in transferring reproductive and sexual health funding from organisations that formerly received it directly, such as FPA Health, to the New South Wales Government. Following that meeting and my sharing their concern, I wrote to the Minister for Health, Morris Iemma, as did other honourable members, and requested that meetings be held.

I am pleased to advise that following a meeting in late September this matter has been resolved. I have received a letter from FPA Health acknowledging the resolution of its concerns. The problem had arisen because while Commonwealth funding, plus indexation, was transferred to the New South Wales Government—a similar situation existed in every other State as well—a decision needed to be made so that FPA Health could continue to improve the reproductive and sexual health of women and men in New South Wales. Also, FPA Health wanted to participate in development by NSW Health of appropriate performance indicators. A meeting between NSW Health and FPA Health took place on 24 September and was attended by a wide range of relevant people. In part, the letter I received from Devora Lieberman, President of FPA Health, stated:

that is the Public Health Outcomes Funding Agreement—

Ms Lieberman wrote also about another problem that requires fairly urgent addressing, that is, the problem of the exorbitant professional indemnity insurance premiums�of course, FPA Health is not alone in that concern�and the way in which that rapid increase in insurance premiums has affected the services provided. Ms Lieberman wrote:

Obviously, it is a matter of considerable concern that this issue be resolved. Ms Lieberman has asked me, and other members I am sure, to talk to the Treasurer, the Hon. Michael Egan, about this matter. I will certainly do so. I endorse the remarks of Ms Lieberman and join in thanking, on behalf of FPA Health, the women and men of New South Wales, the clinic in Dubbo that provides a tremendously valuable function, Minister Iemma, the relevant people in NSW Health and honourable members who have taken up this important issue, for supporting the continued provision of high-level reproductive and sexual health care for the people of New South Wales. I add my personal commitment to having the ongoing problem of professional indemnity insurance premiums addressed.

Motion agreed to.

The House adjourned at 5.46 p.m. until Wednesday 20 October 2004 at 11.00 a.m.
_______________

Last modified 30/09/2008 09:26:00 : Update this page