Debate resumed from 6th March.

Mr J. H. MURRAY (Drummoyne): [11.37]: I support the Moonee Beach Nature Reserve Bill, which was introduced by the honourable member for Manly. It has great relevance to people on the North Coast, in particular the areas north of Coffs Harbour. Over the past six months there has been much public discussions of the actions of the Public Works Department, with the concurrence of the Coffs Harbour City Council, in attempting to bulldoze a sewage outfall through the Look At Me Now Headland against the wishes of the local people. This action was supported by the local member, who spends very little time in the area. He is obviously out of touch with the needs and aspirations of people living on the coastal strip. The House should realise that the Public Works Department is driven by engineers. If engineers can develop a system which will keep them in employment by utilising capital moneys - half of the moneys is provided by local people through their taxes - they have an incentive to come up with the best, whizz-bang, most expensive and least environmentally safe project. The Roads and Traffic Authority is in a similar position. That is the scenario in this case.

People trying to preserve their environment should not be stood over by the local National Party member and a National Party Minister. This bill was brought forward because of the heat generated by this Government's actions on the mid North Coast. If this bill is not passed it will be open slather along the entire coast of New South Wales for the Public Works Department to go in with its bulldozers and to despoil areas which are unique not only to Australia but to the world. People visit this country and after having seen Sydney, the next best place to which they can travel is the North Coast. It is a magnificent area. New South Wales has a pristine coastline which will be despoiled by raw effluent or, in some cases, treated effluent -

Mr Causley: Raw effluent?

Mr J. H. MURRAY: The Minister says "raw effluent?" I use the words "raw effluent" because a system of treatment has never been devised which works 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, without maintenance or without breaking down.


Page 1606
Mr Causley: There are systems in the country.

Mr J. H. MURRAY: Sydney does not have them. The whole genesis of this debate should be that there is a cheaper alternative.

Mr Causley: Is there?

Mr J. H. MURRAY: Yes. The Public Works Department is not willing to take on board new technology which will put its people out of jobs. I did not intend to speak in this debate, but I believe this bill is a milestone which will change the direction of future governments. It is incumbent upon all right-thinking members to support the bill. If they do not, it will be open slather on the coastline of New South Wales.

Mr CAUSLEY (Clarence - Minister for Natural Resources) [11.41]: I have great pleasure in speaking in this debate because, as the honourable member for Drummoyne has said, I was the local member. I know the boundaries changed a little in the last election but I have been involved in this exercise from the start.

Ms Allan: We know that.

Mr CAUSLEY: I am delighted to put some facts before the Parliament. The honourable member for Blacktown interjects. She has been acting in concert with a small group to destroy the proposed sewerage works at Woolgoolga Headland.

[Interruption]

The honourable member for Drummoyne ought to ask his mate Meissner what happened at Gladesville Marina.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! The Minister will be heard in silence.

Mr CAUSLEY: A commission of inquiry was established and decided that the sewerage works should be located at Look At Me Now Headland. One of the left-wing schoolteacher mates of the honourable member for Blacktown was arrested in the demonstration while shouting, "I am a J.P., I am a J.P., you can't arrest me". Honourable members will find out how good that justice of the peace is. The facts should be put before Parliament because this charade, this whole exercise, has continued for more than two years. The honourable member for Drummoyne claims that the Public Works Department is run by engineers who are absolutely appalled that some new technology might put them out of their jobs. Let me start from the beginning. Country sewerage works are different from those in the city. When the coalition parties came to office - and the honourable member for Manly becomes very excited about this - raw effluent was flowing between the Heads because of the absolute incompetence of the Labor Party. Sludge was being released into the ocean from the Sydney treatment works. Those images keep appearing on television. Country sewerage systems are quite different. Country sewage has always undergone secondary treatment. For 30 years sewage released at the Coffs Harbour outfall has undergone secondary treatment. There have been no problems. The sewage to be released from the proposed outfall at Look At Me Now Headland will be tertiary treated.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! The Minister will be heard in silence.


Page 1607
Mr CAUSLEY: Tertiary treated effluent is 99.7 per cent pure water. I am the Minister responsible for fisheries. A report from New South Wales Fisheries clearly states that it supports a tertiary treatment plant. Undoubtedly the honourable member for Manly will talk about Memtec. The other alternatives have been investigated for more than 18 months at a cost of $1.5 million. The Government has nothing against the idea of reusing some of the treated effluent. However, the practicalities must first be examined. If the treated effluent is to be used in Coffs Harbour or any other area - and I am sure the Minister for the Environment is examining these options for Sydney as well - a secondary piping system is needed. It has to be paid for. Obviously the practicalities and the costs have to be looked at. Coffs Harbour has one of the highest rainfalls in the State. It is an average rainfall of 60 inches.

Dr Macdonald: It has had water restrictions for six months.

Mr CAUSLEY: If the honourable member for Manly went back to Scotland, he might discover something there. If he listens to the facts, he might learn something. In some years Coffs Harbour receives more than 100 inches of rain. Where does the effluent go then? When I was the local member, on-land usages were investigated. Much has been put forward about using the treated effluent on bananas. Johnson Farms, which is just up the road from Woolgoolga, was also investigated to ascertain if treated effluent could be used there. Advice from the Department of Water Resources, which also comes under my ministerial control, indicated that if treated effluent was used at Johnson Farms, the Orara River would be polluted. So far as bananas are concerned, the Banana Growers Federation has made it very clear that it is just not interested. What is to be done with the treated effluent? This has been gone through time and again. As I have said, the Government does not oppose the concept in principle, but in practice it cannot happen.

Let me now deal with the human side of the argument, because that is important. I have been approached by not merely one or two but dozens of pensioners from Sandy Beach, which is south of Woolgoolga, who have had problems for many years. The soil in the Sandy Beach area has a high clay content. It is not a good absorption area. Under the Coffs Harbour council rating system, the pensioners are making payments, and have always made payments, for a sewerage system. Because Sandy Beach is not a good absorption area, they also have to pay for pumpouts on a regular basis. They cannot afford it. For at least two years they have been approaching me and saying, "Let's get some common sense into this because this is costing us a lot of money". The stage has been reached where some of them cannot afford it and raw effluent is running down the streets. We must be sensible about this. Raw effluent is running down the streets and the honourable member for Manly, the honourable member for Drummoyne and the honourable member for Blacktown say they do not want a sewage outlet. For goodness sake, what do they want?

I am appalled that people who know nothing about the subject and are acting on the whims of a few greenies are inflicting these sorts of problems on pensioners. The pensioners are astonished by the actions of the honourable member for Manly and the honourable member for Blacktown and, in fact, the Labor Party. I can assure the Leader of the Opposition that if he thought he had a chance in Coffs Harbour, he has no chance. In the last local government election, the people decided which way they would go. This issue was high profile. It was one of the main issues in the local government election. Eight greenies stood for election. They also supported Willis Creek. The effluent from the treatment works at Willis Creek runs into a coastal lagoon and down the beach.

The issue was high profile. The mayor - who was not even on the council at the
Page 1608
time - took up the issue. The people voted overwhelmingly in favour of getting on with the job of a sewage outfall. It is the usual story when a minority cannot get its own way - and a very small minority. It runs to the Opposition, runs to the member for Manly, and says: "We want to overrule democracy. We want the minority to win". Let us get it clear: that is what this bill is all about. There is nothing said about protection of the nature reserve. I have no problems with some of that area - and I was the local member - going into the nature reserve. The fact is that there needs to be access to the back beach as well because the people of Woolgoolga and surfers on the North Coast use it as one of the main surfing beaches. A parking area and a road are needed. The terrible erosion problems on that reserve must be overcome. That can be done if the problems are approached in a sensible manner. The residents of Coffs Harbour, the pensioners and all people involved - except for this small group - have said they want it to be got on with, because it has cost the ratepayers an enormous amount of money. It is continuing to cost them because the project is being delayed by the Opposition. Let me put the matter into perspective for the member for Manly. By interfering in something about which he knows nothing, he is saying to the ratepayers of Coffs Harbour, "I am going to dictate to you that you shall pay an extra $500 per year per ratepayer", and that they cannot have a perfectly legitimate - and the best in the world - technological sewage outfall.

I will return to the issue of Willis Creek. The present sewage outfall at Woolgoolga is at Willis Creek. The sewage is secondary treated. It has been upgraded to remove phosphorous. There are a number of lagoons up and down the coast, and the sewage runs into a coastal lagoon. In most cases, they are beautiful lagoons but the lagoon it runs into is dead. The Minister for the Environment and I visited Willis Creek approximately 18 months ago. The lagoon is dead as a result of effluent from the sewage works. How does the effluent get out to the sea? It runs down the surfing beach. The Opposition says it does want an ocean outfall going out from Look At Me Now Headland into the main currents - and the sewage is dispersed through a nozzle, which is the most modern method of dispersal available. The Opposition does not want the treated sewage to go out into the main current - and it is 99.7 per cent pure water - but wants it to run down the beach from the old treatment works and into the surf.

Dr Macdonald: Upgrade Woolgoolga.

Mr CAUSLEY: The honourable member paraded around Manly and made a big noise about the effluent over there before he was elected to the Parliament. He did not want it on his surfing beach. But he wants to put it down the beach at Woolgoolga. Let us get serious about this -

Dr Macdonald: Do not distort the facts.

Mr CAUSLEY: You are an absolute hypocrite. You are looking for headlines. It does not matter how you get the headlines. You do not care how you hurt people in the process, and you are hurting people.

Ms Allan: The Daily Examiner.

Mr CAUSLEY: It is not the Daily Examiner, it is the Advocate. I receive plenty of headlines when the honourable members come up there and I get more votes.


Page 1609
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! The Minister will be heard in silence.

Mr CAUSLEY: The member for Blacktown is dragging the Opposition by the nose. She has control of the Leader of the Opposition and she is destroying him.

Mr Shedden: Your position is shaky.

Mr CAUSLEY: I have 70 per cent of the vote. I have to say that the honourable member's family said to me last week that they could not believe that he would vote against the Government's forestry legislation. They were amazed that the member for Bankstown, who was a good Kyogle boy, voted with the Opposition against the forestry legislation. His family in Kyogle are appalled at that. I will return to the sewerage system. The advice that I have from the Department of Fisheries is that the tertiary treatment plant can remove more phosphorous than can Memtec. The honourable member wants to load another $5 million on to the people of Coffs Harbour with a Memtec process. Yet the tertiary treatment plant proposed by the Minister for Public Works, after the investigation of every alternative, will remove more phosphorous. The Department of Fisheries has informed me that all the coral reefs about which everyone is concerned are on the southern side of Look At Me Now Headland. If the dispersal is out from the point of Look At Me Now Headland, it would be away from the coral reefs. But, no, those opposed to this idea want the effluent to run down the beach and into the coral reefs.

What are their arguments? We have been through it and through it again and again. The people voted on it. I would estimate that 99.5 per cent of Coffs Harbour residents expressed their opinion at the last local government elections. They said they wanted this proposal at Look At Me Now Headland. The pensioners in the area, whom the Opposition is treating cruelly, want to get on with it because they believe they must have it. What is the Opposition going to do about the third stage? What will it do about the sewage from the Quirindi-Arrawarra, the main developing area around Woolgoolga at the present time? The Opposition does not think about that. Its members jump in with the greenies and do not consider the consequences. I believe the people in the area are appalled to think that the Labor Party and the Independents are lining up to deny them a right that everybody else believes they should have. I am pleased that I came into the Chamber when I did. I had not realised that this debate was in progress. It is clear that it is necessary to get down to facts in this debate, to the nitty gritty, and what it is costing the ordinary person. Honourable members should have some concern for -

Dr Macdonald: Give us the figures.

Mr CAUSLEY: I have given the figures. I will repeat them. Every two to three months pensioners have to pay up to $200 to have their septic tanks pumped out. They also have to pay the rates. There is a levy in the rates for new sewage works for Coffs Harbour.

Mr Fraser: It is $1,500 a year.

Mr CAUSLEY: The honourable member for Coffs Harbour tells me it is costing them $1,500 a year for pumping. Also, the Opposition already cost them $1.5 million in studies and delays - $250,000 to go from Woolgoolga Headland to Look At Me Now Headland. Now members opposite are saying to them that there should be a separate
Page 1610
piping system. The honourable member for Manly - the socialist who owns all the properties - is not going to pay for all this. He comes into this Chamber and pontificates about these issues, but he will not be paying for it. He is standing and saying from afar: "You will do this. I will dictate to you that you will do this". The people are paying. Memtec estimates are approximately $5 million or $6 million. The Opposition is saying to the people of Coffs Harbour - who have already made up their minds on the evidence that has been placed before them - "You do not know what you are talking about. We are going to tell you that you have to pay $500 a year more on your rates". The honourable member should think about that for a while and consider how he would like it.

Ms Allan: On a point of order. We have a long tradition in this House that the member making a contribution should direct his comments through the Chair and not directly to the honourable member concerned.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: On the point of order. The fact that the member for Blacktown and the member for Manly are being embarrassed by the effluent that they -

Ms Allan: On a point of order.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! The Deputy Premier is speaking to a point of order. The member for Blacktown will resume her seat.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: The fact that the honourable member for Blacktown and the honourable member for Manly enjoy discussing their own effluent does not mean that the honourable member for Blacktown can take such a point of order.

Ms Allan: Further to the point of order. I take exception to the remark by the Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works and Minister for Roads that I am stupid. I ask him to withdraw it.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: Further to the point of order. I decline to withdraw the remark, on the basis that the honourable member for Blacktown stood up while I was taking a point of order and in so doing promoted her stupidity in not knowing the standing orders of this House.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! Would the honourable member for Blacktown advise me specifically of the word to which she takes offence?

Ms Allan: I was offended by the Deputy Premier's description of me as being stupid.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: Further to the point of order. If that is the basis of the honourable member's point, the English language will have to be rewritten for use in the House.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! I acknowledge that at certain times debate often becomes heated, and obviously this is an emotive issue. However, in the circumstances I shall not direct the Deputy Premier to withdraw the remark.

Mr CAUSLEY: I am amazed that I have touched such a tender nerve. I have been addressing my comments through the Chair, as I am well aware of the procedures of this house, unlike the honourable member for Blacktown. I am delighted that she
Page 1611
interjects.

Ms Allan: On a point of order. Has the original point of order been determined?

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! No. I remind the Minister of his obligation to direct his comments through the Chair.

Mr CAUSLEY: The point of order taken by the honourable member for Blacktown reinforces what the Deputy Premier said about her. As I said earlier, all this environmental nonsense is being orchestrated by the honourable member for Blacktown. Members of the Opposition - though I know that many of them do not agree with the honourable member for Blacktown - are being led by the nose. I give them fair warning that it will not advance their political cause. The honourable member for Blacktown has no regard for people and absolutely no regard for their jobs. All she wants to do is play politics in this place. I should have thought at this particular time in Australia's history that honourable members on both sides of the House would be more concerned about the average Australian than to seek to score political points. That is all the honourable member is on about, and it is about time Opposition members woke up to her. At present, members of the public are being hurt by stupid legislation and motions that are placed before the Parliament merely to play numbers, and perhaps to assuage the ego of the ethnic member for Manly.

The people of Coffs Harbour and of the southern end of the electorate of Clarence are absolutely appalled at what their so-called representatives are trying to foist on them. They have been through the exercise and looked at all the options. They are not stupid. They are not against the environment. They have weighed up the options and have said what they can afford. In the long term the Government has nothing against the idea of separate effluent reticulation systems, and the Minister for the Environment is working down that track. We are opposed to the idea of dumping sludge into the ocean but we are not doing that in country New South Wales and we never have done it. Country New South Wales has a totally different system. I ask honourable members to rethink the situation, because what they are doing to these people is absolutely appalling. They are being denied the basic right of a sewage system. If this legislation were to become law enormous costs would be foisted on them. I am not crying wolf. I have done my homework. The North Coast of New South Wales has the lowest socio-economic group in Australia. Even the honourable member for Blacktown would know that, but she is trying to foist a gold-plated system on them that they cannot afford.

Dr Macdonald: The Minister should get his facts straight.

Mr CAUSLEY: I have the facts. We have two options: either continue to allow raw effluent to run down the streets of Sandy Beach, Emerald Beach and other villages on the North Coast - and honourable members would not approve of that; or impose upon people a savage levy that they cannot afford. Let us not play games, which is what is happening at present. If honourable members disbelieve me about the figures I have quoted and what I have said about the feeling in the electorate on this issue, they should ask the Labor Party candidate in Coffs Harbour what he thinks. He will not have a hope in hell of being elected if the Labor Party supports this legislation.

Ms ALLAN (Blacktown) [12.6]: It gives me a great deal of pleasure to participate in this debate. Though the Minister for Natural Resources alluded to it,
Page 1612
honourable members should be aware that this issue has been on foot for some considerable time. It predates the election to this place of the honourable member for Manly, the architect of the Moonee Beach Nature Reserve Bill, and it predates the election of the honourable member for Coffs Harbour. This was a major issue when the former member for Coffs Harbour was a member of this Chamber. In December 1988 I remember standing on the Look At Me Now Headland and enjoying the view. At that time I listened to the concerned comments of local citizens about the prospect of an ocean outfall being constructed on that site. Less than six months later a major rally was held in Coffs Harbour mall - perhaps the honourable member for Coffs Harbour was present together with the other 6,999 people - to demonstrate about a range of environmental concerns in Coffs Harbour.

Mr Fraser: That is a lie.

Ms ALLAN: I would like to ask for some order in the Chamber. I intend to listen in silence to the honourable member for Coffs Harbour -

Mr W. T. J. Murray: On a point of order. No member has the right to direct the Chair on how to conduct debate. The honourable member for Blacktown is grossly out of order and I ask that she be reminded of the standing orders of this House.

Ms Allan: On the point of order. A member has the right to request some order in the Chamber.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! The conduct in the House rests with the Chair. I concede that there have been interjections, but they do not warrant my calling honourable members to order. However, honourable members should refrain from interjecting.

Ms ALLAN: In July 1989 there was a massive rally of some 6,000 to 7,000 people at the Coffs Harbour shopping mall. They were protesting on a number of environmental issues, including the possibility of the construction of an ocean outfall in the northern region of Coffs Harbour. When we discuss this issue we must understand -

[Interruption]

Again, Mr Acting-Speaker, I ask for some order.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: On a point of order. It is grossly disorderly for a member to reflect on the Chair. I was taught in my very early days here not to reflect on the Chair. I ask that the honourable member for Blacktown be brought to order.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! I have already ruled on this matter. The level of interjection is not such that I should call members to order. The Chair will control proceedings.

Ms ALLAN: Council was considering alternatives to the ocean outfall and the level of community support for those alternatives was clear. This rally was held approximately three years ago, and even at that time the intensity of debate there was similar to that in this Chamber at present. The point I make is that this issue, which we are approaching with great exuberance and enthusiasm, is not new. For three to four years this issue has been addressed intensively by the community of Coffs Harbour, successive Coffs Harbour councils, successive members for Coffs Harbour, spokespeople
Page 1613
for Government and Opposition, Ministers and public servants. Predating this intensive debate, there were suggestions on how to deal with water resource and sewage disposal issues on the far North Coast. It is an indictment of the Government that we have had to rely on the Independent member for Manly to introduce a bill in an attempt to resolve the morass that has arisen over this issue. Even the Federal Government has been involved in this issue. The former Federal Minister for the Environment, Senator Graham Richardson, visited the area on a number of occasions. There was prime ministerial intervention. In 1989 when the Prime Minister made a major statement on the environment, there was discussion of the possibility of direct funding from the Federal Government in an attempt to resolve some of the issues. It is interesting to consider why we are still in a position of impasse. In the process of debating these issues, a lot of damage has been done to the social fabric of the community of Coffs Harbour. It is very embarrassing for the Government that 267 citizens have been charged with demonstrating against the construction of the outfall. The level of behaviour in which political representatives of the area have to indulge to get their point across is particularly embarrassing.

To find out what has led to this situation, we need go no further than the Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works and Minister for Roads. Let us start at the top, and look no further. During the debate we have heard repeated statements by the Deputy Premier that he has not been prepared to look at alternatives. It is not enough that the Minister for Natural Resources speaks today with some regret about the state of Willis Creek, for example. He says that we should do something about this, otherwise sewage will continue to flow down the streets of Sandy Beach. It is interesting that the same party that is not concerned about effluent running down the streets of the Aboriginal settlement at Mogo is raising concern about pensioners at Sandy Beach facing the same problem.

The Deputy Premier voices concern now, but in 1989 he could have shown some interest in resolving the situation; in fact, he has never shown an interest in this matter. He has been consistent on this issue, as with a few others, because essentially he has said that the Government will not seriously pursue alternatives to ocean outfalls. He has had repeated opportunities to say otherwise. For example, on 10th October, 1989, he made it clear in this Chamber, in answer to a question from the honourable member for Blue Mountains, that there was no way he would take up a Federal Government offer of nearly a quarter of a million dollars to look at alternatives. He was not going to worry about that money; rather, he would continue to support his public servants in the Department of Public Works working on ocean outfall construction. While talking about the construction of ocean outfalls, he made a throw-away comment that the Government would encourage the use of effluent for banana plantation irrigation on a trial basis. He tried to con the Chamber into believing that while the Government was committed to an ocean outfall he would still consider the possibility of the re-use of effluent on banana plantations.

On 15th November, 1989, I asked the Deputy Premier why he refused to contribute to the Coffs Harbour proposal for alternative sewage disposal at Emerald Beach. At that time Coffs Harbour had a different council which had already had a major debate on whether it should support the ocean outfall. It was coming to the conclusion that it had to look seriously at alternatives. It is very convenient for the Government to talk about the recently elected Coffs Harbour council, without mentioning the complex decision-making process that has taken place in the community of Coffs Harbour during the past three years. It took this time for the council to get to the stage where it would look at alternatives. I asked the Deputy Premier why he refused to help the Coffs Harbour council in its quest to look at alternative sewage disposal. I asked him
Page 1614
also whether the Department of Public Works would maintain its policy at that time of contributing to councils looking at alternative sewage disposal half the value of the cheapest option. He showed the same intransigence in his answer then as is shown in debate now - in fact, the level of intransigence of the Government has risen to pig-headedness. His response was, "No, we are not interested".

The Deputy Premier threw a sop in our direction to show that he was not completely narrow-minded. He said that he had instructed his department to prepare an effluent disposal manual. In November 1989 he said that an effluent disposal manual was being printed to provide technical details of the various alternative disposal options. He said that this showed the department's bona fides about the exploration of alternatives. He said that this manual would be available from the New South Wales Government Information Centre by Christmas 1989. Santa Claus did not come to the Government Information Centre that year. Two years later that centre still does not have available for sale or distribution an effluent disposal manual. The minister for democracy, otherwise known as the Minister for Natural Resources, as well as the Deputy Premier and the honourable member for Coffs Harbour, have contributed to the debate, but let us consider why they have not attempted to meet the wishes of the community of Coffs Harbour on the ocean outfall, and put a collar on the Department of Public Work's exploration of alternative use of sewage.

Some of my colleagues will refer to that issue in relation to their electorates. We are still not seeing an aggressive attempt by the Department of Public Works to come to grips with an increasing community distrust of ocean outfalls. I refer briefly to a letter that the Deputy Premier wrote to colleagues on 26th February trying to whistle up support for his position on the Moonee Beach Nature Reserve Bill. He made the point that 18 ocean discharges are being provided in a safe, environmentally responsible manner to country coastal towns in New South Wales and that there have been no challenges to these whatsoever during the past 30 years. He referred also to the existing Coffs Harbour outfall and said that it was built more than 30 years ago and has had insignificant environmental impact. Unfortunately, the Deputy Premier has failed to be aware of the fact that although there may have been 18 discharges during the past 30 years, according to him without any challenge, he should start to get back into the 1990s. Communities all along the coast - some of them traditional National Party constituencies - are saying that they are not satisfied with that particular form of effluent disposal. The community of Coffs Harbour, which is the subject of this bill, has been most vocal in its opposition to this particular way of disposing of sewerage.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: Do you want to close down the Central Coast outfalls too?

Ms ALLAN: The Deputy Premier can leave his head in the sand or in the sewage effluent if he wants, but the rest of the State of New South Wales is not prepared to do so. It is about time he took the collar off his bureaucrats in the Department of Public Works and started to let them get on with the job of seriously pursuing re-use instead of just sitting on it. That is what obviously needs to be done. The debate on waste disposal has been long - it has gone on for some years. It has culminated in the past six months in a large number of arrests that have occurred in the area. That has upped the ante in the community as well. One thing has been very consistent, that the Deputy Premier, as the Minister responsible for Public Works, has shown repeated stubbornness and has not been prepared to address the community's genuine interest in alternative disposal.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: Why should I bother?

Page 1615

Ms ALLAN: The Deputy Premier has asked why he should bother. He needs to get into the 1990s; he needs to realise that those old solutions for environmental use of the coast and using the marine environment for effluent disposal are no longer appropriate. People just do not want to accept that.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: Do you want to close down all the Central Coast outfalls? That is what will happen.

Ms ALLAN: The Deputy Premier, in his very intellectual way, has asked do I want to close down all the ocean outfalls. The point that we have been attempting to make for at least the last four years - I think my colleague the honourable member for Drummoyne made this point earlier - is that we want to look at ways to discourage the continued building and construction of outfalls. No-one is seriously saying that we are going to close down existing operations. What we want is what we are trying to get in Sydney at the moment - an improvement in existing levels of treatment and a hold on the construction of new outfalls. It is important to realise that there is now a body of scientific knowledge which shows that there are alternatives, particularly in areas outside Sydney where we have manageable populations, where those alternatives could be quite justifiably trialled. It is only the National Party in New South Wales that is not aware that the opportunity should be taken in areas outside Sydney to effectively trial that use. This has been a long debate with a long history behind it. There is a lot of emotion, which is obvious from the interjections and the rowdy performance here. A lot of things have happened more recently. I refer to the Coffs Harbour council. One of the difficulties in this particular debate - I am sure we will see this in the contribution of the honourable member for Coffs Harbour, if he makes a contribution - is that since September last year Coffs Harbour has had a council which has not been prepared to abide by the consensus that has emerged within the community of Coffs Harbour during the previous two or three years.

Mr Fraser: You are a liar.

Ms ALLAN: The honourable member for Coffs Harbour has called me a liar. As I said earlier in this debate, before he was elected this issue was being debated in Coffs Harbour and throughout the State. In the two to three years after the debate really hotted up, a consensus started to emerge. There was pressure from the council and the community, on the State Government, in particular to look at alternatives. As I have said, that pressure was ignored. The new council decided to up the ante. It has decided that it will build the ocean outfall no matter what - no matter what the scientific evidence is, it will build the outfall at the Look At Me Now Headland. In conjunction with that, a very aggressive police operation has been conducted in that area, resulting in 267 people being arrested. During the past six months my colleague in the Legislative Council the Hon. Jan Burnswoods repeatedly has asked a number of questions of the Minister for Police about the shabby performance of his police force in the particular area concerned. The fact is that there have been 267 arrests. We should give the police of Coffs Harbour an award because, apart from the arrests which occurred in the southeast forests of New South Wales about 18 months ago, we have not had such an appalling record of arrests on any particular issue.

Mr Causley: On a point or order. The honourable member for Blacktown is deliberately misleading this House. The honourable member for Coogee, one of her Labor colleagues, has indicated that he supports this action.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! No point of order is involved.

Page 1616

Mr W. T. J. Murray: On a point of order. The honourable member for Blacktown is theoretically debating a bill with respect to a nature reserve at Moonee. The bill has no to do with the actions of the police and the management of the police force by the Minister in the other House. I ask that you bring the honourable member for Blacktown back to the terms of the bill.

Ms Allan: On the point of order. Mr Acting-Speaker, as you have said in rulings during the past half an hour or so, this has been an emotional debate. The arrest of people at Coffs Harbour is emotional and I think it is entirely relevant to the debate.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER: Order! I ask the honourable member to confine her comments where possible to the subject-matter of the bill.

Ms ALLAN: Thank you, Mr Acting-Speaker. The protests have resulted in 267 people being arrested - arrested because they feared that an ocean outfall was going to be constructed. Of course, that construction cannot possibly occur now as a result of the specific clause in the Moonee Beach Nature Reserve Bill, which will ensure that that does not occur. A major campaign has been waged by the police, at the behest of the Government, to ensure that the emotional levels within the community of Coffs Harbour are deliberately increased so that people feel that a crisis is occurring. That crisis could have been resolved in 1989 if the Deputy Premier, even then, had accepted the bona fide suggestion of the Federal Government of alternatives to what was proposed by this Government to solve the problem without an ocean outfall. There has been no need for that number of arrests, nor for the vicious debate that has occurred within the local community and, indeed, the Chamber. The Deputy Premier, the Minister responsible for Public Works, could have prevented that if he had allowed those alternatives to be explored in a serious fashion. That just has not happened.

The council, since it was last elected, decided it was convenient to promote this issue. The police force has been aggressive, the Deputy Premier has been intransigent and other members of the National Party have acted in a confrontationist manner on this issue. That put enormous pressure on a colleague of the Deputy Premier, of the Minister for democracy and also of the honourable member for Coffs Harbour - the Minister for Planning and Minister for Energy - who must decide over the next few months whether this issue will be exacerbated or resolved depending on the rezoning attempts engaged in by the Coffs Harbour City Council. We have spoken enough about the past; what about the future? The bill provides a good opportunity to resolve a longstanding deadlock. The measure will remove the Moonee Beach Nature Reserve and the Look At Me Now Headland issues from the agenda of the Coffs Harbour City Council and the Public Works Department in relation to ocean outfalls. The Opposition does not believe that the Willis Creek proposal offers an acceptable environmental solution.

Mr Fraser: What are you going to do with it?

Ms ALLAN: We heard a lot from the Minister for Natural Resources and we still hear from members opposite about Willis Creek. The Opposition does not believe that that is a suitable alternative to the ocean outfall.

Mr Causley: On a point of order. Is the honourable member for Blacktown suggesting that the people of Woolgoolga should not eat?

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! I do not regard that as a valid
Page 1617
point of order. The honourable member for Blacktown should continue bearing in mind that difficulties might have arisen if it had been a valid point of order.

Ms ALLAN: The bill should be passed as quickly as possible so that alternatives can be considered and resources made available in the shortest time. The council can then use the expertise of its engineers, who have been working on this issue for at least five years. Those experienced engineers must be bored stiff having to stand on the sidelines watching this political debate being waged. They want to get on with the job of examining the alternatives. I do not think the future is as grim as National Party members seem to believe. Only a fortnight ago the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs, another colleague of the Minister for Natural Resources, introduced the Fertilizers (Amendment) Bill. That important bill will give an opportunity to the New South Wales composting industry to commence reusing sewage sludge. Reuse of water from sewage effluent has been the subject of wide discussion. The National Party in this State has produced an excellent document in the Fertilizers (Amendment) Bill. Some of the energy of National Party members could be directed towards improving the performance of the Department of Health in processing schemes that are increasingly available and in operation overseas, even though they have not been mooted in New South Wales, for the reuse of sewage effluent.

The cry from members of the National Party and some of the councillors at Coffs Harbour is that such schemes cannot be undertaken because the Department of Health will not authorise them. The Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs has his act together and is starting to reuse sewage sludge in fertilisers. National Party members opposite should urge and encourage the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Affairs and the Minister for Health and Community Services to start talking about and working on proposals such as reusing banana growing effluent and water from sewage effluent. If that happened, we could subsequently examine more detailed water reuse schemes. I agree with National Party members that it has been a very slow process gaining agreement from the Department of Health to strong enough guidelines for the reuse of these sorts of substances. Guidelines are in place for fertilisers. Members opposite should persuade their National Party colleagues and the Minister for Health and Community Services to develop guidelines for sewage effluent.

Mr Causley: On a point of order. The honourable member seems to be deluding herself. The bill relates to a sewage outfall. I thought I made it clear when addressing the Chair that we are not talking about sludge because in country sewage works sludge is not put to sea, it is buried.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! I ask the honourable member for Blacktown to confine her remarks to the bill to this stage. I have been fairly lenient to allow the member an opportunity to present an overall case.

Ms ALLAN: Guidelines from the Department of Health on the reuse of water from sewage effluent are necessary. Year in and year out in past debate the honourable member for Coffs Harbour and the minister for democracy, Mr Causley, have claimed that it is not safe to use that water. They maintained that cry when the environmental movement came forward and suggested setting up systems to use that water instead of dumping it into the ocean. There will not be any improvement in attitude unless the Department of Health can deal with these matters more rapidly. This debate has been an emotional debate largely because it is an ill-informed debate. Generally I do not peruse resolutions passed at National Party conferences but I am sure that an examination of them would show persistent opposition over the years to proposals to enable local
Page 1618
communities in rural and coastal New South Wales to get on with looking at alternatives to sewage ocean outfall construction for sewage disposal. The longstanding intransigence of the National Party is evident in its approach to this issue. That party continues to be a dinosaur in the Parliament especially on most progressive issues, including the bill before the House. That measure will ensure that the Government will not continue to refuse to look at alternatives. The Government will be forced to consider alternatives and will be forced to give support to the local government authority in Coffs Harbour, whether that authority likes it or not, for the trialing of sewage effluent schemes.

Mr FRASER (Coffs Harbour) [12.38]: I am absolutely disgusted that the honourable member for Manly, the honourable member for Blacktown and the honourable member for Davidson - the honourable member for Blacktown is leaving the Chamber to avoid hearing her arguments being refuted - should visit the Coffs Harbour electorate and stick their noses in the effluent debate up there without being fully aware of the facts, not wanting to become familiar with those facts, and peddling the lies of the NIMBYs at Emerald Beach. The present council has taken note of a decision made in 1984 made by a commission of inquiry. That commission of inquiry was established -

Mr W. T. J. Murray: By the Labor Party.

Mr FRASER: - by the Labor Party, as the Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works and Minister for Roads has said. That council recognised that the environment at Willis Creek was being ruined. Green members opposite do not acknowledge that and are willing to allow wetland environment to continue to be ruined and the health of local people to be affected by mental and other strain from possible viral infection from stagnant waterways. The honourable member for Manly ignores his community's needs but puts on his green shirt and comes up to Coffs Harbour to tell the people there what they need. The honourable member for Manly should get off his backside to develop decent water reuse and disposal programs in Manly for his own constituents. Do not come up and tell people in my electorate what they can do with their sewerage system. The honourable member has an ideological blinker and does not want to -

Mr W. T. J. Murray: He is a total bigot.

Mr FRASER: Yes.

Dr Macdonald: Get it off your chest and get to the issue.

Mr FRASER: The issue is that when this matter went to the Land and Environment Court did the Coffs Harbour Environment Centre, the honourable member for Manly or anyone else chase this on environmental grounds? No, they chased it under planning. Look At Me Now has been proved by environmental impact statements and commissions of inquiry to have effluent of a very high quality - it is the highest of anywhere in New South Wales. It has no harmful effect on the marine environment. It is arguable that it could be beneficial to the marine environment. The NIMBY syndrome is backed up by idiots on the other side of the House. The honourable member for Manly does not worry about the effluent that is discharged in his own electorate; he has to try to make a big man of himself in Coffs Harbour. It is about time he woke up. The bill that the honourable member for Davidson tried to introduce did not work so his little lackey introduced one as well. The honourable member for Davidson went on national television and said to the people of New South Wales that we should not have another North Head on the North Coast of New South Wales. The honourable member for
Page 1619
Davidson and the honourable member for Blacktown are putting up absolute lies. The people of Coffs Harbour -

Dr Macdonald: He never said that.

Mr FRASER: The honourable member was at the press conference when the honourable member for Davidson announced that he did not want another North Head on the North Coast. The effluent quality from the two outfalls is like chalk and cheese. The effluent on the North Coast is 99.98 per cent water with some suspended solids.

Mr Gaudry: Pathogens.

Mr FRASER: Did you say pathogens or pathetic? That is about what you are.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! The honourable member for Coffs Harbour will be heard in silence. I call the honourable member for Manly to order.

Mr FRASER: Total lies have been told in this debate. When the honourable member for Manly came to Coffs Harbour he was presented with a very sensible case, with engineers and marine biologists present. He could not argue the facts so he asked about the people he supported who had been arrested for promoting anarchy. If the honourable member does not like the system of government in Australia, if he wants to promote anarchy, he should go back to Scotland to promote it there - not in my electorate. The honourable member for Blacktown said that 6,000 to 7,000 people protested in a mall in Coffs Harbour against the Look At Me Now Headland project. That is a total lie. Those people were protesting over the situation at Willis Creek and the proposal to put a marine outfall off Woolgoolga Headland which would have destroyed plate coral. The people of Coffs Harbour have come up with a solution. This was decided at the last election when the council was elected on the basis of being in favour of the outfall. There is about 80 per cent support by the people of Coffs Harbour for an outfall at Look At Me Now. This is not a new ocean outfall or another ocean outfall. It will replace another outfall that is absolutely ruining Willis Creek, a wetland.

Dr Macdonald: A fine point.

Mr FRASER: It is a fine point. It is not one that the honourable member has looked at. He went to the area for a flit one Saturday afternoon, talked to his green mates and the council and ignored everything that was said by the experts, the marine biologists, the Public Works Department engineers, and council engineers who have spent five years working on this.

Mr Causley: The honourable member for Mount Druitt agrees with what the honourable member for Manly is doing.

Mr FRASER: Of course he does.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Merton): Order! All debate and discussion will take place through the Chair.

Mr FRASER: Mr Acting-Speaker, the Labor Party in Woolgoolga will be screaming about what this mob opposite is doing. Bob Jenner, who was a Labor Party member for 65 years, has resigned from the Labor Party over its attitude on this matter. He will not vote Labor again, because of the attitude of this green mob led by the
Page 1620
honourable member for Manly with the honourable member for Blacktown behind and the honourable member for Davidson in the pack. They are running around trying to tell the people of Coffs Harbour what they should have. There have been outfalls in Coffs Harbour for 35 years. The sludge is re-used. The effluent is used to water the airport. The council is responsible. It supports re-use. It has been given a mandate by the people of Coffs Harbour to build an outfall with re-use options. The State Pollution Control Commission agrees with what the council is doing. The council has given a commitment to the commission, the people of Coffs Harbour and the people of New South Wales that it is acting responsibly in the disposal of effluent in the Coffs Harbour area.

Mr Causley: How is the Federal member for Page going to tell Corindi and Arrawarra?

Mr FRASER: Mr Woods, the Labor member for Page in the Federal Parliament, is absolutely screaming over this issue. People in his electorate are being denied by people like the honourable member for Manly a basic right of sewerage. It is all right for the honourable member to have the poorly treated effluent discharged at Manly to ruin the marine environment; we are talking about high quality effluent with all the sludge removed being re-used on the land at the moment. We have a responsible council and the community should be allowed to decide off their own bat what they want to do with the effluent in the area. They have already decided on the matter. The honourable member for Manly was elected on 34 per cent of the primary vote in his electorate, less than half a per cent of the vote in New South Wales - about 0.26 per cent of the New South Wales vote. He deems that he has the right to tell people in my electorate what they can do. He should wake up. He should get out in the real world and wake up to the fact that he is there to represent his constituents, not mine. He should get his nose out of my electorate. If he visits my area, he should listen to all the facts and take a balanced point of view, not the green ratbag point of view that he is accepting now. Two local councillors, Williams and Dalton, have only told lies and promoted anarchy on this issue. Why did Mr Williams come into the matter? He is a schoolteacher who teaches part time. He has very little else to do with his time. He lives at 41 Dameral Crescent, Emerald Beach.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: He has got green slime outside his house where he pumps out his effluent.

Mr FRASER: Oh no, he is a very responsible person. He is so protective of the green environment that the slime that comes out makes the grass grow very high among the tyres in the front yard. From what I can gather, the aesthetics of his house are absolutely pathetic. But as a minority elected representative he tries to tell the people of Coffs Harbour and the northern beaches that they should pay an extra $400 to $500 a year in rates because he has decided that he wants something different. Why? Because it is in his backyard. He wants to use the toilet but he wants to send the result to Coffs Harbour at a cost of $6 million for a pipeline. Or he wants to stick a Memtec plant in that is said to cost only $1.8 million. But with the projected growth of the northern beaches area that $1.8 million will have to be repeated at least three times.

Mr W. T. J. Murray: And what are they going to do with the sewage after it goes through?

Mr FRASER: It will probably be sent down to Manly. That $6 million cost would be levied on people in my electorate by a man elected on less than 34 per cent of the primary vote in his own electorate. He could not give two hoots about what is happening in his electorate. The people of Coffs Harbour are committed to a sensible
Page 1621
program of effluent disposal and, where possible, re-use. Sawtell golf course at the moment is re-using effluent. The honourable member for Davidson said that he would do whatever he could to stop the outfall at Coffs Harbour. He has not even been in my electorate to look at the situation.

Mr Causley: He dodged the schoolteachers too.

Mr FRASER: Well and truly. He would not speak to schoolteachers there either. It is a lie to compare the outfall in my electorate with that at North Head. There have been suggestions of dual reticulation for usage on bananas. We have already had a trial on bananas and the health department has decided that it should not be done because it would not be conducive to the good health of people buying the bananas.

Mr Causley: How would one market the product?

Mr FRASER: It would be wonderful - effluent-free bananas. The four-letter version of "effluent" would be used about them. [Extension of time agreed to.]

The shadow minister for the environment has told honourable members that effluent should be used on bananas. Obviously, she is not concerned about the salination problem. The honorable member for Manly is supposed to be an environmentalist. He wants effluent to be used on high-acid soil and cause a salination problem the same as in the Murrumbidgee area. The honourable member for Manly should grow up, get out of Manly and see the real world. He should get away from concrete pavements and have a look at the real world. He should remember the revenue earned by agriculture and realise that the rainfall in Coffs Harbour would not allow total re-use at any time. Others have claimed that a dam should be constructed because of water storage problems. Why put effluent in a dam when it can be filled with rainwater? There has been no logic in this debate from anyone on the other side of the House or from the people with the NIMBY syndrome at Emerald Beach. They want to accept everything that has been rejected.

Marnie Yates is still writing letters to the editor of the local newspaper complaining that the outfall is not the right thing. When the commission of inquiry was in full swing in 1984, Marnie Yates said that the commission was the fairest commission she had ever witnessed and whatever decision the commission made should be followed to the letter because it had done such a thorough job and given everyone such a fair hearing. But what happened? When the commission decided in favour of an outfall at Look At Me Now Headland Marnie Yates said, "No, I didn't want that so therefore we can't accept it". That is the typical green attitude that is evident all over Australia, especially in New South Wales which is fuelled by the Labor Party and the green Independents. They claim they will accept any decision of any court or commission of inquiry so long as it is in their favour. If it is not in their favour, they promote anarchy. They go out into the streets and scream, jump up and down and act like fools. The police did a wonderful job at Look At Me Now Headland. When they arrested some of these people -

Mr Causley: The bus-ins from Chaelundi.

Mr FRASER: The Minister has referred to the bus-ins from Chaelundi. They are very cunning. They stood 150 or 180 local people in the front line of the protest and they said, "Stick your foot over that line and you will make that police officer upset, but he will not arrest you. Do this and do that - you won't get arrested". What happened?
Page 1622
They were arrested. The ratbag professional protesters forced local people to break the law for which they were arrested.

Mr Causley: Graham Ashton.

Mr FRASER: Yes, Graham Ashton - Mr justice of the peace? A man who purports to be a justice of the peace, has broken the peace. He has promoted anarchy in Coffs Harbour and should be removed from office. He has no right to hold such an office. He is an anarchist and he laughs at the law. The people who promote this anarchy are professional activists. They are using the local people as pawns. Alderman Lyn Dalton claims she is ashamed of the council because of the arrests at Look At Me Now Headland. That is as load of rot. Those people broke the law and deserve the punishment that will be meted out by the courts. The punishment will fit the crime they committed against the people of Coffs Harbour. It has been claimed also that the police were unduly harsh. Those who were arrested flouted the law and they now expect the council and the Government to drop the charges. I ask the honourable member for Mount Druitt, a former policeman, whether he would have liked to be placed in the position of those officers at Look At Me Now Headland. They had a job to do, yet the protestors claim that because of the green doctrine of the Labor Party they should be excused from breaking the law.

The system being promoted in Coffs Harbour is a sensible, environmentally friendly system. It is far superior to any effluent system in Sydney. Though the honourable member for Manly has agreed that Coffs Harbour has a marvellous effluent system, he came to my electorate as the senator for New South Wales to promote his own cause. Coffs Harbour has a sensible high-quality system. The council and the community are committed to maximum possible re-use. Because of the high rainfall in the area, effluent cannot be re-used 100 per cent of the time. For the past 35 years the council has disposed of its sludge on the land. The system is sound and good for the health of the people of Coffs Harbour. It is an economic benefit to them. The system will give people who live under the lowest socioeconomic conditions in New South Wales the benefit of not having to pay an additional $471 a year in rates. Is the honourable member for Manly prepared to make that up to them? Will he promote a dual reticulation system that will cost $70 million? As he is on the local council, as well as being the honourable member for Manly, would he ask his constituents in Manly to pay the $471 per annum on behalf of constituents of Coffs Harbour, from now until who knows when?

The people of Coffs Harbour have made their decision. They have asked me to bring their case to this Parliament, which I have done on numerous occasions. Their case has been taken to the media, but the media seem to be bent towards the green attitudes of the honourable member for Davidson and the honourable member for Manly, who are irresponsible. This is a responsible Government. Opposition members are irresponsible in the worst sense of the word. They do not care about the plight of the people of Coffs Harbour. They are running for cheap headlines when the facts are available and they choose to ignore them. The people of Coffs Harbour deserve a sewerage system which is economical and environmentally friendly. The Government is giving them that system, but the ratbags on the other side of the House will not let them have it.

Mr W. T. J. MURRAY (Barwon - Deputy Premier, Minister for Public Works and Minister for Roads) [12.58]: I reject totally the proposals in the bill introduced by the honourable member for Manly - the Moonee Beach Nature Reserve Bill. It seeks to use the system of government not to establish a nature reserve but to prevent normal activity occurring. I should like to read a letter from the Northern Beaches branch of the
Page 1623
Australia Labor Party, Woolgoolga. The address of that branch is 16 Ironbark Avenue, Sandy Beach, Coffs Harbour. The letter reads:

Mr Wal Murray
Dept. Premier and
Minister for Local Government
Macquarie Street
SYDNEY N.S.W. 2000

Mr Murray

You have the first hand knowledge of what the involvement is here.

It was simply sewerage, including Emerald Headland outfall, which will be fine screened and should proceed. There is no mention of residences who have health problems through the septic overflow that is generated.

Now the group, including the City Council have come up with another delay tactic (believe it) recycling sewerage to drinking water, (believe it) including the AIDS virus.

The majority of Aldermen who recently called for a referendum only last week refused the Northern Beaches Branch request for a referendum.

It appears they want it both ways.

The Coffs Harbour City Council is stagnated and require your Department to step in "urgently".

The letter is signed by D. M. Lindsay, justice of the peace, the secretary of the Northern Beaches branch of the Australian Labor Party, Woolgoolga. In the letter the Labor Party has utterly rejected the nonsense being advanced by the ersatz member for New South Wales, a person whose presence in this Parliament is becoming an embarrassment to the Labor Party.

Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Chappell): Order! It being 1 o'clock p.m., pursuant to sessional orders, debate is interrupted.

[Mr Acting-Speaker (Mr Chappell) left the chair at 1 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]