The President (The Hon. Peter Thomas Primrose) took the chair at 11.00 a.m.

The President read the Prayers.

Bill received from the Legislative Assembly, and read a first time and ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Tony Kelly, on behalf of the Hon. John Hatzistergos.

Motion by the Hon. Tony Kelly agreed to:

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

Second reading ordered to stand as an order of the day for a later hour.

Message received from the Legislative Assembly returning the bill without amendment.

The President tabled, pursuant to the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, the annual report of the Independent Commission Against Corruption for the year ended 30 June 2008.

The President announced, pursuant to the Act, that it had been authorised that the report be made public.

Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Tony Kelly.

Motion by the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner agreed to:

That, under Standing Order 52, there be laid upon the table of the House within 14 days of the date of the passing of this resolution the following documents in the possession, custody or control of the Minister for Health, NSW Health, or the respective Area Health Services:

(a) the Annual Review of Root Cause Analysis 2007 and the Annual Review of Root Cause Analysis 2006 for the following Area Health Services:

(i) Northern Sydney/Central Coast Area Health Service,

(ii) Sydney West Area Health Service,

(iii) Sydney South West Area Health Service,

(iv) South Eastern Sydney and Illawarra Area Health Service,

(v) Greater Southern Area Health Service,

(vi) Greater Western Area Health Service,

(vii) Hunter New England Area Health Service,

(viii) North Coast Area Health Service, and

(b) any document which records or refers to the production of documents as a result of this order of the House.

The Hon. Christine Robertson, as Chair, tabled the report entitled "Review of the Exercise of the Functions of the Lifetime Care and Support Authority and the Lifetime Care and Support Advisory Council—First Report", together with transcripts of evidence, tabled documents, submissions, correspondence and answers to questions taken on notice, dated October 2008.

Report ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Christine Robertson.

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON [11.05 a.m.]: I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Christine Robertson and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

Petition opposing unjust retirement villages legislation threatening the wellbeing of thousands of older citizens by overriding existing contracts in requiring residents to meet up to 50 per cent of capital costs, received from the Hon. Catherine Cusack.

Private Members' Business item Nos. 5, 59, 93 and 108 outside the Order of Precedence withdrawn by Ms Lee Rhiannon.

Business of the House Notice of Motion No. 1 postponed on motion by the Hon. Duncan Gay.

The PRESIDENT: I inform the House that under section 6 (1) (d) of the Legislation Review Act 1987 I have received correspondence from the Hon. Roy Smith dated 29 October 2008 advising of his resignation from the Legislation Review Committee.

Dr JOHN KAYE [11.11 a.m.], by leave: On 23 October 2008 I inadvertently confused good and evil when I misled the House with respect to high-density and low-density lipids and their respective impacts on human health. I am grateful to the diligent staffer who politely pointed out my error. For the record and the information of members, bad cholesterols are low-density lipoproteins, LDLs, and good cholesterols are high-density lipoproteins, HDLs. The consumption of trans fats boosts the concentration of LDLs and decreases the concentration of HDLs. I am equally grateful to Marie Ficarra who, sympathetic to my sclerotic and incompetent memory, provided me with a mnemonic prescribed for students of medical science. For the benefit of other members who may be similarly afflicted, it goes thus:

While Lecherous Larry is Bad 4 u
It is Happy Harry which is Good 4 u

That is, LDLs are bad for you and HDLs are good for you. Beautiful things happen when poetry and science meet. I doubt whether I, or indeed other members, will make such a mistake again. I have requested that Hansard be amended accordingly.

Debate called on, and adjourned on motion by the Hon. Don Harwin.

Debate called on, and adjourned on motion by the Hon. Greg Donnelly.

Debate resumed from 25 September 2008.

Ms SYLVIA HALE [11.14 a.m.]: I support my colleague Ms Lee Rhiannon's Peak Oil Response Plan Bill, the object of which is to provide for the establishment of a peak oil task force to inquire into and report on the best strategies to mitigate the impact of peak oil, that is, to ensure that we plan so we are ready to face the coming reduction in supply. Members may think the recent easing of petrol prices means that all is well, the current argument being that speculation in oil futures has led to a boost in the price per barrel on international markets. Despite such price fluctuations, however, the price trend is upwards. Australia cannot escape its geology. Australia is not self-sufficient in oil supplies. We cannot produce enough to meet the demands of our current consumption.

Australia's domestic oil production was at its highest level in 2000. Currently, Australia produces about 70 per cent of what we consume; we import the other 30 per cent. Where does that 30 per cent come from? The answer, according to the March statistics released by the Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics, is Vietnam, 1445 megalitres; United Arab Emirates, 780 megalitres; Malaysia, 1310 megalitres; Indonesia, 743 megalitres; Papua New Guinea, 412 megalitres; New Zealand, 528 megalitres; Saudi Arabia, 14 megalitres; and Singapore, 183 megalitres. Other countries, principally Thailand and the Philippines, contribute 872 megalitres. But the problem confronting Australia and other oil importing countries is that exporter countries are reducing their exports or, like Indonesia, have become net importing countries.

Oil production has peaked in nine of the 11 countries that supply oil to Australia, and nine of the 11 supplier countries are experiencing declining exports. Papua New Guinea's production peaked in about 1993. Production in Vietnam, which supplies about 25 per cent of Australia's imported oil, peaked in 2004. Vietnam's exports to all countries peaked even earlier, in 2000. Malaysia, Australia's third-largest supplier, shows signs of slowing production, and its exports have declined slightly. Meanwhile, domestic consumption in Malaysia and Vietnam is rising steeply. But two of Australia's suppliers, United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, are maintaining or increasing oil exports. So for the foreseeable future Australia's oil imports from United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia may continue, at least until another buyer wants the oil more and is prepared to outbid Australia for it.

Between the last quarter of 2007 and March 2008 Saudi Arabia's exports to Australia dropped from 287 megalitres to 14 megalitres. At some point exports to Australia may decline because domestic consumption equals domestic production in the exporting country. The Federal Minister for Resources and Energy, Martin Ferguson, said on the ABC's 7.30 Report that Australia will be importing 80 per cent of its oil by 2015. By 2012—only four years away—it is anticipated that Australia will be importing 70 per cent of its oil needs, not 30 per cent as at present. The prospect facing Australia is that our ability to import oil will be seriously compromised at the same time as our domestic production slumps.

The Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics figures tell us that exploration activity has increased in Australia in the past three years, although large oilfields such as Bass Strait have been in decline for some time. Increasingly, domestic oil is coming from a multitude of smaller fields, but the projections are still that Australia's reliance on imports will rise. To slow things down, we could stop exporting Australian oil or convert more vehicles to natural gas and reduce exports of gas. This may keep cars on the road for a while longer but, of course, it would do nothing to address the problems of global warming. It would be a business as usual for as long as possible approach. But ultimately at some point, given rising global demand, Australia will hit an oil supply brick wall. We are already seeing symptoms of that.

We are ill prepared. Just how unprepared we are should be obvious. Witness the effect of even relatively small petrol price rises—the major parties resorting to populace petrol politicking; motorists grumbling at the bowser; more overcrowding on public transport; and traffic blocking queues at service stations offering cheap fuel, even at a loss to the service station owners. The Government cannot even seem to manage to build a new rail line—heavy or light rail. This task appears beyond the current Government even though governments managed to build hundreds of kilometres of rail and tram lines in the 1920s throughout the State and Australia.

This State simply does not have the infrastructure ready to cope with price rises, let alone a future of depleting oil resources. We are still investing heavily in motorways, subdividing farmland for low-density suburbs and more urban sprawl, and under-investing in rail and other forms of public transport. Our cities and towns are built on the assumption that people can take their personal motor vehicles out of the garage and drive wherever they want whenever they want. In the minds of many, the right to drive, no matter the environmental consequences, has become synonymous with the right to individual liberty. But the right to individual liberty is constrained by the needs of the broader society, and so it must be with the right to drive a motor vehicle powered by oil. Our current car-based lifestyle will inevitably run into the brick wall of a carbon-constrained future.

Despite arguments that increased oil prices were fuelled by speculation, what we do know is that the price of petrol is rising in the medium to long term. We also know that every prediction of a medium- or long-term drop in price has proven incorrect. Since mid-2002 the Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics [ABARE] has consistently under predicted the oil price. Its latest prediction for 2008-09 is $US82 a barrel. The good folk of ABARE must be living in a parallel universe given actual prices have been $US100 or above for most of this year, peaking at $US135 a barrel. My Federal colleague Greens Senator Christine Milne has taken ABARE to task over its woefully inaccurate predictions. We have failed to prepare ourselves for the oil crisis we now face. The predictions of Goldman Sachs analyst, Arjun Murti, and those of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil Australia have been more accurate than ABARE, even though people scoffed at them at the time.

Increased energy costs put pressure on the economy and households because we have built our entire suburban lives on the premise of cheap plentiful oil. Since World War II the uninterrupted supply of cheap, plentiful, burnable fossil fuels has underpinned our growth and the very form our cities and towns have taken. To illustrate just how deeply we hold the assumption that petrol should be, must be, cheap we now see motorists railing at the cost of petrol at about $1.65 a litre. The long commutes to work between their suburban homes and their workplaces and the drive to shops, sport fields and schools are now costing more. Some, where they can, are heading for the trains and buses; others will keep on driving and spending more because they have to, because of the type or location of their work or because of the lack of adequate and safe public transport options.

I note in this morning's Australian that Professor Peter Newman drew attention to the fact that the catastrophic decline in house prices in the United States of America has occurred in suburbs where people are obliged to spend more than an hour a day to get to their jobs. Those suburbs where the housing decline has been most dramatic are far distant and do not have appropriate public transport, so people are reliant on cars. Intervening to reduce the price of petrol is not the answer. It will stave off the inevitable. Forget slashing the fuel excise, as Brendan Nelson has suggested; forget slashing the GST component on petrol, as Wayne Swan has suggested; and forget the populist petrol politicking. What we should do is be honest and prepare the community for further price rises because any short term 3¢ or 5¢ a litre saving for motorists will be overwhelmed in the medium and long term by future price increases.

We must urgently rethink our approach and urban design. This State's rail system is pitiful. I am sure that all members who travel by rail in the morning have witnessed the attempts to close the doors before all people have boarded. Often people at Town Hall and Wynyard stations cannot board the train in the morning. It is amazing that people can manage to get on a train when it pulls in because it is so packed and unsafe. Sydney's rail network was built in the 1890s, even though it took about 100 years for the eastern suburbs railway line to open. Over the past decade, at a time when the Government should have been investing massively in rail infrastructure, the Government has instead shrunk the New South Wales rail system, closed both freight and passenger lines, and encouraged yet more trucks and cars onto our roads. Future generations will see this as a policy of almost criminal negligence. Even now the Government continues to stymie the rail network. Rail infrastructure is increasingly seen as too hard and too costly for the State Government to undertake.

It is deplorable that governments did so much for rail in the 1920s and have done so little since then. Our 1920s predecessors managed to build the underground City Circle line. In the 1920s Sydney had one of the most extensive tram networks in the world, second only to London. In 1860 it was in this Parliament House that the select committee recommended, and the Legislature gave the go-ahead, to Sydney's first tramline. In 1880 the Parliament legislated to construct tramways throughout Sydney and its suburbs. The trams were popular and, by 1925, carried millions of passengers a year. In 1945 there were 405 million journeys by passengers on our trams. In an extraordinary act of short-sighted public policy, trams were removed and, as suburbia expanded without adequate public transport, car usage increased. No longer in many outer suburban areas can you walk to a station or tram stop, or even to a bus stop. That is a catastrophic failure of our planning system for which we are about to pay heavily.

The Greens advocacy of sustainable development is driven by two intertwined issues—global warming and peak oil. Our planning system similarly should be driven by the need to respond to these two issues. What planning principles must we adopt? First, oil will still be available into the future, but its price will result in very expensive discretionary journeys by individuals in private motor vehicles. In the future we may need to consider rationing petrol and prioritising what we use it for. We will still have buses, trains, trams and bicycles, and legs to walk on. We need to build new infrastructure for a post peak oil world, and for a world struggling to cope with rising greenhouse gas emissions. The remaining fossil fuel and gas resources should not be frittered away. If shortages develop more quickly than anticipated we will need to prioritise the building of new infrastructure such as renewable energy generation plants and transport infrastructure that is not overwhelmingly reliant on fossil fuels. We will also need to preserve and expand farmland.

The Greens have spoken and I have spoken in this Chamber about the gross foolishness of allowing urban subdivision of high and medium grade arable land, carving up our food bowls for urban sprawl. But it seems that the Minister for Planning has absolutely no qualms about proposals from the Keith Johnson group—a significant donor to the Australian Labor Party—to convert the rich arable lands at Pitt Town into urban development. Of course, we see the same happening on the North Coast. Recently in Ballina at Alstonville Plateau I heard coffee growers and other farmers complain bitterly about the council's plan to subdivide some of the richest soil in Australia.

There are seven metres of topsoil and the proposal is to subdivide that land and make it available for residential housing. It is an example of extraordinary lunacy. It is culpably irresponsible at this time to sacrifice arable land to housing development because in a land as large as Australia, in a land with very poor soils compared with Europe, we need to preserve good grade farmland and reduce food transportation costs. Market gardeners supply food to the city. It is essential that we preserve the market gardens around Sydney as well as those around the State's other cities and towns.

We also need rail freight for our grain crops to bring them to the cities and ports. Rather than closing freight lines we should be expanding the network. Reaching a position where Pacific National can simply say to agricultural producers that it no longer intends to transport grain because freighting coal is so much more lucrative simply highlights the disastrous results of short-term policies. We should remember that we have a responsibility not only to ourselves but also to others. Australia is a net food exporter. With food prices rising internationally and hunger and starvation on the increase, Australia must maintain what farmland we have to feed people in Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

It is equally misguided to rely on biofuels. Biofuels are the new hydrogen. The energy required to produce the fuel is more than—or nearly as much as—the energy released from the ethanol produced. Biofuels need a lot of oil inputs. A car can be run on an ethanol blend or chip fat, but there is not enough ethanol or cooking oil around to run all the cars on all the roads. Biofuels cannot possibly take the place of oil unless we want to devote all of our farmland to biofuel crops and starve, or unless we can produce it from other sources such as algae. Even so, there is not enough land on earth to produce enough biofuel to maintain the oil consumption patterns of today.

In a nutshell, we need denser urban forms linked by rail—heavy rail between centres and trams for the shorter distances. Buses are in fact quite efficient between centres where they can travel in dedicated road lanes. Industrial areas should be serviced by rail freight and small transport vehicles. Professor Rob Adams, in The Age of 26 May 2008, discussed the sort of urban planning we need to be considering. He said:

At 200 people per hectare, Barcelona is one of the world's most dense, mixed-use cities, a place where you can walk locally to service all your needs. It has 40% open space made up of fine streets and public spaces that sustain a vibrant social and cultural life. Its perimeter blocks provide a clear definition between public and private space with inwardly oriented courtyards that allow its citizens to enjoy an inner tranquillity alongside the bustling city streets. Streets are well serviced by public transport. All of this vibrant life is contained within a uniform built-form of seven storeys, where every building has equal access to the most abundant renewable energy source, the sun. By simply converting the roofs of Barcelona to solar collectors you go 70% of the way to zero emissions. Given Barcelona is not a bad place to live, this suggests that sustainability is possible and not the "hair shirt" existence many of us may fear.

We need to examine the ideas of J. B. Crawford, author of The Carless City, and, closer to home, Adam Taceske's paper on the Leppington town centre and Michael Mobbs' sustainable housing proposals. I suggest that we need to confront peak oil straight on rather than mislead the Australian public that somehow prices will stay at their current level. They will not. Assembling a task force on peak oil is a prudent proposal and one that this House should support.

The Hon. IAN WEST [11.34 a.m.]: I speak against the Peak Oil Response Plan Bill. As members would be aware, the price of oil and petrol in Australia is a matter for the Federal Government. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission closely monitors petrol prices to help expose and limit the gouging by all oil companies. The current relatively high price for petrol is being driven by several factors, including the initial record increase in the cost of crude oil resulting from demand in developing nations such as China and low stock holdings.

However, before we despair that the world is running out of oil and we are facing an energy crisis, let me make a few points about some of the basic economics. If the demand for a resource such as oil increases there are price spikes. Energy companies invest to produce more oil to meet the demand, which results in an oversupply and the price of oil then drops. It is fairly basic economics. Astute members would be aware that oil has now dropped to around $US60 a barrel, again thanks to a decrease in demand and, according to International Energy Agency data in 2007, the average cost of crude oil was about $US72 a barrel. The price of oil had a first time ever peak at over $US100 a barrel in December 2007, representing an unprecedented 100 per cent increase since January 2007. In October 2007 Australia produced 444,000 barrels or 2,188 million litres per day. Of this, about 1,400 million litres was exported and a further 2,400 million litres was imported.

The trade in crude oil is governed by the make-up of a region's oil. Australia's crude oils have limited levels of the heavy fractions needed for lubricants and heavy fuels but are high in light fractions and are valued for petrol production. Hence Australia's crude oil is exported for a higher price—on average a $US5 per barrel premium. The cheaper heavy crude can be purchased from other regions to supply the full spectrum of products needed in Australia. Endeavours to reduce oil consumption are commendable and any reduction will reduce the community's greenhouse gas emissions.

The New South Wales Government is supporting the development of ultra clean coal technologies, which aim to produce high-purity cleaned coal that can be burnt directly in gas turbines and large stationary diesel engines and as a replacement for heavy fuel oil. Ultra clean coal-fired turbines and engines may potentially reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the generator by between 20 and 30 per cent. The technology in this project is wholly Australian owned and uses a chemical process for removing ash and impurities from black coal that should allow the coal to be pulverised and burnt in gas turbines and engines with higher efficiency and lower greenhouse gas emissions than conventional coal power stations.

The New South Wales Government, through the New Frontiers mineral resources exploration initiative, has been successful in attracting petroleum investment in New South Wales. Over the next 12 months major exploration programs are being undertaken in northern and western New South Wales. This exploration has the potential to identify gas resources, particularly coal seam methane, as well as having the potential to discover liquid hydrocarbons. The balance between the cost of recovering these reserves and the price consumers are prepared to pay for petrol will determine whether the necessary investment was made, and even those opposite would comprehend that basic economic fact.

As the Queensland Oil Vulnerability Taskforce reported last year, any actions taken in response to concerns about reducing availability of liquid fossil fuels need to focus on reducing consumption of liquid fossil fuels, encouraging the development of alternative fuels, technologies and strategies, and preparing for demographic and regional changes. The New South Wales Government already adopts this approach.

Our commitment to supporting ethanol and biofuels can be seen in the requirement for 2 per cent of the total volume of petrol sold in New South Wales to be ethanol. Petrol companies are ramping up the availability of ethanol biofuels, which means more ethanol-blended petrol will be available at more New South Wales petrol pumps. Most cars in New South Wales that use unleaded petrol can safely use 10 per cent ethanol-blended fuel, E10. Ordinary petrol will still be available for older cars, boats and other engines that are not able to use ethanol. This mandate is the New South Wales Government's first step towards a broader use of ethanol and other biofuels.

The New South Wales Government requires its vehicle fleet to use ethanol-blended fuel wherever it is practicable, available and cost effective. Honourable members would also be aware of the State Transit buses powered by natural gas. Public transport not only reduces the need for cars on the roads; buses powered by natural gas contribute to reduced petrol consumption on our roads. Our broad-based approach is also demonstrated through other non-transport or liquid-fuel initiatives, such as support for a renewable energy target, and our development of innovative programs such as GreenPower.

In December 2007, and again this week, the New South Wales Government announced a number of energy efficiency measures to strengthen the State's economy and continue efforts to drive down greenhouse gas emissions. As part of those measures the Government has confirmed its commitment to delivering $63 million to provide 220,000 low-income households with audits and retrofits to help people cope with rising energy prices and reduce their energy bills. With current rates of mortgage stress and the rising cost of living it has never been more important to help shield low-income earners from rising electricity prices. These programs will be brought forward as a matter of priority and will help to ensure that cost-effective energy efficiency measures are implemented in homes.

The Government's actions that are directly related to reducing and managing the use of liquid fossil fuels and other environmentally sustainable initiatives mean the task force proposed by the honourable member is not required. Therefore, the notice of motion is opposed.

Mr IAN COHEN [11.43 a.m.]: I rise to support the call by my colleague Ms Lee Rhiannon for a peak oil task force. Based upon the current proven world oil reserves at the end of 2007 and at the 2007 level of consumption, it has been estimated that the current proven reserves will be exhausted in 41.6 years. The concept that the current lifeblood of advanced modern economies is becoming increasingly scarce is a politically difficult prospect. However, this does not mean we have to be ensnared in the negativity of incessant doomsayers or the wilful ignorance of the peak oil denialists. Governments and citizens can meet the concurrent challenges of oil scarcity and anthropogenic climate change with innovative pathways for a sustainable future. We should not approach increasing oil scarcity with reticence and fear, but as an opportunity to immunise our economy from the difficulties of energy security.

The bill introduced by my colleague provides a forum to understand the potential magnitude of peak oil in this State and provides the essential empirical data for the foundation of innovative ideas and measures. In the absence of a whole-of-government strategy and a comprehensive cross-departmental engagement, a peak oil task force will deliver the information we need for a sensible and effective response to peak oil. Responsible governance requires foresight and planning. Praying for particular contingencies to come to fruition without a backstop safety net is irresponsible. Rather than rising to the cross-departmental challenges of oil scarcity, which implicates areas such as urban planning, agricultural production, manufacturing, mining, food production, transport, aviation, tourism and environmental management, the New South Wales Government response as outlined by the Hon. Henry Tsang demonstrates a parochial, one-dimensional denialism. What happens if we fail to find alternatives to petroleum used for transporting people and essential goods, which currently consumes 75 per cent of Australia's transport fuel?

The potential implications of peak oil will be immense and far reaching. The challenges of peak oil permeate a multitude of sectors in society and a one-dimensional response will not secure our livelihoods. The recent Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation [CSIRO] paper "Fuel for thought—the future of transport fuels: challenges and opportunities" models four key oil price scenarios, one of which would see petroleum-based products range between $A2 and $A8 per litre by 2018. On the surface these figures are concerning, but it must be remembered that the models are based on a number of variables and our fate is not sealed just yet. The 2008 CSIRO Future Fuels Forum paper highlights a number of positive opportunities from the development of alternative fuel sources. A peak oil task force, in addition to highlighting our economic vulnerabilities, shows the way forward on new economic opportunities associated with reconfiguration of energy and transport infrastructure. I note the comments of Mr Rick Colless on the use of geothermal power to generate electricity and subsequently hydrogen fuel. We must push forward with alternative fuel sources and focus on the opportunities presented by oil scarcity.

Mr Tsang has indicated that the Government does not support the bill on the grounds that it would be wasteful to spend several millions on the formation of a peak oil task force when the New South Wales Government already has the answers to peak oil. By implication one would assume that the New South Wales Government has this peak oil thing all stitched up—it has crunched the numbers, consulted with community and business stakeholders, modelled alternative strategies and forecast sector-by-sector petroleum use and application.

Mr Tsang indicated that the New South Wales Government has duly noted the report of the Queensland Government Oil Vulnerability Taskforce and is making significant and innovative progress to reduce the consumption of liquid fossil fuels and encourage the use of alternative fuels, and is making preparations for demographic changes. I turned to the New South Wales Government's illustrious State Plan for further information about what the capable and responsible State Labor Government was doing about peak oil. Unfortunately, the term "peak oil" is not in the State Plan vocabulary: the term "peak oil" does not appear once in the State Plan. Being familiar with this courageous and innovative pinnacle of State Government policy, members of the Government would be aware of the omission of peak oil from these documents.

The State Plan, appropriately titled "A New Direction for New South Wales", contains no provision for the potential impact of peak oil upon economic growth, social equity and cohesion and State development. Is the development of New South Wales immune from the impact of global petroleum resource constraints or was it an inadvertent error in the plan? The term "peak oil" is also not present in the Government's Urban Transport Statement "Responding to the Challenges of Travel and Transport within and across Sydney" and the "State Infrastructure Strategy 2006-2016". I would be surprised if a New South Wales Government policy document exists with the phrase "peak oil" in it.

Mr Tsang's second reading speech uses the terminology only once and that instance was in relation to the title of the bill. There may have been a time when the undertones of the phrase "peak oil" reverberated as a catalyst for the decline of capitalism and the rise of some sort of popular utopian socialist revolution, but that was 30 years ago and the people of New South Wales want to know how the Government will insulate our economy from the potential economic slowdown at the hands of oil scarcity. The community deserves forward planning.

Mr Khan said we do not need to be alarmist in regard to peak oil. He is correct, and he is also correct in stating that what is needed is good governance and strong leadership. It is difficult to govern and manage something that is treated as mythology in the State Labor Party policy lexicon. Let us put the peak oil denialism aside and consider what Mr Tsang tells us the New South Wales Government is doing to address the challenges posed by the decline of conventional oil resources. The primary solution wheeled out by the Government is the E2, soon to be E4, ethanol blended fuel mandate—even though the process of reviewing the E2 mandate appears to have been conveniently circumvented. The answer to the issue of peak oil, according to the Government, is a blanket volumetric ethanol mandate—a simple equation of more ethanol, less petroleum.

The Greens have concerns about ethanol. The Greens are not opposed to ethanol as an alternative fuel but continue to have concerns about government encouragement of technologically and environmentally redundant production methods. Particular methods of ethanol production fail the multi-dimensional demands of climate change and biodiversity. I fear that, without the appropriate regulatory boundaries, New South Wales will encourage an ethanol industry based upon cheap environmental shamanism rather than an industry based upon best practice environmental management. A boutique ethanol industry might be one thing, but mandated production increases with no sustainability criteria—similar to that enacted by the New Zealand Parliament recently—will quickly move ethanol production inputs beyond waste feed stocks to whole grains, oil seeds and even soy beans: in other words, food versus fuel.

Some will suggest that the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act provides an adequate forum to consider sustainability issues in ethanol production projects. Requiring a project proponent to simply list an inventory of environmental legislation to which the project would be subject is not sufficient to evaluate the sustainability implications. Sustainability criteria in conjunction with the adoption of the Australian Standard—AS/NZS ISO 14043—for all life cycle assessments will go some way to ensuring ethanol production does not have adverse impacts upon food markets or biodiversity. Without sustainability criteria prescriptions or caveats on ethanol production that divert food stocks away from food supply chains, an E4 mandate may result in unintended policy consequences, as acknowledged by the New South Wales E10 task force.

Introducing an E4 mandate without a sustainability criterion will amount to a nominal response to oil scarcity with the unintended policy prioritisation of private vehicle ownership over the primary sustenance and subsistence requirements of the New South Wales people and our State counterparts that import New South Wales wheat. The plethora of reports into biofuels and ethanol indicate the catchcry of ethanol biofuel as the panacea for peak oil is off target. The CSIRO report for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation "Biofuels in Australia—issues and prospects" stated at page 12:

If all of the ethanol capacity that is currently proposed was to be fulfilled by existing crops (principally wheat and sugar), or if a national E10 target were to be met (eg. by 5.5 Mt of wheat as the feedstock), it could force the import of wheat in drought years.

More importantly the report, as is the case with the majority of reports on biofuels, states that "biofuels are only a part of the solution to our future transport and energy needs". Mr Tsang rolled out support of renewable energy targets and the establishment of the Renewable Energy Development Fund under the Climate Change Fund as examples of peak oil response measures. He then said that the Government is "helping renewable technologies not yet commercial through the $100 million Renewable Energy Development Fund for pilot and demonstration projects". These projects are only relevant to the debate on peak oil to the extent that they assist and encourage the uptake of alternative fuel technologies that substitute for petroleum, not coal.

Further, according to the Department of Environment and Climate Change, the Renewable Energy Development Fund "provides $40 million over five years to support projects which are expected to lead to large scale greenhouse gas emission savings in New South Wales". On the surface it appears that these programs are established for emission reduction purposes, not as peak oil response measures. If this is the sum total of modelling, analysis and planning that the Government has done on the structural adjustments driven by oil scarcity then the transition away from petroleum to various alternatives is going to be testing at best, cataclysmic at worst.

If the Government could answer the questions posed by peak oil—such as what are the sector-by-sector petroleum fuel based requirements of New South Wales to 2020, or what is the effect of peak oil on food affordability, for example—I would accept its opposition to the bill and its claims that the bill is unnecessary. The fact is that the Government does not have the answers and has not established a whole-of-government approach to prevent peak oil from falling between the departmental gaps. The reality is that the New South Wales Government would much rather intensify petroleum exploration to uncover non-conventional sources and sources located in environmentally sensitive areas to address oil scarcity.

A 60 Minutes report in June this year titled "The New Boom" highlighted the environmental cost of extracting non-conventional oil. It also cast light on the attitude of the petroleum production fraternity that there is a buoyant supply of non-conventional petroleum available to service the growing appetite of rapidly modernising nations. They claim our saviours such non-conventional bitumen/tar sands in the Athabasca Basin, advancing recovery techniques, enhanced oil recovery [EOR] techniques and application of nanotechnology in petroleum production have the capacity to significantly delay the onset of peak oil. What they fail to mention is that there is a direct correlation between the difficulty in extracting non-convention oil and environmental damage. Steam assisted gravity drainage [SAGD] extraction techniques use anywhere between two to four barrels of fresh water to extract one barrel of bitumen oil.

There are unproven reserves out there. The Hon. Rick Colless mentioned unrecovered light crude in Brazil. There are many examples of unproven reserves with varying degrees of access. The question becomes: What environmental price are we willing to pay to access and extract non-conventional oil? Do we say that because the market price for oil makes non-conventional and highly environmentally damaging extraction cost-effective and profitable that we should proceed with extraction? This is where it is important that we adequately quantify ecosystem services delivery and conversion of arable land.

The reality is that these measures are tinkering at the edges. To hold up these measures as serious peak oil avoidance pathways is foolish—a brand of denialism on par with the 11 years of the Howard Government's wilful blindness of climate change which will have seismic consequences for this country's long-term global competitiveness. The approach is short sighted, ignores the issue of intergenerational equity and fails to mitigate C0₂ emissions, whereas reducing demand for the resource through a suite of measure is long term, achieves intergenerational justice and mitigates greenhouse gas emissions. I ask that the crossbench members and Opposition members consider the adequacy of the Government's current response to this natural resource management issue as it has substantial potential to aggravate inequities and societal polarities. I commend the Peak Oil Response Plan Bill 2008, which is worthy of the support of the House.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG (Parliamentary Secretary) [11.58 a.m.]: The Government opposes the Peak Oil Response Bill. Honourable members may be interested to know that the Queensland Government—

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Henry Tsang has already spoken in this debate. Are there any further speakers?

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES [11.59 a.m.]: I speak on the Peak Oil Response Plan Bill 2008, which was introduced by Ms Lee Rhiannon. This is a very important issue for each and every citizen of Australia. It could be said quite easily, as I expect the Government will reply, that this is a Commonwealth matter and should be left to the Commonwealth or, alternatively, that other States ought to take it up. As the Premier said, New South Wales needs to examine all issues concerning the future of our supplies of oil and alternative forms of energy. In previous debates we have examined alternative energy forms such as wave power, solar power and wind power, and we have looked at other areas that will make us less dependent on oil.

The PRESIDENT: Order! Members will listen in silence to the contribution of Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes. People in the gallery will also reduce the level of their conversations or I will have the gallery cleared.

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: The issue is whether New South Wales should find out factually if it has sufficient future oil reserves to sustain us at a time when oil prices vary to such an extent that we will have a shortage of oil as well as a shortage of water. The more significant aspect is whether we should continue to use fossil fuels at the rate we do. Various world governments are looking for alternatives to fossil fuel oils and we commend them. Does that mean that we in New South Wales should just rely on what other countries and people say? It seems to me that setting up an inquiry of our own will be expensive, but it should be able to produce—

The PRESIDENT: Order! I place all Government members on one call to order.

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted and set down as an order of the day for a later hour.

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: I direct my question to the Minister for Police. Is the Minister aware of the continuing concerns about violent crime and antisocial behaviour in Thornton in the Hunter Valley, which resulted in more than 120 people turning up to a public meeting in July to express their concerns to their local member Frank Terenzini and me? Is the Minister aware that there will be another public meeting next week? What message will the Minister now send to long-suffering residents in the Thornton area who are concerned about antisocial behaviour and violence in the community, outlining the changes that he as Minister for Police intends to make regarding policing strategy to combat crime in this area? What representations has the Minister made to the Commissioner of Police following the July meeting to increase police resources in Thornton?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: I thank the honourable member for bringing this to my attention. As he well knows, I was not the Minister for Police in July, so I was not aware of that meeting and I had no need to be aware. However, now that he has alerted me to the fact that there is a forthcoming meeting, I will talk to the commissioner and find out what the issues are in the Thornton area.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: My question is directed to the Minister for Health. Does the Minister recall saying in Question Time on Tuesday, "The Nationals have been doing their best to denigrate the work of clinicians and hard-working staff at Dubbo hospital"? How do these comments equate with the Minister's labelling as "preposterous" claims by Orange doctors that the Greater Western Area Health Service [GWAHS] is on its knees due to critical funding shortages? Does the Minister agree that having no money to buy paper towels in a hospital is preposterous? Does this statement show that it is in fact the Minister who is demeaning doctors? Is the Minister now resorting to bullying tactics to fix the problems in the Greater Western Area Health Service?

The PRESIDENT: Order! The question is out of order as it contains imputations.

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON: My question is addressed to the Minister for Health. Can the Minister update the House on the largest hospital redevelopment in the State's history?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The New South Wales Government this week signed a contract to build a new Royal North Shore Hospital. It is the largest health capital works project in the history of New South Wales with a total investment in the site of $950 million. It is astonishing, of course, that the Opposition has been critical about a $950 million investment in one of our major hospitals, which, coincidentally, is located on the North Shore. Since the original concept consultations with clinicians, the community and private sector partners resulted in a much larger project. We talked to the doctors, the nurses and the community and we negotiated. The result is a state-of-the-art investment in public health infrastructure: bigger and better. Of course, the Opposition hates it; its only plan is to sell hospitals. The Opposition hates any investment in public health.

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: That's not right. That's disgusting.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The Government is investing $721 million in a public-private partnership project, consolidating 53 outdated buildings into high-quality purpose-built facilities for acute hospital care and community health. The private sector partnership means the people of New South Wales are getting a brand new hospital for the cost of the redevelopment. This is a serious investment and a demonstration of the Government's solid commitment to deliver improved health services for the families of New South Wales. The $950 million total redevelopment of the site includes a research and education facility, medical equipment and information technology, in addition to the new acute hospital facilities. It is an outstanding design that can expand to meet the future health care needs of the people of Sydney and New South Wales.

This brand new hospital will be critical to the State's ability to respond to medical and technological advances in health care and to support the health requirements of a growing population. It is a terrific example of working with the private sector to deliver new health facilities for the best possible price. The new main hospital building will be relatively low rise, with innovative colour-coded internal spaces to help people navigate the hospital environment. The design maximises local views, light and space, while the compact footprint ensures that every department is within two minutes walk of the main lift core. The new community health building located on Herbert Street will have a welcoming street frontage and a range of facilities to support local community and community mental health services. New South Wales Health will continue to refine the plans with clinicians to make sure the new hospital best meets their clinical needs.

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: The trouble is you won't be there to open it.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Marie Ficarra to order.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I acknowledge her bullying interjections. In the past four weeks detailed department designs have been shown to more than 200 staff members and to the Medical Staff Council.

The Hon. Catherine Cusack: Get your hand off his knee.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I acknowledge also the obscene interjection of the Hon. Catherine Cusack. It may not be possible to accommodate every request, but every effort will be made to respond to clinical needs. A third round of consultation will be held with the hospital's medical staff before the end of the year. Work is expected to commence in the next few months with the community health building expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2011 and the new main hospital building by the end of 2012. Building a new major public hospital is a significant undertaking. It will involve a lot of work and a cooperative approach from all concerned.

We are all aware that the Government is readjusting to economic times. This investment in health infrastructure is a demonstration that public health will remain one of the highest priorities of the Government by making sensible decisions, changes to our expenditure and ensuring the most efficient service delivery. In response to Opposition interjections, I repeat that we have signed the contract to build the new Royal North Shore Hospital. [Time expired.]

Ms SYLVIA HALE: My question is addressed to the Minister for Health. I refer to the Government's announcement that sections of Callan Park are to be handed over to Leichhardt council while other sections are to be retained under the ownership and control of the Department of Health. Does the Department of Health intend to maintain control over any buildings and structures within the lands that are proposed to be handed to Leichhardt council? If so, which buildings within the council's lands will the Department of Health continue to own and control?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Obviously this is a matter addressed to me more in my capacity as the Minister representing the Premier as the matter relates to planning issues and recent decisions made in relation to Callan Park. I will be pleased to obtain detailed information about the overall matter addressed in Ms Sylvia Hale's question. I note that the Department of Health effectively acts as a landlord to a number of non-government organisations that provide important services in the Callan Park precinct. I will obtain exact particulars for her as soon as possible.

The Hon. HENRY TSANG: My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Will he update the House on the State's monthly financial results?

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: I thank the Hon. Henry Tsang for his question on this very important matter. I advise the House that the year-to-date budget result for September is a deficit of $656 million. This result is not unexpected, given the serious downturn in Government incomes that I have previously reported to the House. In line with previous years and in full compliance with the Public Finance and Audit Act, the results will be available on the New South Wales Treasury website today. The result further underlines the need for the 11 November mini-budget.

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox will cease interjecting.

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: The Government must reduce recurrent expenses and reprioritise the forward capital program to address the current shortfalls in income. Difficult but necessary decisions will be announced in the mini-budget to put New South Wales on a sustainable economic footing. More than any other State, New South Wales is feeling the effects of the global financial crisis. The deterioration in the budget result I announced last week shows that New South Wales families, businesses and government incomes have been feeling the effects of the global economic crisis since at least the beginning of the year. As a responsible Government with a track record of over a decade of conservative fiscal management, we are well placed to weather this storm. We will outline the course ahead in the mini-budget on 11 November.

Dr JOHN KAYE: My question is addressed to the Minister for Energy. Does the Government classify the proposed four megawatt wood-fired power station to be built by South East Fibre Exports at its chip-mill at Eden as a source of green energy? In particular, is the chip-mill eligible to generate New South Wales Greenhouse Abatement Certificates under the Greenhouse Gas Abatement Scheme system? What is the estimated total in greenhouse gas emissions in tonnes of CO₂ equivalent per megawatt hour? Does that estimate include the greenhouse gases emitted during the forestry process?

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: I am aware of the proposed development of a generator by South East Fibre Exports in the south of the State. The project has considerable merit, given that it will be using residues; in other words, it will utilise material that would otherwise lie on the ground and rot, thereby releasing carbon. I am supportive of the co-generation concept in our timber industry across the State. The more we work towards utilising these types of projects, the better and—

Mr Ian Cohen: It can be used by other industries as well.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: Not just forestry. In recent years, sugarcane residues have been utilised on the North Coast. I do not have specific details for what Greenhouse Gas Abatement Scheme certificates the project would be eligible. I will obtain that detailed information for the member.

The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I direct my question to the Treasurer. Today's National Electricity Market Management Company report has revised the supply-demand outlook, deferring the need for additional generation capacity for New South Wales by another year to 2014-15. The proposed generation outlook for New South Wales now indicates that expansion of capacity to 2017-18 is likely to be satisfied by several 300 to 385 megawatt gas-fired plants of the type currently provided by private investors. Therefore, does the Treasurer stand by his assertion that an additional $12 billion to $15 billion will be required to spend on the Government's electricity generation and retail businesses over the next 10 to 15 years?

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: I thank the Hon. Greg Pearce for his question because it is an important one. The National Electricity Market Management Company has issued a new statement of opportunities. The statement indicates that New South Wales has an additional 12 months breathing space before new generation is required. Under the circumstances, it is not surprising that since the Owen report there have been some changes in available generation, thanks to some investment taking place in the private sector, so there has been a movement of one year in the need for generation, according to the National Electricity Market Management Company. I would hardly see that as an opportunity for this bereft Opposition to suddenly challenge the whole basis of electricity generation requirements—something that they did not do at the time privatisation was an issue. The report shows that New South Wales has been improving its plan for the State's future electricity needs. We will have enough time to ensure that we will have the capacity we need.

[Interruption]

I ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the Hon. Eddie Obeid to sort out their differences outside the Chamber. It is important to note that in the 2014-15 summer there will be a need for an additional 283 megawatts of new capacity, and that is part of the National Electricity Market Management Company report. We need to ensure that we have the appropriate investment in place to sustain a one-year change in generation.

The Hon. Greg Pearce: It is not going to be provided by the public sector; is that what you are saying? You are going to build it, are you—not the private sector?

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: The Opposition has no credibility. The great party of privatisation is using the electricity industry as a game of political ping-pong. Members opposite know very well that every single industrial group in New South Wales supports electricity industry reforms and so does anybody who understands the electricity industry and anybody who acknowledges the needs of future generations. The Opposition is suggesting, based on a one-year difference in the National Electricity Market Management Company's report, that the whole of the electricity industry planning is incorrect. We are planning an appropriate strategy through the sale of retail outlets and developments in science to ensure that we encourage the private sector to deal with the challenges of generation.

The Hon. KAYEE GRIFFIN: I address my question to the Minister for Police. Will he update the House on some recent initiatives by the New South Wales Police Force to improve responses to domestic violence?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: The Rees Government is committed to tackling domestic and family violence in our community. Members will be aware that all New South Wales police officers receive training in dealing with domestic violence from the time they become recruits. That training is reinforced during their careers through additional training that is offered to all front-line staff as part of their ongoing education requirements. Training is available to all officers through an online domestic violence module. A range of intensive training scenarios that relate to domestic violence and police powers in this area is also available for all front-line police. Further specialist training is provided for police who will become designated specialist domestic violence liaison officers.

Today I am pleased to advise the House that the New South Wales Police Force is rolling out a new specialist training package to deal with domestic violence. The new training package is "the investigation of domestic violence workshop". It has been in development since May this year and expanded from a one-day course to a two-day course, and the training specifically focuses on investigative practice and on victim support. The New South Wale Police Force is rolling out the new training statewide from this month, specifically targeting police domestic violence liaison officers and education and training officers. A key element of the program could be described as train the trainer.

So, 150 police domestic violence liaison officers and education and training officers will receive the training this year. I am pleased to note that these police will then return to their local area commands and deliver the training to their colleagues on the front line. The new training will be subject to constant evaluations during its roll out. The new training is one of a number of new initiatives that the Police Force is pursuing. Together with new powers, more resources and extra staff, the Government is equipping the New South Wales Police Force to fight domestic violence in every community in New South Wales. For example, we are providing new domestic violence evidence kits to all front-line commands.

We are providing extra police to fight domestic violence; police will be deployed to hot spot areas, and we are giving the police the powers they need to protect victims of domestic violence through improvements to the apprehended violence laws. The training package roll out by the Police Force is a good example of the Government's commitment to combating domestic violence in our community. The Government is proud to support the New South Wales Police Force in every community in New South Wales in this important fight.

The Hon. CATHERINE CUSACK: I address my question to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer give the House a full and frank account of Treasury investment losses incurred last year and during the first quarter of the current financial year?

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: All the appropriate information will be provided in the mini-budget.

The Hon. TONY CATANZARITI: I address my question to the Minister for Primary Industries. Will the Minister inform the House of what the Government is doing to help farmers who are facing a plague of locusts in central and southern New South Wales?

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: Locusts are emerging as a major threat facing our hardworking farmers and communities in the central west of the State, the south west and the Riverina. So far this spring there have been more than 1,800 confirmed reports of locust activity in New South Wales. The epicentre of this locust plague is the Wagga Wagga rural lands protection board, where almost 600 reports have been received. Unfortunately, the threat of a plague of locusts will remain as long as seasonal conditions continue to be favourable. Firstly, I thank the farmers and all landholders for their efforts and cooperation so far. They have been working effectively with the Government, where we have spent many months preparing for locust hatchings. The Department of Primary Industries, rural lands protection boards, the New South Wales Farmers Association, the Australian Plague Locust Commission and farmers themselves have all worked in partnership to develop plans to contain spring hatchings.

Enough pesticide to strategically treat 31,000 hectares was initially stockpiled as part of the Government's response. This included sufficient quantities of a fungal bio-control agent suitable for use in environmentally sensitive locations and on organic farms. Pesticide stocks have since been supplemented as needed. To date, enough chemical to treat more than 48,000 hectares has been distributed. Stocks are on hand to treat a further 17,000 hectares. In addition, enough chemical to treat another 41,000 hectares has been ordered. That is a significant purchase of chemical. The most effective method of controlling locusts is to spray them as they band together on the ground before they grow wings. Landholders with sufficient numbers of locusts are supplied with a chemical so the locusts can be strategically sprayed when they are most vulnerable, which is a highly effective control strategy that is both safe and cost effective.

[Interruption]

The department has paid for the chemical. I also point out that aerial spraying is not suitable in these particular areas. As I mentioned, landholders have been crucial in our success to date in confronting locusts through their vigilance in reporting and prompt action in spraying. Although farmers are responsible for controlling locusts on their land, the Department of Primary Industries and rural lands protection boards have mobilised their resources to provide all possible assistance to them. The department has established a statewide coordination centre in Orange to manage the Government's response. A local coordination centre has been set up in Wagga Wagga. Forward command posts have been set up in rural lands protection board offices at Wagga Wagga, Narrandera and Forbes. Aerial surveys conducted in hot spots and suspect areas have located many large unreported locust bands, one of which was estimated to cover more than 24 square kilometres. Numerous other bands eating their way through lush spring paddocks have also been found. Farmers struggling to keep up with control can seek help from their rural lands protection board.

The locust control campaign to date has been thorough and effective. However, over the next few weeks more locusts will start flying. People travelling through some parts of inland New South Wales can expect to see more flying locusts. Therefore, now more than ever, it is critical for landholders to continue regularly monitoring the whole property, reporting new hatchings and treating the locusts where they pose a threat. A recent economic analysis of the control program implemented during the 2004-05 locust plague concluded that the campaign saved more than $1 billion worth of crops and pastures. The current plague is not on the same scale, but it does have the potential to rival the 2004 outbreak if we drop our guard. The Government and all its partner organisations are determined to continue to battle locusts until they are wiped out.

Reverend the Hon. Dr GORDON MOYES: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Health. Is the Minister aware that an estimated 4,600 Australian children under the age of 16 have juvenile arthritis and that almost 22,000 adults were diagnosed with arthritis in childhood? In particular, is the Minister aware of a recent study conducted by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, which states:

An estimated 1,600 Australian children are disabled as a result of their arthritis, mainly because of chronic or recurrent pain and severe activity limitation. Almost 70 percent of them experience restricted physical activity, and children with arthritis are more likely to have days away from school and days of reduced activity compared with other children.

Will the Minister indicate what specific health programs and services, as well as funding arrangements, will be established to assist and support children with this disabling and debilitating condition of juvenile arthritis?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The member has canvassed a number of issues in his question, specifically the incidence of arthritis in young people, and has asked for details about specific programs. I will be happy to make those available to him at the earliest convenience.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I address my question to the Minister for Health. Does the Minister recall saying in question time on Tuesday that "The Nationals have been doing their best to denigrate the work of clinicians and hardworking staff at Dubbo Hospital"? How do those comments equate with the Minister's labelling as "preposterous" claims by Orange doctors that the Greater Western Area Health Service is on its knees due to critical funding shortages? What is preposterous about not having money to buy paper towels in a hospital? How can the Minister justify making such comments about health professionals in the Greater Western Area Health Service?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is almost as inattentive in question time as he is to country media, which is disappointing. I thought the member was an avid reader of various rural publications in New South Wales. In the publication that the member is talking about, I was responding to a claim by a journalist, not a clinician, who was interpreting remarks that a clinician had made to them. I have a great deal of respect for the clinician, who is an outstanding rural health professional in a specialist area of medicine. Clearly, Dr Ruth Arnold has fantastic credentials.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: I think you might have stuffed up and you tried to cover up.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: No. Let me provide the member with the detail he asked for. The front page of the newspaper of a couple of days ago carried an interpretation of comments that suggested Orange Base Hospital would close because of funding issues. That was the interpretation placed on an article by a very good ABC journalist. That journalist interviewed me the next day and I said that claims that the recurrent funding at Orange Base Hospital had stopped were preposterous. Why are the claims preposterous? Because they are preposterous! The idea that recurrent funding at Orange Base Hospital would stop is preposterous. He should know that it is preposterous. He should know it is a silly claim because it is simply not true.

I made the point clear to the journalist on the ABC radio program. I can show the member the transcript, but I am sure he would not read it if I gave it to him. The claim that Orange Base Hospital would cease operating, as put to me, is simply not true. Absurd, preposterous—use whatever word you like! I then went on to say, and I explained in some detail, that there would be increases in recurrent funding for a range of health services, as there always would be in response to increasing demand. However, we had to ensure that we utilise the resources we have to get the best value, that is, best patient care and best opportunities to address health issues in the community. That was the point that I thought I made quite well to the journalist on the ABC.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Obviously not.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I will show the member the transcript. Obviously I was not talking about anything that was said to me by any of the clinicians at Orange Base Hospital, and indeed any other clinicians or health care professionals throughout the system.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: The Minister can't say things in the bush and pretend that they will not come back at him.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I acknowledge the helpful lesson of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. It is too bad he does not take notice of that lesson himself. I reiterate that of course I have listened in great detail to the concerns of the clinicians at Orange Base Hospital. Recently, the Government announced a reinvestment in the transfer of functions of Orange Base Hospital to the Bluefield Campus—a massive investment in rural health, about which the member knows. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is fiddling and playing politics and word games while the Government is building new hospitals, and rebuilding great public health care facilities and making sure—

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Like Bathurst?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Bathurst is an excellent facility, and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition knows full well that I have also visited the clinicians at Bathurst Hospital and that we are working through the issues of properly commissioning Bathurst hospital.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Did anyone resign after you were there?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: No, they were obviously keen to make sure we recommissioned the facility and addressed the concerns to ensure that the community has the confidence in Bathurst hospital that it deserves. [Time expired.]

The Hon. IAN WEST: My question is addressed to the Minister for Industrial Relations. Will the Minister inform the House about the Government's ongoing efforts to assist students when they first start work?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I thank the member for his ongoing interest in the education of young people in the workplace. Many young people enter the workforce whilst they are at school getting jobs to supplement pocket money. They enjoy the independence and freedom that earning an income can bring. Many young people also thrive on the responsibilities they are given and the new friendships that they form through the workplace. Unfortunately entering the workplace for the first time is also when they are most at risk. The New South Wales Office of Industrial Relations provides advice and support to businesses to help them meet their workplace responsibilities and helps young workers understand their workplace rights.

The Know the Deal video competition was an initiative by the Office of Industrial Relations to raise awareness amongst high school students of workplace issues and of the office's Young People at Work website. The competition was developed with input and support from the Department of Education and Training. The Minister for Education and Training was present at the launch yesterday. Students were asked to produce a video, not more than two minutes in length, which delivered at least one key message about workplace rights. The video had to appeal to young people aged between 14 and 20 years, and it also had to promote the Young People at Work website. The competition, which was aligned with appropriate school curricula, provided an opportunity for students to learn more about the issues they face when starting work, such as unpaid trials, rates of pay, leave entitlements and other workplace issues.

[Interruption]

They did notn't give the Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox a shadow portfolio—they couldn't find anything shadowy enough. It also provided young people with the chance to be creative in developing a message to let their friends and peers know that there is somewhere they can go to get information and help. The Know the Deal video competition triggered a 49 per cent increase in the number of visitors to the Young People at Work website over the period that the competition was conducted. Yesterday the six prize-winning entries were announced, and they involved 20 students from three Sydney schools and three from regional New South Wales. The first prize in the metropolitan high schools division was awarded to Harriet Keane, Nadia Raicevich and Marissa Casimatis from MLC School Burwood. The first prize in the regional high schools division was awarded to Alexandra Howard and Madi Scott from James Fallon High School, Albury. I also congratulate the teachers and students from Normanhurst Boys High School, Erskine Park High School, Peel High School and John Paul College on submitting winning entries

The Hon. Melinda Pavey: John Paul College Coffs Harbour?

The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: That is correct. The entries received were of a high standard and can be viewed on the Young People at Work website www.youngpeopleatwork.nsw.gov.au. Not only did the competition provide a forum for young people to have a voice but it also helped raise awareness amongst young people of how they can better prepare themselves for work. The Office of Industrial Relations also provides resources to secondary schools and career counsellors for distribution amongst senior students detailing their rights at work including Offered a job, know your legal rights, a pocket-sized booklet which provides comprehensive information for young workers; and wallet cards and stickers promoting the Young People at Work website.

The Young People at Work website was developed by the office to provide a place where young people can go to find information about their workplace rights and responsibilities. It is in an appealing format and sets out the information to cover the working cycle—looking for work, being in the job and leaving the job. The office also conducts face-to-face presentations to apprentices and trainees in TAFE colleges across New South Wales. Last year alone presentations were made to 30 TAFE colleges and more than 3,000 students.

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE: My question is directed to the Minister for Health in his own capacity and as representing the Premier. Is the Minister preparing to take a range of proposals, including an all-out ban on alcohol advertising to the Health Ministers meeting next month? In view of the dramatic increase in alcohol-related violence and teenage binge drinking, do the Minister's proposals include a ban on 24-hour hotels and at least a 2.00 a.m. closing time? What other proposals does the Minister intend to take to the meeting? If a national agreement on a ban of alcohol advertising is not reached, will New South Wales give the lead, as it has on other occasions, to ban alcohol advertising in New South Wales?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The Premier has made it clear that more needs to be done to curb alcohol abuse and, in particular, to reduce alcohol-related violence. The experience in our hospital emergency departments, for example, is providing us with a strong message that it is time to consider new ways to respond to the issue of so-called binge drinking. Alcohol causes an estimated 40,000 hospitalisations in New South Wales every year. Young women, in particular, are presenting in much higher numbers than ever before. In the past eight years alcohol-related presentations to emergency departments increased by 59 per cent. There are some very good initiatives happening in our health facilities to respond to this problem.

We have established a $1.5 million trial for specialist nurses in south-west Sydney, Newcastle and the Children's Hospital, Westmead, to deal with emergency department patients who are suffering behavioural disturbances as a result of drug or alcohol abuse. This will alleviate the pressures on staff of emergency departments who experience an increase in alcohol and drug affected patients. Hospitals participating in the trial have access to psychiatric emergency care centres and inpatient detoxification units. We also have put in place a telephone and Internet alcohol program aimed at young people who think they may have a problem with alcohol and wish to take control of their drinking habits as part of the Rethink Your Drink campaign. Recent clinical trials of the program found participants were able to reduce their alcohol consumption by more than 50 per cent.

We also need a strong regulatory regime for alcohol advertising because self-regulation is not working. It cannot be ignored that one part of our community is unfettered, urging young people to buy more of their product, while our emergency departments mop up afterwards. It is not doing our young people or our community generally any good. I will be raising the need to strengthen alcohol advertising controls and warnings with my ministerial colleagues at the upcoming meeting of the Australian Health Ministers Council. Obviously in the past these matters have been the focus of considerable attention, as they are now. Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile has pointed out the explicit announcement by the Premier earlier today in relation to alcohol-related violence but there are a number of other initiatives the Government is taking both immediately and long-term.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile referred to past experiences and practices and I advise that we have revisited a number of issues dealing with alcohol advertising, the regulation of alcohol advertising and its impact on public health. I reiterate something that the member may now be more sympathetic to: we do not win our way through this argument and this complex policy debate by reverting to the bad habits of the past. It might be said that binge drinking is not a new phenomenon and reverts to a bad habit of Australians from the earliest times of European settlement. But a bad habit in terms of policy to deal with this issue would be to revert to polarising what in the past might have been labelled a wowser and libertarian approach. This policy and cultural problem needs to be dealt with by creative and strong policy initiatives.

The Hon. Don Harwin: Wowser and libertarian are two different approaches.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: That is right, and the point I am making is that by resorting to the two opposites and having the debate in that framework we end up retreating back to a do-nothing approach or a do-very-little approach. I think we need to go forward on alcohol advertising and cultural change issues, accepting the fact that moderate use of alcohol is part of our culture—it is generally accepted and something that most people happily live with—and that includes the provision of alcohol in appropriately licensed premises and the legitimacy of alcohol as a commercial product. But we need to apply very strict views around the potential for alcohol abuse, including point of sale and advertising. [Time expired.]

The Hon. JENNIFER GARDINER: My question is directed to the Minister for Health. Is the Minister aware that, notwithstanding his reported comments about problems at Orange Base Hospital and the Greater Western Area Health Service, the chair of the Orange Medical Staff Council, Dr Ruth Arnold, has stood by her comments that "Dedicated doctors and nurses are struggling to offer their patients sufficient standards of care"? What is the Minister's response to Dr Arnold's statement? Will the Minister give an assurance that he is doing everything he can to see that in the mini-budget additional funding for Orange Base Hospital is sufficient to ensure that doctors and nurses at Orange and elsewhere do not have to struggle to offer their patients sufficient standards of care?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The first and most direct way to answer the question is that I absolutely agree with Dr Arnold. I listened in detail to the things that she told me on my visit to Orange Base Hospital, and to the things put to me by her colleagues at a fairly extended meeting that I was privileged to attend. I listened to her colleagues in a medical sense at the Bloomfield facility, with whom I had the opportunity to have a briefing about the way in which they are conducting telepsychiatry in rural New South Wales—a world-first breakthrough clinical initiative being carried out very effectively by the New South Wales public health system. I think the honourable member should acknowledge that that work is greatly benefiting rural communities across the area serviced by the Bloomfield facility. I have also had the opportunity to listen to Dr Arnold's colleagues in other parts of the State. Putting aside discussions I have had with doctors in the Hunter and the Sydney metropolitan area, I have talked to other clinicians in the Central West—Dubbo and Bathurst—which I think the honourable member has acknowledged generally in some of her previous questions.

In the most immediate and direct sense, of course I agree with Dr Arnold that there are struggles going on. That was the starting point for my discussions, and we discussed ways in which the Government could make the struggle easier. There is nothing that governments can do to make a very difficult job easy; the only thing it can do is make sure that it provides the right resources and framework. That is what the Government is committed to doing. The Greater Western Area Health Service, like every other area health service, is under pressure as a result of rising presentations, an ageing population and rising healthcare costs. Like every other area health service, the Greater Western Area Health Service has been provided with a record budget to provide health services to its community.

It was reported in the Central Western Daily the other day that the global financial crisis may prevent the New South Wales Government from providing recurrent funding in the future. As I said earlier in answer to a question from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, this is simply not the case. In a radio interview the next day I characterised that report as preposterous. The New South Wales Government will continue to provide recurrent funding to Orange Base Hospital, which provides excellent care to its community.

As I said at the beginning of my remarks, I visited Orange Base Hospital, had the opportunity to meet with clinicians and had the opportunity for extensive discussion with Dr Arnold. The area health service has had difficulty, which has been well acknowledged, in relation to payment of creditors, but, as I have previously outlined to the House, the health service is getting this matter under control and NSW Health is continuing to assist this particular area health service to further improve the situation.

In relation to the other part of the honourable member's question, I am committed to addressing the concerns of Orange clinicians, as I am the other clinicians I have spoken to. As I have said, I am particularly concerned to make sure that we grasp the opportunities created by the fantastic facilities and resources that we are about to build at Orange Base Hospital, the new development at the Bloomfield campus, the development at Bathurst—and obviously there are issues around commissioning, about which I was very frank in my discussions with Bathurst clinicians—and the exciting opportunities around Dubbo Base Hospital. I intend to work with clinicians, management and the area health service to make sure we grasp such opportunities in the future.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Lourdes?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: The honourable member continues to interject, and I am not sure if he is now talking about cricket in England. The most important thing that needs to be focussed on is that the Government is committed to doing the right thing by rural health— [Time expired.]

The Hon. LYNDA VOLTZ: My question is addressed to the Minister for Emergency Services. Can the Minister advise the Chamber of the appointment of a new leader of the State Emergency Service?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: I thank the honourable member for her question and for her continued interest in our emergency services. I am pleased to confirm that the Rees Government has today appointed the New South Wales Fire Brigades Assistant Commissioner Murray Kear as the new Director General of the State Emergency Service. Mr Kear will take up the position next week following the retirement of the current State Emergency Service Director General, Brigadier Philip McNamara.

Mr Kear takes this important leadership role in the State Emergency Service after a long and distinguished career in New South Wales Fire Brigades. He started as a firefighter in 1980 and rose through the ranks to become assistant commissioner and director of community safety. He will bring to the State Emergency Service [SES] a range of professional expertise and experience gained from working in many areas of the State and, in particular, his focus on community safety, prevention and preparedness. Over almost three decades he has served in many operational and specialist areas, including training officer for operational communications, operational and zone commander in Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong, and manager of commercial services and operational research.

Mr Kear was appointed assistant commissioner and region commander for the State's west in 2003. In 2006 he assumed responsibility for the New South Wales Fire Brigades' vital community safety work, including smoke alarms, building inspections, fire inspections and community education. In the same year his diligent service and contribution to the community was recognised when he was awarded the Australian Fire Services Medal, the highest award an Australian firefighter can receive, in the Australia Day honours. Out of interest, Mr Kear is also a qualified pilot. When not contributing to the leadership of the New South Wales Fire Brigades he dedicates a large amount of his time to a range of volunteer community services, including Rotary, Scouts Australia and the Campbelltown-Koshigaya Sister City Association.

The State Emergency Service is a large and diverse organisation with about 10,000 volunteer members in 226 units around the State, whose training, expertise and commitment to serving the community are widely recognised. It has become a leader in storm and flood planning and response, and plays an increasingly important role in community education and preparedness for natural disasters. Mr Kear comes to the organisation as it focuses on these roles and faces new challenges, including the impacts of climate change and recruiting and retaining volunteers from a community that is ageing and managing many competing demands on its time.

I take this opportunity to commend Brigadier Philip McNamara, who many in the House would know, for his significant achievements in advancing the State Emergency Service over the past seven years. Brigadier McNamara assisted the Government as a regional recovery coordinator for the disastrous North Coast floods in 2001. If I remember correctly, because I was involved with him at the time as a backbencher, it was 17 March 2001, a day and a half after he left the Army, that he took up that position and spent a long time on the North Coast doing a wonderful job coordinating the Government's response to the flood disaster in that region.

In about October of that year Brigadier McNamara was appointed the Director General of the State Emergency Service. Over that seven years Brigadier McNamara built the service's strong foundations into a modern, well-equipped, versatile and responsive emergency service. His strong and enthusiastic leadership and representations on behalf of the volunteers have seen the State Emergency Services receive increased funding, with this year's budget at $57.6 million. His other achievements include the establishment of the 24-hour Operations Communications Centre, the Community First Responder Program and increased staffing in regional offices to support the volunteers. I am sure every member of this House will join me in wishing Brigadier McNamara and his wife, Anne, all the best for a long and happy retirement with their family.

Ms LEE RHIANNON: I direct my question to the Treasurer. Given the financial problems facing this State will the Treasurer follow the lead of the Queensland Government and increase the coal royalty figure to 10 per cent? If not, why is he maintaining coal royalties at 7 per cent for open cut mines and 6 per cent for underground mines at a time when coal profits are soaring and New South Wales is heading for a recession?

The Hon. ERIC ROOZENDAAL: Matters such as that are really for the mini-budget.

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: My question is directed to the Minister for Primary Industries. Given that State Water has announced that Lake Pamamaroo is currently releasing water and that it is expected to be dry by March 2009, has the Minister or any officer in his department received an application for the resumption of fishing for native fin species in Lake Pamamaroo by fishermen holding restricted inland fishery licences? Given that the Minister has repeatedly refused to address the plight of these fishermen by way of structural adjustment, will he now approve the resumption of fishing by licensed inland restricted fisheries fishermen for native fin species in Lake Pamamaroo to allow them to at least generate a small amount of income while the opportunity exists? Should these fish be caught and processed while the water quality is good and the fish quality is excellent, or should these fish perish in the mud as the lake dries up?

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: I will consider the specific part of that question relating to the current situation in the lake and I will come back to the Hon. Rick Colless on it. In relation to the structural adjustment, I advise that we have been working for some time on this.

The Hon. Rick Colless: Three years.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: Yes, that is right; it is a question of resources, and I am currently engaged in discussions with the Treasurer about that. I will leave it at that.

The Hon. PENNY SHARPE: My question is addressed to the Minister for State Development. Could the Minister please inform the House about a New South Wales company that has won a State Government award for technology that is assisting the multibillion-dollar horse breeding industry?

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: Last night I had the pleasure of attending the New South Wales Government's Australian Technology Showcase Patrons Award at Government House. This event acknowledges international success by companies that have been assisted through the Government's Australian Technology Showcase program. The program promotes leading New South Wales technologies to national and international markets, helping innovative companies grow. The Australian Technology Showcase program started in 1998 during the lead-up to the Sydney Olympics. Since then more than 600 New South Wales technologies have been supported. These companies have collectively generated more than $730 million in sales, exports and investments, attributable in part to their participation in this New South Wales Government initiative.

I am pleased to inform the House that the latest export star is a company based at Macquarie Park, North Ryde—Peptech Pty Limited. This company was recognised last night for its export market success with its innovative technology, which assists the multibillion-dollar horse breeding industry. Peptech has produced the drug ovuplant, which is providing greater control and certainty for horse breeders across all sectors, not just in the thoroughbred industry. The drug is a small implant that is placed in the neck of mares to release the drug deslorelin, which stimulates hormone production via the pituitary gland. This ensures that within 48 hours of implantation the mare has a very high likelihood of ovulation. This means that horse breeders can precisely time when to introduce a stallion to best achieve fertilisation. It reduces the cost and time associated with successful breeding. It also brings greater certainty to the multibillion-dollar horse breeding industry. This can be particularly vital during times when highly expensive thoroughbred shuttle stallion servicing is being used.

The drug is now being sold to the horse breeding industry in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Argentina, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. It is also being used when artificial insemination is carried out—that is probably in the harness industry. The Department of State and Regional Development has helped Peptech break into global markets with export support grants through the Australian Technology Showcase program.

This same company, Peptech, is also achieving international success with a related drug called suprelorin. This drug is licensed to control breeding in dogs, but it is also being used successfully by zoos and wildlife parks for breeding management in animals including lions, cheetahs, monkeys, dolphins, seals and other mammals. Zoos currently using this drug include Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, St Louis, Calgary and Singapore. Peptech is marketing this drug in France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, United Kingdom, Spain, Italy and Scandinavia, and soon in Switzerland and parts of Eastern Europe.

I would also like to congratulate the other finalists in the Australian Technology Showcase Patrons Award: Ultimo company Nuix Pty Ltd, which produces email and data forensics software for use in litigation and criminal investigations; Ultimo company Fluffy Spider Technologies Pty Ltd for its technology, which offers a multimedia and graphics platform for embedded applications; Seven Hills company Pavement Management Services Pty Ltd, which produces software-based products that model and predict deterioration of roads; Lane Cove company Cap-XX Ltd, which uses breakthrough nanotechnology processes to produce powerful supercapacitors to power portable electronics devices; and St Leonards company Advanced Surgical Design and Manufacture Ltd, which developed a surface finishing technology for chrome cobalt components in knee and other joint replacements. I would like to congratulate all finalists on their success and I look forward to hearing about their progress in the future.

Mr IAN COHEN: My question is addressed to the Attorney General, representing the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment. In light of the comments of Professor Andy Pitman regarding communications from an unidentified real estate representative on publication about the impacts of climate change on coastal areas, which may be construed as amounting to threats, what specific measures will the Minister and the department take to ensure climate change scientists and ecologists are free to publish scientific findings and audits without fear of harm or retribution? Will the Minister take action to ensure independent ecologists can deliver reports without fear and without future employment discrimination? Has the Department of Environment and Climate Change or the Minister considered a model whereby the Department of Environment and Climate Change is the intermediary between developers and independent ecologists so that payment for an ecologist's services is channelled through the Department of Environment and Climate Change, and whereby the Department of Environment and Climate Change, rather than the developer, will select which ecologist undertakes the work?

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

The Hon. CHARLIE LYNN: My question is directed to the Minister for Health. Can the Minister advise the House of his response to the Auditor-General's recent report estimating that New South Wales "would need to build a 300-bed hospital every year to cope with rising demand" unless the Government improves out-of-hospital health care services? Does the Minister acknowledge that 500 hospital beds are freed up for more urgent cases because of the existing out-of-hospital program, which services over 45,000 patients across New South Wales each year? What is the Minister's response to the Auditor-General's call for out-of-hospital care services to be increased from the current 3 per cent of patients to the required 10 per cent of health care patients?

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: I congratulate the Hon. Charlie Lynn on asking an excellent question, and I thank him for his interest in what is a very important opportunity to improve outcomes for patients efficiently and in a way that manages the resources of our hospitals and health services very well. In relation to the first part of the question, the Auditor-General is making an observation, as did the Commonwealth and State heads of Treasury recently. Their estimation of the escalation of health care services is about 9.4 per cent a year. That is obviously the cumulative increase. One could represent that in all sorts of ways.

I think the Auditor-General is correct in making the observation in his report that that would be one of the ways in which the health care system would need to change if it did not reconfigure itself in relation to the ways in which hospital stays and the like are managed. He knows of course that that particular report dealt with assessing existing programs—as New South Wales Health is already doing, and doing very well—to focus on out-of-hospital care options. Those options quite specifically dealt with individual New South Wales programs and a number of programs that are being jointly funded by New South Wales Health and the Commonwealth. The Auditor-General indicated he had some issues with some of those programs, but generally speaking underlined that those that we were conducting were operating very well, that they were in fact returning good patient outcomes, and doing so at much lower cost than relatively longer stays or stays in acute facilities.

The other thing that needs to be taken into consideration—and I made this very clear when I responded to that report on behalf of the Government—is that, from a meaningful perspective, this allows us to manage our healthcare resources much more effectively. It allows us to forestall, for example, the kind of extreme case referred to by the member in his question, which is building a new trainer bed facility every year, forever, based on that growth. The way in which to do that is to make sure we give clinicians the framework and opportunities to make those judgements. In other words, it will not be acceptable to the community if we simply communicate those changes as measures for cost control or something that a politician does, or for that matter something that a so-called bureaucrat or administrator does.

These matters will have to be worked out by the management of our healthcare systems and our clinicians working together on these proposals. The primary consideration in putting in place these measures has to be clinical judgements by doctors, nurses and allied healthcare staff. If we give them the right resources and the right information, I am convinced they will make judgements that are not only right for the patients but also will allow us to use more creative and alternative ways of configuring the healthcare system.

The big issue, following on from the Auditor-General's report of course is that we are anticipating at the end of this month the Garling report. That report, I believe, will be a very important landmark point for us in terms of decisions we need to make about health care. I will not be responding to speculations in respect of that report or to occasional considerations about what may or may not be in it. I will be making a very detailed response to that report when I get what I expect to be very detailed recommendations of Commissioner Garling towards the end of this month or very early next month. I thank the member for a very good question.

The Hon. EDDIE OBEID: My question is addressed to the Minister for Emergency Services. Can the Minister update the House on a scam purporting to fundraise for the State Emergency Service?

The Hon. TONY KELLY: I have been alerted to a scam involving the misuse of the good name of the State Emergency Service. I understand that the controller of the Bingara State Emergency Service unit, which is located in the Namoi State Emergency Service region, received a phone call at home on Wednesday afternoon from a person claiming to represent the State Emergency Service. The person claimed to be selling raffle tickets to raise money for the State Emergency Service to develop evacuation plans for people to use when they cannot get through to the 000 number. Of course, the State Emergency Service does not use that number; it uses 132500.

This is clearly a hoax and a fraudulent attempt to trick well-meaning residents into giving money in the belief the call is made on behalf of the hardworking and committed volunteers of the State Emergency Service, who are held in high esteem by the residents of this State. I urge anyone receiving any such call to hang up immediately. I repeat, this is in no way an authorised State Emergency Service activity. It is a disgraceful attempt to play on the good nature of people in our community, trading on the fine reputation of our volunteers.

The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: If members have further questions, I suggest that they place them on notice.

[The President left the chair at 1.03 p.m. The House resumed at 2.30 p.m.]

The Hon. Henry Tsang tabled the Government's response to report No. 35, entitled "An Inquiry into the Prohibition on the Publication of the Names of Children Involved in Criminal Proceedings", tabled on 21 April 2008.

Ordered to be printed on motion by the Hon. Henry Tsang.

Debate called on, and adjourned on motion by Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

Debate called on, and adjourned on motion by the Hon. Rick Colless and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

Debate resumed from 23 October 2008.

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON [2.35 p.m.]: It gives me much pleasure to endorse this motion of the Hon. Amanda Fazio. The existence of the early intervention program for children with autism demonstrates the amazing differences over the past 50 years in the way we perceive children and the work that has been done to ensure that every child has the right to do as well as possible within the community. When I was a young person—at the same time other members of the House were young—the value to society of families with children who had issues such as autism was discredited. Extra resources certainly were not delivered or placed at their disposal. Very little work was done to ensure that these children had any kind of equitable access to life. Of course, their families suffered as a result of that inequity.

I have spoken on other occasions about when I started at Tamworth High School in 1961. The classes in our first year of high school were described as 1A through to 1J. Students who were in 1J did not receive any extra resources or assistance, which they would have required, to ensure they became valuable members of society. From that time it stuck in my mind that it was important for governments and organisations to provide extra resources to make sure that 1J classes would exist no more. This program is a further extension of that progress. Admittedly, it is a further extension of the science of developing minds and what happens to children as they grow. This motion is about the implementation of that science.

It is encouraging to see agreement on the importance of assisting children with an autism spectrum disorder and their families. Debate continues amongst researchers and service providers about the prevalence and incidence of autism spectrum disorder and the most effective diagnostic methods. The general consensus is that the diagnosis of autism has increased in the past decade. Of course, that is partly due to the fact that people know more about it and are able to work through the issues. In the July 2006 report to the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing authors Jacqueline Roberts and Margot Prior state that there is universal agreement that behavioural interventions have produced positive outcomes for children with autism that are well supported by research. They point out also that the controversy continues about particular behavioural interventions and programs, concerns about methodological issues and differences in the interpretation of research findings. Roberts and Prior also report that intense treatment may not be appropriate for all children and families.

Autism Behavioural Intervention New South Wales is the peak organisation that represents families undertaking applied behavioural analysis programs for children with autism. A major part of the process in recognising autism spectrum disorder as an issue in our community and society has been the work of peak bodies, support groups, parents of autistic children and their families, relatives and friends. Their work has put the issue on the agenda, and I congratulate them.

To keep building on our knowledge of best practice, the Government's $6 million package will facilitate the evaluation of models to be implemented by Autism Behavioural Intervention New South Wales, Autism Spectrum Australia [ASPECT] and the Autism Early Intervention Outcomes Unit [AEIOU], about which we heard quite a deal during the debate. Children with an autism spectrum disorder attend a wide range of services. No one service will meet the needs of all families, and children and parents are encouraged to choose an available service that can best meet the individual needs of their child. The importance of professional development in building capacity among staff working with children with autism spectrum disorder is discussed several times throughout the Roberts and Prior report.

Studies in New South Wales indicate that teachers feel they lack the necessary time, skills training and resources to implement inclusive practice. The Centre for Special Education and Disability Studies at the University of Newcastle received $500,000 for training front-line staff who will be working with young children. That will build capacity of teachers and other personnel working in early childhood intervention settings. In 2006 the university developed an early childhood intervention professional development course titled "Preventing and reducing challenging behaviour in young children using functional assessment: Social and communication supports", which was trialled in 2006-07. The course was trialled statewide in 2007. An internal evaluation of the course indicated that the training workshops were effective in increasing knowledge, skills and confidence of participants in behaviour management, decreasing concerns about managing behaviour, and helping participants to more effectively use behaviour management strategies in their work.

The course is now being conducted across the State over four years to cater for almost 1,000 personnel who are working with young children with challenging behaviour and autism in early childhood intervention and childcare settings—which is a better arrangement than in the 1960s when autistic children were simply put into class 1J. The first series of courses to be presented in the new round of funding have been scheduled for 7 and 21 November and 5 December 2008. The courses are planned for Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care regions at Coffs Harbour, Newcastle, Parramatta, Canterbury, Wollongong and Orange.

In early 2009 the current course will be revised and extended to strengthen the focus of the autism-specific component. It is envisaged that the revised program will also provide an opportunity for accreditation towards tertiary study for personnel wishing to undertake related courses. The project is an important part of the package of support for children with an autism spectrum disorder. It assists in focusing effort, not only on building autism-specific services but also on assisting a range of staff who, in other settings, also are working with children with an autism spectrum disorder. It is an incredibly important part of any program to ensure that in New South Wales there is equity in training for country persons. With across-the-board educational programs, some individuals are not able to attend special centres or special schools because of low numbers within a certain population group. We must ensure that the staff of those institutions obtain the extra skills they require and that there is equity in training opportunities. That is a very important part of the process.

The New South Wales Government recognises the challenges being posed by the increased diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders and is committed to meeting those challenges through services, support, training and research. I congratulate the Hon. Amanda Fazio on bringing this matter to the attention of the House.

The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX [2.43 p.m.]: It is with pleasure that I participate in debate on the motion moved by the Hon. Amanda Fazio. I will make some general comments and refer to some local issues from, Queanbeyan. Clearly, the Government's $6 million package, which is central to the motion, is a positive step in recognising some of the issues inherent in autism as they affect people who live in western Sydney. The Government has adopted a positive approach to ensure that services are available at an early age for all autistic children. The package provides a much-needed $1.24 million autism-specific centre in western Sydney, which will assist in enabling autistic children to attend mainstream schools without the support of an aide.

Federal Government statistics show that more than 50 per cent of autistic children in New South Wales live in south-west Sydney, and that is a very alarming statistic. Although the funding provided by the Government is a good start in addressing the need for early intervention services in western Sydney, I hope I will be able to convince the House that such services should be provided for the whole of New South Wales. I note that similar centres have been set up in Queensland, where success rates have proven such facilities to be highly beneficial to autistic children and the wider community. The statistics show that 70 per cent of children with autism who attended Queensland centres were able to successfully move back into mainstream schools. That is really a fantastic result. I hope that similar success may be achieved in New South Wales. I applaud the Government for finally taking steps to divert much-needed resources to the provision of centres.

Autism in Australia is increasing at an alarming rate. Early detection and treatment of autism is vital. Autism is believed to affect approximately one in 160 children aged between 6 and 12 years old. That also is an alarming statistic because it reveals that the impact and diagnosis of autism has increased steadily over time. The earlier it is detected that a child has autism, the quicker they will be able to obtain access to early intervention services, and that will lead to much better outcomes for the child and for the child's family. It is important for a child to be able to access education programs as well as other vital therapies as soon as possible after diagnosis to ensure that the best results from the programs will be achieved.

Early intervention is important not only for the child's wellbeing but also, as I mentioned, for the child's family. Those who care for an autistic child must be able to support the child and access resources and professional advice to assist them to cope with the additional challenges they face. Quality accessible information often goes a long way towards better equipping parents to look after their autistic child. The $200,000 funding for a DVD to assist families is a positive step in assisting parents to understand how to best manage their child's autism. Educational equipment and material should be offered free to families because it is an essential tool in understanding and dealing with autism. I know personally a number of families who have a child with autism, and I understand the behavioural difficulties that they must deal with.

Behaviour varies very much from child to child, but challenging behaviour of an autistic child can impact heavily upon everyday, simple activities. For example, autistic children have difficulty in dealing with change. Even taking a different route home from their local shopping centre or changing a daily routine to include an outing can be an enormously confronting and alarming occurrence for them. The impact of their reaction upon carers and families can be very great. Autistic behaviour can be very difficult for a family to manage, particularly when there are other children in the family. The impact of autism on families is perhaps less well understood in our community than it should be. While it is wonderful that resources will be diverted to assist in providing early intervention, it is only one part of the problem. The Government should extend a helping hand to families.

Autism is difficult to diagnose because there is no medical test that can be applied consistently. Early indications of autism may include unusual patterns of behaviour as well as unusual communication and social skills. There is no single indicator of autism. Often a combination of several indicators will manifest in a child. Autism disorders are usually diagnosed by the age of three, but signs of autism may present themselves during the first 15 to 18 months, when parents may notice various delays in development. The ability to diagnose autism as early as possible is critical, and the Government can extend further assistance to families by ensuring that adequate resources are available not only in western Sydney but across the State so that these conditions are diagnosed as early as possible. It is through early diagnosis that we can then move to intervene and maximise the opportunities for the child and their family to deal with what is often a difficult and confronting situation.

All research to date highlights the point that early diagnosis of autism leads to better outcomes for the child. This was outlined in a paper by the Australian Advisory Board on Autism Spectrum Disorders. In its September 2007 national call for action paper it highlighted the importance of accessing early intervention services and emphasised the need for increased resource allocation for these services for children with autism. The paper also expressed the importance of strategies that focus not only on the child but also on family members and carers. Many organisations in Australia assist people with autism in their families. One of the most prominent organisations is Autism Spectrum Australia [Aspect] based in New South Wales. Aspect has been highlighting the need for funding, early intervention and education of the broader community for many years.

Autism Spectrum Australia's vision of overcoming the isolation of autism is becoming a reality as it leads the way in providing education, information and other services to families and communities. I am sure the measures outlined in the package will go a long way to complement the fantastic work of organisations such as Autism Spectrum Australia. I encourage the Government to continue further down that path and ensure that adequate funding is provided over time for these services as well as a host of other services across New South Wales. This allocation of funding in western Sydney is long overdue. The Coalition welcomes the funding. It acknowledges the commitment made by the former Howard Government before the 2007 election when it put the importance of increased funding for autism in the spotlight and announced a $190 million plan to help children with autism. On the day the announcement was made the then Federal member for Eden-Monaro, the Hon. Gary Nairn, and I were visiting the special needs children's group in Queanbeyan. The announcement was well received by the parents and carers of children.

I acknowledge that the motion before the House deals only with western Sydney, and in that respect it is inadequate; the issue applies across the State. It is worthwhile making a few comments, particularly about the Queanbeyan region, which I know well. The Queanbeyan special needs group is a wonderful local organisation that provides support to families with children with autism and other special needs. I have visited the organisation on a number of occasions. Indeed, I am a member of the organisation as I have a child with special needs. In that regard, it is disturbing to see the appalling lack of funding provided by government to these organisations, which provide a wonderful community support for parents.

I acknowledge the wonderful work of members of the Queanbeyan special needs group and the professionals who work closely with them. The kids are wonderful. It is sad that the organisation is so critically underfunded that its own building is falling down around itself, and services promised by the State Government are simply not provided. The staff of the Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care do a wonderful job in terms of providing services. Although on paper the department is adequately resourced by government, the reality is that the professionals who perform the necessary work are not available in country New South Wales.

Although early intervention services are provided in the State Government budget, it is sad that people cannot access those services as there are no trained speech pathologists in places such as Queanbeyan, which is a significant regional centre. The further west the area, the worse the problem becomes. The Hon. Michael Veitch has seen the problem in his area and in the Young area. Further west again, the services become non-existent. Problems may exist in western Sydney but the Government has not adequately catered for the serious problems in western New South Wales. The Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care staff in the Queanbeyan area are absolutely wonderful and do a tremendous job with families on a range of issues. They provide not only speech pathology but also occupational therapy and other early intervention services that are critical to ensure that the children get the best possible outcomes.

We must ensure that country communities are looked after and that we as a society give those who are less fortunate than most of us the opportunity to live a full and rich life. Sadly, some of the basic services missing in the Queanbeyan region in particular go straight to the heart of identifying these problems early. At present if a parent in Queanbeyan suspects that their child has autism they must travel to Goulburn for an assessment of whether autism or other issues are the cause. Many families, with the everyday pressures we all face, find that difficult. Alternatively, they may go to the Australian Capital Territory and pay for a diagnosis.

Diagnosis is critical not only for ensuring that one can move to early intervention services, which may or may not be available in a particular area; it is also important because organisations such as the special needs group in Queanbeyan are partly funded by the Department of Education and Training, which requires that a child be assessed as having special needs before funding is provided for the child. It is a circular argument: often funding is denied to local community organisations because of a lack of funding to ensure that an assessment is made in the first place. Sadly, that is the situation in places such as Queanbeyan and in other places across rural and regional New South Wales.

One might think that the people of Queanbeyan might be able to access services in the Australian Capital Territory but services in the Australian Capital Territory are not available to residents of New South Wales. There is an Australian Capital Territory cross-border agreement on health, which is a long and colourful story in itself. In that regard I note that negotiation of the 2009-13 agreement is ongoing. Sadly, the people who miss out are the residents of New South Wales who simply do not receive the necessary services. There is no Australian Capital Territory-New South Wales cross-border agreement relating to disability services, because the New South Wales Government has not pushed the issue with the Australian Capital Territory to the necessary level.

It is fine on the one hand to have an Australian Capital Territory-New South Wales cross-border health agreement whereby patients from New South Wales provide the cornerstone of the Australian Capital Territory system through approximately 20 per cent of the funding for the Australian Capital Territory hospital system, but it is unsatisfactory on the other hand that the Australian Capital Territory, which is happy to receive that money, will not provide any disability services to New South Wales residents. That is appalling. Some cross-border cooperation in the provision of disability services area is well over due, and I call on the New South Wales Government to address this anomaly as a matter of priority. It is a very practical measure and I encourage the Government to enter into negotiation with the Australian Capital Territory to ensure that such services are provided promptly to residents of New South Wales who live near the Australian Capital Territory border.

I acknowledge the wonderful families of children with autism and those who care for such children, and the wonderful work they do to give autistic children the best start in life. They are an enormous hidden resource for our community in that they spend their lives supporting their children—an instinct that all of us have—but they do so in such a selfless way, and that is so terribly undervalued by our communities. Governments need to be very careful about ensuring that people who provide these hidden support services are given as much support as possible in order that they too can live as rich a life as possible.

Special needs children in Queanbeyan use facilities in a run-down old building that is surrounded by barbed wire and provided by local council at a peppercorn rent. There is a dire need for significant infrastructure funding to ensure the availability of a proper facility for these children, their families, and professionals who provide services in the community. I note that $500,000 has been allocated by the Government to provide a new facility in Queanbeyan. I understand that a site is being sought and that further funding will be required to ensure that it is provided to children with special needs. It is worth noting that recently a similar building was provided in Cooma, and that has been a wonderful investment for that community. I encourage the Government to provide a similar facility as early as possible to the people of Queanbeyan, where there is a strong demand from many families and children with special needs.

In closing, I commend the Hon. Amanda Fazio for bringing this issue to the attention of the House. I agree with the import of the motion. I suggest that the Government seek to enhance such services throughout New South Wales, but particularly in rural and regional areas. I call on the Government to provide those resources as quickly as possible, and I ask the Government to negotiate with the Australian Capital Territory Government to provide services on the ground in the Queanbeyan region.

The Hon. KAYEE GRIFFIN [3.03 p.m.]: The New South Wales Government is determined that children with autism and their families do not fall through the cracks. We know that without access to new and expanded services these children and their families or carers may experience social and economic problems. We also know that families with children who have behaviour disorders and autism want and need more long-term help and practical solutions. The number of children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder continues to rise and we now face the challenge of how to best support these children, young people and their families. In November 2007 the Minister launched an innovative information kit prepared by Aspect at a cost of $185,000. This kit includes information to assist families with a young child who has recently been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder. It also provides an overview of autism spectrum disorders, early indicators, the diagnostic process and responses to questions typically asked by parents.

The Government is also producing information kits for Aboriginal and culturally and linguistically diverse families who have a child with a disability including autism, as well as information for families around key transition points for a child or young person with a disability. The $6 million package over four years, announced in March this year, will boost services for young children with autism and their families in a wide variety of ways. Five demonstration projects have been funded under the Support Networks: Children and Young People with a Disability and their Families Program, which is an initiative to trial projects that promote parent, sibling and peer support networks, including two projects that will focus on supporting children and young people and their families with autism spectrum disorder.

A grant of $200,000 was provided to Autism Behavioural Intervention New South Wales in 2006, to establish a non-intensive service based on the principles and techniques of applied behavioural analysis. A supplementary grant of $100,000 was then allocated to applied behavioural analysis in January 2008 to assist with the completion of this program by June 2008. This is a form of early intervention for children under the age of six who do not currently attend school. An external review of the program conducted in 2008 indicated that this pilot program was well received by families and met the criteria for good practice. In 2008 the Government announced the provision of $5 million over four years to support children and their families with managing problem behaviours both at home and at school under the Helping Children with Autism and Challenging Behaviours Project. The Government also recognises the support that families need over holiday periods and has provided $1 million in 2007-08 to fund access to holiday camps and recreational activities as part of the Leisure Link Program. This funding is to be integrated with a case management model in 2008-09 in two pilot areas, Macarthur and Gosford, with the provision of an additional $500,000.

The Government has increased the support available to families experiencing significant stress in caring for their child with autism spectrum disorder. Sixteen intensive family support services have now been funded across New South Wales at a cost of approximately $4.5 million per year. A recent independent evaluation of the intensive family support services indicated that they play an important role in supporting families, and that families caring for a child with challenging behaviours are the major clients of the service. An additional $5 million has been allocated to improve the availability of more flexible, longer-term support for families caring for children with high medical support needs or challenging behaviours, and that includes children with autism. Up to 100 families per annum will benefit from this funding through packages of up to $50,000 per family. The provision of this funding will address the critical gaps in the service system for families experiencing significant stress.

One of the most important parts of diagnosing and supporting children and families is recognising that the earlier that intervention in a child's life occurs, the greater the benefit that intervention can make to the child at all levels of society. Although I do not have personal involvement with a child with autism I can say that early intervention was of vital importance to the life of my goddaughter, who has Down's syndrome. I have spoken before in this House about Jenny McCullum. She is now an adult and we are very proud of her. The early intervention programs that were available when Jenny was a very young child have certainly contributed to the significant role she plays in society today.

The Hon. MICHAEL VEITCH [3.09 p.m.]: I support the motion. Before becoming a member of this House last year I worked in the disability services sector for some 15 years, essentially training and finding jobs for people with disabilities, many of whom suffered from autism. Autism can be one of the more difficult disabilities to work with because the broader community has little understanding of it. In my experience the broader community can accept the limitations of someone with a physical disability who may be in a wheelchair, however find it difficult to grasp the concept of a disability that is not physical.

Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes: Especially autism.

The Hon. MICHAEL VEITCH: That is right. There is often a lack of understanding of autism. I have heard autism described best as "being in a foreign country without a map, unable to speak the language and unable to understand, convey or recognise feelings or emotions in other people". I often wonder how I would cope in a foreign country, unable to communicate with anyone and not able to consult a map or guide. As an old shearer, I probably would not do too well. The problem with that analogy is that autism as a condition is not static. With early intervention, tailored educational programs and the right support and guidance, autism sufferers can learn to cope and manage with day-to-day living tasks and can contribute to their wider community. It is important for all of us to remember that autism does not just affect the lives of sufferers and their families; the entire community is impacted by autism.

Synergies Economic Consulting has estimated that the annual total cost to the community of autism is about $4.5 billion to $7 billion. This includes direct costs for the likes of health care, social services and education, and indirect costs for employment, informal care and the burden of illness. It is suggested that these costs, which are borne by the community, could be reduced with appropriate, effective, early intervention, and targeted and tailored education programs.

It is estimated by some that autism may affect as many as one in 500 people, making it more common than childhood cancer or indeed Down's syndrome. In addition to this, rates of autism diagnosis are increasing. The costs to the community and the increasing rates of diagnosis have led the New South Wales Government to act, offering the largest ever package for autism funding in New South Wales—a $6 million package for the expansion of early intervention services for children with autism. This includes an autism-specific childcare centre in Western Sydney. The centre will be run by the Autism Early Intervention Outcomes Unit [AEIOU], which has run very successful centres in Queensland. The hope is to repeat those successes here in New South Wales, giving kids with autism the leg-up they need to make it through mainstream schooling.

However, it is well known that there is no one magic solution for autism. In fact it often takes a variety of educational approaches to find one that works for individual sufferers. The Labor Government recognises that a variety of approaches is needed and that is why in this $6 million package the Government is investing in another two services with different approaches—$2 million to expand a project run by Autism Behavioural Intervention and a further $2 million for the Autism Spectrum Australia's Building Blocks Program, which provides both home and centre-based care. These early intervention educational programs are vitally important for children diagnosed with autism and also critically important for their families. According to the Autism Early Intervention Outcomes Unit, a leader in the field, early intervention is about applying a structured approach to the education of children with autism and, further, that children who receive educational intervention before the age of four years have shown to significantly improve their chances of learning new skills and adapting to their environment.

The New South Wales Government is also investing $500,000 to increase training. As a result, more than 900 training spots will be provided for early intervention and early childhood teachers. There is also money to produce a manual and a DVD to assist parents immediately following the diagnosis of autism. As the former Minister for Disability Services, Ms Kristina Keneally, said in the lower House, "This package is the single biggest expansion of early intervention services for children with autism in the State's history."

Not only have I worked with people with autism, I also have family members living with autism. My sister has twin autistic sons. The funding is a welcome boost and will provide the platform to build further funding arrangements. I would like to reflect, as I am certain most members have, on the very passionate speech of the Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox. There are cross-border issues with the Australian Capital Territory not only relating to access to services for people with a disability, but also relating to housing and diagnostic services. It would be remiss of any member not to reflect on the matters raised in the member's passionate contribution. I commend the motion to the House.

Debate adjourned on motion by the Hon. Greg Donnelly and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, as Chair, tabled report No. 32, entitled "The Need for a Mini-budget", dated October 2008, together with the transcript of evidence, tabled document and correspondence.

Report ordered to be printed on motion by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile.

Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [3.15 p.m.]: I move:

That the House take note of the report.

As members know, on 29 August 2008 the former Premier, the Hon. Morris Iemma, announced that a mini-budget would be delivered within 10 weeks in order to reflect the changed fiscal outlook for the State, and the Treasurer, the Hon. Eric Roozendaal, has since announced that the mini-budget will be handed down on 11 November 2008. On 24 September 2008 General Purpose Standing Committee No. 1 resolved to adopt the terms of reference pursuant to its power to self-reference. The terms of the reference required the committee to examine the need for a mini-budget and report to the House by 30 October, prior to the handing down of the mini-budget. The Committee had one public hearing in Parliament House on 9 October 2008. The main witness was the Secretary of New South Wales Treasury, Mr John Pierce. He explained to the committee that the need to deliver a special mini-budget was motivated by three related issues: first, the lack of parliamentary approval for the Government's electricity reform package; second, emerging risks to budget operation results due to pressure on revenues and expenses; and, third, Standard and Poor's downgrading of the State's credit rating from stable to negative following the blocking of the electricity reform package.

The committee examined these issues in detail during questions by committee members to the secretary. I wish to draw the attention of the House to the committee's power to order documents. During the hearing on 9 October 2008 a member of the committee requested that Mr Pierce provide the committee with a copy of the briefing note to the former Treasurer regarding interest rate calculations. Mr Pierce undertook to advise the committee whether he would provide the briefing note at his next appearance before the committee on Tuesday 14 October 2008, when he was to give evidence at an inquiry into the 2008-09 budget estimates. When I asked, as chair of the committee, during budget estimates whether he would provide the committee with a briefing note, Mr Pierce responded:

I am advised that the Crown Solicitor has advised that the Committee does not have the power to order the production of documents. If necessary, that should be dealt with by the whole House under Standing Order 52. If the Committee wishes to progress this request, I ask that the Committee refer the matter to the House.

The committee decided not to make an order for the document at the hearing on 9 October. The status of that request was simply that of an individual member of the committee requesting that the witness provide the document voluntarily. However, with respect, the committee does not support the interpretation of its powers as provided by the Crown Solicitor. The committee acknowledges that there is a difference in view between the Executive and the Legislative Council as to the power of its committees to order the production of documents. In this case the committee has chosen not to pursue the matter further, although it has the power should it wish to do so.

Debate adjourned on motion by Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile and set down as an order of the day for a future day.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [3.19 p.m.]: The great pleasure that I have in moving this motion is tinged with a little sadness because it highlights the demise of the once great Labor Party in regional New South Wales. I move:

1. That this House notes:

(a) that the Western Division Group of the Shires Association of New South Wales held its 2008 annual conference on Monday 3 March 2008,

(b) that this region, which covers over half of the State, is of great social and economic importance to New South Wales,

(c) that this conference discussed, addressed and passed motions on key issues in the areas of planning, environment, water management, local government, finance, roads and transport, and community services,

(d) that this conference was attended by Liberal/Nationals members, Mr John Turner, MP, Shadow Minister for Lands and Mineral Resources; Mr Chris Hartcher, MP, Shadow Minister for Local Government and Water Utilities; Mr John Williams, MP, Member for Murray-Darling; and Mr Duncan Gay, MLC, in his capacity as Shadow Minister for Roads, Ports and Waterways—

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: You left the best till last.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I could not say that. The Leader of the Opposition can. I have not put it in the motion but I am nearly certain that Kevin Humphries, the member for Barwon, was there when I was not. I can say that in the knowledge that not one member of the Labor Party in this House or in the other place would know any different or be able to challenge what I said. The reason for that is coming up in a moment.

The Hon. Tony Catanzariti: There was no invitation.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: The letter was not in the mail. We will come back to that one. The motion continues:

(e) that this conference was attended by councillors from Balranald, Bogan, Bourke, Brewarrina, Broken Hill, Carrathool, Central Darling, Cobar, Hay, Lachlan, Moree, Walgett and Wentworth,

(f) that not a single Labor Party Minister was in attendance at this important conference,

(g) that not a single Labor Party Member was in attendance at this important conference, and

(h) that not a single Country Labor Member was in attendance at this important conference.

2. That this House:

(a) expresses dissatisfaction with the Government's blatant disregard for the people of country New South Wales, and

(b) expresses dissatisfaction with the Government's city-centric focus where priority and focus is centred on damage control over recent corruption allegations rather than doing the job of serving the people of New South Wales.

One has to ask where Labor members were. They say they did not get an invitation. It was probably the same for the other local government conferences that were held around the State at that time at which they were notable by their absence. They just were not there. In fact, we are missing them all over regional New South Wales. A couple of weekends ago I was in Port Macquarie for the by-election and I was looking for the Labor Party candidate. I looked everywhere. I looked in the cupboards; I looked in the usual places where one finds Labor candidates. They were not there.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: How many rocks did you lift?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I looked under lots of rocks. I looked in all the usual places you would find a Labor candidate, but I could not find one anywhere. The delicious irony of this is that—

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Charlie Lynn will cease interjecting.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: —despite not fielding a candidate in the Port Macquarie by-election the Labor Party is going to Port Macquarie for its big knees-up. Country New South Wales is a great place to visit but the Labor Party does not really want to represent it. Labor members do not really care about it and they do not really want to represent it. I started my foray into politics about 30 years ago fighting the good fight in Goulburn. I had a helluva lot of fights with some fabulous people like Ernie McDermott and other great people from the Labor Party in those times. We disagreed vehemently but they always turned up and always fought their fight. Whether you agreed with their politics or not, they were decent people who actually had a go for rural people. They were not a mob of wimps that were playing politics at the behest of Sussex Street and people like the Hon. Eric Roozendaal. The farthest west the Hon. Eric Roozendaal has ever been is Parliament House. He is an example of the sorts of people who run the Labor Party and that is why, when we looked around at the Cobar conference, we wondered where they were.

I looked for the Hon. Tony Kelly. He is a nice bloke, but he always wants to have a little niggling go at The Nationals. He has his dorothy dixers and he puts the sword in and twists it. He tells country people how he wants to represent them. Where was he?

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: He must have been there.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: He was not there. No-one saw him. Where was Morris Iemma? Morris was not there. Honourable members will remember the bloke who was Premier for a little while, the bloke honourable members opposite are now saying they want back.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: It is not that he was not there; it is just that he was not all here.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: That is what a lot of people are saying. Where was Frank Sartor? Let us be fair: local government representatives did not want Frank there. Well, they probably did because they had a few words they wanted to say to him, but he was not there. Where was the Minister for Local Government? The Minister is the first person who is always invited to the regional conferences. Honourable members opposite say he was not on the mailing list. Can you believe that? He was not on the mailing list. The cheque is in the mail, the dog ate my homework—it is all the old stuff. Where was he? Where was the Hon. Ian Macdonald—Macca? He was in Asia probably, fanging over China.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: There is no chairman's lounge out there.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: There is not. You cannot get a chairman's lounge when you fly to Dubbo and then have to drive to Cobar. It is just not there and Macca likes to be up the front when he fangs across the State. I would have thought the Hon. Michael Veitch would have been there. I have to tell honourable members that people in Young are saying that Mick Veitch is harder to find in the electorate than Alby Schultz.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Is that right?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: That is right. It is a big claim. I do not necessarily support this, but it is a problem. This is the old shearer; you would have thought he would have been at Cobar.

The Hon. Charlie Lynn: He was shearing in the bar.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Yes, he was shearing in a bar. He was not there. Of course, another Minister was not there. Can anyone guess who that was? Here we were out in the Western Division discussing issues to do with water and there was an inquiry underway into water by Ian Armstrong. Nathan Rees used to be the Minister for Water, now he is the big kahuna—the new Morris Iemma.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: He is in love.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: He is in love with traffic, and who can blame him.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: It looks like a speed hump to me.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: On his way out of the State. People are wondering about that. It was a very strange thing. It was a shires conference attended by an important group of people discussing the issues of the region and there was an inquiry underway into water, so one has to ask: Where was Nathan Rees? He was not there; no-one from Labor was there. I have a sneaking suspicion why they were not there. They were scared. They did not want to be there because they knew that their Government had not paid the bills. They knew—the Hon. Tony Catanzariti, the Cat, would have known—that the Nyngan butcher was owed nearly $4,000 by the Greater Western Area Health Service [GWAHS]. The rest of Country Labor would have known that the Greater Western Area Health Service owed a Dareton transport business $332.85, which had been outstanding for more than 100 days. A Broken Hill office supplies business was owed $12,230.01, which had been outstanding since May. The Hon. Tony Kelly would have known this. That is why, nice bloke that he is, he did not want to front up. He would have known that. The Hon. John Della Bosca, who is not a member of Country Labor, was not the Minister for Health then, but one of his predecessors should have been there. There have been so many I cannot remember who they are, but one of them should have been out there anyway.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Did they have Matt Brown out there to entertain them?

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Jamie Drury!

The Hon. Greg Donnelly: Point of order: As entertaining as the presentation of the honourable member might be, drawing as it has a lot of chuckling from his side of the Chamber, I presume the honourable member is familiar with the rules of debate in this place. He would well know the provisions of Standing Order 91 (3) regarding imputations and reflections on members. I ask that he be requested to make his contribution accordingly.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: To the point of order: I know that many things are prohibited by the standing orders of this House. However, I would not have thought that enjoying a debate or enjoying your own contribution is one of those. Also, I suspect that Matt Brown would not be offended by being likened to Jamie Drury.

The PRESIDENT: Order! Most debates in this place are conducted with great seriousness. Debate on this motion should be treated no differently, otherwise, clearly the Deputy Leader of the Opposition would not have sought to have it included on the Notice Paper. To give due weight to the point of order, I am guided by the fair and reasonable ruling given on 19 November 1997 by Deputy-President Gay, which states:

Imputations of improper motives to and personal reflections on members are deemed to be disorderly.

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition should bear that ruling in mind.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Mr President, I accept that learned ruling, and will abide by it. I return to the case that I was prosecuting—why Labor members were not in attendance, much to their embarrassment. The fact is that a Broken Hill business was owed $3,500 by the Greater Western Area Health Service for powder coating, and the amount had been outstanding since June 2008. Invoices from a Broken Hill business for beverages dating back two years and totalling about $4,000 remain outstanding. Needless to say, that company no longer provides services to the Greater Western Area Health Service. A Dubbo coffee shop was owed approximately $2,000 to $3,000 by the Greater Western Area Health Service. Another Dubbo coffee shop was owed approximately $7,000 to $8,000 by the Greater Western Area Health Service. It is a cafe latte society out there, I suspect; no bandages, and a large amount of money owed to small businesses. A Dubbo distribution company was owed $20,000 at the same time as Dubbo hospital staff were forced to get bandages from a local vet. Garbage bags were sent from Dubbo to Mudgee hospital—

The Hon. Christine Robertson: Point of order: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is debating issues outside the motion before the House.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: To the point of order: I am addressing the motion, part of which expresses concern that Labor members of Parliament did not attend a Western Division Shires Association conference. I am attempting to prosecute and find out why they did not attend. The large amount of money owned to local businesses is probably the reason. I understand why the honourable member might not like what I am saying, but it is certainly within the ambit of the motion.

The Hon. Christine Robertson: Further to the point of order: The wording of the motion does not imply that any member of the Labor Party is afraid of the people of the Western Division of New South Wales. I am disturbed that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is using the motion to make that assertion.

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is addressing subparagraphs (a) and (b) of paragraph (2) of the motion, and provided he remains within the broad leave of the motion, he may proceed.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I would not want to offend my friend opposite. As she appears quite concerned by what I have had to say, I will not pursue that line any further. Of course, I can understand her concern about that. Recently I named the president of the Shires Association as a member of the Labor Party—a nice man from Cowra, a decent bloke in the community, and a well-known supporter of the Labor Party who had handed out for them for years. He phoned me and said, "Duncan, can you correct the record. I'm—"

The Hon. Greg Donnelly: Point of order: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition knows full well that he must direct his comments through the Chair and may not engage in personal dialogue with the Leader of the Opposition.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I uphold the point of order. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition should direct his comments through the Chair; however, he may look at the Leader of the Opposition while doing so.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Mr President, I am proud to call him a friend—unlike some on the Government side who do not talk to each other! I was saying that the president of the Shires Association rang me and quite rightly said, "Duncan, you called me a member of the Labor Party, and I'm not a member of the Labor Party." I immediately came into the House and, as honourable members would recall, indicated that he had requested that I not call him a member of the Labor Party. Frankly, who could blame him! No-one in New South Wales wants to be known as a member of the Labor Party at the moment. The only safe seats for the Labor Party in New South Wales at the moment are the ones I am looking at—and some of those are not so safe either! A 22 per cent swing against Labor across New South Wales is an indication that something is wrong—and maybe, just maybe, it could get back to the fact that its members did not attend this conference. Just five minutes ago the Leader of the Opposition mentioned to me that he attended a function in the city, and that was the second function that week that he attended where no-one was present from the Labor Party.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: There were a thousand people there.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: At both?

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: At one.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: And 300 at the other.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Yes, 300, just an hour ago.
The Hon. Lynda Voltz: Point of order: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition should be addressing his remarks through the Chair.

The PRESIDENT: Order! The question of members addressing their comments through the Chair is a vexed one. Members are not required to physically look at the Chair while making a speech. However, they must address their comments to the Chair and not directly to another member. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is making a general address to the Chamber and he may continue to do so provided he does not engage in a private conversation or discussion with another member.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Mr President, you were circumspect in saying where I looked, not how I looked. I quite often note that members in the other place who have had media training in the Labor school of politics do not even look at Mr Speaker; instead, they raise their arms and direct their remarks to the television camera, not even to members of the Chamber. Today I have tried to engage the people in the Chamber. In fact, some of them have complained that I have engaged them too much!

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: It's the people's House!

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is the people's House: the jokes and the contributions are good. Many people from the Labor Party in this House have worked hard for a long time for a party that has great traditions.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: They are slipping away from them.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: They are just slipping away. These tactics of not standing candidates—or running dead—in regional areas to allow Independents to be elected is killing the Labor Party. Labor's vote across the State is down. It does not stand candidates in many rural seats and now its members do not even attend important events in regional areas. Many people in regional local governments are Labor Party members. Last night I spoke very briefly during the adjournment debate about former upper Lachlan shire councillor John Coombs from Crookwell. I do not always agree with him. I like the slogan "MUA go away" rather than the other one!

The Hon. Ian West: You said he was an outstanding councillor.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I did say he was an outstanding councillor. He was elected to Crookwell council and he did a damn good job. He then was voted off. Many Government members were not present during the adjournment debate last night because they do not stay until the proceedings of the House conclude and therefore they would not know that he was voted off the council because of David Campbell. David Campbell was to provide the police that John Coombs had promised the people of Crookwell. On a cold winter's night there was Katrina Hodgkinson, Pru Goward and me—not Alby Schultz. John Coombs promised us that we would keep our sergeant of police. It was a good promise and he was applauded because we wanted to keep the sergeant.

Crookwell has a low crime rate, one of the reasons for which is the police presence. John Coombs said there was no need for any of us to do any work, he would ring up his Labor mate—people have Labor mates—and would fix it. Of course, he could not. Not having John as a councillor was a loss to our community. I hated his politics, but I liked him and the job he did. Western Division councils have many good Labor councillors, a lot of true-blues, who have been fighting for a long time. But those regional areas are disappointed in Labor. They have let the Sussex Street lot, the Eric Roozendaals, rule.

The Hon. Tony Catanzariti: Don't worry about it. You don't have to worry about us.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Somebody has to help. The Hon. Eddie Obeid has the table of knowledge. He has the Hon. John Robertson—Robbo—already sitting at the table of knowledge. The table of knowledge has been moved from Wollongong back up to the Hon. Eddie Obeid's office. The Hon. John Robertson is up there at the moment getting the word from the Hon. Eddie Obeid. The problem is that Labor is overlooking the people. It was a huge shame that the people at the conference were not able to have their problems addressed. We play politics down here when we deal with regional issues, but the people in regional areas do not like politics. They like everyone trying to work together. Members of the State Government were not present at the conference. Honourable members opposite have not learned: they are trying to say that no invitation was sent. That is a load of rubbish.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: They didn't invite me.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: I got my mail. I found my mail, and I have fewer staff than Ministers. We can open our mail and reply. I got in my four-wheel-drive and I managed to get out there.

The Hon. Tony Catanzariti: Show us the invitation.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Why could the Hon. Tony Catanzariti not get there? He is closer to the region than I am. The Hon. Tony Catanzariti—the Cat—did not make it. They would have liked the Cat if they saw him. Everyone likes the Cat. The Hon. Tony Catanzariti is a man of great spirit and joy, but he was not there.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: Nor was Mick Veitch.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Nor was the Hon. Mick Veitch, like the other bloke, the Scarlet Pimpernel.

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: You are recycling material.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: There is a rule on that. The Government members have put up the flag: we have made a point. Labor was not there when the people needed them. It should have been represented, and it is an indictment that Labor will have to wear. I hope its members learn from their mistakes. I suspect they will not.

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON [3.45 p.m.]: This motion is a perfect example of The Nationals' operations in western New South Wales: half-truths, sleight-of-hand tricks and total untruths.

The Hon. Charlie Lynn: Who wrote that?

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON: I did. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition placed this motion on the Notice Paper on 4 March Mr Antony Dale and I rushed around our office to double-check that we had not missed an invitation. We had not.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: You are Minister for what?

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON: I am the Country Labor member of the Legislative Council for the Barwon electorate. If I had received an invitation, I would have asked for a pair so that I could go to Cobar. As I have said before, my mother grew up at Coolabah. It takes me about six to seven hours to drive there, but I go there as often as I can.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: You would not have needed a pair. Parliament was not sitting.

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON: Parliament does not sit on Mondays, but it does sit on Tuesdays. For me to drive for six or seven hours to Cobar to be at the conference on a Monday would have required me to organise a pair for a Tuesday sitting day. To reinforce the nonsense of this motion, I found this item on Wednesday 5 March posted on the ABC News and, further, the general manager's report on 4 March to the Broken Hill City Council. At least the council noted that Parliament was sitting and that was the reason Government Ministers were unable to attend. I would like the mover of the motion to tell me how Opposition members attended the conference and managed to arrive back here on time on Tuesday. At least the general manager's report registered that it was a sitting week and that an apology had been received from the Minister.

The 2008 Western Division Conference of the Shires Association conducted in Cobar from Sunday 2 March to Tuesday 4 March was the last of the nine shires divisional conferences for the year. I am advised that the office of the Minister for Local Government and the Department of Local Government were represented at all nine divisional conferences by Mr Michael Fleming, Director of Reform Implementation. I have attended several Western Division conferences at the request of the Minister for Local Government at the time. I find conferences an informative and important process. If I had received an invitation to this particular divisional conference, I certainly would have attended if it were possible.

The former Minister attended A Division in Bellingen and G Division in Tumbarumba. Mr Ross Woodward, Deputy Director General of the Department of Local Government, also attended and spoke at the G Division conference. Western Division conferences traditionally have been well attended by Government Ministers. Unfortunately, in recent years the Western Division has chosen to schedule the conference during parliamentary sitting weeks, with the resultant decline in the availability of Ministers.

The Western Division conference was scheduled to be held this year on Monday 3 March—the same day as a Cabinet meeting was held, and the day before the commencement of a parliamentary sitting week. In the agenda papers for 2008 the secretary alerted conference participants to the fact that invited Ministers would be unlikely to attend as the House was sitting that week. The papers were circulated well before the meeting—and that was probably when the sleight of hand and tricks began. The former Minister for Local Government met regularly with rural councils across New South Wales, including those in the Western Division. That practice will continue with the new Minister for Local Government.

As the duty member of the Legislative Council for the Barwon electorate, I point out that I also meet fairly regularly with all the councils in Barwon. In a couple of weeks I will be travelling to Moree for exactly that purpose. The Western Division previously conducted a mini-conference in Sydney when Parliament was sitting. The former Minister attended that mini-conference in 2007. The Minister for Local Government has an open-door policy. Rural and regional councils are welcome to meet her at any time. She has already begun holding regular meetings with the presidents of the Local Government and Shires Associations of New South Wales to discuss items of mutual interest. The presidents of both associations are also represented on the ministerial advisory council.

I am very well aware of the great social and economic importance to New South Wales of rural and regional areas, including those within the Western Division. The Government is also very well aware of the importance of rural and regional New South Wales as a whole. In recognition of that, in June 2007 the former Premier established a task force chaired by Dr Col Gellatly and comprising members of the Legislative Assembly Richard Torbay and Steve Whan to examine and provide advice on key economic, environmental and social issues affecting rural and regional communities. The task force invited public submissions, held public forums, and consulted extensively with individuals, businesses, community groups and local government. Some 20 councils and regional organisations of councils made submissions to the task force, and some 80 councils participated in public forums held in areas around the State, including many forums that were held in the Western Division.

The Government is also working to improve communication between communities, local government and State Government agencies to better deal with local issues facing the people of country New South Wales, for which the Government has the greatest regard. This entire motion and the nonsense that came from some of the participants of the Western Division conference constitute a most blatant setup, which I should imagine was plotted by many of the individuals at the conference.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher: They will love that.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: So it is a conspiracy!

The Hon. CHRISTINE ROBERTSON: Excuse me, I said quite clearly "some of the participants", which would include, I suspect, those who attended as future—perhaps never—or shadow Ministers and an amazing number of shire councillors from country New South Wales, particularly western New South Wales, who stand very firmly as Independents and make statements about their independence, but who probably were candidates for The Nationals in the 2007 Federal election. And they still claim to be Independents! They have the audacity to say that politics must be kept out of local government. If this motion is not a perfect example of dumping politics into local government for a destructive cause that does not enhance in any way the importance of western New South Wales, I do not know what is. We are watching extremists of The Nationals in destroy mode.

The Hon. RICK COLLESS [3.53 p.m.]: I have attended the Shires Association Western Division Group conference on many occasions since I was elected to Parliament. It is very obvious that western New South Wales is the forgotten part of New South Wales: the current New South Wales Government certainly has forgot it. The Australian Labor Party has no interest in western New South Wales, despite paying lip-service—as we have just heard from the Hon. Christine Robertson—on a regular basis. But the lip-service is never backed up with action. In contrast, The Nationals are always out and about in that part of the world. That is our territory. That is where we come from. That is where we live. That is where we work. That is where we visit on a regular basis. We have excellent local parliamentary representatives.

The Hon. Ian West: Where was the conference in 2008?

The Hon. Lynda Voltz: Where was it?

The Hon. Ian West: Kirribilli.

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: I acknowledge the interjections and point out that once in 15 years we have a conference in Sydney because we have a metropolitan branch. But I do not hear Government members mention when we have our conference in Broken Hill or in Dubbo, or that next year we are holding the conference in Wagga Wagga. They do not mention that because they are a bunch of hypocrites.

The Coalition has great New South Wales members of the lower House who represent western electorates, such as the member for Murray-Darling, John Williams. The Labor Party lost the seat of Murray-Darling for a reason—not representing the west! That is why Labor lost Murray-Darling and that is why John Williams is now the member for Murray-Darling. It is also why Kevin Humphries won so handsomely in Barwon, having defeated a Labor Party-funded Independent. Both those electorates primarily cover councils that belong to the Western Division Group of the Shires Association. The issues brought forward by the Western Division Group of the Shires Association, which include the environment, water, roads, transport, community services and planning, as well as fundamental core local government matters, are critical issues for all the people who live in those areas.

The Hon. Christine Robertson: Point of order: I would very much appreciate the Hon. Rick Colless withdrawing his reference to an Independent in the Barwon electorate. The statement is wrong and it is untrue. He is misleading the House.

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: Which part of it was wrong?

The Hon. Christine Robertson: That the Labor Party funded an Independent in the Barwon electorate. That statement should be withdrawn because it is totally untrue.

The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order. The Hon. Rick Colless has made a debating point that other members can address in their contributions should they wish to do so.

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: One would have thought that when representatives of 13 local government authorities from the Western Division assembled in one place over a period of days Ministers and members of the Australian Labor Party would have wanted to turn up and that they would have taken every step possible to attend the conference, irrespective of whether Parliament was sitting that week—just as so many members of the Coalition did, including The Nationals and a couple of Liberal shadow Ministers. One would also think that every member of that factional farce within the Australian Labor Party, so-called Country Labor, would consider it essential to attend the conference.

As the member who preceded me in this debate pointed out, not one Minister, not one member of the Australian Labor Party, and not one Country Labor member turned up to the Western Division Group of the Shires Association conference. In other words, they did not bother to turn up to a meeting attended by representatives of 50 per cent of local government areas in the State. That really shows how much Labor members care about western New South Wales. They do not care. The Hon. Christine Robertson pointed out that it is an eight-hour drive from Sydney to Cobar, and I can verify that because I have done the drive many times and gone on to all points farther west. But she may be surprised to learn that there is an air service to Dubbo and that from Dubbo it takes approximately two and a half hours to reach Cobar by car.

Better than that, there is an air service that flies into Cobar, so I do not know why the Hon. Christine Robertson could not take a commercial flight with Air Link Airlines. I am sure that the airline would have been happy to transport members of the Australian Labor Party to Cobar. If a few members wanted to go, the airline probably would have put on an extra service.

The Hon. Tony Catanzariti: I notice you are not suggesting risking it with Rex.

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: It is not Rex; it is Air Link. I suspect Air Link Airlines would have looked after members of the Labor Party had they made a few bookings to travel to Cobar. But they did not even try to go there.

The Hon. Charlie Lynn: They were embarrassed.

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: It is particularly embarrassing for the Hon. Christine Robertson, as the duty member of the Legislative Council for Barwon, that she does not even know that Air Link Airlines flies to Cobar. She probably does not even know that Cobar is in the Barwon electorate. Where was Gerard Martin?

The Hon. Charlie Lynn: Where's Bundy bear?

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: That is what they ask in Bathurst as well. Where was Gerard Martin? Where was Steve Whan? The so-called convener of Country Labor was missing in action. Where was the Minister for Roads? Where was the Minister for Local Government? Where was the Minister for Planning? Where was the Minister for Lands? Where was the Hon. Michael Veitch? Where was the Hon. Christine Robertson? Where was the Hon. Tony Catanzariti? They were all probably sitting comfortably at home waiting to pack their bags and get on the next plane to Sydney for the next sitting week. Where was the Minister for Primary Industries? The Western Division is a big primary industry area, with mining and all the other things he looks after. I suspect that he was too busy fanging around Asia or somewhere.

The PRESIDENT: Order! Earlier I drew the attention of members to a learned ruling of Deputy-President Gay that imputations of improper motives to and personal reflections on members are deemed to be disorderly. The Hon. Rick Colless may continue but he should confine his remarks to the motion and not impute improper motives to or make personal reflections on other members.

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: I withdraw the term "fanging around Asia" and say that the Minister for Primary Industries was probably flying around Asia. As the Deputy Leader of the Opposition asked: where was the then Minister for Water? Apparently the Minister now has another job that he is struggling with, but he was not there. Where were all the other farcical factional fighters from Country Labor? They have disappeared altogether. They were nowhere to be seen on the face of the map. The conference was too far away for members opposite to venture to the land where support for the Australian Labor Party [ALP] has diminished as people in these areas realise that the New South Wales Government has deserted them forever. Let us have a look at the ALP vote in the Northern Tablelands electorate at the 2007 State election.

The Hon. Penny Sharpe: Who won the seat? It wasn't a Nationals candidate.

The Hon. RICK COLLESS: No, but the Labor Party hardly got a vote. That is the point. The Independent member for that electorate has taken about 40 per cent of the Labor Party's vote and about 15 per cent of The Nationals vote. That is what he has done to the Labor Party. Great Labor Party stalwarts in Inverell such as Eric Colley, Bob Dasey and Phil Riley are spitting chips at Eric Roozendaal and the other factional fighters in Sussex Street because Labor members have crucified the Labor Party in some of these electorates. Mark my words: they will not forget what Labor members have done. Since the Deputy Leader of the Opposition gave notice of this motion paragraph 2 (b) has suddenly taken on a whole new perspective. The Government's city-centric focus has now degraded into an ALP-centric focus, with members so embroiled in internal party machinations and recriminations that they are completely unable to govern the State.

Premiers, Deputy Premiers and Ministers at all levels are so busy protecting their own backs that they are unable to look forward to fixing the dreadful state of affairs in New South Wales. Daily Telegraph journalist Bruce McDougall summed it up in today's newspaper when he noted that disillusioned voters had only another 876 days to go before they get a chance to throw the Rees Government out of office. Letters in the media are telling the Government to do the right thing and let the people of New South Wales decide whether it has the right to continue to govern in New South Wales. If Labor members are game they should go to the Governor now and see what happens.

Today we are again witnessing an errant Minister attempting to cover his tracks following an unacceptable outburst and unacceptable actions, and the weak Premier does not have the intestinal fortitude to take action and terminate this bloke. Only 876 days to go. This House has no alternative but to agree to this motion. While it is disgraceful that ALP members and Ministers did not attend the conference of the Western Division of the Shires Association of New South Wales, events since this motion was placed on the Notice Paper raise the importance of paragraph 2 (b). I commend the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for moving this motion, and I commend the motion to the House.

The Hon. MICHAEL VEITCH [4.04 p.m.]: Much as been said about this motion by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. In particular, he asked where Labor members were. Where was the Hon. Trevor Khan while the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was speaking? Where was the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner? Where was the Hon. Melinda Pavey? They were not here to support the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. His loyal servant the Hon. Rick Colless was here, but where were the rest of The Nationals? If the Deputy Leader of the Opposition read the reports tabled in this House he would know that on 3 March the Hon. Jennifer Gardiner was not at the Western Division conference because she was attending a hearing of the Select Committee on Political Electoral and Political Party Funding in the Jubilee Room in Parliament House. I attended that hearing as well. If the Deputy Leader of the Opposition had read the report he would know that, and that is my apology for not attending the Western Division conference.

I meet with 17 southern councils every three months in places such as Adelong, Bethungra and Forbes. The Hon. Nathan Rees was at the meeting in Bethungra: he meets with local councils. We do not disrespect local councils; we meet with them regularly. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that we adopt a bipartisan approach and work together on these matters. He should talk to the members of his caucus. If he did he would know that every June during the shires association conference Katrina Hodgkinson and I host a dinner in Parliament House for the representatives of councils in the Burrinjuck electorate. Is that not working together? I suggest that it might be a way to work together. The member should ask the member for Burrinjuck about that.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Why don't you talk about your mate Alby?

The Hon. MICHAEL VEITCH: We will talk about Alby during debate on another motion. We will have another opportunity to debate Alby, and I suggest that we will probably agree. The Hon. Rick Colless made a serious allegation about a breach of the Electoral Act. He alleged that the Labor Party had provided funding and assistance to an Independent candidate. I suggest that he check his information and withdraw his comments, because he has misled the House. The allegation is serious. He should provide evidence before making comments. He is much better than that.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Don't try that rubbish.

The Hon. MICHAEL VEITCH: No, the Hon. Rick Colless is much better than that. It was a low act. The member should withdraw. It is a disgrace. After my initial comment about how important this issue is to The Nationals no-one has come through the door. The Nationals are not here to support the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. They are doing an Andrew Fraser on the Deputy Leader of the Opposition; they have left him. The Hon. Rick Colless referred to Kirribilli. I understand that the leadership of The Nationals decided to hold their conference at Kirribilli. But the Hon. Rick Colless cannot deny the fact that The Nationals conference was held at Kirribilli. The Labor conference, which will be held at Port Macquarie this weekend—it is close to the tenth anniversary of Country Labor—will be three times as big as the conference held by The Nationals. We have more delegates.

It is the second-largest political conference in New South Wales. It is a shame that The Nationals are not paying attention to what is happening in the bush, let alone in their own electorates. I find it intriguing that The Nationals would accuse the Labor Party of being city centric. By any measure, The Nationals have lost their bearings because their conferences are being held at Kirribilli. They will look out over the serene water while drinking probably imported mineral water. Seriously, this motion is simply an opportunity for the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to attack Country Labor because he knows that The Nationals are under direct threat from Country Labor. Country Labor has The Nationals on the back foot. I urge members to oppose this motion.

Ms SYLVIA HALE [4.08 p.m.]: I am concerned about paragraph 2 (b) of the motion, which states:

… expresses dissatisfaction with the Government's city centric focus where priority and focus is centred on damage control over recent corruption allegations rather than doing the job of serving the people of New South Wales.

That is completely erroneous. This Government is not remotely concerned about damage control over recent corruption allegations. Just last Monday in Wollongong I attended a big meeting of more than 150 residents who were utterly concerned about what the Government through the Department of Lands was proposing in relation to the development of Wollongong harbour. The residents considered this issue so important that they extended an invitation to every member of this Parliament.

Reverend the Hon. Dr Gordon Moyes: Noreen Hay?

Ms SYLVIA HALE: I attended but not one other member attended, including Noreen Hay. Noreen Hay's excuse was that Parliament was sitting this week. The meeting was on Monday night. I do not know how difficult it is to get from Cobar to Sydney but it is certainly not hard to get from Wollongong to Sydney and yet not one Labor member of Parliament was prepared to attend the meeting. The residents only wanted them to listen to what was being said; they did not ask them to agree with what was said. Provision was made for people who did attend to speak if they wanted. Lots of residents and people in the community spoke and were absolutely dismayed that this Government, possibly in collusion with the administrators, would sell off the Crown land to the highest bidder, in fact, following the path that has been followed by Labor councillors during the term of the last Wollongong council. Labor members of Parliament were not prepared to attend or even engage with their representatives.

The Hon. Greg Donnelly: Point of order: I have taken the time to refresh my understanding of the motion moved by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition that deals specifically with a range of issues associated with the Western Division Group of Shires Associations of New South Wales conference. Ms Sylvia Hale is examining a whole range of issues to do with Wollongong and related matters, which seems to be outside the leave of the notice of motion. Therefore, I suggest that Ms Sylvia Hale be invited to look carefully again at the motion and restrict her comments to it.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: To the point of order: I would have thought the comments of Ms Sylvia Hale, apart from being about local government, which is the tenor of this motion, fall directly under paragraph 2 (a) of my motion, which states:

2. That this House:

(a) expresses dissatisfaction with the Government’s blatant disregard for the people of country New South Wales …

I believe the comments of Ms Sylvia Hale are totally pertinent to that paragraph of the motion.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I will not reflect on the content of a motion, nor will I constrain the broad-ranging nature of the debate. However, it is clear that the motion comprises two paragraphs, the second of which is contingent on the first. Accordingly, Ms Sylvia Hale may continue to address the motion broadly, but should bear in mind that paragraph (1) of the motion constrains debate on paragraph (2) of the motion.

Ms SYLVIA HALE: Whilst this motion deals with the problems confronting the Western Division Group of the Shires Association of New South Wales many of the problems experienced by that group are also experienced by other councils, that is, a neglect of their interests by Labor members of this Parliament. I drew the attention of the House particularly to paragraph 2 (b) because I thought that that subparagraph was specifically in error in that it suggested that the focus of the Government was centred on damage control. Clearly, this Government has little concern about damage control with regard to corruption allegations because we have seen from its history in relation to local councils generally, and in relation to the Western Division as well, that it is quite prepared to ignore the interests of those councils whether it comes to the question of forced amalgamation and rate pegging being capped or the whole policies of trying to cost-shift onto local councils costs that should in fact be borne by this Government.

In that regard a former member of this House, Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans, consistently said that it would be highly desirable when bills that impact on local government are introduced that they be accompanied by a costing which indicates what the cost will be to local councils when they are implemented. In relation to the reference in the motion to recent corruption allegations, Labor has a long and dishonourable history, whether it is Strathfield, Rockdale or Wollongong, of its councillors behaving in an absolutely reprehensible manner. The fact that the Government does not care about that or attempts to turn its back was indicated last Monday night at the meeting in Wollongong. It is further indicated by the dismissal of councils and the appointment of administrators such as we saw in the cases of the Labor Liverpool and Wollongong councils, and potentially Shellharbour council.

The Government does not listen to community requests that local government elections proceed expeditiously once a council has been dismissed; it tries to ride out the storm and hopes that the stench will disappear during the inordinately long gap between the dismissal of the council and the holding of council elections. All of that, of course, just alienates the community more and more. I have reservations about the wording of the motion but I think in many ways the spirit of it is right on the ball.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [4.17 p.m.], in reply: The Hon. John Robertson is a new member in his first week in Parliament. He may be aware that I am about to reply addressing the issues that have been raised by members against my motion. It will be a very short address in reply because just about nothing has been raised. It is appalling that Government members did not attend the conference when they should have been there. We have heard some mealy-mouthed reasons why Government members could not attend: The dog ate my homework.

The Hon. Christine Robertson's story was that there was a Cabinet meeting that day. We have heard that Ministers have changed portfolios—the Premier was formerly the Minister for Water—and some present Ministers were not in the Ministry when the conference was held. Frankly, the conference was probably better off because they were not in attendance. There is no reason in the world that at least the Minister for Local Government could not have attended the conference.

Each of those Ministers would have received an invitation. The second part of the Hon. Christine Robertson's defence was that she and the Hon. Tony Catanzariti did not receive invitations. If members accept their story that they could not make it—which I do not accept for one moment; they could have attended given that the conference was held on a Sunday and Monday, with the meeting being held on the Monday—why did they not delegate other members to take their place? The answer is simple. They do not care. They are scared to go into these areas because the people are hostile towards them—and they have good reason to be hostile.

The third reason that the Hon. Christine Robertson advanced was that she could not get a "pair" from Parliament. I can assure you that John Turner, Kevin Humphries, Chris Hartcher, Duncan Gay and other Coalition members did not need a pair to attend the conference. We used our logistic support allocation [LSA] and commercial facilities. As the Hon. Rick Colless indicated, it is possible to hop on a Rex or Qantas flight to Dubbo, or even hire a car—our logistic support allocation lets us do that these days—and drive a couple of hours west of Dubbo. Cobar is a nice place. I know Labor Party members like their coffee; they can get coffee in Cobar.

The Hon. Robyn Parker: They can even get lattes!

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Indeed, and we know that members of the Australian Labor Party are big on lattes! They could have done all that, but they chose not to. Instead they have tried to put up excuses for not attending. The Hon. Christine Robertson is the duty MLC for the area, but she does not know how to get to Cobar, which is in the seat of Barwon. In fact there is actually a flight direct to Cobar. The conference was on Sunday and Monday, and the Parliament did not sit until Tuesday. I have not heard such a load of rubbish in my life. Their attempts at back-pedalling are lame.

The Hon. Mick Veitch suggested that the reason I brought this motion on is that Country Labor is a direct threat to The Nationals. Well, Mick, my advice to you is that the best way Country Labor can become a direct threat to The Nationals is for Country Labor to actually stand a candidate in some of our seats because, mate, you ain't doing it at the moment! He and his colleagues should be looking after the decent members of the Labor Party who have been out there fighting for their community for years. I implore the Hon. Mick Veitch: Don't let them down. I know the member's roots; I know they are good. I recall saying to Johno Johnson when I first saw him as a Labor Party candidate for a Federal election, "Look after this bloke, he's a decent bloke." And quite frankly the Labor Party could do with some decent blokes. He has gone off a little, but the basic bones are still all right.

The Hon. Michael Veitch: Don't do that to me Duncan. All my colleagues are starting to move away from me!

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is always the way, Mick. By the way, Alby Schultz said to thank you as well. You can't help it when you have friends in all quarters. I will not take up any more of the time of the House; there is very little argument for me to counter. Whatever argument there was, was based on no particular fact. I am sure that these particular Labor Party members—and most of them are decent people—are feeling pretty shabby about not looking after their people at the conference. I commend the motion to the House.

Question—That the motion be agreed to—put.

The House divided.
Question resolved in the negative.

Motion negatived.

The President reported the receipt of the following message from the Legislative Assembly:

Mr President

The Legislative Assembly informs the Legislative Council that it has this day agreed to the following resolution:

That Robert Anthony Furolo be appointed to serve on the Legislation Review Committee in place of Noreen Hay, discharged.

Legislative Assembly Richard Torbay
30 October 2008 Speaker

Bill introduced, and read a first time and ordered to be printed on motion by Ms Sylvia Hale.

Ms SYLVIA HALE [4.34 p.m.]: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

It is critical for our community that the supply of affordable housing increases. This bill is one step towards realising that goal. We cannot leave it to the market to ensure that housing remains within the reach of low- to medium-income earners. We have only to look about us today to see how illusory and delusory that notion is. If affordable housing is to be available to all those in desperate need of it, we must act to promote that outcome. We must plan and legislate for that outcome. The bill is very moderate. All it does is to take one of the Government's existing policies and extend its reach. The bill merely extends the ambit of State Environmental Planning Policy 70 [SEPP 70]. It is fair to say, therefore, that the Government's response to this bill will be a litmus test of just how genuine Labor's commitment to affordable housing actually is. SEPP 70 enables a few councils to levy for affordable housing. Other councils would like to be able to do the same. The question is: Will this Government allow them the autonomy to implement the affordable housing strategies that some of them are so keen to adopt?

At the outset I would like to pay tribute to Brian Howe, the former Labor Federal housing Minister, to councillors and social planners at North Sydney Council and Willoughby City Council, and to the former Mayor of Waverley and current member for Coogee, Paul Pearce. The councils referred to have already established affordable housing schemes. I also thank Shelter New South Wales and the Council of Social Service of New South Wales [NCOSS], which have promoted affordable housing policies for many years.

The legislation I am proposing on behalf of the Greens is by no means novel. Similar legislation was adopted in the United Kingdom and the United States of America years ago. I will discuss overseas experience of affordable housing measures later in this speech. Closer to home, the South Australian Government is mandating 15 per cent affordable housing in new growth areas in that State. Greens members of the Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly proposed two very similar bills some time ago. Although the major parties did not support those bills at the time, the former Stanhope Government announced an affordable housing scheme in the new suburb of Mackellar. One can rest assured that the four Greens members of the Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly will do all they can to actively pursue the issue.

The bill seeks to amend the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in relation to affordable housing contributions from developers. The bill will allow but not compel local councils to impose an affordable housing levy on developers of new multi-unit developments as a condition of development consent. The bill provides that where a council determines to require an affordable housing contribution, that contribution can take the form of either a dedication to council or other social housing provider of a percentage ranging up to a maximum of 25 per cent of the total number of units in the development, provided that development comprises 10 or more dwellings, or the monetary equivalent. If the developer is a government agency, for example Landcom, the percentage required can be a maximum of 30 per cent. Housing New South Wales is, of course, exempt because it already provides 100 per cent affordable housing in each of its developments.

This bill is not radical; it is modest and reformist in approach. It provides a tool that local governments can choose to use or not to use. Councils can choose the level of contribution required—and that level is capped at 25 per cent—or they can choose just where the levy is to be applied in their local areas. The approach is flexible; it does not stipulate a fixed percentage or specify the areas where the levy is to apply—it is up to councils and local communities to determine what is best for their areas—and developers are not prevented from arguing a case about commercial viability. Councils can formulate developer contribution plans in a sensible manner, and there is no reason why a requirement for affordable housing will necessarily impact so heavily on developers that their projects become unviable.

It is not in council's interest that that be the case; otherwise there will be no new multi-developments in their areas. The evidence from overseas is that such levies work, and that they do not spell doom and gloom for the residential development industry. The measures in this bill are only one part of the answer to a widespread affordable housing problem—there is, I am sure we are all aware, a significant problem. The more policies there are in place to increase affordable housing supply, the better.

According to the Australian Council of Social Service [ACOSS] paper "Response to the National Rental Affordability Scheme—technical discussion paper" of May 2008, nearly 30 per cent of low-income households—that is, 800,500 households across Australia—are in housing stress, that is, they are paying more than 30 per cent of household income on housing cost. The position of low-income private renters is far worse, with 65 per cent of low-income private renters experiencing housing stress. The Australian Council of Social Service attributes this to the decline in public housing stock and the increase in house prices. The most recent Demographia survey rated Sydney the seventh-most expensive city in the world, and the most expensive city in Australasia.

Yates, Kendig, Phillips, Milligan and Tanton, in their February 2000 date study "Sustaining fair shares: the Australian housing system and intergenerational sustainability", found there was a downward trend in home ownership, especially for young to middle-aged people. Between 1981 and 2006, home ownership rates fell about 9 per cent for 25 to 39 year olds. The study also found that between 1951 and 2006 house prices increased from nearly four times average income to more than seven times average income. The study projects that over the period 2006 to 2045 the proportion of households in housing stress will increase from 12 per cent to 14 per cent, and that home ownership will continue to decline.

It is clear that people are borrowing more money than they can afford in a desperate attempt to secure a home. As a result, mortgage default repossessions have increased. The Australian reported on 16 May 2007 that 5,363 writs of possession were issued in 2006 in New South Wales, up 10 per cent on 2005 figures. It has been reported that in Sydney the default rate rose by 35 per cent in the 2007 financial year, compared to 2006. Despite interest rates easing, if Australia succumbs to recession, we can expect a further increase in mortgage defaults as unemployment rises. Clearly, the problem is structural and complex.

While this bill does propose a new levy on developers, it is not up to developers alone to provide affordable housing. The Greens recognise that there is no single solution to the problem. Governments should play a much stronger role in capital funding for social and affordable housing, and infrastructure provision. Initiatives such as the Rudd Government's National Rental Affordability Scheme are part of the solution. The scheme will provide incentives for producing rental housing at 20 per cent below market rent. On the other hand, the Rudd Government is encouraging housing price inflation by handing cash to first-home buyers of existing dwellings. The Greens agree with ANZ economist Saul Eastlake that subsidies should be directed to new housing only.

There is a long history behind the bill. The New South Wales Labor Government has really let down a lot of people over the past decade. There was hope among local government and the housing sector 10 years ago that the Carr Government would introduce a new environmental planning policy to allow all councils to levy for affordable housing. Former planning Minister Craig Knowles made vague commitments, but nothing happened. The Carr Government brought Professor Ed Blakely here from the United States of America to assist with planning. He tried to inject affordable housing provisions into the Metro Strategy. When addressing the Sydney Futures Forum in December 2004, he said:

We have to look at tenure arrangement. We have to look at non-profit organisations and institutions being a party to the housing developments. We have to look at new planning strategies and incentives for affordable housing, including that in innovative delivery.

Despite Professor Blakely's recommendations, we have a Metropolitan Strategy that contains no real affordable housing measures. The Government amended the planning Act in May 2005 to make provision for voluntary planning agreements. New section 93F, however, relies on a council being able to come to an agreement with a developer by offering inducements—perhaps floor space density bonuses, or a breach of height restrictions—in return for a few units of affordable housing. The Government amendment specifically precluded councils from imposing mandatory contributions. Former Premier Iemma, on his first day as Premier, promised that he would take a particular interest in affordable housing. He reiterated that commitment in his address to an anti-poverty week event organised by the Council of Social Service of New South Wales. We have, however, heard very little about affordable housing since then, apart from vague reassurances from the then Premier that he was "looking at it" and that there were "policies before Cabinet".

The former Premier even set up an interagency task force. He promised an affordable housing strategy by August 2006. Nothing emerged. Then we heard it would be released before the 2007 State election. The election came and went. Then there was the claim, in response to a question I asked on 27 February this year, that the affordable housing strategy actually consisted of an announcement of the refurbishing of some public housing units in the inner west, a bit more public housing for older people, and increasing community housing management of housing units. The Government may believe that is an affordable strategy, but most in the New South Wales housing sector do not. Tellingly, there is no affordable housing provision in the new local environment plan template. Many councils are extremely disappointed, none more so than Waverley, which was told by the Director-General of Planning earlier this year that the council must remove the affordable housing provisions from its draft local environmental plan.

Parramatta Council asked four years ago to be allowed to go forward with its affordable housing strategy and to be included in SEPP 70. It is yet to receive a clear answer from the department, a fact of which David Borger, former mayor of Parramatta and current Minister for Housing, is only too well aware. Clearly, the Government has actively thwarted attempts by councils to institute affordable housing programs. In the absence of a genuine affordable housing strategy the Government has taken to claiming that private market housing is "affordable housing". The member for Parramatta announced in the Legislative Assembly on 22 October 2008:

Bonnyrigg will deliver 833 brand new homes for people in need and 1,500 new, affordable homes for private homeowners.

Here she is referring to the redevelopment of the Bonnyrigg housing estate, which involves partial privatisation of public land but no net gain in social housing stock. The 1,500 new houses for private home buyers will be built and sold privately. There is no control on the price at which they are to be sold, and no control on who buys them. How can the Government possibly claim those as affordable housing? As Professor Julian Disney recently said at a cooperative housing conference:

The housing affordability crisis was predictable and was predicted. Yet governments have done very little to address it.

Government can boost the supply of affordable housing in various ways, particularly by adopting the housing through planning mechanism, which Professor Mike Berry describes as using the land use planning system to encourage or require developers to set aside a proportion of the housing they construct for sale or rent at less than market rates. This Greens bill seeks to use this mechanism, by introducing inclusionary zoning throughout New South Wales.

Inclusionary zoning is a method that many governments, including Labor governments, have taken up in other cities. It is a policy tool in common in expensive global cities. Inclusionary zoning is one way of ensuring that there is a supply of affordable housing available to low to moderate income workers, who are excluded from the private market that demands high prices. That is why we need to counteract this exclusion, hence the term "inclusionary zoning". In essence, developers and governments must act jointly to ensure affordable housing is available.

Sydney is rapidly becoming dysfunctional. Labour shortages have developed in certain areas. Essential service workers—rubbish collectors, nurses, bus drivers, childcare workers, train guards, retail workers, hairdressers, trade apprentices and gardeners, and all the others who keep our cities and towns running—need to live somewhere. I am sure that John Robertson, the former head of Unions New South Wales, understands how higher housing costs and long commutes to and from work have impinged on workers' lives. This bill will go part of the way to ensuring that workers on low to moderate incomes will be able to afford to live closer to where they work.

In England thousands of homes have been provided via section 106 agreements, as they are known. Both government and councils allocate affordable housing units to key workers in certain professions. In London, the affordable housing target is 50 per cent of all new housing across the greater London area. Former Labor Mayor Ken Livingstone was a driving force behind this target. At Imperial Wharf in London 50 per cent of new housing is pegged at affordable prices. These units have been set aside for a mixture of people, including moderate income workers, students, elderly people and others who are unable to afford market rents. The British Government has assisted also in some areas by contributing surplus land. Certainly there is scope for such initiatives in this State.

Most United States jurisdictions require an affordable housing contribution of between 10 per cent and 20 per cent, and in some cases even up to 35 per cent. Inclusionary housing programs originated in the Washington DC metropolitan area in the early 1970s when both Fairfax County, Virginia, and Montgomery County, Maryland, adopted inclusionary zoning ordinances. There are now ordinances in about 300 United States jurisdictions requiring developer contributions to affordable housing. In California as of March 2003 there were 107 cities and counties using inclusionary housing, representing one-fifth of all localities in that State. In Washington State alone inclusionary zoning programs have produced a total of 15,252 affordable units. Inclusionary zoning laws apply in New York, as do rent control laws.

Canadian jurisdictions also use inclusionary zoning mechanisms. Since 1988 the city of Vancouver has required that certain major developments include 20 per cent social housing. In Ontario, many municipalities have adopted inclusionary zoning policies. In our own country, South Australia has introduced planning legislation that includes inclusionary zoning mechanisms. Jay Weatherill, the former South Australian Minister for Housing, released a Housing Plan that specifies a target of 10 per cent affordable and 5 per cent high needs housing in new developments. The then Minister said that his Government would "influence the planning system to achieve this", and the Labor Government amended the planning law accordingly.

In Victoria, 20 per cent of 1,500 new dwellings in a Coburg urban renewal plan will be reserved for affordable housing. Developer Daniel Grollo, whose company Equiset is involved in the scheme, said he could live with inclusionary zoning at the site. At least some Australian developers are getting used to the idea. Federal Minister for Housing, Tanya Plibersek, told the Age that inclusionary zoning may become necessary across the country. She was quoted in the Age on 8 May saying:

We don't want to end up living in cities where you have really huge distinctions in income levels between areas, so that you can't actually afford to live in some suburbs if you're working in those suburbs.

I have written to the Minister urging her to pressure the New South Wales Government to allow more inclusionary zoning. New South Wales has only a handful of affordable housing schemes. However, we host a pioneering affordable housing scheme at Pyrmont-Ultimo and Green Square, which is managed by City West Housing Limited, a company set up by the New South Wales Government in the 1990s. Much of the credit for this scheme has to go to the former Labor Federal Minister for Housing, Brian Howe. The City West Housing Company scheme was financed from three sources: developer contributions, the New South Wales Government and the Commonwealth through the Building Better Cities program. This seed funding allowed the company to start with enough capital to eventually allow it to expand. The scheme has been a success. As of today, the company owns 491 units that house approximately 1,000 people. The company has development approval to construct an additional 57 units at Greens Square, due to be completed in April 2010.

City West makes a surplus of around $7 million a year. Therefore it has the money to plough back into new housing developments. It houses a broad range of people, some of whom earn up to 120 per cent of median income. People at the higher end of the income range pay market rents or close to market. They thereby contribute to the surplus and assist in allowing the company to offer lower rents to those less able to pay, such as pensioners. Why can we not and why should we not replicate this model, given that it is so successful? The Greens' major criticism of Labor's current affordable housing programs is that they are limited. The Government has taken a boutique approach to the problem. It currently requires the planning Minister to authorise schemes via listing in State environment planning policy [SEPP] 70. It does not use the planning legislation across the spectrum, which is the aim of this bill.

If the Government fails to support this bill, it must explain why councils should be prevented from acquiring affordable housing, especially if the council deems it necessary and has made provision for it in its contributions plan and local environment plan. The Government must address the problems of the one-quarter of people in this State who rent privately. These are the people experiencing the highest level of housing stress. These are the people who are making ends meet from week to week, or are leaving New South Wales and moving interstate. Most are not eligible for public housing, and cannot afford to buy. We need policies that meet their needs as well.

I refer to the specifics of the bill. A new definition of who is eligible for affordable housing will be added to the Act. Affordable housing will be for people whose disposable income is in the lowest 40 per cent of household incomes based on the statistical subdivision of Sydney, as identified by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. They will be eligible for affordable housing and pay rent of not more than 30 per cent of their income. The current provisions in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act that deal with affordable housing are very weak. Section 93F contains provisions that allow for planning agreements between councils and developers, but those provisions cannot be used to require affordable housing provisions as a condition of consent. The current provisions specify that only the affordable housing schemes listed in a State Environment Planning Policy can be funded via mandatory contributions. The schemes listed in SEPP 70 number only three. The Government has shown no inclination to expand that number.

This bill amends the Act so that New South Wales councils can legally levy for affordable housing. The Greens' amendments to the Act will give all councils a general power. In section 116C affordable housing is designated as community and public infrastructure, which will remove the necessity for a scheme to be listed in SEPP 70 and thus removes the necessity for SEPP 70. Proposed new Division 5, Development contributions for affordable housing, contains a new section 116Y outlining the conditions where contributions can be imposed. The conditions are that a local environment plan must identify a need for affordable housing within an area to which the plan applies. This could be part or whole of a local government area.

The conditions further include that there must be a development contributions plan in place; the new development to which the contributions plan applies must comprise 10 dwellings or more; it must be a private development or a development undertaken by a government agency, such as Landcom. Social housing providers are exempted for the reasons already outlined; contributions may be up to 25 per cent in private developments and up to 30 per cent for government developments; and developer contributions can be in the form of housing units. For example, out of 100 new homes planned for a site, 10 could be set aside for affordable housing, or it could be an equivalent monetary contribution based on the value of the development. This is consistent with the provisions governing the already existing affordable housing schemes operating in New South Wales.

The provisions in the bill enable councils flexibility in the quantum and type of contribution they seek. In a large multimillion dollar development, such as the former Carlton United Brewery site on Broadway, the council may place a 25 per cent requirement on the developer. But in a 20-unit development in Coffs Harbour, the council may require only a 5 per cent contribution, which would be one unit. In Dubbo, the council might decide that it does not require any contribution at all. Each council will work out, in its contributions plan, the details that meet its specific local conditions. Proposed section 116ZB specifies what will be done with the affordable housing units or monetary equivalent.

A council may either retain the housing or transfer title and management to a social housing provider, such as the Department of Housing, a community housing or cooperative organisation, or a non-profit affordable housing body, such as City West Housing. Any affordable housing contributions will apply only to development applications that are received after the commencement date of the bill. They will not apply to development applications that are made but are not yet approved. The bill will also apply to the Redfern-Waterloo area that currently has special provisions in the Redfern-Waterloo Authority Act 2004, but the bill before the House provides for only a very small affordable housing contribution of 1.5 per cent, which will be applied as the Minister sees fit. The general levy power should apply to this area as well. The remainder of the provisions are of a savings or transitional nature.

I anticipate that there will be opposition to this bill from some quarters. Some developers will say that this is an additional tax on developers. It is certainly a levy or, rather, a developer contribution. The Government already imposes that type of levy on developers for affordable housing purposes in a limited number of areas. It is already in force in New South Wales in a few areas. The affordable housing levy has the advantage of working well in high-cost, high-building activity areas where developers build and expect to make profits. It cannot work if the levy is so high that the developer cannot afford to build. Developers capitalise on land. When a council or other authority makes a decision that results in a windfall gain, such as rezoning or a development consent decision—

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted to permit a motion to adjourn the House if desired.

The House continued to sit.

Item of business set down as an order of the day for a future day.

Motion by the Hon. Tony Kelly agreed to:

That this House at its rising today do adjourn until Tuesday 11 November 2008 at 2.30 p.m.

The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Police, Minister for Lands, and Minister for Emergency Services) [5.01 p.m.]: I move:

This this House do now adjourn.

Ms LEE RHIANNON [5.01 p.m.]: It is time the New South Wales Government changed its policy on motorcycles. The Greens support a reduction in tollway fees for motorcycles relative to cars. Motorcycles and scooters should be allowed to use on-road bus lanes, obviously with buses retaining the right of way. Another easy way to provide for the growing number of motorcyclists and scooter users is to allocate the first and last parking spaces on each street to motorcycles where kerbside parking spaces already are provided.

In 2007 motorcycles and scooters made up 3 per cent of registered vehicles, and their use is growing rapidly, particularly in Sydney. Many people are attracted to scooters and motorbikes as a fuel-efficient, low-cost alternative to private cars. The State Government now needs to include motorcycles and scooters in transport planning. There has been a failure to accommodate motorcycles in the planning of toll roads. Prior to the private-public partnership [PPP] toll roads, motorcycle riders paid one-quarter of the toll rate of a car. When the first private-public partnership toll road opened, motorcycles were reclassified to pay the same toll as cars. A car driver does not pay the truck rate for tolls, so why should motorcyclists have to pay the car rate? The private-public partnership connection suggests that some deal was done between the Government and tollway operators, and motorcyclists were the losers.

In Melbourne motorcyclists do not pay tolls on motorways. In London motorcyclists do not pay the congestion charge. The Roads and Traffic Authority urgently should give more attention to the use of e-tags on motorcycles. E-tags remain inconvenient and problematic for many riders because they are designed for use in enclosed vehicles and remain vulnerable to theft or rain when they are attached to motorcycles. Mounting an e-tag that reliably will be detected is impossible on most motorcycles. A motorcycle rider cannot hear the beep, and a whole number of issues related to inconvenience are associated with e-tags for motorcyclists. If riders do not use e-tags at toll gates, they must remove their gloves to locate coins, so the inconvenience is considerable.

While motorcycling is a relatively high-risk form of transport, overall safety could be improved if motorcycles are taken into account in the road infrastructure planning and road maintenance stages. Road surface hazards were identified as a contributing factor in 21 per cent of single vehicle motorcycle crashes in New South Wales from 2001 to 2005. Motorcycles and bicycles are rarely considered in road maintenance, and that sometimes exposes riders to unstable road conditions caused by slippery steel plates that are used as temporary hole covers, slippery road marking paint, and loose gravel. Crash barriers or guardrails provide enhanced safety for cars and trucks; however, it is time that we also thought of other road users when these barriers are designed. They have been the point of impact for 15 per cent of motorcycle riders who died in single vehicle crashes in New South Wales from 2001 to 2005.

An important book that has been produced is titled "Positioned for safety 2010—Motorcycle safety strategic plan 2007-2010". It sets out a range of recommendations that may reduce accidents and injuries as well as save lives. The Motorcycle Council of New South Wales was instrumental in drawing up the book, and I congratulate Guy Stanford and other members of the council on producing the book. A recent Newspoll survey that was conducted for Motorcycle Awareness Week revealed that 72 per cent of people in the State believe that motorcycles and scooters will play a major part in future transport options. Right now 30 per cent of people in the State are considering the switch from four-wheel vehicles to two-wheel vehicles, owing to increasing petrol prices. Clearly there is a need for an advisory board that can provide motorcyclists with a conduit for direct feedback to the New South Wales Government. I urge the Government to change its policy in relation to motorcycles.

On 11 April this year, Ina Heidtman was awarded an honorary life membership of the Maritime Union of Australia—the first woman ever to receive the honour. Greg Combet is the only other recipient of an honorary life membership awarded by the Maritime Union of Australia. Ina was the Sydney branch manager of the union for 46 years. She commenced with the Waterside Workers Federation when she was 15 years old. Her work has been quite extraordinary. Ina holds the women's record for attending the most May Day rallies; she joined the Communist Party in 1953 at the age of 18; she continues to carry out much of the international work for the Maritime Union of Australia. She was branch secretary to Tom Nelson when she was only 18 years old. Her lifetime of work continues to this day. The House should congratulate Ina Heidtman. [Time expired.]

Mr IAN COHEN [5.06 p.m.]: I speak in this House to commemorate the life of Peter Hamilton and the passing of a true earth champion. Peter Hamilton died peacefully with his family around him in his home at Byron Bay on Thursday night 23 October 2008. He was aged 84 years. I will attend the celebration of his life and his burial that will take place on Saturday 1 November at his home community of Bodhi Farm, Wallace Road, The Channon. Peter was an elder of the alternative movement and was recognised by all who knew him as a wise man. He lived on Bodhi Farm—a pioneering community of people living together and bringing into reality a way of living together in harmony. It was a gathering of people, mostly young, with shared ideals. Peter was central to the philosophical and social life of that community. I often looked to Peter for advice in those early days, as I am sure many others did. He was a guiding light to many people. The official invitation to the burial is in keeping with Peter's life. He will be buried in a bush cemetery in the community in which he spent a significant portion of his life, hence the comment in the invitation to celebrate Peter's long and productive life:

Please bring a plate of vegetarian food to share for lunch, wear celebratory clothes, a hat and sturdy footwear for a burial in our bush cemetery.

Peter was well known and loved for his passion and commitment to community, sustainable lifestyles and the environment. He was an active participant in the first Australian campaign to protect rainforest that took place in the Terania Creek Basin, which is now protected in the Nightcap National Park. He played a leading role in the 10-year Paterson Hill campaign to save an ecologically significant area, now protected as an endangered ecological community, the Byron Bay Dwarf Graminoid Clay Heath, and preserved in Arakwal National Park.

Peter had a keen interest in low-cost, sustainable housing and cohesive social interaction, and was a key player in the creation of planning legislation allowing multiple occupancy in New South Wales. He was a founding member of the Bodhi Farm community. Peter was trained as an architect, and in the 1960s he lived with Aboriginal people in central Australia and studied traditional Aboriginal architecture. He made an extensive photographic study of the traditional wiltja—shelter—focusing on the construction and design in relation to desert conditions and social interaction. Peter played a pivotal role in understanding the significance of Aboriginal architecture and its relationship to Aboriginal social structures. He was deeply interested in the way the quality of architectural design affects all human social interactions and quality of life.

Peter was a pioneer in Australian folk music recording. In the 1950s he founded Wattle Records and Films, together with Edgar Waters, who is now deceased. Wattle Records was dedicated to preserving and promoting traditional bush and indigenous music, and sparked a continuing interest in traditional music of the Australian bush. I last visited Peter in Byron hospital during the local government election campaign. Despite his own difficulties, he displayed a keen interest in the fortunes of local affairs and coped with his situation with stoicism and understanding that only the truly wise could muster. His air of acceptance and peace was inspiring, and his genuine love showed through. Peter has impacted in a positive manner on a significant number of people in all walks of life—more than any of us could appreciate. His long life is to be celebrated and his spirit will live on in the hearts of the many he has touched over the years.

Peter leaves behind an extensive family, all of whom will miss him dearly. His family includes the late P. M. Hamilton and Dulcie Hamilton; his sister, Nola; his dearly loved friends Denise Nagorcka and Leahwyn Seed; his former wife Annette and his children Daniel and Emma and grandchildren Lily and Laluka; his former wife Barbara and his children Katherine and Kim, and his granddaughters Stephanie and Victoria. The ceremony will be a celebration of Peter's life. It is appropriate to place on the record of this House his wish for all. It is simply for people and governments to work together for the creation of a sane and sustainable society. Peter Hamilton, energetic community activist, great environmentalist, deep philosopher and a true new age pioneer will be missed but not forgotten.

The Hon. DON HARWIN [5.11 p.m.]: This afternoon I acknowledge the tremendous results achieved by Liberal candidates in the local government elections. Before doing so, I take this opportunity to pay tribute to a stalwart of the Liberal Party in the eastern suburbs, the late Shirley Provera, whose family is present in the gallery. My colleague the Hon. Marie Ficarra will add to my comments later. Shirley was the President of the Rose Bay branch of the Liberal Party—one of the largest in our party. Together with her husband, Peter, she was a key Liberal supporter in the Vaucluse electorate for many years. I had the great pleasure of knowing Shirley for 14 of her 16 years in the party. She worked hard as a coordinator at the Rose Bay polling booth and worked in the local member's electorate office as a volunteer when needed. She was always a reliable hard worker for the party despite her many battles with ill health. Indeed, she was always such a happy and cheerful person that one never would have known the seriousness of the health challenges she faced.

When Shirley entered the room she always brought joy and laughter with her. She was a dear and caring friend to many in the Vaucluse electorate, and she will be sorely missed. It was in the eastern suburbs, where Shirley was an active member, that Liberal candidates obtained some of the largest swings at the recent local government elections. In Waverley the hardworking Liberal team led by Sally Betts recorded a swing of 8.9 per cent, while the Liberals in Randwick led by Mayor Bruce Notley-Smith recorded a swing of 8.3 per cent. In both cases the swings were greater than those gained by the Greens. I am proud that Sally Betts and Bruce Notley-Smith are now the mayors of Waverley and Randwick. I congratulate Deputy Mayor Kerryn Sloan, Joy Clayton, Tony Kay and Yvonne Coburn in Waverley, and Ten Seng, Kiel Smith, Robert Belleli and Scott Nash in Randwick on their tremendous results.

There was also a great result for the Liberal team on Woollahra Council. A swing of 5.5 per cent enabled the Liberals to take control of the council. I congratulate Andrew Petrie and Isabelle Shapiro on their election as mayor and deputy mayor, respectively, and commend the strong campaign that the team ran in Woollahra to get Sean Carmichael, Chris Howe, Toni Zeltzer, Peter Cavanagh, Anthony Boskovitz and Lucienne Edleman elected for the next four years. In the City of Sydney elections the Liberal ticket secured a swing of 3.5 per cent. I am pleased that the incumbent Liberal councillor, Shayne Mallard, achieved an even larger swing of 4.3 per cent in the vote for the lord mayoralty. It was great to see Shayne's personal vote increase beyond that achieved by the Liberal brand. It is a reward for his hard work on council over the past four years and for the innovative and forward-looking campaign he ran for the city's top job.

I also place on record my admiration for the results achieved by Liberal candidates in four inner-west councils. In Canterbury the Liberals achieved a swing of 3.8 per cent. I am delighted that Michael Hawatt, a hardworking Liberal councillor, has been re-elected and that he is now joined by a new Liberal councillor, Ken Nam, whose father served as a councillor from the same ward for many years. This is the first time the Liberals have had two councillors on Canterbury City Council. In Burwood the Liberals returned to the council with John Sidoti and Henson Liang both elected, and the team came close to securing a third place for Joe Alvaro. In Canada Bay the Liberals were able to increase their representation on council from two to three. An overall swing of 10 per cent was enough to secure the re-election of Michael Megna and Helen McCaffrey, who are now joined by Mirjana Cestar. In the contest for the mayoralty it was pleasing to see Michael Megna achieve a 12.4 per cent swing and closely challenge the incumbent.

The Liberal representation on Leichhardt Municipal Council has also increased. Indeed, it is now larger than that of the Labor Party. Councillor Vera-Ann Hannaford was re-elected, and she is now joined on the council by Gordon Weiss and Tony Constantino. All the Liberal candidates at the election worked hard to highlight the Liberal Party's strong track record of fighting to preserve Callan Park and our determination to achieve an appropriate outcome for the site in the years ahead. The Government's announcement last week that control of the precinct will be granted to Leichhardt Municipal Council is a victory for many local activists, including councillor Hannaford and the former mayor, Nick Dyer. Over the past six years they both lobbied the Government relentlessly for this outcome, and I am tremendously pleased to see their efforts rewarded. All these Liberal candidates at the recent local government elections campaigned strongly for better service delivery, improved management and greater protection of our community's open spaces and important heritage assets. The results they and others carrying the Liberal banner have achieved are outstanding, and I wish them all well in the work that now lies ahead of them.

The Hon. PENNY SHARPE (Parliamentary Secretary) [5.16 p.m.]: Last Friday 24 October marked the sixtieth anniversary of United Nations Day. Although the United Nations effectively began when the United Nations Charter came into force on 24 October 1945, 24 October has been celebrated as United Nations Day since 1948. The League of Nations had failed to prevent the horrors of World War II. As World War II drew to a close the world needed a new organisation dedicated to finding a way to deal collectively with international issues—an organisation that would work cooperatively to avoid conflict. In 1945, at a meeting of 46 nations in San Francisco, the United Nations was born. Over the past 60 years the United Nations has made important contributions not only to peace and security but also to enshrining in international law principles of equality to which all States should aspire.

The United Nations is not without its problems but it remains an essential part of tackling the issues confronting our societies, nations, regions and, indeed, our planet. The birth of the United Nations was shaped by many characters. In celebrating United Nations Day, I shall reflect on the contribution made by two Australians. Dr Herbert Vere Evatt needs no introduction to this Chamber. He was a lawyer, a High Court judge, an Attorney General and a Federal Minister for External Affairs. One of Doc Evatt's most important contributions was his leadership of the Australian delegation to the San Francisco conference in 1945.

It is useful to understand what Doc Evatt and the Australians confronted when they attended the San Francisco conference. The great powers dominated the San Francisco conference. For example, the United States of America was represented by 175 delegates, compared to just three delegates for some small countries. Australia was represented by a delegation of 25. Evatt and the Australians became champions of the smaller nations, convincing them that they had diplomatic muscle if they voted in a block and supporting their rights to peaceful development and equality. But to truly appreciate Evatt's contribution to the founding of the United Nations, it is important to understand his belief:

… that real stability in the post-war world [could] be achieved only by carefully building an organisation that will do its utmost to assure the peoples of the world a full opportunity of living in freedom from want, as well as in freedom from external aggression.

To Evatt, economic justice was an essential precondition for security. The Australian delegation of 25 had only one woman. Jessie Street was among a small group of women at the San Francisco conference who joined together to ensure that the rights of women were not lost in the United Nations Charter. They fought to have the equal rights of men and women recognised in the preamble to the United Nations Charter. They also succeeded in securing a permanent body to deal with women's rights in the Commission for the Status of Women—contributions that remain important to this day.

The 10 December this year will mark the sixtieth anniversary of the proclamation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a process that was overseen by Doc Evatt, who by 1948 had been elected President of the General Assembly. This document is the foundation of international human rights law that is practised today—the first formal recognition of the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family. In the 60 years since proclamation the global human family has come a long way towards achieving respect for, and observance of, human rights. Now after a 10-year hiatus Australia is once again becoming a country that takes human rights seriously and engages with the United Nations.

Since coming to office the Rudd Government has: ratified the Kyoto Protocol, and the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities; commenced the process towards accession to the optional protocol to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women; and issued a standing invitation for human rights inspectors to visit Australia. Labor has seen the end of mandatory detention and legislation to remove discrimination against same-sex couples in Commonwealth laws. At the same time the Federal Government has committed itself to the principle of creative middle-power diplomacy. The Prime Minister has said:

… Australia can be a greater force for good in the world … Australia's voice has been too quiet for too long across the various councils of the world. That is why during the course of the next three years, the world will see an increasingly activist Australian international policy in areas where we believe we may be able to make a positive difference.

I also want to see Australia become a greater force for good in the world. I also want to see Australia enshrine commitments to equality and human rights in our domestic laws. The sixtieth anniversaries of United Nations Day and the Declaration of Human Rights provide perfect timing to begin the debate about Australia's own charter of rights. I note that the Rudd Government is committed to begin this discussion. I look forward to it and encourage everyone to get behind a charter of human rights for Australia.

The Hon. KAYEE GRIFFIN [5.21 p.m.]: Last week from 19 to 25 October was Carers Week, a national week of awareness and recognition of the valuable and demanding role carers play in Australia. Carers provide unpaid care and support to family members and friends who have a disability, mental illness, chronic condition, terminal illness or who are frail. Carers Week is a celebration of the contribution carers make, not only to the lives of the people they care for but also the wider community as a whole. Carers Australia is the recognised national voice of carers in Australia. Their mission statement reads:

We believe that all carers are entitled to the same rights, choices and opportunities as other Australians. These include the ability to enjoy optimum health, social and economic wellbeing and to participate in family, social and community life, employment and education. This belief is based not only on a sense of social responsibility, but also on the understanding that what is good for carers is good for society. When carers are properly supported, everyone benefits.

Since 1993 the Department of Health and Ageing has provided funds to coordinate Carers Week with Carers Australia working in conjunction with other carers agencies throughout Australia for a collaborative national Carers Week initiative. The New South Wales Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care provided Carers New South Wales with grants for more than 200 carer support groups or organisations to hold events for carers across the State during Carers Week. The theme of Carers Week 2008 was "Because I care". This theme incorporated stories from carers about how their lives are impacted by their responsibilities as carers. The campaign centred on a selection of carers each discussing their own experiences, all of them unique and different to the next. The experiences used as examples for this campaign highlighted the fact that whilst the role of a carer can be enriching and rewarding, the demands on carers and the sacrifices they make are immense.

Provisions for the wellbeing of carers, and an appreciation of the value of the work they do has made carers a key social policy concern. Carers enable the elderly and people with a disability or long-term illness to remain in the community longer before accessing traditional, full-time care places at hospices and nursing homes. While it is true that many carers find caring a positive experience, caring can be extremely difficult and demanding. While the love and commitment carers show brings them closer together with those they care for, this does not always lessen the stress of caring or the social isolation and loneliness that caring can bring. Taking on the role of carer is not an easy decision to make. Caring for someone affects people in different ways. Mental and physical exhaustion, depression, anxiety, guilt and frustration are all common feelings expressed by carers.

Carers New South Wales aims to build awareness and recognition of carers and their needs, and to work towards improving the range of services, systems and supports available to them. Carer support officers can help by providing information and emotional support, referrals to specialised carer counsellors, and other services. Carers New South Wales also provides activities and social events for carers and young carers, 26 years and under, where they can meet and get to know other carers in their areas and are also provided with some respite from their carer responsibilities. It is imperative that carers have the support of those around them and that is why awareness campaigns such as Carers Week 2008 are so useful in reminding the community of the invaluable service carers provide. For many, the constant care of a loved one with a disability or illness becomes part of the everyday routine and too often the valuable contribution carers make to those they care for and indeed to the wider community, goes unnoticed or is taken for granted. Carers Week 2008 was a great opportunity to let carers in Australia know that their devotion and dedication is recognised and appreciated.

Last week I referred to breast cancer awareness and I now refer to a fundraising initiative held at Canterbury City Council depot in Leslie Street, Roselands in relation to it. I understand that council's works manager, Mr Phil Rudder, who is a keen bike rider, decided to ride to work with a bit of a different initiative, that is, council staff organise to ride 8.5 kilometres from the depot to the administration centre via the Cooks River bike track. Council staff were already selling pink ribbon merchandise but they decided to ask for gold coin donations from the depot non-riders to put towards the pink ribbon day contributions. On Wednesday 15 October 16 riders assembled at 6.30 a.m. and were waved off by supporters and arrived at Campsie 45 minutes later to the cheers of the council's road safety officer, Colleen Barclay. Council's human resources section had gratuitously donated a health breakfast for the riders. The depot has since contributed $702.50 to the pink ribbon day contributions and I thank them for it. They were always so generous to my charity fund when I was mayor. Once again I acknowledge the fundraising efforts they make.

The Hon. MARIE FICARRA [5.26 p.m.]: Today I am honoured to pay tribute to the extraordinary life of a wonderful lady, the late Shirley Anne Provera. Shirley was born in Sydney on 28 September 1935 to Alice and Herbert Griffiths and was the oldest of four children. I acknowledge and welcome Shirley's sister Pauline in the gallery. The family lived in the Strathfield municipality and her father, Herbert, worked diligently as a council labourer to support his family. Shirley's great grandparents, the Whalebones, were free settlers from England and Ireland. In Australia, Richard Whalebone became one of the founding fathers of the western plains wool industry based in Wellington, New South Wales.

Shirley often talked about the love of her life, her husband Peter "Pierino" Provera, whom she met at a party when she was 18 and married one year later after being romanced intensely and successfully. Peter and his family were migrants from Casale in Piedmont, Italy arriving in Australia in 1937. The Provera family settled in Queensland as cane farmers based in Ingham, where many still remain to this day. Peter Provera was proud to have had the chance to work with American Air Force engineers building the Townsville airport as part of our national defence base for the Battle of the Coral Sea during World War II. Married in April 1955 with a grand reception held at the then very chic Australia Hotel, Shirley and Peter charmed the two family cultures, Aussie and Italo, over the many years of her happy and colourful married life. Two beautiful children followed, Leyanne Salvina and Peter Deone Felice, known as Leyanne and Deone. Shirley was filled with joy and pride.

Being a gifted student with a passion for Latin, Shirley gained a place at the selective Fort Street High. We remember her beauty and it comes as no surprise that Shirley was a finalist in the Miss New South Wales quest at the age of 17, but was forced to withdraw due to ill health. Shirley always sparkled when talking about the time she ran her own fashion outlet Xanadu at Wynyard. Shirley and Peter moved successfully from operating the Miller Hotel in Fairfield to the retailing world of fruit and vegetables, and then onto the fashion arena with Shirley operating other boutiques in Auburn, Burwood and Bexley. Having a strong sense of community service and encouragement of effort, Shirley become involved with Quota and other organisations assisting women to establish themselves in business. The best was yet to come, as eagerly recalled by daughter Leyanne, Shirley always considered the years spent in the New South Wales Liberal Party from the late 1980s as the best years of her life.

I want to acknowledge the incredible reciprocal respect and devotion shown to Shirley by the many friends and admirers she had in the New South Wales Liberal Women's Council and indeed the New South Wales Division. I especially mention Mary-Lou Jarvis and Teena McQueen—Shirley once described them as the Thelma and Louise team from women's council executive—and I acknowledge their presence in the gallery this evening. Nurtured and encouraged by Shirley as president of the Rose Bay branch, the two forged a strong and supportive friendship with Shirley. They were fearless during the electoral campaigns of Malcolm Turnbull and Peter Debnam, their local members.

Women such as Shirley have been and will always be the backbone of the Liberal Party. Indeed, Shirley gave so much support and encouragement to so many within the party and her community, where she felt they were capable of giving more of themselves, just as she did, to make this country a better place to live. Shirley was fiercely Australian. She valued free enterprise and believed in meritocracy. An intelligent, kind and generous, astute and intuitive, diplomatic lady of style, wit and charm, Shirley will always be remembered by her famous greeting "Hello, darling" as she would open her home, her heart and herself to all around her.

I especially remember Shirley's grandchildren—her treasures in life—Brooklyn, Benjamin, Joshua, Sarah, Sienna and Jared. She loved them, lived for them and talked about them incessantly. Shirley battled cancer courageously for so many years but she died peacefully having had the chance to visit with Leyanne and her beautiful grandchildren in England. Shirley was taken from us on 26 September, just two days before her seventy-third birthday. Heaven has warmly welcomed Shirley Provera and we know that she is assisting Saint Peter and his angels in getting the job done well. We salute the wonderful life of Shirley Anne Provera.

Dr JOHN KAYE [5.30 p.m.]: Funding under the Priority Action Schools Program was set up in 2002 to address the effects of profound disadvantage in 27 schools—$16 million of State funding going to 27 public schools dealing with the most disadvantaged communities in New South Wales, and dealing with them at the greatest rate of stress. The selection criteria for those schools were based not only on a survey of the socioeconomic wealth or poverty and impoverishment of the parents of those children, but also on a number of other measures that were there to assess the impact of socioeconomic disadvantage on the functioning of the school.

Those measures included such factors as the rate of absenteeism, the number of teachers who have had less than three years of experience, the number of expulsions, and other factors which were a measure of whether the school functioned correctly or not. The diversity of the measures of disadvantage in those schools was introduced purely to recognise not only the level of disadvantage but the way that disadvantage plays out in the schools. Disgracefully, the New South Wales Government has changed the measures in a way that will totally disadvantage at least 27 of those schools. The Greens call on the Government to reverse that decision.

[Time for debate expired.]

Question—That this House do now adjourn—put and resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.